Skip to main content
ISTH 2024 Main banner
Back

Poster Networking

Inherited Bleeding Disorders and Inhibitors

PB0520 - Navigating Treatment Adherence: A Comparative Analysis of Prophylaxis with Emicizumab versus Conventional CFC in Nigeria

Monday, June 24, 2024
13:45 – 14:45 ICT
Room: Exhibition Hall

    Presenting Author(s)

  • Theresa U. Nwagha, MD, MPH, FMCPath, MSc

    Consultant Haematologist
    University of Nigeria , College of Medicine Ituku Ozalla Campus
    Enugu, Enugu, Nigeria

    • Co-Author(s)

  • MA

    Megan Adediran

    President / Executive Director
    Haemophilia Foundation of Nigeria
    Kaduna, Kaduna, Nigeria

  • Helen Chioma Okoye, MBBS, MSc, MD, FMCPath, FWACP

    Associate Professor of Haematology/Consultant Haematologist
    Department of Haematology and Immunology, College of Medicine, University of Nigeria
    Enugu, Enugu, Nigeria

  • EE

    Eyiuche Ezigbo

    Senior Lecturer
    Faculty of health Sciences Department of Medical Laboratory Science UNEC
    Enugu, Enugu, Nigeria

  • oO

    onochie I. Obodo

    Trainee Haematologist
    University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu
    Enugu, Enugu, Nigeria

  • cE

    chioma Sandra Ejezie, V

    Consultant Haematologist
    University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital Ituku-Ozalla Enugu Nigeria
    Enugu, Enugu, Nigeria

Background: The success of therapeutic interventions in managing hemophilia significantly depends on the patient’s adherence to prophylaxis. WFH humanitarian aid programs contribute significantly to enhancing treatment adherence and improving patient outcomes. However, in Nigeria, as well as in many other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), several factors make it difficult to ensure this adherence such as limited resources, lack of awareness, and access to specialized care.

Aims: To assess any potential differences in prophylaxis treatment adherence between Emicizumab and conventional CFC .

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was carried out with 95 participants in Nigeria who were on prophylaxis with eitherEmicizumab or conventional CFC. The treatment adherence was measured using the Haemophilia Regimen Treatment Adherence Scale-Prophylaxis (VERITAS-Pro), a validated questionnaire, with 24 questions across six subscales (time, dose, plan, remember, skip, and communicate), uses a 5-point Likert scale to assess various aspects of treatment adherence. A score of more than 61 on the scale indicates nonadherence to treatment.

Results: Of the 93 participants, 53 were receiving Emicizumab and 42 were on low dose prophylaxis with conventional CFC. Overall adherence to the prophylaxis regimen with conventional CFC and Emicizumab were 81.0% and 98.1% respectively The mean total VERITAS-Pro, for the adherent group conventional CFC vs Emicizumab was 37.35 ±9.08 and 30.06 ±7.61, respectively. The mean subscale scores for the adherent group (conventional CFC) ranged from 0.67 (communication) to 8.68 (planning), while the mean subscale scores range from 8.0 communication to 20.0 (planning) for the Emicizumab

Conclusion(s): Emicizumab had lower VERITAS-Pro scores than CFCs, indicating better adherence. Emicizumab also had higher scores on the communication and planning subscales, but lower scores on the other subscales, compared to the adherent group who received CFCs. This suggests that emicizumab may improve adherence by reducing the burden and frequency of injections, as well as enhancing communication and planning skills.