Volume 9 (2022): Issue 1 (January 2022)

Increasing survival among people with haemophilia means that more individuals are at risk of developing age-related morbidity. Little is known about morbidity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in different age groups within a single large population of people with haemophilia.

This study aimed to explore the association between increasing age and comorbidity among people with haemophilia and to compare their HRQoL with that of a sample of the general population in England.

The prevalence of comorbidity recorded in medical records and HRQoL assessed by EQ-5D were compared by age group in participants in the Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: A Socioeconomic Survey study (CHESS) in Europe. HRQoL was compared with that of a sample of the general population taken from the 2012 Health Survey for England (HSE).

Younger adults in CHESS were more likely to have received prophylaxis from an early age. The mean number of affected joints in younger adults was 1.0; participants aged 41–50 (1.25) and 51–60 years (1.41) had the highest mean number of affected joints. The prevalence of comorbidity was 36% in patients aged 18–30, 61% in 31–60-year-olds and 68% in those aged 61+. HRQoL impairment in young adults with haemophilia was comparable with that in the HSE population aged over 60.

Older people with haemophilia have impaired quality of life compared with younger adults and an increasing prevalence of several age-related disorders affecting mental health and cardiovascular and bone health. Young adults with haemophilia report impaired HRQoL comparable with that in a general population aged 61+.

Patient registries are an invaluable resource for furthering the understanding of rare diseases such as bleeding disorders, providing large, pooled datasets not achievable by other means of data collection. As well as supporting clinical care and research, registries must also be able to answer questions that are important to the wider bleeding disorders community. However, there are challenges associated with the need for secure access, exchange of health data, quality and interoperability, and data delivery.

As part of the EHC Think Tank Patient Registries Workstream, 17 stakeholders representing health care providers, patient groups, research and industry met in October 2021 to identify challenges to managing and utilising patient registries, from each of their stakeholder perspectives. This is a first step in a longer term process aiming to identify or co-create solutions that could improve access and interpretation of patient data. The challenges identified relate to five key categories which are interlinked in various ways: 1. The multiplicity of registries and datasets; 2. Data quality; 3. Data sharing; 4. Expanding the scope of registries; 5. The role of the patient in registries.

The heterogeneity in the way that registries are designed, funded and owned, the type of data collected, and the way data is collected are issues that must be addressed. Good, quality data is needed at all levels to ensure the provision and funding of effective care. Data quality will increase overall if it is possible to merge data from different registries. The value of patient participation in registries must also be acknowledged and built on to help ensure their quality, that they remain fit for purpose, and that data input is sustained over time.

The hub and spoke model can deliver high quality care to a scattered population through centres of expertise supported by a network of several smaller geographically dispersed centres. This approach is now being proposed to provide care for people with rare diseases, and in particular for rare bleeding disorders. To ensure that specialised treatments such as gene therapy can be delivered effectively using the hub and spoke model of care, it is important to understand the challenges that the model presents for all stakeholders.

As part of the EHC Think Tank Workstream on Hub and Spoke Treatment Models, 14 stakeholders representing health care providers, patient groups, research and industry met in November 2021 to identify challenges in the design, implementation and sustainable operation of hub and spoke models, and to propose ways in which resources could be allocated and collaboration fostered, from each of their stakeholder perspectives. Five key challenges were identified: 1. How future care might be re-envisioned; 2. Which agencies and stakeholders should determine which centres become hubs or spokes, and how this process might be carried out; 3. Identifying the criteria that will define a hub and spoke, and the roles of various stakeholders in that process; 4. How resources might be allocated; 5. How hubs and spokes will collaborate to ensure that patients' needs are prioritised. This model may also be recommended for treatment with gene therapy in certain rare diseases.

Hub and spoke models should be implemented by establishing criteria for hub and spoke status, prioritising patients in service reorganisation and in the care pathway, and considering the impact of new service models on current arrangements. The next step is to vet the challenges identified by this workstream with a broader group of external stakeholders and bring their perspectives back for consideration.

Patient agency refers to the abilities and capabilities of patients to act, contribute, influence and make decisions about their healthcare. It depends on both the willingness of patients to participate and the constraints imposed by healthcare providers, services and systems. To determine the factors affecting patient agency, especially for patients with chronic, rare diseases such as haemophilia requiring lifelong care, it is important to consider the patterns, structures, and mental models that define the ecosystem that patients are a part of, irrespective of their level of engagement.

At the first workshop of the EHC Think Tank Workstream on Patient Agency in December 2021, participants identified five key themes for in-depth discussion relevant to patient agency: the concept of shared decision-making (SDM), patient empowerment, the spectrum of engagement, cultural change and health literacy. The Iceberg Model was used to unpack challenges by identifying composite factors on four levels: events, patterns, structures and mental models.

Across the five themes, four common perceived challenges stand out: uneven relationships between patients and healthcare professionals, services and systems; paternalism and hierarchical cultures; failure to recognise problems; conservatism and resistance to change. Despite some progress towards patient empowerment, a ‘glass ceiling’ prevents patients from driving transformation and taking leadership roles in strategy, policymaking and governance. Patient engagement is fluid and those who could benefit most are least likely to engage. Health literacy is perceived as the problem of the patient, not the system, and patients rather than healthcare providers are typically expected to adapt. Preliminary suggestions for addressing these challenges include behavioural communication training for patients and healthcare professionals, a learning system for empowered patient and family care, and a level playing field for stakeholders to interact equally, leading to mutual acceptance and respect.

There is a historic but persistent belief in haemophilia care that women do not suffer with the condition, they merely carry and transmit it. However, around 250 women worldwide are known to have factor levels within the severe to moderate haemophilia range (<1 IU/dL to 5 IU/dL), and the true figure may be greater than this. The experience of these women may be the same as or similar to those of men with similar factor levels, but there may be significant differences. What these differences are and what they mean to the women affected are not well understood as their voices are not heard. This case study highlights the issues and experiences of one woman living severe haemophilia.

A single semi-structured qualitative interview was undertaken to explore the experiences of a young woman who has factor VIII levels of <1 IU/dL. The interview was recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed.

Four interlinked themes were identified: recognition, self-advocacy, identity and access to treatment.

This case study indicates that, despite recent attempts to improve the diagnostic nomenclature, women and girls with haemophilia continue to find it difficult to access similar levels of care to men and boys. As such, they may fail to achieve parity in terms of safety, integrity and wellbeing, and have a reduced quality of life. If women and girls affected by haemophilia are to receive levels of treatment comparable to men, diagnostic criteria need to change further. Focusing on genotype, levels of factor expressed and phenotypical presentation rather than biological sex will acknowledge and validate their experiences, and improve treatment for all people with haemophilia in the future.

Clinical trials for investigational haemophilia treatments such as gene therapy offer a potentially life-changing opportunity to those who are selected for enrolment. However, the number of enrolment slots available for these trials is often greatly exceeded by the number of eligible patients. Many of the strategies that are commonly used to select candidates for participation can be highly unsystematic, inequitable, and subjective. A more rigorous set of criteria is therefore needed to evaluate each candidate's suitability for trial participation in order to eliminate bias in selection and fulfill the ethical principle of justice.

To review current knowledge and issues in patient selection for paediatric haemophilia clinical trials with competitive availability, and to develop a more objective standard for decision-making that takes into account the needs of all involved parties.

A literature search on the ethics of trial participant selection and the practice of fairly distributing limited medical resources was conducted to identify previous literature and best practices in the area. A list of essential decision-making considerations was then designed to guide the selection of paediatric participants for haemophilia therapy trials through iterative group discussions between a diverse team of health professionals at McMaster Children's Hospital, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Current practices in resolving this ethical issue are highly heterogenous, although there are some common themes and recommendations. The three main criteria supported by the team and the literature search for inclusion in the considerations were: medical need, need for support, and potential safety considerations for the patient. Three measures for evaluating each criterion were developed and added for consideration during the decision-making process. The role of patient selection in meeting the scientific aims of the trial was also considered.

Attempting to create an equitable, systematic decision-making procedure for clinical trial participant selection involves a wide variety of competing values and ethical considerations, and discrepancies between recommendations are commonplace. The criteria presented here are intended to be used as a guideline to assist the equitable selection of paediatric patients for participation in haemophilia clinical trials with highly limited enrolment, although it may have some applicability to other areas of clinical research or therapeutic areas concerned with the allocation of scarce medical resources. Next steps should involve speaking with patients, community members and other stakeholders in order to include their perspectives.

The patient voice is an important consideration in the availability and choice of pharmaceuticals – however, how to capture this complex area and apply it formally within regulation, health technology assessment and reimbursement remains subject to ongoing debate. Patient preference studies such as discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are being utilised more frequently in healthcare and it is anticipated that patient preference data will be incorporated more frequently into regulatory submissions moving forward.

The aim of this review is to provide an overview of DCEs conducted within haemophilia to date and to consider the key issues in response to a rapidly evolving therapeutic pathway.

A systematic literature search was undertaken via Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE CLASSIC + EMBASE. Abstracts were uploaded and analysed via Rayyan systematic review software. Results: Of 478 records identified from the database searches, 12 full text journal articles met the inclusion criteria with a date range from 2005–2021. There have been two published studies exploring haemophilia patient preferences in relation to gene therapy: one DCE and one utilising a threshold technique. Surveyed audiences included physicians, patients, pharmacists, healthcare professionals and caregivers. 50% of the included studies (n=6) were exclusively conducted in the US, whilst 3 recruited participants across multiple countries. The sample size varied considerably between studies with the total sample size ranging from 30 participants to 505 participants. For the studies involving patients and their caregivers, the mean patient age range was 8.2–41.4 years. There was diversity in (a) the scale of the qualitative work undertaken to support the DCEs, (b) the undertaking of pilots, and (c) how extensively these elements were reported in the included studies. There is a notable trend towards using an online web-based format, with 3 out of 4 DCEs since 2019 utilising this approach. The number of attributes observed per DCE ranged from 5–12 with a median of 6 attributes from the included studies. The number of levels per attribute was relatively consistent (range 2–5) with 2–3 (n=4) and 2–4 levels (n=4) being utilised most frequently.

Patient preferences and the methods for capturing these are likely to be subject to ongoing debate as the haemophilia care pathway evolves to offer more therapeutic options with a range of risks and benefits. Whilst techniques such as DCE are effective at quantifying patient preferences, they tell us little about the reasons driving these decisions and the likelihood that they will change in response to temporal or external factors. DCEs could be particularly useful for estimating the uptake of new products and assessing potential budget impact. Accelerated and reformed regulatory processes are likely to increase demand for patient preference studies. There is therefore an increased requirement to ensure that patient advocacy groups (PAGs) are resourced and have the expertise to support these studies alongside other research commitments, and that manufacturers consider collaborative approaches when formally capturing patient preferences.

As more therapeutic options become available in haemophilia care, discrete choice experiment may be a useful means of gauging patient preference

© Shutterstock

Haemophilia treatment centres (HTCs) around the world are increasingly adopting point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) for the assessment of acute haemarthrosis and to monitor joint health. POCUS is in large part administered by physiotherapists in most comprehensive care teams. Appropriate implementation of haemophilia-specific POCUS requires an educational foundation and training to ensure competency and optimal outcomes. Inter-professional agreement and evaluation of image quality are important measures of competency and acceptable use of POCUS.

To determine the level of agreement between physiotherapist and sonographer-performed POCUS scans and to compare the quality of the ultrasound images obtained by physiotherapists to those obtained by the sonographer.

This single blind, prospective, pilot study recruited patients with haemophilia A and B who presented to clinic with a suspected acute haemarthrosis of the elbow, knee, or ankle and consented to participate. POCUS scans were performed by one trained physiotherapist and one sonographer in the haemophilia ambulatory clinic at patient presentation, one-week follow-up, and two-week follow-up. The physiotherapist participated in formal training consisting of 12 hours of online didactic modules and a two-day, 12-hour practical module with instructor-led hands-on training. For the primary objective, the outcome of interest was the binary decision on the presence or absence of blood within the joint. For the secondary objective, image quality was evaluated by the radiologist post hoc and rated as optimal, acceptable, or sub-optimal.

Thirteen participants with haemophilia consented to the study. The results indicated an excellent level of agreement (k=0.80) with an observed agreement of 91.7%, a specific positive agreement of 94.1%, and a specific negative agreement of 85.7% for the detection of blood within the joint space. The quality of the ultrasound images obtained by the physiotherapist were rated by the radiologist as optimal (84.6%) and acceptable (15.4%). None of the images were rated as sub-optimal.

Optimal image quality and a high level of agreement between the physiotherapist and sonographer-performed POCUS for the assessment of acute hemarthrosis in people with haemophilia A and B was observed. These results suggest that, with a short formal training programme, physiotherapists can be proficient in the performance, acquisition, and interpretation of POCUS scans in patients with haemophilia.

In children with haemophilia (CwH), central venous access devices (CVADs) are frequently placed to aid in the delivery of factor concentrates. In those who develop inhibitors, CVADs also allow for easy venous access and facilitation of immune tolerance therapy.

In this study, we compare perioperative practices for CVAD placement in children with haemophilia to assess similarities and differences in practices across centres in two countries (Singapore and Canada).

Retrospective chart review was conducted involving CwH (with and without inhibitors) who underwent CVAD placement from January 2007 to September 2017 at two centres in Singapore and at one centre in Hamilton, Canada. Data obtained included demographics, operative details, preoperative investigations, perioperative factor replacement, use of bypassing agents, antibiotic and antifibrinolytic use, length of stay, complications and need for CVAD revision.

Twenty-one CwH were included in the data analysis. Amongst those without inhibitors, the mean preoperative factor dose was 50.0 IU/kg (SD=7.6) in Singapore, and 72.4 IU/kg (SD=12.5) in Hamilton (p=0.002); mean total factor use in the perioperative period was 425.0IU/kg (SD=114.9) in Singapore and 646.8IU/kg (SD=118.1) in Hamilton (p=0.004); mean duration of clotting factor replacement was 5.3 days (SD=0.9) in Singapore and 6.9 days (SD=0.7) in Hamilton (p=0.004). Amongst those with inhibitors, the mean preoperative dose of rFVIIa was 160.5 mcg/kg (SD=99.9) in Singapore and 88.2 mcg/kg (SD=3.8) in Hamilton (p=0.244); mean total rFVIIa used from surgery to discharge was 3,008.0 mcg/kg (SD=2305.9) in Singapore and 2,640.2 mcg/kg (SD=134.1) in Hamilton (p=0.842); mean duration of rFVIIa cover was 5.3 days (SD=1.7) in Singapore and 9.5 days (SD=2.1) in Hamilton (p=0.054). None of the CwH without inhibitors developed postoperative complications, compared to 57% in those with inhibitors (p=0.006).

Amongst CwH without inhibitors, significant variations were seen in perioperative factor replacement. Amongst those with inhibitors, there were also differences in perioperative practices across centres, although not statistically significant. Across centres, CwH with inhibitors were found to have more postoperative complications.

People with haemophilia (PwH) require frequent infusions with plasma-derived or recombinant coagulation factors to help prevent and treat acute bleeding episodes. This ‘replacement therapy’ can be administered at home by PwH or their caregivers using a drug reconstitution device. MixPro^® and Mix2Vial^® are two such devices.

To compare the experiences and evaluate the preferences of PwH and caregivers using two reconstitution devices: MixPro^® and Mix2Vial^®.

Qualitative interviews were conducted between the 22 June and 4 August 2021 with male PwH or caregivers of PwH. Participants were asked questions about the reconstitution devices they have used in general, followed by questions relating specifically to the MixPro^® or Mix2Vial^® devices. Demonstration devices were provided to all participants during the interview.

In total, 105 participants (71 PwH and 34 caregivers) were interviewed in the USA, Italy, UK, and Japan. PwH had a mean age of 29 years (3–69 years). Overall, participants reported the number of parts, speed of reconstitution, and ease of use to be the largest unmet needs with reconstitution devices. Regarding the device features, low contamination risk was ranked as most important (importance score: 15.1) for all countries except Italy, where portability of the device was most important (11.7 for portability vs. 10.6 for low contamination risk). When MixPro^® and Mix2Vial^® features were independently evaluated, MixPro^® outperformed Mix2Vial^® across 17 of the 18 features; both devices were rated equally for low contamination risk. When asked which device performed best on each feature, MixPro^® was chosen by the majority of participants (74%). MixPro^® was associated with words such as quick (54%), user-friendly (47%), and easy (46%), while Mix2Vial^® was associated with the words easy (33%), safe (32%), and awkward (30%). Participants felt MixPro^® would make a positive difference to their lives citing reasons such as saving time, ease of portability, and general confidence in using the system. Relatively few participants thought Mix2Vial^® would make a positive difference to their lives, with some noting it was not much different than the previous generation of devices.

In this study, MixPro^® was preferred over Mix2Vial^® as a reconstitution device for PwH and caregivers of PwH.

Haemophilia A and B are X-linked inherited bleeding disorders, resulting in the deficiency of clotting factor VIII and IX, respectively. Since the introduction of recombinant clotting factor concentrates in the early 1990s, the major safety concern for haemophilia therapy has been the development of inhibitory antibodies, or inhibitors. Over the recent past, new therapies for the treatment and prevention of bleeding have received regulatory approval or are under study.

‘ATHN 7: A Natural History Cohort Study of the Safety, Effectiveess, and Practice of Treatment for People with Hemophilia is designed to determine the safety of current haemophilia therapies when used for participants with haemophilia with or without inhibitors. Secondarily, ATHN 7 will describe the real-world effectiveness of current therapies by assessing bleeding rate and location, therapy utilisation, adherence, and patient-reported outcomes.

This longitudinal, observational cohort study by the American Thrombosis and Hemostasis Network (ATHN) will follow participants with haemophilia with or without inhibitors for four years from the time of enrolment. Each participant is assessed every three months. All data are collected into ATHN Systems. The primary outcome measure is the incidence of safety events as defined by the European Haemophilia Safety Surveillance (EUHASS) programme. Effectiveness will be described based on annualised bleeding rate, therapy utilisation, adherence, and patient-reported outcomes.

As the first product-agnostic, real-world study of haemophilia therapy in the United States, ATHN 7 collects data to determine current intervention safety and effectiveness. Based on this success, ATHN will continue to collect these data longitudinally through the ATHN Transcends study.