A multi-stakeholder collaborative approach to awareness, education and support needed in the haemophilia gene therapy patient journey – a report on insights from a European patient advisory board

Brian O’Mahony; Simon Fletcher; Manuel Baarslag; Kate Khair; Daan Breederveld; Nathalie Jansen; Luke Pembroke; Karen Pinachyan; Sujan Sivasubramaniyam

doi:10.2478/jhp-2024-0007

Abstract

Abstract

Gene therapy presents a potentially transformational approach to haemophilia management. The patient journey for gene therapy is unlike that for other haemophilia treatments, and its one-time, irreversible nature has led to broad agreement that informed shared decision-making is essential. Understanding the educational and support needs of people with haemophilia (PwH) who may consider or undergo gene therapy in the future is key to enabling this. A one-day patient advisory board was conducted with the aim of gaining insights on what education and support would enable PwH to have appropriate conversations with health care practitioners (HCPs) about gene therapy and participate in informed shared decision-making. The participants were 11 age-diverse men with severe haemophilia A or B, including six who had received gene therapy in phase 1-3 clinical trials. Two were members of a national patient organisation or a patient organisation leader. Participants agreed that informed shared decision-making was essential for gene therapy, but most felt the choice to have gene therapy would be limited by healthcare budgets and access arrangements. They identified key education needed by PwH to enable true informed decision-making, best delivered through a collaborative approach by patient organisations and HCPs. Eligibility criteria should be more widely shared within the community as part of general education around gene therapy. Gene therapy should be presented as one of a range of treatment options; understanding its risks, uncertainties and benefits is key to managing expectations and minimising treatment remorse. Awareness of how different factor levels impact bleeding tendency and frequency would be helpful, as success of gene therapy cannot be determined by factor activity alone. Other key educational needs included follow-up commitments, the role and potential side effects of corticosteroids or other immunosuppressants, impact on sense of identity, mental health, family planning, and managing bleeds after gene therapy. Teach-back could help ensure appropriate levels of understanding; psychological support could aid managing expectations. Peer-to-peer learning delivered across a variety of platforms, to share experiences of gene therapy and contextualise more ‘formal’ gene therapy education, was considered invaluable.

Article

View Full Article

References

1. Srivastava A, Santagostino E, Dougall A, et al.; WFH Guidelines for the Management of Hemophilia panelists and co-authors. WFH Guidelines for the Management of Hemophilia, 3rd edition. Haemophilia 2020; 26(S6): 1-158. doi: 10.1111/hae.14046.
2. Manco-Johnson MJ, Michael Soucie J, Cox J. Prophylaxis usage, bleeding rates, and joint outcomes of hemophilia 1999 to 2010: a surveillance project. Blood 2017; 129(17): 2368-2374. doi: 10.1182/blood-2016-02-683169.
3. O’Hara S, Castro FA, Black J, et al. Disease burden and remaining unmet need in patients with haemophilia A treated with primary prophylaxis. Haemophilia 2021; 27(1): 113-119. doi: 10.1111/hae.14171.
4. Brod M, Bushnell DM, Neergaard JS, Waldman LT, Busk AK. Understanding treatment burden in hemophilia: development and validation of the Hemophilia Treatment Experience Measure (Hemo-TEM). J Patient Rep Outcomes 2023; 7: 17. doi: 10.1186/s41687-023-00550-6.
5. Chowdary P. Extended half-life recombinant products in haemophilia clinical practice – Expectations, opportunities and challenges. Thromb Res 2020; 196: 609-617. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2019.12.012.
6. Ellsworth P. Factor-mimetic and rebalancing therapies in hemophilia A and B: the end of factor concentrates? Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2021; 2021(1): 219-225. doi: 10.1182/hematology.2021000253.
7. Young G. Nonfactor therapies for hemophilia. Hemasphere 2023; 7(6): e911. doi: 10.1097/HS9.0000000000000911.
8. Chowdary P. Nonfactor therapies: New approaches to prophylactic treatment of haemophilia. Hamostaseologie 2021; 41(4): 247–256. doi: 10.1055/a-1424-7900.
9. Wells JR, Gater A, Marshall C, Tritton T, Vashi P, Kessabi S. Exploring the impact of infusion frequency in hemophilia A: exit interviews with patients participating in BAY 94–9027 extension studies (PROTECT VIII). Patient 2019;12(6):611–619. doi: 10.1007/s40271-019-00374-x.
10. Cantore A, Naldini L. WFH State-of-the-art paper 2020: In vivo lentiviral vector gene therapy for haemophilia. Haemophilia 2021; 27(S3): 122-125. doi: 10.1111/hae.14056.
11. Rodríguez-Merchán EC, De Pablo-Moreno JA, Liras A. Gene therapy in hemophilia: recent advances. Int J Mol Sci 2021; 22: 7647. doi: 10.3390/ijms22147647.
12. Wang M, Negrier C, Diessler F, Goodman C, Skinner MW. The haemophilia gene therapy patient journey questions and answers for shared decision-making. Patient Prefer Adherence 2022; 16: 1439-1447. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S355627.
13. Le Quellec S, Breederveld D, Coppens M, Pinachyan K. The paradigm shift of gene therapy for haemophilia: impact on the patient journey. ESGCT 29th Annual Congress in collaboration with BSGCT Edinburgh, UK, 11-14 October 2022 (P129).
14. Valentino L, Blanchette V, Negrier C, O’Mahony B, Bias V, Sannié T, Skinner MW. Personalising haemophilia management with shared decision making. J Haem Pract 2021; 8(1): 69-79. doi: 10.17225/jhp00178.
15. Miesbach W, O’Mahony B, Key NS, Makris M. How to discuss gene therapy for haemophilia? A patient and physician perspective. Haemophilia 2019; 25(4): 545-557. doi: 10.1111/hae.13769.
16. Woollard L, Gorman R, Rosenfelt DJ. Improving patient informed consent for haemophilia gene therapy: the case for change. Ther Adv Rare Dis 2021; 2: 1-16. doi: 10.1177/26330040211047244.
17. Miesbach W, Garcia Barcenilla S, Golan G, Lobet S. Implications of haemophilia gene therapy for the changing role of the multidisciplinary team. Haemophilia 2022; 28(1): e12-e14. doi: 10.1111/hae.14440.
18. Limjoco J, Calatroni A, Aristizabal P, Thornburg CD. Gene therapy preferences and informed decision-making. Results from a National Hemophilia Foundation Community Voices in Research survey. Haemophilia 2023; 29(1): 50-60. doi: 10.1111/hae.14706.
19. Fletcher S, Jenner K, Khair K. Shared decision-making for gene therapy in haemophilia care. J Haem Pract 2023; 10(1): 62-67. doi: 10.2478/jhp-2023-0009.
20. Fletcher S, Jenner K, Pembroke L, Holland M, Khair K. The experiences of people with haemophilia and their families of gene therapy in a clinical trial setting: regaining control, The Exigency Study. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2022; 17(1): 155. doi: 10.1186/s13023-022-02256-2.
21. Noone D, Astermark J, O’Mahony B, et al. The journey of gene therapy in haemophilia – putting the patient at the centre of the hub and spoke model. J Haem Pract 2022; 9(1): 156-166. doi: 10.2478/jhp-2022-0021.
22. Rayment R, Chalmers E, Forsyth K, et al.; British Society for Haematology. Guidelines on the use of prophylactic factor replacement for children and adults with haemophilia A and B. Br J Haem 2020; 190(5): 684-695. doi: 10.1111/bjh.16704.
23. Limjoco J, Calatroni A, Aristizabal P, Thornburg CD. Gene therapy preferences and informed decision-making: Results from a National Hemophilia Foundation Community Voices in Research survey. Haemophilia 2023; 19(1): 51-60. doi: 10.1111/hae.14706.
24. Pierce GF, Iorio A. Past, present and future of haemophilia gene therapy: From vectors and transgenes to known and unknown outcomes. Haemophilia 2018; 24(S6): 60-67. doi: 10.1111/hae.13489.
25. Yamaguti-Hayakawa GG, Ozelo MC. Gene therapy for haemophilia: looking beyond factor expression. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 2022; 247(24): 2223-2232. doi: 10.1177/15353702221147565.
26. Krumb E, Hermans C. Living with a “hemophilia-free mind” – The new ambition of haemophilia care? Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2021; 5(5): e12567. doi: 10.1002/rth2.12567.
27. Hermans C, Gruel Y, Frenzel L, Krumb E. How to translate and implement the current science of gene therapy into haemophilia care? Ther Adv Hematol 2023; 14: 20406207221145627. doi: 10.1177/20406207221145627.
28. Boyce S, Fletcher S, Jones A, et al. Educational needs of patients, families, and healthcare professionals to support the patient journey in haemophilia gene therapy. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2023; 18: 366. doi: 10.1186/s13023-023-02977-y.
29. Pierce GF, Coffin D, Members of the WFH Gene Therapy Round Table Program Committee and Organizing Committee. The 1st WFH Gene Therapy Round Table: Understanding the landscape and challenges of gene therapy for haemophilia around the world. Haemophilia 2019; 25(2): 189-194. doi: 10.1111/hae.13673.

PDF Download

Download PDF

Open in full-page viewer

Authors

Brian O’Mahony

Irish Haemophilia Society, Dublin, Ireland
Simon Fletcher
Manuel Baarslag

Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Kate Khair

Haemnet Ltd, London, UK
Daan Breederveld

Brendaan Consultancy, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Nathalie Jansen

CSL Behring, Hattersheim am Main, Germany
Luke Pembroke

Haemnet Ltd, London, UK
Karen Pinachyan

CSL Behring, Hattersheim am Main, Germany
Sujan Sivasubramaniyam