首页> 外文期刊>Current medical research and opinion >Efficacy of emicizumab prophylaxis versus factor VIII prophylaxis for treatment of hemophilia A without inhibitors: network meta-analysis and sub-group analyses of the intra-patient comparison of the HAVEN 3 trial
【24h】

Efficacy of emicizumab prophylaxis versus factor VIII prophylaxis for treatment of hemophilia A without inhibitors: network meta-analysis and sub-group analyses of the intra-patient comparison of the HAVEN 3 trial

机译:Emicizumab预防对因子VIII预防治疗血友病A没有抑制剂的疗效:网络元分析和患者内避风中的患者内部比较的分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Objectives: To compare the efficacy of emicizumab prophylaxis with that of factor VIII (FVIII) prophylaxis in patients with hemophilia A without inhibitors using two approaches: network meta-analyses (NMA) and additional sub-group analyses from the HAVEN 3 trial. Methods: The NMA used data from trials identified using a systematic literature review and compared bleed rates in patients receiving emicizumab prophylaxis and patients receiving FVIII prophylaxis using a Bayesian, random effects generalized linear model with log link Poisson likelihood. Additional sub-groups of the HAVEN 3 trial included here were defined as patients whose dose-taking behavior met either European label or World Federation of Hemophilia guidelines. A negative binomial regression model was used to conduct an intra-patient comparison of bleed rates within the sub-groups, during treatment with FVIII prophylaxis before entering HAVEN 3 and treatment with emicizumab prophylaxis during HAVEN 3. Results: Four studies were included in the base-case NMA. Evidence showed that the total treated bleed rate was lower with emicizumab prophylaxis compared with FVIII prophylaxis (rate ratio [RR] = 0.36 [95% credible interval (CrI) = 0.13-0.95]). Similar associations were observed in sensitivity analyses. The additional HAVEN 3 analyses also showed lower rates of treated bleeds with emicizumab prophylaxis than with FVIII prophylaxis (RRs [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.380 [0.186-0.790] and 0.472 [0.258-0.866] in two sub-groups). These results confirm the original HAVEN 3 intra-patient comparison findings. Conclusions: Combined findings from NMA and additional sub-group analyses of HAVEN 3 support the superiority of emicizumab prophylaxis over FVIII prophylaxis in patients with hemophilia A without inhibitors.
机译:目标:将Emicizumab预防的疗效与使用两种方法的血友病A没有抑制剂的血友病A患者的因子VIII(FVIII)预防的疗效进行比较:网络元分析(NMA)和来自避风港3试验的额外子组分析。方法:NMA使用来自使用系统文献综述和使用贝叶斯,随机效果接受FVIII预防患者的患者的患者中鉴定的试验数据和使用贝叶斯,随机效应具有日志链路泊松似的患者的患者的患者。这里包含的避风港3次审判的其他小组被定义为患有剂量行为符合欧洲标签或世界血友病指南联合会的患者。在进入Haven 3之前用FVIII预防治疗期间,使用患有子组内渗流率的患者内部患者的患者内部比较,并在避风港进入3.结果3.结果:碱基中包含四项研究-case nma。证据表明,与FVIII预防相比(速率比[RR] = 0.36 [95%可靠间隔(CRI)= 0.13-0.95]),emicizumab预防的总处理的渗出速率较低。在敏感性分析中观察到类似的关联。附加避风港3分析还显示出与FVIII预防(RRS [95%置信区间隔(CI)] = 0.380 [0.258-0.866]中的eMicizumab预防治疗渗流的较低速率。在两个子组中,0.380 [0.258-0.866]) 。这些结果证实了原始的避风港患者内部的比较结果。结论:NMA的组合结果和避风港的额外子组分析支持血友病A没有抑制剂血友病患者FVIII预防的Emicizumab预防的优越性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号