Valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene therapy provides durable haemostatic control for up to 7 years for haemophilia A.

INTRODUCTION: Valoctocogene roxaparvovec is an adeno-associated virus vector serotype 5 (AAV5)-mediated gene therapy approved for severe haemophilia A (HA). AIM: To report the safety and efficacy of valoctocogene roxaparvovec 7 years after dosing in a phase 1/2 clinical study (NCT02576795). METHODS: Males ≥18 years with severe HA (factor VIII [FVIII] ≤1 international unit [IU]/dL) who were previously receiving exogenous FVIII and had no history of FVIII inhibitors or anti-AAV5 antibodies received valoctocogene roxaparvovec treatment and were followed for 7 (6 × 1013 vg/kg; n = 7) and 6 (4 × 1013 vg/kg; n = 6) years. RESULTS: In the last year, one participant in each cohort reported treatment-related adverse events (AEs): grade 1 (G1) hepatomegaly (6 × 1013), and G1 splenomegaly and G1 hepatic steatosis (4 × 1013). During all follow-up, mean annualized treated bleeds and exogenous FVIII infusion rates were ≥88% lower than baseline values. At years 7 and 6, mean (median) FVIII activity (chromogenic assay) was 16.2 (10.3) and 6.7 (7.2) IU/dL in the 6 × 1013 (n = 5) and 4 × 1013 (n = 4) cohorts, respectively, corresponding to mild haemophilia. Regression analyses of the last year estimated rate of change in FVIII activity was -0.001 and -0.07 IU/dL/week for the 6 × 1013 and 4 × 1013 cohorts, respectively. Two participants (6 × 1013) resumed prophylaxis in year 7: one after a non-treatment-related G4 serious AE of spontaneous internal carotid artery bleed, and the other to manage bleeds and FVIII activity. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and efficacy of valoctocogene roxaparvovec remain generally consistent with previous reports, with good haemostatic control for most participants. Two participants returned to prophylaxis.

Three-year outcomes of valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene therapy for hemophilia A.

BACKGROUND: Valoctocogene roxaparvovec transfers a human factor (F)VIII coding sequence into hepatocytes of people with severe hemophilia A to provide bleeding protection. OBJECTIVES: To present 3-year efficacy and safety in the multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase 3 GENEr8-1 trial. METHODS: GENEr8-1 enrolled 134 adult males with severe hemophilia A who were receiving FVIII prophylaxis. Efficacy endpoints included annualized bleeding rate, annualized FVIII utilization, FVIII activity (chromogenic substrate assay; imputed as 1 IU/dL at baseline and 0 IU/dL after discontinuation), and the Haemophilia-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adults. Safety was assessed by adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: At week 156, 131 of 134 participants remained in the study; overall, 17 of 134 resumed prophylaxis. Mean annualized bleeding rate for treated bleeds decreased from 4.8 (SD, 6.5) bleeds/y at baseline to 0.8 (SD, 2.3; P < .0001) bleeds/y after prophylaxis (prophylaxis cessation to last follow-up) and 0.97 (SD, 3.48) bleeds/y during year 3. Annualized FVIII utilization decreased 96.8% from baseline after prophylaxis and 94.2% during year 3. At week 156, mean and median FVIII activity were 18.4 (SD, 30.8) and 8.3 IU/dL, respectively. FVIII activity decrease was lower between years 2 and 3 than between years 1 and 2. At the end of year 3, clinically meaningful improvements in the Haemophilia-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adults Total Score were observed (mean change from baseline, 6.6; 95% CI, 4.24-8.87; P < .0001). Mild alanine aminotransferase elevations remained the most common AE during year 3 (23.7% of participants). A serious AE of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia was considered unrelated to treatment. CONCLUSION: Hemostatic efficacy was maintained, and safety remained unchanged from previous years.

Transitioning from emicizumab prophylaxis to valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene therapy: A simulation study for individuals with severe haemophilia A.

INTRODUCTION: Valoctocogene roxaparvovec, a gene therapy evaluated in the phase 3 GENEr8-1 trial, supports endogenous factor VIII (FVIII) production to prevent bleeding in people with severe haemophilia A. Individuals receiving emicizumab, an antibody mimicking the function of activated FVIII, were excluded from GENEr8-1 enrolment since emicizumab was an investigational therapy at the time of trial initiation. AIM: Utilize pharmacokinetic simulations to provide guidance on best practices for maintaining haemostatic control while transitioning from emicizumab prophylaxis to valoctocogene roxaparvovec. METHODS: To estimate bleeding risk at weekly intervals following valoctocogene roxaparvovec infusion, a published emicizumab pharmacokinetic model was used to simulate emicizumab concentrations and merged with FVIII activity time-course data for participants in GENEr8-1. The analysis investigated three approved emicizumab dosing regimens for two transition scenarios that varied whether the last dose of emicizumab was administered on the same day or 4 weeks after valoctocogene roxaparvovec infusion. RESULTS: Simulations demonstrated administering the last emicizumab dose the day of valoctocogene roxaparvovec infusion and 4 weeks after offered similar levels of haemostatic control, and bleeding risk was similar for all emicizumab dosing regimens. An algorithm was developed to provide guidance for discontinuation of emicizumab. Theoretical cases based on GENEr8-1 participants are presented to illustrate how decisions may vary among individuals. CONCLUSION: Pharmacokinetic simulations demonstrated no clinically meaningful difference in bleeding risk caused by decaying emicizumab levels and rising gene therapy-derived endogenous FVIII for all examined emicizumab doses and dosing regimens. Therefore, multiple approaches can safely transition individuals from emicizumab prophylaxis to valoctocogene roxaparvovec.

Long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene transfer up to 6 years post-treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Valoctocogene roxaparvovec uses an adeno-associated virus serotype 5 (AAV5) vector to transfer a factor VIII (FVIII) coding sequence to individuals with severe haemophilia A, providing bleeding protection. AIM: To assess safety and efficacy of valoctocogene roxaparvovec 5-6 years post-treatment. METHODS: In a phase 1/2 trial, adult male participants with severe haemophilia A (FVIII ≤1 IU/dL) without FVIII inhibitors or anti-AAV5 antibodies received valoctocogene roxaparvovec and were followed for 6 (6 × 1013 vg/kg; n = 7) and 5 (4 × 1013 vg/kg; n = 6) years. Safety, including investigation of potential associations between a malignancy and gene therapy, and efficacy are reported. RESULTS: No new treatment-related safety signals emerged. During year 6, a participant in the 6 × 1013  vg/kg cohort was diagnosed with grade 2 parotid gland acinar cell carcinoma; definitive treatment was uncomplicated parotidectomy with lymph node dissection. Target enrichment sequencing of tumour and adjacent healthy tissue revealed low vector integration (8.25 × 10-5 per diploid cell). Integrations were not elevated in tumour samples, no insertions appeared to drive tumorigenesis, and no clonal expansion of integration-containing cells occurred. During all follow-ups, >90% decreases from baseline in annualised treated bleeds and FVIII infusion rates were maintained. At the end of years 6 and 5, mean FVIII activity (chromogenic assay) was 9.8 IU/dL (median, 5.6 IU/dL) and 7.6 IU/dL (median, 7.1 IU/dL) for the 6 × 1013 and 4 × 1013 vg/kg cohorts, respectively, representing proportionally smaller year-over-year declines than earlier timepoints. CONCLUSIONS: Valoctocogene roxaparvovec safety and efficacy profiles remain largely unchanged; genomic investigations showed no association with a parotid tumour.

Prestige and financial stability: motivating factors to pursue a doctor of pharmacy degree.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify factors influencing students' decision to pursue a doctorate in pharmacy (PharmD). METHODS: Focus-group interviews and quantitative surveys were used in sequence to investigate pharmacy students' motivations. A total of 36 current PharmD students from two US colleges of pharmacy participated in five focus groups. The resulting qualitative findings, along with existing literature, informed the development of a survey questionnaire, which was then administered to two cohorts of first-year pharmacy students at one of the participating colleges. KEY FINDINGS: Identified themes include prestige of a doctorate, patient interaction, career versatility, and pharmacy school's lower intensity vis-à-vis medical school. A total of 110 first-year pharmacy students from a 4-year program (average (SD) age 23 (5); 65% female) completed the survey (98.5% response rate). The order of factors that respondents ranked as important or somewhat important for choosing pharmacy include: financial stability (n = 107 (97%)), prestige of a doctorate degree ((n = 97 (88%)), good work-life balance ((n = 96 (87%)), the opportunity to use critical thinking skills ((n = 93 (85%)), having patient interaction and communication ((n = 91 (83%)), and being in a profession or service ((n = 91 (83%)). CONCLUSIONS: US PharmD students are mainly drawn by job and financial stability, prestige of a doctorate, and a good work-life balance.