ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2026
Emicizumab prophylaxis vs immune tolerance induction in children with severe hemophilia A and inhibitors: a retrospective comparison of bleeding control, quality of life, and cost.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is limited evidence directly comparing emicizumab (EMI) prophylaxis and immune tolerance induction (ITI) in children with severe hemophilia A and high-titer inhibitors (SHAcwHTI), particularly bleeding control, quality of life (QoL), and cost. Objectives: This study compared outcomes of EMI vs ITI in SHAcwHTI, focusing on bleeding rates, QoL, and costs. Methods: This single-center retrospective study enrolled SHA children (inhibitor titer ≥5 Bethesda Units/mL), receiving EMI or ITI from January 2020 to December 2024. EMI included loading (initial 4 weeks) and maintenance doses; ITI involved intermediate-dose (factor [F]VIII 100 IU/kg/d) or low-dose (FVIII 50 IU/kg once every other day). Outcomes included annualized bleeding rate (ABR), annualized joint bleeding rate (AJBR), Canadian Hemophilia Outcomes-Kids Life Assessment Tool scores, and medication costs. Results: Among 140 patients (24 in EMI group and 116 in ITI group [40 intermediate-dose ITI and 76 low-dose ITI]), EMI was associated with better bleeding control: median ABR and AJBR were 0 across all observation periods, significantly lower than ITI. For ITI, both ABR and AJBR declined over time but remained higher than those of EMI group. Target joint proportion decreased most markedly in patients receiving EMI (35.7%-0%; Conclusions: EMI prophylaxis was associated with improved bleeding control and QoL while reduced costs compared with ITI, offering a valuable option for SHAcwHTI, prioritizing immediate hemostasis over the long-term goal of inhibitor eradication, especially in resource-limited settings.
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.