Drug repurposing has gained significant interest in recent years due to the high costs associated with de novo drug development; however, comprehensive pharmacological information is needed for the translation of pre-existing drugs across clinical applications. In the present study, we explore the current pharmacological understanding of the orphan drug, hemin, and identify remaining knowledge gaps with regard to hemin repurposing for the treatment of cardiovascular disease. Originally approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 1983 for the treatment of porphyria, hemin has attracted significant interest for therapeutic repurposing across a variety of pathophysiological conditions. Yet, the clinical translation of hemin remains limited to porphyria. Understanding hemin\'s pharmacological profile in health and disease strengthens our ability to treat patients effectively, identify therapeutic opportunities or limitations, and predict and prevent adverse side effects. However, requirements for the pre-clinical and clinical characterization of biologics approved under the U.S. FDA\'s Orphan Drug Act in 1983 (such as hemin) differed significantly from current standards, presenting fundamental gaps in our collective understanding of hemin pharmacology as well as knowledge barriers to clinical translation for future applications. Using information extracted from the primary and regulatory literature (including documents submitted to Health Canada in support of hemin\'s approval for the Canadian market in 2018), we present a comprehensive case study of current knowledge related to hemin\'s biopharmaceutical properties, pre-clinical/clinical pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, dosing, and safety, focusing specifically on the drug\'s effects on heme regulation and in the context of acute myocardial infarction.

UNASSIGNED: Since 1983, hemin has been FDA-approved for acute intermittent porphyria (AIP) attacks. In 2019, FDA approved givosiran for the treatment of adults with acute hepatic porphyria. The objective of this research was to estimate and compare the total cost of AIP-related healthcare for patients treated with hemin or givosiran.
UNASSIGNED: A microsimulation cost model was developed to estimate the annual economic impact of hemin versus givosiran treatment for patients with AIP from the U.S. healthcare payer perspective. Hemin treatment costs were calculated from the Hemin Shipment Data in which patients were defined as receiving acute attack treatment or prophylaxis treatment based on shipment patterns. Three separate hemin subpopulations were considered: one attack per year, multiple attacks per year, and hemin prophylaxis. Treatment costs for givosiran (with hemin for acute attacks) were simulated based on Phase III trial efficacy results applied to individual treatment histories in the Hemin Shipment Data. Other healthcare utilization was also considered. Outcomes were annualized and expenditures inflated to 2019.
UNASSIGNED: For all patients with AIP, the average annual total cost of care with hemin was 78% lower (difference = $482,113; 95% CI=$373,638-$594,778) than the average annual total cost of care with givosiran. Average annual total cost of care with hemin was between 46% and 92% lower than givosiran for the three hemin subpopulations: one attack per year (difference = $545,219; 95% CI=$436,584-$657,239), multiple attacks per year (difference = $459,366; 95% CI=$350,291-$574,403), and hemin prophylaxis (difference = $311,950; 95% CI=$191,898-$435,893). Cost savings with hemin were robust to one-way and probabilistic sensitivity as well as scenario analyses.
UNASSIGNED: Hemin is expected to provide cost savings compared to givosiran for all AIP patients and subpopulations. Lower annual total costs of care with hemin range from $311,950 to $545,219 less depending on whether the patient uses hemin prophylactically or for acute treatment attacks.

Background and aims: Patients with acute intermittent porphyria (AIP) may suffer from acute non-specific attacks that often result in hospitalizations or emergency room (ER) visits. Prior to the recent approval of givosiran (November 2019), hemin was the only FDA-approved therapy for AIP attacks in the US. Our aim was to estimate the annual healthcare utilization and expenditures for AIP patients treated with hemin using real-world data.Methods: Patients with ≥1 hemin claim and confirmed AIP diagnosis - 1 inpatient claim or 2 outpatient claims ≥30 d apart for AIP (2015-2017) or acute porphyria (prior to 2015) - were identified in MarketScan administrative claims dataset between 2007 and 2017. Continuous enrolment for ≥6 months from confirmed diagnosis was required. A secondary analysis (\"active disease population\") limited the sample to adult patients with ≥3 attacks or 10 months of prophylactic use of hemin within a 12-month pre-index period. AIP-related care was defined by hemin use during an attack (daily glucose and/or hemin use) or prophylaxis (non-attack hemin use). Outcomes were annualized and expenditures were inflated to 2017.Results: Across 10 years, patients with a confirmed AIP diagnosis (N = 8,877) and ≥1 hemin claim (N = 164) were restricted by ≥6 months continuous follow-up (N = 139). AIP patients were mostly female (N = 112; 81%), had median age of 40 and 3 years average follow-up. Annualized average total expenditures for AIP-related care were $113,477. Annualized average all-cause (any diagnosis) hospitalizations were statistically significantly lower for patients treated with hemin prophylaxis vs. acute treatment (1.0 vs. 2.1; p < .001). In the secondary analysis (N = 27), annualized average total expenditures for AIP-related care were higher ($187,480).Conclusions: For AIP patients treated with hemin, patients treated for acute attacks may use a greater number of resources compared to patients treated prophylactically.