21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Controlled, cross-sectional MRI evaluation of joint status in severe haemophilia A patients treated with prophylaxis vs. on demand

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In patients with haemophilia A, factor VIII (FVIII) prophylaxis reduces bleeding frequency and joint damage compared with on-demand therapy. To assess the effect of prophylaxis initiation age, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to evaluate bone and cartilage damage in patients with severe haemophilia A. In this cross-sectional, multinational investigation, patients aged 12–35 years were assigned to 1 of 5 groups: primary prophylaxis started at age <2 years (group 1); secondary prophylaxis started at age 2 to <6 years (group 2), 6 to <12 years (group 3), or 12−18 years (group 4); or on-demand treatment (group 5). Joint status at ankles and knees was assessed using Compatible Additive MRI scoring (maximum and mean ankle; maximum and mean of all 4 joints) and Gilbert scores in the per-protocol population ( n = 118). All prophylaxis groups had better MRI joint scores than the on-demand group. MRI scores generally increased with current patient age and later start of prophylaxis. Ankles were the most affected joints. In group 1 patients currently aged 27−35 years, the median of maximum ankle scores was 0.0; corresponding values in groups 4 and 5 were 17.0 and 18.0, respectively [medians of mean index joint scores: 0.0 (group 1), 8.1 (group 2) and 13.8 (group 4)]. Gilbert scores revealed outcomes less pronounced than MRI scores. MRI scores identified pathologic joint status with high sensitivity. Prophylaxis groups had lower annualized joint bleeds and MRI scores vs. the on-demand group. Primary prophylaxis demonstrated protective effects against joint deterioration compared with secondary prophylaxis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Prophylaxis versus episodic treatment to prevent joint disease in boys with severe hemophilia.

          Effective ways to prevent arthropathy in severe hemophilia are unknown. We randomly assigned young boys with severe hemophilia A to regular infusions of recombinant factor VIII (prophylaxis) or to an enhanced episodic infusion schedule of at least three doses totaling a minimum of 80 IU of factor VIII per kilogram of body weight at the time of a joint hemorrhage. The primary outcome was the incidence of bone or cartilage damage as detected in index joints (ankles, knees, and elbows) by radiography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Sixty-five boys younger than 30 months of age were randomly assigned to prophylaxis (32 boys) or enhanced episodic therapy (33 boys). When the boys reached 6 years of age, 93% of those in the prophylaxis group and 55% of those in the episodic-therapy group were considered to have normal index-joint structure on MRI (P=0.006). The relative risk of MRI-detected joint damage with episodic therapy as compared with prophylaxis was 6.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.5 to 24.4). The mean annual numbers of joint and total hemorrhages were higher at study exit in the episodic-therapy group than in the prophylaxis group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). High titers of inhibitors of factor VIII developed in two boys who received prophylaxis; three boys in the episodic-therapy group had a life-threatening hemorrhage. Hospitalizations and infections associated with central-catheter placement did not differ significantly between the two groups. Prophylaxis with recombinant factor VIII can prevent joint damage and decrease the frequency of joint and other hemorrhages in young boys with severe hemophilia A. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00207597 [ClinicalTrials.gov].). Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Twenty-five years' experience of prophylactic treatment in severe haemophilia A and B.

            In Sweden, prophylactic treatment of boys with severe haemophilia has been practised since 1958 in an attempt to convert the disease from a severe to a milder form. The present study population consisted of 60 severe haemophiliacs (52 A, 8 B), aged 3-32 years. Treatment is started when the boys are 1-2 years of age, the regimens used being 24-40 IU F VIII kg-1 three times weekly in haemophilia-A cases (i.e. greater than 2000 IU kg-1 annually) and 25-40 IU F IX kg-1 twice weekly in haemophilia-B cases. The orthopaedic and radiological joint scores (maximum scores of 90 and 78, respectively) are evaluated as recommended by the World Federation of Haemophilia. Of those subjects aged 3-17 years, 29 out of 35 individuals had joint scores of zero. The oldest group had only minor joint defects. The VIII:C and IX:C concentrations had usually not fallen below 1% of normal. All 60 patients are able to lead normal lives. In conclusion, it appears to be possible to prevent haemophilic arthropathy by giving effective continuous prophylaxis from an early age, and preventing the VIII:C or IX:C concentration from falling below 1% of normal.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial of routine prophylaxis vs. on-demand treatment with sucrose-formulated recombinant factor VIII in adults with severe hemophilia A (SPINART).

              The benefits of routine prophylaxis vs. on-demand treatment with factor VIII products have not been evaluated in controlled clinical trials in older patients with hemophilia A. To report results from a preplanned analysis of data from the first year of the 3-year SPINART study, which compares routine prophylaxis with on-demand treatment with sucrose-formulated recombinant FVIII (rFVIII-FS). SPINART is an open-label, randomized, controlled, parallel-group, multinational trial. Males aged 12-50 years with severe hemophilia A, ≥ 150 days of exposure to FVIII, no FVIII inhibitors, no prophylaxis for > 12 consecutive months in the past 5 years and 6-24 bleeding episodes in the preceding 6 months were randomized 1 : 1 to rFVIII-FS prophylaxis (25 IU kg(-1) , three times weekly) or on-demand treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint, number of total bleeding episodes in the intent-to-treat population, was analyzed after the last patient had completed 1 year of follow-up. A negative binomial model was used for the primary endpoint analysis; analysis of variance was used for confirmatory analysis of annualized bleeding rates. Eighty-four patients were enrolled and analyzed (n = 42 per group; mean age, 30.6 years; median treatment duration, 1.7 years). The median number of total bleeding episodes and total bleeding episodes per year were significantly lower with prophylaxis than with on-demand treatment (total, 0 vs. 54.5; total per year, 0 vs. 27.9; both P < 0.0001). No treatment-related adverse events occurred, and no patients developed FVIII inhibitors. Routine prophylaxis with rFVIII-FS leads to a significant reduction in bleeding as compared with on-demand treatment. Adverse events were consistent with the established rFVIII-FS safety profile. © 2013 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Haemophilia
                Haemophilia
                hae
                Haemophilia
                BlackWell Publishing Ltd (Oxford, UK )
                1351-8216
                1365-2516
                March 2015
                02 December 2014
                : 21
                : 2
                : 171-179
                Affiliations
                [* ]University Clinic Bonn Bonn, Germany
                []Kurpfalz Hospital and Haemophilia Centre for Children and Adults Heidelberg, Germany
                []Laikon General Hospital Athens, Greece
                [§ ]Hippocration General Hospital Athens, Greece
                []University of Padua Medical School Padua, Italy
                [** ]Bayer Vital GmbH Leverkusen, Germany
                [†† ]Lund University and Skåne University Hospital Lund, Sweden
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Johannes Oldenburg, Institute of Experimental Haematology and Transfusion Medicine, University Clinic Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Str. 25, Bonn 53127, Germany. Tel.: +49 (0)228 287 15176/15175; fax: +49 (0)228 287 16087/14783; e-mail: johannes.oldenburg@ 123456ukb.uni-bonn.de
                [a]

                The cross-sectional MRI study investigators are listed in the Appendix.

                Article
                10.1111/hae.12539
                4359687
                25470205
                b2a5be59-78ac-496c-8dbd-ca1e4ac4f48a
                © 2014 The Authors. Haemophilia Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 08 August 2014
                Categories
                Original Articles

                Hematology
                cross-sectional study,haemophilia,joint status,magnetic resonance imaging,on-demand treatment,prophylaxis

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log