MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Safety, Efficacy and Pharmacokinetics of Nonacog Beta Pegol (N9-GP) in Prophylaxis and Treatment of Bleeding Episodes in Previously Treated Pediatric Hemophilia B Patients

2014· article· en· W2979805398 on OpenAlexaff
Manuel Carção, Marek Žák, F. Abdul Karim, Hideji Hanabusa, Susan Kearney, Meng‐Yao Lu, Paula Persson, Savita Rangarajan, Elena Santagostino

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHaemophiliaFactor IXHemarthrosisQuality of life (healthcare)PediatricsPharmacokineticsIncidence (geometry)Clinical trialHaemophilia BHaemophilia AInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Primary prophylaxis in severe hemophilia patients has been shown to improve patient outcomes and quality of life by decreasing the number of joint bleeds, lowering the subsequent risk of developing hemophilic arthropathy (Blanchette et al.Haemophilia 2010 (Suppl. 5); Ljung R. Blood Rev 2009) and by reducing the incidence of other bleeds including intracranial hemorrhages. Currently licensed factor concentrates have a relatively short half-life, and require frequent infusions for effectiveness. The intensity of this prophylaxis is difficult for most patients (particularly young children) and contributes to reduced compliance and quality of life. Nonacog beta pegol (N9-GP) is a glycoPEGylated recombinant factor IX (rFIX) with a prolonged half-life (up to 111 h in adolescent and adult patients) as compared to currently available standard plasma-derived and rFIX products (18-19 h). N9-GP is therefore expected to be effective in preventing bleeds when given less frequently than currently available FIX products. It is hoped that this will improve patient compliance, clinical outcomes and quality of life. Until now only adolescents and adults have received N9-GP. Given this experience a trial (paradigm™5) was undertaken to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of N9-GP in children ≤12 years of age. Aims: The primary objective of this trial was to evaluate immunogenicity of N9-GP in previously treated pediatric (≤12 years of age) hemophilia B patients (FIX≤2%) with no history of inhibitors and at least 50 exposures days (ED) to other FIX products. Key secondary objectives were to evaluate efficacy, pharmacokinetic (PK) properties and general safety of N9-GP in this group of patients. Methods: paradigm™5 was a multicenter, single arm, open label trial investigating the safety, efficacy and PK of N9-GP in this group of patients. A total of 20 children allocated to two age cohorts ≤6 years and 7-12 years (minimum 10 patients per age cohort) were required to be dosed with a prophylactic regimen of 40 U/kg N9-GP once weekly for at least 50 exposures (as per EMA guidelines), with treatment of breakthrough bleeds with 40 U/kg N9-GP (80 U/kg N9-GP for severe bleeding episodes). Results: 25 patients were enrolled and treated in the trial: 12 in the younger (0-6 years) and 13 in the older (7-12 years) age group. No patients developed inhibitors during the trial, and no safety concerns were observed in standard safety parameters and clinical evaluation. Among patients on prophylaxis prior to inclusion (N=22), the median (range) number of bleeds in the 12 months prior to inclusion was 2.0 (0–9). The median (range) annualized bleeding rate during the trial was 1.0 (0.0–6.5); 5 of the 12 younger patients (41.7%) and 10 of the 13 older patients (76.9%) reported bleeds. 72.7% of these bleeds in the younger cohort were reported as traumatic vs. 54.8% in the older age cohort. All bleeding episodes were treated with 40 U/kg N9-GP: 92.9% were successfully treated; 85.7% were treated with a single injection. PK analysis showed 1) an incremental recovery (IR) of N9-GP of 0.016 (U/mL)/(U/kg) with no difference between the 2 age groups; 2) a geometric mean single-dose half-life of 69.6 (0-6 years) and 76.3 hours (7-12 years) and 3) a faster clearance in the younger vs. older age group (0.758 and 0.650 mL/h/kg, respectively). Geometric mean FIX trough levels after the first dose of N9-GP was 0.084 U/ml in the 0-6 year age group and 0.109 U/ml in the 7-12 year age group. Estimated mean steady state trough levels (95% CI) for the younger age group was 0.154 U/ml (0.127; 0.186), as compared to 0.190 U/ml (0.159; 0.228) in the older age group. Steady state trough levels were reached after approximately 4 weeks of treatment. Conclusion: In this trial, N9-GP appeared to have a safe and well-tolerated profile. Prophylactic protection and treatment of bleeds with N9-GP in previously treated pediatric hemophilia B patients was confirmed. The PK profile of N9-GP confirmed an extended half-life and high trough levels with 40 U/kg once weekly injections in the pediatric population. As with other FIX products younger patients show lower IR, shorter half-lives and higher clearance than what is observed in adolescents and adults. Disclosures Carcao: Baxter, Bayer, Biogen, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, CSL Behring, Octapharma: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: N9-GP is not yet FDA approved. Information provided will discuss phase 3 pediatric clinical trial data.. Zak:Novo Nordisk A/S: Employment. Hanabusa:Baxter Healthcare, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, Pfizer, Biogen Idec and KaketsuKen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Persson:Novo Nordisk A/S: Employment. Rangarajan:Baxter, Biotest, Grifols, Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Santagostino:Pfizer, Bayer, Baxter, Novo Nordisk, CSL Behring, Grifols, Biotest: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207