Prophylaxis with standard therapeutic factor concentrate vs pegylated liposome FVIII formulation: ABR
Prophylaxis with standard therapeutic factor concentrate showed no clear difference in ABR compared with pegylated liposome FVIII formulation (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Prophylaxis with standard therapeutic factor concentrate vs pegylated liposome FVIII formulation ABR · children or adults with hemophilia A Prophylaxis with standard therapeutic factor concentrate showed no clear difference in ABR compared with pegylated liposome FVIII formulation (low certainty). Clotting factor concentrates for preventing bleeding and bleeding‐related complications in previously… (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 143 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clotting factor concentrates for preventing bleeding and bleeding‐related complications in previously treated individuals with haemophilia… 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.