| 1. |
- Pipe, Steven W., et al.
(författare)
-
Gene Therapy with Etranacogene Dezaparvovec for Hemophilia B
- 2023
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793. ; 388:8, s. 706-718
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Moderate-to-severe hemophilia B is treated with lifelong, continuous coagulation factor IX replacement to prevent bleeding. Gene therapy for hemophilia B aims to establish sustained factor IX activity, thereby protecting against bleeding without burdensome factor IX replacement. Methods: In this open-label, phase 3 study, after a lead-in period (≥6 months) of factor IX prophylaxis, we administered one infusion of adeno-associated virus 5 (AAV5) vector expressing the Padua factor IX variant (etranacogene dezaparvovec; 2×1013 genome copies per kilogram of body weight) to 54 men with hemophilia B (factor IX activity ≤2% of the normal value) regardless of preexisting AAV5 neutralizing antibodies. The primary end point was the annualized bleeding rate, evaluated in a noninferiority analysis comparing the rate during months 7 through 18 after etranacogene dezaparvovec treatment with the rate during the lead-in period. Noninferiority of etranacogene dezaparvovec was defined as an upper limit of the two-sided 95% Wald confidence interval of the annualized bleeding rate ratio that was less than the noninferiority margin of 1.8. Superiority, additional efficacy measures, and safety were also assessed. Results: The annualized bleeding rate decreased from 4.19 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.22 to 5.45) during the lead-in period to 1.51 (95% CI, 0.81 to 2.82) during months 7 through 18 after treatment, for a rate ratio of 0.36 (95% Wald CI, 0.20 to 0.64; P<0.001), demonstrating noninferiority and superiority of etranacogene dezaparvovec as compared with factor IX prophylaxis. Factor IX activity had increased from baseline by a least-squares mean of 36.2 percentage points (95% CI, 31.4 to 41.0) at 6 months and 34.3 percentage points (95% CI, 29.5 to 39.1) at 18 months after treatment, and usage of factor IX concentrate decreased by a mean of 248,825 IU per year per participant in the post-treatment period (P<0.001 for all three comparisons). Benefits and safety were observed in participants with predose AAV5 neutralizing antibody titers of less than 700. No treatment-related serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions: Etranacogene dezaparvovec gene therapy was superior to prophylactic factor IX with respect to the annualized bleeding rate, and it had a favorable safety profile.
|
|
| 2. |
- van Overbeeke, Eline, et al.
(författare)
-
Patient perspectives regarding gene therapy in haemophilia: Interviews from the PAVING study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Haemophilia. - : Wiley. - 1351-8216 .- 1365-2516. ; 00:1, s. 1-8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Exploring patient perceptions regarding gene therapies may provide insights about their acceptability to patients. Objective: To investigate opinions of people with haemophilia (PWH) regarding gene therapies. Moreover, this study aimed to identify patient-relevant attributes (treatment features) that influence PWH’s treatment choices. Methods: Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with Belgian PWH, types A and B. A predefined interview guide included information sections and open, attribute ranking and case questions. Qualitative data were organized using NVivo 12 and analysed following framework analysis. Sum totals of scores obtained in the ranking exercise were calculated per attribute. Results: In total, 20 PWH participated in the interviews. Most participants demonstrated a positive attitude towards gene therapy and were very willing (40%; n = 8) or willing (35%; n = 7) to receive this treatment. The following five attributes were identified as most important to PWH in making their choice: annual bleeding rate, factor level, uncertainty of long-term risks, impact on daily life, and probability that prophylaxis can be stopped. While participants were concerned about the uncertainty regarding long-term safety, most participants were less concerned about uncertainty regarding long-term efficacy. Conclusions: This qualitative study showed that most PWH have a positive attitude towards gene therapy and that besides efficacy, safety and the related uncertainties, also impact on daily life is important to patients. The identified patient-relevant attributes may be used by regulators, health technology assessment bodies and payers in their evaluation of gene therapies for haemophilia. Moreover, they may inform clinical trial design, pay-for-performance schemes and real-world evidence studies.
|
|
| 3. |
- van Overbeeke, Eline, et al.
(författare)
-
Patient preferences for gene therapy in haemophilia: Results from the PAVING threshold technique survey
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Haemophilia. - : Wiley. - 1351-8216 .- 1365-2516.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: The aim of the Patient preferences to Assess Value IN Gene therapies (PAVING) study was to investigate trade-offs that adult Belgian people with haemophilia (PWH) A and B are willing to make when choosing between prophylactic factor replacement therapy (PFRT) and gene therapy.Methods: The threshold technique was used to quantify the minimum acceptable benefit (MAB) of a switch from PFRT to gene therapy in terms of ‘Annual bleeding rate’(ABR), ‘Chance to stop prophylaxis’ (STOP), and ‘Quality of life’ (QOL). The design was supported by stakeholder involvement and included an educational tool on gene therapy. Threshold intervals were analysed using interval regression models in Stata 16. Results: A total of 117 PWH completed the survey. Mean thresholds were identified for all benefits, but substantial preference heterogeneity was observed; especially for the STOP thresholds, where the distribution of preferences was bimodal. Time spent on the educational tool and residence were found to impact MAB thresholds. The most accepted (88% of PWH) gene therapy profile investigated in this study comprised of zero bleeds per year (vs. six for PFRT), 90% chance to stop prophylaxis, no impact on QoL, and 10 years of follow-up on side effects (vs. 30 for PFRT). Conclusions: Results from this study proved the value of educating patients on novel treatments. Moreover, preference heterogeneity for novel treatments was confirmed in this study. In gene therapy decision-making, preference heterogeneity and the impact of patient education on acceptance should be considered.
|
|
