Inhibitor development in non-severe haemophilia across Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence about inhibitor formation in non-severe haemophilia and the potential role for clotting factor concentrate type is scant. It was the aim of this study to report inhibitor development in non-severe haemophilia patients enrolled in the European Haemophilia Safety Surveillance (EUHASS) study. Inhibitors are reported quarterly and total treated patients annually. Incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated according to diagnosis and concentrate used. Between 1-10-2008 and 31-12-2012, 68 centres reported on 7,969 patients with non-severe haemophilia A and 1,863 patients with non-severe haemophilia B. For haemophilia A, 37 inhibitors occurred in 8,622 treatment years, resulting in an inhibitor rate of 0.43/100 treatment years (95% CI 0.30-0.59). Inhibitors occurred at a median age of 35 years, after a median of 38 exposure days (EDs; P25-P75: 20-80); with 72% occurring within the first 50 EDs. In haemophilia B, one inhibitor was detected in 2,149 treatment years, resulting in an inhibitor rate of 0.05/100 years (95% CI 0.001-0.26). This inhibitor developed at the age of six years, after six EDs. The rate of inhibitors appeared similar across recombinant and plasma derived factor VIII (FVIII) concentrates. Rates for individual concentrates could not be calculated at this stage due to low number of events. In conclusion, inhibitors in non-severe haemophilia occur three times more frequently than in previously treated patients with severe haemophilia at a rate of 0.43/100 patient years (haemophilia A) and 0.05/100 years (haemophilia B). Although the majority of inhibitors developed in the first 50 EDs, inhibitor development continued with increasing exposure to FVIII.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".