MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037933729

Final Results of the Prospective ADVATE® Immune Tolerance Induction Registry (PAIR) Study with Plasma- and Albumin-Free Recombinant Factor VIII

2021· other· en· W7037933729 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Research and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBaxalta
KeywordsIncidence (geometry)Adverse effectClinical endpointProspective cohort studyImmune toleranceObservational studyComplicationClinical trialRisk factor
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amy D Shapiro,1 Alejandro Fernandez,2 Jerome Teitel,3 Jaco Botha,2 Kate Khair4 1Indiana Hemophilia & Thrombosis Center, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 2Takeda Pharmaceutical International AG, Zürich, Switzerland; 3St. Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; 4Centre for Outcomes and Experience Research in Children’s Health Illness and Disability (ORCHID), Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UKCorrespondence: Jaco BothaTakeda Pharmaceutical International AG, Thurgauerstrasse 130, Glattpark-Opfikon, Zürich, 8152, SwitzerlandTel +41 79 961 8561Email jaco.botha@takeda.comIntroduction: Neutralizing antibodies to coagulation factor VIII (FVIII) remain a major complication associated with FVIII replacement therapy.Aim: To assess safety and efficacy of immune tolerance induction (ITI) therapy with ADVATE® (antihemophilic factor [recombinant] [rAHF]) in patients who participated in the Prospective ADVATE Immune Tolerance Induction Registry (PAIR) study.Methods: The PAIR study was an international, multicenter, open-label, prospective, observational study in patients with hemophilia A and inhibitors, prescribed rAHF ITI therapy in clinical practice. The primary endpoint was adverse event (AE) reporting; the secondary endpoints included incidence of central venous access device-related complications and success rates of ITI therapy. Maintenance of immune tolerance was monitored for 12 months post-ITI therapy.Results: Of 44 patients, 36 completed ITI therapy, including 31 completing the 12-month follow-up. Most patients received rAHF 90– 130 IU/kg/day (59.1%) and a mean of 6.0 doses/week; the median duration of rAHF ITI therapy during the PAIR study was 600 days. Overall, 284 AEs were reported; 56 AEs were serious, of which none were considered rAHF-related. Of 228 nonserious AEs, 14 (in six patients) were deemed rAHF-related: increase of FVIII inhibitors titer due to anamnestic response, nausea, catheter site pain, pyrexia, urticaria, upper respiratory tract infection, arthralgia, and hemarthrosis. None were severe or led to ITI discontinuation. Eighteen patients experienced ≥ 1 central venous access device-related complication, and 21 of 36 completers achieved a negative inhibitor titer. The Kaplan–Meier estimate of success for achievement of first negative titer at 18 months of ITI therapy was 68.3% (95% confidence interval 51.8– 83.6%) among completers. Of patients with partial or complete success post-ITI, 87% (20/23) maintained immune tolerance at 12-month follow-up.Conclusion: Data suggest that rAHF ITI therapy in the PAIR study was effective, with no unexpected safety signals reported.Keywords: hemophilia A, immune tolerance, post-marketing product surveillance, therapeutics, adverse effects

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group)Same topicBotanical Research and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207