Pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of IMMUNATE solvent/detergent (IMMUNATE S/D) in previously treated patients with severe hemophilia A: results of a prospective, multicenter, open-label phase III study

Quality of clinical studies present in the package inserts of coagulation factors used in the treatment of hemophilia

Objective

To identify and analyze the quality of scientific evidence from clinical efficacy studies present in the package inserts of coagulation factors, used in the treatment of hemophilia A and B.

Methods

Documentary study developed in two stages. The first stage consisted of identifying the medicine packages inserts electronically registered in the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency, and analyzing the availability of the bibliographic references cited therein. This analysis was conducted in the PubMed, SciELO, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases. The second step was the analysis of the methodological quality of the efficacy studies. Two trained researchers used the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias version 5.1.0 tools for methodological quality analysis, and Review Manager 5.4 software to generate the risk of bias graph.

Results

Of the 17 medicines listed, 7 had referenced package inserts. Of these, 10 studies were eligible for analysis of methodological quality. More than half of the analyzed studies did not control for selection, performance, and detection bias. A total of 100% controlled attrition and reporting biases, and 50% had a high risk of conflict of interest.

Conclusion

The biases present are significant and may have influenced the overestimation of the effects of the outcomes of each of the studies.

Clotting factor concentrates for preventing bleeding and bleeding-related complications in previously treated individuals with haemophilia A or B

BACKGROUND

The hallmark of severe hemophilia (A or B) is recurrent bleeding into joints and soft tissues with progressive joint damage, despite on-demand treatment. Prophylaxis has long been used, but not universally adopted, because of medical, psychosocial, and cost controversies.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of clotting factor concentrate prophylaxis in managing previously-treated individuals with hemophilia A or B.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. In addition, we searched MEDLINE and Embase and online trial registries. Most recent search of Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register: 24 February 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating people with hemophilia A or hemophilia B, who were previously treated with clotting factor concentrates to manage their hemophilia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently reviewed trials for eligibility, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. The authors used the GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten trials (including 608 participants) were eligible for inclusion. Eight of the trials (477 participants) had arms comparing two or more prophylactic regimens to one another and four of the trials (n = 258) compared prophylaxis to on-demand treatment (two trials had multiple arms and were included in both comparisons). Comparison of two or more prophylactic regimens For trials comparing one prophylaxis regimen to another, given the heterogeneity of the data, none of the data were pooled for this comparison. Considering the individual trials, three trials reported the primary outcome of joint bleeding, and none showed a dfference between dosing regimens (low-certainty evidence). For the secondary outcome of total bleeding events, prophylaxis with a twice-weekly regimen of FIX likely results in reduced total bleeds compared to a once-a-week regimen of the same dose, mean difference (MD) 11.2 (5.81 to 16.59) (one trial, 10 participants, low-certainty evidence). Transient low-titer anti-FVIII inhibitors were reported in one of the trials. Blood-transmitted infections were not identified. Other adverse events reported include hypersensitivity, oedema, and weight gain. These were, however, rare and unrelated to study drugs (very low-certainty evidence). Comparison of prophylactic and on-demand regimens Four of the trials (258 participants) had arms that compared prophylaxis to on-demand treatment. Prophylaxis may result in a large decrease in the number of joint bleeds compared to on-demand treatment, MD -30.34 (95% CI -46.95 to -13.73) (two trials, 164 participants, low-certainty evidence). One of these trials (84 participants) also reported the long-term effects of prophylaxis versus on-demand therapy showing improved joint function, quality of life, and pain; but no differences between groups in joint structure when assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In one trial (84 participants) validated measures for joint health and pain assessment showed that prophylaxis likely improves joint health compared to an on-demand regimen with an estimated change difference of 0.94 points (95% CI 0.23 to 1.65) and improves total pain scores, MD -17.20 (95% CI -27.48 to -6.92 (moderate-certainty evidence). Two trials (131 participants) reported that prophylaxis likely results in a slight increase in adverse events, risk ratio 1.71 (1.24 to 2.37) (moderate-certainty evidence). No inhibitor development and blood-transmitted infections were identified. Overall, the certainty of the body of evidence was judged to be low because of different types of bias that could have altered the effect.   AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence from RCTs that prophylaxis, as compared to on-demand treatment, may reduce bleeding frequency in previously-treated people with hemophilia. Prophylaxis may also improve joint function, pain and quality of life, even though this does not translate into a detectable improvement of articular damage when assessed by MRI.  When comparing two different prophylaxis regimens, no significant differences in terms of protection from bleeding were found. Dose optimization could, however, result in improved efficacy. Given the heterogeneity of the data, pooled estimates were not obtained for most comparisons.  Well-designed RCTs and prospective observational controlled studies with standardised definitions and measurements are needed to establish the optimal and most cost-effective treatment regimens.

Allometry of factor VIII and informed scaling of next-generation therapeutic proteins

Allometric scaling has been applied to the pharmacokinetics (PK) of factor VIII (FVIII), but published relationships are based on relatively small subsets of available data. Numerous next-generation forms of FVIII are being developed (e.g., Fc fusion, PEGylated, and liposomal formulations) and traditional PK scaling of these products would not incorporate the wealth of existing knowledge for current FVIII therapy in humans. We conducted a meta-analysis and developed allometric relationships of FVIII from over 100 PK studies collected from literature. Normalized Wajima curves were used to relate mean FVIII profiles between species. An "informed scaling" approach was derived for predicting first-in-human PK parameters and demonstrated with a case study for an Fc fusion FVIII. NCA values for FVIII PK were well described by the allometric equations CL = 6.59 W(0.85) and V(ss) = 65.0 W(0.97). A subset of studies characterized by two-compartment modeling showed strong linearity in scaling of total clearance (CL) and central volume, but more variability in distributional CL and peripheral volume. Wajima curves for FVIII superimposed across species and the disposition of Fc fusion FVIII in humans was well predicted by "informed scaling." This approach might be generally applicable for predicting human PK of next-generational therapeutics.