MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417013583 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-4838

Characterization of participants with elevated bleeding rates responding to prophylactic marstacimab treatment in the phase 3 BASIS trial

2025· article· en· W4417013583 on OpenAlexaff
Young Shil Park, Fahri Şahin, Laurent Frenzel, Davide Matino, Priya Patel, Pengling Sun, Carrie Turich Taylor, Andrew Palladino

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyPhases of clinical researchClinical trialCoagulationAdverse effectFactor X

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Marstacimab, a monoclonal antibody targeting tissue factor pathway inhibitor to reduce inhibition of the extrinsic coagulation pathway and rebalance hemostasis, is approved for prophylaxis in patients with hemophilia A (HA) or B (HB) without inhibitors. The phase 3 BASIS study (NCT03938792) demonstrated marstacimab was effective in reducing treated annualized bleeding rate (ABR) vs prior on-demand (OD) or routine prophylaxis (RP) therapy in participants (pts) with severe HA (FVIII <1%) or moderately severe to severe HB (FIX ≤2%) without inhibitors. Marstacimab was generally well tolerated with no unanticipated side effects. However, some pts had high ABRs during marstacimab treatment that deviated from the overall study population. Understanding factors that influence responder outcomes is crucial for personalized treatment and effective management of hemophilia. We aimed to identify prognostic factors for pts with elevated ABRs in BASIS. Methods Eligible pts were male, aged ≥12 to <75 years with severe HA or moderately severe to severe HB with or without inhibitors. Results are reported for the noninhibitor cohort. Pts entered a 6-month observational phase (OP) and received prescribed factor replacement therapy (OD or RP) before receiving a single subcutaneous (SC) dose of 300 mg marstacimab (2×150 mg) followed by 150 mg SC once weekly (QW) in the 12-month active treatment phase (ATP). Dose escalation to 300 mg was allowed per investigator’s discretion after Day 180 for pts who met protocol-specified criteria based on breakthrough bleeding. After completing the ATP, pts could enroll in the open-label extension (OLE) study (NCT05145127). Pts with elevated ABRs were identified based on the data distribution of ABR in the ATP from all pts (OD+RP); pts with an ABR in the ATP greater than the mean ABR+1.5× interquartile range (ie, ABR >12) were assessed. Prognostic factors evaluated for an elevated ABR were age, region, hemophilic arthropathy, baseline hemophilia joint health score (HJHS) total score and number of target joints at baseline. Descriptive data are presented. Results In all, 116 pts received marstacimab in the ATP. Model-based mean ABR (95% CI) decreased from the OP to the ATP in OD and RP groups (OD: 39.9 [33.1-48.1] vs 3.2 [2.1-4.9]; RP: 7.9 [5.1-10.7] vs 5.1 [3.4-6.8]). Overall, 12 pts (OD: n=1; RP: n=11; HA: n=10; HB: n=2) with an ABR >12 in the ATP were identified. At baseline, most (n=11; 92%) pts were aged >18 y (5 [42%] ≥45 y), 6 (50%) pts were Asian and 6 (50%) were White. Most (n=11; 92%) had ≥1 target joint (≥3 target joints: n=5, 42%) and 8 (67%) had hemophilic arthropathy. Compared with the lower ABR group (ABR ≤12), the group with elevated ABRs (ABR >12) was comprised of a higher percentage of adults (OD: 100% vs 93.8%; RP: 90.9% vs 77.8%), a higher percentage with hemophilic arthropathy (OD: 100% vs 50%; RP: 63.6% vs 54.2%), a higher mean HJHS total score indicative of worse joint health (OD: 29.0 vs 21.0; RP: 22.7 vs 16.8), more target joints at baseline (pts with ≥3 target joints: OD: 100.0 vs 34.4; RP: 36.4 vs 12.5) and a greater proportion of RP pts from Asia (OD: 0% vs 65.6%; RP: 54.5% vs 33.3%). Although these pts had a higher ABR during the ATP (range 13.8-35.5) vs the lower ABR group (range 0.0-11.2), 41.7% (n=5/12) had a mean decrease in ABR of 55.4% (SD 28.1) vs the OP. Of the pts with an elevated ABR, 5 (42%) dose-escalated to marstacimab 300 mg SC QW; ABR decreased in all pts after dose escalation (range 0.0-10.1). Neutralizing antibodies were detected in 1 pt at Day 60; titers were transient and resolved by Day 180. Eight (67%) pts with an elevated ABR continued into the OLE (3 discontinued early, 1 chose not to enroll) and continued ABR improvements were observed in 7 (88%) pts. Conclusions Twelve pts had an ABR >12 during the ATP. The sample size precludes definitive conclusions on prognostic factors but variables associated with an elevated ABR included older age, residence in Asia, hemophilic arthropathy, higher baseline HJHS total score and baseline target joints. Worse joint disease correlated with a higher ABR. However, most pts with an elevated ABR showed ABR reductions during the ATP or OLE, suggesting these pts still responded to marstacimab. Dose escalation to marstacimab 300 mg SC QW led to reduced ABR in all pts with an elevated ABR who escalated, suggesting this may be an option for select pts.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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