Search

INTRODUCTION Few studies have examined the real-world impact of haemophilia on daily activities and work productivity in people with severe haemophilia A (PWSHA). AIM To determine clinical attributes and treatment characteristics associated with impairment in daily activities and work among PWSHA using the patient-reported Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-General Health Questionnaire (WPAI-GH). METHODS PWSHA were asked to complete the WPAI-GH as part of the Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: A Socioeconomic Survey (CHESS) study. Outcomes were determined for activity impairment (AI), absenteeism, presenteeism and overall work productivity loss (WPL). Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were used to evaluate the association between these outcomes and clinical and treatment attributes. RESULTS Overall, 376 participants completed the AI element of WPAI-GH; 175 were employed and thus also reported on work impact. Mean ± standard deviation scores were as follows: AI = 34.2% ± 25.8%; absenteeism = 0.06% ±0.2%; presenteeism = 26.8% ± 22.4%; WPL = 28.6% ± 24.0%. Increased AI and WPL were associated with high haemophilia-related morbidity, measured both as chronic pain (p

Introduction Haemophilia is an inherited bleeding disorder characterised by spontaneous bleeding, often leading to impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Commonly used treatments include episodic and prophylactic treatment regimens. Gene therapies could soon become available, potentially creating a paradigm shift in patient management. Aim This paper proposes hypotheses about the potential impact of gene therapy on HRQoL domains in haemophilia, and how these impacts might differ compared with existing treatments. Methods An expert working group with 10 individuals experienced in haemophilia and HRQoL research was established to discuss potential impacts of gene therapy on HRQoL in general and for specific domains in haemophilia. As part of a one-day workshop, domains of three widely used patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments were explored: the Haemo-QoL-A, the Patient Reported Outcomes, Burden and Experiences (PROBE), and the Haemophilia Activities List (HAL). Results The group expected a greater improvement in HRQoL from gene therapy compared with existing treatments for the following domains: physical/role functioning, worry, and consequences of bleeding (Haemo-QoL-A); haemophilia-related health and EQ-5D-5L (part of the PROBE); leg and arm function, and leisure activities (HAL). In contrast, the experts suggested that no change or potential deterioration might be observed for the emotional impact (HAL) and treatment concerns (Haemo-QoL-A) domains. Conclusions Current PRO instruments in haemophilia have limitations when applied in the context of gene therapy, and no single instrument fully captures the relevant HRQoL domains. However, the PROBE and Haemo-QoL-A were considered as the most suitable existing instruments. As haemophilia treatments evolve, further research should examine the potential effectiveness of existing PRO instruments as compared to the development of novel PRO measures.

INTRODUCTION: With the development of gene therapy for people with haemophilia (PWH), it is important to understand how people impacted by haemophilia (PIH) and clinicians prioritise haemophilia treatment attributes to support informed treatment decisions. OBJECTIVE: To examine the treatment attribute preferences of PIH and clinical experts in the United Kingdom (UK) and to develop a profile of gene therapy characteristics fit for use in future discrete choice experiments (DCEs). METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with PIH (n = 14) and clinical experts (n = 6) who ranked pre-defined treatment attributes by importance. Framework analysis was conducted to identify key themes and treatment attributes; points were allocated based on the rankings. Synthesis of results by a multidisciplinary group informed development of a profile of gene therapy characteristics for use in future research. RESULTS: Key themes identified by PIH and clinical experts included patient relevant features and the importance of 'informed decision making'. The six top-ranked treatment attributes were 'effect on factor level' (79 points), 'uncertainty regarding long-term risks' (57 points), 'impact on daily life' (41 points), 'frequency of monitoring' (33 points), 'impact on ability to participate in physical activity' (29 points), and 'uncertainty regarding long-term benefits' (28 points). The final treatment characteristics were categorised as therapeutic option, treatment effectiveness, safety concerns, impact on self-management and quality of life (role limitations). CONCLUSION: We identified several gene therapy characteristics important to PIH and clinicians in the UK. These characteristics will be used in a future DCE to further investigate patient preferences for gene therapy. ispartof: HAEMOPHILIA vol:28 issue:4 pages:588-609 ispartof: location:England status: published

AIMS There is evidence that people with haemophilia A still experience morbidity and functional limitation due to joint damage despite prophylaxis. This study aimed to compare their quality of life and work-related function with that of the general population and patients with osteoarthritis. METHODS Data from the Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey (CHESS) database were compared with published data from normative populations and patients with osteoarthritis in Europe and the United States. RESULTS In the predominantly young (age 18-35 years) adult CHESS population treated with primary prophylaxis, about 30% reported a target joint; the average frequency of bleeds was one per year; half reported chronic pain. Levels of anxiety and depression were similar to those reported by people using on-demand treatment. Employment and productivity were lower than in the general population. The level of presenteeism (attending work with impairment) was comparable with that reported for a much older population with osteoarthritis who had more extensive joint damage and greater prevalence of pain. CONCLUSION Compared with the general population, clinical outcomes and quality of life are indicated to be impaired for young adults whose haemophilia is managed by primary prophylaxis. Primary prophylaxis is not associated with lower levels of anxiety and depression than on-demand treatment, and pain is common. The level of presenteeism is comparable to that reported in people with osteoarthritis, an older population with more joint disease. Further studies are needed to fully assess the implications of compromised work performance among young adults with haemophilia as they seek to build a career.

Introduction The benefits of physical activity (PA) for people with haemophilia (PWH) may include improvements in joint, bone and muscle health. However, the factor VIII activity level required to avoid a bleeding episode associated with PA is unknown. Aim To elicit the opinion of clinical experts on the minimum level and ideal factor VIII activity ('level') required to avoid a bleeding episode during participation in different types of PA for PWH. Methods Based on the 2017 National Hemophilia Foundation PA descriptions, clinical experts estimated a minimally acceptable and an ideal factor level at which a bleed could be avoided. The uncertainty around estimates was quantified using an approach to construct a probability distribution to represent expert opinion. Results Minimum and ideal factor level increased with higher risk PA, whether or not joint morbidity was present, as did the experts' uncertainty in their estimates (ie the range between lowest and highest estimates for minimum and ideal levels). Mean minimum levels ranged from 4% to 48% for low to high risk for people without joint morbidity, and from 7% to 47% for those with joint morbidity. For ideal factor levels, corresponding figures were 9%-52% and 12%-64%, respectively. Conclusion To support a patient-centric outcome, expert opinion indicates that the clinical norm of 0.01 IU/mL (1%) trough level is insufficient. It is anticipated that introducing a more targeted approach to meet the needs of patients who are increasingly physically active will benefit patients further in addition to recent treatment advances.

Background Some studies suggest that people with haemophilia (PwH) who use prophylaxis value low frequency of clotting factor administration more than a lower risk of bleeding. However, more frequent infusions offer the potential of reducing joint disease and pain, which in turn may improve functioning and quality of life. Aims To explore the impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) aspects of haemophilia associated with adherence and annual infusion rate in the context of factors influencing treatment that are important to patients, including prophylaxis, chronic pain, concomitant conditions and hospital admission. Materials and methods HRQoL was assessed in participants with severe haemophilia in the ‘Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey’ (CHESS) study who were using prophylaxis. Patients using on-demand treatment were excluded. This multivariate analysis examined the interaction between factors potentially influencing treatment and HRQoL, and minor and major bleeds. Results From the total CHESS population (n=1,285), 338 (26%) participants provided responses for major and minor bleeds and target joints, and 145 (11%) provided EQ-5D-3L responses. Major and minor bleeds were associated with pain. Patients with severe chronic pain reported a substantial negative impact on HRQoL; but this was significantly improved by increases in the annual infusion rate. This was not apparent in participants with mild or moderate pain. Conclusion Increasing the frequency of prophylaxis infusions is associated with improved quality of life in PwH who have severe chronic pain. However, increasing the number of infusions per week in those with mild or moderate chronic pain with the intention of improving prophylactic effect may not have the same effect.

INTRODUCTION Gene therapy has shown promise in clinical trials for patients with haemophilia, but patient preference studies have focused on factor replacement treatments. AIM We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to investigate the relative importance and differential preferences patients provide for gene therapy attributes. METHODS We surveyed male adults with haemophilia in the United States recruited from patient panels including the National Hemophilia Foundation Community Voices in Research platform using an online survey over 4 months in 2020/21. Participants indicated preferences for gene therapy attributes including dosing frequency/durability, effect on annual bleeding, uncertainty related to side effects, impact on daily activities, impact on mental health, and post-treatment requirements. The relative importance of each attribute was analysed overall and for subgroups based on haemophilia type and severity. RESULTS A total of 183 males with haemophilia A (n = 120) or B (n = 63) were included. Half (47%) had severe haemophilia; most (75%) were White. Overall, participants gave effect on bleeding rate the greatest relative importance (31%), followed by dose frequency/durability (26%), uncertainty regarding safety issues (17%), and impact on daily activities (11%). Dose frequency/durability had the greatest importance for those with haemophilia B (35%). CONCLUSION People with haemophilia prioritised reduced bleeding and treatment burden; the former was more important in haemophilia A and the latter in haemophilia B, followed by safety and impact on daily life in this DCE of gene therapy attributes. These findings and differences can inform clinical and health policy decisions to improve health equity for people with haemophilia.

Introduction: Hemophilia A (HA) is a congenital bleeding disorder caused by a deficiency in clotting factor VIII (FVIII). There are currently limited data on the impact of HA on daily life. Here we examine the impact of HA on the daily life of adult persons with HA (PwHA) without current FVIII inhibitors according to disease severity. Methods: The Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey II (CHESS II) is a retrospective, burden-of-illness study in adults with mild, moderate, and severe HA or hemophilia B (defined by endogenous FVIII/IX [IU/dL] relative to normal; mild, 5- Results: Of 258 PwHA completing questionnaires, 15.9% (n=41), 27.9% (n=72), and 56.2% (n=145) had mild, moderate, and severe HA, respectively. Of those with severe HA, 60.0% were currently receiving FVIII prophylaxis (standard of care for severe HA); in comparison, 4.9% and 6.9% of those with mild and moderate HA were receiving prophylaxis (Table 1). Treatment adaptation in anticipation of physical or social activity was reported by 19.5%, 23.6%, and 38.6% of those with mild, moderate, and severe HA, respectively. Over a third of participants with mild (36.6%) and moderate (44.4%) HA, and 64.8% of those with severe HA (58.6% with severe HA receiving on-demand treatment and 69.0% receiving prophylaxis) agreed or strongly agreed that HA had reduced their physical activity (Figure 1). Overall, 38.9% of those with moderate HA and 58.6% of those with severe HA (63.8% with severe HA receiving on-demand treatment and 55.2% receiving prophylaxis) agreed or strongly agreed that their HA had reduced their social activity; this was less pronounced in mild HA (9.8%). Additionally, 31.7%, 36.1%, and 64.1% of those with mild, moderate, and severe HA (62.1% with severe HA receiving on-demand treatment and 65.5% receiving prophylaxis) agreed or strongly agreed that their HA had caused them to miss opportunities. Correspondingly, frustration due to HA was felt by 19.5%, 34.7% and 57.9% (56.9% with severe HA receiving on-demand treatment and 58.6% receiving prophylaxis) of people, respectively. When asked whether they believed their daily life was compromised due to their hemophilia, 24.4%, 37.5%, and 63.4% of those with mild, moderate, and severe HA, respectively, agreed. Pain, as reported by the physician, was noted in 36.6% of people with mild HA (100% was reported as 'mild'); in people with moderate HA, pain was reported as 'mild', 'moderate', and 'severe' in 44.4%, 20.8%, and 1.4% of PwHA, respectively. In people with severe HA, pain was reported as 'mild', 'moderate', and 'severe' in 39.7%, 27.6%, and 8.6% for those receiving on-demand treatment, and 37.9%, 32.2%, and 8.0% for those receiving prophylaxis, respectively. Conclusions: In all disease severity groups, there was a notable group of PwHA that felt that they have had to reduce their physical and social activity, have had fewer opportunities and are frustrated due to their disease. While the impact on daily life is most pronounced in people with severe HA (including those receiving on-demand treatment and those receiving prophylaxis), it is also apparent in mild and moderate HA, indicating that there may be an unmet medical need in these groups. Disclosures Noone: Healthcare Decision Consultants: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Research Investigator PROBE: Research Funding; European Haemophilia Consortium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Nissen:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment; Actelion: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding. Xu:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Other: All authors received support for third party writing assistance, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, provided by F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland.. Burke:University of Chester: Current Employment; HCD Economics: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy. Asghar:HCD Economics: Current Employment. Dhillon:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Other: All authors received editorial support for this abstract, furnished by Scott Battle, funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland. ; HCD Economics: Current Employment. Aizenas:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Meier:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. O'Hara:HCD Economics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy. Khair:Biomarin: Consultancy; HCD Economics: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medikhair: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sobi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Honoraria, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Haemnet: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Historically, treatment based on the availability of clotting factor replacement has resulted in an arcane guideline for the correction of factor deficiencies in people with haemophilia (PwH). While all other disease entities seek to restore function to a normal level, PwH are restricted to factor nadirs still equivalent to mild or moderate disease, resulting in continued risk of bleeding. A new treatment paradigm is needed based on the defined needs of PwH. A treatment model was developed by a panel of haemophilia providers, patient advocates and health economists to establish specific treatment milestones and targeted outcomes. The panel defined a series of treatment milestones to characterize the activity and outcomes linked to level of factor deficiency correction. All agreed that the ultimate goal should be ‘functional cure’ and ‘health equity’. Seven levels to achieving a functional cure were identified, (a) Sustain life; (b) Minimal joint impairment; (c) Freedom from any spontaneous bleeds; (d) Attainment of ‘normal’ mobility; (e) Able to sustain minor trauma without additional intervention; (f) Ability to sustain major surgery or trauma; and (g) Normal haemostasis. A parallel set of patient‐reported outcomes to achieve health equity was identified. These guidelines are now comparable with other disorders where the goal is to replace missing proteins to attain normal activity levels. As we are no longer limited by plasma supply due to the manufacture of recombinant factors, mimetics, and the early success of gene therapy, health equity is now achievable.

Factor VIII protein (FVIII) as a coagulation replacement factor has for decades been used as the standard of care for management of people with haemophilia A. It is effective for treatment of bleeding events, as prophylaxis to prevent bleeding events and preserve joint function, and to support surgery in people with haemophilia A. Despite long experience in treating haemophilia A, we are only beginning to understand the functions of FVIII beyond its established role as a coenzyme to factor IXa to expedite thrombin generation through the intrinsic pathway of coagulation. Here, we review the current role of FVIII coagulant (FVIII:C) in haemophilia A management and emerging evidence for the role of FVIII across multiple systems, including the cardiovascular system, angiogenesis and maintenance of bone health. For instance, supraphysiological FVIII levels are a risk factor for venous thromboembolism. von Willebrand factor (VWF), which forms a non-covalent complex with circulating FVIII, is an established marker and regulator of angiogenesis. In a mouse model of haemophilia, treatment with FVIII decreased expression of receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-Β ligand (RANKL), a marker for bone turnover. Longitudinal follow-up data in people with haemophilia A are needed to confirm and extend these observations.

IntroductionPeople with inherited and long-term conditions such as haemophilia have been shown to adapt to their levels of disability, often reporting better quality of life (QoL) than expected from the general population (the disability paradox).AimTo investigate the disability paradox in people with haemophilia in the United States by examining preference differences in health state valuations versus the general population.MethodsWe conducted a discrete choice experiment including duration to capture valuations of health states based on patient-reported preferences. Participants indicated their preferences for hypothetical health states using the EQ-5D-5L, where each participant completed 15 of the 120 choice tasks. Response inconsistencies were evaluated with dominated and repeated scenarios. Conditional-logit regressions with random sampling of the general population responses were used to match the sample of patients with haemophilia. We compared model estimates and derived preferences associated with EQ-5D-5L health states.ResultsAfter removing respondents with response inconsistencies, 1327/2138 (62%) participants remained (177/283 haemophilia; 1150/1900 general population). Patients with haemophilia indicated higher preference value for 99% of EQ-5D-5L health states compared to the general population (when matched on age and gender). The mean health state valuation difference of 0.17 indicated a meaningful difference compared to a minimal clinically important difference threshold of 0.07. Results were consistent by haemophilia type and severity.ConclusionOur findings indicated the presence of a disability paradox among patients with haemophilia, who reported higher health states than the general population, suggesting the impact of haemophilia may be underestimated if general population value sets are used.

Background Patients with hemophilia and inhibitors generally face greater disease burden compared to patients without inhibitors. While raising awareness of relative burden may improve the standard of care for patients with inhibitors, comparative data are sparse. Analyzing data drawn from the Cost of Haemophilia across Europe – a Socioeconomic Survey (CHESS) study, the aim of this study was to compare the clinical burden of disease in patients with severe hemophilia with and without inhibitors. Hemophilia specialists (N = 139) across five European countries completed an online survey between January–April 2015, providing demographic, clinical and 12-month ambulatory/secondary care activity data for 1285 patients. Patients with hemophilia who currently presented with inhibitors and those who never had inhibitors were matched on baseline characteristics via propensity score matching. Outcomes were compared between the two cohorts using a paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank or McNemar’s test. Results The proportion of patients who currently presented with inhibitors was 4.5% (58/1285). Compared to PS-matched patients without inhibitors, patients with inhibitors experienced more than twice the mean annual number of bleeds (mean ± standard deviation, 8.29 ± 9.18 vs 3.72 ± 3.95; p

Introduction Severe hemophilia A (SHA) is characterized by spontaneous (non-trauma related) bleeding episodes into the joint space and muscle tissue, leading to progressive joint deterioration and chronic pain. Chronic joint damage is most often associated with severe hemophilia, however more recent research has illustrated that people with moderate hemophilia A (MHA) also experience hemophilic arthropathy and functional impairment. The need to measure joint health in children as well as adults, is underscored by findings from the Joint Outcome Continuation Study, which found that FVIII prophylaxis was insufficient to protect joints from damage, from childhood through adolescence in severe HA (Warren et al., 2020). The objective of this analysis is to gain a more patient-centric understanding of the clinical, economic and humanistic burden associated with 'Problem Joints', a measure of joint morbidity developed in consultation with an expert panel to overcome limitations with existing measures, in people with MHA and SHA. Methods A descriptive cohort analysis was conducted, utilizing retrospective, cross-sectional real-world data from the 'Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey' (CHESS Paeds and CHESS II), studies of adult and pediatric persons with hemophilia. The analysis population is comprised of children (17 and below) with MHA or SHA in CHESS Paeds, and adults aged 20 and over with MHA or SHA in CHESS II. To account for the possibility that persons aged 18 or 19 in CHESS II may have participated in CHESS Paeds, these individuals were excluded from the analysis. Physician-reported clinical outcome data and patient/caregiver-reported quality of life were analyzed. A problem joint (PJ) is defined as having chronic joint pain and/or limited range of movement due to compromised joint integrity (i.e. chronic synovitis and/or hemophilic arthropathy). Analyses were stratified by number of PJs: none, 1 PJ, and 2+ PJs. We report retrospective data of the 12 months prior to study enrollment, on annualized bleeding rate (ABR), prevalence of target joints (TJ), as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis, and EQ-5D-/5L/Y/Proxy score. Results are presented as mean (standard deviation) or N (%). Results Among 785 participants (N = 464 SHA; N = 321 MHA) in CHESS Paeds, mean age and BMI were 10.33 (4.63) and 22.50 (17.07), respectively. Of 493 participants (aged 20 and above) in CHESS II (N = 298 SHA; N = 195 MHA), the mean age and BMI were 38.61 (14.06) and 24.55 (2.92), respectively. Current inhibitor to FVIII replacement was more prevalent in children than in adults (10% vs. 5%). In CHESS II, approximately 40% of people with MHA and 49% with SHA had one or more PJs, respectively [1 PJ (23% vs. 28%); 2+ PJs (16% vs. 21%)]. In CHESS Paeds, approximately 14% of children with MHA and 18% with SHA had at least one PJ, respectively [1 PJ (9% vs. 14%); 2+ PJs (5% vs. 3%)]. TJs were less prevalent with MHA in comparison to SHA, in both adults (24% vs. 45%) and children (13% vs. 22%). Clinical burden was higher among both children and adults with PJs compared to those with no PJs. ABR correlates with the number of PJs, in those with MHA and SHA in CHESS II (Figure 1). Similarly, PJs were associated with higher ABR across MHA and SHA in CHESS Paeds (Figure 2). Hemophilia-related hospitalizations were higher in both adult and pediatric participants with PJs. In CHESS II, MHA with no PJs had fewer [0.73 (1.23)] hospitalizations compared to having those with 1 PJ [1.38 (1.11)] or 2+ PJs [1.28 (1.25)]. Similarly, children with MHA with 2+ PJs had 1.60 (1.92) hemophilia-related hospitalizations, compared to 1.38 (1.92) with 1 PJ and 0.71 (1.14) with no PJs. PJs were associated with impaired quality of life. In CHESS II, MHA and SHA EQ-5D-5L values in persons with no PJs were 0.81 (0.19) and 0.79 (0.18), respectively, compared to 0.65 (0.16) and 0.62 (0.23) with 1 PJ, and 0.65 (0.14) and 0.51 (0.33) in with 2+ PJs. A similar trend was observed in EQ-5D-Y and EQ-5D-proxy scores in CHESS Paeds. Conclusions Data from CHESS Paeds and CHESS II demonstrate an association between chronic joint damage, as measured by the 'problem joint' definition, and worsening clinical and quality of life outcomes, across both MHA and SHA. Further analyses will seek to expand upon the initial results presented here, to investigate the wider elements of burden associated with compromised long-term joint health. Disclosures McLaughlin: BioMarin: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sobi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche/Chugai: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Hermans:Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sobi: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biogen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; CAF-DCF: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; WFH: Other; EAHAD: Other; Octapharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Kedrion: Speakers Bureau; LFB: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Asghar:HCD Economics: Current Employment. Burke:HCD Economics: Current Employment; University of Chester: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy. Nissen:GSK: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Actelion: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment. Aizenas:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Meier:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Dhillon:HCD Economics: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Other: All authors received editorial support for this abstract, furnished by Scott Battle, funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland. . O'Hara:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; HCD Economics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company.

Introduction Clinical severity and impact of haemophilia on quality of life have been generally considered to be lower for haemophilia B (HB) compared with haemophilia A (HA) patients. Aims To compare annual bleeding rate (ABR), target joint development and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) between adult (≥18 years) severe HA and HB patients using recent data from the Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey (CHESS) study. Methods Multivariate generalized linear models (GLM) were constructed to assess the relationship between haemophilia type, ABR, HRQoL (derived from EQ-5D index scores) and the presence of target joints while controlling for covariates. Results Of the 1225 patients included, 77% (n = 949) had HA and 23% (n = 278) had HB. Of the 514 patients who completed the EQ-5D, 78% (n = 405) had HA, and 22% (n = 110) had HB. Unadjusted mean ABR was 3.79 in HA and 4.60 in HB. The presence of ≥1 target joint was reported in 59% and 54% of patients with HA and HB, respectively. Unadjusted mean EQ-5D index score was 0.78 in HA and 0.76 in HB. Haemophilia type was not a significant predictor of ABR, target joints or HRQoL when adjusted for confounding factors such as BMI, age and replacement therapy regimen. Conclusion Data suggest comparable ABR, incidence of target joints and HRQoL between patients with HB and HA indicating comparable clinical severity and disease impact on patient quality of life.

Objectives Target joints are a common complication of severe haemophilia. While factor replacement therapy constitutes the majority of costs in haemophilia, the relationship between target joints and non drug-related direct costs (NDDCs) has not been studied. Methods Data on haemophilia patients without inhibitors was drawn from the ‘Cost of Haemophilia across Europe – a Socioeconomic Survey’ (CHESS) study, a cost assessment in severe haemophilia A and B across five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom) in which 139 haemophilia specialists provided demographic and clinical information for 1285 adult patients. NDDCs were calculated using publicly available cost data, including 12-month ambulatory and secondary care activity: haematologist and other specialist consultant consultations, medical tests and examinations, bleed-related hospital admissions, and payments to professional care providers. A generalized linear model was developed to investigate the relationship between NDDCs and target joints (areas of chronic synovitis), adjusted for patient covariates. Results Five hundred and thirteen patients (42% of the sample) had no diagnosed target joints; a total of 1376 target joints (range 1–10) were recorded in the remaining 714 patients. Mean adjusted NDDCs for persons with no target joints were EUR 3134 (standard error (SE) EUR 158); for persons with one or more target joints, mean adjusted NDDCs were EUR 3913 (SE EUR 157; average mean effect EUR 779; p

Background Severe haemophilia is associated with major psychological and economic burden for patients, caregivers, and the wider health care system. This burden has been quantified and documented for a number of European countries in recent years. However, few studies have taken a standardised methodology across multiple countries simultaneously, and sought to amalgamate all three levels of burden for severe disease. The overall aim of the ‘Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey’ (CHESS) study was to capture the annualised economic and psychosocial burden of severe haemophilia in five European countries. A cross-section of haemophilia specialists (surveyed between January and April 2015) provided demographic and clinical information and 12-month ambulatory and secondary care activity for patients via an online survey. In turn, patients provided corresponding direct and indirect non-medical cost information, including work loss and out-of-pocket expenses, as well as information on quality of life and adherence. The direct and indirect costs for the patient sample were calculated and extrapolated to population level. Results Clinical reports for a total of 1,285 patients were received. Five hundred and fifty-two patients (43% of the sample) provided information on indirect costs and health-related quality of life via the PSC. The total annual cost of severe haemophilia across the five countries for 2014 was estimated at EUR 1.4 billion, or just under EUR 200,000 per patient. The highest per-patient costs were in Germany (mean EUR 319,024) and the lowest were in the United Kingdom (mean EUR 129,365), with a study average of EUR 199,541. As expected, consumption of clotting factor replacement therapy represented the vast majority of costs (up to 99%). Indirect costs are driven by patient and caregiver work loss. Conclusions The results of the CHESS study reflect previous research findings suggesting that costs of factor replacement therapy account for the vast majority of the cost burden in severe haemophilia. However, the importance of the indirect impact of haemophilia on the patient and family should not be overlooked. The CHESS study highlights the benefits of observational study methodologies in capturing a ‘snapshot’ of information for patients with rare diseases.

Background: Hemophilia B (HB) is a rare disease caused by congenital Factor IX (FIX) deficiency. HB requires life-long management to prevent or manage bleeding and associated morbidity. Although HB affects only a small portion of the population, it is associated with high overall cost and imposes a significant financial burden on individuals, payers, and society in general. Due to variation in patient clinical characteristics and treatment choice, cost and healthcare resource utilization associated with disease management can vary significantly from patient to patient. Aims: To review published direct costs and healthcare resource utilization associated with the management of HB in the US. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted by searching electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE, Tufts CEA registry) to identify full-text studies (March 2009–March 2019). Additionally, a manual search for abstracts from relevant conferences was performed (from 2016). Studies were included in the review using pre-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria for population, study type, language (English), and location (US). Publications consisting of budget impact analysis, cost, burden of disease, healthcare resource utilization, and economics evaluations were included. Results: Of 693 titles and abstracts screened, a total of 17 studies evaluating cost and resource utilization in patients with HB in the US were included. Data sources for these studies included: medical records (n = 5), insurance claims databases (n = 10), and surveys (n = 2). Reported cost and resource use varied across studies depending on severity of the disease, treatment regimen, and product type: extended (EHL) or standard half-life (SHL). The cost of FIX replacement therapy constitutes the majority of costs in HB management. Among patients with severe or moderate HB, reported mean annual cost of FIX ranged from $187,070 to $925,864 with an average of $560,801. Annual cost of EHLs could exceed more than twice the cost of SHLs. For example, mean annual cost of EHL FIX was $921,291 vs $478,096 for SHL FIX. Rates of healthcare resource utilization were also substantial for patients with HB and include hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and physician visits. Conclusions: This systematic literature review found significant economic burden associated with HB in the US. The substantial costs and health resources utilized by patients highlight unmet needs remaining in HB.

Background: BAY 81-8973 (Kovaltry®, Bayer) is an unmodified full-length recombinant FVIII launched in 2016 in Europe and the US for the prophylaxis and treatment of bleeds in patients with hemophilia A. BAY 81-8973 has been extensively studied in clinical trials, which have demonstrated consistent efficacy and safety in both children and adults in the LEOPOLD trials, and since launch, 6750 patient-years of experience have been accumulated. Pharmacokinetic analyses have demonstrated an increased half-life for BAY 81-8973 compared with standard factor VIII products (rFVIII-FS and rFVIII [rAHF-PFM]). Real world evidence demonstrating the effectiveness and safety of BAY 81-8973 across age groups is being collected, though aggregated international data have yet to be published. The primary objective of this analysis was to describe the effectiveness of BAY 81-8973 in the real world setting in children and adults from Europe and the US, as captured in the Cost of Haemophilia: a Socioeconomic Survey (CHESS) study. Methods: The CHESS 2018 program investigated the economic and psychological burden of moderate and severe hemophilia (FVIII < 5%) in Europe and the USA. The pediatric cohort (CHESS Pediatric) included 1050 males aged 1-17 years, with moderate or severe hemophilia, while CHESS US included 568 adults with severe hemophilia aged > 18 years. Clinical and patient reported data were obtained via medical chart abstraction and cross-sectional surveys sent to both physicians and patients. Data were collected between December 2017 and April 2018, and captured 12 months of clinical retrospective data. The current study is a descriptive analysis of patients treated with BAY 81-8973 from the CHESS pediatric and adult cohorts. Results: At the data cut off (May 2018), 49 patients were being treated with BAY 81-8973. The majority of pediatric patients were aged 6-11 years (51.7%, n=15), while 17.2% (n=5) were aged 0-5 years and 31% (n=9) were aged 12-17 years. In the adult US cohort, most (60%, n=12) were aged 18-35 years, 35% (n=7) were aged 36-59 years, and 5% (n=1) were aged > 60 years. The vast majority of patients across cohorts had severe disease (93.1% of children and 100% of adults); however, 89.7% (26/29) of children and 80% (16/20) of adults had no target joints. In this population, 75.9% (22/29) of children and 55.0% (11/20) of adults were receiving regular prophylaxis with BAY 81-8973. Children and adults on prophylaxis both had a mean (± SD) of 2 (± 1) infusions/week, with median (Q1; Q3) weekly doses of 84 (67; 110) and 62 (29; 144) IU/kg, respectively. Overall, 20.7% (6/29) of children and 35% (7/20) of adults treated with BAY 81-8973 had zero bleeds and mean annualized bleed rate (ABR) was 2.66 (± 2.06) in children and 1.45 (± 1) in adults; 68.9% (20/29) of children and 95.0% (19/20) of adults had experienced ≤ 3 bleeds in the previous year. There were no reports of inhibitor development in either the pediatric or adult cohorts while on BAY 81-8973. Conclusions: These observations suggest that BAY 81-8973 is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for adults and children with moderate and severe hemophilia A, with ABR < 3 in children and < 2 in adults and with many patients free from bleeds despite only 67% of patients studied receiving regular prophylaxis. These data confirm the observations from the LEOPOLD trials, suggest BAY 81-8973 provides good protection from bleeding across a range of patient types in routine clinical practice and illustrate how the established pharmacokinetic profile of BAY 81-8973 translates to clinical benefits for patients with hemophilia A. Study supported by Bayer Disclosures Hirst: Bayer: Employment. Rauchensteiner:Bayer: Employment.

Introduction: The development of inhibitors is the most serious complication associated with the treatment of hemophilia. Prophylaxis remains the standard of care among non-inhibitor patients but the majority of inhibitor patients are managed on-demand. While it is generally accepted that inhibitor patients face a higher disease burden compared to non-inhibitor patients, limited comparative data exist in the literature. Objective: This study compares disease burden between inhibitor and non-inhibitor patients. Methods: Data were drawn from the Cost of Haemophilia across Europe - a Socioeconomic Survey (CHESS) study with data collected from January to April 2015. CHESS was developed as the first comprehensive, 'bottom-up' cost-of-illness study in severe hemophilia A & B (factor level Results: Of the 1,285 surveyed patients, 58 (4.5%) currently had inhibitors and 1,091(84.9%) never had inhibitors. Mean (standard deviation; SD) age for the inhibitor and non-inhibitor patients was 41.9 (15) years and 35.2 (14.8) years, respectively. Mean (SD) number of bleeds for inhibitor and non-inhibitor patients was 8.3 (9.2) and 3.8 (5.4), respectively; 32.5% of bleeds for inhibitor patients were major versus 21.5% for non-inhibitor patients. Target joints were reported in 93.1% of inhibitor and 55.3% of non-inhibitor patients. Mean (SD) number of target joints for inhibitor and non-inhibitor patients was 2.2 (1.9) and 1 (1.3), respectively. Mean (SD) number of hemophilia-related consultations for inhibitor and non-inhibitor patients was 9.1 (5.1) and 6.5 (5.5), respectively. Mean hemophilia-related hospitalizations for inhibitor and non-inhibitor patients were 1.9 (1.9) and 0.6 (1.4), respectively. Moderate to severe pain was reported by 53.5% of inhibitor patients and 23.7% of non-inhibitor patients. Patients with inhibitors also reported lower QOL (i.e. mean (SD) EQ-5D: 0.5 (0.4) vs. 0.8 (0.3)) and more missed days from work (i.e. mean (SD) days: 30.1 (8.6) vs. 3.7 (24)) than non-inhibitor patients. Conclusion: Data from the CHESS study suggest higher clinical and humanistic disease burden among hemophilia patients with inhibitors. Improving the standard of care for inhibitor patients, including the use of prophylaxis, may reduce the burden of disease in this population and improve health. Disclosures Oladapo: Shire: Employment. Walsh:Shire: Consultancy; HCD Economics: Employment. O'Hara:Shire: Consultancy; HCD Economics: Employment. Kauf:Shire: Employment.