Back to Journals » Journal of Blood Medicine » Volume 6

Issues in assessing products for the treatment of hemophilia – the intersection between efficacy, economics, and ethics

Authors Farrugia A, Noone D, Schlenkrich U, Schlenkrich S, O’Mahony B, Cassar J

Received 6 March 2015

Accepted for publication 21 April 2015

Published 15 June 2015 Volume 2015:6 Pages 185—195

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/JBM.S79091

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Dr Martin Bluth

Video abstract presented by Albert Farrugia

Views: 83

Albert Farrugia,1,2 Declan Noone,3 Uwe Schlenkrich,4 Steffen Schlenkrich,5 Brian O'Mahony,3 Josephine Cassar6

1School of Surgery, QEII Medical Centre, The University of Western Australia (M509), Crawley, WA, Australia; 2College of Medicine, Medicine and Environment, Australian National University, Canberra, WA, Australia; 3Irish Haemophilia Society, Dublin, Ireland; 4Deutsche Hämophiliegesellschaft (DHG), Hamburg, Germany; 5Am Holzbiel, Erfurt-Töttleben, Germany; 6Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, WA, Australia

Abstract: Following the obviation of the pathogen safety threats posed by previous generations of clotting factor concentrates for the treatment of hemophilia, the principal issue facing the patient community is timely access to adequate supplies of continuously improving therapies. The application of evidence-based medicine has enhanced the basis of hemophilia therapy, while resulting in some challenges to patient care. Increasingly, the criteria used for the approval and payment of treatment products by regulatory and reimbursement agencies, respectively, are becoming inflexible and unrealistic. This is occurring particularly in the requirements for demonstrating product efficacy. Concurrently, emerging evidence of the interpatient variability in the clinical response to therapy has led to the proposed personalization of therapeutic regimens. Possible impediments to optimal care include competitive tensions among suppliers who seek to gain label claims for reimbursement purposes, which result in clinical trial designs of, arguably, unethical design, carried out in poor countries. We synthesize these converging developments to suggest some changes to the current hemophilia treatment paradigm, which should make it more patient-centric and enable speedier access to new therapies.

Keywords: hemophilia, treatment products, clinical trials, standards, reimbursement

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Readers of this article also read:

Emerging and future therapies for hemophilia

Carr ME, Tortella BJ

Journal of Blood Medicine 2015, 6:245-255

Published Date: 3 September 2015

Acquired hemophilia A: emerging treatment options

Janbain M, Leissinger CA, Kruse-Jarres R

Journal of Blood Medicine 2015, 6:143-150

Published Date: 8 May 2015

Profile of efraloctocog alfa and its potential in the treatment of hemophilia A

George LA, Camire RM

Journal of Blood Medicine 2015, 6:131-141

Published Date: 24 April 2015

Romiplostim as a treatment for immune thrombocytopenia: a review

Chalmers S, Tarantino MD

Journal of Blood Medicine 2015, 6:37-44

Published Date: 19 January 2015

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010