Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 197
Filter
1.
Mult Scler Relat Disord ; 66: 104025, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2181739

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This analysis evaluated long-term safety findings from the SAkuraSky and SAkuraStar studies with satralizumab in patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). METHODS: SAkuraSky (satralizumab in combination with baseline immunosuppressive therapy; IST) and SAkuraStar (satralizumab monotherapy) are international, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies consisting of a double-blind (DB) period followed by an open-label extension (OLE). The overall satralizumab treatment (OST) period safety population comprised patients receiving ≥1 dose of satralizumab in the DB and/or OLE periods (cut-off date: 22 February 2021). Safety was evaluated in the DB and OST periods. RESULTS: In the SAkuraSky DB period, patients received satralizumab (n = 41) or placebo (n = 42) in addition to stable baseline IST; 75 patients were included in the OST population. In the SAkuraStar DB period, 63 patients received satralizumab monotherapy and 32 received placebo; 91 patients were included in the OST population. Median treatment exposure in the OST period was 4.4 years (range 0.1-7.0) in SAkuraSky and 4.0 years (range 0.1-6.1) in SAkuraStar. Rates of adverse events (AEs per 100 patient-years) and serious AEs in the OST period were comparable with satralizumab and placebo in the DB periods of both studies. Similarly, overall rates of infections and serious infections were consistent between the OST and DB periods with satralizumab, with no increase in rates of infections or serious infections over time. In the OST periods, longer exposure to satralizumab was not associated with a higher risk of severe (grade ≥3) laboratory changes versus the DB periods. No deaths or anaphylactic reactions to treatment with satralizumab were reported during the OST periods of both studies. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of satralizumab as a monotherapy or in combination with IST was maintained in the OLE, and no new safety concerns versus the DB period were observed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02028884 (SAkuraSky) and NCT02073279 (SAkuraStar).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Neuromyelitis Optica , Humans , Double-Blind Method , Neuromyelitis Optica/drug therapy , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects
2.
Mult Scler Relat Disord ; 63: 103921, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2181738

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Infections in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) may have a detrimental effect on disease progression, risk of hospitalization, and healthcare resource utilization (HRU). The infection risk and HRU costs may vary between disease-modifying therapies (DMTs); however, the individual risks and differences associated with DMTs are not well characterized. Some DMTs may increase the risk for infections in PwMS; however, previous studies have reported an intact humoral immune response in dimethyl fumarate (DMF)-treated patients. The objective was to compare infection-related HRU and healthcare costs (HCCs) between PwMS treated with DMF or ocrelizumab (OCR). METHODS: Eligible patients were identified from the Optum US claims database between April 2017 and September 2020 (DMF n = 1429; OCR n = 3170). Patients were followed from index date to first occurrence of: (1) end of study, (2) end of insurance eligibility, (3) discontinuation of index DMT, or (4) switch from index DMT to another DMT. Outcomes were annualized rate of infection encounters (defined as infection encounters [n] during follow-up window / days followed [n] × 365); annualized infection-related HCCs (defined as aggregated costs of infection encounters during follow-up window / days followed [n] × 365); location-specific infections, and overall infection-related events. Propensity score matching (PSM) 1:1 method was used; PS was calculated via logistic regression for probability of DMF treatment conditional on demographics and comorbidities. Mean differences (MD) were reported for infection encounter measures. RESULTS: After PSM, DMF and OCR cohorts (n = 1094 in each cohort) were balanced based on baseline characteristics (standardized MD of adjusted baseline characteristics <0.1). Mean (standard deviation) follow-up was 296 (244) days for DMF patients and 297 (243) for OCR patients. DMF patients experienced lower annualized rates of overall infection encounters vs OCR patients (MD -0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.92 to -0.11], p = 0.01). When stratified by type of infection encounter, DMF patients experienced significantly lower annualized rates of outpatient (MD [95% CI]: -0.44 [-0.80 to -0.08], p = 0.02) and inpatient/hospitalization infection encounters (-0.08 [-0.14 to -0.02], p<0.01) vs OCR patients. A trend towards a shorter duration of infection-related hospitalization in the DMF vs the OCR group was observed (MD [95% CI]: -2.20 [-4.73 to 0.26] days, p = 0.08). The most common infection types in both DMT groups were urinary tract infections, sepsis, and pneumonia. DMF patients experienced lower annualized infection-related HCCs (MD [95% CI]: -$3642 [-$6380 to -$904], p < 0.01) vs OCR patients, which were driven largely by infection-related hospitalization costs (-$3639 [-$6019 to -$1259], p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: DMF-treated patients PS-matched with OCR patients experienced lower annualized rates of infection encounters and lower infection-related HCCs.


Subject(s)
Dimethyl Fumarate , Multiple Sclerosis , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Dimethyl Fumarate/therapeutic use , Health Care Costs , Humans , Multiple Sclerosis/chemically induced , Multiple Sclerosis/complications , Multiple Sclerosis/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies
4.
Headache ; 62(9): 1218-1221, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2136842

ABSTRACT

Erenumab is a monoclonal antibody (mAb) approved for the preventive treatment of migraine. While preclinical studies on calcitonin gene-related peptide mAbs did not identify any reproductive toxicity, pregnant and breastfeeding women were excluded from the pivotal human studies, and therefore the safety of calcitonin gene-related peptide medications in this population must be studied. So far, postmarketing data of accidental exposures have not brought to light any specific toxicities. Three women treated with erenumab in our series conceived while exposed to the drug. All had previous successful pregnancies, were on erenumab for more than 6 months, and had ≥80% reduction in headache frequency. The one who stopped erenumab only 1 month before conceiving had a spontaneous abortion during the first trimester due to a gestational trophoblastic neoplasia and has since conceived with an uneventful gestation. The other two women stopped treatment during the first trimester, and both pregnancies went to term with no complications. All babies have shown normal development. No plausible explanation relates the mechanism of action of erenumab and the serious complication that occurred in one patient. Continuous follow-up and reporting of all exposures are encouraged to gather safety data on pregnant and nursing women and on the development of the newborns. So far, immediately stopping the drug is advised and may contribute to decreasing the potential risks.


Subject(s)
Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonists , Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
5.
Ter Arkh ; 94(5): 675-682, 2022 Jun 17.
Article in Russian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2091501

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of virus-neutralizing monoclonal antibodies is an effective method of etiotropic therapy for SARS-CoV-2 in patients of high-risk groups of severe COVID-19. Regdanvimab is a single-component monoclonal antibodies immunoglobulin G1, whose mechanism of action is aimed at binding SARS-CoV-2 virus at the RBD site of the spike protein S1 domain. In the Russian Federation, regdanvimab is approved for emergency administration in COVID-19 for adult patients not requiring respiratory therapy who are at high risk of developing a severe course of the disease. AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of therapy with regdanvimab in patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 in a short-term hospital unit. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Virus-neutralizing therapy with regdanvimab was performed at the short-term hospital unit of the Moscow City Clinic. An open retrospective observational single-center study included 92 adult patients with mild/moderate coronavirus infection. All patients had comorbid chronic diseases and belonged to the high-risk group for the development of a severe COVID-19. INCLUSION CRITERIA: age 18 to 75 years; presence of a verified diagnosis of COVID-19 of mild/moderate COVID-19, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed; one or more chronic diseases; first 7 days from the onset of the first symptoms of COVID-19 (including day 7). EXCLUSION CRITERIA: need for oxygen support. Clinical efficacy was assessed according to the World Health Organization Сlinical Progression Scale and supplemented with laboratory markers at baseline and in dynamics, as well as with monitoring of virus elimination by PCR. STATISTICS: Calculations were performed using the statistical computing environment R 4.1.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Austria). For quantitative indices the median (1; 3 quartiles) was indicated. For binomial signs we calculated 95% confidence intervals according to Wilson's method. Time interval analysis was performed according to the KaplanMeier method. The significance level was determined at p0.05. RESULTS: A significant decrease in the severity of clinical manifestations according to the World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale was noted by patients by day 4 after regdanvimab administration. All 92 patients in the cohort were discharged from the hospital l on average on day 5 after regdanvimab administration and on day 9 of the disease. On day 4 after drug administration 82% of patients was being PCR negative. No adverse events related to the administration of regdanvimab were reported during the study. CONCLUSION: In real clinical practice, the efficacy and safety of regdanvimab in patients at high risk of severe COVID-19 was confirmed once again, with a positive clinical result observed in a mixed cohort by the causative agent omicron and delta strain.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Adolescent , Young Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Retrospective Studies , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus , Time Factors , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Oxygen
7.
Lancet Respir Med ; 10(3): 237-246, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2036653

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of COVID-19 includes immune-mediated hyperinflammation, which could potentially lead to respiratory failure and death. Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) is among cytokines that contribute to the inflammatory processes. Lenzilumab, a GM-CSF neutralising monoclonal antibody, was investigated in the LIVE-AIR trial to assess its efficacy and safety in treating COVID-19 beyond available treatments. METHODS: In LIVE-AIR, a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, hospitalised adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation were recruited from 29 sites in the USA and Brazil and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive three intravenous doses of lenzilumab (600 mg per dose) or placebo delivered 8 h apart. All patients received standard supportive care, including the use of remdesivir and corticosteroids. Patients were stratified at randomisation by age and disease severity. The primary endpoint was survival without invasive mechanical ventilation to day 28 in the modified intention-to-treat population (mITT), comprising all randomised participants who received at least one dose of study drug under the documented supervision of the principal investigator or sub-investigator. Adverse events were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04351152, and is completed. FINDINGS: Patients were enrolled from May 5, 2020, until Jan 27, 2021. 528 patients were screened, of whom 520 were randomly assigned and included in the intention-to-treat population. 479 of these patients (n=236, lenzilumab; n=243, placebo) were included in the mITT analysis for the primary outcome. Baseline demographics were similar between groups. 311 (65%) participants were males, mean age was 61 (SD 14) years at baseline, and median C-reactive protein concentration was 79 (IQR 41-137) mg/L. Steroids were administered to 449 (94%) patients and remdesivir to 347 (72%) patients; 331 (69%) patients received both treatments. Survival without invasive mechanical ventilation to day 28 was achieved in 198 (84%; 95% CI 79-89) participants in the lenzilumab group and in 190 (78%; 72-83) patients in the placebo group, and the likelihood of survival was greater with lenzilumab than placebo (hazard ratio 1·54; 95% CI 1·02-2·32; p=0·040). 68 (27%) of 255 patients in the lenzilumab group and 84 (33%) of 257 patients in the placebo group experienced at least one adverse event that was at least grade 3 in severity based on CTCAE criteria. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or higher were related to respiratory disorders (26%) and cardiac disorders (6%) and none led to death. INTERPRETATION: Lenzilumab significantly improved survival without invasive mechanical ventilation in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, with a safety profile similar to that of placebo. The added value of lenzilumab beyond other immunomodulators used to treat COVID-19 alongside steroids remains unknown. FUNDING: Humanigen.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
8.
N Engl J Med ; 387(6): 495-505, 2022 08 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2031919

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Teclistamab is a T-cell-redirecting bispecific antibody that targets both CD3 expressed on the surface of T cells and B-cell maturation antigen expressed on the surface of myeloma cells. In the phase 1 dose-defining portion of the study, teclistamab showed promising efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this phase 1-2 study, we enrolled patients who had relapsed or refractory myeloma after at least three therapy lines, including triple-class exposure to an immunomodulatory drug, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 antibody. Patients received a weekly subcutaneous injection of teclistamab (at a dose of 1.5 mg per kilogram of body weight) after receiving step-up doses of 0.06 mg and 0.3 mg per kilogram. The primary end point was the overall response (partial response or better). RESULTS: Among 165 patients who received teclistamab, 77.6% had triple-class refractory disease (median, five previous therapy lines). With a median follow-up of 14.1 months, the overall response rate was 63.0%, with 65 patients (39.4%) having a complete response or better. A total of 44 patients (26.7%) were found to have no minimal residual disease (MRD); the MRD-negativity rate among the patients with a complete response or better was 46%. The median duration of response was 18.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.9 to not estimable). The median duration of progression-free survival was 11.3 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 17.1). Common adverse events included cytokine release syndrome (in 72.1% of the patients; grade 3, 0.6%; no grade 4), neutropenia (in 70.9%; grade 3 or 4, 64.2%), anemia (in 52.1%; grade 3 or 4, 37.0%), and thrombocytopenia (in 40.0%; grade 3 or 4, 21.2%). Infections were frequent (in 76.4%; grade 3 or 4, 44.8%). Neurotoxic events occurred in 24 patients (14.5%), including immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome in 5 patients (3.0%; all grade 1 or 2). CONCLUSIONS: Teclistamab resulted in a high rate of deep and durable response in patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Cytopenias and infections were common; toxic effects that were consistent with T-cell redirection were mostly grade 1 or 2. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MajesTEC-1 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03145181 and NCT04557098.).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Bispecific , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological , B-Cell Maturation Antigen , CD3 Complex , Multiple Myeloma , Antibodies, Bispecific/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Bispecific/adverse effects , Antibodies, Bispecific/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , B-Cell Maturation Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , CD3 Complex/antagonists & inhibitors , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Multiple Myeloma/drug therapy , Multiple Myeloma/immunology , Multiple Myeloma/pathology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy , Recurrence , T-Lymphocytes/drug effects , T-Lymphocytes/immunology
9.
Mult Scler ; 28(10): 1576-1590, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1997275

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Ofatumumab is approved for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). Ongoing safety reporting is crucial to understand its long-term benefit-risk profile. OBJECTIVE: Report the safety and tolerability of ofatumumab in RMS after extended treatment up to 3.5 years. METHODS: Patients completing ASCLEPIOS I/II (phase 3), APLIOS, or APOLITOS (phase 2) trials could enter ALITHIOS, a phase 3b, open-label, long-term safety study. We analyzed cumulative data of continuous ofatumumab treatment and of patients newly switched from teriflunomide. RESULTS: The safety population had 1969 patients: 1292 continuously treated with ofatumumab (median time-at-risk 35.5 months, 3253 patient-years) and 677 newly switched (median time-at-risk 18.3 months, 986 patient-years). A total of 1650 patients (83.8%) had ⩾1 adverse events and 191 (9.7%) had ⩾1 serious adverse events. No opportunistic infections or progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy events were identified; the risk of malignancies was low. Mean serum immunoglobulin (Ig) G levels remained stable. Mean IgM levels decreased but remained above the lower limit of normal in most. Serious infection incidence was low; decreased Ig levels were not associated with serious infections. CONCLUSION: In patients with up to 3.5 years' exposure, ofatumumab was well tolerated, with no new safety risks identified. These findings, with its established effectiveness, support a favorable benefit-risk profile of ofatumumab in RMS.


Subject(s)
Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting , Multiple Sclerosis , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Humans , Multiple Sclerosis/drug therapy , Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting/drug therapy
10.
Front Immunol ; 13: 897748, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1987493

ABSTRACT

Sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators and anti-CD20 treatment are widely used disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis. Unfortunately, they may impair the patient's ability to mount sufficient humoral and T-cellular responses to vaccination, which is of special relevance in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We present here a case series of six multiple sclerosis patients on treatment with sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators who failed to develop SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies and T-cells after three doses of vaccination. Due to their ongoing immunotherapy, lacking vaccination response, and additional risk factors, we offered them pre-exposure prophylactic treatment with monoclonal SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies. Initially, treatment was conducted with the antibody cocktail casirivimab/imdevimab. When the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant became predominant, we switched treatment to monoclonal antibody sotrovimab due to its sustained neutralizing ability also against the Omicron strain. Since sotrovimab was approved only for the treatment of COVID-19 infection and not for pre-exposure prophylaxis, we switched treatment to tixagevimab/cilgavimab as soon as it was granted marketing authorization in the European Union. This antibody cocktail has retained, albeit reduced, neutralizing activity against the Omicron variant and is approved for pre-exposure prophylaxis. No severe adverse events were recorded for our patients. One patient had a positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 under treatment with sotrovimab, but was asymptomatic. The other five patients did not develop symptoms of an upper respiratory tract infection or evidence of a SARS-CoV-2 infection during the time of treatment up until the finalization of this report. SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibody treatment should be considered individually for multiple sclerosis patients lacking adequate vaccination responses on account of their immunomodulatory treatment, especially in times of high incidences of SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , COVID-19 , Multiple Sclerosis , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , Antibodies, Monoclonal , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Multiple Sclerosis/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Sphingosine-1-Phosphate Receptors , Vaccination
11.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 58(8)2022 Aug 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1979313

ABSTRACT

Background and objectives: COVID-19 patients exhibit a broad range of manifestations, presenting with a flu-like respiratory tract infection that can advance to a systemic and severe disease characterized by pneumonia, pulmonary edema, severe damage to the airways, and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS, causing fatality in 70% of COVID-19 cases). A 'cytokine storm' profile is found in most severely influenced COVID-19 patients. The treatment protocol of the disease also includes tocilizumab, which is a humanized monoclonal antibody used to treat autoimmune and inflammatory conditions. This study was designed (1) to assess the role of tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients regarding therapeutic efficacy through evaluation of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) resolution and anticoagulant effect, analyzing clinical safety via monitoring of associated adverse effects profile; and (2) to compare the clinical safety and therapeutic efficacy of institutional treatment regimen (alone) versus tocilizumab added to an institutional treatment module in COVID-19 patients. Materials and Methods: In this study, the endpoints parametric assessment of severely diseased patients of COVID-19 was performed (total n = 172, control group (institutional protocol treatment provided), n = 101 and test group (tocilizumab provided), n = 71) at the Khyber Teaching Institution, MTI, Peshawar. The assessments were compared using non-parametric analyses at baseline and after a follow-up of 12-18 days until the patient discharged or expired. Results: Results of the study revealed an insignificant difference among the control vs. test group in resolving inflammatory parameters (C-reactive protein (CRP) 21.30 vs. 50.07; p = 0.470, ferritin 482.9 vs. 211.5; p = 0.612, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) 29.12 vs.18.8; p = 0.0863, and D-dimer 464 vs.164.4; p = 0.131). However, a statistically significant difference was found between the control group and test group regarding coagulation parameters (international normalized ratio (INR) 0.12 vs. -0.07; p ≤ 0.001; activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) 0.42 vs. -1.16; p ≤ 0.001; prothrombin time (PT) 0.31 vs. -0.96; p ≤ 0.001; platelet count -12.34 vs. -1.47; p = 0.012) and clinical survival rate (89.10 vs. 90.14; p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was significantly higher infection rates and raised alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) associated with the tocilizumab group as compared to those receiving institutional treatment (bacterial infections: 0.99% vs. 15.49%; p ≤ 0.01, ALT: 3.96% vs. 28.16%; p ≤ 0.01, ALP: 1.98% vs. 22.53%; p ≤ 0.01). Conclusions: From this study, it was concluded that tocilizumab can be a better drug of choice in terms of efficacy, particularly in resolving coagulopathy in severe COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , Cytokine Release Syndrome , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
14.
Lancet Neurol ; 21(7): 597-607, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1895523

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The monoclonal antibody eptinezumab, which targets calcitonin gene-related peptide, has shown migraine preventive effects starting the day following infusion and acceptable safety and tolerability in phase 3 trials, but benefits in the subpopulations of patients with previous preventive treatment failures were not examined. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of eptinezumab for migraine prevention in adults with migraine and two-to-four previous preventive treatment failures. METHODS: DELIVER was a multicentre, multi-arm, phase 3b trial comprising a 24-week double-blind, placebo-controlled period and a 48-week dose-blinded extension. We recruited adults with episodic or chronic migraine with at least 4 monthly migraine days (as per International Headache Society guidelines) and documented evidence of two-to-four previous preventive treatment failures within the past 10 years, from 96 study locations across Europe (n=93) and the USA (n=3). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via a centralised randomisation system, stratified by baseline monthly headache days and country, to eptinezumab 100 mg, eptinezumab 300 mg, or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days (captured using a daily electronic diary) in weeks 1-12, assessed in the full analysis set. All participants and study personnel were masked to study drug assignments. The dose-blinded extension period is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04418765, and EudraCT, 2019-004497-25. FINDINGS: Between June 1, 2020, and Oct 7, 2021, 891 individuals were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of study drug (safety population; eptinezumab 100 mg n=299 [34%], eptinezumab 300 mg n=294 [33%], placebo n=298 [33%]). 865 patients completed the placebo-controlled period. The change from baseline to weeks 1-12 in mean monthly migraine days was -4·8 (SE 0·37) with eptinezumab 100 mg, -5·3 (0·37) with eptinezumab 300 mg, and -2·1 (0·38) with placebo. The difference from placebo in change in mean monthly migraine days from baseline was significant with eptinezumab 100 mg (-2·7 [95% CI -3·4 to -2·0]; p<0·0001) and eptinezumab 300 mg (-3·2 [-3·9 to -2·5]; p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 127 (42%) of 299 patients in the eptinezumab 100 mg group, in 120 (41%) of 294 in the eptinezumab 300 mg group, and in 119 (40%) of 298 in the placebo group. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was COVID-19 (20 [7%] of 299 patients in the eptinezumab 100 mg group, 17 [6%] of 294 in the eptinezumab 300 mg group, and 16 [5%] of 298 in the placebo group). Serious adverse events were uncommon (five [2%] of 299 in the eptinezumab 100 mg group, seven [2%] of 294 in the eptinezumab 300 mg group, four [1%] of 298 in the placebo group) and included anaphylactic reaction (eptinezumab 300 mg n=2) and COVID-19 (eptinezumab 100 mg n=1 and eptinezumab 300 mg n=1). INTERPRETATION: In adults with migraine and two-to-four previous preventive treatment failures, eptinezumab provided significant migraine preventive effects compared with placebo, with acceptable safety and tolerability, indicating that eptinezumab might be an effective treatment option for this patient population. The dose-blinded extension period will provide additional long-term safety data in patients with migraine and previous preventive treatment failures. FUNDING: H Lundbeck.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Migraine Disorders , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , COVID-19 , Double-Blind Method , Headache , Humans , Migraine Disorders/prevention & control , Treatment Failure , Treatment Outcome
15.
Lancet ; 399(10336): 1718-1729, 2022 04 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1882652

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab prolongs progression-free and overall survival among patients with advanced melanoma and recurrence-free survival in resected stage III disease. KEYNOTE-716 assessed pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy in patients with completely resected, high-risk, stage II melanoma. We report results from the planned first and second interim analyses for recurrence-free survival. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 study, involving 160 academic medical centres and hospitals in 16 countries (Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Poland, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA), patients aged 12 years or older with newly diagnosed, completely resected stage IIB or IIC melanoma (TNM stage T3b or T4 with a negative sentinel lymph node biopsy) were recruited. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), in blocks of four and stratified by T-category (3b, 4a, and 4b) and paediatric status (age 12-17 years vs ≥18 years), using an interactive response technology system to intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg (2 mg/kg in paediatric patients) or placebo every 3 weeks for 17 cycles or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. All patients, clinical investigators, and analysts were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed recurrence-free survival (defined as time from randomisation to recurrence or death) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all patients randomly assigned to treatment). The primary endpoint was met if recurrence-free survival was significantly improved for pembrolizumab versus placebo at either the first interim analysis (after approximately 128 patients had events) or second interim analysis (after 179 patients had events) under multiplicity control. Safety was assessed in all patients randomly assigned to treatment who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03553836, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Sept 23, 2018, and Nov 4, 2020, 1182 patients were screened, of whom 976 were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab (n=487) or placebo (n=489; ITT population). The median age was 61 years (IQR 52-69) and 387 (40%) patients were female and 589 (60%) were male. 874 (90%) of 976 patients were White and 799 (82%) were not Hispanic or Latino. 483 (99%) of 487 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 486 (99%) of 489 in the placebo group received assigned treatment. At the first interim analysis (data cutoff on Dec 4, 2020; median follow-up of 14·4 months [IQR 10·2-18·7] in the pembrolizumab group and 14·3 months [10·1-18·7] in the placebo group), 54 (11%) of 487 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 82 (17%) of 489 in the placebo group had a first recurrence of disease or died (hazard ratio [HR] 0·65 [95% CI 0·46-0·92]; p=0·0066). At the second interim analysis (data cutoff on June 21, 2021; median follow-up of 20·9 months [16·7-25·3] in the pembrolizumab group and 20·9 months [16·6-25·3] in the placebo group), 72 (15%) patients in the pembrolizumab group and 115 (24%) in the placebo group had a first recurrence or died (HR 0·61 [95% CI 0·45-0·82]). Median recurrence-free survival was not reached in either group at either assessment timepoint. At the first interim analysis, grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 78 (16%) of 483 patients in the pembrolizumab groups versus 21 (4%) of 486 in the placebo group. At the first interim analysis, four patients died from an adverse event, all in the placebo group (one each due to pneumonia, COVID-19-related pneumonia, suicide, and recurrent cancer), and at the second interim analysis, one additional patient, who was in the pembrolizumab group, died from an adverse event (COVID-19-related pneumonia). No deaths due to study treatment occurred. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy for up to approximately 1 year for stage IIB or IIC melanoma resulted in a significant reduction in the risk of disease recurrence or death versus placebo, with a manageable safety profile. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Melanoma , Testicular Neoplasms , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Child , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/surgery , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy
16.
Mult Scler ; 28(6): 910-924, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1883453

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Ofatumumab, the first fully human anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, is approved in several countries for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the bioequivalence of ofatumumab administered by an autoinjector versus a pre-filled syringe (PFS) and to explore the effect of ofatumumab on B-cell depletion. METHODS: APLIOS (NCT03560739) is a 12-week, open-label, parallel-group, phase-2 study in patients with RMS receiving subcutaneous ofatumumab 20 mg every 4 weeks (q4w) (from Week 4, after initial doses on Days 1, 7, and 14). Patients were randomized 10:10:1:1 to autoinjector or PFS in the abdomen, or autoinjector or PFS in the thigh, respectively. Bioequivalence was determined by area under the curve (AUCτ) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) for Weeks 8-12. B-cell depletion and safety/tolerability were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 256 patients contributed to the bioequivalence analyses (autoinjector-abdomen, n = 128; PFS-abdomen, n = 128). Abdominal ofatumumab pharmacokinetic exposure was bioequivalent for autoinjector and PFS (geometric mean AUCτ, 487.7 vs 474.1 h × µg/mL (ratio 1.03); Cmax, 1.409 vs 1.409 µg/mL (ratio 1.00)). B-cell counts (median cells/µL) depleted rapidly in all groups from 214.0 (baseline) to 2.0 (Day 14). Ofatumumab was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Ofatumumab 20 mg q4w self-administered subcutaneously via autoinjector is bioequivalent to PFS administration and provides rapid B-cell depletion.


Subject(s)
Multiple Sclerosis , Antibodies, Monoclonal , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Multiple Sclerosis/chemically induced
17.
PLoS One ; 17(6): e0269368, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1879321

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: We systematically assessed benefits and harms of tocilizumab (TCZ), which is an antibody blocking IL-6 receptors, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Five electronic databases and two preprint webpages were searched until March 4, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) cohorts assessing TCZ effects in hospitalized, COVID-19 adult patients were included. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, clinical worsening, clinical improvement, need for mechanical ventilation, and adverse events (AE). Inverse variance random-effects meta-analyses were performed with quality of evidence (QoE) evaluated using GRADE methodology. RESULTS: Nine RCTs (n = 7,021) and nine IPTW cohorts (n = 7,796) were included. TCZ significantly reduced all-cause mortality in RCTs (RR 0.89, 95%CI 0.81-0.98, p = 0.03; moderate QoE) and non-significantly in cohorts (RR 0.67, 95%CI 0.44-1.02, p = 0.08; very low QoE) vs. control (standard of care [SOC] or placebo). TCZ significantly reduced the need for mechanical ventilation (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.71-0.90, p = 0.001; moderate QoE) and length of stay (MD -1.92 days, 95%CI -3.46 to -0.38, p = 0.01; low QoE) vs. control in RCTs. There was no significant difference in clinical improvement or worsening between treatments. AEs, severe AEs, bleeding and thrombotic events were similar between arms in RCTs, but there was higher neutropenia risk with TCZ (very low QoE). Subgroup analyses by disease severity or risk of bias (RoB) were consistent with main analyses. Quality of evidence was moderate to very low in both RCTs and cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to SOC or placebo, TCZ reduced all-cause mortality in all studies and reduced mechanical ventilation and length of stay in RCTs in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Other clinical outcomes were not significantly impacted. TCZ did not have effect on AEs, except a significant increased neutropenia risk in RCTs. TCZ has a potential role in the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neutropenia , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , Humans , Neutropenia/drug therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
18.
Clin Exp Rheumatol ; 40(3): 634-646, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1865797

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis was aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab (TCZ) in treating severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: The electronic search was made using PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL, and Google scholar to identify the retrospective observational reports. The studies published from 01 January 2020 to 30th October 2020. Participants were hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Interventions included tocilizumab versus placebo/standard of care. The comparison will be between TCZ versus standard of care (SOC)/placebo. Inconsistency between the studies was evaluated with I2 and quality of the evidences were evaluated by Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Based on the inclusion criteria there were 24 retrospective studies involving 5686 subjects were included. The outcomes of the meta-analysis have revealed that the TCZ has reduced mortality (M-H, RE-OR -0.11(-0.18--0.04) 95% CI, p=0.001, I2 =88%) and increased the incidences of super-infections (M-H, RE-OR 1.49(1.13-1.96) 95% CI, p=0.004, I2=47%). However, there is no significant difference in ICU admissions rate (M-H, RE-OR -0.06(-0.23-0.12), I2=93%), need for mechanical ventilation (M-H, RE-OR of 0.00(-0.06-0.07), I=74%), LOS (IV -2.86(-0.91-3.38), I2=100%), LOS-ICU (IV: -3.93(-12.35-4.48), I2=100%), and incidences of pulmonary thrombosis (MH, RE-OR 1.01 (0.45-2.26), I2=0%) compared to SOC/control. CONCLUSIONS: Based on cumulative low-to-moderate certainty evidence shows that TCZ could reduce the risk of mortality in hospitalised patients. However, there is no statistically significant difference observed between the TCZ and SOC/control groups in other parameters.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , Humans , Retrospective Studies
19.
BMJ ; 377: e068714, 2022 04 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1807349

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sintilimab versus placebo in combination with chemotherapy (cisplatin plus paclitaxel or cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil) as first line treatment of unresectable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised, double blind, phase 3 trial. SETTING: 66 sites in China and 13 sites outside of China between 14 December 2018 and 9 April 2021. PARTICIPANTS: 659 adults (aged ≥18 years) with advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma who had not received systemic treatment. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomised 1:1 to receive sintilimab or placebo (3 mg/kg in patients weighing <60 kg or 200 mg in patients weighing ≥60 kg) in combination with cisplatin 75 mg/m2 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every three weeks. The trial was amended to allow investigators to choose the chemotherapy regimen: cisplatin plus paclitaxel or cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil (800 mg/m2 continuous infusion on days 1-5). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival in all patients and in patients with combined positive scores of ≥10 for expression of programmed cell death ligand 1. RESULTS: 659 patients were randomly assigned to sintilimab (n=327) or placebo (n=332) with chemotherapy. 616 of 659 patients (93%) received sintilimab or placebo in combination with cisplatin plus paclitaxel and 43 of 659 patients (7%) received sintilimab or placebo in combination with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil. At the interim analysis, sintilimab with chemotherapy showed better overall survival compared with placebo and chemotherapy in all patients (median 16.7 v 12.5 months, hazard ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.51 to 0.78, P<0.001) and in patients with combined positive scores of ≥10 (17.2 v 13.6 months, 0.64, 0.48 to 0.85, P=0.002). Sintilimab and chemotherapy significantly improved progression free survival compared with placebo and chemotherapy in all patients (7.2 v 5.7 months, 0.56, 0.46 to 0.68, P<0.001) and in patients with combined positive scores of ≥10 (8.3 v 6.4 months, 0.58, 0.45 to 0.75, P<0.001). Adverse events related to treatment occurred in 321 of 327 patients (98%) in the sintilimab-chemotherapy group versus 326 of 332 (98%) patients in the placebo-chemotherapy group. Rates of adverse events related to treatment, grade ≥3, were 60% (196/327) and 55% (181/332) in the sintilimab-chemotherapy and placebo-chemotherapy groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with placebo, sintilimab in combination with cisplatin plus paclitaxel showed significant benefits in overall survival and progression free survival as first line treatment in patients with advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Similar benefits of sintilimab with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil seem promising. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03748134.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma , Adolescent , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Double-Blind Method , Esophageal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma/drug therapy , Fluorouracil/therapeutic use , Humans , Paclitaxel/therapeutic use
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL