ArticleAnnals of hematology2026
Emicizumab in the treatment of acquired hemophilia A: A Two-Center experience.
Article in Annals of hematology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emicizumab is a FVIII mimetic antibody used in the treatment of inherited hemophilia A that could potentially be used in acquired hemophilia A (AHA) to achieve hemostasis and shorten hospital stay while reducing bypass therapies. We report on 12 cases of AHA patients treated with emicizumab in an academic center between January 2020 and June 2024. There were 5 male and 7 female patients, with median (interquartile range [IQR]) age and maximum inhibitor titer of 73 (60-76) years and 138 (36.75 -164.25) BU/mL, respectively. Ten patients were started on emicizumab while admitted inpatient, while 2 were started outpatient. The initial emicizumab dose was 3 mg/kg for 8 patients and 1.5 mg/kg for 4 patients; all patients then continued therapy with emicizumab 1.5 mg/kg every other week starting on day 8 and received immunosuppression with steroids and rituximab. Patients who began emicizumab therapy inpatient required a median (IQR) of 8 (6-10) days of bypass therapy and stopped bypass therapy 2.5 (1-5.25) days after emicizumab initiation. Furthermore, these patients were hospitalized for a median (IQR) of 10 (6.5-18.75) days and discharged 3 (2-6) days after starting emicizumab. One patient developed deep vein thrombosis and acute pulmonary thromboembolism while on emicizumab and was subsequently treated with anticoagulation. In conclusion, emicizumab appears to be an effective treatment in attaining hemostasis and reducing need of bypass therapy in patients with AHA. Emicizumab use in AHA may warrant monitoring for thromboembolic complications, and further study is needed to determine whether immunosuppression can be avoided.
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.