Sequential therapy with activated prothrombin complex concentrate and recombinant factor VIIa in patients with severe haemophilia and inhibitors

Reduced plasma factor X is associated with a lack of response to recombinant activated factor VII in patients with hemophilia A and inhibitor, but does not impair emicizumab-driven hemostasis in vitro

BACKGROUND

The hemostatic effect of recombinant (r) factor (F)VIIa after repetitive intermittent administration may be attenuated in patients with hemophilia A (PwHA) with inhibitors (PwHAwI) creating a clinically unresponsive status, although mechanism(s) remain to be clarified. In patients receiving prophylaxis treatment with emicizumab, concomitant rFVIIa is sometimes utilized in multiple doses for surgical procedures or breakthrough bleeding.

AIM AND METHODS

We identified 'unresponsiveness' to rFVIIa, based on global coagulation function monitored using rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in 11 PwHAwI and 5 patients with acquired HA, and investigated possible mechanisms focusing on the association between plasma FX levels and rFVIIa-mediated interactions.

RESULTS

Our data demonstrated that FX antigen levels were lower in the rFVIIa-unresponsive group than in the rFVIIa-responsive group (0.46 ± 0.14 IU/mL vs. 0.87 ± 0.15 IU/mL, p < 0.01). This relationship was further examined by thrombin generation assays using a FX-deficient PwHAwI plasma model. The addition of FX with rFVIIa was associated with increased peak thrombin (PeakTh) generation. At low levels of FX (<0.5 IU/mL), rFVIIa failed to increase PeakTh to the normal range, consistent with clinical rFVIIa-unresponsiveness. In the presence of emicizumab (50 μg/mL), PeakTh was increased maximally to 80 % of normal, even at low levels of FX (0.28 IU/mL).

CONCLUSIONS

Unresponsiveness to rFVIIa was associated with reduced levels of FX in PwHAwI. Emicizumab exhibited in vitro coagulation potential in the presence of FX at concentrations that appeared to limit the clinical response to rFVIIa therapy.

Immunogenicity of Therapeutic Biological Modalities - Lessons from Hemophilia A Therapies

The introduction and development of biologics such as therapeutic proteins, gene-, and cell-based therapy have revolutionized the scope of treatment for many diseases. However, a significant portion of the patients develop unwanted immune reactions against these novel biological modalities, referred to as immunogenicity, and no longer benefit from the treatments. In the current review, using Hemophilia A (HA) therapy as an example, we will discuss the immunogenicity issue of multiple biological modalities. Currently, the number of therapeutic modalities that are approved or recently explored to treat HA, a hereditary bleeding disorder, is increasing rapidly. These include, but are not limited to, recombinant factor VIII proteins, PEGylated FVIII, FVIII Fc fusion protein, bispecific monoclonal antibodies, gene replacement therapy, gene editing therapy, and cell-based therapy. They offer the patients a broader range of more advanced and effective treatment options, yet immunogenicity remains the most critical complication in the management of this disorder. Recent advances in strategies to manage and mitigate immunogenicity will also be reviewed.

Efficacy and safety evaluation of eptacog beta (coagulation factor VIIa [recombinant]-jncw) for the treatment of hemophilia A and B with inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Bypassing agents (BPAs) are used to treat acute bleeding episodes, manage bleeding during perioperative care, and prophylactically minimize bleed occurrence in persons with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors (PwHABI). However, the effectiveness of BPAs that have been prescribed for the last several decades can be variable, motivating the development of a new recombinant activated factor VII, eptacog beta.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers key eptacog beta findings from phase 1b and phase 3 (PERSEPT) clinical trials, which formed the basis for its regulatory approval to treat PwHABI ages 12 and older. Descriptions of eptacog beta structure and glycosylation profile, mechanism of action, preclinical study results, and cost analyses are also presented.

EXPERT OPINION

PwHABI have had only two options for bleed treatment for the past several decades. With its distinct glycosylation profile, eptacog beta offers a novel therapy aiming to improve upon BPAs currently in use, providing an option with more than one dosing regimen and a rapid response that allows most bleeds to be treated with just one dose. This has become particularly important given the use of subcutaneous medications (e.g., emicizumab) for prophylaxis of bleeding. Clinicians should consider eptacog beta as a BPA for all PwHABI.

Thromboembolic event rate in patients exposed to anti-inhibitor coagulant complex: a meta-analysis of 40-year published data

Anti-inhibitor coagulant complex (AICC), an activated prothrombin complex concentrate, has been available for the treatment of patients with inhibitors since 1977, and thromboembolic events (TEEs) have been reported after infusion of AICC in patients with congenital or acquired hemophilia. With the aim of estimating the TEE incidence rate (IR) related to AICC exposure in these patients, a systematic review of the literature was carried out in Medline, according to PRISMA guidelines, from inception date to March 2017. The IR of TEEs was estimated through a meta-analytic approach by using a generalized linear mixed model based on a Poisson distribution. Thirty-nine studies were included (1980-2016). Overall, 46 TEEs were reported; of these, 13 were reported as disseminated intravascular coagulations, 11 as myocardial infarctions, and 3 as thrombotic cerebrovascular accidents. The pooled TEE IR was 2.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-25.40) per 100 000 AICC infusions (5.42 in retrospective studies [95% CI, 0.92-31.82]; 1.09 in prospective studies [95% CI, 0.01-238.77]). The TEE rate was 5.09 (95% CI, 0.01-1795.60) per 100 000 AICC infusions administered on demand, whereas no TEEs were reported with prophylaxis. Interestingly, the estimated IR in patients with congenital hemophilia was <0.01 per 100 000 infusions. These findings provide robust evidence of safety of AICC over almost 40 years of published studies.

How I use bypassing therapy for prophylaxis in patients with hemophilia A and inhibitors

Inhibitor development poses a significant challenge in the management of hemophilia because once an inhibitor is present, bleeding episodes can no longer be treated with standard clotting factor replacement therapy. Consequently, patients with inhibitors are at increased risk for difficult-to-control bleeding and complications, particularly arthropathy and physical disability. Three clinical trials in patients with inhibitors have demonstrated that prophylaxis with a bypassing agent reduces joint and other types of bleeding and improves health-related quality of life compared with on-demand bypassing therapy. In hemophilia patients without inhibitors, the initiation of prophylaxis with factor (F) VIII or FIX prior to the onset of recurrent hemarthroses can prevent the development of joint disease. Whether this is also true for bypassing agent prophylaxis remains to be determined.

Toward optimal therapy for inhibitors in hemophilia

Treatment of patients with hemophilia A and B has undergone significant advances during the past 2 decades. However, despite these advances, the development of antibodies that inhibit the function of infused clotting factor remains a major challenge and is considered the most significant complication of hemophilia treatment. This chapter reviews current tools available for the care of patients with inhibitors and highlights areas where progress is imminent or strongly needed. For management of bleeding, bypassing agents remain the mainstay of therapy. Recombinant factor VIIa and activated prothrombin complex concentrates are similarly effective in populations of patients with hemophilia and inhibitors; however, individuals may show a better response to one agent over another. Recent studies have shown that prophylaxis with bypassing agents can reduce bleeding episodes by ∼50%-80%. The prophylactic use of bypassing agents is an important tool to reduce morbidity in patients before they undergo immune tolerance induction (ITI) and in those with persistent high titer inhibitors, but cost and lack of convenience remain barriers. Because of the significant burden that inhibitors add to the individual patient and the health care system, inhibitor eradication should be pursued in as many patients as possible. ITI is an effective tool, particularly in patients with severe hemophilia A and good risk profiles, and leads to a return to a normal factor VIII response in ∼60% of patients. However, for the group of patients who fail to respond to ITI or have hemophilia B, new and improved tools are needed.

Toward optimal therapy for inhibitors in hemophilia

Treatment of patients with hemophilia A and B has undergone significant advances during the past 2 decades. However, despite these advances, the development of antibodies that inhibit the function of infused clotting factor remains a major challenge and is considered the most significant complication of hemophilia treatment. This chapter reviews current tools available for the care of patients with inhibitors and highlights areas where progress is imminent or strongly needed. For management of bleeding, bypassing agents remain the mainstay of therapy. Recombinant factor VIIa and activated prothrombin complex concentrates are similarly effective in populations of patients with hemophilia and inhibitors; however, individuals may show a better response to one agent over another. Recent studies have shown that prophylaxis with bypassing agents can reduce bleeding episodes by ∼50%-80%. The prophylactic use of bypassing agents is an important tool to reduce morbidity in patients before they undergo immune tolerance induction (ITI) and in those with persistent high titer inhibitors, but cost and lack of convenience remain barriers. Because of the significant burden that inhibitors add to the individual patient and the health care system, inhibitor eradication should be pursued in as many patients as possible. ITI is an effective tool, particularly in patients with severe hemophilia A and good risk profiles, and leads to a return to a normal factor VIII response in ∼60% of patients. However, for the group of patients who fail to respond to ITI or have hemophilia B, new and improved tools are needed.

Challenges and open issues in the management of acquired hemophilia A (AHA)

Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) is a rare autoimmune bleeding disorder caused by antibodies which neutralize the function of factor VIII (FVIII). The disease presents a complex clinical challenge to the treating Physicians and Hematologists. As the disease is associated with high mortality, prompt management is necessary. Early recognition, quick diagnosis and timely referral to a specialized center are important for better management of these patients. The different clinical manifestations, underlying pathology, inhibitor kinetics and the associated age related comorbidities do not allow extrapolation of the treatment protocols of congenital hemophilia to AHA. The basic strategies of the management of AHA patients involve maintaining hemostasis, suppression or eradication of antibodies, diagnosis and treatment of underlying pathology and avoid treatment related complications like thrombosis. The efficiency of hemostatic agents which are generally used to treat AHA is unpredictable. Due to the rarity of the disease, there are no randomized clinical trials on the management of this disorder and thus the expertise and experience of the treating Physicians' guide treatment strategies.

Sequential therapy with activated prothrombin complex concentrates and recombinant activated factor VII to treat unresponsive bleeding in patients with hemophilia and inhibitors: a single center experience

BACKGROUND

Currently, the greatest challenge in hemophilia treatment is managing hemophilia patients with inhibitors. The two main bypassing agents that are used to treat hemophilia patients with inhibitors are activated prothrombin complex concentrates (APCC) and recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa). Hemophilia patients with inhibitors can develop bleeding episodes, that are refractory to monotherapy with either APCC or rFVIIa and thus are often difficult to manage.

METHODS

This report describes a retrospective chart review of four hospitalized patients with severe hemophilia and inhibitors who were treated with sequential therapy of APCC and rFVIIa for refractory bleeding. Sequential therapy was defined as the administration of both rFVIIa and APCC within 12 h.

RESULTS

In 5 episodes experienced by 4 patients with inhibitors, bleeding was not controlled by single bypass treatment, but it was controlled when two agents were sequentially administered. Sequential therapy was administered by alternating one APCC dose to 1 to 2 rFVIIa doses, with dosing intervals ranging from 3 to 6 h. All bleeding episodes were controlled within 12 to 24 h. Sequential therapy was discontinued after 2 to 5 days. No adverse clinical events, such as thrombosis, were observed.

CONCLUSION

Sequential therapy with APCC and rFVIIa was efficacious without adverse events; however, attention on thrombosis is needed. In addition, a prospective clinical trial is needed to provide further evidence for this treatment.

Factor VIII inhibitors in hemophilia A: rationale and latest evidence

Factor VIII (FVIII) replacement therapy is the foundation of treatment in hemophilia A and is effective unless a patient develops an alloantibody (inhibitor) against exogenous FVIII. Inhibitor development is currently the most significant treatment complication seen in patients with hemophilia and is associated with considerable morbidity and a decreased quality of life. The development of an inhibitor is the result of a complex interaction between a patient's immune system and genetic and environmental risk factors. The mainstay of treatment is the eradication of the inhibitor through immune tolerance. This review summarizes the current evidence regarding inhibitor risk factors, eradication, and hemostatic bypassing agents.

Acquired hemophilia: a rare but life-threatening potential cause of bleeding in the intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

There are a number of potential etiologies of severe bleeding encountered in the intensive care unit. Although rare, acquired hemophilia is one such etiology that often presents with major bleeding requiring intensive care. Despite the introduction of effective treatments, the reported mortality rate of patients with acquired hemophilia ranges from 6 to 8% and is in part attributable to sequential delays in diagnosis and appropriate treatment. The purpose of this review is to familiarize the intensive care specialist with this underrecognized cause of bleeding, with an emphasis on diagnosis and treatment.

METHODS

As the objective of this article was to provide a concise overview of the diagnosis and management of acquired hemophilia, a directed search of English-language literature was undertaken using the PubMed database, targeting such topics as the differential diagnosis of bleeding in the intensive care unit and the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of acquired hemophilia. Clinical study findings pertaining to the efficacy of specific treatments for acquired hemophilia were summarized.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Recognition of acquired hemophilia presents a clinical challenge, given the rarity of this condition, a general lack of familiarity with acquired hemophilia, and the potential for confusion with other more common causes of bleeding in the intensive care unit. Nevertheless, there are sentinel clinical and laboratory findings that should raise suspicion of this diagnosis. The treatment of acquired hemophilia is a multi-step, physiologically focused process aimed at controlling both active and recurrent bleeding. Therefore, prompt diagnosis is central to prognosis. Consultation with a hematologist may facilitate efficient diagnosis and management.

Management of difficult-to-treat inhibitor patients

The workshop looked at seven scenarios based on fictional and real-life cases of difficult-to-treat patients with haemophilia A or haemophilia B and inhibitors with the aim of sharing clinical opinion and experience from around the world. Delegate opinions on the best treatment option for each scenario are described together with actual treatment given in real-life cases and its outcome.

Critical appraisal of the role of recombinant activated factor VII in the treatment of hemophilia patients with inhibitors

Hemophilia patients with inhibitors faced the constraint of inadequate treatment for several years before the era of recombinant factor VIIa (rFVII). Initially, rFVIIa was used in the compassionate-use programs. After a worldwide license was issued, more than 1.5 million doses were administered. Bleeding of joints and muscles was controlled effectively by means of an early home treatment program, with either a standard dose of 90 μg/kg every 2 to 3 hours for a few doses or a single dose of 270 μg/kg. For more serious bleeding episodes or minor surgery, an initial dose of 90 μg/kg was given every 2 hours for 24 to 48 hours followed by increased intervals of 3 to 6 hours according to the severity of bleeding and efficacy of bleeding control. In cases of major surgery such as orthopedic procedures, the same regimen can be applied except for a higher initial dose of 120 to 180 μg/kg. However, increasing the dose should be considered if there are unexpected bleeding complications since the half-life and clearance of rFVIIa differ between individuals. In addition, prophylaxis is administered to a small number of patients. Finally, the reported thromboembolic events found in hemophilia patients with inhibitors receiving rFVIIa are extremely low, much less than 1%.

International recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of patients with acquired hemophilia A

Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) is a rare bleeding disorder characterized by autoantibodies directed against circulating coagulation factor (F) VIII. Typically, patients with no prior history of a bleeding disorder present with spontaneous bleeding and an isolated prolonged aPTT. AHA may, however, present without any bleeding symptoms, therefore an isolated prolonged aPTT should always be investigated further irrespective of the clinical findings. Control of acute bleeding is the first priority, and we recommend first-line therapy with bypassing agents such as recombinant activated FVII or activated prothrombin complex concentrate. Once the diagnosis has been achieved, immediate autoantibody eradication to reduce subsequent bleeding risk should be performed. We recommend initial treatment with corticosteroids or combination therapy with corticosteroids and cyclophosphamide and suggest second-line therapy with rituximab if first-line therapy fails or is contraindicated. In contrast to congenital hemophilia, no comparative studies exist to support treatment recommendations for patients with AHA, therefore treatment guidance must rely on the expertise and clinical experience of specialists in the field. The aim of this document is to provide a set of international practice guidelines based on our collective clinical experience in treating patients with AHA and contribute to improved care for this patient group.

How we treat a hemophilia A patient with a factor VIII inhibitor

The most significant complication of treatment in patients with hemophilia A is the development of alloantibodies that inhibit factor VIII activity. In the presence of inhibitory antibodies, replacement of the missing clotting factor by infusion of factor VIII becomes less effective. Once replacement therapy is ineffective, acute management of bleeding requires agents that bypass factor VIII activity. Long-term management consists of eradicating the inhibitor through immune tolerance. Despite success in the treatment of acute bleeding and inhibitor eradication, there remains an inability to predict or prevent inhibitor formation. Ideally, prediction and ultimately prevention will come with an improved understanding of how patient-specific and treatment-related factors work together to influence anti–factor VIII antibody production.

From theory to practice: applying current clinical knowledge and treatment strategies to the care of hemophilia a patients with inhibitors

Two bypassing agents are currently available to circumvent the need for factor FVIII in hemophilia A patients with inhibitors: the activated prothrombin complex FEIBA VH and recombinant activated factor VII (NovoSeven. Both products are highly effective in controlling bleeding in the presence of inhibitory alloantibodies, yet their hemostatic efficacy can be unpredictable. As the results of the FEIBA NovoSeven( Comparative (FENOC) study illustrate, patients may respond better to one bypassing agent than the other. Furthermore, guidelines from an expert panel reflect that responsiveness to bypassing therapy may change from one bleed to the next in the same patient and even from hour to hour during the course of a single bleeding event. These findings underscore the need to have both bypassing products available to treat bleeding episodes in inhibitor patients, to frequently evaluate the efficacy of hemostasis during the course of a bleeding event, and to switch products early if the response to treatment is unsatisfactory.

A systematic approach to controlling problem bleeds in patients with severe congenital haemophilia A and high-titre inhibitors

The presence of inhibitory antibodies to clotting factors complicates the treatment of bleeding in haemophilia patients. For patients with high-titre inhibitors, bypassing agents are essential to haemostatic management. To determine optimal treatment practices, an international panel of physicians convened to develop a systematic treatment approach for problem bleeds (i.e. bleeds that are unresponsive to initial therapy with a single agent within a reasonable amount of time) in haemophilia patients with inhibitors.

AIM

The goal of this panel was to develop a consensus algorithm that would aid physicians in considering a variety of treatment approaches to optimize patient care by preventing extensive therapy with inadequate treatments that may lead to suboptimal patient outcomes and unnecessary costs.

METHODS

Consensus opinions were analyzed for clinical preferences at different time periods, depending on patient response to treatment. Decision-making points were defined based on the type of bleed: every 8-12 h for the first 24 h, then every 24 h thereafter for limb-threatening bleeds; every 2-4 h for 2-7 days for life-threatening bleeds.

RESULTS

The resultant consensus guidelines provide a generalized methodology to guide the treatment of problem bleeds in patients with severe haemophilia A and inhibitors, and emphasize changing treatment at the first sign of an inadequate haemostatic response. The treatment algorithms apply to both paediatric and adult patients, although the differences between the two groups were reviewed.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines are focused on optimising the timing of treatment decisions, which may lead to faster responses and improved outcomes.

Surgical interventions in a cohort of patients with haemophilia A and inhibitors: an experiential retrospective chart review

Strategies for the management of perioperative bleeding in patients with haemophilia and inhibitors have evolved rapidly as a result of the development of the bypassing agents Factor Eight Inhibitor Bypassing Activity, Anti-inhibitor Coagulant Complex (FEIBA) and activated recombinant factor VII (rFVIIa). However, there are currently no established guidelines for perioperative use of bypassing agents, and few controlled clinical studies have been carried out. Thus, case reports, such as those presented here, provide useful anecdotal evidence to guide the treatment of inhibitor patients. The purpose of this report was to describe experiences in the use of bypassing agents in a small cohort of patients with haemophilia A and inhibitors undergoing surgical procedures. Cases from five treatment centres were reviewed. Twenty-two procedures using FEIBA, rFVIIa or a combination of both agents were compiled from seven inhibitor patients (six with an alloantibody inhibitor and one with an acquired autoantibody inhibitor). Eleven procedures used FEIBA monotherapy, two employed rFVIIa monotherapy and nine were performed using combination therapy. Supplemental therapies were required to manage bleeding in some cases. Haemostatic control was achieved in all cases, and treatment regimens were generally well tolerated. One thrombotic adverse event was reported: evidence of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) was found after rFVIIa use in one case, although the direct cause of DIC was unknown. The experiences in this case review demonstrate that both major and minor surgical procedures can be safely performed in patients with haemophilia and high-titre inhibitors under the cover of bypassing agents, with a high expectation of success.

An overview of the history, clinical practice concerns, comparative studies and strategies to optimize therapy of bypassing agents

Despite significant advances in the treatment of haemophilia, including availability of recombinant coagulation factor replacement products and the use of prophylactic infusion regimens, the segment of haemophilic patients who develop inhibitory antibodies remain at higher risk for morbidity and mortality associated with recurrent or uncontrolled bleeding events. Bypassing agents represent the mainstay of treatment and prevention of bleeding. The most commonly used of the currently available therapeutic agents are a plasma-based therapy, factor eight inhibitor bypassing activity, vapour heated, and a recombinant therapy, NovoSeven (recombinant activated factor VIIa). A substantial body of literature exists to document efficacy and adverse event profiles for these two products. There is, however, a paucity of data arising from adequately powered prospective trials to determine optimal treatment and dosing in various clinical situations. Certain clinical circumstances, patient profiles, individual responses, or provider predilection may lead to preferential use of one of these products over the other; however, the continued presence of both agents in the therapeutic armamentarium remains critically important to this fragile population. The historical use, clinical practice concerns, published comparative studies and methods for optimization of these two bypassing agents are reviewed.

Factor VIIa analogue (V158D/E296V/M298Q-FVIIa) normalises clot formation in whole blood from patients with severe haemophilia A

This study evaluated and compared the haemostatic potential of a recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) analogue (V158D/E296V/M298Q-FVIIa, NN1731, Novo Nordisk, Denmark) with rFVIIa (NovoSeven, Novo Nordisk). In vitro studies were performed using freshly drawn whole blood (WB) from 14 patients with severe haemophilia A and two patients with inhibitory antibodies to FVIII, comparing NN1731 and rFVIIa against a buffer control. Fourteen healthy males served as controls. Dynamic WB coagulation profiles were recorded, quantitatively illustrating the initiation [clotting time = CT (s)], propagation [maximum velocity = MaxVel (mm*100/s)] and termination [maximum clot firmness = MCF (mm*100)] as determined by thromboelastography with minute amounts of tissue factor (TF, Innovin - final dilution 1:50 000, c. 0.12 pM) serving as activator. WB clot stability was assessed using a separate set-up including TF plus tissue plasminogen activator (final concentration 2 nmol/l), evaluating the MCF as well as the area under the elasticity curve (AUEC) after 60 min (mm*100*s). NN1731 shortened the CT more markedly than rFVIIa. At the dose tested, NN1731 even shortened CT in haemophilia below the value of healthy males. NN1731 accelerated MaxVel giving a value indistinguishable from that in healthy males. Furthermore, NN1731 increased clot stability more markedly than rFVIIa. Altogether, these in vitro studies on WB revealed a favourable haemostatic potential of NN1731 compared with rFVIIa in severe haemophilia A, both in the absence and presence of enhanced fibrinolytic activity.

Sequential therapy with activated prothrombin complex concentrates and recombinant FVIIa in patients with severe haemophilia and inhibitors: update of our previous experience

Haemophilia patients with inhibitors can develop bleeding episodes, which are refractory to monotherapy with either recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) or activated prothrombin complex concentrates (APCC). Management of such bleeds is often difficult. We previously reported the safety of using a combination of rFVIIa and APCC given in sequential fashion. In this report, we update our experience with sequential therapy. A retrospective review of medical records was conducted including all reports of sequential therapy defined as receiving both rFVIIa and APCC within 6 h. Data extracted included demographic data, treatment prior to and following hospital admission, clinical data including type and location of bleed, response to therapy, physical examination and laboratory data. In addition, for some patients, thromboelastography was performed to document the effect of sequential therapy on clot formation characteristics. Four patients comprising 35 admissions, 209 hospital days and 115 days of sequential therapy were included in the updated dataset. No patient developed thrombosis or overt disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) although elevations in the D-dimer above 5 microg mL(-1) were noted in 42% of the courses that lasted >3 days. Efficacy is suggested by the fact that patients had resolution of their bleeds after a median of 3 days of sequential therapy after failing to respond to a median of 3 days of monotherapy. Thromboelastography demonstrated an additive effect. Sequential therapy is a safe, potentially efficacious approach in the management of refractory bleeding episodes in patients with haemophilia and inhibitors.

Use of FEIBA for invasive or surgical procedures in patients with severe hemophilia A or B with inhibitors

Achieving hemostasis in patients with hemophilia A or B is complicated by the presence of inhibitors and is made even more difficult when these individuals require surgery. Over a 4-year period, 6 patients with inhibitors to factor VIII and 1 patient with inhibitors to factor IX underwent surgery or invasive procedures at our institution. A total of 26 procedures were performed, primarily using the bypassing agent FEIBA for bleeding control. Excellent hemostasis was obtained in all cases, adding to accumulating data indicating that FEIBA is safe and effective in hemophilia patients with inhibitors who require surgery.

Successful self-infusion of activated prothrombin complex concentrate for prophylaxis in a child with a factor VIII inhibitor

Regular self-infusion of an activated prothrombin complex concentrate (APCC) has been successfully introduced to a 14-year-old boy with hemophilia A. The child was diagnosed as a neonate, and at age 7 years, developed a high titer (127 BU/mL) factor VIII inhibitor coincident with a protracted ankle joint bleeding. From age 7-10 years, he received on-demand therapy using a prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), PROPLEX-ST. From age 10-14 years, he received prophylaxis with PROPLEX-ST, initiated after an intracranial hemorrhage and coincident anamnestic inhibitor response. Throughout 7-year period of PCC treatment, he experienced recurrent bleeding episodes. Self-prophylaxis with APCC, FEIBA VH [Anti-inhibitor Coagulant Complex] (50 U/kg/dose three times per week) using infusion pump was initiated at 14 years of age and has continued for 2 years. There were no bleeding, thrombotic events or other adverse events after initiation of this prophylaxis, and inhibitor levels decreased to 1 BU/mL. His quality of life was improved, particularly with respect to school. Our long observation proposes a well-disciplined home-based FEIBA prophylaxis in inhibitor-positive hemophiliacs.

Application of current knowledge to the management of bleeding events during immune tolerance induction

The development of inhibitors to factor VIII is the most serious adverse event associated with the treatment of haemophilia A, predisposing patients to uncontrollable haemorrhage, disability and premature death. Eradication of inhibitors via immune tolerance induction (ITI) is effective in the majority of patients, but may require months to years to achieve success. In the interim, the treatment and prevention of acute bleeding episodes are primary foci of care. Regrettably, there is a paucity of information regarding management of bleeding episodes in inhibitor patients undergoing tolerization. Until specific data from ongoing clinical trials are available to provide more guidance in this patient group, it is reasonable and useful to rely on the broader base of medical literature pertaining to patients not being tolerized to deduce strategies for controlling acute and perioperative bleeding episodes in inhibitor patients during ITI.

Individualization of bypassing agent treatment for haemophilic patients with inhibitors utilizing thromboelastography

The treatment of bleeding for haemophilic patients with inhibitors relies on the use of the bypassing agents, recombinant factor VIIa and factor eight inhibitor bypass activity (FEIBA). While both therapies are effective in the majority of bleeding episodes, there is a significant amount of interindividual variability when it comes to the response to therapy. As of yet, there is no reliable laboratory parameter that can predict the response to therapy in the same manner that factor VIII and factor IX levels predict response in non-inhibitor patients. Developing such a laboratory parameter is vital in order to maximize the clinical efficacy of these agents. Thromboelastography (TEG) is a device, which assesses clot formation over time in whole blood and has several characteristics which suggest it may be an effective way to monitor bypass agent therapy. We studied the ability of TEG to individualize the treatment regimens of three patients with high titre inhibitors assessing the response to recombinant factor VIIa, FEIBA, and when both were used sequentially. The TEG allowed for individualization of treatment for each of the three patients and resulted in more effective, convenient and less expensive treatment regimens. We thus believe that TEG is a promising device for monitoring of bypass agent therapy and should be studied further.