Search

Introduction: The 2024 ISTH clinical practice guideline (CPG) for treatment of congenital haemophilia, the NBDF-McMaster Guideline on Care Models for Haemophilia Management, and ASH ISTH NBDF WFH guidelines on the diagnosis and management of VWD all utilised GRADE methodology., Aim: Discuss missed opportunities and the methodological approach of the ISTH Guideline in contrast to how GRADE was previously applied in rare diseases., Methods: Critically analyse the methodology of each guideline along with best practices in the use of GRADE. Where applicable, the WFH Guidelines for the Management of Haemophilia were analysed., Results: Important differentiating features in applying GRADE were identified. Where a strong evidence base is lacking, data other than those from randomized controlled trials, which may not always be justified, need to be considered, including incorporation of outcomes important to people living with the disease. Justification and stakeholder input to prioritize questions requiring a new guideline, panel composition with necessary patient participation and content expertise were also found to be significant differentiating features., Conclusion: The puristic approach taken in the ISTH Guideline development process, without consideration of accepted adaptations to GRADE implementation, created a missed opportunity for progressing haemophilia care, leading to guideline recommendations that have been widely deemed invalid and obsolete by expert healthcare professionals and by those living with the condition, the very people who are expected to implement or bear the impact of the recommendations. Lessons learnt from this comparative analysis should guide future guideline development and encourage collaboration to further advance haemophilia., (© 2024 The Author(s). Haemophilia published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines drive optimal patient care and facilitate access to high-quality treatment. Creating guidelines for rare diseases such as haemophilia, where evidence does not often come from randomized controlled trials but from non-randomized and well-designed observational studies and real-world data, is challenging. The methodology used for assessing available evidence should consider this critical fact. In formulating guidelines, it is essential to include treatment goals and patient preference., Aim: This paper comprehensively critiques, against this background, the recommendations of the ISTH clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of haemophilia., Methods: Each recommendation was critically reviewed against available evidence as well as existing guidelines and commented upon for its scientific validity, impact on clinical practice and access to care globally. The validity of the way in which the GRADE methodology was applied to existing evidence was also assessed., Results: The critique provided shows that these recommendations have major limitations: they did not state treatment goals and contradict existing guidelines; opportunities for providing access to innovation were missed when the therapeutic benefits of the products approved in the last decades were not included. A major reason for this is the inappropriate adoption of the GRADE methodology without adaptations and without considering treatment goals and patient-relevant outcomes., Conclusion: These recommendations may mislead healthcare professionals, payers and governments and therefore cannot serve the patient community well. They setback the advances made in haemophilia care because they overlook important available evidence and do not guide clinical practice to contemporary standards., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Treatment options are expanding for von Willebrand disease (VWD). A core outcome set (COS)-a minimum set of agreed-upon outcomes to be used in every clinical trial for a given condition-provides guidance on which outcomes are most important to measure to ensure necessary data is collected for a variety of stakeholders and enable comparison across products and trials., Aim: coreVWD aimed to develop a COS for trials for prophylaxis and perioperative treatments for VWD., Methods: A modified Delphi consensus process was used to condense/prioritize a long list of potential outcomes. Over three Delphi rounds, a multi-stakeholder panel (patients, clinicians, pharmaceutical company representatives, HTA organizations, payer, and government organization representatives) rated each outcome from 1 (not important to include in a COS) to 9 (essential to include). Outcomes were eliminated or retained based on pre-determined criteria; a special provision to elevate patient priorities was included. An in-person consensus meeting was held after Delphi round 2., Results: Thirty-nine panellists participated. The final COS for prophylaxis treatment included 18 outcomes, seven of which are part of a special subset selected for women, girls and people with the potential to menstruate. There were 11 outcomes in the final perioperative branch COS. Six outcomes overlapped both COS., Conclusions: The coreVWD COS represents a consensus list of outcomes for clinical trials for both factor and non-factor VWD therapies. These outcomes will be useful across the lifecycle of a product, from clinical development through regulatory and market access phases and into patient-provider decision-making., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Acquired haemophilia A (AHA) is a rare and potentially life-threatening bleeding disorder arising from autoantibodies that inhibit coagulation factor VIII (FVIII). Treatment entails achieving haemostasis with bypassing agents or factor replacement, and eradication of the inhibitor with immunosuppressive therapy (IST). Due to the rarity of AHA, there are few prospective data to guide management., Methods: We present a retrospective report of 11 AHA patients treated with emicizumab, a FVIII-mimetic bispecific antibody, administered at 3 mg/kg weekly for 4 weeks in conjunction with rituximab-based immunosuppressive therapy. The chromogenic FVIII inhibitor assay was used to assess for inhibitor eradication., Results: The median follow-up was 13.9 months. The median number of days of additional haemostatic therapy or red blood cell transfusions after initiating emicizumab was 2 (range 0-15). The median was 0 days (range 0-8) for patients who did not require vascular embolization to achieve haemostasis. Eight patients achieved a complete remission (defined as recovery of FVIII activity to > 50% with a negative inhibitor test in the absence of haemostatic and IST); two patients achieved a partial remission (FVIII activity > 50% but with detectable inhibitor); one patient experienced refractory disease. One patient experienced rebleeding and two patients experienced inhibitor recurrence. No thrombotic, thrombotic microangiopathic or infectious complications occurred., Conclusion: Our observations suggest emicizumab can facilitate haemostasis for AHA patients and be combined with safer, lower-intensity immunosuppressive therapies to achieve remission., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Von Willebrand Disease (VWD) is a common inherited bleeding disorder. Patients with VWD suffering from severe bleeding may benefit from the use of secondary long-term prophylaxis., Aim: Systematically summarize the evidence on the clinical outcomes of secondary long-term prophylaxis in patients with VWD and severe recurrent bleedings., Methods: We searched Medline and EMBASE through October 2019 for relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies (OS) assessing the effects of secondary long-term prophylaxis in patients with VWD. We used Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) tool and the RoB for Non-Randomized Studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool to assess the quality of the included studies. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach., Results: We included 12 studies. Evidence from one placebo controlled RCT suggested that VWD prophylaxis as compared to no prophylaxis reduced the rate of bleeding episodes (Rate ratio [RR], .24; 95% confidence interval [CI], .17-.35; low certainty evidence), and of epistaxis (RR, .38; 95%CI, .21-.67; moderate certainty evidence), and may increase serious adverse events RR 2.73 (95%CI .12-59.57; low certainty). Evidence from four before-and-after studies in which researchers reported comparative data suggested that VWD prophylaxis reduced the rate of bleeding (RR .34; 95%CI, .25-.46; very low certainty evidence)., Conclusion: VWD prophylaxis treatment seems to reduce the risk of spontaneous bleeding, epistaxis, and hospitalizations. More RCTs should be conducted to increase the certainty in these benefits., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: von Willebrand disease (VWD) is an inherited bleeding disorder caused by a quantitative or qualitative dysfunction of von Willebrand factor. Clinicians, patients and other stakeholders have many questions about the diagnosis and management of the disease., Aim: To identify topics of highest importance to stakeholders that could be addressed by guidelines to be developed by the American Society of Hematology (ASH), the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH), the National Hemophilia Foundation (NHF) and the World Federation of Hemophilia (WFH)., Methods: A survey to determine and prioritize topics to be addressed in the collaborative development of guidelines for VWD was distributed to international stakeholders including patients, caregivers and healthcare providers (HCPs). Representatives of the four organizations coordinated the distribution strategy. The survey focused on both diagnosis and management of VWD, soliciting 7-point Likert-scale responses and open-ended comments, in English, French and Spanish. We conducted descriptive analysis with comparison of results by stakeholder type, gender and countries' income classification for the rating questions and qualitative conventional content data analysis for the open-ended responses., Results: A total of 601 participants responded to the survey (49% patients/caregivers and 51% healthcare providers). The highest priority topics identified were diagnostic criteria/classification, bleeding assessment tools and treatment options for women and surgical patients. In contrast, screening for anaemia and differentiating plasma-derived therapy versus recombinant therapies received lower ratings., Conclusion: This survey highlighted areas of importance to a diverse representation of stakeholders in the diagnosis and management of VWD, providing a framework for future guideline development and implementation., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)