A 4% Solution of Bovine Serum Albumin May Be Used in Place of Factor VIII:C Deficient Plasma in the Control Sample in the Nijmegen Modification of the Bethesda Factor VIII:C Inhibitor Assay

International Council for Standardization in Haematology recommendations for laboratory measurement of factor VIII and FIX type I inhibitors

This guidance document has been prepared on behalf of the International Council for Standardisation in Hematology. The aim of the document is to provide guidance and recommendations on the measurement of factor VIII (FVIII) and factor IX (FIX) inhibitors. After an introduction on the clinical background and relevance of factor VIII and factor IX inhibitor testing, the following aspects of laboratory testing are included: screening for inhibitors, assay principle, sample requirements, testing requirements and interpretation, quality assurance, interferences and recent developments. This guidance document focusses on recommendations for a standardised procedure for the laboratory measurement of FVIII and FIX type I inhibitors. The recommendations are based on published data in peer-reviewed literature and expert opinion.

Genetic variants at the chromosomal region 2q21.3 underlying inhibitor development in patients with severe haemophilia A

Introduction

Inhibitor development affects about 30% of patients with severe haemophilia A (HA) and results from different environmental and genetic risk factors. Previously, we identified the missense variant rs3754689 in the LCT gene linked with this predisposition. Since rs3754689 variant is benign and is located in a conserved haplotype region, we hypothesized that the association signal captured by this variant is located in coinherited, neighbouring genes.

Aim

To identify novel genetic risk factors associated with inhibitor development in coding regions of R3HDM1, UBXN4, CXCR4, MCM6, DARS and miR128‐1 genes.

Methods

Targeted sequencing was performed in 246 severe HA patients (72 with and 174 without inhibitor): 181 previously and 65 newly enrolled.

Results

Forty‐one common and 152 rare variants passed the quality control. Logistic regression analysis of common variants identified rs3754689 and four additional variants (.011 < P < .047; FDR ranging .2‐.38). Logistic regression analysis performed only in the 220 Italian patients showed similar results (.004 < P < .05; FDR ranging .12‐.22). Three of these variants (rs3213892 and rs3816155 in the LCT intron 13 and rs961360 in the R3HDM1 intron10‐exon11 junction) may affect the expression of UBXN4 and R3HDM1, respectively. Rare variants did not show association with inhibitor development. Identified variants were not replicated in the multi‐ethnic SIPPET cohort of 230 severe HA patients.

Conclusion

Due to the limited sample size that may be responsible of the high FDR values, we could not confirm with certainty the analysed association. Further evaluation of the expression levels of analysed genes will confirm or not their role in inhibitor development.

Acquired Hemophilia A in IgG4-Related Disease: Case Report, Immunopathogenic Study, and Review of the Literature

We report the observation of a 75-year-old patient referred for cervical lymphadenopathies. A pre-lymphadenectomy blood work revealed an asymptomatic elevation of aPTT with low factor VIII (FVIII) levels and high anti-FVIII antibodies titers, consistent with acquired hemophilia A (AHA). Histological work-up of a cervical lymphadenopathy revealed benign follicular hyperplasia with IgG4⁺ lymphoplasmacytic infiltration; and serum IgG4 levels were markedly elevated, compatible with IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD). He was successfully treated with a 9-month course of prednisone, secondarily associated with rituximab when an AHA relapse occurred. As this patient presented with an unusual association of rare diseases, we wondered whether there was a link between the two conditions. Our first hypothesis was that the anti-FVIII autoantibodies could be directly produced by the proliferating IgG4⁺ plasma cells as a result of broken tolerance to autologous FVIII. To test this assumption, we determined the anti-FVIII IgG subclasses in our patient and in a control group of 11 AHA patients without IgG4-RD. The FVIII inhibitor was mostly IgG4, with an anti-FVIII IgG4/IgG1 ratio of 42 at diagnosis and 268 at relapse in our patient; similar values were observed in non-IgG4-RD AHA patients. As a second hypothesis, we considered whether the anti-FVIII activity could be the result of a non-specific autoantibody production due to polyclonal IgG4⁺ plasma cell proliferation. To test this hypothesis, we measured the anti-FVIII IgG4/total IgG4 ratio in our patient, as well as in several control groups: 11 AHA patients without IgG4-RD, 8 IgG4-RD patients without AHA, and 11 healthy controls. We found that the median [min-max] ratio was higher in AHA-only controls (2.4 10^-2 [5.7 10^-4-1.79 10^-1]), an oligoclonal setting in which only anti-FVIII plasma cells proliferate, than in IgG4-RD-only controls (3.0 10^-5 [2.0 10^-5-6.0 10^-5]), a polyclonal setting in which all IgG4⁺ plasma cells proliferate equally. Our patient had intermediate ratio values (2.7 10^-3 at diagnosis and 1.0 10^-3 at relapse), which could plead for a combination of both mechanisms. Although no definitive conclusion can be drawn, we hypothesized that the anti-FVIII autoantibody production in our IgG4-RD AHA patient could be the result of both broken tolerance to FVIII and bystander polyclonal IgG4⁺ plasma cell proliferation.

Role of lupus anticoagulants in immediate acting inhibitor positivity in congenital haemophilia A patients

OBJECTIVES

Presence of lupus anticoagulants (LA) in haemophilia and their interference in coagulation assays is well-known. Factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors are generally time and temperature dependent whereas LAs are immediate acting inhibitors (IAIs). The present study reports the challenges in laboratory detection of both progressive and non-progressive, specific FVIII inhibitors in the presence of LA.

METHODS

From 2012 through 2015, 4900 HA patients were screened for inhibitors. APTT based inhibitor screening tests and Nijmegen-modified Bethesda assay (NBA) were done in all samples. LA test and FVIII inhibitors by ELISA were done in patients with IAIs.

RESULTS

Out of 451 patients positive for inhibitors in the initial screening tests, classical and progressive FVIII inhibitors were observed in 398 patients while 53 had IAIs showing no/partial correction in 1:1 mixtures of NPP and patient plasma. In 27 patients, both FVIII and FIX activity levels were <1%, resulting in difficulty in diagnosis. In 48 HA patients with IAIs, 42 were LA positive. 4 patients were found to have only LA with false positive results in NBA while 38 had a combination of LA and FVIII inhibitors. Six patients were LA negative and had only FVIII IAIs. Five (62.5%) of 8 HA patients initiated on immune tolerance induction (ITI) also were positive for IAIs.

CONCLUSION

The findings emphasizes the presence of specific FVIII inhibitors in congenital HA with absence of time dependent inactivation kinetics in a small proportion of cases. ELISA or chromogenic assays along with LA testing can offer accurate laboratory diagnosis in patients with coexisting LA.

Prediction of factor VIII inhibitor development in the SIPPET cohort by mutational analysis and factor VIII antigen measurement

Essentials A residual factor VIII synthesis is likely to be protective towards inhibitor (INH) development. Mutation type-inhibitor risk association was explored in 231 patients with severe hemophilia A. A 2-fold increase in INH development for in silico null vs. non-null mutations was found. A 3.5-fold increase in INH risk for antigen negative vs. antigen positive mutations was found.

SUMMARY

Background The type of F8 mutation is the main predictor of inhibitor development in patients with severe hemophilia A. Mutations expected to allow residual synthesis of factor VIII are likely to play a protective role against alloantibody development by inducing immune tolerance. According to the expected full or partial impairment of FVIII synthesis, F8 variants are commonly classified as null and non-null. Objectives To explore the mutation type-inhibitor risk association in a cohort of 231 patients with severe hemophilia A enrolled in the Survey of Inhibitors in Plasma-Product Exposed Toddlers (SIPPET) randomized trial. Methods The genetic defects in these patients, consisting of inversions of intron 22 (n = 110) and intron 1 (n = 6), large deletions (n = 16), and nonsense (n = 38), frameshift (n = 28), missense (n = 19) and splicing (n = 14) variants, of which 34 have been previously unreported, were reclassified according to two additional criteria: the functional effects of missense and splicing alterations as predicted by multiple in silico analyses, and the levels of FVIII antigen in patient plasma. Results A two-fold increase in inhibitor development for in silico null mutations as compared with in silico non-null mutations (hazard ratio [HR] 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-5.17) and a 3.5-fold increase in inhibitor development for antigen-negative mutations as compared with antigen-positive mutations (HR 3.61, 95% CI 0.89-14.74] were found. Conclusions Our findings confirm an association between the synthesis of minute amounts of FVIII and inhibitor protection, and underline the importance of investigating the residual FVIII antigen levels associated with causative variants in order to understand their clinical relevance.

Laboratory testing for factor VIII and IX inhibitors in haemophilia: A review

Inhibitors are antibodies directed against haemophilia treatment products which interfere with their function. Factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors in haemophilia A and factor IX (FIX) inhibitors in haemophilia B are significant clinically when they require a change in a patient's treatment regimen. Their persistence may increase morbidity and mortality. Multiple laboratory tests are now available for detecting and understanding inhibitors in haemophilia. Inhibitors are traditionally measured by their interference in clotting or chromogenic factor assays. They may also be detected using immunologic assays, such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or fluorescence immunoassay. Anti-FVIII or anti-FIX antibodies of IgG4 subclass best correlate with the presence of functional inhibitors. Improvements in inhibitor measurement have been recently introduced. Preanalytical heat treatment of patient specimens allows testing of patients without delaying treatment. Use of chromogenic and immunologic assays may aid in identification of false-positive results, which are frequent among low-titre inhibitors. Validated reagent substitutions can be used to reduce assay cost. New methods for defining assay positivity and reporting low-titre inhibitors have been suggested. Challenges remain in the areas of quality control, assay standardization, monitoring of patients undergoing immune tolerance induction therapy and testing in the presence of modified and novel treatment products.

Timing and severity of inhibitor development in recombinant versus plasma-derived factor VIII concentrates: a SIPPET analysis

Essentials Recombinant factor VIII (rFVIII) was contrasted with plasma-derived FVIII (pdFVIII). In previously untreated patients with hemophilia A, rFVIII led to more inhibitors than pdFVIII. Inhibitors with rFVIII developed earlier, and the peak rate was higher than with pdFVIII. Inhibitors with rFVIII were more severe (higher titre) than with pdFVIII.

SUMMARY

Background The development of neutralizing antibodies (inhibitors) against factor VIII (FVIII) is the most severe complication in the early phases of treatment of severe hemophilia A. Recently, a randomized trial, the Survey of Inhibitors in Plasma-Product Exposed Toddlers (SIPPET) demonstrated a 2-fold higher risk of inhibitor development in children treated with recombinant FVIII (rFVIII) products than with plasma-derived FVIII (pdFVIII) during the first 50 exposure days (EDs). Objective/Methods In this post-hoc SIPPET analysis we evaluated the rate of inhibitor incidence over time by every 5 EDs (from 0 to 50 EDs) in patients treated with different classes of FVIII product, made possible by a frequent testing regime. Results The highest rate of inhibitor development occurred in the first 10 EDs, with a large contrast between rFVIII and pdFVIII during the first 5 EDs: hazard ratio 3.14 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-9.74) for all inhibitors and 4.19 (95% CI, 1.18-14.8) for high-titer inhibitors. For patients treated with pdFVIII, the peak of inhibitor development occurred later (6-10 EDs) and lasted for a shorter time. Conclusion These results emphasize the high immunologic vulnerability of patients during the earliest exposure to FVIII concentrates, with the strongest response to recombinant FVIII products.

Diagnostic accuracy study of a factor VIII ELISA for detection of factor VIII antibodies in congenital and acquired haemophilia A

Antibody formation to factor VIII (FVIII) remains the greatest clinical and diagnostic challenge to the haemophilia-treating physician. Current guidance for testing for inhibitory FVIII antibodies (inhibitors) recommends the functional Nijmegen-Bethesda assay (NBA). A FVIII ELISA offers a complementary, immunological approach for FVIII antibody testing. It was the aim of this study to retrospectively evaluate the performance of a FVIII ELISA (index) for detection of FVIII antibodies, compared with the NBA (reference). All samples sent for routine FVIII antibody testing at two haemophilia Comprehensive Care Centres, were tested in parallel using the NBA and a solid-phase, indirect FVIII ELISA kit (Immucor). A total of 497 samples from 239 patients (severe haemophilia A=140, non-severe haemophilia A=85, acquired haemophilia A=14) were available for analysis. Sixty-THree samples tested positive by the NBA (prevalence 12.7 %, 95 % confidence interval [CI], 9.9–15.9 %), with a median inhibitor titre of 1.2 BU/ml (range 0.7–978.0). The FVIII ELISA demonstrated a specificity of 94.0 % (95 %CI, 91.3–96.0), sensitivity of 77.8 % (95 %CI, 65.5–87.3), negative predictive value of 96.7 % (95 %CI, 94.5–98.2), positive predictive value 65.3 % (95 %CI, 53.5–76.0), negative likelihood ratio 0.2 (95 %CI, 0.1–0.4), positive likelihood ratio 13.0 (95 %CI, 8.7–19.3) and a diagnostic odds ratio of 54.9 (95 %CI, 27.0–112.0). Strong positive correlation (r=0.77, p< 0.001) was seen between the results of the NBA (log adjusted) and FVIII ELISA optical density. In conclusion, FVIII ELISA offers a simple, specific, surveillance method enabling batch testing of non-urgent samples for the presence of FVIII antibodies.

Detection and Measurement of Factor Inhibitors

Specific coagulation factor inhibitors, most notably to coagulation factor VIII, can develop in patients with hemophilia after exposure to replacement factor or as an acquired (autoimmune) event. Such inhibitors can be detected by a combination of prolonged coagulation screening tests, such as the activated partial thromboplastin time, plus a non-correcting mixing test. Non-correction may only be evident, or else may be extenuated, with incubation at 37 °C. The Bethesda assay for quantitation of inhibitor strength is based on a combination of mixing tests followed by specific factor assays.

A Randomized Trial of Factor VIII and Neutralizing Antibodies in Hemophilia A

BACKGROUND

The development of neutralizing anti-factor VIII alloantibodies (inhibitors) in patients with severe hemophilia A may depend on the concentrate used for replacement therapy.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized trial to assess the incidence of factor VIII inhibitors among patients treated with plasma-derived factor VIII containing von Willebrand factor or recombinant factor VIII. Patients who met the eligibility criteria (male sex, age <6 years, severe hemophilia A, and no previous treatment with any factor VIII concentrate or only minimal treatment with blood components) were included from 42 sites.

RESULTS

Of 303 patients screened, 264 underwent randomization and 251 were analyzed. Inhibitors developed in 76 patients, 50 of whom had high-titer inhibitors (≥5 Bethesda units). Inhibitors developed in 29 of the 125 patients treated with plasma-derived factor VIII (20 patients had high-titer inhibitors) and in 47 of the 126 patients treated with recombinant factor VIII (30 patients had high-titer inhibitors). The cumulative incidence of all inhibitors was 26.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 18.4 to 35.2) with plasma-derived factor VIII and 44.5% (95% CI, 34.7 to 54.3) with recombinant factor VIII; the cumulative incidence of high-titer inhibitors was 18.6% (95% CI, 11.2 to 26.0) and 28.4% (95% CI, 19.6 to 37.2), respectively. In Cox regression models for the primary end point of all inhibitors, recombinant factor VIII was associated with an 87% higher incidence than plasma-derived factor VIII (hazard ratio, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.17 to 2.96). This association did not change in multivariable analysis. For high-titer inhibitors, the hazard ratio was 1.69 (95% CI, 0.96 to 2.98). When the analysis was restricted to recombinant factor VIII products other than second-generation full-length recombinant factor VIII, effect estimates remained similar for all inhibitors (hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 0.99 to 3.97) and high-titer inhibitors (hazard ratio, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.11 to 6.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with plasma-derived factor VIII containing von Willebrand factor had a lower incidence of inhibitors than those treated with recombinant factor VIII. (Funded by the Angelo Bianchi Bonomi Foundation and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01064284; EudraCT number, 2009-011186-88.).

Pearls and pitfalls in factor inhibitor assays

The proper performance and interpretation of factor inhibitor assays is a critical role for the hemostasis laboratory. Both false-positive and false-negative inhibitor assays may be reported, leading to serious patient mismanagement. Knowledge and recognition of common causes of both false-positive and negative-results can aid in the identification of these potential pitfalls. Safeguards to reporting accurate factor inhibitor assays include initial characterization of the sample, using the Nijmegen modification, properly performing and interpreting an incubated mixing test in conjunction, and performing two dilutions for each dependent dilution in the factor inhibitor assay.

Does the presence of von Willebrand factor in FVIII-deficient plasma influences the measurement of FVIII inhibitor titres in haemophilia A patients?

INTRODUCTION

Reliable measurement of FVIII inhibitor is critical in the follow-up of haemophilia A patients. We performed a multicentre study to evaluate whether the presence of von Willebrand factor (VWF) in FVIII-deficient plasma (FVIII-DP) influences FVIII inhibitor titres.

METHODS

Six French haematology laboratories participated in this study. Three samples with varying FVIII inhibitor titres (1, 5 and 15 BU/mL) and one sample without any detectable FVIII inhibitor were tested using four different procedures for FVIII inhibitor assay. The Nijmegen method and a modified assay with imidazole were performed using FVIII-DP with and without VWF in the control mixture and as substrate plasma in the FVIII one stage assay (OSA). Each mixture (reference and test) was incubated for two hours at 37 °C with buffered normal pool plasma.

RESULTS

Higher inhibitor titres were measured in 5 and 15 BU/mL samples when assays were performed with the Nijmegen method and FVIII-DP without VWF. When samples were diluted in imidazole buffer, similar inhibitor titres, close to expected values, were measured whether VWF was present in the FVIII-DP or not. The data obtained were also more accurate when residual FVIII activity levels between 40% and 60% were used to calculate inhibitor titres, despite a linear type I reaction kinetics.

CONCLUSION

These results support the hypothesis that reliable FVIII inhibitor titres can be measured without the use of FVIII-DP containing VWF when an imidazole-modified assay is used.

Nijmegen-Bethesda assay to measure factor VIII inhibitors

Hemophilia A is an inherited bleeding disorder caused by a deficiency of factor VIII coagulant activity (FVIII:C). Patients are treated with infusions of either plasma-derived or recombinant factor VIII. However, some patients develop inhibitory antibodies (inhibitors) to infused factor VIII which render it ineffective. The original Bethesda method was developed to standardize measurement of inhibitors in a factor VIII neutralization assay. One Bethesda unit is defined as that amount of inhibitor that results in 50% residual FVIII:C activity of a defined test mixture. In the Nijmegen modification of the original Bethesda method, the pH and the protein concentration of the test mixture is further standardized. As a result, the FVIII:C in the test mixture is less prone to artifactual deterioration and the test has improved specificity. Even with a standardized procedure a number of factors can affect the performance of the test and it is important for laboratory staff to be aware of their impact on the result outcome.

Laboratory identification of factor inhibitors: an update

Coagulation factor inhibitors comprise antibodies that bind to and then neutralise specific pro-coagulant plasma proteins. Coagulation factor inhibitors can develop against any coagulation factor, although the most common are against factor VIII (FVIII). These can develop in individuals with inherited haemophilia A (HA) as an immune response to factor replacement therapy, or as auto-antibodies leading to the condition of acquired HA. Clinical suspicion for inhibitors may arise when individuals present with bleeding symptoms without any prior bleeding diathesis, or when a patient with known mild haemophilia presents with a bleeding diathesis more extreme to their usual presentation, or when there is failure of factor replacement therapy to arrest bleeding in a known haemophiliac. The laboratory identification of factor inhibitors requires a careful and systematic approach that excludes other possible causes of prolonged screening tests, most commonly the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), and sometimes prothrombin time (PT). Coagulation factor inhibitor studies, including the Bethesda assay, are then undertaken to measure inhibitor titre, which guides treatment. This paper overviews the laboratory investigation of factor inhibitors, and also briefly reviews recent cross-laboratory inhibitor studies and the most recent evidence related to differential inhibitor formation according to type of therapy.

Validation of Nijmegen-Bethesda assay modifications to allow inhibitor measurement during replacement therapy and facilitate inhibitor surveillance

BACKGROUND

As part of a pilot U.S. inhibitor surveillance project initiated at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2006, a centralized inhibitor measurement was instituted.

OBJECTIVE

To validate a modified method for inhibitor measurement suitable for surveillance of treated and untreated patients.

METHODS/RESULTS

In all, 710 subjects with hemophilia A were enrolled; 122 had a history of inhibitor (HI). Nijmegen-Bethesda assay (NBA) results on 50 split specimens shipped on cold packs and frozen were equivalent (r=0.998). Because 55% of 228 initial specimens had factor (F)VIII activity (VIII:C) present, a heat treatment step was added. Heating specimens to 56°C for 30 min and centrifuging removed FVIII, as demonstrated by a reduction of VIII:C and FVIII antigen to <1 U dL(-1) in recently treated patients. Among specimens inhibitor-negative before heating, one of 159 with negative HI and five of 30 with positive HI rose to ≥ 0.5 Nijmegen-Bethesda units (NBU) after heating. Correlation of heated and unheated inhibitor-positive specimens was 0.94 (P=0.0001). The modified method had a coefficient of variation (CV) for a 1 NBU positive control of 10.3% and for the negative control of 9.8%. Based on results on 710 enrollment specimens, a positive CDC inhibitor was defined as ≥ 0.5 NBU. Results were similar when 643 post-enrollment specimens were included. Of 160 enrolled hemophilia B patients, two had HI. All others had NBU ≤ 0.2 at enrollment.

CONCLUSION

The CDC experience demonstrates that this modified NBA can be standardized to be within acceptable limits for clinical tests and can be used for national surveillance.

Inhibitor treatment in haemophilias A and B: inhibitor diagnosis

The clinical diagnosis and quantitative measurement of polyclonal IgG inhibiting antibodies are the subjects of this review. Inhibitors in congenital haemophilia are usually diagnosed either as part of a routine surveillance schedule or following a bleeding episode that responds poorly to standard specific replacement therapy. Routine surveillance schedules for paediatric haemophilia A patients during high-risk incidence periods are variable and the subject of ongoing discussion. There have never been any published recommendations for following haemophilia B patients at high risk for inhibitor development. The Factor VIII/IX Subcommittee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis scientifically endorsed the Nijmegen method for inhibitor measurement in 1996. However, there are many unresolved issues surrounding inhibitor diagnosis using these assays. These issues include: (i) questions of accuracy and inter-assay variability inherent to the one-stage clotting assay; (ii) lack of consensus regarding the assay cut-off for negative determination; (iii) lack of assay standardization and (iv) the clinical importance of capturing non-neutralizing antibodies currently not measured in the functional assays. Ongoing efforts to resolve these issues will be discussed.

Tailored prophylaxis in severe hemophilia A: interim results from the first 5 years of the Canadian Hemophilia Primary Prophylaxis Study

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic treatment for severe hemophilia A is likely to be more effective than treatment when bleeding occurs, however, prophylaxis is costly. We studied an inception cohort of 25 boys using a tailored prophylaxis approach to see if clotting factor use could be reduced with acceptable outcomes.

METHODS

Ten Canadian centers enrolled subjects in this 5-year study. Children were followed every 3 months at a comprehensive care hemophilia clinic. They were initially treated with once-weekly clotting factor; the frequency was escalated in a stepwise fashion if unacceptable bleeding occurred. Bleeding frequency, target joint development, physiotherapy and radiographic outcomes, as well as resource utilization, were determined prospectively.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 4.1 years (total 96.9 person-years). The median time to escalate to twice-weekly therapy was 3.42 years (lower 95% confidence limit 2.05 years). Nine subjects developed target joints at a rate of 0.09 per person-year. There was an average of 1.2 joint bleeds per person-year. The cohort consumed on average 3656 IU kg(-1)year(-1) of factor (F) VIII. Ten subjects required central venous catheters (three while on study); no complications of these devices were seen. One subject developed a transient FVIII inhibitor. End-of-study joint examination scores--both clinically and radiographically--were normal or near-normal.

CONCLUSIONS

Most boys with severe hemophilia A will probably have little bleeding and good joint function with tailored prophylaxis, while infusing less FVIII than usually required for traditional prophylaxis.

The Role of Immunomodulation in the Management of Factor VIII Inhibitors

Approximately 25% of persons with hemophilia A will have their treatment complicated by the development of anti-FVIII inhibitory antibodies. This adverse event requires the use of alternative hemostatic agents to treat bleeding and the consideration of a protocol to generate immunological tolerance to FVIII. The pathogenetic factors contributing to FVIII inhibitor generation include both patient- and concentrate-related characteristics. The FVIII genotype contributes to this risk as do other, less well defined, immunogenetic factors. The role of the type of FVIII concentrate as a precipitant for inhibitor generation appears to be less influential. Immunomodulatory management of FVIII inhibitors requires sustained and repeated exposure to FVIII through a variety of intravenous immune tolerance induction (ITI) protocols. Certain pre-ITI characteristics predict for the likelihood of success, most especially the pre-ITI anti-FVIII inhibitor titer. Currently, two major areas of debate remain unresolved with relation to the optimal form of ITI schedule. The best FVIII dose to generate FVIII tolerance is under investigation in an international prospective trial, while the issue of whether von Willebrand factor–containing concentrates may provide more powerful tolerizing effects remains open for further discussion. With a variety of ITI protocols, success rates of approximately 80% have been achieved with good-risk patients. In those that fail initial attempts at ITI, additional treatments using agents such rituximab are now being explored with further evidence of success in 60–80% of these salvage patients. Finally, several pre-clinical studies of innovative approaches to achieving FVIII tolerance suggest that combinations of immunomodulatory therapy may be of benefit in the future.

Can activated recombinant factor VII be used to postpone the exposure of infants to factor VIII until after 2 years of age?

Two retrospective studies have suggested that exposure to factor VIII (FVIII) in early infancy is associated with an increased risk of FVIII inhibitor development. We prospectively studied 11 infants who needed replacement therapy for bleeding episodes before the age of 2 years. They received activated recombinant factor VII (rFVIIa) concentrate on demand, with the intention of postponing their first exposure to FVIII after 2 years of age. Thirty-three bleeding episodes were treated with 154 doses of rFVIIa with no evidence of adverse effect. Bleeding was controlled in 27 of 33 episodes. Mouth bleeds were most difficult to treat. The use of rFVIIa allowed postponement of the use of FVIII for a mean of 5.5 months (median 4, range 0-12) but in only three of 11 children could be the first exposure to factor postponed after the age of 2 years. With this modest effect of rFVIIa in postponing the first exposure to FVIII, more convincing evidence for the benefit of such a postponement will have to be demonstrated before rFVIIa could be recommended for this indication.

Aminoglycoside suppression of nonsense mutations in severe hemophilia

Aminoglycoside antibiotics exhibit their bactericidal effect by interfering with normal ribosomal activity. In this pilot study, we have evaluated the effect of the aminoglycoside antibiotic gentamicin on the factor VIII (FVIII) and IX levels of severe hemophiliacs with known nonsense mutations. Five patients were enrolled and each patient was given 3 consecutive days of gentamicin at a dose of 7 mg/kg intravenously every 24 hours. Two patients (patient no. 1: hemophilia A, Ser1395Stop; and patient no. 5: hemophilia B, Arg333Stop) showed a decrease in their activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), an increase in their FVIII (0.016 IU/mL, 1.6%) or FIX (0.02 IU/mL, 2%) levels, and an increase in thrombin generation. The remaining 3 patients (patient no. 2: hemophilia B, Arg252Stop; patient no. 3: hemophilia A, Arg2116Stop; and patient no. 4: hemophilia A, Arg427Stop) showed no response in the aPTTs or factor levels, but one (patient no. 2: hemophilia B, Arg252Stop) showed an increase in the factor IX antigen level (2%-5.5%) that persisted throughout the period of the study and was concordant with an increase in thrombin generation. Gentamicin is unlikely to be an effective treatment for severe hemophilia due to its potential toxicities and the minimal response documented in this report. This study, however, does provide a proof of principle, suggesting that ribosomal interference with a less toxic agent may be a potential therapeutic mechanism for severe hemophilia patients with nonsense mutations.