Regional variation and cost implications of prescribed extended half‐life factor concentrates among U.S. Haemophilia Treatment Centres for patients with moderate and severe haemophilia. Issue 4 (17th April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Croteau, Stacy E.; Cheng, Dunlei; Cohen, Alice J.; Holmes, Chris E.; Malec, Lynn M.; Silvey, Michael; Thornburg, Courtney D.; Wheeler, Allison P.; Kouides, Peter A.; Raffini, Leslie J.; Neufeld, Ellis J.
• Is Part Of: Haemophilia. Volume 25:Issue 4(2019)
• Page Start: 668
• Page End: 675
• Publication Date: 2019-04-17
• Subjects: EHL -- haemophilia A -- haemophilia B -- pharmacokinetics -- prophylaxis -- utilization; Hemophilia -- Periodicals; 616.1572005
• DOI: 10.1111/hae.13758
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1351-8216

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Extended half‐life (EHL) factor VIII (FVIII) and IX (FIX) products are intended to decrease the burden of prophylaxis for patients with haemophilia A or B. Whether these newer concentrates have led to meaningful clinical practice change remains vague. Aim: To characterize the longitudinal use of standard (SHL) and EHL factor concentrates at haemophilia treatment centres (HTCs), using the ATHNdataset, a US database of 138 ATHN‐affiliated HTCs. Methods: Factor concentrate use among moderate and severe haemophilia A and B patients without inhibitors was analysed at three time points over 18 months. Results: Use of EHL concentrates rose from 10% of patients to 22% during this study. EHL FVIII prophylaxis is prescribed to the minority of patients, 28%; EHL FIX now predominates for prophylaxis, 52%. Rates of prescribed EHL products varied significantly by age group and HTC region. Median prescribed prophylaxis for SHL compared to EHL products was FVIII 6240 and 5200 and FIX 6968 and FIX 3900 IU/kg/y, respectively. On‐demand EHL use has grown but has minimal contribution to overall usage (2%). Conclusion: Haemophilia treatment centre region and patient age impact the rate of adoption of EHL products; however, EHL prescribing continues to rise nationally, particularly for EHL FIX. Careful attention to annual cost of prophylaxis is imperative as the decrease in median EHL prophylaxis consumption is not offset by the higher unit cost of these products. It is unclear how further growth in use of EHLs will be impacted by emerging non‐factor replacement and gene therapies.