Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41164015›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in hematology2025

Gene therapy for hemophilia: results of ISTH global survey on current knowledge, attitudes, and preparedness of the hemophilia care team.

Melissa F Glasner, Wolfgang Miesbach

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in hematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Melissa F GlasnerThe France Foundation, The Chandler Building, 84 Lyme Street, Old Lyme, CT 06371, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7706-1288
Wolfgang MiesbachCoagulation Disorders and Comprehensive Care Centre, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Hessen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4506-0061

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Gene therapy has emerged as a transformative treatment for hemophilia, offering the potential for durable factor expression after a single administration. Since 2019, multiple gene therapies have been approved for adults with hemophilia A and B. However, the adoption of gene therapy into clinical practice has been slow, and provider preparedness remains uncertain. Objective: To assess current knowledge, perceptions, and clinical preparedness regarding hemophilia gene therapy among international healthcare professionals. Methods: An anonymous online survey was distributed internationally from August 24, 2023 to January 24, 2024 through four professional organizations. The 24-question survey included items on demographics, perceptions of gene therapy, and knowledge-based questions. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze responses. Results: A total of 327 participants from 66 countries responded. Top concerns with current therapies included dosing burden, inhibitor risk, and venous access. Only 7.5% of respondents were extremely familiar with regulatory guidance on gene therapy, and 35.6% were not comfortable answering patient questions about trials. Perceived barriers to adoption included uncertainty about durability, immune responses, eligibility, and cost. Conclusion: While clinical integration of gene therapy for hemophilia is advancing, this survey highlights persistent gaps in provider knowledge and confidence, especially related to regulatory guidance and clinical trial data. Targeted education and training initiatives are needed to support informed implementation of gene therapy in diverse clinical settings.

Indexed as

AAV vectorbleeding disorderfactor IXfactor VIIIgene therapyglobal surveyhemophilia Ahemophilia Bhemostasisknowledge gaps

Identifiers

PMID41164015
PMCPMC12559639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.