Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Haemophilia. 2019 May;25(3):408-415. doi: 10.1111/hae.13753. Epub 2019 May 2.
The optimal treatment modality for haemophilia A is lifelong prophylaxis which is expensive and may not be implementable everywhere where factor VIII (FVIII) availability is limited. A less costly alternative to prophylaxis is low-dose prophylaxis (LDP) which was compared to conventional prophylaxis in this model-based simulation study.
To explore whether LDP is motivated where standard prophylaxis is not implementable, including evaluating LDP efficacy compared to high-dose prophylaxis and investigating the potential economic benefit of individualized dosing.
For a virtual adult haemophilia A population, FVIII activity levels were simulated following alternative treatment regimens, based on a published population PK model. The regimens included very LDP, LDP and conventional prophylaxis twice and thrice weekly. The annual probability of bleeding was predicted based on the weekly time spent below 1 IU/dL, using a previously published relationship. Additionally, PK-based dose individualization was evaluated to determine FVIII savings using Bayesian forecasting.
A treatment regimen of 10 IU/kg administered thrice weekly cost 75% less than a standard high-dose regimen and was predicted to have a 5% higher median probability of annual bleeds. PK-based dose individualization may result in further cost-savings, but implementation needs benefit versus feasibility consideration.
Based on simulations, a promising LDP regimen was identified that decreased treatment costs compared with standard high-dose prophylaxis at a small increase in bleeding risk. The results indicate that LDP is advocated where the standard-of-care is on-demand treatment; however, the results should be considered in the context of any limitations of the applied models.
血友病 A 的最佳治疗方式是终身预防治疗,但这种治疗方式费用高昂,且在因子 VIII(FVIII)供应有限的地方可能无法实施。与预防治疗相比,低剂量预防治疗(LDP)是一种成本较低的替代方案,本基于模型的模拟研究将其与常规预防治疗进行了比较。
探索在无法实施标准预防治疗的情况下,LDP 是否可行,包括评估 LDP 与高剂量预防治疗的疗效,并研究个体化剂量的潜在经济效益。
根据已发表的群体药代动力学模型,对虚拟成年血友病 A 人群的 FVIII 活性水平进行了替代治疗方案的模拟。这些方案包括极低剂量预防治疗、低剂量预防治疗和常规预防治疗,每周预防治疗 2 次和 3 次。根据先前发表的关系,基于每周低于 1 IU/dL 的时间来预测每年出血的概率。此外,还评估了基于 PK 的剂量个体化,以确定使用贝叶斯预测的 FVIII 节省情况。
每周预防治疗 3 次、每次 10 IU/kg 的治疗方案比标准高剂量方案的成本降低了 75%,且预测每年出血的中位数概率增加了 5%。基于 PK 的剂量个体化可能会进一步节省成本,但需要考虑收益与可行性。
基于模拟结果,确定了一种有前途的 LDP 方案,与标准高剂量预防治疗相比,该方案降低了治疗成本,但出血风险略有增加。结果表明,在标准治疗为按需治疗的情况下,提倡使用 LDP;然而,应结合所应用模型的任何局限性来考虑这些结果。