Observational studyThrombosis and haemostasis2021
A Practical, One-Clinic Visit Protocol for Pharmacokinetic Profile Generation with the ADVATE myPKFiT Dosing Tool in Severe Hemophilia A Subjects.
Observational study in Thrombosis and haemostasis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlation Analysis of DNA Methylation in the von Willebrand Factor Promoter Region and the Risk of Unexplained Recurrent Hemophilia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Pooled it
- Machine learning estimation of FVIII pharmacokinetic parameters in Chinese children with severe Hemophilia A.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2026Article
- Comparison Pharmacokinetic Dosing Tools in Hemophilia A Children.Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion · 2024Article
- Clinical Predictors and Prediction Models for rFVIII-Fc Half Life in Real-World People with Severe Hemophilia A.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 13 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Standard pharmacokinetic (PK) assessments are demanding for persons with hemophilia A, requiring a 72-hour washout and 5 to 11 timed blood samples. A no-washout, single-clinic visit, sparse sampling population PK (PPK) protocol is an attractive alternative. Here, we compared PK parameters obtained with a traditional washout, 6-sampling time point PPK protocol with a no-washout, single-clinic visit, reverse 2-sampling time point PPK protocol in persons with severe hemophilia A (SHA) receiving ADVATE. A total of 39 inhibitor-negative males with SHA (factor VIII activity [FVIII:C] < 2%) were enrolled in a prospective sequential design PK study. Participants completed a washout, 6-sampling time point PPK protocol as well as a no-washout, reverse 2-sampling time point protocol, with samples taken during a single 3-hour clinic visit 24 hours post home infusion of FVIII and then 3 hours post infusion in clinic. FVIII:C levels were analyzed by one-stage and chromogenic assays; blood group and von Willebrand factor antigen (VWF:Ag) were determined; and PK parameters were analyzed using the ADVATE myPKFiT dosing tool. There was moderate to almost perfect agreement for the PK parameters obtained with the 2- and the 6- point PPK protocols using a one-stage FVIII:C assay and a substantial to almost perfect agreement using a chromogenic FVIII:C assay. Significant associations between specific PK parameters and blood group and VWF:Ag were observed. The no-washout, single-clinic visit, reverse 2-sampling time point PPK protocol can be used in the routine clinical setting since it demonstrates sufficient accuracy compared with the more demanding and less practical washout, 6-sampling time point PPK protocol in persons with SHA receiving ADVATE.
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.