Searching the Resource Information Network

Our searching services are busy right now. Please try again later

  • Register
X
Forgot Password

If you have forgotten your password you can enter your email here and get a temporary password sent to your email.

X

Leaving Community

Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.

No
Yes

Lessons from a systematic literature review of the effectiveness of recombinant factor VIIa in acquired haemophilia.

Andreas Tiede | Andrew Worster
Annals of hematology | 2018

To conduct a systematic review of the literature reporting efficacy and safety of recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) for the treatment of bleeding in acquired haemophilia and, if data permitted, undertake a meta-analysis of the current evidence. MEDLINE®, Embase®, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for all studies on rFVIIa treatment in acquired haemophilia. Heterogeneity of included studies was measured using the inconsistency index (I2). Of the 2353 publications screened, 290 potentially relevant references were identified: 12 studies published in 32 publications met inclusion criteria. In total, 1244 patients and 1714 bleeds were included (671 patients received rFVIIa treatment for 1063 bleeds). In seven of 12 studies, the initial dose of Recombinant FVIIa was 90 ± 10 μg/kg. Recombinant FVIIa was used as first-line therapy in the majority of cases. Median number of doses administered ranged from 10 to 28. Between 68 and 74% of bleeds were spontaneous, whereas 4-50% were traumatic. Thirty-nine to 90% of bleeds were severe. Haemostatic effectiveness was > 90% in 5/6 studies for both patient and bleed level. Recombinant FVIIa had a favourable safety profile with low risk of general adverse events and thromboembolic-associated events. The heterogeneity of the studies and data precluded a meta-analysis. Recombinant FVIIa demonstrated effectiveness for the treatment of bleeds and had a good safety profile. It is apparent from these data that there is a need for more standardised measures of clinical effectiveness in acquired haemophilia to enable comparison and pooling of results in the future.

Pubmed ID: 29804265

Research resources used in this publication

None found

Additional research tools detected in this publication

Antibodies used in this publication

None found

Associated grants

None

Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.

This is a list of tools and resources that we have found mentioned in this publication.


Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (tool)

RRID:SCR_006576

A bibliographic database that provides a highly concentrated source of reports of randomized controlled trials. Records contain the list of authors, the title of the article, the source, volume, issue, page numbers, and, in many cases, a summary of the article (abstract). They do not contain the full text of the article. Cochrane Groups maintain and update Specialized Registers, which are collections of controlled trials relevant to the groups. CENTRAL is comprised of these Specialized Registers, relevant records retrieved from MEDLINE and EMBASE, and records retrieved through handsearching (planned manual searching of a journal or conference proceedings to identify all reports of randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials). The Cochrane Collaboration contracts a technology company, Metaxis, to merge the records from the sources outlined above and provide a data feed to the publisher. New and changed data are delivered to the publisher on a monthly basis.

View all literature mentions