The history and evolution of the clinical effectiveness of haemophilia type a treatment: a systematic review.

First evidence of cases of haemophilia dates from ancient Egypt, but it was when Queen Victoria from England in the 19th century transmitted this illness to her descendants, when it became known as the "royal disease". Last decades of the 20th century account for major discoveries that improved the life expectancy and quality of life of these patients. The history and evolution of haemophilia healthcare counts ups and downs. The introduction of prophylactic schemes during the 1970s have proved to be more effective that the classic on-demand replacement of clotting factors, nevertheless many patients managed with frequent plasma transfusions or derived products became infected with the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and Hepatitis C virus during the 1980s and 1990s. Recombinant factor VIII inception has decreased the risk of blood borne infections and restored back longer life expectancies. Main concerns for haemophilia healthcare are shifting from the pure clinical aspects to the economic considerations of long-term replacement therapy. Nowadays researchers' attention has been placed on the future costs and cost-effectiveness of costly long-term treatment. Equity considerations are relevant as well, and alternative options for less affluent countries are under the scope of further research. The aim of this review was to assess the evidence of different treatment options for haemophilia type A over the past four decades, focusing on the most important technological advances that have influenced the natural course of this "royal disease"

Inhibitor clinical burden of disease: a comparative analysis of the CHESS data.

From Europe PMC via Jisc Publications Router.Publication status: PublishedBACKGROUND: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 < .0001) and joint bleeds (2.17 ± 1.90 vs 0.98 ± 1.15; p < .0001), and required more hemophilia-related (mean ± standard deviation, 1.79 ± 1.83 vs 0.64 ± 1.13) and bleed-related hospitalizations (1.86 ± 1.88 vs 0.81 ± 1.26), hemophilia-related consultations (9.30 ± 4.99 vs 6.77 ± 4.47), and outpatient visits (22.09 ± 17.77 vs 11.48 ± 16.00) (all, p < .001). More than one-half (53.5%) experienced moderate/severe pain necessitating medication compared to one-third (32.8%) of patients without inhibitors (p = .01). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with hemophilia and inhibitors exhibited greater clinical burden and higher resource utilization compared to their peers without inhibitors. Strategies for improving the standard of care may alleviate burden in this population