Literature DB >> 22726081

Prevention and prediction of inhibitor risk.

J Astermark1.   

Abstract

Studies of determinants of the development of inhibitory antibodies in patients with haemophilia indicate that this is a complex process involving several factors. The foundation is characterized by the T- and B-cell repertoire and the antigen presenting cells and to elicit an immune response to the deficient factor, a pre-disposing foundation is needed. Hence, in the absence of a certain set of circumstances, there will be no risk for development of inhibitors. Conversely, in patients fundamentally at risk, genetic and non-genetic factors might add to the risk. These factors may be additive or interactive, and ultimately promote or counteract the immune reaction by modifying immune regulators and the cytokine profile in an individual. In some subjects, only minor inflammatory signals might be needed, whereas in others a more pronounced pro-inflammatory state will be required. Regarding genetic markers other than the type of mutation and the HLA class II molecules, polymorphisms in various immune regulatory genes have been associated with inhibitor risk. These associations have not, however, been consistent across all patient groups. The reason for this is not clear, but could be related to study design or statistical power, family relationships among those studied, the complexity of interacting molecules and ethnic genomic variation. The Hemophilia Inhibitor Genetics Study (HIGS) has identified additional candidates within the intracellular pathways, all of which require additional evaluation to be fully appreciated. In the case of non-genetic factors, the overall view is that immune system challenges might add to the risk. HIGS data suggest that it will be possible to calculate a genetic score to identify patients at high risk for inhibitor development before the start of treatment. By doing so, it may hopefully be possible in the future to prevent the formation of inhibitors in these patients by offering therapeutic options other than the native factor VIII or IX molecule in an inflammatory setting.
© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22726081     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2012.02827.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Haemophilia        ISSN: 1351-8216            Impact factor:   4.287


  4 in total

Review 1.  Immunogenicity of anti-TNF biologic therapies for rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Pauline A van Schouwenburg; Theo Rispens; Gerrit Jan Wolbink
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2013-02-12       Impact factor: 20.543

2.  Clinical Care of Bone Health in Patients on the Immune Tolerance Induction's Protocols With an Immunosuppressive Agent for Inhibitor Eradication in Hemophilia.

Authors:  Zahra Rezaieyazdi; Hassan Mansouritorghabeh
Journal:  Clin Appl Thromb Hemost       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 2.389

3.  Evaluation of nonneutralizing antibodies against factor VIII in severe haemophilia A patients from India.

Authors:  Sachin David; Nitty S Mathews; G Surender Singh; Anu Korula; Fouzia Nambiatheyil Aboobacker; Aby Abraham; Biju George; Alok Srivastava; Vikram Mathews; Sukesh C Nair
Journal:  Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 1.276

Review 4.  Importance of immune response genes in hemophilia A.

Authors:  Josiane Bazzo de Alencar; Luciana Conci Macedo; Morgana Ferreira de Barros; Camila Rodrigues; Renata Campos Cadide; Ana Maria Sell; Jeane Eliete Laguila Visentainer
Journal:  Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter       Date:  2013
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.