Hemophilia B Gene Therapy with a High-Specific-Activity Factor IX Variant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevention of bleeding with adequately sustained levels of clotting factor, after a single therapeutic intervention and without the need for further medical intervention, represents an important goal in the treatment of hemophilia. METHODS: vector genomes per kilogram of body weight in 10 men with hemophilia B who had factor IX coagulant activity of 2% or less of the normal value. Laboratory values, bleeding frequency, and consumption of factor IX concentrate were prospectively evaluated after vector infusion and were compared with baseline values. RESULTS: No serious adverse events occurred during or after vector infusion. Vector-derived factor IX coagulant activity was sustained in all the participants, with a mean (±SD) steady-state factor IX coagulant activity of 33.7±18.5% (range, 14 to 81). On cumulative follow-up of 492 weeks among all the participants (range of follow-up in individual participants, 28 to 78 weeks), the annualized bleeding rate was significantly reduced (mean rate, 11.1 events per year [range, 0 to 48] before vector administration vs. 0.4 events per year [range, 0 to 4] after administration; P=0.02), as was factor use (mean dose, 2908 IU per kilogram [range, 0 to 8090] before vector administration vs. 49.3 IU per kilogram [range, 0 to 376] after administration; P=0.004). A total of 8 of 10 participants did not use factor, and 9 of 10 did not have bleeds after vector administration. An asymptomatic increase in liver-enzyme levels developed in 2 participants and resolved with short-term prednisone treatment. One participant, who had substantial, advanced arthropathy at baseline, administered factor for bleeding but overall used 91% less factor than before vector infusion. CONCLUSIONS: We found sustained therapeutic expression of factor IX coagulant activity after gene transfer in 10 participants with hemophilia who received the same vector dose. Transgene-derived factor IX coagulant activity enabled the termination of baseline prophylaxis and the near elimination of bleeding and factor use. (Funded by Spark Therapeutics and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02484092 .).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".