OBJECTIVES: To characterize the formation of anti-vatreptacog alfa ADAs in hemophilia patients with inhibitors.
METHODS/PATIENTS: This was a post hoc analysis of adept(™) 2. Immunoglobulin isotype determination, specificity analysis of rFVIIa cross-reactive antibodies, epitope mapping of rFVIIa single mutant analogs and pharmacokinetic (PK) profiling were performed to characterize the ADAs.
RESULTS: Immunoglobulin isotyping indicated that the ADAs were of the immunoglobulin G subtype. In epitope mapping, none of the rFVIIa single mutant analogs (V158D, E296V or M298Q) contained the complete antibody epitope, confirming that the antibodies were specific for vatreptacog alfa. In two patients, for whom PK profiling was performed both before and after the development of ADAs, vatreptacog alfa showed a prolonged elimination phase following ADA development. During the follow-up evaluation, the rFVIIa cross-reactivity disappeared after the last vatreptacog alfa exposure, despite continued exposure to rFVIIa as part of standard care.
CONCLUSIONS: Results from the vatreptacog alfa phase III trial demonstrate that the specific changes made, albeit relatively small, to the FVIIa molecule alter its clinical immunogenicity.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this extension study was to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of rVIII-SingleChain prophylaxis in ≥200 previously treated patients (PTPs) with hemophilia A with ≥100 exposure days (EDs).
METHODS: In total, 222 patients were enrolled, of which 204 rolled over from prior rVIII-SingleChain studies. The median age was 21 years (range, 2-65 years), including 155 patients ≥12 years and 67 patients <12 years. Patients continued with their previously assigned dose and regimen, or switched at the investigator's discretion. Patients were treated for a mean duration of 31 months (range, 1-47 months), the mean ED was 342 (standard deviation, 135.5), and 212 (95.5%) patients achieved >100 EDs. When the study ended, most patients were on either a prophylaxis regimen of 34.9 (17-62) IU/kg, 3×/week (N = 88; 39.6%), or 37.2 (13-65) IU/kg, 2×/week regimen (N = 72; 32.4%).
RESULTS: Hemostatic efficacy was rated excellent or good in 87.1% of assessed bleeds. The median (range) annualized bleeding rate was 1.21 (0.0-42.6), and the annualized spontaneous bleeding rate (AsBR) was 0.32 (0.0-33.0) for prophylaxis regimens. Median AsBR was similar for patients treated 3×/week and 2×/week (0.31 and 0.30, respectively). Surgical hemostatic efficacy was rated excellent or good in 100% of surgeries. No inhibitors, anaphylactic reactions, or thromboembolic events were reported in PTPs.
CONCLUSION: These results confirm the safety and efficacy of rVIII-SingleChain as a long-term prophylaxis treatment modality for PTPs with severe hemophilia A.
METHODS: A total of 1402 ACLF patients, enrolled in the APASL-ACLF Research Consortium (AARC) with 90-day follow-up, were analyzed. An ACLF score was developed in a derivation cohort (n = 480) and was validated (n = 922).
RESULTS: The overall survival of ACLF patients at 28 days was 51.7%, with a median of 26.3 days. Five baseline variables, total bilirubin, creatinine, serum lactate, INR and hepatic encephalopathy, were found to be independent predictors of mortality, with AUROC in derivation and validation cohorts being 0.80 and 0.78, respectively. AARC-ACLF score (range 5-15) was found to be superior to MELD and CLIF SOFA scores in predicting mortality with an AUROC of 0.80. The point scores were categorized into grades of liver failure (Gr I: 5-7; II: 8-10; and III: 11-15 points) with 28-day cumulative mortalities of 12.7, 44.5 and 85.9%, respectively. The mortality risk could be dynamically calculated as, with each unit increase in AARC-ACLF score above 10, the risk increased by 20%. A score of ≥11 at baseline or persisting in the first week was often seen among nonsurvivors (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The AARC-ACLF score is easy to use, dynamic and reliable, and superior to the existing prediction models. It can reliably predict the need for interventions, such as liver transplant, within the first week.
METHODS: We enrolled participants who were vaccinated through the SISONKE South African clinical trial of the Ad26.CoV2.S vaccine in healthcare workers (HCWs). PLWH in this group had well-controlled HIV infection. We also enrolled unvaccinated participants previously infected with SARS-CoV-2. Neutralization capacity was assessed by a live virus neutralization assay of the Delta variant.
RESULTS: Most Ad26.CoV2.S vaccinated HCWs were previously infected with SARS-CoV-2. In this group, Delta variant neutralization was 9-fold higher compared with the infected-only group and 26-fold higher relative to the vaccinated-only group. No decrease in Delta variant neutralization was observed in PLWH relative to HIV-negative participants. In contrast, SARS-CoV-2-infected, unvaccinated PLWH showed 7-fold lower neutralization and a higher frequency of nonresponders, with the highest frequency of nonresponders in people with HIV viremia. Vaccinated-only participants showed low neutralization capacity.
CONCLUSIONS: The neutralization response of the Delta variant following Ad26.CoV2.S vaccination in PLWH with well-controlled HIV was not inferior to HIV-negative participants, irrespective of past SARS-CoV-2 infection. In SARS-CoV-2-infected and nonvaccinated participants, HIV infection reduced the neutralization response to SARS-CoV-2, with the strongest reduction in HIV viremic individuals.
METHODS: Altogether 1021 patients were analyzed for the severity and organ failure at admission to determine transplant eligibility and 28 day survival with or without transplant.
RESULTS: The ACLF cohort [mean age 44 ± 12.2 years, males 81%) was of sick patients; 55% willing for LT at admission, though 63% of them were ineligible due to sepsis or organ failure. On day 4, recovery in sepsis and/or organ failure led to an improvement in transplant eligibility from 37% at baseline to 63.7%. Delay in LT up to 7 days led to a higher incidence of multiorgan failure (p
METHODS: Prospectively collected data of ACLF patients from APASL-ACLF Research Consortium (AARC) was analyzed for 30-day outcomes. The models evaluated at days 0, 4, and 7 of presentation for 30-day mortality were: AARC (model and score), CLIF-C (ACLF score, and OF score), NACSELD-ACLF (model and binary), SOFA, APACHE-II, MELD, MELD-Lactate, and CTP. Evaluation parameters were discrimination (c-indices), calibration [accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive/negative predictive values (PPV/NPV)], Akaike/Bayesian Information Criteria (AIC/BIC), Nagelkerke-R2, relative prediction errors, and odds ratios.
RESULTS: Thirty-day survival of the cohort (n = 2864) was 64.9% and was lowest for final-AARC-grade-III (32.8%) ACLF. Performance parameters of all models were best at day 7 than at day 4 or day 0 (p 12 had the lowest 30-day survival (5.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: APASL-ACLF is often a progressive disease, and models assessed up to day 7 of presentation reliably predict 30-day mortality. Day-7 AARC model is a statistically robust tool for classifying risk of death and accurately predicting 30-day outcomes with relatively lower prediction errors. Day-7 AARC score > 12 may be used as a futility criterion in APASL-ACLF patients.
METHODS: Patients with MAFLD-ACLF were recruited from the AARC registry. The diagnosis of MAFLD-ACLF was made when the treating unit had identified the etiology of chronic liver disease (CLD) as MAFLD (or previous nomenclature such as NAFLD, NASH, or NASH-cirrhosis). Patients with coexisting other etiologies of CLD (such as alcohol, HBV, HCV, etc.) were excluded. Data was randomly split into derivation (n=258) and validation (n=111) cohorts at a 70:30 ratio. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Only the baseline clinical, laboratory features and severity scores were considered.
RESULTS: The derivation group had 258 patients; 60% were male, with a mean age of 53. Diabetes was noted in 27%, and hypertension in 29%. The dominant precipitants included viral hepatitis (HAV and HEV, 32%), drug-induced injury (DILI, 29%) and sepsis (23%). MELD-Na and AARC scores upon admission averaged 32±6 and 10.4±1.9. At 90 days, 51% survived. Non-viral precipitant, diabetes, bilirubin, INR, and encephalopathy were independent factors influencing mortality. Adding diabetes and precipitant to MELD-Na and AARC scores, the novel MAFLD-MELD-Na score (+12 for diabetes, +12 for non-viral precipitant) and MAFLD-AARC score (+5 for each) were formed. These outperformed the standard scores in both cohorts.
CONCLUSION: Almost half of MAFLD-ACLF patients die within 90 days. Diabetes and non-viral precipitants such as DILI and sepsis lead to adverse outcomes. The new MAFLD-MELD-Na and MAFLD-AARC scores provide reliable 90-day mortality predictions for MAFLD-ACLF patients.