Switching from standard to extended half‐life FVIII prophylaxis in haemophilia A: Comparison of factor product use, bleed rates and pharmacokinetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Majority of haemophilia A patients in our comprehensive care centre have switched from standard half-life (SHL) to extended half-life (EHL) FVIII products in a short time. AIM: We compared the clinical and laboratory outcomes between SHL and EHL FVIII prophylaxis in product switchers. METHODS: This is a retrospective inception cohort of all adult haemophilia A patients switched to EHL (rFVIIIFc or rFVIII-PEG) prophylaxis in our centre. Dosing, product utilization, annualized bleed rates (ABR), treatment regimen and pharmacokinetics by Web Accessible Population Pharmacokinetic Service (WAPPS)-Hemo were compared between SHL and EHL. RESULTS: We included 38 patients, whose median age was 38 years (range 17-75). Median FVIII dose was 23 IU/kg for SHL versus 25 IU/kg for EHL. After switching, weekly infusions decreased by 29% from median 2.8 (every 2.5 days) to 2.0 (every 3.5 days) (P = <.001) and factor consumption for prophylaxis by 17% from 60 to 50 IU/kg/week (P = <.001). Weekly infusions decreased in 71% and FVIII utilization in 55% of patients. ABR remained low (1.0 for SHL and .5 for EHL, respectively). In pharmacokinetics, the half-life of FVIII increased from median 13 to 21 h after switching. Times above .01 and .03 IU/ml improved from 85 to 131 h and from 65 to 106 h. Half-lives of the SHL products and von Willebrand factor levels predicted half-lives with the EHL products. CONCLUSIONS: Our cohort study confirms the successful experience of switching to EHL FVIII products, with decreased infusion frequency, factor consumption and excellent clinical efficacy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".