ReviewHematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program2017
Novel alternate hemostatic agents for patients with inhibitors: beyond bypass therapy.
Review in Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancements in CRISPR-basedFrontiers in genome editing · 2026Review
- Article
- Preclinical development of plant-based oral immune modulatory therapy for haemophilia B.Plant biotechnology journal · 2021Article
- Haemophilia.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inhibitor formation is among the most severe complications of hemophilia treatment. With a cumulative incidence of ∼30% in those with severe hemophilia A and ∼3% in those with severe hemophilia B, inhibitors are caused by a T-cell response directed against infused coagulation factor; these inhibitors neutralize factor VIII or IX activity and disrupt normal hemostasis. Inhibitor patients become unresponsive to standard factor treatment and, as an alternative, use bypass treatment (eg, recombinant factor VIIa or factor VIII inhibitor bypass activity). However, response to bypass agents is poorer and the burden of disease is higher, with greater morbidity, hospitalization, cost, and mortality, than in noninhibitor patients. Furthermore, inhibitor formation interferes with prophylaxis to prevent bleeding episodes and is a contraindication to gene therapy. Thus, more effective therapies for inhibitor patients are greatly needed. In the last several years, there has been an explosion of novel alternative hemostatic agents for hemophilia patients with and without inhibitors. These agents take advantage of technologic manipulation of coagulation factors and natural anticoagulants to promote hemostasis. The approaches include the following: (1) mutants or mimics of coagulation factors, rendering them resistant to natural anticoagulants; or (2) knock-down or disruption of natural anticoagulants, preventing degradation of coagulation factors. The purpose of this article was to review these novel alternative hemostatic agents and their mechanisms of action, as well as the preliminary pharmacokinetic, safety, and efficacy data available from early-phase clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.