NICE Recommends First Subcutaneous Option for Haemophilia B
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has recommended marstacimab (Hympavzi, Pfizer) for treating severe haemophilia B.
The treatment is advised for patients aged 12 years and over who weigh at least 35 kg and do not have factor IX inhibitors.
It is the first subcutaneous injection for this condition.
The treatment was approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency last month.
How Marstacimab Works
Marstacimab is administered weekly.
It works by targeting tissue factor pathway inhibitor (TFPI), a protein that prevents blood from clotting. By reducing TFPI levels, marstacimab promotes the formation of thrombin, helping to increase clotting and stop bleeding.
About 255 people in England live with severe haemophilia B, defined by a factor IX activity level below 1%.
NICE estimates that around 205 patients will be eligible for marstacimab.
People with haemophilia B currently receive factor IX replacement therapy by infusion, sometimes every 2-3 days. Gene therapy is also available, following approval by NICE last year.
The final draft guidance is based on results from the BASIS study, a phase 3 trial that evaluated marstacimab in 116 adults and adolescents aged 12 years and older with severe haemophilia A or B without inhibitors.
Marstacimab significantly reduced the annualised bleeding rate for treated bleeds during the 12-month active treatment period. It demonstrated both noninferiority and statistical superiority compared with routine factor-based prophylaxis.
Not Recommended for Haemophilia A
While marstacimab can also treat haemophilia A, NICE found it was not cost-effective for this group. It is therefore not recommended for NHS use in these patients.
Current treatment options for haemophilia A include factor VIII, emicizumab, and efanesoctocog alfa.
'Marstacimab's clinical and cost-effectiveness compared with current treatment, together with its once-weekly dosing by injection under the skin, means it has the potential to significantly improve the quality of life of people with severe haemophilia B,' said Helen Knight, director of medicines evaluation at NICE.
Conan McIlwrath, chair of the Haemophilia Society, welcomed the move. 'This will hopefully help people move towards more individualised treatment plans, based on what best supports the life they choose to live,' he said.
Once the final NICE guideline is published, marstacimab could be available to eligible patients as early as this autumn.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
Fast Five Quiz: Ovarian Cancer Overview
Ovarian cancer poses a significant threat to women's health, often developing quietly and without early symptoms. It is commonly discovered after progression. This late detection, along with resistance to treatment and frequent relapse, contributes to poor outcomes. Although medical and surgical interventions have evolved, survival rates remain low. These challenges highlight the critical importance of early detection methods, precise diagnostic technologies, and individualized care coordinated across medical specialties. How much do you know about ovarian cancer? Test your knowledge with this quick quiz. High-grade serous carcinoma is by far the most prevalent, representing approximately 70%-80% of epithelial ovarian cancer cases. In contrast, the low-grade form of serous carcinoma is much less common (< 5%). Endometrioid and clear cell subtypes are each responsible for about 10% of cases and have known associations with endometriosis. Mucinous carcinomas are uncommon, comprising a small fraction (around 3%) of epithelial ovarian cancers. Learn more about ovarian cancer. According to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, for patients with inherited mutations linked to a higher chance of developing ovarian cancer (eg, alterations in BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1, PALB2 ), the most effective preventive surgical procedure is the bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (which is the removal of both fallopian tubes and ovaries). This intervention has been proven to greatly reduce ovarian cancer risk and enhance long-term survival among these high-risk groups. However, when performed in premenopausal women, it induces menopause. Removing one ovary (unilateral oophorectomy) or the uterus (total hysterectomy) does not offer adequate protection against ovarian cancer. Procedures like cervical conization are unrelated to ovarian cancer and are used to manage cervical abnormalities. Learn more about salpingo-oophorectomy. HRT is typically recommended for women who undergo bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy before reaching the natural age of menopause and have not had breast cancer. This type of surgery causes a sudden and early drop in estrogen levels, which can result in bothersome symptoms and increase the risk for long-term health issues such as bone loss or cardiovascular problems. HRT helps ease these effects and maintain health until the typical menopausal age. In contrast, women older than age 50 years are often already in or near menopause, and HRT is not routinely needed unless specific symptoms arise. Patients who have a history of breast cancer must be assessed on a case-by-case basis because HRT might not be safe. Women with a uterus should be offered combined HRT, whereas women without a uterus should be offered estrogen-only HRT. Additionally, women who have not had their ovaries removed do not experience the abrupt hormonal shift that warrants preventive HRT. Learn more about HRT. Individuals who carry a BRCA1 mutation face a significantly elevated risk of developing ovarian cancer, often at a younger age than those with other hereditary mutations. If a woman with a BRCA1 mutation decides not to undergo surgery to remove her ovaries and fallopian tubes, monitoring for early signs of cancer should begin after age 35 years. This timing aligns with evidence suggesting that BRCA1 -related ovarian cancers tend to occur earlier than those linked to BRCA2 or other genetic variants. Initiating surveillance at age 30 years is generally premature and not part of standard recommendations. For BRCA2 carriers, screening is usually deferred until after age 40 years, whereas those with alterations in genes like RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1 , or PALB2 typically begin surveillance after age 45 years. Individuals with Lynch syndrome-related mutations (eg, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 ) are also advised to start at age 35 years if surgery is postponed. Learn more about breast cancer risk factors. Although mucinous tumors can arise directly from the ovary, many are actually secondary cancers that have spread from other organs, most notably the gastrointestinal system, including the colon and appendix. Distinguishing between primary and metastatic mucinous tumors is crucial for proper diagnosis and management. High-grade serous cancers more commonly begin in the epithelium of the fallopian tubes rather than the ovaries. On the other hand, low-grade serous carcinomas are thought to originate in the ovary and are typically diagnosed in younger females, with outcomes generally more favorable than their high-grade counterparts. Germ cell tumors and sex cord-stromal tumors are far more frequent in adolescents and young adults, with most cases occurring before age 30 years and not in women older than 45. Learn more about endometrioid carcinoma.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Health groups urge insurers to cover COVID-19 shots for pregnant women
A pharmacist fills a syringe with the Pfizer COVID-19 booster vaccination at a booster shot clinic in October 2021 in San Rafael, Calif. Thirty prominent professional health organizations signed an open letter urging insurers to continue covering vaccinations during pregnancy. () This story originally appeared on Stateline. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is urging insurers to continue covering vaccinations during pregnancy in an open letter signed by 30 prominent professional health organizations. Pregnant patients and their infants are vulnerable to complications from COVID-19. In the letter to payers and insurance companies released this week, ACOG stressed the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccinations and how they protect babies and pregnant people. It was signed by prominent professional groups including the American College of Physicians, Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Public Health Association. The letter follows U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s decision to eliminate the recommendation for COVID-19 vaccinations for healthy children and healthy pregnant patients, sidestepping an established decision process by scientists. Kennedy, who has made false claims questioning vaccine safety, earlier this week fired all 17 experts on the federal vaccine advisory committee panel, replacing them with eight new members, four of whom have spoken out against vaccines. The Trump administration's moves have alarmed health experts, who worry about coverage and access to the shot amid the agency's dismissal of science. 'We are deeply concerned about the recently adopted HHS policy to no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy,' the letter reads. 'Given the historic gaps in research, investment, and support for women's health, it is essential that all aspects of obstetric and gynecologic care — including COVID-19 vaccination — be grounded in the best available scientific evidence. Studies have shown babies born following a COVID-19 infection during pregnancy have a higher risk of low birth weights, stillbirth and respiratory distress, and data demonstrates the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Pregnant women who contract COVID-19 are also at higher risk of complications such as blood clots, are more likely to be hospitalized in intensive care units or to need ventilators, and are at a higher risk of death, the letter notes. Payers should make the vaccine available to 'pregnant people without undue utilization management or cost-sharing requirements,' the letter reads. Without insurance, a Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 shot can cost roughly $140 for adults. Following the recommendation rollback, public health officials in some states have emphasized their support of COVID-19 vaccines. The Wisconsin Department of Health Services, for example, said it 'continues to recommend the current COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy and for every person 6 months and older,' noting that newborns 'depend on maternal antibodies from the vaccine for protection.' Wisconsin Medicaid will also continue to cover the shot, the department said in a media release. Officials in Georgia also said they expect continued coverage of the shot. In Washington, a spokesperson for the state health agency told local media that the department is advising pregnant people to speak with their provider 'to determine if receiving a COVID-19 vaccine is best for them.' During this year's legislative sessions, at least seven states introduced legislation aiming to ban or limit mRNA vaccines. Instead of using a weakened or dead version of the actual virus to stimulate an immune response, mRNA vaccines use a genetic code created in a laboratory to tell the body's cells to produce a protein that triggers an immune response. The Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna COVID-19 vaccines use mRNA technology. 'The COVID vaccines were a remarkable scientific accomplishment, and they remain the best tool that we have to prevent severe outcomes associated with COVID infection,' Dr. Steven J. Fleischman, ACOG president, wrote in a statement. 'Ob-gyns know that COVID infection during pregnancy can be incredibly dangerous for our pregnant patients — and we know that the vaccine can protect both them and their infants after birth.' When patients are 'forced to pay out of pocket, or to cover high cost sharing,' he wrote, 'they are less likely to be able to protect themselves, their families, and their communities.' Stateline reporter Nada Hassanein can be reached at nhassanein@ Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
UCLA study: COVID vaccinations may lessen severe kidney damage
June 13 (UPI) -- A new study from UCLA Health suggests COVID vaccines may protect patients from severe kidney damage. The study found hospitalized COVID patients were less likely to have severe kidney damage if they were vaccinated. UCLA Health researchers found 16% of unvaccinated patients were more likely to need a constant dialysis therapy, compared with 11% of vaccinated patients. The study data came from roughly 3,500 patients admitted to hospitals between March 2020 and March 2022. Study lead author and UCLA nephrology professor Dr. Niloofar Nobakht said the continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) form of dialysis is vital for intensive care patients with damaged kidneys. The goal of the study was to asses the severity of kidney injury in COVID patients needing CRRT while hospitalized. According to University of Pennsylvania biostatistics professor Yong Chen, serious kidney complications are typically associated with severe COVID cases. Study participants had received at least two doses of the Pfizer or Moderna mRNA vaccines or one dose of the Johnson & Johnson Janssen vaccine. Yale University Dr. F. Perry Wilson said the main reason vaccinated people have lower kidney injury rates is the vaccines tend to lessen the chances of severe illness. He said the vaccines don't act directly on the kidneys but instead reduce overall illness severity, which in turn helps to prevent complications such as multi-organ failure.
