4.2 Article

Benefits of rIX-FP prophylaxis in patients with Haemophilia B: real-world evidence from a Spanish reference centre

Journal

HEMATOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/16078454.2023.2242656

Keywords

Haemophilia B; rIX-FP; extended half-life; real world evidence; pharmacokinetic

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study reports the real-world experience of PWHB in a Spanish center using rIX-FP. The results show that after switching to rIX-FP, patients had good bleeding control, significant reduction in infusion rate and factor consumption, and higher plasma factor levels compared to previous treatment.
Standard FIX prophylaxis for PWHB require frequent injections, which has led to the development of extended half-life products like rIX-FP (albutrepenonacog alfa) that has shown good efficacy in clinical studies. This ambispective study aims to report a real-world experience with rIX-FP in a Spanish centre with PWHB who switched from SHL-FIX or began prophylaxis with rIX-FP. Five PWHB were included in this study, Four PTP switched to rIX-FP with prophylaxis every 7 days whilst one PUP started with an every-14-days regimen. 3 PTPs extended their dosing intervals to every 14 days or every 21 days. In all PTPs, median annualized spontaneous and joint bleeding rates were maintained at 0.00 and median (range) of ABR was 0.92 (0.00-2.77) after switch to rIX-FP. Mean trough level with previous product was 3.68% (SD = 2.06), while it was 7.08% (SD = 3) with all rIX-FP dosing intervals. After switching to rIX-FP, all PTP reduced their annual infusion rate between 50 and 84% and their annual FIX consumption by 61% (59-67%). This is the first reported real-world experience with albutrepenonacog alfa in a small cohort in Spain and demonstrates good bleeding control together with a reduction of the infusion rate, factor consumption and higher through factor level than previous treatment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available