Comparison of single subject and population‐based pharmacokinetics for optimizing prophylaxis with simoctocog alfa in patients with haemophilia A
Introduction The use of pharmacokinetic assessment for optimal prophylactic dosing of factor concentrates in haemophilia has gained increasing enthusiasm over the last decade. However, blood sampling on several occasions is burdensome and limited sampling using population‐based PK is appealing. Aim...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia 2021-07, Vol.27 (4), p.626-633 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 633 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 626 |
container_title | Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia |
container_volume | 27 |
creator | Astermark, Jan Olsson, Anna Chelle, Pierre Täckström, Kinga Walger, Maria Magnusson, Maria Iorio, Alfonso |
description | Introduction
The use of pharmacokinetic assessment for optimal prophylactic dosing of factor concentrates in haemophilia has gained increasing enthusiasm over the last decade. However, blood sampling on several occasions is burdensome and limited sampling using population‐based PK is appealing.
Aim
To compare the pharmacokinetics and dosing recommendations for prophylaxis using six‐point single subject versus population‐based method (WAPPS‐Hemo) for simoctocog alfa (Nuwiq®).
Methods
Twelve adult patients with severe haemophilia A received a factor VIII (FVIII) dose of ≈50 IU/kg, and the activity was measured pre‐infusion and at 30 min, 6, 9, 24 and 48 h post‐infusion. Half‐life (t1/2), weight‐normalized AUC and time to troughs of 5%, 3% and 1% were calculated. The correlation between the PK algorithms was assessed using intraclass correlations (ICC) and dosing estimations were provided.
Results
WAPPS‐Hemo yielded a slightly longer mean t1/2, but the overall correlation between the methods was good (ICC ≥0.79) The time to troughs of 5%, 3% and 1% showed ICCs ≥0.86. For all variables, the most converging limited time point was 6+48 h. Additional time points did not improve the correlation. Despite similar pharmacokinetics, the mean estimated dose for a specific trough level varied from 60% less to 20% more using the population‐based approach. The time to 1% and the corresponding dose was sensitive to the baseline assumption.
Conclusion
Our data support the use of population‐based PK for patients on simoctocog alfa prophylaxis but also indicates differences, stressing the importance of the sampling scheme and monitoring actual FVIII levels achieved. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/hae.14329 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_webof</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_webofscience_primary_000648394700001CitationCount</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2552287348</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5109-a85823299494221b6d2cd8f7ce60f58d43de72f843b124649fda6199c89bad063</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkt-KEzEUxgdR3HX1wheQgDeKzG7-N7ksZXWFgjd6HZJMZpvuzGSczFDrlY8g-IY-iafbbgWhYCDkEH7fd85JTlG8JPiSwLpa2XBJOKP6UXFOmBQlFUQ-3sWClIoSeVY8y3mNMWEUy6fFGWNaSkb0efFrkdreDjGnDqUa5djdNgHlya2DH5HtKtSnfmrsGFP3-8dPZ3OAq5UdWuvTXezCGH1GdRpQ6sfYxu9ggPoh9attY7_FjDZxXIFtm_yYfLpFtqktih3qwTJ04wGADlrQxCZaNH9ePKltk8OLw3lRfHl__XlxUy4_ffi4mC9LLwjWpVVCUWhac80pJU5W1FeqnvkgcS1UxVkVZrRWnDlCueS6rqwkWnulna2wZBdFuffNm9BPzvRDbO2wNclGc7i6gygYLikRCnh9koeWq7-iByHhEnRCcNAuT2qbqYftYO80QrrZTBNmpKohNdbcWBWIEU4T5YiVuqJg92ZvB3m_TiGPpo3Zh6axXUhTNlRQrhSXDAP6-h90naahg4cFSlCqZozvenu7p_yQch5CfayQYLMbMgNfZO6HDNhXB8fJtaE6kg9TBYDaA5vgUp09fLQPRwxjLCGj5jOIMFnE8X66FmnqRpC--38p0FcHOjZhe7pkczO_3tf-B0GeAAY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2552287348</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of single subject and population‐based pharmacokinetics for optimizing prophylaxis with simoctocog alfa in patients with haemophilia A</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SWEPUB Freely available online</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /></source><creator>Astermark, Jan ; Olsson, Anna ; Chelle, Pierre ; Täckström, Kinga ; Walger, Maria ; Magnusson, Maria ; Iorio, Alfonso</creator><creatorcontrib>Astermark, Jan ; Olsson, Anna ; Chelle, Pierre ; Täckström, Kinga ; Walger, Maria ; Magnusson, Maria ; Iorio, Alfonso</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction
The use of pharmacokinetic assessment for optimal prophylactic dosing of factor concentrates in haemophilia has gained increasing enthusiasm over the last decade. However, blood sampling on several occasions is burdensome and limited sampling using population‐based PK is appealing.
Aim
To compare the pharmacokinetics and dosing recommendations for prophylaxis using six‐point single subject versus population‐based method (WAPPS‐Hemo) for simoctocog alfa (Nuwiq®).
Methods
Twelve adult patients with severe haemophilia A received a factor VIII (FVIII) dose of ≈50 IU/kg, and the activity was measured pre‐infusion and at 30 min, 6, 9, 24 and 48 h post‐infusion. Half‐life (t1/2), weight‐normalized AUC and time to troughs of 5%, 3% and 1% were calculated. The correlation between the PK algorithms was assessed using intraclass correlations (ICC) and dosing estimations were provided.
Results
WAPPS‐Hemo yielded a slightly longer mean t1/2, but the overall correlation between the methods was good (ICC ≥0.79) The time to troughs of 5%, 3% and 1% showed ICCs ≥0.86. For all variables, the most converging limited time point was 6+48 h. Additional time points did not improve the correlation. Despite similar pharmacokinetics, the mean estimated dose for a specific trough level varied from 60% less to 20% more using the population‐based approach. The time to 1% and the corresponding dose was sensitive to the baseline assumption.
Conclusion
Our data support the use of population‐based PK for patients on simoctocog alfa prophylaxis but also indicates differences, stressing the importance of the sampling scheme and monitoring actual FVIII levels achieved.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1351-8216</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1365-2516</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2516</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/hae.14329</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33966319</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>HOBOKEN: Wiley</publisher><subject>Adult ; Blood Specimen Collection ; Clinical Medicine ; Coagulation factors ; Disease prevention ; Dosage ; Factor VIII - pharmacokinetics ; Factor VIII - therapeutic use ; Factor VIII deficiency ; haemophilia ; Half-Life ; Hematologi ; Hematology ; Hemophilia ; Hemophilia A - drug therapy ; Hemostatics - pharmacokinetics ; Hemostatics - therapeutic use ; Humans ; Klinisk medicin ; Life Sciences & Biomedicine ; Medical and Health Sciences ; Medicin och hälsovetenskap ; nuwiq ; Pharmacokinetics ; Population ; Prophylaxis ; Sampling ; Science & Technology ; simoctocog alfa</subject><ispartof>Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia, 2021-07, Vol.27 (4), p.626-633</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2021 The Authors. Haemophilia published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2021. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>true</woscitedreferencessubscribed><woscitedreferencescount>2</woscitedreferencescount><woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid>wos000648394700001</woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5109-a85823299494221b6d2cd8f7ce60f58d43de72f843b124649fda6199c89bad063</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5109-a85823299494221b6d2cd8f7ce60f58d43de72f843b124649fda6199c89bad063</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8500-2483</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fhae.14329$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fhae.14329$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,554,782,786,887,1419,27933,27934,39267,45583,45584</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33966319$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://lup.lub.lu.se/record/56b77913-68fe-4094-a8e1-5b918b1a69d2$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://kipublications.ki.se/Default.aspx?queryparsed=id:146583554$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Astermark, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olsson, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chelle, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Täckström, Kinga</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walger, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magnusson, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iorio, Alfonso</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of single subject and population‐based pharmacokinetics for optimizing prophylaxis with simoctocog alfa in patients with haemophilia A</title><title>Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia</title><addtitle>HAEMOPHILIA</addtitle><addtitle>Haemophilia</addtitle><description>Introduction
The use of pharmacokinetic assessment for optimal prophylactic dosing of factor concentrates in haemophilia has gained increasing enthusiasm over the last decade. However, blood sampling on several occasions is burdensome and limited sampling using population‐based PK is appealing.
Aim
To compare the pharmacokinetics and dosing recommendations for prophylaxis using six‐point single subject versus population‐based method (WAPPS‐Hemo) for simoctocog alfa (Nuwiq®).
Methods
Twelve adult patients with severe haemophilia A received a factor VIII (FVIII) dose of ≈50 IU/kg, and the activity was measured pre‐infusion and at 30 min, 6, 9, 24 and 48 h post‐infusion. Half‐life (t1/2), weight‐normalized AUC and time to troughs of 5%, 3% and 1% were calculated. The correlation between the PK algorithms was assessed using intraclass correlations (ICC) and dosing estimations were provided.
Results
WAPPS‐Hemo yielded a slightly longer mean t1/2, but the overall correlation between the methods was good (ICC ≥0.79) The time to troughs of 5%, 3% and 1% showed ICCs ≥0.86. For all variables, the most converging limited time point was 6+48 h. Additional time points did not improve the correlation. Despite similar pharmacokinetics, the mean estimated dose for a specific trough level varied from 60% less to 20% more using the population‐based approach. The time to 1% and the corresponding dose was sensitive to the baseline assumption.
Conclusion
Our data support the use of population‐based PK for patients on simoctocog alfa prophylaxis but also indicates differences, stressing the importance of the sampling scheme and monitoring actual FVIII levels achieved.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Blood Specimen Collection</subject><subject>Clinical Medicine</subject><subject>Coagulation factors</subject><subject>Disease prevention</subject><subject>Dosage</subject><subject>Factor VIII - pharmacokinetics</subject><subject>Factor VIII - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Factor VIII deficiency</subject><subject>haemophilia</subject><subject>Half-Life</subject><subject>Hematologi</subject><subject>Hematology</subject><subject>Hemophilia</subject><subject>Hemophilia A - drug therapy</subject><subject>Hemostatics - pharmacokinetics</subject><subject>Hemostatics - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Klinisk medicin</subject><subject>Life Sciences & Biomedicine</subject><subject>Medical and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Medicin och hälsovetenskap</subject><subject>nuwiq</subject><subject>Pharmacokinetics</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Prophylaxis</subject><subject>Sampling</subject><subject>Science & Technology</subject><subject>simoctocog alfa</subject><issn>1351-8216</issn><issn>1365-2516</issn><issn>1365-2516</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>HGBXW</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>D8T</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkt-KEzEUxgdR3HX1wheQgDeKzG7-N7ksZXWFgjd6HZJMZpvuzGSczFDrlY8g-IY-iafbbgWhYCDkEH7fd85JTlG8JPiSwLpa2XBJOKP6UXFOmBQlFUQ-3sWClIoSeVY8y3mNMWEUy6fFGWNaSkb0efFrkdreDjGnDqUa5djdNgHlya2DH5HtKtSnfmrsGFP3-8dPZ3OAq5UdWuvTXezCGH1GdRpQ6sfYxu9ggPoh9attY7_FjDZxXIFtm_yYfLpFtqktih3qwTJ04wGADlrQxCZaNH9ePKltk8OLw3lRfHl__XlxUy4_ffi4mC9LLwjWpVVCUWhac80pJU5W1FeqnvkgcS1UxVkVZrRWnDlCueS6rqwkWnulna2wZBdFuffNm9BPzvRDbO2wNclGc7i6gygYLikRCnh9koeWq7-iByHhEnRCcNAuT2qbqYftYO80QrrZTBNmpKohNdbcWBWIEU4T5YiVuqJg92ZvB3m_TiGPpo3Zh6axXUhTNlRQrhSXDAP6-h90naahg4cFSlCqZozvenu7p_yQch5CfayQYLMbMgNfZO6HDNhXB8fJtaE6kg9TBYDaA5vgUp09fLQPRwxjLCGj5jOIMFnE8X66FmnqRpC--38p0FcHOjZhe7pkczO_3tf-B0GeAAY</recordid><startdate>202107</startdate><enddate>202107</enddate><creator>Astermark, Jan</creator><creator>Olsson, Anna</creator><creator>Chelle, Pierre</creator><creator>Täckström, Kinga</creator><creator>Walger, Maria</creator><creator>Magnusson, Maria</creator><creator>Iorio, Alfonso</creator><general>Wiley</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>BLEPL</scope><scope>DTL</scope><scope>HGBXW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AGCHP</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope><scope>D8T</scope><scope>D95</scope><scope>ZZAVC</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8500-2483</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202107</creationdate><title>Comparison of single subject and population‐based pharmacokinetics for optimizing prophylaxis with simoctocog alfa in patients with haemophilia A</title><author>Astermark, Jan ; Olsson, Anna ; Chelle, Pierre ; Täckström, Kinga ; Walger, Maria ; Magnusson, Maria ; Iorio, Alfonso</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5109-a85823299494221b6d2cd8f7ce60f58d43de72f843b124649fda6199c89bad063</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Blood Specimen Collection</topic><topic>Clinical Medicine</topic><topic>Coagulation factors</topic><topic>Disease prevention</topic><topic>Dosage</topic><topic>Factor VIII - pharmacokinetics</topic><topic>Factor VIII - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Factor VIII deficiency</topic><topic>haemophilia</topic><topic>Half-Life</topic><topic>Hematologi</topic><topic>Hematology</topic><topic>Hemophilia</topic><topic>Hemophilia A - drug therapy</topic><topic>Hemostatics - pharmacokinetics</topic><topic>Hemostatics - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Klinisk medicin</topic><topic>Life Sciences & Biomedicine</topic><topic>Medical and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Medicin och hälsovetenskap</topic><topic>nuwiq</topic><topic>Pharmacokinetics</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Prophylaxis</topic><topic>Sampling</topic><topic>Science & Technology</topic><topic>simoctocog alfa</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Astermark, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olsson, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chelle, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Täckström, Kinga</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walger, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magnusson, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iorio, Alfonso</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Web of Science Core Collection</collection><collection>Science Citation Index Expanded</collection><collection>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SWEPUB Lunds universitet full text</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><collection>SWEPUB Freely available online</collection><collection>SWEPUB Lunds universitet</collection><collection>SwePub Articles full text</collection><jtitle>Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Astermark, Jan</au><au>Olsson, Anna</au><au>Chelle, Pierre</au><au>Täckström, Kinga</au><au>Walger, Maria</au><au>Magnusson, Maria</au><au>Iorio, Alfonso</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of single subject and population‐based pharmacokinetics for optimizing prophylaxis with simoctocog alfa in patients with haemophilia A</atitle><jtitle>Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia</jtitle><stitle>HAEMOPHILIA</stitle><addtitle>Haemophilia</addtitle><date>2021-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>626</spage><epage>633</epage><pages>626-633</pages><issn>1351-8216</issn><issn>1365-2516</issn><eissn>1365-2516</eissn><abstract>Introduction
The use of pharmacokinetic assessment for optimal prophylactic dosing of factor concentrates in haemophilia has gained increasing enthusiasm over the last decade. However, blood sampling on several occasions is burdensome and limited sampling using population‐based PK is appealing.
Aim
To compare the pharmacokinetics and dosing recommendations for prophylaxis using six‐point single subject versus population‐based method (WAPPS‐Hemo) for simoctocog alfa (Nuwiq®).
Methods
Twelve adult patients with severe haemophilia A received a factor VIII (FVIII) dose of ≈50 IU/kg, and the activity was measured pre‐infusion and at 30 min, 6, 9, 24 and 48 h post‐infusion. Half‐life (t1/2), weight‐normalized AUC and time to troughs of 5%, 3% and 1% were calculated. The correlation between the PK algorithms was assessed using intraclass correlations (ICC) and dosing estimations were provided.
Results
WAPPS‐Hemo yielded a slightly longer mean t1/2, but the overall correlation between the methods was good (ICC ≥0.79) The time to troughs of 5%, 3% and 1% showed ICCs ≥0.86. For all variables, the most converging limited time point was 6+48 h. Additional time points did not improve the correlation. Despite similar pharmacokinetics, the mean estimated dose for a specific trough level varied from 60% less to 20% more using the population‐based approach. The time to 1% and the corresponding dose was sensitive to the baseline assumption.
Conclusion
Our data support the use of population‐based PK for patients on simoctocog alfa prophylaxis but also indicates differences, stressing the importance of the sampling scheme and monitoring actual FVIII levels achieved.</abstract><cop>HOBOKEN</cop><pub>Wiley</pub><pmid>33966319</pmid><doi>10.1111/hae.14329</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8500-2483</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1351-8216 |
ispartof | Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia, 2021-07, Vol.27 (4), p.626-633 |
issn | 1351-8216 1365-2516 1365-2516 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_webofscience_primary_000648394700001CitationCount |
source | MEDLINE; SWEPUB Freely available online; Access via Wiley Online Library; Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /> |
subjects | Adult Blood Specimen Collection Clinical Medicine Coagulation factors Disease prevention Dosage Factor VIII - pharmacokinetics Factor VIII - therapeutic use Factor VIII deficiency haemophilia Half-Life Hematologi Hematology Hemophilia Hemophilia A - drug therapy Hemostatics - pharmacokinetics Hemostatics - therapeutic use Humans Klinisk medicin Life Sciences & Biomedicine Medical and Health Sciences Medicin och hälsovetenskap nuwiq Pharmacokinetics Population Prophylaxis Sampling Science & Technology simoctocog alfa |
title | Comparison of single subject and population‐based pharmacokinetics for optimizing prophylaxis with simoctocog alfa in patients with haemophilia A |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-03T12%3A53%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_webof&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20single%20subject%20and%20population%E2%80%90based%20pharmacokinetics%20for%20optimizing%20prophylaxis%20with%20simoctocog%20alfa%20in%20patients%20with%20haemophilia%20A&rft.jtitle=Haemophilia%20:%20the%20official%20journal%20of%20the%20World%20Federation%20of%20Hemophilia&rft.au=Astermark,%20Jan&rft.date=2021-07&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=626&rft.epage=633&rft.pages=626-633&rft.issn=1351-8216&rft.eissn=1365-2516&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/hae.14329&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_webof%3E2552287348%3C/proquest_webof%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2552287348&rft_id=info:pmid/33966319&rfr_iscdi=true |