Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
INTRODUCTION: Haemophilia A or B patients with inhibitors have been treated with FVIIa-containing bypassing agents for over 20 years. However, due to uncertainty regarding dose response and thrombotic risk, the use of a gradual, titrated, minimal dosing strategy remains prevalent, potentially hampering early haemostasis. AIM: Evaluate the dose-dependent efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of activated eptacog beta (rhFVIIa), a new recombinant inhibitor bypassing agent for the treatment of bleeding episodes (BEs). METHODS: A Phase 3, randomized, cross-over study of initial dose regimens (IDRs) in 27 bleeding congenital haemophilia A or B subjects with inhibitors was conducted to evaluate on-demand treatment of mild/moderate BEs. Intravenous 75 μg/kg or 225 μg/kg initial doses with 75 μg/kg subsequent doses by schedule were administered until clinical response. RESULTS: The primary endpoint was sustained clinical response within 12 hours, determined by a composite of objective and pain measures. In the 75 μg/kg IDR, 84.9% (95% CI; 74.0%, 95.7%) of mild/moderate BEs at 12 hours were successfully treated compared to 93.2% (95% CI; 88.1%, 98.3%) treated in the 225 μg/kg IDR. Efficacy between the IDRs was statistically different (P<.020) in mild/moderate bleeding episodes. Both IDRs were well tolerated with no detectable immunogenic or thrombotic responses to rhFVIIa or host cell proteins. CONCLUSION: The dose-dependent efficacy seen in this study supports individualizing the initial dose of eptacog beta to optimize clinical response. By reducing uncertainty, the PERSEPT 1 results should increase the adoption of early haemostasis as a treatment goal for clinicians who treat haemorrhage in the inhibitor population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: