1.
Inhibitor development in previously treated hemophilia A patients: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression
Xi M, Makris M, Marcucci M, Santagostino E, Mannucci PM, Iorio A
Journal of Thrombosis & Haemostasis. 2013;11((9):):1655-62.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The development of neutralizing alloantibodies (inhibitors) is the most serious complication of factor VIII (FVIII) replacement therapy in patients with hemophilia A. Unlike previously untreated patients, no definite risk factors for inhibitor development are known for previously treated patients (PTPs). The investigation of the development of inhibitors in PTPs is hindered by several methodological limitations in the available literature. We conducted a systematic review to account for these limitations. METHODS We considered the studies reporting on PTPs that were included in the Wight and Paisley meta-analysis and a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies published after 2003. Studies that investigated the development of inhibitors in hemophilia A PTPs who were treated with any type of FVIII concentrate and that included at least 25 patients with follow-up were included in the analysis. RESULTS Thirty-three independent cohorts of PTPs with 4323 subjects and 43 incident de novo inhibitors were found and analyzed. The pooled incidence rate of inhibitor development for the 25 studies providing data on follow-up was 3 (95% confidence interval 1-4) per 1000 person-years. A significant association was not found between putative risk factors and inhibitor development in PTPs at meta-regression analysis and subgroup analysis, but the model was sensitive enough to the inclusion of the reports on the Belgian-Dutch experience with a highly immunogenic factor VIII. CONCLUSION We confirmed a low overall rate of de novo inhibitors in PTPs, without any significant effect of putative predictors, including the type of factor VIII concentrate. 2013 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.
2.
Comparison of four virus-inactivated plasma concentrates for treatment of severe von Willebrand disease: a cross-over randomized trial
Mannucci PM, Tenconi PM, Castaman G, Rodeghiero F
Blood. 1992;79((12):):3130-7.
Abstract
Until recently, cryoprecipitate has been the treatment of choice in patients with severe von Willebrand disease (vWD) because it can transiently correct low plasma levels of factor VIII coagulant activity (FVIIIC) and shorten or normalize the prolonged bleeding time (BT), the two laboratory hallmarks of the disease. However, cryoprecipitate may still transmit blood-borne viruses, whereas the development of virucidal methods have rendered plasma concentrates containing FVIIIC and von Willebrand factor (vWF) safer. To establish their potential usefulness in the treatment of vWD, we compared the effect of four virus-inactivated concentrates on FVIIC and vWF plasma levels and the BT (template method) in 10 patients with severe vWD using a crossover randomized design. The concentrates were an intermediate-purity, pasteurized FVIII-vWF concentrate; an intermediate-purity, dry-heated FVIII-vWF concentrate; a solvent/detergent-treated vWF concentrate, containing little FVIII; and a high-purity solvent/detergent-treated FVIII-vWF concentrate. All concentrates were equally effective in attaining normal and sustained levels of FVIIIC postinfusion, although peak levels were more delayed after the vWF concentrate. The effect of concentrates on the BT, however, was less uniform and satisfactory. The pasteurized FVIII-vWF concentrate transiently corrected, completely or partially, the BT in 8 of 10 patients, the dry-heated and solvent/detergent FVIII/vWF concentrates in five, whereas in no patient did the vWF concentrate correct the BT according to the criteria used in this study. These effects on the BT were not related to the plasma levels of ristocetin cofactor activity-attained postinfusion (100 U/dL or more in the majority of patients) or to the multimeric structure of vWF in concentrates (defective in larger multimers in all cases). In conclusion, even though virus-inactivated concentrates can be used to increase FVIIIC levels in patients with severe vWD, none of the concentrates studied by us consistently normalizes the BT in a sustained fashion.
3.
Immune status of asymptomatic HIV-infected hemophiliacs: randomized, prospective, two-year comparison of treatment with a high-purity or an intermediate-purity factor VIII concentrate
Mannucci PM, Gringeri A, de Biasi R, Baudo F, Morfini M, Ciavarella N
Thrombosis & Haemostasis. 1992;67((3):):310-3.
Abstract
It has been postulated that high-purity factor VIII (FVIII) concentrates, since they contain less alloantigenic proteins than intermediate-purity concentrates, might cause lesser deterioration of the immune systems of hemophilic patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). To evaluate this hypothesis, we have prospectively compared T-lymphocytes subsets and delayed hypersensitivity reactions to skin tests in 17 asymptomatic HIV-positive hemophiliacs randomly assigned to continue treatment with an intermediate-purity concentrate with those of 16 hemophiliacs changed to a high-purity concentrate. For both groups, during the 24-month follow-up period CD4 cell counts showed similar rates of fall from baseline values. There was also no difference in the number of patients anergic to skin tests. Three patients treated with the intermediate purity concentrate and one treated with the high-purity concentrate developed symptoms of HIV infection. On the whole, no striking benefit is conferred to the immune status of asymptomatic HIV-positive hemophiliacs by using this high-purity concentrate for 2 years.
4.
Comparative evaluation of the pharmacokinetics of three monoclonal factor VIII concentrates
Morfini M, Mannucci PM, Longo G, Cinotti S, Messori A
Thrombosis Research. 1991;61((3):):285-90.
Abstract
Hemofil M, Monoclate HT, and Monoclate P are high-purity Factor VIII concentrates, obtained from plasma by immunoaffinity chromatography with monoclonal antibodies specific for Factor VIII (Hemofil M) or von Willebrand Factor (Monoclate HT and Monoclate P). The concentrates are subjected to virucidal treatments: a solvent/detergent method (TNBP/Na-cholate) for Hemofil M, heating in the lyophilized state and in solution (pasteurization) for Monoclate HT and Monoclate P, respectively. Since these differences in the manufacturing process might result in different in vivo characteristics of the concentrates, we compared their in vivo behavior in a cross-over, single-dose, pharmacokinetic study performed in 10 non-bleeding patients with severe hemophilia A. The experimental conditions (Factor VIII dose, number and timing of blood sampling, Factor VIII assay methods, calculation of pharmacokinetic parameters) were identical for the three products. The results showed that the clearance, the mean residence time, and the volume of distribution did not differ among the three products.