MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405038380 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-211342

Inhibitors Significantly Impair Quality of Life for Hemophilia a Patients

2024· article· en· W4405038380 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zulisa Saripuddin, TY Loo, Boey Yee Cheng, Ayse Levent

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Hemophilia A is a rare, inherited bleeding disorder that can severely affect a patient's quality of life (QoL) across all age groups. The development of inhibitors, antibodies that neutralize clotting factor therapies, may further exacerbate the disease burden in this patient population. Aims: This study aims to assess the impact of inhibitors on key disease burden factors and their association with decreased QoL in hemophilia A patients. Methods: The Ipsos Hemophilia Therapy Monitor, a multi-country quantitative online survey, was conducted from November 2023 to February 2024.The study collected 805 hemophilia A patient records (US n=149; UK n=113; France n=110; Germany n=87; Italy n=144; Spain n=154; Canada n= 48) from participating physicians, including 113 patients with inhibitors and 692 patients without inhibitors. Physicians were screened for duration of practice in their specialty and caseload, and provided data on the presence of target joints (defined as joints in which spontaneous bleeding has occurred on 3 or more occasions within the past 12 months), chronic pain levels (0-10 scale), and treated bleeds (a bleeding event where coagulation factors are administered to treat signs or symptoms of bleeding (e.g., pain, swelling, etc.) in the past 12 months). Patients were considered to have decreased QoL if they reported the presence of target joints, chronic pain levels of 5 or above, and at least one treated bleed in the past 12 months. Results: In the study, reported patients with inhibitors were significantly more likely to have target joints (30% vs. 12%, p<0.01), chronic pain levels of 5 or above (45% vs. 21%, p<0.01), and had at least one treated bleed in the past 12 months (61% vs. 43%, p<0.01) compared to those without inhibitors. Inhibitor patients were also more likely to experience all 3 impairments simultaneously (19% vs. 6%, p<0.01), indicating a higher prevalence of decreased QoL. Overall, only 26% of the inhibitor patients reported none of the 3 disease burdens, compared to 48% of non-inhibitor patients (p<0.01). Interestingly, 40% of patients who had previously developed inhibitors but are now inhibitor-free reported an absence of the three impairments. This suggests that patients who have overcome inhibitors may experience an improvement in their QoL, potentially regaining functionality and reduced disease burden compared to those who continue to struggle with persistent inhibitors. Summary/Conclusion: In this study, hemophilia patients with inhibitors, across all age groups, experienced a severe, multifaceted disease burden, that significantly undermined their quality of life. However, eradicating inhibitors may lead to improved QoL outcomes. These findings highlight the critical need for enhanced treatment strategies and comprehensive care approaches to alleviate the unique challenges faced by inhibitor hemophilia A patients and optimize their overall well-being. Further research using comparator data is warranted.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicHemophilia Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→