Lusher J M
Prog Clin Biol Res. 1984;150:277-90.
Since the introduction of PCC for treatment of bleeding episodes in hemophiliacs with inhibitors in 1972, many anecdotal reports and uncontrolled observations have been published, often with conflicting reports of efficacy. To date, three controlled double blind studies have been completed in which PCC have been evaluated. In each of the three studies acute hemarthrosis has been the only (Lusher et al 1980; Lusher et al 1983) or the predominant (Sjamsoedin 1981) type of bleeding evaluated. While acute joint bleeding lends itself well to clinical trial, there are recognized problems in evaluating response to treatment. Despite these limitations, it is noteworthy that non-activated PCC were found to be effective in approximately 50% of episodes in all three trials. Future trials are now being planned in an attempt to determine the role of activated PCC in the management of bleeding episodes in hemophiliacs with inhibitors. In the design of these trials, possible modifications to be considered are the exclusion (or separate randomization) of chronically disabled or "target" joints, more than one dose of unknown product, and longer periods of assessment.
自1972年将凝血酶原复合物(PCC)用于治疗有抑制物的血友病患者的出血发作以来,已发表了许多轶事报告和非对照观察结果,疗效报告常常相互矛盾。迄今为止,已经完成了三项评估PCC的对照双盲研究。在这三项研究的每一项中,急性关节积血都是唯一(Lusher等人,1980年;Lusher等人,1983年)或主要(Sjamsoedin,1981年)评估的出血类型。虽然急性关节出血很适合进行临床试验,但在评估治疗反应方面存在公认的问题。尽管有这些局限性,但值得注意的是,在所有三项试验中,约50%的发作中发现非活化PCC是有效的。目前正在计划未来的试验,以确定活化PCC在有抑制物的血友病患者出血发作管理中的作用。在这些试验的设计中,需要考虑的可能修改包括排除(或单独随机分组)长期残疾或“目标”关节、使用超过一剂未知产品以及延长评估期。