Matching‐adjusted indirect comparison of bleeding outcomes in severe haemophilia A: Comparing valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene therapy, emicizumab prophylaxis, and FVIII replacement prophylaxis

Author:

Astermark Jan12ORCID,Buckner Tyler W3,Frenzel Laurent4ORCID,Hatswell Anthony J56,You Xiaojun7,Liu Hai7,Goodman Erin7,Santos Sandra8,Hawes Charles8,Hinds David7,Klamroth Robert910ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Translational Medicine Lund University Lund Sweden

2. Department for Hematology Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital Malmö Sweden

3. University of Colorado School of Medicine Hemophilia and Thrombosis Center Aurora Colorado USA

4. Centre de Traitement de l'Hemophilie, AP‐HP, Hôpital Universitaire Necker‐Enfants Malades Paris France

5. Delta Hat Limited Nottingham UK

6. Department of Statistics University College London London UK

7. BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. Novato California USA

8. BioMarin UK Ltd London UK

9. Vascular Medicine and Haemostaseology, Vivantes Klinikum im Friedrichshain Berlin Germany

10. Institute of Experimental Hematology and Transfusion Medicine University Hospital Bonn, Medical Faculty, University of Bonn Bonn Germany

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionHead‐to‐head evaluation of valoctocogene roxaparvovec, the first gene therapy approved for haemophilia A, with emicizumab is not available. Therefore, phase 3 trial data were indirectly compared.AimTo compare bleeding rates in trials evaluating 6 × 1013 vg/kg valoctocogene roxaparvovec (GENEr8‐1; NCT03370913), 1.5 mg/kg emicizumab dosed every week (HAVEN 3; NCT02847637), and FVIII prophylaxis (270–902) in participants with severe haemophilia A (FVIII ≤1 IU/dL).MethodsValoctocogene roxaparvovec versus emicizumab and FVIII prophylaxis as used in 270–902 versus emicizumab cross‐trial comparisons were performed using matching‐adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). Individual participant data from GENEr8‐1 and 270–902 were weighted to equalise aggregate participant baseline characteristics from HAVEN 3. After MAIC weighting, annualised bleeding rates (ABR) and proportions of participants without bleeds were compared for treated bleeds, all bleeds, treated joint bleeds, and treated spontaneous bleeds.ResultsAfter MAIC weighting, ABR for all bleeds was statistically significantly lower with valoctocogene roxaparvovec than emicizumab (rate ratio [95% CI], .55 [.33–.93]). Additionally, significantly higher proportions of participants had no treated joint bleeds (odds ratio [95% CI], 2.75 [1.20–6.31]) and no treated bleeds (3.25 [1.53–6.90]) with valoctocogene roxaparvovec versus emicizumab. When compared with the mainly standard half‐life FVIII prophylaxis regimens in 270–902, mean ABRs (except for all bleeds) were significantly lower, and significantly higher proportions reported 0 bleeds for all outcomes with emicizumab.ConclusionValoctocogene roxaparvovec provided generally lower bleeding rates and higher probability of no bleeds, including treated joint bleeds, than emicizumab. Emicizumab was more effective than FVIII prophylaxis regimens used in 270–902.

Funder

BioMarin Pharmaceutical

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Genetics (clinical),Hematology,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3