Preferences and Health-Related Quality-of-Life Related to Disease and Treatment Features for Patients with Hemophilia A in a Canadian General Population Sample

References

• Srivastava A, Santagostino E, Dougall A, et al. WFH Guidelines for the Management of Hemophilia, 3rd edition. Haemophilia. 2020;26:1–158.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srivastava A, Brewer A, Mauser-Bunschoten E, et al. WFH Guidelines for the management of hemophilia. Haemophilia. 2013;19:e1–e47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Federation of Hemophilia. Report on the Annual Global Survey 2018: Montréal, Québec; 2019. 20. 88.
   Google Scholar
• Weyand AC, Pipe SW. New therapies for hemophilia. Blood. 2019;133:389–398.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahlangu J, Oldenburg J, Paz-Priel I, et al. EmicizumaB prophylaxis in patients who have Hemophilia A without Inhibitors. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:811–822.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peyvandi F, Garagiola I, Seregni S. Future of coagulation factor replacement therapy. J Thromb Haemost. 2013;11:84–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cafuir LA, Kempton CL. Current and emerging factor VIII replacement products for hemophilia A. Ther Adv Hematol. 2017;8:303–313.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. Emicizumab for Hemophilia a with Inhibitors: Effectiveness and Value. CEPAC. 1–162. 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Roche Canada. Positive phase III results for Roche’s Hemlibra for haemophilia A without factor VIII inhibitors. N Engl J Med. 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Oldenburg J, Mahlangu J, Kim B, et al. Emicizumab prophylaxis in hemophilia A with inhibitors. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:809–819.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young G, Sidonio R, Liesner R et al. HAVEN 2 updated analysis: multicenter, open-label, Phase 3 study to evaluate efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of subcutaneous administration of emicizumab prophylaxis in pediatric patients with hemophilia A with inhibitors. The Annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. Atlanta, GA 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Pipe S, Shima M, Lehle M, et al. Efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of emicizumab prophylaxis given every 4 weeks in people with haemophilia A (HAVEN 4): a multicentre, open-label, non-randomised phase 3 study. Lancet Haematol. 2019;6:e295–e305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffmann-La Roche Limited. Product Monograph: Pr HEMLIBRA^® Subcutaneous Emicizumab Injection. Mississauga, ON: Health Canada; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Naraine V, Risebrough N, Oh P, et al. Health-related quality-of-life treatments for severe haemophilia: utility measurements using the Standard Gamble technique. Haemophilia. 2002;8:112–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santagostino E, Lentz S, Busk A, et al. Assessment of the impact of treatment on quality of life of patients with haemophilia A at different ages: insights from two clinical trials on turoctocog alfa. Haemophilia. 2014;20:527534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeKoven M, Karkare S, Lee W, et al. Impact of haemophilia with inhibitors on caregiver burden in the United States. Haemophilia. Haemophilia. 2014;20:822–830.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khair K, Von Mackensen S. Caregiver burden in haemophilia: results from a single UK centre. The Journal of Haemophilia Practice. J Haemophilia Pract. 2017;4:40–48.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz C, Powell V, Su J, et al. The impact of extended half-life versus conventional factor product on hemophilia caregiver burden. Qual Life Res. 2018;27:1335–1345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr R, Saleh M, Furlong W, et al. Health status and health‐related quality of life associated with hemophilia. Am J Hematol. 2002;71:152–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaugule S. Hay J and Young G. Understanding patient preferences and willingness to pay for hemophilia therapies. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015;9:1623–1630.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grosse S. Chaugule S and Hay J. Estimates of utility weights in hemophilia: implications for cost utility analysis of clotting factor prophylaxis. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2015;15:267–283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durand C, Eldoma M, Marshall D, et al. Patient preferences for disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. J Rheumatol. 2020;47:176–187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones G, Vogt K, Chambers D, et al. What is the burden of immunoglobulin replacement therapy in adult patients with primary immunodeficiencies? A systematic review. Front Immunol. 2018;9:1308.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoner K, Harder H, Fallowfield L, et al. Intravenous versus subcutaneous drug administration. Which do patients prefer? A systematic review. The Patient. 2015;8:145–153.
   Google Scholar
• Wiley R, Khoury C, Snihur A, et al. From the voices of people with haemophilia A and their caregivers: challenges with current treatment, their impact on quality of life and desired improvements in future therapies. Haemophilia. 2018;25:433–440.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joffe H, Yardley L. Content and thematic analysis. In: Marks DF, & Yardley L, Editors. Research Methods for Clinical and Health Psychology. London: SAGE Publications, Ltd.; 2004:56–68.
   Google Scholar
• Government of Canada Canadian Institutes of Health Research NSaERCoC, and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Tri-Council Policy Statement - Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS2 2018). 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. Personal Information Retention and Disposal: Principles and Best Practices. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. US Department of Commerce. Guidelines for Media Sanitization: Computer Security; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy, Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of Emicizumab Given Every 4 Weeks in Participants With Hemophilia A (HAVEN 4) NCT03020160. 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Lenert LA, Cher DJ, Goldstein MK, et al. The effect of search procedures on utility elicitations. Med Decision Making. 1998;18:76–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attema AE, Edelaar-Peeters Y, Versteegh MM, Stolk EA. Time trade-off: one methodology, different methods. Eur j Health Econom. 2013;14(Suppl 1):S53–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oppe M, Rand-Hendriksen K, Shah K, et al. EuroQol protocols for time trade-off valuation of health outcomes. PharmacoEconomics. 2016;34:993–1004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen J, Hill S, Mott D, et al. Conducting a time trade-off study alongside a clinical trial: a case study and recommendations. PharmacoEconomics. 2019;3:5–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoots W, Ebbesen L, Konkle B, et al. Secondary prophylaxis with recombinant activated factor VII improves health‐related quality of life of haemophilia patients with inhibitors. Haemophilia. 2008;14:466–475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noone D, O’Mahony B, Prihodova L. A survey of the outcome of prophylaxis, on-demand or combined treatment in 20-35 year old men with severe haemophilia in four European countries (letter). Haemophilia. 2011;17:E842–E3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oladapo A, Epstein J, Williams E, et al. Health-related quality of life assessment in haemophilia patients on prophylaxis therapy: a systematic review of results from prospective clinical trials. Haemophilia. 2015;21:e344–e58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stasyshyn O, Antunes S, Mamanov V, et al. Prophylaxis with anti‐inhibitor coagulant complex improves health‐related quality of life in haemophilia patients with inhibitors: results from FEIBA NF Prophylaxis Study. Haemophilia. 2014;20:644–650.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Usuba K, Price V, Blanchette V, et al. Impact of prophylaxis on health‐related quality of life of boys with hemophilia: an analysis of pooled data from 9 countries. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2019;3:397–404.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Risebrough N, Oh P, Blanchette V, et al. Cost‐utility analysis of Canadian tailored prophylaxis, primary prophylaxis and on‐demand therapy in young children with severe haemophilia A. Haemophilia. 2008;14:743–752.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchbinder D, Ragni V. What is the role of prophylaxis in the improvement of health-related quality of life of patients with hemophilia? Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2013;52-5.
   Google Scholar
• Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. Valoctocogene Roxaparvovec and Emicizumab for Hemophilia A without Inhibitors: Effectiveness and Value: Final Report. Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Briggs A. Belozeroff V and Feeny D. Comparison of health state utility estimates from instrument-based and vignette-based methods: a case study in kidney disease. BMC Res Notes. 2019;12:385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar