The Impact of Pharmacokinetic-Guided Prophylaxis on Clinical Outcomes and Healthcare Resource Utilization in Hemophilia A Patients: Real-World Evidence from the CHESS II Study

Abstract

Enrico Ferri Grazzi,1 Shawn X Sun,2 Tom Burke,1,3 Jamie O’Hara1,3 1Health Economics and Outcomes Research, HCD Economics Ltd, Daresbury, Warrington, UK; 2Global Evidence and Outcomes, Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc, Cambridge, MA, USA; 3Department of Health and Social Care, University of Chester, Chester, UKCorrespondence: Enrico Ferri Grazzi, Health Economics and Outcomes Research, HCD Economics Ltd, The Innovation Centre, Keckwick Lane, Daresbury, Warrington, WA4 4FS, UK, Tel [phone], Email [email protected]: Using a pharmacokinetic (PK)-guided approach to personalize the dose and frequency of prophylactic treatment can help achieve and maintain targeted factor VIII (FVIII) trough levels in patients with hemophilia A.Objective: Investigate clinical and healthcare resource use outcomes in patients with hemophilia A treated with or without PK-guided prophylaxis using data from the Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: A Socioeconomic Survey (CHESS) II database.Methods: CHESS II was a cross-sectional, retrospective, burden-of-illness study incorporating data from eight European countries. Patients were eligible for this analysis if they were male, ≥ 18 years of age, and diagnosed with congenital hemophilia A of any severity. The clinical endpoints included annualized bleeding rate (ABR), presence and number of problem/target joints, and occurrence of joint surgeries. Healthcare resource utilization endpoints included the number of hematologist consultations and bleed-related hospitalizations or emergency department admissions. Data from November 2018 to October 2020 were included and were stratified according to treatment regimen and use of PK-guided dosing.Results: Altogether, 281 patients on prophylaxis had available FVIII trough level data. Mean (SD) age was 35.7 (13.8) years. A specific FVIII trough level was targeted in 120 (42.7%) patients and 47 (39.2%) received PK-guided dosing. Patients receiving PK-guided dosing had a mean (SD) ABR of 2.8 (2.1) and target joint number of 0.5 (0.7), compared with 3.9 (2.7) and 0.9 (1.4), respectively, for patients receiving non–PK-guided treatment. The mean (SD) number of hematologist consultations was 7.1 (5.3) for patients receiving PK-guided dosing versus 10.7 (5.7) for those who were not. A higher proportion of patients in the non–PK-guided group required hospitalization during their lifetime compared with the PK-guided group.Conclusion: This analysis of real-world data suggests that PK-guided dosing for prophylaxis has a beneficial impact on clinical and healthcare resource utilization outcomes in patients with hemophilia A.Keywords: hemophilia A, recombinant factor VIII, prophylaxis, PK-guided dosing, personalized treatment, CHESS II

Keywords

• hemophilia a
• recombinant factor viii
• prophylaxis
• pk-guided dosing
• personalized treatment
• chess ii