Efficacy of rFIXFc versus N9-GP Prophylaxis in Patients with Hemophilia B: Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of B-LONG and PARADIGM 2 Trials.

For patients with hemophilia B, extended half-life factor IX (FIX) products are available for prophylaxis and for treating bleeds. Different methods are used to extend the half-lives of recombinant FIX Fc fusion protein (rFIXFc) and nonacog beta pegol (N9-GP). This affects their biodistribution and plasma FIX levels, although differences do not always correlate with clinical outcomes. A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of prophylaxis with rFIXFc and N9-GP was performed, based on licensed dosing in the European Union. Combined rFIXFc data from the weekly and individualized interval prophylaxis arms of the B-LONG clinical trial, and N9-GP data from the 40 IU/kg once-weekly prophylaxis arm of PARADIGM 2 were used in a MAIC. Individual patient data for rFIXFc (n=87) were matched to aggregated data for N9-GP (n=29). Estimated annualized bleeding rates (ABRs) for rFIXFc were recalculated using a Poisson regression model with adjustment for over-dispersion, and compared with ABRs reported for N9-GP, using incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). There was no evidence of significant differences in estimated ABRs between prophylaxis with rFIXFc and N9-GP. Analysis of pooled rFIXFc weekly and interval-adjusted dosing compared with N9-GP 40 IU/kg once weekly produced estimated ABRs of 2.59 versus 2.51 (IRR 1.03; 95% CI 0.56-1.89), as well as 1.34 versus 1.22 (IRR 1.10; 95% CI 0.42-2.91) and 1.13 versus 1.29 (IRR 0.88; 95% CI 0.47-1.63) for overall, spontaneous, and traumatic bleeding events, respectively. The study did not reveal any significant differences in the efficacy of rFIXFc and N9-GP prophylaxis. Given differences in trough levels (rFIXFc dosing was targeted to achieve a trough 1-3 IU/dL above baseline versus a reported estimated N9-GP mean trough of 27.3 IU/dL), interpreting plasma FIX levels as potential surrogate efficacy markers requires consideration of compound-specific pharmacokinetic profiles.

© 2023 Mancuso et al.

M.E. Mancuso has acted as paid consultant/speaker and/or advisor for Bayer, Biomarin, CSL Behring, Grifols, Kedrion, LFB, Novo Nordisk, Octapharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Sobi, Spark Therapeutics, Takeda and UniQure. D. Eriksson, A. Falk and Z. Hakimi are employees of Sobi. When the analyses described in this manuscript were performed, P. Wojciechowski and M. Wdowiak were both employees of Creativ-Ceutical, a consultancy company that received funding from Sobi for this research. R. Klamroth reports research funding and honoraria for consulting and lectures from Bayer, Biomarin, Biotest, CSL Behring, Chugai, Grifols, Novo Nordisk, Octapharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Sobi, Takeda/Shire and UniQure. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.