How to translate and implement the current science of gene therapy into haemophilia care?

Liver-related aspects of valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene therapy for hemophilia A: expert guidance for clinical practice

Adeno-associated virus-based gene therapy (valoctocogene roxaparvovec) is an attractive treatment for hemophilia A. Careful clinical management is required to minimize the risk of hepatotoxicity, including assessment of baseline liver condition to determine treatment eligibility and monitoring liver function after gene therapy. This article describes recommendations (developed by a group of hemophilia experts) on hepatic function monitoring before and after gene therapy. To prevent harmful liver-related effects, gene therapy is contraindicated in patients with uncontrolled liver infections, autoimmune hepatitis, liver stiffness ≥8 kPa, or cirrhosis. Before using gene therapy in patients with liver steatosis or other liver disorders, the risk of liver damage should be considered using a highly individualized approach. Treatment is not recommended in patients with abnormal liver enzymes, including alanine aminotransferase (ALT) at any level above the upper limit of normal (ULN). Therefore, pretreatment assessment of liver health should include laboratory tests, abdominal ultrasound, and liver stiffness measurements by transient elastography (TE). In the first year after therapy, ALT levels should be monitored 1 to 2 times per week to detect elevations ≥1.5× ULN, which may require immunosuppressant therapy. Patients with ALT elevation should receive prednisone 60 mg/d for 2 weeks, followed by stepwise tapering when ALT returns to baseline. ALT monitoring should continue long term (every 3-6 months), along with abdominal ultrasound (every 6 months) and TE (yearly) evaluations. When patients with good liver health are selected for treatment and closely monitored thereafter, ALT elevations can be promptly treated and are expected to resolve without long-term hepatic sequelae.

Emergency-Driven Multiple Simultaneous Invasive Procedures in Haemophilia

Despite the controversies regarding the appropriateness and justification of simultaneous bi- and multi-concomitant surgical procedures, this operative technique is increasingly undertaken for economic reasons. This paper discusses three cases of simultaneous interventions: two involving osteoarticular procedures and one involving a complex approach encompassing general and plastic surgery. The indications in emergency-driven cases are mandatory, life-saving, and limb-saving, and not subject to debate.

Moving towards Normalization of haemostasis and health equity: Evolving treatment goals for haemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for people with haemophilia are evolving at a rapid pace and a range of prophylactic treatment options using various technologies are currently available, each with their own distinct safety and efficacy profile.

TREATMENT GOALS

The access to replacement therapy and prophylaxis has driven a dramatic reduction in mortality and resultant increase in life expectancy. Beyond this, the abolition of bleeds and preservation of joint health represent the expected, but rarely attained, goals of haemophilia treatment and care. These outcomes also do not address the complexity of health-related quality of life impacted by haemophilia and its treatment.

CONCLUSION

Capitalizing on the major potential of therapeutic innovations, 'Normalization' of haemostasis, as a concept, should include the aspiration of enabling individuals to live as normal a life as possible, free from haemophilia-imposed limitations. To achieve this-being supported by the data reviewed in this manuscript-the concept of haemostatic and life Normalization needs to be explored and debated within the wider multidisciplinary teams and haemophilia community.

Can hemophilia be cured? It depends on the definition

Over the years, the palette of treatment options for hemophilia has grown extensively, leading to an increased life expectancy and quality of life for people living with hemophilia. Nonetheless, it is frequently emphasized that none of the current treatment modalities provides a "cure." It is therefore hoped that innovative treatments such as gene therapy may bridge this void. However, the precise definition of a "cure" for hemophilia remains unclear. In this review, we show how the concept of cure is currently used in the field of hemophilia. We then relate the discussion on cure to debates surrounding the classification of hemophilia and philosophical debates on the concepts of health and disease.

Haemophilia care in Asia: Learning from clinical practice in some Asian countries

BACKGROUND

The healthcare systems in Asia vary greatly due to the socio-economic and cultural diversities which impact haemophilia management.

METHODS

An advisory board meeting was conducted with experts in haemophilia care from Asia to understand the heterogeneity in clinical practices and care provision in the region.

FINDINGS

The overall prevalence of haemophilia in Asia ranges between 3 and 8.58/100,000 patients. Haemophilia A was more prevalent as compared to haemophilia B with a ratio of around 5:1. There is under-diagnosis in the region due to lack of diagnosis, registries and/or lack of appropriate facilities in suburban areas. Most patients are referred to the haematologists by their families or primary care physicians, while some are identified during bleeding episodes. Genetic testing faces obstacles like resource constraints, services available at limited centres and unwillingness of patients to participate. Prophylaxis is offered for people with haemophilia (PWH) with a severe bleeding phenotype. Recombinant factors are approved in most countries across the region and are the preferred therapy. The challenges highlighted for not receiving a high standard of care include patients' reluctance to use an intravenous treatment, poor patient compliance due to frequency of infusions, budget constraints and lack of funding, insurance, availability and accessibility of factor concentrates. Prevalence of neutralizing antibodies ranged from 5% to 20% in the region. Use of immune tolerance induction and bypassing agents to treat inhibitors depends on their cost and availability.

CONCLUSION

Haemophilia care in Asia has evolved to a great extent. However, some challenges remain for which a strategic approach along with multi-stakeholder involvement are needed.

Awareness of individual goals, preferences, and priorities of persons with severe congenital haemophilia A for a tailored shared decision-making approach to liver-directed gene therapy. A practical guideline

In clinical medicine, shared decision making (SDM) is a well-recognized strategy to enhance engagement of both patients and clinicians in medical decisions. The success of liver-directed gene therapy (GT) to transform severe congenital haemophilia A (HA) from an incurable to a curable disease has launched a shift beyond current standards of treatment. However, GT acceptance remains low in the community of HA persons. We argue for both persons with haemophilia (PWH) and specialists in HA care including clinicians, as needing SDM-oriented educational programs devoted to GT. Here, we provide an ad hoc outline to implement education to SDM and tailor clinician information on GT to individual PWHs. Based on routine key components of SDM: patient priorities; recommendations based on individual risk reduction; adverse effects; drug-drug interactions; alternatives to GT; and ongoing re-assessment of the objectives as risk factors (and individual priorities) change, this approach is finalized to exploit efficacious communication.

Hemophilia gene therapy: first, do no harm

The introduction of adeno-associated virus-mediated, liver-directed gene therapy into the hemophilia treatment landscape brings not only great promise but also considerable uncertainty to a community that has a history punctuated by the devastating effects of HIV and hepatitis C virus. These infections were introduced into people with hemophilia through the innovation of factor concentrates in the 1970s and 1980s. Concentrates, heralded as a major advance in treatment at the time, brought devastation and death to the community already challenged by the complications of bleeding into joints, vital organs, and the brain. Over the past 5 decades, considerable advances in hemophilia treatment have improved the survival, quality of life, and participation of people with hemophilia, although challenges remain and health equity with their unaffected peers has not yet been achieved. The decision to take a gene therapy product is one in which an informed, holistic, and shared decision-making approach must be employed. Bias on the part of health care professionals and people with hemophilia must be addressed and minimized. Here, we review data leading to the regulatory authorization of valoctocogene roxaparvovec, an adeno-associated virus 5 gene therapy, in Europe to treat hemophilia A and etranacogene dezaparvovec-drlb in the United States and Europe to treat hemophilia B. We also provide an overview of the decision-making process and recommend steps that should be taken by the hemophilia community to ensure the safety of and optimal outcomes for people with hemophilia who choose to receive a gene therapy product.