Management of Severe Hemophilia A: Low-Dose Prophylaxis vs. On-Demand Treatment.

INTRODUCTION

Prophylactic clotting factor infusion regimens to prevent bleeding and joint deformity has become the standard of care in severe hemophilia A patients.

AIM

To assess low-dose factor prophylaxis in our population as an alternative approach to managing severe hemophilia A.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study that included 68 hemophilia A patients divided into two groups, i.e., Prophylaxis and on-demand. The two groups were compared for annualized bleeding rate (ABR), hospitalization, units of factor VIII (FVIII) infused, or plasma products transfused, i.e., fresh frozen plasma (FFP) and cryoprecipitate (CP), and development of FVIII inhibitors.

RESULTS

Of the 68 patients recruited in this study, 25 (36.7%) were in the prophylaxis group, and 43(63.3%) were in the on-demand group. The on-demand group presented a higher median-IQR ABR [8(20-3) vs. 5(10-1.5), p-value 0.024], several hospitalizations (39.7% vs. 0, p-value ), and inhibitor development (9.3% vs. 0, p-value 0.289) compared to the prophylaxis group. The prophylaxis approach demonstrated a significant negative correlation of ABR with FVIII prophylaxis (r=-0484, p=value=0.014). Moreover, no hospitalizations or inhibitor development was observed in the prophylaxis group. The estimated annual consumption of FVIII was 328 IU/kg/year in the on-demand group and 1662.6 IU/kg/year in the prophylaxis group. However, a highly significant difference in plasma product utilization was observed between the two groups, i.e., p-value <0.001 and 0.038 for FFP and CP, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose factor prophylaxis resulted in improved outcomes compared to on-demand treatment in terms of ABR, joint bleeding, hospitalization, and the development of inhibitors. This treatment approach should be adopted as an economically feasible alternative to high-dose Prophylaxis in resource-constrained countries.