Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31264762›Full record

ArticleHaemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia2019

Impact of the Survey of Inhibitors in Plasma-Product Exposed Toddlers (SIPPET) study and its post hoc analyses on clinical practice in the United States: A survey of Haemophilia and Thrombosis Research Society members.

Christopher M Sande, Ahmad Al-Huniti, Patrick Ten Eyck, Anjali A Sharathkumar

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Extension Study With rVIII-SingleChain in Previously Untreated Patients (PUPs) With Severe Haemophilia A.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia · 2025
    Trial
  2. Shaping hemophilia care: lessons and legacy of the SIPPET trial after 10 years.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christopher M SandeUniversity of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5868-1986
Ahmad Al-HunitiDivision of Pediatric Hematology-Oncology, University of Iowa Stead Family Department of Pediatrics, Iowa City, Iowa.
Patrick Ten EyckUniversity of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa.
Anjali A SharathkumarUniversity of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4574-6175
University of Iowa · US

Funding

The University of Iowa Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR002537 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI HANSEN, MARLAN R, WINOKUR, PATRICIA · 2018 to 2022
$20.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002537NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR002537
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA recent randomized trial, the Survey of Inhibitors in Plasma-Product Exposed Toddlers (SIPPET), confirmed that exposure to recombinant FVIII (rFVIII) products doubled the risk of inhibitor development compared to plasma-derived FVIII (pdFVIII) in previously untreated (or minimally treated) patients (PUPs) with severe haemophilia A. SIPPET post hoc analyses showed that early exposure to rFVIII was more immunogenic and that rFVIII could harm low-risk PUPs with non-null mutations. Clinical implications of SIPPET findings for the haemophilia community were unclear.

aimStudy the impact of the SIPPET study and its post hoc analyses on clinical practice for PUPs with severe haemophilia A in the United States.

methodsMembers of the North American Hemophilia and Thrombosis Research Society (HTRS) completed two online questionnaires related to SIPPET publications and PUP management (study period: 12/2016-8/2018).

resultsOver 50% participated the study. Sixty per cent expressed methodological concerns about the SIPPET study, yet 55% shared the study with new families. During the study period, rFVIII selection fell from 43/61 (70%) to 15/54 (28%) while use of pdFVIII and shared decision-making increased from 5/61 (8%) to 9/54 (17%) and from 4/61 (7%) to 10/54 (19%), respectively. Based on post hoc analyses, 44/54 (82%) would change their clinical practice with 31/44 (70%) using pdFVIII for PUPs. Barriers to translation of SIPPET analyses included study design concerns, non-inclusion of novel therapies, inability to perform genetic testing at diagnosis and risk of plasma-derived infections.

conclusionDespite the methodological concerns about the SIPPET study, this Grade I evidence appears to have influenced the clinical practice of haemophilia providers in the United States.

Indexed as

Blood Coagulation Factor InhibitorsFemaleHemophilia AHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesThrombosisUnited StatesBlood Coagulation Factor Inhibitorsfactor VIIIfactor VIII concentrateshaemophilia Aneutralizing antibodiespreviously untreated patientsvon Willebrand factor

Identifiers

PMID31264762
PMCPMC7056002
OpenAlexW2955843735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.