From pharmacokinetic-guided FVIII prophylaxis to low-dose Emicizumab prophylaxis: a pilot study revealed a flush of hope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited studies investigated the low dose emicizumab prophylaxis, especially in patients switched from pharmacokinetic (PK)-guided FVIII prophylaxis. A retrospective study was conducted among inhibitor-free boys with severe hemophilia A (SHA). They received PK-guided FVIII prophylaxis for six months and then switched to low dose emicizumab regimen for one year. The patients' demographic data, PK profiles and clinical outcomes (annualized bleeding rates and zero bleeding proportions) were collected from six-month pre-switch to one-year post-switch. The target joints and direct cost of treatment were also calculated. Twenty boys with SHA were enrolled and the median age was 4.3 years (IQR 3.1-5.8). With a median dose and infusion frequency of 25.3 IU/kg and 3.5 infusions per week, their trough FVIII level is 3.5 IU/dL with range of 2.0-5.8 IU/dL. After their switch to emicizumab, the median dose was 3.5 mg/kg/month with range of 3.0-4.0 mg/kg/month. Significantly improved annualized bleeding rate [0(0, 0.75) vs. 2(2,4), P < 0.0001], annualized treated bleeding rate [0(0, 0.75) vs. 1.0 (0, 3.5), P < 0.01], annualized joint bleeding rate [0(0,0) vs. 0(0, 3.5), P < 0.05] and zero bleeding proportion [75% vs. 20%, P < 0.01] were observed. Compared with FVIII, low dose emicizumab showed a much lower direct cost [median, 26676 vs. 35568 dollars yearly, P < 0.01]. Participants received well improved clinical outcomes of reduced annualized bleeding rates and increased zero bleeding proportions. The emicizumab prophylaxis demonstrated a significant decrease in direct cost of 25% compared with FVIII infusions. PK-guided individualized emicizumab prophylaxis could be expected to enhance cost-effectiveness further.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".