User login
Barriers to CAR T use in the spotlight at first European meeting
outcomes data suggest.
For that reason, and because bone marrow units are profit centers and CAR T-cell therapy reimbursement remains problematic, CAR T in the United States is “effectively being used as a bridge to transplant” – at a cost of more than $1 million per dose, economist Duane Schulthess told attendees at a recent, first-of-its-kind joint European CAR T-cell meeting in Paris, which was cosponsored by the European Hematology Association (EHA) and the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT).
“This is the way clinical practice is evolving right now; the price is not allowing enough experimentation for CAR T to flow up and be used in the less-diseased population,” said Mr. Schulthess, managing director of Vital Transformation, a consulting company based in Wezembeek-Oppem, Belgium.
In Europe, there is a slightly different problem in that health technology assessment bodies (HTAs) “have to figure out what they want to do” given the 2018 approvals of the first CAR T therapies there, he said, explaining that the data he presented was from a study commissioned by the Dutch government to help determine “what [CAR T] looks like from an effectiveness standpoint while they’re trying to figure out how much it’s worth and what they should pay.”
“Increasingly these are the big issues,” Mr. Schulthess said.
In August, the European Commission approved tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta) on the recommendation of the European Medicines Agency. Kymriah was approved for pediatric and young adult patients up to age 25 years with refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in relapse after transplant or in second or later relapse, as well as for adults patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after failing at least two lines of systemic therapy, and Yescarta was approved for the latter and for the treatment of primary refractory mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma after at least two lines of systemic therapy.
The approvals have researchers and clinicians there clamoring for information about the therapy, which is revolutionizing the field of hematologic malignancies, according to Christian Chabannon, MD, PhD, chair of the EBMT Cellular Therapy & Immunobiology Working Party and vice-chair of the EBMT Scientific Council.
“An increasing number of European institutions are starting to administer this new category of medicinal products and increasingly contribute to ongoing clinical protocols and preclinical studies,” Dr. Chabannon said in an interview, explaining the urgency in planning the 1st European CAR T Cell Meeting just 6 months after the CAR T approvals in Europe.
EHA and EBMT brought together patient advocates, young investigators, and experts from across the globe to present the latest relevant information and data on topics ranging from current trials and experience, CAR T implementation and management, the preclinical and clinical pipelines, various CAR T applications, industry perspectives, and relevant economic issues, he said.
The latter is where Mr. Schulthess came in.
His research involved patient-level treatment pathway data from a database of more than 3 million patients treated with either allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HCT) or CAR T therapy across 5 years of experience. The data showed up to 85% response rates for each in the first-line setting. He and his colleagues then looked at therapy choices for those who failed to respond to second-line therapies and at how decisions were made regarding transplant and CAR T therapy – and specifically whether CAR T can be a substitute for transplant.
Ultimately, they looked at 29 allo-HCT recipients and 14 CAR T therapy recipients for a head-to-head comparison of the two treatments and performed an in-depth cost-efficacy analysis using a novel “visual pathology” methodology to account for limitations in the data.
The 3-year relapse-free survival probability was nearly 68% in the transplant recipients and 46% with CAR T.
“Now why is that? [Because] ... these populations are not the same; the CAR T population has a much higher disease burden,” Mr. Schulthess said. “So what we’re seeing [among] actual clinical doctors doing this for real – they are defaulting to bone marrow transplants, except in those cases where they do not have enough time or the patient does not respond. Then and only then are they giving CAR T.”
And that comes back to the fact that bone marrow units make money, he said.
CAR T is costly, and reimbursement can be problematic; these are disincentives for doctors to use CAR T therapy, at least in the United States, and while this is currently “being worked out,” the choice more often is “giving bone marrow transplant first and seeing what happens,” Mr. Schulthess said.
In Europe, that creates “a tough choice” for the HTAs, he said, noting that, in the absence of evidence of CAR T being curative in the subpopulation of patients with high disease burden who fail transplant and given the high cost, there is a push to determine at what point it begins to make sense economically.
“We think that you gain efficiency at ... roughly $277,000 [per dose] because [at that cost] you can do more CAR Ts than you can do bone marrow transplants. [CAR T] is less invasive, it’s lighter touch, it’s more efficient,” he said. “So if we were to see an efficiency cost of between $222,000 and $277,000, we think that works.”
Another recent study came to similar conclusions based on quality assessments, he said (J Clin Oncol. 2018 Sep 13. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2018.79.0642).
“We think that’s where this is going to end up, so we think that, if someone starts producing this for a couple hundred thousand bucks, then – certainly in Europe – it will make sense for this to start drifting up and being used as a substitute [to transplant],” he added.
Mr. Schulthess was one of scores of experts and investigators who presented at the EHA/EBMT joint meeting, which included numerous U.S. pioneers in the field and young European investigators, among others, Dr. Chabannon said.
Attesting to the enthusiasm in Europe regarding CAR T, Dr. Chabannon said that there were “more requests for registration than the venue could safely accommodate, a long waiting list, and a high number of individuals on the waiting list who registered for the live streaming” of the event.
“The field of CAR T cells is growing at a fast pace since the first clinical successes reported in the early 2010s, and one can wonder whether the expectations are not in excess of what reality will deliver,” he said. “Nevertheless, CAR T cells represent an essential innovation, not an incremental progress in biomedical sciences. They combine new mechanisms of action, clinical activity in advanced malignancies (and possibly beyond the field of cancer), transfer of manufacturing of human cell-based therapeutics to the industry, and potentially the first commercial success for a gene therapy.”
Surveys conducted by various professional associations, including EBMT, have clearly identified the potential for clinical successes that CAR T cells represent and the tremendous challenges raised by these innovations, he said, noting that “these include fulfilling specific educational needs.”
Therefore, EBMT and EHA have already announced that a second edition of the meeting is planned for Jan. 30 – Feb. 1, 2020, he noted.
Mr. Schulthess reported that his research was funded by the Dutch government.
outcomes data suggest.
For that reason, and because bone marrow units are profit centers and CAR T-cell therapy reimbursement remains problematic, CAR T in the United States is “effectively being used as a bridge to transplant” – at a cost of more than $1 million per dose, economist Duane Schulthess told attendees at a recent, first-of-its-kind joint European CAR T-cell meeting in Paris, which was cosponsored by the European Hematology Association (EHA) and the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT).
“This is the way clinical practice is evolving right now; the price is not allowing enough experimentation for CAR T to flow up and be used in the less-diseased population,” said Mr. Schulthess, managing director of Vital Transformation, a consulting company based in Wezembeek-Oppem, Belgium.
In Europe, there is a slightly different problem in that health technology assessment bodies (HTAs) “have to figure out what they want to do” given the 2018 approvals of the first CAR T therapies there, he said, explaining that the data he presented was from a study commissioned by the Dutch government to help determine “what [CAR T] looks like from an effectiveness standpoint while they’re trying to figure out how much it’s worth and what they should pay.”
“Increasingly these are the big issues,” Mr. Schulthess said.
In August, the European Commission approved tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta) on the recommendation of the European Medicines Agency. Kymriah was approved for pediatric and young adult patients up to age 25 years with refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in relapse after transplant or in second or later relapse, as well as for adults patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after failing at least two lines of systemic therapy, and Yescarta was approved for the latter and for the treatment of primary refractory mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma after at least two lines of systemic therapy.
The approvals have researchers and clinicians there clamoring for information about the therapy, which is revolutionizing the field of hematologic malignancies, according to Christian Chabannon, MD, PhD, chair of the EBMT Cellular Therapy & Immunobiology Working Party and vice-chair of the EBMT Scientific Council.
“An increasing number of European institutions are starting to administer this new category of medicinal products and increasingly contribute to ongoing clinical protocols and preclinical studies,” Dr. Chabannon said in an interview, explaining the urgency in planning the 1st European CAR T Cell Meeting just 6 months after the CAR T approvals in Europe.
EHA and EBMT brought together patient advocates, young investigators, and experts from across the globe to present the latest relevant information and data on topics ranging from current trials and experience, CAR T implementation and management, the preclinical and clinical pipelines, various CAR T applications, industry perspectives, and relevant economic issues, he said.
The latter is where Mr. Schulthess came in.
His research involved patient-level treatment pathway data from a database of more than 3 million patients treated with either allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HCT) or CAR T therapy across 5 years of experience. The data showed up to 85% response rates for each in the first-line setting. He and his colleagues then looked at therapy choices for those who failed to respond to second-line therapies and at how decisions were made regarding transplant and CAR T therapy – and specifically whether CAR T can be a substitute for transplant.
Ultimately, they looked at 29 allo-HCT recipients and 14 CAR T therapy recipients for a head-to-head comparison of the two treatments and performed an in-depth cost-efficacy analysis using a novel “visual pathology” methodology to account for limitations in the data.
The 3-year relapse-free survival probability was nearly 68% in the transplant recipients and 46% with CAR T.
“Now why is that? [Because] ... these populations are not the same; the CAR T population has a much higher disease burden,” Mr. Schulthess said. “So what we’re seeing [among] actual clinical doctors doing this for real – they are defaulting to bone marrow transplants, except in those cases where they do not have enough time or the patient does not respond. Then and only then are they giving CAR T.”
And that comes back to the fact that bone marrow units make money, he said.
CAR T is costly, and reimbursement can be problematic; these are disincentives for doctors to use CAR T therapy, at least in the United States, and while this is currently “being worked out,” the choice more often is “giving bone marrow transplant first and seeing what happens,” Mr. Schulthess said.
In Europe, that creates “a tough choice” for the HTAs, he said, noting that, in the absence of evidence of CAR T being curative in the subpopulation of patients with high disease burden who fail transplant and given the high cost, there is a push to determine at what point it begins to make sense economically.
“We think that you gain efficiency at ... roughly $277,000 [per dose] because [at that cost] you can do more CAR Ts than you can do bone marrow transplants. [CAR T] is less invasive, it’s lighter touch, it’s more efficient,” he said. “So if we were to see an efficiency cost of between $222,000 and $277,000, we think that works.”
Another recent study came to similar conclusions based on quality assessments, he said (J Clin Oncol. 2018 Sep 13. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2018.79.0642).
“We think that’s where this is going to end up, so we think that, if someone starts producing this for a couple hundred thousand bucks, then – certainly in Europe – it will make sense for this to start drifting up and being used as a substitute [to transplant],” he added.
Mr. Schulthess was one of scores of experts and investigators who presented at the EHA/EBMT joint meeting, which included numerous U.S. pioneers in the field and young European investigators, among others, Dr. Chabannon said.
Attesting to the enthusiasm in Europe regarding CAR T, Dr. Chabannon said that there were “more requests for registration than the venue could safely accommodate, a long waiting list, and a high number of individuals on the waiting list who registered for the live streaming” of the event.
“The field of CAR T cells is growing at a fast pace since the first clinical successes reported in the early 2010s, and one can wonder whether the expectations are not in excess of what reality will deliver,” he said. “Nevertheless, CAR T cells represent an essential innovation, not an incremental progress in biomedical sciences. They combine new mechanisms of action, clinical activity in advanced malignancies (and possibly beyond the field of cancer), transfer of manufacturing of human cell-based therapeutics to the industry, and potentially the first commercial success for a gene therapy.”
Surveys conducted by various professional associations, including EBMT, have clearly identified the potential for clinical successes that CAR T cells represent and the tremendous challenges raised by these innovations, he said, noting that “these include fulfilling specific educational needs.”
Therefore, EBMT and EHA have already announced that a second edition of the meeting is planned for Jan. 30 – Feb. 1, 2020, he noted.
Mr. Schulthess reported that his research was funded by the Dutch government.
outcomes data suggest.
For that reason, and because bone marrow units are profit centers and CAR T-cell therapy reimbursement remains problematic, CAR T in the United States is “effectively being used as a bridge to transplant” – at a cost of more than $1 million per dose, economist Duane Schulthess told attendees at a recent, first-of-its-kind joint European CAR T-cell meeting in Paris, which was cosponsored by the European Hematology Association (EHA) and the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT).
“This is the way clinical practice is evolving right now; the price is not allowing enough experimentation for CAR T to flow up and be used in the less-diseased population,” said Mr. Schulthess, managing director of Vital Transformation, a consulting company based in Wezembeek-Oppem, Belgium.
In Europe, there is a slightly different problem in that health technology assessment bodies (HTAs) “have to figure out what they want to do” given the 2018 approvals of the first CAR T therapies there, he said, explaining that the data he presented was from a study commissioned by the Dutch government to help determine “what [CAR T] looks like from an effectiveness standpoint while they’re trying to figure out how much it’s worth and what they should pay.”
“Increasingly these are the big issues,” Mr. Schulthess said.
In August, the European Commission approved tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta) on the recommendation of the European Medicines Agency. Kymriah was approved for pediatric and young adult patients up to age 25 years with refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in relapse after transplant or in second or later relapse, as well as for adults patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after failing at least two lines of systemic therapy, and Yescarta was approved for the latter and for the treatment of primary refractory mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma after at least two lines of systemic therapy.
The approvals have researchers and clinicians there clamoring for information about the therapy, which is revolutionizing the field of hematologic malignancies, according to Christian Chabannon, MD, PhD, chair of the EBMT Cellular Therapy & Immunobiology Working Party and vice-chair of the EBMT Scientific Council.
“An increasing number of European institutions are starting to administer this new category of medicinal products and increasingly contribute to ongoing clinical protocols and preclinical studies,” Dr. Chabannon said in an interview, explaining the urgency in planning the 1st European CAR T Cell Meeting just 6 months after the CAR T approvals in Europe.
EHA and EBMT brought together patient advocates, young investigators, and experts from across the globe to present the latest relevant information and data on topics ranging from current trials and experience, CAR T implementation and management, the preclinical and clinical pipelines, various CAR T applications, industry perspectives, and relevant economic issues, he said.
The latter is where Mr. Schulthess came in.
His research involved patient-level treatment pathway data from a database of more than 3 million patients treated with either allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HCT) or CAR T therapy across 5 years of experience. The data showed up to 85% response rates for each in the first-line setting. He and his colleagues then looked at therapy choices for those who failed to respond to second-line therapies and at how decisions were made regarding transplant and CAR T therapy – and specifically whether CAR T can be a substitute for transplant.
Ultimately, they looked at 29 allo-HCT recipients and 14 CAR T therapy recipients for a head-to-head comparison of the two treatments and performed an in-depth cost-efficacy analysis using a novel “visual pathology” methodology to account for limitations in the data.
The 3-year relapse-free survival probability was nearly 68% in the transplant recipients and 46% with CAR T.
“Now why is that? [Because] ... these populations are not the same; the CAR T population has a much higher disease burden,” Mr. Schulthess said. “So what we’re seeing [among] actual clinical doctors doing this for real – they are defaulting to bone marrow transplants, except in those cases where they do not have enough time or the patient does not respond. Then and only then are they giving CAR T.”
And that comes back to the fact that bone marrow units make money, he said.
CAR T is costly, and reimbursement can be problematic; these are disincentives for doctors to use CAR T therapy, at least in the United States, and while this is currently “being worked out,” the choice more often is “giving bone marrow transplant first and seeing what happens,” Mr. Schulthess said.
In Europe, that creates “a tough choice” for the HTAs, he said, noting that, in the absence of evidence of CAR T being curative in the subpopulation of patients with high disease burden who fail transplant and given the high cost, there is a push to determine at what point it begins to make sense economically.
“We think that you gain efficiency at ... roughly $277,000 [per dose] because [at that cost] you can do more CAR Ts than you can do bone marrow transplants. [CAR T] is less invasive, it’s lighter touch, it’s more efficient,” he said. “So if we were to see an efficiency cost of between $222,000 and $277,000, we think that works.”
Another recent study came to similar conclusions based on quality assessments, he said (J Clin Oncol. 2018 Sep 13. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2018.79.0642).
“We think that’s where this is going to end up, so we think that, if someone starts producing this for a couple hundred thousand bucks, then – certainly in Europe – it will make sense for this to start drifting up and being used as a substitute [to transplant],” he added.
Mr. Schulthess was one of scores of experts and investigators who presented at the EHA/EBMT joint meeting, which included numerous U.S. pioneers in the field and young European investigators, among others, Dr. Chabannon said.
Attesting to the enthusiasm in Europe regarding CAR T, Dr. Chabannon said that there were “more requests for registration than the venue could safely accommodate, a long waiting list, and a high number of individuals on the waiting list who registered for the live streaming” of the event.
“The field of CAR T cells is growing at a fast pace since the first clinical successes reported in the early 2010s, and one can wonder whether the expectations are not in excess of what reality will deliver,” he said. “Nevertheless, CAR T cells represent an essential innovation, not an incremental progress in biomedical sciences. They combine new mechanisms of action, clinical activity in advanced malignancies (and possibly beyond the field of cancer), transfer of manufacturing of human cell-based therapeutics to the industry, and potentially the first commercial success for a gene therapy.”
Surveys conducted by various professional associations, including EBMT, have clearly identified the potential for clinical successes that CAR T cells represent and the tremendous challenges raised by these innovations, he said, noting that “these include fulfilling specific educational needs.”
Therefore, EBMT and EHA have already announced that a second edition of the meeting is planned for Jan. 30 – Feb. 1, 2020, he noted.
Mr. Schulthess reported that his research was funded by the Dutch government.
FDA: Safety signal emerged with higher dose of tofacitinib in RA study
the Food and Drug Administration reported.
The trial’s Data Safety and Monitoring Board identified the signal in patients taking a 10-mg dose of tofacitinib twice daily, the FDA said in a safety announcement.
Pfizer, the trial’s sponsor, took “immediate action” to transition patients in the ongoing trial from the 10-mg, twice-daily dose to 5 mg twice daily, which is the approved dose for adult patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, the agency said. The 10-mg, twice-daily dose is approved only in the dosing regimen for patients with ulcerative colitis. Xeljanz is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. The 11-mg, once-daily dose of Xeljanz XR that is approved to treat rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis was not tested in the trial.
The ongoing study was designed to assess risks of cardiovascular events, cancer, and opportunistic infections with tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily or 5 mg twice daily versus the risks in a control group treated with a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor, according to the statement.
Patients had to be 50 years of age or older and have at least one cardiovascular risk factor to be eligible for the study, which was required by the agency in 2012 when it approved tofacitinib, the statement says.
The FDA is reviewing trial data and working with Pfizer to better understand the safety signal, its effect on patients, and how tofacitinib should be used, Janet Woodcock, MD, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in a news release. The trial will continue and is expected to be completed by the end of 2019.
“The agency will take appropriate action, as warranted, to ensure patients enrolled in this and other trials are protected and that health care professionals and clinical trial researchers understand the risks associated with this use,” she added.
Health care professionals should follow tofacitinib prescribing information, monitor patients for the signs and symptoms of pulmonary embolism, and advise patients to seek medical attention immediately if they experience those signs and symptoms, according to the statement.
“We are communicating now, given the serious nature of the safety issue, to ensure that patients taking tofacitinib are aware that the FDA still believes the benefits of taking tofacitinib for its approved uses continue to outweigh the risks,” Dr. Woodcock said in the release.
While not approved in rheumatoid arthritis, the 10-mg, twice-daily dose of tofacitinib is approved in the dosing regimen for patients with ulcerative colitis, the release says.
the Food and Drug Administration reported.
The trial’s Data Safety and Monitoring Board identified the signal in patients taking a 10-mg dose of tofacitinib twice daily, the FDA said in a safety announcement.
Pfizer, the trial’s sponsor, took “immediate action” to transition patients in the ongoing trial from the 10-mg, twice-daily dose to 5 mg twice daily, which is the approved dose for adult patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, the agency said. The 10-mg, twice-daily dose is approved only in the dosing regimen for patients with ulcerative colitis. Xeljanz is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. The 11-mg, once-daily dose of Xeljanz XR that is approved to treat rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis was not tested in the trial.
The ongoing study was designed to assess risks of cardiovascular events, cancer, and opportunistic infections with tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily or 5 mg twice daily versus the risks in a control group treated with a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor, according to the statement.
Patients had to be 50 years of age or older and have at least one cardiovascular risk factor to be eligible for the study, which was required by the agency in 2012 when it approved tofacitinib, the statement says.
The FDA is reviewing trial data and working with Pfizer to better understand the safety signal, its effect on patients, and how tofacitinib should be used, Janet Woodcock, MD, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in a news release. The trial will continue and is expected to be completed by the end of 2019.
“The agency will take appropriate action, as warranted, to ensure patients enrolled in this and other trials are protected and that health care professionals and clinical trial researchers understand the risks associated with this use,” she added.
Health care professionals should follow tofacitinib prescribing information, monitor patients for the signs and symptoms of pulmonary embolism, and advise patients to seek medical attention immediately if they experience those signs and symptoms, according to the statement.
“We are communicating now, given the serious nature of the safety issue, to ensure that patients taking tofacitinib are aware that the FDA still believes the benefits of taking tofacitinib for its approved uses continue to outweigh the risks,” Dr. Woodcock said in the release.
While not approved in rheumatoid arthritis, the 10-mg, twice-daily dose of tofacitinib is approved in the dosing regimen for patients with ulcerative colitis, the release says.
the Food and Drug Administration reported.
The trial’s Data Safety and Monitoring Board identified the signal in patients taking a 10-mg dose of tofacitinib twice daily, the FDA said in a safety announcement.
Pfizer, the trial’s sponsor, took “immediate action” to transition patients in the ongoing trial from the 10-mg, twice-daily dose to 5 mg twice daily, which is the approved dose for adult patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, the agency said. The 10-mg, twice-daily dose is approved only in the dosing regimen for patients with ulcerative colitis. Xeljanz is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. The 11-mg, once-daily dose of Xeljanz XR that is approved to treat rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis was not tested in the trial.
The ongoing study was designed to assess risks of cardiovascular events, cancer, and opportunistic infections with tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily or 5 mg twice daily versus the risks in a control group treated with a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor, according to the statement.
Patients had to be 50 years of age or older and have at least one cardiovascular risk factor to be eligible for the study, which was required by the agency in 2012 when it approved tofacitinib, the statement says.
The FDA is reviewing trial data and working with Pfizer to better understand the safety signal, its effect on patients, and how tofacitinib should be used, Janet Woodcock, MD, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in a news release. The trial will continue and is expected to be completed by the end of 2019.
“The agency will take appropriate action, as warranted, to ensure patients enrolled in this and other trials are protected and that health care professionals and clinical trial researchers understand the risks associated with this use,” she added.
Health care professionals should follow tofacitinib prescribing information, monitor patients for the signs and symptoms of pulmonary embolism, and advise patients to seek medical attention immediately if they experience those signs and symptoms, according to the statement.
“We are communicating now, given the serious nature of the safety issue, to ensure that patients taking tofacitinib are aware that the FDA still believes the benefits of taking tofacitinib for its approved uses continue to outweigh the risks,” Dr. Woodcock said in the release.
While not approved in rheumatoid arthritis, the 10-mg, twice-daily dose of tofacitinib is approved in the dosing regimen for patients with ulcerative colitis, the release says.
Ultrasound method predicts liver complications in pediatric transplant
HOUSTON – An ultrasound method for assessing liver stiffness might be useful for predicting which pediatric patients will develop a life-threatening complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Shear wave elastography values predicted severe hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/veno-occlusive disease (SOS/VOD) at least 4 days before standard diagnostic criteria in most patients treated in a small, prospective, two-center study, Sherwin S. Chan, MD, PhD, said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.
Early identification of SOS/VOD using elastography could be beneficial in light of data showing that timing is critical in the administration of defibrotide, a treatment recommended for severe and very severe patients, according to Dr. Chan, vice chair of radiology for the University of Missouri at Kansas City.
“If you’re able to initiate it early, you can really increase day 100 survival,” Dr. Chan said in an oral presentation.
The data presented included 54 pediatric patients undergoing transplantation at one of two institutions.
At one site, the patients underwent shear wave elastography evaluation 10 days before the conditioning regimen began, and again at 5 and 14 days after the transplant. At the other site, patients with suspected SOS/VOD were enrolled and underwent elastography every other day for up to 10 exams.
Those are very different imaging protocols, Dr. Chan acknowledged in his presentation, noting that the studies started independently and data were pooled as investigators at the two institutions became aware of one another’s work.
A total of 16 patients, or 30%, developed SOS/VOD, Dr. Chan reported. Of those 16 cases, 12 (75%) were severe or very severe by the recent European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) criteria.
Increased shear wave elastography velocity was the best predictor of severe SOS/VOD, according to Dr. Chan, with a cutoff value of 1.65 m/s being 92% sensitive and 67% specific for severe SOS/VOD.
That threshold was passed at least 4 days before severe grading or death in 9 out of the 12 severe cases, he added.
Accordingly, a prospective, multicenter trial has been initiated at a number of U.S. centers to investigate whether the findings of this study are generalizable to other patient populations, Dr. Chan said at the meeting held by the American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At this meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy.
That prospective, multicenter trial is supported by Jazz Pharmaceuticals, according to Dr. Chan, who reported consulting with Jazz Pharmaceuticals in his disclosure statement.
SOURCE: Chan SS et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 55.
HOUSTON – An ultrasound method for assessing liver stiffness might be useful for predicting which pediatric patients will develop a life-threatening complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Shear wave elastography values predicted severe hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/veno-occlusive disease (SOS/VOD) at least 4 days before standard diagnostic criteria in most patients treated in a small, prospective, two-center study, Sherwin S. Chan, MD, PhD, said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.
Early identification of SOS/VOD using elastography could be beneficial in light of data showing that timing is critical in the administration of defibrotide, a treatment recommended for severe and very severe patients, according to Dr. Chan, vice chair of radiology for the University of Missouri at Kansas City.
“If you’re able to initiate it early, you can really increase day 100 survival,” Dr. Chan said in an oral presentation.
The data presented included 54 pediatric patients undergoing transplantation at one of two institutions.
At one site, the patients underwent shear wave elastography evaluation 10 days before the conditioning regimen began, and again at 5 and 14 days after the transplant. At the other site, patients with suspected SOS/VOD were enrolled and underwent elastography every other day for up to 10 exams.
Those are very different imaging protocols, Dr. Chan acknowledged in his presentation, noting that the studies started independently and data were pooled as investigators at the two institutions became aware of one another’s work.
A total of 16 patients, or 30%, developed SOS/VOD, Dr. Chan reported. Of those 16 cases, 12 (75%) were severe or very severe by the recent European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) criteria.
Increased shear wave elastography velocity was the best predictor of severe SOS/VOD, according to Dr. Chan, with a cutoff value of 1.65 m/s being 92% sensitive and 67% specific for severe SOS/VOD.
That threshold was passed at least 4 days before severe grading or death in 9 out of the 12 severe cases, he added.
Accordingly, a prospective, multicenter trial has been initiated at a number of U.S. centers to investigate whether the findings of this study are generalizable to other patient populations, Dr. Chan said at the meeting held by the American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At this meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy.
That prospective, multicenter trial is supported by Jazz Pharmaceuticals, according to Dr. Chan, who reported consulting with Jazz Pharmaceuticals in his disclosure statement.
SOURCE: Chan SS et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 55.
HOUSTON – An ultrasound method for assessing liver stiffness might be useful for predicting which pediatric patients will develop a life-threatening complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Shear wave elastography values predicted severe hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/veno-occlusive disease (SOS/VOD) at least 4 days before standard diagnostic criteria in most patients treated in a small, prospective, two-center study, Sherwin S. Chan, MD, PhD, said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.
Early identification of SOS/VOD using elastography could be beneficial in light of data showing that timing is critical in the administration of defibrotide, a treatment recommended for severe and very severe patients, according to Dr. Chan, vice chair of radiology for the University of Missouri at Kansas City.
“If you’re able to initiate it early, you can really increase day 100 survival,” Dr. Chan said in an oral presentation.
The data presented included 54 pediatric patients undergoing transplantation at one of two institutions.
At one site, the patients underwent shear wave elastography evaluation 10 days before the conditioning regimen began, and again at 5 and 14 days after the transplant. At the other site, patients with suspected SOS/VOD were enrolled and underwent elastography every other day for up to 10 exams.
Those are very different imaging protocols, Dr. Chan acknowledged in his presentation, noting that the studies started independently and data were pooled as investigators at the two institutions became aware of one another’s work.
A total of 16 patients, or 30%, developed SOS/VOD, Dr. Chan reported. Of those 16 cases, 12 (75%) were severe or very severe by the recent European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) criteria.
Increased shear wave elastography velocity was the best predictor of severe SOS/VOD, according to Dr. Chan, with a cutoff value of 1.65 m/s being 92% sensitive and 67% specific for severe SOS/VOD.
That threshold was passed at least 4 days before severe grading or death in 9 out of the 12 severe cases, he added.
Accordingly, a prospective, multicenter trial has been initiated at a number of U.S. centers to investigate whether the findings of this study are generalizable to other patient populations, Dr. Chan said at the meeting held by the American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At this meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy.
That prospective, multicenter trial is supported by Jazz Pharmaceuticals, according to Dr. Chan, who reported consulting with Jazz Pharmaceuticals in his disclosure statement.
SOURCE: Chan SS et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 55.
REPORTING FROM TCT 2019
ICYMI: Rivaroxaban reduces VTE incidence in ambulatory cancer patients
While treatment with rivaroxaban did not significantly reduce venous thromboembolism incidence in high-risk ambulatory patients with cancer over the entire course of a 180-day intervention period (6.0% vs. 8.8% in controls; hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.09), it did reduce major bleeding incidence while patients were on treatment (2.0% vs. 6.4%; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20 0.80), according to results from the multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3b CASSINI trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814630).
We reported this story at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology before it was published in the journal. Find our coverage at the link below.
While treatment with rivaroxaban did not significantly reduce venous thromboembolism incidence in high-risk ambulatory patients with cancer over the entire course of a 180-day intervention period (6.0% vs. 8.8% in controls; hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.09), it did reduce major bleeding incidence while patients were on treatment (2.0% vs. 6.4%; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20 0.80), according to results from the multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3b CASSINI trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814630).
We reported this story at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology before it was published in the journal. Find our coverage at the link below.
While treatment with rivaroxaban did not significantly reduce venous thromboembolism incidence in high-risk ambulatory patients with cancer over the entire course of a 180-day intervention period (6.0% vs. 8.8% in controls; hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.09), it did reduce major bleeding incidence while patients were on treatment (2.0% vs. 6.4%; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20 0.80), according to results from the multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3b CASSINI trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814630).
We reported this story at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology before it was published in the journal. Find our coverage at the link below.
FROM THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
Supplementary compression doesn’t improve DVT odds in critically ill
SAN DIEGO – In critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, (DVT), according to a new trial.
“I was surprised. My hypothesis was that it would work,” said lead author Yaseen M. Arabi, MD, chairman of the intensive care department at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Many physicians routinely carry out the practice on the assumption that IPC should lead to better blood flow and further cut DVT risk. The procedure carries few risks, aside from patient discomfort. “The main issue is that it’s not needed. It might be useful in patients who are not receiving heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin,” said Dr. Arabi, who presented the results of the study at the Critical Care Congress sponsored by the Society of Critical Care Medicine. The study was simultaneously published online in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin reduces the risk of DVT by about 50%, but about 5%-20% of critically ill patients will develop DVT in spite of treatment, and mechanical thromboprophylaxis reduces DVT risk, compared with no prophylaxis. Some researchers have attempted to address whether adjunct intermittent pneumatic compression could further reduce DVT risk, but their studies were marked by a lack of controls, unoptimized pharmacologic regimens, and other limitations.
The trial included 2,003 adults from 20 sites in Saudi Arabia, Canada, Australia, and India, who were expected to have an intensive care unit stay of at least 72 hours. They were randomized to receive IPC combined with pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis (pneumatic compression group) or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone (control).
The proportion of patients receiving unfractionated heparin versus low-molecular-weight heparin was similar between the two groups, with about 58% treated with unfractionated heparin.
A total of 3.9% of patients in the pneumatic compression group experienced incident proximal DVT, compared with 4.2% of controls (relative risk, 0.93; P =.74). A total of 3.4% experienced prevalent proximal DVT, compared with 2.7% of controls (RR, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-2.12). There was no significant difference in the incidence of any lower-limb DVT (9.6% vs. 8.4%; RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86-1.51).
There was no difference between the two groups in a composite outcome that included pulmonary embolism or all prevalent and incident lower-limb DVT (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.85-1.44), and there were no between-group differences with respect to lower-limb skin injury or ischemia.
The results should change practice among those who still provide adjunct intermittent pneumatic compression, however surprising physicians may find these new results to be, according to Dr. Arabi: “People believed strongly that (adjunct IPC) should work, but you need to be evidence based, and here it showed no difference. But that’s why we do studies, right?”
The study was funded by King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology and King Abdullah International Medical Research Center. Dr. Arabi has no relevant financial conflicts.
SOURCE: Arabi Y et al. CCC48, Abstract 142. N Engl J Med Feb 18. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1816150.
SAN DIEGO – In critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, (DVT), according to a new trial.
“I was surprised. My hypothesis was that it would work,” said lead author Yaseen M. Arabi, MD, chairman of the intensive care department at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Many physicians routinely carry out the practice on the assumption that IPC should lead to better blood flow and further cut DVT risk. The procedure carries few risks, aside from patient discomfort. “The main issue is that it’s not needed. It might be useful in patients who are not receiving heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin,” said Dr. Arabi, who presented the results of the study at the Critical Care Congress sponsored by the Society of Critical Care Medicine. The study was simultaneously published online in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin reduces the risk of DVT by about 50%, but about 5%-20% of critically ill patients will develop DVT in spite of treatment, and mechanical thromboprophylaxis reduces DVT risk, compared with no prophylaxis. Some researchers have attempted to address whether adjunct intermittent pneumatic compression could further reduce DVT risk, but their studies were marked by a lack of controls, unoptimized pharmacologic regimens, and other limitations.
The trial included 2,003 adults from 20 sites in Saudi Arabia, Canada, Australia, and India, who were expected to have an intensive care unit stay of at least 72 hours. They were randomized to receive IPC combined with pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis (pneumatic compression group) or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone (control).
The proportion of patients receiving unfractionated heparin versus low-molecular-weight heparin was similar between the two groups, with about 58% treated with unfractionated heparin.
A total of 3.9% of patients in the pneumatic compression group experienced incident proximal DVT, compared with 4.2% of controls (relative risk, 0.93; P =.74). A total of 3.4% experienced prevalent proximal DVT, compared with 2.7% of controls (RR, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-2.12). There was no significant difference in the incidence of any lower-limb DVT (9.6% vs. 8.4%; RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86-1.51).
There was no difference between the two groups in a composite outcome that included pulmonary embolism or all prevalent and incident lower-limb DVT (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.85-1.44), and there were no between-group differences with respect to lower-limb skin injury or ischemia.
The results should change practice among those who still provide adjunct intermittent pneumatic compression, however surprising physicians may find these new results to be, according to Dr. Arabi: “People believed strongly that (adjunct IPC) should work, but you need to be evidence based, and here it showed no difference. But that’s why we do studies, right?”
The study was funded by King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology and King Abdullah International Medical Research Center. Dr. Arabi has no relevant financial conflicts.
SOURCE: Arabi Y et al. CCC48, Abstract 142. N Engl J Med Feb 18. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1816150.
SAN DIEGO – In critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, (DVT), according to a new trial.
“I was surprised. My hypothesis was that it would work,” said lead author Yaseen M. Arabi, MD, chairman of the intensive care department at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Many physicians routinely carry out the practice on the assumption that IPC should lead to better blood flow and further cut DVT risk. The procedure carries few risks, aside from patient discomfort. “The main issue is that it’s not needed. It might be useful in patients who are not receiving heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin,” said Dr. Arabi, who presented the results of the study at the Critical Care Congress sponsored by the Society of Critical Care Medicine. The study was simultaneously published online in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin reduces the risk of DVT by about 50%, but about 5%-20% of critically ill patients will develop DVT in spite of treatment, and mechanical thromboprophylaxis reduces DVT risk, compared with no prophylaxis. Some researchers have attempted to address whether adjunct intermittent pneumatic compression could further reduce DVT risk, but their studies were marked by a lack of controls, unoptimized pharmacologic regimens, and other limitations.
The trial included 2,003 adults from 20 sites in Saudi Arabia, Canada, Australia, and India, who were expected to have an intensive care unit stay of at least 72 hours. They were randomized to receive IPC combined with pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis (pneumatic compression group) or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone (control).
The proportion of patients receiving unfractionated heparin versus low-molecular-weight heparin was similar between the two groups, with about 58% treated with unfractionated heparin.
A total of 3.9% of patients in the pneumatic compression group experienced incident proximal DVT, compared with 4.2% of controls (relative risk, 0.93; P =.74). A total of 3.4% experienced prevalent proximal DVT, compared with 2.7% of controls (RR, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-2.12). There was no significant difference in the incidence of any lower-limb DVT (9.6% vs. 8.4%; RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86-1.51).
There was no difference between the two groups in a composite outcome that included pulmonary embolism or all prevalent and incident lower-limb DVT (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.85-1.44), and there were no between-group differences with respect to lower-limb skin injury or ischemia.
The results should change practice among those who still provide adjunct intermittent pneumatic compression, however surprising physicians may find these new results to be, according to Dr. Arabi: “People believed strongly that (adjunct IPC) should work, but you need to be evidence based, and here it showed no difference. But that’s why we do studies, right?”
The study was funded by King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology and King Abdullah International Medical Research Center. Dr. Arabi has no relevant financial conflicts.
SOURCE: Arabi Y et al. CCC48, Abstract 142. N Engl J Med Feb 18. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1816150.
REPORTING FROM CCC48
ICYMI: Andexanet alfa reduces anti–factor Xa activity from apixaban, rivaroxaban
Patients with acute major bleeding associated with factor Xa inhibitor usage who received andexanet alfa experienced a significant decrease in anti–factor Xa activity, with more than three-quarters of patients experiencing good or excellent hemostatic efficiency after 12 hours. That finding emerged from the multicenter, prospective, open-label, single-group ANNEXA-4 trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2019 Feb 11. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814051).
We reported this story at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology before it was published in the journal. Find our coverage at the link below.
Patients with acute major bleeding associated with factor Xa inhibitor usage who received andexanet alfa experienced a significant decrease in anti–factor Xa activity, with more than three-quarters of patients experiencing good or excellent hemostatic efficiency after 12 hours. That finding emerged from the multicenter, prospective, open-label, single-group ANNEXA-4 trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2019 Feb 11. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814051).
We reported this story at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology before it was published in the journal. Find our coverage at the link below.
Patients with acute major bleeding associated with factor Xa inhibitor usage who received andexanet alfa experienced a significant decrease in anti–factor Xa activity, with more than three-quarters of patients experiencing good or excellent hemostatic efficiency after 12 hours. That finding emerged from the multicenter, prospective, open-label, single-group ANNEXA-4 trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2019 Feb 11. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814051).
We reported this story at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology before it was published in the journal. Find our coverage at the link below.
FROM THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
Inhibitor risk nears zero after 75 days in previously untreated hemophilia A
PRAGUE—For previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe hemophilia A, the risk of developing factor VIII (FVIII) alloantibodies (inhibitors) becomes negligible after 75 exposure days, according to a recent study involving more than 1,000 infants.
This finding answers a long-standing and important question in the management of hemophilia A, reported lead author H. Marijke van den Berg, MD, PhD, of University Medical Centre in Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Inhibitor development is the biggest safety concern facing infants with severe hemophilia A because it affects 25%-35% of the patient population, but no previous studies have adequately described the associated risk profile, she noted.
“Most studies until now collected data until about 50 [exposure days] and not that far beyond,” Dr. van den Berg said at the annual congress of the European Association for Haemophilia and Allied Disorders. “So we were interested to see the serum plateau in our large cohort.”
Such a plateau would represent the time point at which risk of inhibitor development approaches zero.
Dr. van den Berg and her colleagues followed 1,038 PUPs with severe hemophilia A from first exposure to FVIII onward. Data were from drawn from the PedNet Registry. From the initial group, 943 patients (91%) were followed until 50 exposure days, and 899 (87%) were followed until 75 exposure days.
Inhibitor development was defined by a minimum of two positive inhibitor titers. In addition to determining the point in time of inhibitor development, the investigators performed a survival analysis for inhibitor incidence and reported median ages at first exposure and at exposure day 75.
The results showed that 298 out of 300 instances of inhibitor development occurred within 75 exposure days, and no inhibitors developed between exposure day 75 and 150. The final two instances occurred at exposure day 249 and 262, both with a low titer.
Median age at first exposure was 1.1 years, compared with 2.3 years at exposure day 75.
These findings suggest that risk of inhibitors is “near zero” after 75 days and that risk is approaching zero just 1 year after first exposure to FVIII, she said.
The results from this study could affect the design of future clinical trials for PUPs.
“Our recommendation will be to continue frequent [inhibitor] testing until 75 exposure days,” Dr. van den Berg said.
The time frame involved is very short, so close monitoring should be feasible for investigators, she noted.
Dr. van den Berg said that additional data, including Kaplan-Meier curves, would “hopefully” be published in a journal soon.
Dr. van den Berg reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: van den Berg HM et al. EAHAD 2019, Abstract OR05.
PRAGUE—For previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe hemophilia A, the risk of developing factor VIII (FVIII) alloantibodies (inhibitors) becomes negligible after 75 exposure days, according to a recent study involving more than 1,000 infants.
This finding answers a long-standing and important question in the management of hemophilia A, reported lead author H. Marijke van den Berg, MD, PhD, of University Medical Centre in Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Inhibitor development is the biggest safety concern facing infants with severe hemophilia A because it affects 25%-35% of the patient population, but no previous studies have adequately described the associated risk profile, she noted.
“Most studies until now collected data until about 50 [exposure days] and not that far beyond,” Dr. van den Berg said at the annual congress of the European Association for Haemophilia and Allied Disorders. “So we were interested to see the serum plateau in our large cohort.”
Such a plateau would represent the time point at which risk of inhibitor development approaches zero.
Dr. van den Berg and her colleagues followed 1,038 PUPs with severe hemophilia A from first exposure to FVIII onward. Data were from drawn from the PedNet Registry. From the initial group, 943 patients (91%) were followed until 50 exposure days, and 899 (87%) were followed until 75 exposure days.
Inhibitor development was defined by a minimum of two positive inhibitor titers. In addition to determining the point in time of inhibitor development, the investigators performed a survival analysis for inhibitor incidence and reported median ages at first exposure and at exposure day 75.
The results showed that 298 out of 300 instances of inhibitor development occurred within 75 exposure days, and no inhibitors developed between exposure day 75 and 150. The final two instances occurred at exposure day 249 and 262, both with a low titer.
Median age at first exposure was 1.1 years, compared with 2.3 years at exposure day 75.
These findings suggest that risk of inhibitors is “near zero” after 75 days and that risk is approaching zero just 1 year after first exposure to FVIII, she said.
The results from this study could affect the design of future clinical trials for PUPs.
“Our recommendation will be to continue frequent [inhibitor] testing until 75 exposure days,” Dr. van den Berg said.
The time frame involved is very short, so close monitoring should be feasible for investigators, she noted.
Dr. van den Berg said that additional data, including Kaplan-Meier curves, would “hopefully” be published in a journal soon.
Dr. van den Berg reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: van den Berg HM et al. EAHAD 2019, Abstract OR05.
PRAGUE—For previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe hemophilia A, the risk of developing factor VIII (FVIII) alloantibodies (inhibitors) becomes negligible after 75 exposure days, according to a recent study involving more than 1,000 infants.
This finding answers a long-standing and important question in the management of hemophilia A, reported lead author H. Marijke van den Berg, MD, PhD, of University Medical Centre in Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Inhibitor development is the biggest safety concern facing infants with severe hemophilia A because it affects 25%-35% of the patient population, but no previous studies have adequately described the associated risk profile, she noted.
“Most studies until now collected data until about 50 [exposure days] and not that far beyond,” Dr. van den Berg said at the annual congress of the European Association for Haemophilia and Allied Disorders. “So we were interested to see the serum plateau in our large cohort.”
Such a plateau would represent the time point at which risk of inhibitor development approaches zero.
Dr. van den Berg and her colleagues followed 1,038 PUPs with severe hemophilia A from first exposure to FVIII onward. Data were from drawn from the PedNet Registry. From the initial group, 943 patients (91%) were followed until 50 exposure days, and 899 (87%) were followed until 75 exposure days.
Inhibitor development was defined by a minimum of two positive inhibitor titers. In addition to determining the point in time of inhibitor development, the investigators performed a survival analysis for inhibitor incidence and reported median ages at first exposure and at exposure day 75.
The results showed that 298 out of 300 instances of inhibitor development occurred within 75 exposure days, and no inhibitors developed between exposure day 75 and 150. The final two instances occurred at exposure day 249 and 262, both with a low titer.
Median age at first exposure was 1.1 years, compared with 2.3 years at exposure day 75.
These findings suggest that risk of inhibitors is “near zero” after 75 days and that risk is approaching zero just 1 year after first exposure to FVIII, she said.
The results from this study could affect the design of future clinical trials for PUPs.
“Our recommendation will be to continue frequent [inhibitor] testing until 75 exposure days,” Dr. van den Berg said.
The time frame involved is very short, so close monitoring should be feasible for investigators, she noted.
Dr. van den Berg said that additional data, including Kaplan-Meier curves, would “hopefully” be published in a journal soon.
Dr. van den Berg reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: van den Berg HM et al. EAHAD 2019, Abstract OR05.
REPORTING FROM EAHAD 2019
Key clinical point: Major finding: Less than 1% of infants with severe hemophilia A developed inhibitors after 75 exposure days.
Study details: An observational study involving 1,038 previously untreated patients with severe hemophilia A, of which 899 (87%) were followed until 75 exposure days.
Disclosures: Dr. van den Berg reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Source: van den Berg HM et al. EAHAD 2019, Abstract OR05.
FDA approves caplacizumab for aTTP
The Food and Drug Administration has approved caplacizumab (Cablivi) in combination with plasma exchange and immunosuppressive therapy for the treatment of adults with acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (aTTP).
Caplacizumab is an anti–von Willebrand factor nanobody designed to inhibit the interaction between von Willebrand factor and platelets. The injection previously received orphan drug designation from the FDA and was approved under priority review.
The FDA’s approval of caplacizumab was based on results from the phase 3 HERCULES trial (N Engl J Med 2019 Jan 24;380:335-46).
The trial (NCT02553317) included 145 adults with aTTP. They were randomized to receive caplacizumab (n = 72) or placebo (n = 73), in addition to plasma exchange and immunosuppression.
The study’s primary endpoint was the time to platelet count response (normalization), which was defined as a platelet count of at least 150 x 109/L with subsequent stop of daily plasma exchange within 5 days.
There was a significant reduction in time to platelet count response in the caplacizumab arm, compared with the placebo arm – 2.69 days and 2.88 days, respectively. The platelet normalization rate ratio was 1.55 (P less than .01).
A secondary endpoint was the combination of aTTP-related death, aTTP recurrence, and at least one major thromboembolic event during study treatment. The incidence of this combined endpoint was 12% in the caplacizumab arm and 49% in the placebo arm (P less than .001).
The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (occurring in at least 15% of patients in the caplacizumab and placebo arms, respectively) were epistaxis (32% and 3%), headache (23% and 8%), urticaria (17% and 7%), and hypokalemia (9% and 19%).
During the treatment period, there were no deaths in the caplacizumab arm and three deaths in the placebo arm. There was one death (from cerebral ischemia) in the caplacizumab arm during the follow-up period, but it was considered unrelated to caplacizumab.
For more details on caplacizumab, see the full prescribing information.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved caplacizumab (Cablivi) in combination with plasma exchange and immunosuppressive therapy for the treatment of adults with acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (aTTP).
Caplacizumab is an anti–von Willebrand factor nanobody designed to inhibit the interaction between von Willebrand factor and platelets. The injection previously received orphan drug designation from the FDA and was approved under priority review.
The FDA’s approval of caplacizumab was based on results from the phase 3 HERCULES trial (N Engl J Med 2019 Jan 24;380:335-46).
The trial (NCT02553317) included 145 adults with aTTP. They were randomized to receive caplacizumab (n = 72) or placebo (n = 73), in addition to plasma exchange and immunosuppression.
The study’s primary endpoint was the time to platelet count response (normalization), which was defined as a platelet count of at least 150 x 109/L with subsequent stop of daily plasma exchange within 5 days.
There was a significant reduction in time to platelet count response in the caplacizumab arm, compared with the placebo arm – 2.69 days and 2.88 days, respectively. The platelet normalization rate ratio was 1.55 (P less than .01).
A secondary endpoint was the combination of aTTP-related death, aTTP recurrence, and at least one major thromboembolic event during study treatment. The incidence of this combined endpoint was 12% in the caplacizumab arm and 49% in the placebo arm (P less than .001).
The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (occurring in at least 15% of patients in the caplacizumab and placebo arms, respectively) were epistaxis (32% and 3%), headache (23% and 8%), urticaria (17% and 7%), and hypokalemia (9% and 19%).
During the treatment period, there were no deaths in the caplacizumab arm and three deaths in the placebo arm. There was one death (from cerebral ischemia) in the caplacizumab arm during the follow-up period, but it was considered unrelated to caplacizumab.
For more details on caplacizumab, see the full prescribing information.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved caplacizumab (Cablivi) in combination with plasma exchange and immunosuppressive therapy for the treatment of adults with acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (aTTP).
Caplacizumab is an anti–von Willebrand factor nanobody designed to inhibit the interaction between von Willebrand factor and platelets. The injection previously received orphan drug designation from the FDA and was approved under priority review.
The FDA’s approval of caplacizumab was based on results from the phase 3 HERCULES trial (N Engl J Med 2019 Jan 24;380:335-46).
The trial (NCT02553317) included 145 adults with aTTP. They were randomized to receive caplacizumab (n = 72) or placebo (n = 73), in addition to plasma exchange and immunosuppression.
The study’s primary endpoint was the time to platelet count response (normalization), which was defined as a platelet count of at least 150 x 109/L with subsequent stop of daily plasma exchange within 5 days.
There was a significant reduction in time to platelet count response in the caplacizumab arm, compared with the placebo arm – 2.69 days and 2.88 days, respectively. The platelet normalization rate ratio was 1.55 (P less than .01).
A secondary endpoint was the combination of aTTP-related death, aTTP recurrence, and at least one major thromboembolic event during study treatment. The incidence of this combined endpoint was 12% in the caplacizumab arm and 49% in the placebo arm (P less than .001).
The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (occurring in at least 15% of patients in the caplacizumab and placebo arms, respectively) were epistaxis (32% and 3%), headache (23% and 8%), urticaria (17% and 7%), and hypokalemia (9% and 19%).
During the treatment period, there were no deaths in the caplacizumab arm and three deaths in the placebo arm. There was one death (from cerebral ischemia) in the caplacizumab arm during the follow-up period, but it was considered unrelated to caplacizumab.
For more details on caplacizumab, see the full prescribing information.
Biomarkers predict VTE risk with menopausal oral hormone therapy
CHICAGO – An elevated baseline D-dimer level is helpful to women and their physicians in clarifying decision making about oral hormone therapy for troublesome menopausal symptoms, Mary Cushman, MD, said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.
She was lead investigator in a nested case-control study embedded in the landmark Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), which showed that participants who had a baseline D-dimer greater than 0.54 mg/L – putting them in the top 25% – and were randomized to oral menopausal hormone therapy had a 5-year incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of 6%. That’s 500% higher than in women with a lower D-dimer randomized to placebo.
“The number needed to test for D-dimer in advance of prescribing in order to prevent one VTE over 5 years of hormone therapy was only 33. So this is potentially something in the toolbox you can use in counseling women about oral hormone therapy,” said Dr. Cushman, professor of medicine and pathology and medical director of the thrombosis and hemostasis program at the University of Vermont, Burlington.
The biomarker study included 1,082 WHI participants aged 50-79 years randomized to oral conjugated equine estrogen with or without medroxyprogesterone acetate or to placebo, 215 of whom experienced VTE during a mean 4.1 years of follow-up. Levels of a variety of biomarkers obtained at baseline were assessed in terms of their associated risk of future VTE. The biomarkers included C-reactive protein and procoagulant, anticoagulant, and fibrinolytic factors.
In a logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, race, body mass index, and hysterectomy, the strongest association with VTE was a high D-dimer. That 500% increased risk of VTE with hormone therapy in women with a D-dimer greater than 0.54 mg/L was comparable in magnitude with the risk Dr. Cushman and her coinvestigators previously reported for the combination of factor V Leiden and hormone therapy.
Dr. Cushman and her associates also took a first step towards developing a multibiomarker risk score. They found that WHI participants randomized to hormone therapy who had abnormal baseline values for any three or more of eight biomarkers had a 1,450% greater risk of future VTE than women with zero or one abnormal biomarker who were assigned to placebo. The eight-biomarker panel described in the recently published study comprised D-dimer, factor V Leiden, protein C, total protein S, free protein S, antithrombin, plasmin-antiplasmin complex, and fragment 1.2. However, the investigators indicated the risk score needs further study before it’s ready for adoption in clinical practice (Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2018 Apr 17;2[2]:310-9).
Dr. Cushman noted that, although the main findings of the WHI have largely resulted in abandonment of menopausal hormone therapy for disease prevention, many women still want to take oral hormone therapy for relief of bothersome menopausal symptoms. She tries to steer them instead to safer nonoral formulations. Transdermal estrogen replacement has no associated risk of VTE and doesn’t activate anticoagulation. Neither does vaginal estradiol.
In offering what she called “the 30,000-foot view of the impact of venous thrombosis on women’s health,” Dr. Cushman noted that VTE is the third-most common vascular disease in the United States, with up to 900,000 cases per year. The lifetime risk in women after age 45 is 8.4%. Half of VTEs are provoked and therefore potentially preventable, with common triggers being surgery, cancer, pregnancy, trauma, and immobilization, especially during travel.
In addition, a retrospective study conducted in the Worcester, Mass., area showed that 1-month mortality after VTE remained static in the 5%-10% range during 1999-2009.
“This is a fatal disease, even though we treat it as an outpatient quite a lot,” Dr. Cushman observed.
Common nonfatal complications of VTE include major bleeding in 5%-10% of cases, a recurrence rate of 5%-10% annually, a 20%-40% of the burdensome and not infrequently disabling condition known as postthrombotic syndrome, and a 3%-4% incidence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. Yet despite the seriousness of VTE, awareness about VTE is poor among both patients and physicians, and appropriate prophylaxis is underutilized, she said.
The key to improved primary prevention of VTE, Dr. Cushman continued, is greater attention to modifiable behavioral risk factors, along with more use of prophylactic medication when needed.
The traditional cardiovascular risk factors, like hypertension, smoking, and hyperlipidemia, aren’t relevant to VTE risk. But obesity and sedentary lifestyle have come to be recognized as important modifiable risk factors. In one study of more than 30,000 Americans, the risk of VTE was shown to be reduced by 40% in individuals who exercised at least four times per week, compared with the physically inactive.
And in an analysis led by Dr. Cushman of nearly 21,000 participants over age 45 years with 12.6 years of follow-up in the Longitudinal Investigation of Thromboembolism Etiology (LITE), the investigators found that greater levels of all body size measures – not just body mass index, but calf circumference, waist-hip ratio, hip circumference, and others – were associated with increased VTE risk. These associations weren’t affected by levels of circulating biomarkers for inflammation or hypercoagulability, suggesting that it’s obesity per se, with its associated adverse impact on blood flow caused by physical factors, that explains the mechanism underlying obesity as a risk factor for VTE (Thromb Res. 2016 Aug;144:127-32).
At the meeting’s opening ceremonies, AHA President Ivor Benjamin, MD, of the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, presented Dr. Cushman with the AHA Population Research Prize. She was honored for her “critically acclaimed research utilizing biomarker assessments in population studies to elucidate pathways of disease etiology for the three most common vascular diseases – coronary heart disease, stroke, and venous thromboembolism – as well as their risk factors,” said Dr. Benjamin.
Dr. Cushman reported having no financial conflicts regarding her D-dimer study, which was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
CHICAGO – An elevated baseline D-dimer level is helpful to women and their physicians in clarifying decision making about oral hormone therapy for troublesome menopausal symptoms, Mary Cushman, MD, said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.
She was lead investigator in a nested case-control study embedded in the landmark Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), which showed that participants who had a baseline D-dimer greater than 0.54 mg/L – putting them in the top 25% – and were randomized to oral menopausal hormone therapy had a 5-year incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of 6%. That’s 500% higher than in women with a lower D-dimer randomized to placebo.
“The number needed to test for D-dimer in advance of prescribing in order to prevent one VTE over 5 years of hormone therapy was only 33. So this is potentially something in the toolbox you can use in counseling women about oral hormone therapy,” said Dr. Cushman, professor of medicine and pathology and medical director of the thrombosis and hemostasis program at the University of Vermont, Burlington.
The biomarker study included 1,082 WHI participants aged 50-79 years randomized to oral conjugated equine estrogen with or without medroxyprogesterone acetate or to placebo, 215 of whom experienced VTE during a mean 4.1 years of follow-up. Levels of a variety of biomarkers obtained at baseline were assessed in terms of their associated risk of future VTE. The biomarkers included C-reactive protein and procoagulant, anticoagulant, and fibrinolytic factors.
In a logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, race, body mass index, and hysterectomy, the strongest association with VTE was a high D-dimer. That 500% increased risk of VTE with hormone therapy in women with a D-dimer greater than 0.54 mg/L was comparable in magnitude with the risk Dr. Cushman and her coinvestigators previously reported for the combination of factor V Leiden and hormone therapy.
Dr. Cushman and her associates also took a first step towards developing a multibiomarker risk score. They found that WHI participants randomized to hormone therapy who had abnormal baseline values for any three or more of eight biomarkers had a 1,450% greater risk of future VTE than women with zero or one abnormal biomarker who were assigned to placebo. The eight-biomarker panel described in the recently published study comprised D-dimer, factor V Leiden, protein C, total protein S, free protein S, antithrombin, plasmin-antiplasmin complex, and fragment 1.2. However, the investigators indicated the risk score needs further study before it’s ready for adoption in clinical practice (Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2018 Apr 17;2[2]:310-9).
Dr. Cushman noted that, although the main findings of the WHI have largely resulted in abandonment of menopausal hormone therapy for disease prevention, many women still want to take oral hormone therapy for relief of bothersome menopausal symptoms. She tries to steer them instead to safer nonoral formulations. Transdermal estrogen replacement has no associated risk of VTE and doesn’t activate anticoagulation. Neither does vaginal estradiol.
In offering what she called “the 30,000-foot view of the impact of venous thrombosis on women’s health,” Dr. Cushman noted that VTE is the third-most common vascular disease in the United States, with up to 900,000 cases per year. The lifetime risk in women after age 45 is 8.4%. Half of VTEs are provoked and therefore potentially preventable, with common triggers being surgery, cancer, pregnancy, trauma, and immobilization, especially during travel.
In addition, a retrospective study conducted in the Worcester, Mass., area showed that 1-month mortality after VTE remained static in the 5%-10% range during 1999-2009.
“This is a fatal disease, even though we treat it as an outpatient quite a lot,” Dr. Cushman observed.
Common nonfatal complications of VTE include major bleeding in 5%-10% of cases, a recurrence rate of 5%-10% annually, a 20%-40% of the burdensome and not infrequently disabling condition known as postthrombotic syndrome, and a 3%-4% incidence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. Yet despite the seriousness of VTE, awareness about VTE is poor among both patients and physicians, and appropriate prophylaxis is underutilized, she said.
The key to improved primary prevention of VTE, Dr. Cushman continued, is greater attention to modifiable behavioral risk factors, along with more use of prophylactic medication when needed.
The traditional cardiovascular risk factors, like hypertension, smoking, and hyperlipidemia, aren’t relevant to VTE risk. But obesity and sedentary lifestyle have come to be recognized as important modifiable risk factors. In one study of more than 30,000 Americans, the risk of VTE was shown to be reduced by 40% in individuals who exercised at least four times per week, compared with the physically inactive.
And in an analysis led by Dr. Cushman of nearly 21,000 participants over age 45 years with 12.6 years of follow-up in the Longitudinal Investigation of Thromboembolism Etiology (LITE), the investigators found that greater levels of all body size measures – not just body mass index, but calf circumference, waist-hip ratio, hip circumference, and others – were associated with increased VTE risk. These associations weren’t affected by levels of circulating biomarkers for inflammation or hypercoagulability, suggesting that it’s obesity per se, with its associated adverse impact on blood flow caused by physical factors, that explains the mechanism underlying obesity as a risk factor for VTE (Thromb Res. 2016 Aug;144:127-32).
At the meeting’s opening ceremonies, AHA President Ivor Benjamin, MD, of the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, presented Dr. Cushman with the AHA Population Research Prize. She was honored for her “critically acclaimed research utilizing biomarker assessments in population studies to elucidate pathways of disease etiology for the three most common vascular diseases – coronary heart disease, stroke, and venous thromboembolism – as well as their risk factors,” said Dr. Benjamin.
Dr. Cushman reported having no financial conflicts regarding her D-dimer study, which was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
CHICAGO – An elevated baseline D-dimer level is helpful to women and their physicians in clarifying decision making about oral hormone therapy for troublesome menopausal symptoms, Mary Cushman, MD, said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.
She was lead investigator in a nested case-control study embedded in the landmark Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), which showed that participants who had a baseline D-dimer greater than 0.54 mg/L – putting them in the top 25% – and were randomized to oral menopausal hormone therapy had a 5-year incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of 6%. That’s 500% higher than in women with a lower D-dimer randomized to placebo.
“The number needed to test for D-dimer in advance of prescribing in order to prevent one VTE over 5 years of hormone therapy was only 33. So this is potentially something in the toolbox you can use in counseling women about oral hormone therapy,” said Dr. Cushman, professor of medicine and pathology and medical director of the thrombosis and hemostasis program at the University of Vermont, Burlington.
The biomarker study included 1,082 WHI participants aged 50-79 years randomized to oral conjugated equine estrogen with or without medroxyprogesterone acetate or to placebo, 215 of whom experienced VTE during a mean 4.1 years of follow-up. Levels of a variety of biomarkers obtained at baseline were assessed in terms of their associated risk of future VTE. The biomarkers included C-reactive protein and procoagulant, anticoagulant, and fibrinolytic factors.
In a logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, race, body mass index, and hysterectomy, the strongest association with VTE was a high D-dimer. That 500% increased risk of VTE with hormone therapy in women with a D-dimer greater than 0.54 mg/L was comparable in magnitude with the risk Dr. Cushman and her coinvestigators previously reported for the combination of factor V Leiden and hormone therapy.
Dr. Cushman and her associates also took a first step towards developing a multibiomarker risk score. They found that WHI participants randomized to hormone therapy who had abnormal baseline values for any three or more of eight biomarkers had a 1,450% greater risk of future VTE than women with zero or one abnormal biomarker who were assigned to placebo. The eight-biomarker panel described in the recently published study comprised D-dimer, factor V Leiden, protein C, total protein S, free protein S, antithrombin, plasmin-antiplasmin complex, and fragment 1.2. However, the investigators indicated the risk score needs further study before it’s ready for adoption in clinical practice (Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2018 Apr 17;2[2]:310-9).
Dr. Cushman noted that, although the main findings of the WHI have largely resulted in abandonment of menopausal hormone therapy for disease prevention, many women still want to take oral hormone therapy for relief of bothersome menopausal symptoms. She tries to steer them instead to safer nonoral formulations. Transdermal estrogen replacement has no associated risk of VTE and doesn’t activate anticoagulation. Neither does vaginal estradiol.
In offering what she called “the 30,000-foot view of the impact of venous thrombosis on women’s health,” Dr. Cushman noted that VTE is the third-most common vascular disease in the United States, with up to 900,000 cases per year. The lifetime risk in women after age 45 is 8.4%. Half of VTEs are provoked and therefore potentially preventable, with common triggers being surgery, cancer, pregnancy, trauma, and immobilization, especially during travel.
In addition, a retrospective study conducted in the Worcester, Mass., area showed that 1-month mortality after VTE remained static in the 5%-10% range during 1999-2009.
“This is a fatal disease, even though we treat it as an outpatient quite a lot,” Dr. Cushman observed.
Common nonfatal complications of VTE include major bleeding in 5%-10% of cases, a recurrence rate of 5%-10% annually, a 20%-40% of the burdensome and not infrequently disabling condition known as postthrombotic syndrome, and a 3%-4% incidence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. Yet despite the seriousness of VTE, awareness about VTE is poor among both patients and physicians, and appropriate prophylaxis is underutilized, she said.
The key to improved primary prevention of VTE, Dr. Cushman continued, is greater attention to modifiable behavioral risk factors, along with more use of prophylactic medication when needed.
The traditional cardiovascular risk factors, like hypertension, smoking, and hyperlipidemia, aren’t relevant to VTE risk. But obesity and sedentary lifestyle have come to be recognized as important modifiable risk factors. In one study of more than 30,000 Americans, the risk of VTE was shown to be reduced by 40% in individuals who exercised at least four times per week, compared with the physically inactive.
And in an analysis led by Dr. Cushman of nearly 21,000 participants over age 45 years with 12.6 years of follow-up in the Longitudinal Investigation of Thromboembolism Etiology (LITE), the investigators found that greater levels of all body size measures – not just body mass index, but calf circumference, waist-hip ratio, hip circumference, and others – were associated with increased VTE risk. These associations weren’t affected by levels of circulating biomarkers for inflammation or hypercoagulability, suggesting that it’s obesity per se, with its associated adverse impact on blood flow caused by physical factors, that explains the mechanism underlying obesity as a risk factor for VTE (Thromb Res. 2016 Aug;144:127-32).
At the meeting’s opening ceremonies, AHA President Ivor Benjamin, MD, of the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, presented Dr. Cushman with the AHA Population Research Prize. She was honored for her “critically acclaimed research utilizing biomarker assessments in population studies to elucidate pathways of disease etiology for the three most common vascular diseases – coronary heart disease, stroke, and venous thromboembolism – as well as their risk factors,” said Dr. Benjamin.
Dr. Cushman reported having no financial conflicts regarding her D-dimer study, which was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
REPORTING FROM THE AHA SCIENTIFIC SESSIONS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Women in the top 25% for D-dimer level before going on menopausal hormone therapy had a 6% incidence of venous thromboembolism over 5 years.
Study details: This was a nested case-control study focused on identifying biomarkers for venous thromboembolism risk which included 1,082 participants in the Women’s Health Initiative randomized to menopausal hormone therapy or placebo.
Disclosures: The presenter reported having no financial conflicts regarding the study, which was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
Meta-analysis: IVIG bests anti-D on platelet count in pediatric ITP
For patients with pediatric immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), treatment with intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) is more likely to raise platelet count in the short-term, compared with anti-D immunoglobulins (anti-D), according the authors of a recent systematic review and meta-analysis.
Although findings from the meta-analysis support recommendations for first-line IVIG, not all studies reported bleeding symptoms, so the clinical effects of differing platelet responses remain unknown, reported lead author Bertrand Lioger, MD, of François-Rabelais University in Tours, France, and his colleagues.
“To date, no meta-analysis has compared the efficacy and safety of IVIG vs. anti-D,” the investigators wrote in The Journal of Pediatrics.
Each treatment approach has strengths and weaknesses, the investigators noted. Namely, IVIG is more expensive, while anti-D is more likely to cause adverse drugs reactions (ADRs), such as disseminated intravascular coagulation and hemolysis.
The present review evaluated 11 studies comparing the efficacy of IVIG with that of anti-D in 704 children with ITP. Platelet response and bleeding were the main efficacy outcomes. The investigators used response thresholds defined by each study because several did not use standardized levels. Other outcomes considered were mortality, disease course, splenectomy, and ADRs. The ADRs included serious adverse reactions, infusion reactions, transfusions, hemoglobin loss, and hemolysis.
In alignment with previous guidelines, anti-D therapy was most often given to RhD positive, nonsplenectomized children at a dose of 50-75 mcg/kg, whereas IVIG was dosed at 0.8-1 g/kg for 1 or 2 consecutive days.
Results showed that patients treated with IVIG were 15% more likely to have platelet counts greater than 20 × 109/L within 24-72 hours, compared with those given anti-D. This disparity rose to 25% in favor of IVIG when using a threshold of 50 × 109/L.
Treatment risk was lower and general symptoms were less common after treatment with anti-D infusion, compared with IVIG (24.6% vs. 31.4%), but this was only true for trials foregoing premedication. Anti-D was more often associated with hemolysis, making transfusion necessary for some patients.
Although platelet count is often used as a surrogate measure of bleeding risk, the investigators decided that a lack of bleeding data among the studies precluded an accurate determination of clinical superiority between the treatments.
“Severe hemolysis remains an important issue when using anti-D immunoglobulins and premedication reduces the incidence of general symptoms observed with IVIG,” the investigators wrote. “Our conclusions should, however, be cautiously considered due to the poor overall quality of included studies and to limited data about clinically relevant outcomes.”
The study was not supported by outside funding. The investigators reported financial relationships with Amgen, Novartis, Roche Pharma, Sanofi, and others.
SOURCE: Lioger B et al. J Pediatr. 2019;204:225-33.
For patients with pediatric immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), treatment with intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) is more likely to raise platelet count in the short-term, compared with anti-D immunoglobulins (anti-D), according the authors of a recent systematic review and meta-analysis.
Although findings from the meta-analysis support recommendations for first-line IVIG, not all studies reported bleeding symptoms, so the clinical effects of differing platelet responses remain unknown, reported lead author Bertrand Lioger, MD, of François-Rabelais University in Tours, France, and his colleagues.
“To date, no meta-analysis has compared the efficacy and safety of IVIG vs. anti-D,” the investigators wrote in The Journal of Pediatrics.
Each treatment approach has strengths and weaknesses, the investigators noted. Namely, IVIG is more expensive, while anti-D is more likely to cause adverse drugs reactions (ADRs), such as disseminated intravascular coagulation and hemolysis.
The present review evaluated 11 studies comparing the efficacy of IVIG with that of anti-D in 704 children with ITP. Platelet response and bleeding were the main efficacy outcomes. The investigators used response thresholds defined by each study because several did not use standardized levels. Other outcomes considered were mortality, disease course, splenectomy, and ADRs. The ADRs included serious adverse reactions, infusion reactions, transfusions, hemoglobin loss, and hemolysis.
In alignment with previous guidelines, anti-D therapy was most often given to RhD positive, nonsplenectomized children at a dose of 50-75 mcg/kg, whereas IVIG was dosed at 0.8-1 g/kg for 1 or 2 consecutive days.
Results showed that patients treated with IVIG were 15% more likely to have platelet counts greater than 20 × 109/L within 24-72 hours, compared with those given anti-D. This disparity rose to 25% in favor of IVIG when using a threshold of 50 × 109/L.
Treatment risk was lower and general symptoms were less common after treatment with anti-D infusion, compared with IVIG (24.6% vs. 31.4%), but this was only true for trials foregoing premedication. Anti-D was more often associated with hemolysis, making transfusion necessary for some patients.
Although platelet count is often used as a surrogate measure of bleeding risk, the investigators decided that a lack of bleeding data among the studies precluded an accurate determination of clinical superiority between the treatments.
“Severe hemolysis remains an important issue when using anti-D immunoglobulins and premedication reduces the incidence of general symptoms observed with IVIG,” the investigators wrote. “Our conclusions should, however, be cautiously considered due to the poor overall quality of included studies and to limited data about clinically relevant outcomes.”
The study was not supported by outside funding. The investigators reported financial relationships with Amgen, Novartis, Roche Pharma, Sanofi, and others.
SOURCE: Lioger B et al. J Pediatr. 2019;204:225-33.
For patients with pediatric immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), treatment with intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) is more likely to raise platelet count in the short-term, compared with anti-D immunoglobulins (anti-D), according the authors of a recent systematic review and meta-analysis.
Although findings from the meta-analysis support recommendations for first-line IVIG, not all studies reported bleeding symptoms, so the clinical effects of differing platelet responses remain unknown, reported lead author Bertrand Lioger, MD, of François-Rabelais University in Tours, France, and his colleagues.
“To date, no meta-analysis has compared the efficacy and safety of IVIG vs. anti-D,” the investigators wrote in The Journal of Pediatrics.
Each treatment approach has strengths and weaknesses, the investigators noted. Namely, IVIG is more expensive, while anti-D is more likely to cause adverse drugs reactions (ADRs), such as disseminated intravascular coagulation and hemolysis.
The present review evaluated 11 studies comparing the efficacy of IVIG with that of anti-D in 704 children with ITP. Platelet response and bleeding were the main efficacy outcomes. The investigators used response thresholds defined by each study because several did not use standardized levels. Other outcomes considered were mortality, disease course, splenectomy, and ADRs. The ADRs included serious adverse reactions, infusion reactions, transfusions, hemoglobin loss, and hemolysis.
In alignment with previous guidelines, anti-D therapy was most often given to RhD positive, nonsplenectomized children at a dose of 50-75 mcg/kg, whereas IVIG was dosed at 0.8-1 g/kg for 1 or 2 consecutive days.
Results showed that patients treated with IVIG were 15% more likely to have platelet counts greater than 20 × 109/L within 24-72 hours, compared with those given anti-D. This disparity rose to 25% in favor of IVIG when using a threshold of 50 × 109/L.
Treatment risk was lower and general symptoms were less common after treatment with anti-D infusion, compared with IVIG (24.6% vs. 31.4%), but this was only true for trials foregoing premedication. Anti-D was more often associated with hemolysis, making transfusion necessary for some patients.
Although platelet count is often used as a surrogate measure of bleeding risk, the investigators decided that a lack of bleeding data among the studies precluded an accurate determination of clinical superiority between the treatments.
“Severe hemolysis remains an important issue when using anti-D immunoglobulins and premedication reduces the incidence of general symptoms observed with IVIG,” the investigators wrote. “Our conclusions should, however, be cautiously considered due to the poor overall quality of included studies and to limited data about clinically relevant outcomes.”
The study was not supported by outside funding. The investigators reported financial relationships with Amgen, Novartis, Roche Pharma, Sanofi, and others.
SOURCE: Lioger B et al. J Pediatr. 2019;204:225-33.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Treatment with IVIG was 15% more likely than anti-D immunoglobulin to raise platelet counts higher than 20 × 109/L within 24-72 hours.
Study details: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 11 studies comparing the efficacy of IVIG with that of anti-D in 704 children with ITP.
Disclosures: The meta-analysis did not have outside funding. The investigators reported financial relationships with Amgen, Novartis, Roche Pharma, Sanofi, and others.
Source: Lioger B et al. J Pediatr. 2019; 204:225-33.