The cost of severe haemophilia in Europe: the CHESS study

Background Severe haemophilia is associated with major psychological and economic burden for patients, caregivers, and the wider health care system. This burden has been quantified and documented for a number of European countries in recent years. However, few studies have taken a standardised methodology across multiple countries simultaneously, and sought to amalgamate all three levels of burden for severe disease. The overall aim of the ‘Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey’ (CHESS) study was to capture the annualised economic and psychosocial burden of severe haemophilia in five European countries. A cross-section of haemophilia specialists (surveyed between January and April 2015) provided demographic and clinical information and 12-month ambulatory and secondary care activity for patients via an online survey. In turn, patients provided corresponding direct and indirect non-medical cost information, including work loss and out-of-pocket expenses, as well as information on quality of life and adherence. The direct and indirect costs for the patient sample were calculated and extrapolated to population level. Results Clinical reports for a total of 1,285 patients were received. Five hundred and fifty-two patients (43% of the sample) provided information on indirect costs and health-related quality of life via the PSC. The total annual cost of severe haemophilia across the five countries for 2014 was estimated at EUR 1.4 billion, or just under EUR 200,000 per patient. The highest per-patient costs were in Germany (mean EUR 319,024) and the lowest were in the United Kingdom (mean EUR 129,365), with a study average of EUR 199,541. As expected, consumption of clotting factor replacement therapy represented the vast majority of costs (up to 99%). Indirect costs are driven by patient and caregiver work loss. Conclusions The results of the CHESS study reflect previous research findings suggesting that costs of factor replacement therapy account for the vast majority of the cost burden in severe haemophilia. However, the importance of the indirect impact of haemophilia on the patient and family should not be overlooked. The CHESS study highlights the benefits of observational study methodologies in capturing a ‘snapshot’ of information for patients with rare diseases

Management of COVID‐19‐associated coagulopathy in persons with haemophilia

Introduction The SARS‐CoV‐2 coronavirus‐induced infection (COVID‐19) can be associated with a coagulopathy mainly responsible for pulmonary microvasculature thrombosis and systemic thromboembolic manifestations. The pathophysiology and management of the COVID‐19 coagulopathy are likely more complex in patients with inherited bleeding diseases such as haemophilia. These individuals might indeed present with both bleeding and thrombotic complications and require simultaneous antithrombotic and haemostatic treatments. Objective We propose practical guidance for the diagnosis and management of COVID‐19 coagulopathy in persons with haemophilia. Results Continuation of regular haemostatic treatment is recommended for ambulatory patients. For patients requiring hospital admission and on replacement therapy with factors VIII or IX concentrates, prophylaxis with concentrates should be intensified according to the risk of bleeding complications and associated with prophylactic doses of LMWH. For patients on nonreplacement therapy, emicizumab should be continued and possibly combined with factor VIII and prophylactic doses of LMWH depending on the risk of bleeding and thrombosis. Dose escalation of LMWH tailored to the risk of thrombosis can be employed but not supported by evidence. Conclusions These practical recommendations are based on the current literature on COVID‐19 with its impact on haemostasis, indications and modalities for thromboprophylaxis mainly in nonhaemophilic patients and how that is likely to affect persons with haemophilia in different circumstances. They will need to be tailored to each patient's clinical status and validated in future studies

Current concepts in the prevention of pathogen transmission via blood/plasma-derived products for bleeding disorders

The pathogen safety of blood/plasma-derived products has historically been a subject of significant concern to the medical community. Measures such as donor selection and blood screening have contributed to increase the safety of these products, but pathogen transmission does still occur. Reasons for this include lack of sensitivity/specificity of current screening methods, lack of reliable screening tests for some pathogens (e.g. prions) and the fact that many potentially harmful infectious agents are not routinely screened for. Methods for the purification/inactivation of blood/plasma-derived products have been developed in order to further reduce the residual risk, but low concentrations of pathogens do not necessarily imply a low level of risk for the patient and so the overall challenge of minimising risk remains. This review aims to discuss the variable level of pathogenic risk and describes the current screening methods used to prevent/detect the presence of pathogens in blood/plasma-derived products