We have located links that may give you full text access.
The effectiveness and safety of octocog alfa in patients with hemophilia A: up to 7-year follow-up of the real-world AHEAD international study.
BACKGROUND: Real-world data assessing treatment outcomes in patients with hemophilia A in routine clinical practice are limited.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of octocog alfa in patients with moderate/severe hemophilia A receiving treatment in clinical practice.
DESIGN: The international Antihemophilic Factor Hemophilia A Outcome Database study is an observational, noninterventional, prospective, multicenter study.
METHODS: This planned interim data read-out was conducted following 7 years of observation of patients receiving octocog alfa (cut-off, 30 June 2020). The primary endpoint was joint health status, assessed by the Gilbert Score. Secondary endpoints included annualized bleeding rates (ABRs), Hemophilia Joint Health Score (HJHS), health-related quality of life, consumption, and safety. This post hoc analysis stratified data by hemophilia severity at baseline [moderate, factor VIII (FVIII) 1-5%; severe, FVIII <1%].
RESULTS: Of the 711 patients in this analysis, 582 (82%) were receiving prophylaxis with octocog alfa at enrollment, and 498 (70%) had severe disease. Median Gilbert Scores were higher with on-demand therapy versus prophylaxis and scores were comparable in moderate and severe disease. In patients receiving prophylaxis, there was an improvement in HJHS Global Gait Score over 7 years of follow-up overall and in patients with severe disease. ABRs and annualized joint bleeding rates were low across all 7 years. An ABR of zero was reported in 34-56% of prophylaxis patients versus 20-40% in the on-demand group. ABRs were similar in severe and moderate disease. In total, 13/702 (1.9%) patients experienced 18 treatment-related adverse events.
CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate the long-term effectiveness and safety of octocog alfa in patients with moderate and severe hemophilia A, especially in those receiving prophylaxis. The high number of patients receiving on-demand treatment experiencing zero bleeds could be due to selection bias within the study, with patients with less severe disease more likely to be receiving on-demand treatment.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02078427.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of octocog alfa in patients with moderate/severe hemophilia A receiving treatment in clinical practice.
DESIGN: The international Antihemophilic Factor Hemophilia A Outcome Database study is an observational, noninterventional, prospective, multicenter study.
METHODS: This planned interim data read-out was conducted following 7 years of observation of patients receiving octocog alfa (cut-off, 30 June 2020). The primary endpoint was joint health status, assessed by the Gilbert Score. Secondary endpoints included annualized bleeding rates (ABRs), Hemophilia Joint Health Score (HJHS), health-related quality of life, consumption, and safety. This post hoc analysis stratified data by hemophilia severity at baseline [moderate, factor VIII (FVIII) 1-5%; severe, FVIII <1%].
RESULTS: Of the 711 patients in this analysis, 582 (82%) were receiving prophylaxis with octocog alfa at enrollment, and 498 (70%) had severe disease. Median Gilbert Scores were higher with on-demand therapy versus prophylaxis and scores were comparable in moderate and severe disease. In patients receiving prophylaxis, there was an improvement in HJHS Global Gait Score over 7 years of follow-up overall and in patients with severe disease. ABRs and annualized joint bleeding rates were low across all 7 years. An ABR of zero was reported in 34-56% of prophylaxis patients versus 20-40% in the on-demand group. ABRs were similar in severe and moderate disease. In total, 13/702 (1.9%) patients experienced 18 treatment-related adverse events.
CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate the long-term effectiveness and safety of octocog alfa in patients with moderate and severe hemophilia A, especially in those receiving prophylaxis. The high number of patients receiving on-demand treatment experiencing zero bleeds could be due to selection bias within the study, with patients with less severe disease more likely to be receiving on-demand treatment.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02078427.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app