Recombinant factor VIII Fc fusion protein for immune tolerance induction in patients with severe haemophilia A with inhibitors—A retrospective analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Immune tolerance induction (ITI) is the gold standard for eradication of factor VIII inhibitors in severe haemophilia A; however, it usually requires treatment for extended periods with associated high burden on patients and healthcare resources. AIM: Review outcomes of ITI with recombinant factor VIII Fc fusion protein (rFVIIIFc) in patients with severe haemophilia A and high-titre inhibitors. METHODS: Multicentre retrospective chart review of severe haemophilia A patients treated with rFVIIIFc for ITI. RESULTS: Of 19 patients, 7 were first-time ITI and 12 were rescue ITI. Of 7 first-time patients, 6 had at least 1 high-risk feature for ITI failure. Four of 7 first-time patients were tolerized in a median of 7.8 months. The remaining 3 patients continue on rFVIIIFc ITI. Of 12 rescue patients, 7 initially achieved a negative Bethesda titre (≤0.6) in a median of 3.3 months, 1 had a decrease in Bethesda titre and continues on rFVIIIFc ITI and 4 have not demonstrated a decrease in Bethesda titre. Of these 4, 3 continue on rFVIIIFc ITI and 1 switched to bypass therapy alone. Two initially responsive patients transitioned to other factors due to recurrence. Overall, 16 of 19 patients remain on rFVIIIFc (prophylaxis or ITI). For those still undergoing ITI, longer follow-up is needed to determine final outcomes. No adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: Recombinant factor VIII Fc fusion protein demonstrated rapid time to tolerization in high-risk first-time ITI patients. For rescue ITI, rFVIIIFc showed therapeutic benefit in some patients who previously failed ITI with other products. These findings highlight the need to further evaluate the use of rFVIIIFc for ITI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".