Such unexpected results may lead to publication of provocative al

Such unexpected results may lead to publication of provocative although counterintuitive conclusions with unpredictable consequences on clinical practice and decision-making. It is critical to the clinician that the conclusions of the Rodin study be placed

in perspective so that wise treatment and regulatory decisions can be made. This study primarily set out to prove (or otherwise) that there was no reduced inhibitor risk with plasma-derived products when compared to rFVIII products. In addition, click here the study was designed to determine whether product switching would increase the risk of inhibitor development in PUPs. These important objectives were convincingly achieved and will certainly influence the standard of care for PUPs. On the other hand, the Rodin study also suggested that a second-generation rFVIII concentrate may increase inhibitor risk and this conclusion has promulgated a loud danger signal. How this finding will be interpreted by government agencies, patient consumers, and physician prescribers may adversely affect patient, treater and health care authorities’ acceptance of such products. Provoked

Kinase Inhibitor Library supplier by the results of the Rodin study, the European Medicines Agency has recently initiated a review of the safety of the second-generation rFVIII used in the trial and intends to determine whether the marketing authorization of the product should be ‘maintained, varied, suspended, or withdrawn across the EU’ [12]. A similar fate also could potentially befall the third-generation rFVIII used in Rodin, related to the higher than anticipated PUP inhibitor incidence in the EPIC study. This commentary MYO10 offers an opportunity for open discussion of the results of the Rodin trial, the appropriate biostatistical approach to study design for future clinical research efforts in this field, and the relative value of a prospective/retrospective observational study vs. prospective, randomized controlled trials. CMK has received research funding from Baxter, Bayer, Grifols, Octapharma, NovoNordisk and Pfizer.

He has also served on advisory boards for Baxter, Bayer, Biogen, CSL, Grifols, Octapharma, NovoNordisk, and has consulted for all mentioned companies. He is not on any speakers bureaus but has received honoraria from all mentioned companies for providing educational programmes and participating in CME generating symposia. AI has received research funding from Baxter, Bayer, Pfizer and NovoNordisk. He has also served on advisory boards for Baxter, Bayer, Pfizer and NovoNordisk and has consulted for Bayer and NovoNordisk. He received honoraria from all mentioned companies for providing educational programmes and for participating in CME generating symposia. “
“Inhibitor development against von Willebrand factor, factor VIII or factor IX is one of the most severe complications of treating patients with von Willebrand’s disease (VWD), haemophilia A or haemophilia B respectively.

Comments are closed.