Trial reportBlood advances2026
Concizumab in patients with hemophilia A or B without inhibitors: 56-week cutoff results of the phase 3 explorer8 study.
Trial report in Blood advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04082429 (Efficacy and Safety of Concizumab Prophylaxis in Patients With Haemophilia A or B Without Inhibitors), which is not on this 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.
Efficacy and Safety of Concizumab Prophylaxis in Patients With Haemophilia A or B Without Inhibitors
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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractConcizumab is a novel nonfactor replacement therapy for once-daily subcutaneous prophylactic treatment of hemophilia A/B (HA/HB) with and without inhibitors. Concizumab was superior to on-demand treatment in patients with HA/HB without inhibitors in the prospective, multicenter, open-label phase 3 explorer8 study. Here, longer-term efficacy and safety results from the start of the study up to the 56-week cutoff are presented. Males aged ≥12 years with HA/HB were randomized 1:2 to no prophylaxis (group 1) or concizumab (group 2) or allocated to concizumab (groups 3 and 4). Assessments at the 56-week cutoff included efficacy, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, and safety. The 56-week cutoff was defined as when all patients in groups 2 to 4 had completed the visit at 56 weeks or permanently discontinued treatment. Of 148 patients in the full analysis set, 21 were randomized to no prophylaxis (group 1: HA, n = 9; HB, n = 12), 42 to concizumab (group 2: HA, n = 18; HB, n = 24), and 85 to the nonrandomized concizumab groups (groups 3 and 4: HA, n = 55; HB, n = 30). After ≥24 weeks of treatment, 17 patients in group 1 switched to concizumab. Low median annualized bleeding rates for treated spontaneous and traumatic bleeding episodes were maintained at the 56-week cutoff in patients receiving concizumab (HA, 1.7 [interquartile range (IQR), 0.0-4.5]; HB, 2.8 [IQR, 0.0-6.4]), consistent with 32-week cutoff results. Concizumab plasma concentration remained stable, with no new safety concerns. Concizumab showed longer-term efficacy in patients with HA/HB at the 56-week cutoff and was considered safe and well tolerated. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04082429.
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.