MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417207019 · doi:10.1016/j.rpth.2025.103156

HTRS2025.O8C.4 Efficacy and Safety of Giroctocogene Fitelparvovec in Adults With Moderately Severe to Severe Hemophilia A: Results From the Phase 3 AFFINE Gene Therapy Trial

2025· article· en· W4417207019 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Berube, Andrew D. Leavitt, Barbara A. Konkle, Tseng Li-Jung, Jasmine Healy, Delphine Agathon, Frank Plonski

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)
FundersBarts Health NHS TrustUniversität WienImperial College Healthcare NHS TrustImperial College LondonUniversity of WashingtonUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation TrustMedizinische Universität WienUniversity of Pittsburgh
KeywordsClinical trialPhase (matter)Genetic enhancementPhases of clinical researchIncidence (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The effectiveness of damoctocog alfa pegol for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in previously treated children with severe hemophilia A was demonstrated in the PROTECT VIII Kids trial (NCT01775618).Children aged < 12 years were excluded from damoctocog alfa pegol's initial marketing authorization application because of observed loss of efficacy and/or hypersensitivity reactions occurring within the first 4 exposure days (EDs) in some children aged < 6 years due to an immune response to PEG.These responses were not seen in children aged ≥7 years.Objectives: To evaluate the risk of hypersensitivity and loss of efficacy associated with anti-PEG antibodies during the first 4 EDs with damoctocog alfa pegol in children aged 7 to < 12 years.Methods: The phase 3, multicenter, open-label, single-arm Alfa-PROTECT study (NCT05147662) comprised a 6-month main study (completed) with ≥50 EDs, and an 18 month extension (ongoing).In the main study, patients received 40 IU/kg (up to 60 IU/kg at the investigator's discretion) of damoctocog alfa pegol prophylaxis, twice weekly.The primary endpoint (estimated by a Bayesian model including prior information from PRO-TECT VIII Kids) was the incidence of adverse events of special interest (AESI) -hypersensitivity or loss of efficacy -leading to discontinuation during the first 4 EDs.Secondary endpoints included adverse reactions, development of anti-drug antibodies, annualized bleeding rate, and utilization.Results: In total, 35 patients (safety analysis set [SAF]) received at least 1 dose of study drug.The median (range) treatment duration was 182 (7-198) days with a median of 53 (1-59) EDs.Median age at baseline was 8 years (Table 1).Of the SAF, 32 had documented bleed and utilization data for ≥3 months (Table 2) and 31 had ≥50 damoctocog alfa pegol EDs.In the SAF, 21/35 patients (60%) experienced ≥1 adverse event (AE), all mild or moderate, and 3/35 patients (9%) had AEs related to the study drug.Study-drug-related AEs of injection site pain or injection site itch of moderate intensity occurred in 2 patients, not leading to treatment disruption.Loss of efficacy at Day 12, due to high-titer anti-PEG antibodies (after 2nd ED), leading to treatment interruption occurred in one patient; this was considered a study-drug-related AESI.Antibodies disappeared and patient resumed treatment 2 months later.Mean and median of the posterior distribution of the true incidence of AESI were 2.1% and 1.59%, respectively (90% CI [0.18; 5.76%]).No AEs resulted in study drug discontinuation, no deaths were reported.Mean (SD) number of bleeds in the 12 months before screening was 3.25 (5.6), and during the study the mean (SD) annualized number of treated bleeds was 1.3 (2.7).Conclusions: These data confirm the safety profile of damoctocog alfa pegol in children aged 7 to < 12 years with severe hemophilia A, and secondary endpoints indicate effectiveness of treatment in this population.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch and Practice in Thrombosis and HaemostasisSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207