Rodriguez, Vilmarie

AbstractBackgroundΕ‐Aminocaproic acid oral solution (EACA OS) is the only commercially available antifibrinolytic for patients who cannot swallow tablets. Insurance denials and high costs remain barriers to its use.ObjectivesTo determine the safety and efficacy of crushed tranexamic acid tablets in water (cTXAw) for children with bleeding disorders.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed records of children (<10 years) with bleeding disorders who received cTXAw or EACA OS from 1 December 2018, through 31 July 2022, at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minnesota). Bleeding outcomes were defined according to ISTH criteria.ResultsThirty‐two patients were included (median age, 3 years; male, n = 23). Diagnoses were VWD (n = 17), haemophilia (n = 5), FVII deficiency (n = 3), inherited platelet disorder (n = 4), ITP (n = 2), and combined FV and FVII deficiencies (n = 1). Thirty‐two courses of cTXAw (monotherapy 24/32; mean duration 6 days) and fifteen courses of EACA (monotherapy 12/15; mean duration 5 days) were administered. No surgical procedures (n = 28) were complicated by bleeding. Of the 19 bleeding events, 16 had effective haemostasis, two had no reported outcome, and one had no response. cTXAw and EACA were equally effective in preventing and treating bleeding (p value > .1). No patients had adverse effects. Eight of 19 patients (42%) who were initially prescribed EACA OS did not receive it because of cost or insurance denial.The estimated average wholesale price of one treatment was $94 for cTXAw and $905 for EACA OS.ConclusionsCTXAw appears to be an effective, safe, and low‐cost alternative option to EACA OS for young children with bleeding disorders.

BACKGROUND: Coagulopathy and thrombosis are well-described complications of asparaginase therapy; however, treatment practices in pediatric hematology oncology patients vary widely as evidence-based guidelines for clinical management of these complications in this population are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess management practices of asparaginase-related coagulopathy by pediatric hematology oncology (PHO) providers. DESIGN/METHOD: Email survey sent to 2,327 PHO providers primarily practicing in the United States. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty-five (12.2%) attending physicians completed the survey. Only 4.6% (n=13/285) routinely prescribe prophylactic anticoagulation during induction chemotherapy for leukemia. Slightly more than half (n=145/250, 50.9%) of all providers perform baseline coagulation studies. Most providers that were surveyed (n= 185/285, 64.9%) only replete coagulant factors if the patient experiences bleeding or bruising. One hundred and thirty (n = 130/285, 45.6%) physicians replace low fibrinogen, and the median replacement was 100 mg/dL (range: 40-200 mg/dL) with the median target of at least 100 mg/dL (range: 50-200 mg/dL). A minority of physicians (n=39/250, 13.7%) replace low antithrombin at a median cutoff activity level of 60% (range 40-100 %) with a median target of 75% (range: 40-125 %). CONCLUSION: There is a significant variation in PHO provider practices for monitoring and management of asparaginase-associated hemostatic derangements. Evidence-based guidelines have the potential to standardize practices.

AbstractBackgroundHemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) attributable to anti‐M is rare, although case reports implicate anti‐M in varying severities of HDFN, including fetal hydrops and intrauterine death.Case DescriptionWe describe the case of a newborn with HDFN associated with an atypical immunoglobulin (Ig) G anti‐M that reacted best at cold temperatures. The maternal antibody detected in pregnancy was not reactive at 37°C, and a direct antiglobulin test (DAT) on red blood cells (RBCs) from the newborn was negative, suggesting an anti‐M that should not have been clinically relevant. However, the infant developed hyperbilirubinemia (bilirubin level, 17.6 mg/dL), hemolytic anemia (hemoglobin nadir, 5.5 g/dL), and reticulocytopenia. Laboratory testing demonstrated the presence of an IgG anti‐M in maternal and neonatal samples reacting best at 4°C. This passively acquired IgG anti‐M provoked hemolytic anemia in the infant and likely suppressed erythropoiesis, resulting in reticulocytopenia with prolonged anemia. He was treated for IgG anti‐M HDFN with 10 intravenous Ig infusions and 10 days of oral prednisone followed by a taper. He required seven transfusions with M− RBCs. His hemoglobin level normalized at 3 months of age. Follow‐up at 2 years revealed no hematologic or neuro‐developmental concerns.ConclusionTo our knowledge, this is the second report of HDFN attributable to an IgG anti‐M reacting preferentially at cold temperature with no 37°C reactivity. Clinically relevant IgG anti‐M may elude standard testing. Early recognition and testing for cold‐reacting IgG anti‐M should be considered for newborns with hemolysis, a negative DAT, and prolonged anemia.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a life-threatening complication rarely encountered with the use of combined oral contraceptives (COCs). Obesity is an additional thrombosis risk factor that has been shown to further increase the risk of VTE with the use of COCs. We present 5 cases of obese adolescents (body mass index >30 kg/m2) who encountered thrombosis complications while on COCs. Although the absolute risk of VTE events in the setting of COCs is rare, caution should be observed when choosing hormonal therapy and safer COCs alternatives discussed with adolescents who are obese.

Introduction: Among the most challenging complications of hemophilia A is inhibitor formation. A T-cell dependent B-cell response to exogenous factor VIII (FVIII), inhibitors result in a high burden of disease, with poorly controlled bleeding, twice the hospitalizations, 10-fold the cost, and 3.5-fold the mortality of non-inhibitor patients. Thus, a major goal of hemophilia management is to prevent and eradicate inhibitors. With the availability of novel therapies, including eloctate, a recombinant Fc-fusion protein (rFVIII-Fc) which induces regulatory T cells to promote FVIII tolerance, and emicizumab, a bispecific monoclonal FVIII mimetic, we designed the INHIBIT Clinical Trials Platform (X01HL143024), Fig.1. The platform is composed of two linked randomized phase III trials, the Inhibitor Prevention Trial (NCT04303559), comparing rFVIII-Fc vs emicizumab prophylaxis to prevent inhibitors, and the Inhibitor Eradication Trial (NCT04303572), comparing rFVIII-Fc immune tolerance induction (ITI) plus emicizumab vs rFVIII-Fc ITI alone to eradicate inhibitors. The platform uses adaptive design to incorporate historical data (Bayesian priors) on inhibitor formation to increase power and promote efficient use of rare data. Yet, there is equipoise regarding the optimal approach to inhibitor prevention and eradication, and, as clinical practice is changing, we aimed to test the feasibility of the INHIBIT trial design. Methods: To establish design feasibility, we conducted interviews with 30 hemophilia treatment center (HTC) physicians participating in the INHIBIT trials, to determine prophylaxis and tolerance regimens they prescribe and perceived barriers to the INHIBIT trials design. A 4-question survey was subsequently emailed to these physicians to ascertain the initial prophylaxis regimens they prescribe in previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe hemophilia A, and the initial immune tolerance induction (ITI) they prescribe in high-responding inhibitor patients with severe hemophilia A; if new inhibitors had been observed during emicizumab prophylaxis, and willingness to participate in post-trial surveillance. Results: In interviews, HTC physicians indicated the issues that influenced choice of prophylaxis/ ITI regimen were patient preference, family history of inhibitors, infusion frequency, IV access, port requirement, and family fatigue. In the absence of clinical trials data in PUPs, there was general agreement that emicizumab prophylaxis, with it simpler subcutaneous (SQ) administration, might delay or potentially prevent inhibitors. Survey findings in Table 1 indicated 75% of physicians prescribe extended half-life (EHL) FVIII in a once-weekly prophylaxis regimen, as planned in the Prevention Trial, despite the persistent 27% inhibitor rate (ALong PUPs Trial, Königs et al, ISTH 2020) and potential risks with port use. There was support for the 1:3 preferential randomization to emicizumab in the Prevention Trial due to the simpler SQ route, despite concern it might delay rather than prevent inhibitor formation, although no inhibitors were reported by physician survey with emicizumab use alone. There was also concern that breakthrough bleeds requiring FVIII during emicizumab prophylaxis, might lead to immune activation and inhibitor formation. There was strong agreement, however, in 29 (97%) of physicians to participate in post-trial surveillance for long-term inhibitor outcomes. FVIII ITI was considered essential to eradicate inhibitors, despite the intensity of the infusion regimen. Notably, 60% prescribe emicizumab with FVIII ITI, as planned in the Eradicate Trial, although the every-other-day infusion was considered a potential barrier to participation. Omitting FVIII ITI was not favored due to the risk of inhibitor anamnesis if FVIII treatment was subsequently required for surgery or acute hemorrhages. Despite these concerns, there was agreement to participate in the trials. Discussion: Physician interviews and surveys confirm there is heterogeneity in current hemophilia clinical practice, specifically in initial prophylaxis regimens and in initial immune tolerance regimens, including agent choice and duration. However, there is physician consensus with the INHIBIT trial aims and with the proposed INHIBIT trial regimens to prevent and eradicate inhibitors. Disclosures Ragni: Bioverativ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Alnylam/Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BioMarin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ATHN: Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding. Seaman:Bayer: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Spark Therapeutics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Acharya:Novonordisk: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BPL: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer Pharma Inc.: Research Funding. Wheeler:Novo Nordisk: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biomarin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; UniQure: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Tarango:Takeda/Shire: Honoraria, Other; Bayer: Consultancy, Other; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other. Dunn:ATHN: Research Funding; Spire: Honoraria; Medscape: Honoraria; World Federation of Hemophilia USA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; BioMarin: Research Funding; uniQure: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy; Nationwide Children's Hospital: Current Employment. Kulkarni:Sanofi/ Bioverativ, Bayer, Biomarin, Shire/Takeda, Novo Nordisk, Freeline: Other: clinical trial research grants ; Bioverativ/Sanofi, BPL, Genentech, Kedrion, Novo Nordisk, Octapharma, Pfizer, Takeda, Catalyst Bioscience Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ahuja:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; XaTek, Inc.: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding. Chitlur:Takeda: Honoraria; Biovertiv: Honoraria; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Honoraria. Pipe:Apcintex, Bayer, BioMarin, Catalyst Biosciences, CSL Behring, HEMA Biologics, Freeline, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech, Inc., Sangamo Therapeutics, Sanofi, Takeda, Spark Therapeutics, uniQure: Consultancy; Siemens: Research Funding; Medical and Scientific Advisory Council to the National Hemophilia Foundation; Medical Advisory Board to World Federation of Hemophilia: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Malec:Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; SOBI: Consultancy. Leissinger:Bayer: Consultancy; Kedrion: Consultancy; CSL Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy; HEMA Biologics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Uniqure: Consultancy; Spark: Consultancy. Carpenter:Hemostasis & Thrombosis Research Society: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; American Academy of Pediatrics: Other: PREP Heme/Onc editorial board; Kedrion: Honoraria; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria; Genentech, Inc.: Honoraria; American Thrombosis and Hemostasis Network: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CSL Behring: Research Funding; Shire: Research Funding. Knoll:NovoNordisk: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wang:Bioverativ Inc: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; CSL Behring: Honoraria; Biomarin: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Young:Genentech/Roche, Grifols, and Takeda: Research Funding; Bayer, CSL Behring, Freeline, UniQure: Consultancy; BioMarin, Freeline, Genentech/Roche, Grifols, Kedrion, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi Genzyme, Spark, Takeda, and UniQure: Honoraria. Thornburg:Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Spark Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Ironwood Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; American Thrombosis and Hemostasis Network: Research Funding; Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy, Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board, Research Funding; NovoNordisk: Research Funding; Biomarin: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; National Hemophilia Foundation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lucas:CRISPR Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hwang:Shire: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria.

AbstractBackgroundThe electronic health record (EHR) is a contributor to serious patient harm occurring within a sociotechnical system. Chemotherapy ordering is a high‐risk task due to the complex nature of ordering workflows and potential detrimental effects if wrong chemotherapeutic doses are administered. Many chemotherapy ordering errors cannot be mitigated through systems‐based changes due to the limited extent to which individual institutions are able to customize proprietary EHR software. We hypothesized that simulation‐based training could improve providers’ ability to identify and mitigate common chemotherapy ordering errors.MethodsPediatric hematology/oncology providers voluntarily participated in simulations using an EHR testing (“Playground”) environment. The number of safety risks identified and mitigated by each provider at baseline was recorded. Risks were reviewed one‐on‐one after initial simulations and at a group “lunch‐and‐learn” session. At three‐month follow‐up, repeat simulations assessed for improvements in error identification and mitigation, and providers were surveyed about prevention of real‐life safety events.ResultsThe 8 participating providers identified and mitigated an average of 5.5 out of 10 safety risks during the initial simulation, compared 7.4 safety risks at the follow up simulation (p=0.030). Two of the providers (25%) reported preventing at least one real‐world patient safety event in the clinical setting as a result of the initial training session.ConclusionsSimulation‐based training may reduce providers’ susceptibility to chemotherapy ordering safety vulnerabilities within the EHR. This approach may be used when systems‐based EHR improvements are not feasible due to limited ability to customize local instances of proprietary EHR software.

Abstract Introduction May–Thurner syndrome (MTS) is a vascular anatomic variant resulting in compression of the left common iliac vein by the right common iliac artery, affecting approximately 22% of the population. In adults, following acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the iliofemoral veins, the incidence of postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) and recurrent DVT are high if treated with anticoagulation alone, warranting adjunctive treatment with thrombolysis and stent placement. However, there is paucity of literature documenting the course of treatment and associated outcomes in pediatric patients with MTS. Methods A retrospective chart review of pediatric patients (≤ 18 years of age) with radiologic confirmation of MTS with or without DVT evaluated and/or treated at our institution from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2015 was conducted. Results Seventeen patients (4 male; 13 female) were identified. Median age was 15.4 years (range 8.8–17.1 years) with a median follow-up of 1.2 years (range 0.4–7.5 years). Thirteen (76.5%) patients presented with left lower extremity DVT. Management included catheter-directed thrombolysis (n = 5), systemic thrombolysis (n = 1), and mechanical thrombectomy (n = 1). Fifteen patients were treated with anticoagulation including two patients with endovascular stents without DVT. Median duration of anticoagulation was 6.3 months (range 3.2–18.7 months). Ten patients (59%) underwent stent placements.Complete and partial thrombus resolution was noted in six patients each and no resolution in one patient. Four patients had recurrence/progression of thrombus (n = 3 with stents) at a median time of 29 days (range 12–495 days). No bleeding complications were observed. Clinically documented or self-reported PTS was noted in 8 patients (62%). Conclusion There are no clear guidelines for MTS management in children and adolescents. In our cohort, thrombolysis, anticoagulation, or stent placements were not associated with bleeding risks, with recurrence/progression of DVT and signs and symptoms of PTS noted in 30 and 62%, respectively. Further studies are needed to determine a standardized treatment approach of the pediatric patient with MTS with or without thrombosis.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a life-threatening complication rarely encountered with the use of combined oral contraceptives (COCs). Obesity is an additional thrombosis risk factor that has been shown to further increase the risk of VTE with the use of COCs. We present five cases of obese adolescents (BMI >30 kg/m2) who encountered thrombosis complications while on COCs. Although the absolute risk of VTE events in the setting of COCs is rare, caution should be observed when choosing hormonal therapy and safer COCs alternatives discussed with adolescents who are obese.