ReviewCureus2022
The Implication of New Developments in Hemophilia Treatment on Its Laboratory Evaluation.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laboratory Challenges in the Era of Novel Haemophilia Therapies.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2026Review
- Intrinsic activated thrombin generation for treatment efficacy and monitoring of octocog alfa and emicizumab in severe hemophilia A.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Article
- Concizumab, a Non-Replacement Therapy for Persons with Hemophilia with Inhibitors.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laboratories monitor hemophilia replacement therapy by specific coagulation factor measurement before and after the infusion of human-derived or recombinant factors. Bypassing agents are now used for patients with inhibitors. Recently, modified long-acting coagulation factors have been introduced, for which discrepant results may be expected when the measurement is performed with one-stage clotting or chromogenic assays. Currently, novel drugs not based on coagulation factors are being developed and further tested in clinical studies. These drugs do require new methods, and therefore, laboratory evaluation of hemophilia will undergo dramatic changes in the near future. Accordingly, present laboratory methods for monitoring, which include one-stage clotting or chromogenic assays, used to measure either factor VIII (FVIII) or factor IX (FIX), will not be sufficient. A thrombin generation test (TGT) or thromboelastometry may be used to monitor bypassing agents. For measuring modified long-acting coagulation factors, chromogenic assays will be probably more suitable than one-stage clotting assays. Novel drugs that are not based on coagulation factors, such as emicizumab, fitusiran, or concizumab, will require alternative methods.
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.