Opinion
Video
Comparing Hemophilia A Therapies: Efficacy and Safety Insights
An expert explores the safety profiles of factor replacement therapies and emicizumab in hemophilia A, covering adverse events, risks, and long-term safety considerations.
This is a video synopsis/summary of an Insights featuring Steven W. Pipe, MD.
Pipe compares the safety profiles of factor prophylaxis and emicizumab in treating hemophilia A. While emicizumab prophylaxis generally proves superior in efficacy, Pipe discusses nuances in specific patient groups. He delves into the risks associated with factor replacement therapy, emphasizing factor inhibitors and the challenges of maintaining adequate trough levels. The introduction of extended half-life agents, such as Altuviiio, shows promise in addressing some limitations. Emicizumab, a bispecific antibody, offers subcutaneous delivery and steady-state hemostasis but has limitations, including breakthrough bleeds and the absence of individualized dosing. Pipe highlights concerns about the lack of natural physiologic regulation with emicizumab, raising questions about potential thrombotic complications. He reflects on observed issues during clinical trials, such as thrombotic events in the inhibitor population, attributing them to specific concomitant treatments. The discussion extends to long-term safety considerations, contrasting the morbidity associated with factor VIII inhibitors and chronic arthropathy in factor replacement therapy with the potential nonhemostatic roles of factor VIII in bone health. While emicizumab minimizes factor VIII inhibitor impact, the interview emphasizes the need for ongoing studies, including registry data and observational research, to comprehensively evaluate the long-term safety of these evolving hemophilia A therapies.
Video synopsis is AI-generated and reviewed by AJMC® editorial staff.
