Trends in bleeding patterns during prophylaxis for severe haemophilia: observations from a series of prospective clinical trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Replacement therapy or prophylaxis, has become the standard of care for the treatment of severe haemophilia A. To describe bleeding patterns in children, adolescents and adults on prophylaxis and their observed relationships to times of infusion (during the week and during the day) as well as season of the year. Data from Advate pre-licensure prospective clinical trials from 145 patients with factor VIII (FVIII) <1%, were used. All patients underwent a 48-h pharmacokinetic study. The 10-65 year group had ≥ 75 exposure days on fixed prophylaxis (25-40 IU kg(-1) 3-4x per week). Prophylaxis was not fixed but similar for 1-6 year olds. Bleeding patterns were analysed. Overall, 700 bleeds were observed in 110/145 patients. All were treated with prophylaxis, mean dose 108 IU kg(-1) week(-1) in on average 2.9 infusions (1-6 years), 86 IU kg (-1) week(-1) in 2.7 infusions (10-17 years), and 75 IU kg (-1) week(-1) in 2.6 infusions (18-65 years), respectively. On prophylaxis, median total bleeds per year were low at 3.1 for patients aged 1-6 years, 3.3 for those aged 10-17 years and 2.1 for patients aged 18-65 years. Patients aged 1-6 years had predominantly soft tissue bleeds (79%). Incidence of joint bleeding was not associated with season, but was significantly lower in patients who infused FVIII in the mornings: median 0 per year (IQR 0.0-0.4) compared to those who infused later [median 1.8 per year (IQR 0.0-5.2)]. Older patients predominantly experienced joint bleeds (50% and 62%, respectively). More joint bleeds occurred during the summer [43 and 46% respectively, (P < 0.01)]. Bleeding patterns in patients on prophylaxis varied according to age. In addition, the 10-65 year olds showed increased bleeding during the summer. After confirmation in prospective studies, this information may be used to improve tailoring of prophylactic treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".