INTRODUCTION: The optimal treatment modality for haemophilia A is lifelong prophylaxis which is expensive and may not be implementable everywhere where factor VIII (FVIII) availability is limited. A less costly alternative to prophylaxis is low-dose prophylaxis (LDP) which was compared to conventional prophylaxis in this model-based simulation study. AIM: To explore whether LDP is motivated where standard prophylaxis is not implementable, including evaluating LDP efficacy compared to high-dose prophylaxis and investigating the potential economic benefit of individualized dosing. METHODS: For a virtual adult haemophilia A population, FVIII activity levels were simulated following alternative treatment regimens, based on a published population PK model. The regimens included very LDP, LDP and conventional prophylaxis twice and thrice weekly. The annual probability of bleeding was predicted based on the weekly time spent below 1 IU/dL, using a previously published relationship. Additionally, PK-based dose individualization was evaluated to determine FVIII savings using Bayesian forecasting. RESULTS: A treatment regimen of 10 IU/kg administered thrice weekly cost 75% less than a standard high-dose regimen and was predicted to have a 5% higher median probability of annual bleeds. PK-based dose individualization may result in further cost-savings, but implementation needs benefit versus feasibility consideration. CONCLUSION: Based on simulations, a promising LDP regimen was identified that decreased treatment costs compared with standard high-dose prophylaxis at a small increase in bleeding risk. The results indicate that LDP is advocated where the standard-of-care is on-demand treatment; however, the results should be considered in the context of any limitations of the applied models.
INTRODUCTION: The optimal treatment modality for haemophilia A is lifelong prophylaxis which is expensive and may not be implementable everywhere where factor VIII (FVIII) availability is limited. A less costly alternative to prophylaxis is low-dose prophylaxis (LDP) which was compared to conventional prophylaxis in this model-based simulation study. AIM: To explore whether LDP is motivated where standard prophylaxis is not implementable, including evaluating LDP efficacy compared to high-dose prophylaxis and investigating the potential economic benefit of individualized dosing. METHODS: For a virtual adult haemophilia A population, FVIII activity levels were simulated following alternative treatment regimens, based on a published population PK model. The regimens included very LDP, LDP and conventional prophylaxis twice and thrice weekly. The annual probability of bleeding was predicted based on the weekly time spent below 1 IU/dL, using a previously published relationship. Additionally, PK-based dose individualization was evaluated to determine FVIII savings using Bayesian forecasting. RESULTS: A treatment regimen of 10 IU/kg administered thrice weekly cost 75% less than a standard high-dose regimen and was predicted to have a 5% higher median probability of annual bleeds. PK-based dose individualization may result in further cost-savings, but implementation needs benefit versus feasibility consideration. CONCLUSION: Based on simulations, a promising LDP regimen was identified that decreased treatment costs compared with standard high-dose prophylaxis at a small increase in bleeding risk. The results indicate that LDP is advocated where the standard-of-care is on-demand treatment; however, the results should be considered in the context of any limitations of the applied models.
Authors: Olav Versloot; Emma Iserman; Pierre Chelle; Federico Germini; Andrea N Edginton; Roger E G Schutgens; Alfonso Iorio; Kathelijn Fischer Journal: Hemasphere Date: 2022-03-21
Authors: Tim Preijers; Lisette M Schütte; Marieke J H A Kruip; Marjon H Cnossen; Frank W G Leebeek; Reinier M van Hest; Ron A A Mathôt Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 6.447