Blood Res (2024) 59:29
Published online August 29, 2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44313-024-00023-9
© The Korean Society of Hematology
Correspondence to : Eun Jin Choi
ejchoi2@cu.ac.kr
© The Author(s) 2024. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Purpose This study aimed to investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK) of factor VIII (FVIII) in Korean patients, as limited information is available on the PK of FVIII in this population.
Methods We collected the FVIII PK results from patients with moderate-to-severe hemophilia A using myPKFiT. PK variations were assessed according to age, blood type, inhibitor history, von Willebrand factor antigen (vWF:Ag) level, and body mass index. Additionally, the correlation between the PK profile and prophylaxis regimen was specifically analyzed for each product in severe cases.
Results The PK data of 48 and 81 patients treated with octocog alfa and rurioctocog alfa pegol, respectively, were obtained. The median half-lives of octocog alfa and rurioctocog alfa pegol were 9.9 (range: 6.3–15.2) h and 15.3 (range: 10.4–23.9) h, respectively. The PK profiles for each product did not differ according to age group; however, blood type-O patients had shorter half-lives and time to 1% compared to non-blood type-O patients. In regression analysis, the PK of octocog alfa showed a statistically significant difference according to age, whereas the PK of rurioctocog alfa pegol correlated with vWF:Ag. Only the frequency of rurioctocog alfa pegol use showed a statistically significant difference in relation to time to 1%, although the coefficient of determination was small.
Conclusion This study confirmed significant interpatient variation in the PK of FVIII among Korean patients with hemophilia A. To achieve optimized prophylaxis, personalizing the regimen based on the PK profile of each individual patient is essential.
Keywords Hemophilia A, FVIII, Pharmacokinetics, Prophylaxis, Korean
Blood Res 2024; 59():
Published online August 29, 2024 https://doi.org/10.1007/s44313-024-00023-9
Copyright © The Korean Society of Hematology.
Young-Shil Park1 , Ki-Young Yoo2 , Sang Kyu Park3 , Taiju Hwang4 , Aeran Jung5 and Eun Jin Choi6*
1 Department of Pediatrics, Kyung Hee University Hospital, Gangdong, Seoul, Republic of Korea
2 Korea Hemophilia Foundation Clinic, Seoul, Republic of Korea
3 Korea Hemophilia Foundation Clinic, Busan, Republic of Korea
4 Korea Hemophilia Foundation Clinic, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
5 Medical Affairs, Takeda Pharmaceuticals Korea Co., Ltd, Seoul, Republic of Korea
6 Department of Pediatrics, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center, 33 Duryugongwon‑Ro 17‑Gil, Nam‑Gu, Daegu 42472, Republic of Korea
Correspondence to:Eun Jin Choi
ejchoi2@cu.ac.kr
© The Author(s) 2024. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Purpose This study aimed to investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK) of factor VIII (FVIII) in Korean patients, as limited information is available on the PK of FVIII in this population.
Methods We collected the FVIII PK results from patients with moderate-to-severe hemophilia A using myPKFiT. PK variations were assessed according to age, blood type, inhibitor history, von Willebrand factor antigen (vWF:Ag) level, and body mass index. Additionally, the correlation between the PK profile and prophylaxis regimen was specifically analyzed for each product in severe cases.
Results The PK data of 48 and 81 patients treated with octocog alfa and rurioctocog alfa pegol, respectively, were obtained. The median half-lives of octocog alfa and rurioctocog alfa pegol were 9.9 (range: 6.3–15.2) h and 15.3 (range: 10.4–23.9) h, respectively. The PK profiles for each product did not differ according to age group; however, blood type-O patients had shorter half-lives and time to 1% compared to non-blood type-O patients. In regression analysis, the PK of octocog alfa showed a statistically significant difference according to age, whereas the PK of rurioctocog alfa pegol correlated with vWF:Ag. Only the frequency of rurioctocog alfa pegol use showed a statistically significant difference in relation to time to 1%, although the coefficient of determination was small.
Conclusion This study confirmed significant interpatient variation in the PK of FVIII among Korean patients with hemophilia A. To achieve optimized prophylaxis, personalizing the regimen based on the PK profile of each individual patient is essential.
Keywords: Hemophilia A, FVIII, Pharmacokinetics, Prophylaxis, Korean
Table 1 . Demographic data.
Variables | Octocog alfa (N = 48) | Rurioctocog alfa pegol (N = 81) | P-value |
---|---|---|---|
Mean ± SD or N (%) | Mean ± SD or N (%) | ||
Sex | |||
Male | 47(97.92) | 81(100.00) | 0.3721 |
Female | 1(2.08) | - | |
Age, years | 23.21 ± 10.66 | 27.60 ± 10.04 | 0.0779 |
Height, cm | 162.60 ± 23.09 | 172.66 ± 5.23 | 0.0898 |
Weight, kg | 59.64 ± 23.36 | 73.30 ± 12.47 | 0.0035 |
BMI, kg/m2 | 23.29 ± 4.27 | 24.78 ± 3.78 | 0.0545 |
< 18.5 | 7(14.58) | 2(2.47) | 0.0369 |
18.5–22.9 | 13(27.08) | 21(25.93) | |
23.0–24.9 | 5(10.42) | 18(22.22) | |
≥ 25.0 | 17(35.42) | 31(38.27) | |
Blood type | |||
A | 15(31.25) | 27(33.33) | 0.2370 |
B | 8(16.67) | 21(25.93) | |
AB | 3(6.25) | 5(6.17) | |
O | 15(31.25) | 12(14.81) | |
Unknown | 7(14.58) | 16(19.75) | |
FVIII level (Baseline) | |||
Severe (< 1 IU/dL) | 41(85.42) | 70(86.42) | 0.8737 |
Moderate (≥ 1– < 5 IU/dL) | 7(14.58) | 11(13.58) |
BMI Body mass index, SD Standard deviation.
Table 2 . Medical history and treatment.
Variables | Octocog alfa (N = 48) | Rurioctocog alfa pegol (N = 81) | P-value |
---|---|---|---|
Mean ± SD or N (%) | Mean ± SD or N (%) | ||
Medical history | |||
FVIII inhibitor history | |||
Yes (≥ 0.6 BU) | 6(12.50) | 5(6.17) | 0.8737 |
No (< 0.6 BU) | 42(87.50) | 76(93.83) | |
ITI history | 0.4986 | ||
Yes | 5(10.42) | 5(6.17) | |
No | 43(89.58) | 76(93.83) | |
ITI Completion | |||
Yes | 5(10.42) | 5(6.17) | |
ITI Result | - | ||
Complete response | 5(10.42) | 5(6.17) | |
Partial Response/Fail | - | - | |
Treatment information | |||
FVIII treatment regimen at the time of PK test | 0.2811 | ||
Prophylaxis | 40(83.33) | 72(88.89) | |
On-demand | 4(8.33) | 2(2.47) | |
Prophylaxis + On-demand | 2(4.17) | 6(7.41) | |
Other | 1(2.08) | - | |
Unknown | 1(2.08) | 1(1.23) | |
Dose, IU/kg | 29.09 ± 4.68 | 28.81 ± 4.04 | 0.1842 |
Frequency, Times per week | 2.98 ± 1.50 | 2.20 ± 0.80 | < 0.0001 |
ITI Immune tolerance induction, SD Standard deviation.
Table 3 . PK profiles of octocog alfa and rurioctocog alfa pegol.
Octocog alfa (N = 48) | Rurioctocog alfa pegol (N = 81) | Difference (%)a | P-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Median (min, max) | Median (min, max) | |||
Half-life (h) | 9.90 (6.30, 15.20) | 15.30 (10.40, 23.90) | 154.06 | < 0.0001 |
Time to 1% (h) | 53.00 (27.00, 88.00) | 94.00 (63.00, 150.00) | 176.37 | < 0.0001 |
Clearance (dL/h/kg) | 0.04 (0.02, 0.08) | 0.02 (0.01, 0.04) | 40.00 | < 0.0001 |
a Difference (%) = (values of rurioctocog alfa pegol/octocog alfa)*100.
Table 4 . Regression analysis of PK profile and patient variables.
Variables | Parameter | Octocog alfa | Rurioctocog alfa pegol | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | Estimate | P-value | n | Estimate | P-value | ||
Half-life (h) | Age | 48 | 0.106 | < 0.0001 | 81 | 0.013 | 0.6850 |
BMI | 42 | 0.100 | 0.1460 | 72 | -0.053 | 0.5490 | |
vWF:Ag | 6 | 0.045 | 0.1026 | 18 | 0.046 | 0.0002 | |
Time to 1% (h) | Age | 48 | 0.589 | 0.0002 | 81 | 0.144 | 0.4800 |
BMI | 42 | 0.567 | 0.2166 | 72 | 0.179 | 0.7580 | |
vWF:Ag | 6 | 0.331 | 0.0528 | 18 | 0.311 | < 0.0001 | |
Clearance (dL/h/kg) | Age | 48 | -0.001 | 0.0002 | 81 | 0.001 | 0.9200 |
BMI | 42 | -0.001 | 0.1310 | 72 | -0.001 | 0.0090 | |
vWF:Ag | 6 | -0.0002 | 0.1859 | 18 | 0.0000 | 0.0052 |
BMI Body mass index, vWF Ag, von Willebrand factor antigen.
Table 5 . PK profile of each product according to age, blood type, inhibitor history, and BMI classification.
Variables | Octocog alfa (N = 48) | Rurioctocog alfa pegol (N = 81) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | Median (min, max) | P-value | n | Median (min, max) | P-value | |
Age | ||||||
Half-life (h) | ||||||
< 6 years | 3 | 8.30 (6.30, 10.60) | 0.0941 | - | - | |
≥ 6– < 12 years | 5 | 9.21 (7.20, 9.50) | - | - | ||
≥ 12–18 years | 7 | 9.70 (7.80, 11.30) | 11 | 14.80 (12.10, 19.10) | 0.6807 | |
≥ 18 years | 33 | 10.30 (6.40, 15.20) | 70 | 15.40 (10.40, 23.90) | ||
Time to 1% (h) | ||||||
< 6 years | 3 | 45.00 (34.00, 58.00) | 0.4220 | - | - | |
≥ 6– < 12 years | 5 | 51.00 (38.00, 54.00) | - | - | ||
≥ 12– < 18 years | 7 | 52.00 (38.00, 62.00) | 11 | 88.00 (67.00, 108.00) | 0.3315 | |
≥ 18 years | 33 | 54.00 (27.00, 88.00) | 70 | 95.00 (63.00, 150.00) | ||
Clearance (dL/h/kg) | ||||||
< 6 years | 3 | 0.05 (0.04, 0.07) | 0.0829 | - | - | |
≥ 6– < 12 years | 5 | 0.05 (0.05, 0.06) | - | - | ||
≥ 12– < 18 years | 7 | 0.05 (0.04, 0.06) | 11 | 0.02 (0.02, 0.03) | 0.1015 | |
≥ 18 years | 33 | 0.04 (0.02, 0.08) | 70 | 0.02 (0.01, 0.04) | ||
Blood type | ||||||
Half-life (h) | ||||||
O | 15 | 8.30 (6.40, 10.60) | < 0.0001 | 12 | 12.65 (10.40, 18.00) | < 0.0001 |
Non-O | 26 | 10.6 (6.30, 15.20) | 53 | 15.70 (10.40, 23.90) | ||
Time to 1% (h) | ||||||
O | 15 | 42.00 (27.00, 56.00) | < 0.0001 | 12 | 75.00 (63.00, 112.00) | < 0.0001 |
Non-O | 26 | 57.00 (34.00, 88.00) | 53 | 96.00 (66.00, 150.00) | ||
Clearance (dL/h/kg) | ||||||
O | 15 | 0.06 (0.04, 0.08) | < 0.0001 | 12 | 0.03 (0.02, 0.04) | < 0.0001 |
Non-O | 26 | 0.04 (0.02, 0.07) | 53 | 0.02 (0.01, 0.02) | ||
Inhibitor history | ||||||
Half-life (h) | ||||||
Yes (≥ 0.6 BU) | 6 | 8.50 (6.30, 13.90) | 0.2082 | 5 | 15.40 (10.40, 15.60) | 0.1469 |
No (< 0.6 BU) | 42 | 9.95 (6.40, 15.20) | 76 | 15.30 (10.40, 23.90) | ||
Time to 1% (h) | ||||||
Yes (≥ 0.6 BU) | 6 | 41.00 (34.00, 77.00) | 0.2355 | 5 | 94.00 (66.00, 95.00) | 0.2025 |
No (< 0.6 BU) | 42 | 53.00 (27.00, 88.00) | 76 | 93.50 (63.00, 150.00) | ||
Clearance (dL/h/kg) | ||||||
Yes (≥ 0.6 BU) | 6 | 0.05 (0.03, 0.07) | 0.1423 | 5 | 0.02 (0.02, 0.02) | 0.6368 |
No (< 0.6 BU) | 42 | 0.04 (0.02, 0.08) | 76 | 0.02 (0.01, 0.04) | ||
BMI (kg/m2) | ||||||
Half-life (h) | ||||||
< 18.5 | 7 | 8.40 (6.30, 11.70) | 0.2139 | 2 | 14.65 (10.50, 22.50) | 0.8583 |
18.5–22.9 | 13 | 9.90 (7.80, 11.90) | 21 | 15.40 (11.90, 19.20) | ||
23.0–24.9 | 5 | 10.60 (8.90, 15.20) | 18 | 14.45 (10.40, 23.90) | ||
≥ 25.0 | 17 | 10.30 (6.40, 13.40) | 31 | 15.40 (10.40, 23.90) | ||
Time to 1% (h) | ||||||
< 18.5 | 7 | 48.00 (34.00, 64.00) | 0.2882 | 2 | 84.00 (63.00, 137.00) | 0.5681 |
18.5–22.9 | 13 | 53.00 (39.00, 64.00) | 21 | 91.00 (70.00, 117.00) | ||
23.0–24.9 | 5 | 55.00 (46.00, 88.00) | 18 | 88.50 (64.00, 150.00) | ||
≥ 25.0 | 17 | 54.00 (27.00, 79.00) | 31 | 95.00 (64.00, 150.00) | ||
Clearance (dL/h/kg) | ||||||
< 18.5 | 7 | 0.05 (0.04, 0.07) | 0.3039 | 2 | 0.02 (0.02, 0.03) | 0.0029 |
18.5–22.9 | 13 | 0.05 (0.03, 0.06) | 21 | 0.02 (0.02, 0.04) | ||
23.0–24.9 | 5 | 0.04 (0.02, 0.05) | 18 | 0.02 (0.01, 0.03) | ||
≥ 25.0 | 17 | 0.04 (0.03, 0.08) | 31 | 0.02 (0.01, 0.03) |
BMI Body mass index.
Sung Eun Kim, Ji Yoon Kim, Jeong A Park, Chuhl Joo Lyu, Seung Min Hahn, Jung Woo Han and Young Shil Park
Blood Res 2024; 59():Valentina Perrone, Melania Leogrande, Maria Cappuccilli and Luca Degli Esposti
Blood Res 2024; 59():Young Shil Park, Ji Kyoung Park, Jeong A Park, Hee Jo Baek, Jae Hee Lee, Chur Woo You, Chuhl Joo Lyu and Eun Jin Choi
Blood Res 2024; 59():