Haemophilia A management in Victorian, New South Wales and South Australian haemophilia centres

Converting factor and nonfactor usage into a single metric to facilitate benchmarking the resources consumed for haemophilia care across jurisdictions and over time

INTRODUCTION

The World Federation of Hemophilia started measuring factor utilization at the country level as IU/capita (International Units of factor concentrates used per country population) in 2001 for its Annual Global Survey. IU/capita have been used to benchmark a country's usage over time and for advocacy. The introduction of a common metric usage spanning across standard half-life (SHL), and extended half-life (EHL) clotting factor concentrates (CFCs) and emicizumab would be a valuable simplification for national healthcare policymaking and industrial production planning.

AIM

Develop and examine a method of converting IU of SHL or EHL, and milligrams of emicizumab into a single metric.

METHODS

We developed conversion factors from manufacturer's recommended dose for prophylaxis with SHL, EHL, and emicizumab as reported on the licensing information for the United States and Europe. We validate the accuracy of these conversion factors against real-world usage data.

RESULTS

The prescribing information in the United States and Europe is marginally different. The SHL/EHL conversion factors are higher when calculated based on the prescribing information than on real-world studies, which are considered more representative of clinical practice. The best estimate of the SHL/EHL conversion factors for FVIII and FIX were 1.04 and 1.87. The conversion factor for emicizumab to SHL is 70 IU/mg.

CONCLUSION

We have generated robust estimates of conversion factors for currently used treatment options for prophylaxis in haemophilia. Usage of a single, harmonized metric will facilitate benchmarking across different countries or longitudinally irrespective of the case-mix of treatment options.

On-demand treatment in persons with severe haemophilia

There are two main modes of replacement therapy for haemophilia patients: either to stop bleeding (on-demand) or regular infusions of clotting factor to prevent bleeds (prophylaxis). Fifty yr of clinical experience have provided evidence of the superiority of prophylaxis by showing a reduction in bleeds and development of arthropathy. Prophylaxis has been described extensively in terms of efficacy and health-economic aspects; however, on-demand treatment has received less attention. The aim of this study was to critically review the published literature on PubMed and discuss potential gaps of knowledge in on-demand treatment in persons with severe haemophilia without inhibitors by focusing on two key aspects: how on-demand treatment is provided and what outcome measures have been reported. We identified 134 papers of which 112 were excluded. Of the remaining 22 papers, 16 were comparative studies between prophylaxis and on-demand treatment and six were descriptions of on-demand treatment. The results showed limited reporting on data related to the key aspects of treatment on-demand. Early studies looked at degrees of joint bleeds and different treatment regimens in finding the optimal dose. However, from the late 1980s, there was almost no research into on-demand therapy except efficacy and safety studies of new rFVIII products and studies to prove superiority of prophylaxis over treatment on-demand. The success of on-demand therapy may depend on several factors, for example time to initial dose after a bleed and duration of treatment. Data on these key factors are limited and highlight the necessity of research to optimise replacement therapy.

An economic evaluation of plasma production via erythroplasmapheresis and whole blood collection

This paper presents cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of plasma collection via two alternative methods: whole blood collection (WBC) and erythroplasmapheresis collection (EPC). The objective of the study is to provide an answer to the question 'What is the least-cost method of plasma production'. This question is answered, both from the viewpoint of the blood collection agency (using financial CEA) and from that of 'society' as a whole (using economic CEA). We employ detailed financial data and economic survey data for collections made by a blood collection agency and to WBC and EPC donors in Brisbane, Australia. The results indicate that, despite the superior yield provided by EPC, WBC is actually more cost-effective. This result is robust to thorough sensitivity analysis and arises regardless of whether an economic or financial perspective is taken. We conclude that, ceteris paribus, the cost of recruiting new plasma donors would need to be quite substantial for marginal investments in EPC to be considered cost-effective.