1 / 36

Maggie Constantine, MD, FRCPC Resident, Transfusion Medicine UBC

Maggie Constantine, MD, FRCPC Resident, Transfusion Medicine UBC TMR Journal Club – November 7, 2007. Prevention of joint disease in hemophilia Background. Joint disease Hemarthrosis Acute inflammation Pain, swelling, loss of function Predisposition to future bleeding

missy
Download Presentation

Maggie Constantine, MD, FRCPC Resident, Transfusion Medicine UBC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Maggie Constantine, MD, FRCPC Resident, Transfusion Medicine UBC TMR Journal Club – November 7, 2007

  2. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground • Joint disease • Hemarthrosis • Acute inflammation • Pain, swelling, loss of function • Predisposition to future bleeding • Chronic synovial hypertrophy • Destruction of cartilage • Loss of joint space • Hemophiliac arthropathy Carcao M, Aledort L. Blood Rev. 2004;18:101-113.

  3. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - Staging/Grading joint disease

  4. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - Staging/Grading joint disease

  5. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - Prophylaxis or no prophylaxis • Prophylaxis (primary) • Treatment by IV injection of factor concentrate in anticipation of and in order to prevent bleeding (Consensus statement. Haemophilia 2003) • FVIII at least twice a week • FVIII 25-40 U/kg given on alternate days (min 3 days/week) • Commence prior to age 2 or 3 - prior to joint damage

  6. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - Prophylaxis, the benefits • Malmo (Sweden) experience • 25 year experience • 60 patients - both severe hemophilia A and B • Virtually no bleeds and maintenance of perfect joints if: • Started prophylaxis at a very young age (1-2 years old) • FVIII given in large doses (2000-9000 U/kg/year) • Joints already damaged prior to prophylaxis underwent progressive deterioration despite prophylaxis • Irrespective of future bleeding in joints Nilsson IM et al. J Intern Med 1992;232:25-32.

  7. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - Prophylaxis, the benefits • Aledort L et al. J Intern Med 1994;236:391-9. • On-demand vs prophylaxis • Prophylaxis • Fewer joint bleeds • Fewer total bleeding episodes • Better initial and final orthopedic and radiological scores • Annual use of factor concentrates was 3 times higher

  8. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - Prophylaxis, the recommendations • 1994, National Hemophilia Foundation with World Federation of Hemophilia and WHO • Prophylaxis considered optimal therapy for children with severe hemophilia • Prophylaxis be instituted early with trough levels >/= 1% • Need to evaluate joints, document complications and costs • Prophylaxis to be considered for other age groups

  9. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - AHCDC • Provide prophylaxis (primary and secondary) to patients in accordance with AHCDC recommendations and best practice. http://www.ahcdc.ca/documents/CanadianHemophiliaStandardsFirstEdition070612_1.pdf

  10. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - AHCDC • Recent studies suggest that prophylactic infusion to maintain clotting-factor levels above 0.01 U/mL (more than 1% activity) at all times prevents most episodes of spontaneous bleeding into joints and preserves joint function.<19-23> Clinical studies are now underway in Canada to find the proper dose, and to confirm the efficacy and cost-benefit ratio of this mode of management. Studies are also needed to assess the safety, efficacy and cost-benefit ratio of continuous versus pulse coagulation-product infusion in prophylactic therapy. http://www.ahcdc.ca/vWDManagement.html

  11. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - Prophylaxis, the gap analysis • North American hemophilia treatment centers • Survey • Prophylaxis: only 51% of boys with severe hemophilia A under 18 yo • 30% of severe hemophilia A </= 5 yo were receiving full dose prophlaxis Blanchette VS et al. Haemophilia 2003;19(Suppl 9):19-26.

  12. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaBackground - Prophylaxis, why the gap • Burdens • Cost • Frequent veni-puncture • Need for CVC • CVC complications - thrombosis (20-60%, not all with inhibitors), infection, malfunction • Thrombotic complications • Inhibitor development

  13. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary • Whether prophylaxis prevents joint hemorrhage and damage • Multicenter • Randomized, open-label • Prophylaxis vs intensive replacement • August 1996 to April 2005 • Long list of disclosures: Bayer HealthCare donated the FVIII (otherwise no other role)

  14. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary • Inclusion • Age less than 30 mos • FVIII activity level of 2 U/dL or less • History of two or fewer hemorrhages into each index joint • Normal baseline joint imaging • Undetectable levels of FVIII inhibitor • Normal platelet count • Normal joint motion

  15. Prophylaxis FVIII 25 IU /kg q2d Hemarthroses FVIII 40 IU/kg Prophylaxis resumed the next day Episodic Treated only at the time of clinically recognized hemarthroses FVIII 40 IU/kg at the time of joint hemorrhage 20 IUkg at 24 hours and 72 hours after first dose Continue infusions of 20 IU/kg q2d until pain and impairment of mobility resolved Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary

  16. Primary outcome Preservation of index-joint structure Determined by MRI and plain-film x-ray at completion of study Joint failure: subchondral cyst, surface erosion, joint-space narrowing Secondary outcomes # of joint and other bleeding events Number of infusions Total units of FVIII administered Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary

  17. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary • Power calculation • Pilot data indicating that normal joint structure would be maintained in 70% of children receiving prophylaxis and 20% of those receiving enhanced episodic therapy • Estimated proportions of loss of participants were 10% for follow-up • 64 participants needed to detect a significant difference between the two treatments with a two-sided test (0.05 alpha level and 95% power)

  18. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary • Radiologists blinded to treatment arm • Randomization was performed centrally and stratified by site in permuted blocks of 2, 4 or 6

  19. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary • Protocol failure • Allowance for “early termination of participation” if (also defined as serious adverse events) • Development of FVIII inhibitor • Life-threatening hemorrhage • Bone/cartilage damage on joint imaging • (death also a serious adverse event) • Withdrawn from study if • FVIII inhibitor titre >25 BU on duplicate testing over 3 mos • Recurrent life-threatening hemorrhage • Early joint evaluation showed bone or cartilate damage

  20. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary • Statistical analysis • Primary outcome • Proportion of children in whom normal joint structure was maintained, as determined by MRI or x-ray • Intention-to-treat analysis

  21. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Results

  22. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Results

  23. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Results

  24. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Results Prophylaxis MRI P Value

  25. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Results

  26. Prevention of joint disease in hemophiliaManco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)

  27. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Results

  28. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Results

  29. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Results

  30. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Discussion and Conclusions • > 1/2 of joint abnormalities detected by MRI were not apparent on x-ray • “We believe that MRI is the preferable imaging technique for young boys with hemophilia.”

  31. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Discussion and Conclusions • # of clinically evident hemarthroses correlated weakly with the primary outcome • “…chronic microhemorrhage into the joints…. Causes deterioration of joints without clinical evidence of hemarthroses and that prophylaxis prevents this subclinical process.”

  32. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Study summary - Discussion and Conclusions • “This study demonstrates the efficacy of prophylaxis with recombinant factor VIII in reducing the incidence of joint hemorrhages, life-threatening hemorrhages, and other hemorrhages in and in lowering the risk of joint damage…” • “However, the high cost of recombinant factor VIII is a barrier to widespread acceptance of prophylaxis.”

  33. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Critical appraisal • Randomized? YES - centrally and stratified by site in permuted blocks of 2,4, or 6 • Follow-up complete? NO • A priori assumption of 10% loss of participants in follow-up • 1 in episodic-therapy arm “lost to follow-up” • Intention-to-treat analysis? YES • Blinded? NO • Patients and clinicians were not blinded • Radiologists reading MRI and x-rays were blinded

  34. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Critical appraisal • Groups similar at start of trial? YES • Aside from experimental intervention - groups treated similarly? Unclear • Compliance 96% in prophylaxis group • 98% in episodic • But did participants receive additional rFVIII? • RR of joint damage in the episodic group • by MRI is 6.1 (95% CI, 1.5 to 24.4) • by x-ray 5.2 (95% CI, 0.65 to 41.5)

  35. Manco-Johnson et al. NEJM 2007;357(6)Critical appraisal • How would the results of this study change my clinical practice? • % of episodic patients with joint disease=51.5% • % of prophylaxis patients with joint disease=21.8% • AAR = 29.6% • NNT=3.36 (95% CI 1.9 to 13.6) • If cost is not a concern, then YES I would recommend prophylaxis to severe hemophilia A boys to start prior to 30 mos of age, to prevent joint disease in index joints.

  36. Maggie Constantine, MD, FRCPC Resident, Transfusion Medicine UBC TMR Journal Club – November 7, 2007 Comments? Questions?

More Related