Safety of recombinant activated factor VII (<scp>rFVII</scp>a) in patients with congenital haemophilia with inhibitors: overall <scp>rFVII</scp>a exposure and intervals following high (>240 μg kg<sup>−1</sup>) <scp>rFVII</scp>a doses across clinical trials and registries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) is indicated for treatment of bleeding in congenital haemophilia with inhibitors (CHwI) using 90 μg kg(-1) every 2-3 h (EU and US) or a single 270 μg kg(-1) dose (EU only) with ~90% efficacy reported for both regimens. Dosing of rFVIIa varies, and home treatment makes assessment of frequency of doses >90 μg kg(-1), the intervals before additional treatment, and the risk for thromboembolic events (TEs) more difficult. This post hoc analysis assessed the safety and distribution of rFVIIa dosing in CHwI and the impact of >240 μg kg(-1) dosing on subsequent bypassing agent (BPA) dosing interval and frequency. Data regarding on-demand or prophylactic rFVIIa dosing, TE incidence and subsequent BPA dosing after high rFVIIa doses were compiled from multiple sources incorporating safety surveillance. A total of 61 734 rFVIIa doses were reported in 481 patients treated for 3947 bleeds and for 43 135 prophylaxis days. Over half (52%) exceeded 120 μg kg(-1), 37% exceeded 160 μg kg(-1) and 15% exceeded 240 μg kg(-1). Subsequent doses of BPA(s) were administered after 38% of initial and 49% of any rFVIIa dose >240 μg kg(-1), and were most frequently administered ≥24 h after initial (40%) or any (53%) doses >240 μg kg(-1). No TEs were reported. The findings of this analysis show that rFVIIa doses >90 μg kg(-1) are utilized for 'real-world' treatment of children and adults. When additional BPA was administered following an rFVIIa dose >240 μg kg(-1), reported intervals were prolonged, often ≥24 h. No safety issues were identified in the 61,734 doses analysed.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".