Regional effects on efficacy and safety of vilobelimab in mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19

Introduction: Poor outcomes in COVID-19 patients (pt) are associated with C5a-C5aR axis activation. A C5a-specific monoclonal antibody, vilobelimab (VILO), improves outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 pt in a Phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo (PLC)- controlled study [1]. Method(s): COVID-19 pt within 48 h of intubation were randomly assigned to receive 6, 800 mg infusions of VILO or PLC at a 1:1 ratio on top of standard of care. Predefined subgroup analyses by region and country were performed. Result(s): Forty-six (46) hospitals on 4 continents randomized 369 pt: VILO (n = 178), PLC (n = 191). VILO significantly reduced 28- (HR 0.67;95% CI 0.48-0.96;p = 0.027) and 60-Day mortality (HR 0.67;95% CI 0.48-0.93, p = 0.0163) using a predefined, unstratified per protocol analysis. Mortality rates at 28- and 60-days and VILO treatment effects, however, differed substantially between regions: Western Europe HR for 60-day mortality 0.59 [0.37-0.95], South Africa plus Russian Federation HR 0.62 [0.28-1.38] and South America HR 0.80 [0.46-1.39] (Fig. 1). The weak signal in South America is predominately driven by Brazil (n = 74), which showed a significant age imbalance with a median 9-years younger PLC group (44.5-years-old vs 53.5-years-old) with low 60-day mortality of ~ 32.5% in the PLC group versus ~ 43.3% in Western Europe. Adjusting for age group categories (<= 30, 31-40, 41-50, 51-60, > 60;Cox regression) for 60-day mortality changed the HR in Brazil (0.96 [0.44-2.10] for continuous age-adjustment) to values near the estimate for the entire study population (HR 0.77 [0.35-1.69] for age in categories), suggesting a by chance imbalance and not a statistically evident weaker effect in Brazil. Conclusion(s): Regional efficacy differences between the rest of the world and South America were driven by age imbalances between treatment groups, which do not diminish the robust efficacy signal for VILO in severe COVID-19.

Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis of vilobelimab and anaphylatoxin c5a as well as antidrug antibodies in Panamo: a phase 3 study in critically ill, mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients

Introduction: C5a-C5aR axis activation is associated with increased mortality in severe COVID-19. Vilobelimab (VILO), a C5a-specific monoclonal antibody, improved mortality in severe COVID-19 patients (pts) in a Phase 3 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PLC)- controlled study [1]. A pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) analysis was undertaken to assess VILO and C5a as well as antidrug antibodies (ADA) levels in the study. Method(s): Forty-six (46) hospitals on four continents randomized 369 COVID-19 pts (VILO [n = 178], PLC [n = 191]) within 48 h of being mechanically ventilated to receive 6, 800 mg infusions of VILO or PLC at a 1:1 ratio on top of standard of care. Blood samples were taken at screening, Day 8 and at hospital discharge for VILO and C5a and at screening and hospital discharge for ADA. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays were used to analyze levels. Result(s): Screening blood samples for VILO and C5a were available for VILO (n = 93) and PLC (n = 99) from sites in Western Europe. On Day 8 after 3 infusions, mean VILO trough concentrations were 21799.3- 302972.1 ng/mL (geometric mean 137881.3 ng/mL) (Fig. 1). At screening, C5a was highly elevated and comparable between groups: VILO median 118.3 ng/mL, mean 130.3 ng/mL, PLC median 104.6 ng/mL, mean 123.2 ng/mL. By Day 8, C5a levels were reduced by 84.6% in the VILO group (median 14.5 ng/mL [mean 16.8 ng/mL], p < 0.001) versus a 19.6% increase in the PLC group (median, 119.2 ng/mL, mean 129.8 ng/ mL). Beyond Day 8, though PD sampling was sparse, C5a levels remained elevated for PLC whereas C5a slowly rose but did not reach screening levels for VILO. Treatment-induced ADA were observed in 1 pt in the VILO group (Day 40 discharge) and 1 pt in the PLC group (Day 25 discharge), both appeared independent of treatment. Conclusion(s): The PK/PD analysis shows that VILO efficiently inhibits C5a in pts with severe COVID-19 resulting in a robust clinical effect on mortality reduction without inducing ADA.

Phase 3 RCT of C5a-Specific Vilobelimab in Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia

Background: Blocking the C5a-C5aR axis in COVID-19 patients could improve outcomes by limiting myeloid cell infiltration in damaged organs and preventing excessive lung inflammation and endothelialitis. Aims and Objectives: Vilobelimab (VILO), an anti-C5a mAb that preserves the membrane attack complex (MAC), was tested in a Phase III adaptively designed multicenter, double-blind placebo (P)-controlled study for survival in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Method(s): COVID-19 pneumonia patients (N=369;VILO n=178, P n=191) within 48 hrs of intubation were randomly assigned to receive 6, 800 mg infusions of VILO or P on top of standard of care. Primary outcome was 28-day allcause mortality. Result(s): 28-day all-cause mortality was 31.7% VILO vs 41.6% P (Kaplan-Meier estimates;Cox regression site stratified, HR 0.73;95%CI:0.50-1.06;P=0.094) with a 22.7% relative mortality reduction to Day 60. In predefined primary outcome analysis without site stratification, VILO significantly reduced 28-day mortality (HR 0.67;95%CI:0.48-0.96;P=0.027);needed to treat number, 10 to save 1. VILO significantly reduced 28-day mortality in severe patients with baseline WHO ordinal scale score of 7 (n=237, HR 0.62;95%CI:0.40-0.95;P=0.028) or severe ARDS/PaO2/FiO2<=100 mmHg (n=98, HR 0.55;95%CI:0.30-0.98;P=0.044) or eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73m2 (n=108, HR 0.55;95%CI:0.31-0.96;P=0.036). Treatment emergent AEs were 90.9% VILO vs 91.0% P. Infections were comparable;VILO (62.9%), P (59.3%). Serious AEs were 58.9% VILO, 63.5% P. Conclusion(s): VILO reduced mortality at 28 to 60 days in severe COVID-19 pneumonia patients with no increase in infections suggesting the importance of targeting C5a while preserving MAC.

Randomized, Controlled Phase 3 Study of anti-C5a Vilobelimab's Effect on Mortality in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Therapy for Viral Pneumonia

Background. SARS-CoV-2 induces endothelial damage and activates the complement system. In severe COVID-19 patients, complement split factor C5a is highly elevated leading to inflammation that contributes to multiorgan failure. The anti-C5a monoclonal antibody, Vilobelimab (Vilo), which preserves the membrane attack complex (MAC), was investigated in an adaptively designed, randomized doubleblind, placebo (P)-controlled Phase 3 international multicenter study for survival in critically ill COVID-19 patients (pts). Methods. COVID-19 pneumonia pts (N=368;Vilo n=177, P n=191), mechanically ventilated within 48 hrs before treatment, received up to 6, 800 mg infusions of Vilo or P on top of standard of care. The primary and main secondary endpoints were 28-day (d) and 60-d all-cause mortality. Results. Pts enrolled in the study were on corticosteroids (97%) and anticoagulants (98%) as standard of care. A smaller proportion (20%) were either continuing or had taken immunomodulators such as tocilizumab and baricitinib prior to receiving Vilo. The 28-d all-cause mortality was 31.7% with Vilo vs 41.6% with P (Kaplan-Meier estimates;Cox regression site-stratified, HR 0.73;95% CI:0.50-1.06;P=0.094), representing a 23.8% relative mortality reduction. In predefined primary outcome analysis without site stratification, however, Vilo significantly reduced mortality at 28 (HR 0.67;95% CI:0.48-0.96;P=0.027) and 60 days (HR 0.67;95% CI:0.48-0.92;P=0.016). Vilo also significantly reduced 28-d mortality in more severe pts with baseline WHO ordinal scale score of 7 (n=237, HR 0.62;95% CI:0.40-0.95;P=0.028), severe ARDS/PaO2/FiO2 <= 100 mmHg (n=98, HR 0.55;95% CI:0.30-0.98;P=0.044) and eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73m2 (n=108, HR 0.55;95% CI:0.31-0.96;P=0.036). Treatment-emergent AEs were 90.9% Vilo vs 91.0% P. Infections were comparable: Vilo 62.9%, P 59.3%. Infection incidence per 100 Pt days were equal. No meningococcal infections were reported. Serious AEs were 58.9% Vilo, 63.5% P. Conclusion. Vilo significantly reduced mortality at 28 and 60 days in critically ill COVID-19 pts with no increase in infections suggesting the importance of targeting C5a while preserving MAC. Vilo targets inflammation which may represent an approach to treat sepsis and ARDS caused by other respiratory viruses. (Figure Presented).

Impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on acute stroke care.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There are concerns that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak negatively affects the quality of care for acute cardiovascular conditions. We assessed the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on trends in hospital admissions and workflow parameters of acute stroke care in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. METHODS: We used data from the three hospitals that provide acute stroke care for the Amsterdam region. We compared two 7-week periods: one during the peak of the COVID-19 outbreak (March 16th-May 3th 2020) and one prior to the outbreak (October 21st-December 8th 2019). We included consecutive patients who presented to the emergency departments with a suspected stroke and assessed the change in number of patients as an incidence-rate ratio (IRR) using a Poisson regression analysis. Other outcomes were the IRR for stroke subtypes, change in use of reperfusion therapy, treatment times, and in-hospital complications. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 period, 309 patients presented with a suspected stroke compared to 407 patients in the pre-COVID-19 period (IRR 0.76 95%CI 0.65-0.88). The proportion of men was higher during the COVID-19 period (59% vs. 47%, p < 0.001). There was no change in the proportion of stroke patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis (28% vs. 30%, p = 0.58) or endovascular thrombectomy (11% vs 12%, p = 0.82) or associated treatment times. Seven patients (all ischemic strokes) were diagnosed with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: We observed a 24% decrease in suspected stroke presentations during the COVID-19 outbreak, but no evidence for a decrease in quality of acute stroke care.