While primary prophylaxis is a well-established and recommended method of care delivery for children with severe haemophilia, fewer studies have documented the benefits of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescence or adulthood. To evaluate the role of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescent and adult severe haemophiliacs, a retrospective observational cohort study was conducted in 10 Italian Centres that investigated 84 haemophiliacs who had bled frequently and had thus switched from on-demand to prophylactic treatment during adolescence (n = 30) or adulthood (n = 54). The consumption of clotting factor concentrates, the orthopaedic and radiological scores, quality of life and disease-related morbidity were compared before and after starting secondary prophylaxis. Prophylaxis reduced the mean annual number of total and joint bleeds (35.8 vs. 4.2 and 32.4 vs. 3.3; P < 0.01) and of days lost from work/school (34.6 vs. 3.0, P < 0.01). A statistically significant reduction in the orthopaedic score was observed during prophylaxis in adolescents, but not in the whole cohort. Patients used more factor concentrates with corresponding higher costs on prophylaxis, but experienced a better quality of life. With respect to on-demand treatment, higher factor consumption and cost of secondary prophylaxis were balanced by marked clinical benefits and greater well-being in this cohort of adolescent/adult haemophiliacs.
Hemophilia A is an X-linked bleeding disorder caused by widespread mutations in the human coagulation factor 8 gene. We have searched for mutations in factor 8 gene DNAs from 40 unrelated Italian patients with hemophilia A. All patients came from the same region (Calabria) and were followed-up at the same hemophilia center. Of the 40 patients, 20 (50%) had severe hemophilia A, 19 (47.5%) had moderate hemophilia A, and one (2.5%) had mild hemophilia A. All patients were first screened for the common intron 22 and intron 1 inversions. Inversion-negative samples were screened for point mutations by direct sequencing of all coding regions and intron-exon boundaries of the factor 8 gene. Mutations previously reported as causative of hemophilia A were identified in 14 of the 40 patients. These included five (12.5%) intron 22 inversions, one (2.5%) small deletion, one (2.5%) small insertion and seven (17.5%) point mutations. In all patients with moderate and mild hemophilia A, a nucleotide change in the c.1538 -18G>A in intron 10, not reported in the HAMSTeRS factor 8 mutation database (http://europium.csc.mrc.ac.uk/), was found. The G-to-A change predicts the appearance of a new acceptor splice site. We have also demonstrated that all patients share a common haplotype, suggesting that the mutation probably occurred in a single ancestor. In conclusion, we suggest that the c.1538-18G>A transition can be the putative mutation, which probably occurred in a common ancestor and then spread in neighbours, in patients with moderate-mild hemophilia A investigated in the present study.
Background Immune tolerance induction (ITI) is the only proven strategy to eradicate factor VIII inhibitors in patients with haemophilia A (HA). Aim To identify patients and treatment options with the highest chance of inhibitor eradication by primary ITI. Patients and methods In the frame of the Italian ITI Registry, carried out from 1995 to 2015 (last follow‐up 2018), 137 primary ITI courses in severe HA patients (90/137 with poor prognosis) were analysed for predictors of outcome (complete/partial response or failure). Sixty‐six of them (48%) were prospectively evaluated. Results ITI was successful in 91/137 patients (66.4%) and 70 (51.1%) achieved complete response within 11 months (median). Historical peak titres ≤200 BU/ml (P = .033), inhibitor titres ≤5 BU/ml at ITI start (P = .001), peak titres ≤100 BU/ml during ITI (P < .001) and missense mutations and small insertions/deletions of FVIII gene (P = .027) predicted complete inhibitor eradication. A score that considers the cumulative number of these variables predicted complete response with positive predictive values up to .81 at ITI start and .91 during ITI, respectively. Patients who had no bleeding (OR, 3.45, 95% CI: 1.4–8.6) nor other adverse events (OR 2.6, 95%CI: 1.3–5.3) during ITI had higher chances of complete response. During the 120‐month follow‐up (median), 2/70 patients who had achieved complete response relapsed (2.9%). Conclusions This Registry, with a centralized review of outcomes, homogeneous data collection (half of which prospective) and long‐term follow‐up, provides insights for optimizing ITI, with a rationale for further studies in the currently evolving scenario of inhibitor management in HA patients.
Although synovitis is recognized as a marker of joint disease activity, its periodic assessment is not included in routine clinical surveillance of patients with haemophilia (PwH). In order to evaluate the current knowledge and to identify controversial issues, a preliminary literature search by the Musculoskeletal Committee of the Italian Association of Haemophilia Centres (AICE) has been conducted. Statements have been established and sent to the Italian AICE members to collect their level of agreement or disagreement by a Delphi process. Thirty-seven consensus recommendations have been drafted. We found a general agreement on the indication to consider the presence of synovitis as a marker of joint disease activity in PwH. Accordingly, there was agreement on the indication to search for synovitis both in patients reporting joint pain and in asymptomatic ones, recognizing ultrasound as the most practical imaging technique to perform periodic joint screening. Interestingly, after detection of synovitis, there was agreement on the indication to modify the therapeutic approach, suggesting prophylaxis in patients treated on demand and tailoring treatment in patients already under prophylaxis. Whereas the need of an early consultation with a physiotherapist is recommended for PwH affected by chronic synovitis, the exact timing for an orthopaedic surgeon consultation is currently unknown.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.