Efficacy and safety of 48 weeks of guselkumab for patients with Crohn's disease: maintenance results from the phase 2, randomised, double-blind GALAXI-1 trial.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease do not respond to available therapies or lose response over time. The GALAXI-1 study previously found that three intravenous guselkumab dosages showed superior clinical and endoscopic outcomes over placebo at week 12 in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. We report the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous guselkumab maintenance regimens to week 48 in the GALAXI-1 study. METHODS: We did a phase 2, randomised, multicentre, double-blind trial. Adult patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease were randomly allocated with a computer-generated randomisation schedule to receive one of five treatment groups, with regimens consisting of an intravenous induction phase transitioning to a subcutaneous maintenance phase starting at week 12 in a treat-through design: (1) guselkumab 200→100 mg group (200 mg intravenous at weeks 0, 4, and 8, then 100 mg subcutaneous every 8 weeks; (2) guselkumab 600→200 mg group (600 mg intravenous at weeks 0, 4, and 8, then 200 mg subcutaneous every 4 weeks); (3) guselkumab 1200→200 mg group (1200 mg intravenous at weeks 0, 4, and 8, then 200 mg subcutaneous every 4 weeks); (4) ustekinumab group (approximately 6 mg/kg intravenous at week 0, then 90 mg subcutaneous every 8 weeks); or (5) placebo group (placebo induction followed by either placebo maintenance [for those with CDAI clinical response at week 12] or crossover to ustekinumab [for those without CDAI clinical response at week 12]). Endpoints assessed at week 48 included CDAI remission (CDAI score <150), endoscopic response (≥50% improvement from baseline in SES-CD or SES-CD score ≤2), and endoscopic remission (SES-CD score ≤2) in the primary efficacy analysis population of all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug, excluding those discontinued during a temporary study pause. Safety analyses included all randomised patients who received at least one study drug dose. This trial is registered at Clinical Trials.gov (NCT03466411) and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Among 700 patients screened, 309 (112 biologic-naive; 197 biologic-experienced) were included in the primary efficacy analysis population: 61 in the guselkumab 200→100 mg group, 63 in the guselkumab 600→200 mg group, 61 in the guselkumab 1200→200 mg group, 63 in the ustekinumab group, and 61 in the placebo group. 126 (41%) women and 183 (59%) men were included, with median age 36·0 years (IQR 28·0-49·0). At week 48, the numbers of patients with CDAI clinical remission were 39 (64%) in the guselkumab 200→100 mg group, 46 (73%) in the guselkumab 600→200 mg group, 35 (57%) in the guselkumab 1200→200 mg group, and 37 (59%) in the ustekinumab group. The corresponding numbers of patients with endoscopic response were 27 (44%), 29 (46%), 27 (44%), and 19 (30%), respectively, and endoscopic remission was seen in 11 (18%), 11 (17%), 20 (33%), and four (6%) patients, respectively. In the placebo group, 15 patients were in CDAI clinical response at week 12 and continued placebo; of these, nine (60%) were in clinical remission at week 48. 44 patients in the placebo group were not in CDAI clinical response at week 12 and crossed over to ustekinumab; of these, 26 (59%) were in clinical remission at week 48. Up to week 48, adverse events frequencies in the safety population (n=360) were 46 (66%) of 70 patients (464·9 events per 100 patient-years of follow-up) in the placebo group, 163 (74%) of 220 patients (353·1 per 100 patient-years) in the three guselkumab groups combined, and 60 (85%) of 71 patients (350·7 per 100 patient-years) in the ustekinumab group. Among patients treated with guselkumab or ustekinumab, the most frequently reported infections up to week 48 were nasopharyngitis (25 [11%] of 220 guselkumab recipients, 12 [11%] of 114 ustekinumab recipients) and upper respiratory infections (13 [6%] guselkumab recipients, eight [7%] ustekinumab recipients). After week 12, one patient who responded to placebo induction and two guselkumab-treated patients had serious infections. No active tuberculosis, opportunistic infections, or deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Patients receiving guselkumab intravenous induction and subcutaneous maintenance treatment achieved high rates of clinical and endoscopic efficacy up to week 48. No new safety concerns were identified. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Guselkumab for the Treatment of Crohn's Disease: Induction Results From the Phase 2 GALAXI-1 Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Guselkumab, a selective p19 interleukin-23 antagonist, is approved for the treatment of plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of guselkumab in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease with inadequate response or intolerance to conventional or biologic therapy. METHODS: GALAXI-1, a phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, randomized patients 1:1:1:1:1 to intravenous guselkumab 200 mg, 600 mg, or 1200 mg at weeks 0, 4, and 8; intravenous ustekinumab approximately 6 mg/kg at week 0 and 90 mg subcutaneously at week 8; or placebo. Change from baseline in Crohn's Disease Activity Index score (primary end point), clinical remission, clinical response, Patient Reported Outcomes-2 remission, clinical-biomarker response, endoscopic response (major secondary end points), and safety in guselkumab-treated patients vs placebo were evaluated through week 12. Ustekinumab was a reference arm. RESULTS: Of 309 patients evaluated, approximately 50% had disease refractory to prior biologic therapy. At week 12, significantly greater reductions in Crohn's Disease Activity Index from baseline (least squares means: 200 mg: -160.4, 600 mg: -138.9, and 1200 mg: -144.9 vs placebo: -36.2; all, P < .05) and significantly greater proportions of patients achieved clinical remission in each guselkumab group vs placebo (Crohn's Disease Activity Index <150; 57.4%, 55.6%, and 45.9% vs 16.4%; all, P < .05). Greater proportions of patients receiving guselkumab achieved clinical response, Patient Reported Outcomes-2 remission, clinical-biomarker response, and endoscopic response at week 12 vs placebo. Efficacy of ustekinumab vs placebo was also demonstrated. Safety event rates were generally similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: At week 12, all 3 dose regimens of guselkumab induced greater clinical and endoscopic improvements vs placebo, with a favorable safety profile. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT03466411.

Efficacy and safety of glucagon-like peptide-1/glucagon receptor co-agonist JNJ-64565111 in individuals with obesity without type 2 diabetes mellitus: A randomized dose-ranging study.

Individuals with obesity have a heightened risk of developing serious comorbidities, and pharmacological treatments for people with obesity are limited. This phase 2 study assessed the safety and efficacy of JNJ-64565111, a dual agonist of glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucagon receptors, in individuals with class II/III obesity without type 2 diabetes. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled and open-label active-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre study, participants aged 18 to 70 years with a body mass index of 35 to 50 kg/m2 and stable weight were randomly assigned in a 1:1:2:2:2 ratio to blinded treatment with placebo; JNJ-64565111 (5.0, 7.4 or 10.0 mg, each with no dose escalation), or open-label liraglutide 3.0 mg. The primary efficacy endpoint was percent change from baseline in body weight at week 26. Four-hundred seventy four participants were randomized and 343 (72.4%) completed treatment. At week 26, placebo-subtracted body weight changes (adjusted for multiplicity) were -6.8%, -8.1% and -10.0% for the JNJ-64565111 5.0 mg, 7.4 mg and 10.0 mg groups, respectively, and -5.8% for the liraglutide group. Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events, especially nausea and vomiting, was higher in each JNJ-64565111 treatment group compared to placebo and liraglutide. JNJ-64565111 significantly reduced body weight in a dose-dependent manner vs placebo but was associated with greater incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events.

A randomized study to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of a single dose of the TRPV1 antagonist mavatrep in patients with osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Transient receptor potential vanilloid type 1 (TRPV1) receptor antagonists have been evaluated in clinical studies for their analgesic effects. Mavatrep, a potent, selective, competitive TRPV1 receptor antagonist has demonstrated pharmacodynamic effects consistent with target engagement at the TRPV1 receptor in a previous single-dose clinical study. The current study was conducted to evaluate the analgesic effects of a single dose of mavatrep. METHODS: In this randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, 3-way crossover, phase 1b study, patients with painful knee osteoarthritis were treated with a single-dose of 50mg mavatrep, 500mg naproxen twice-daily, and placebo. Patients were randomized to 1 of 6 treatment sequences. Each treatment sequence included three treatment periods of 7 days duration with a 7 day washout between each treatment period. The primary efficacy evaluation was pain reduction measured by the 4-h postdose sum of pain intensity difference (SPID) based on the 11-point (0-10) Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain after stair-climbing (PASC). The secondary efficacy evaluations included 11-point (0-10) NRS pain scores entered into the Actiwatch between clinic visits, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index subscales (WOMAC) questionnaire, and use of rescue medication. Safety and tolerability of single oral dose mavatrep were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 33 patients randomized, 32 completed the study. A statistically significantly (p<0.1) greater reduction in PASC was observed for mavatrep versus placebo (4-h SPID least square mean [LSM] [SE] difference: 1.5 [0.53]; p=0.005 and 2-h LSM [SE] difference of PID: 0.7 [0.30]; p=0.029). The mean average daily current pain NRS scores were lower in the mavatrep and naproxen treatment arm than in the placebo arm (mavatrep: 7 day mean [SD], 3.72 [1.851]; naproxen: 7 day mean [SD], 3.49 [1.544]; placebo: 7 day mean [SD], 4.9 [1.413]). Mavatrep showed statistically significant improvements as compared with placebo on the WOMAC subscales (pain on days 2 [p=0.049] and 7 [p=0.041], stiffness on day 7 [p=0.075]), and function on day 7 [p=0.077]). The same pattern of improvement was evident for naproxen versus placebo. The mean (SD) number of rescue medication tablets taken during the 7-day treatment period was 4.2 (6.49) for mavatrep treatment, 2.8 (5.42) for naproxen, and 6.3 (8.25) for placebo treatment. All patients that received mavatrep reported at least 1 treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE). Feeling cold (79%), thermohypoesthesia (61%), dysgeusia (58%), paraesthesia (36%), and feeling hot (15%) were the most common TEAEs in the mavatrep group. Total 9% patients receiving mavatrep experienced minor thermal burns. No deaths or serious AEs or discontinuations due to AEs occurred. CONCLUSION: Overall, mavatrep was associated with a significant reduction in pain, stiffness, and physical function when compared with placebo in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Mavatrep's safety profile was consistent with its mechanism of action as a TRPV1 antagonist. IMPLICATIONS: Further studies are required to evaluate whether lower multiple doses of mavatrep can produce analgesic efficacy while minimizing adverse events, as well as the potential for improved patient counselling techniques to reduce the minor thermal burns related to decreased heat perception. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 2009-010961-21 (EudraCT Number).

Coadministration of Canagliflozin and Phentermine for Weight Management in Overweight and Obese Individuals Without Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of coadministration of canagliflozin (CANA) and phentermine (PHEN) compared with placebo (PBO) and CANA or PHEN monotherapies in individuals who were overweight and obese without type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This 26-week, phase 2a, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled, multicenter, parallel-group study enrolled individuals who were obese or overweight without type 2 diabetes (N = 335, aged 18-65 years, BMI ≥30 to <50 kg/m2 or BMI ≥27 to <50 kg/m2 with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia). Participants were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive PBO, CANA 300 mg, PHEN 15 mg, or coadministration of CANA 300 mg and PHEN 15 mg (CANA/PHEN) orally once daily. The primary end point was percent change in body weight from baseline to week 26; key secondary end points were the proportion of participants achieving weight loss ≥5% and change from baseline in systolic blood pressure. RESULTS: CANA/PHEN provided statistically superior weight loss from baseline versus PBO at week 26 (least squares mean difference -6.9% [95% CI -8.6 to -5.2]; P < 0.001). CANA/PHEN also provided statistically superior achievement of weight loss ≥5% and reduction in systolic blood pressure compared with PBO. CANA/PHEN was generally well tolerated, with a safety and tolerability profile consistent with that of the individual components. CONCLUSIONS: CANA/PHEN produced meaningful reductions in body weight and was generally well tolerated in individuals who were overweight or obese without type 2 diabetes. Further studies are warranted to evaluate potential use of this combination for long-term weight management.

Fulranumab in Patients With Pain Associated With Postherpetic Neuralgia and Postraumatic Neuropathy: Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability Results From a Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Phase-2 Study.

OBJECTIVE: Fulranumab is an antibody that specifically neutralizes the biological activity of human nerve growth factor. This multicenter, phase-2, randomized, double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled study evaluated the analgesic efficacy and safety of fulranumab in postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) and posttraumatic neuropathy (PTN) patients. METHODS: Patients (18 to 80 y) with inadequately controlled moderate-to-severe pain received study medication (subcutaneous injection) every 4 weeks. PHN patients were randomized (3:2:2:3) to receive either placebo or one of 3 doses of fulranumab: 1 mg (1 mgQ4 wk), 3 mg (3 mgQ4 wk), or 10 mg (10 mgQ4 wk). PTN patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either placebo or fulranumab 10 mgQ4 wk. RESULTS: The US Food and Drug Administration placed a clinical hold (December 23, 2010) on all trials of antinerve growth factor drugs, including fulranumab, due to identified risks of osteonecrosis or rapidly progressing osteoarthritis; therefore, only 49 (of 150 planned) PHN patients and 34 (of 50 planned) PTN patients completed the DB efficacy evaluation. There was no significant difference (P>0.05, fulranumab vs. placebo) for change in 7-day average of daily pain intensity scores from DB baseline to end of 12-week DB efficacy phase in PHN or PTN patients (primary endpoint). No significant difference was found with fulranumab versus placebo (P>0.05) in other efficacy measures in either PHN or PTN patients. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (>10% incidence) in PTN patients were sinusitis, carpal tunnel syndrome, and headache, whereas in PHN patients it was arthralgia. DISCUSSION: Fulranumab did not demonstrate efficacy in either PHN or PTN patients, but was generally well-tolerated in this small underpowered and abbreviated study.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 12 week trial of acetaminophen extended release for the treatment of signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Determine efficacy and safety of acetaminophen extended release (ER) 1300 mg given three times daily compared to placebo for relieving signs and symptoms of hip or knee osteoarthritis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Sixty investigators at 58 private, ambulatory, primary care sites in the US enrolled 542 outpatient adults ≥40 years old with moderate to severe idiopathic osteoarthritis pain into a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind 12 week clinical trial. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment given three times daily of acetaminophen 1300 mg (n = 267) or placebo (n = 275). RESULTS: The three primary endpoints measured through week 12 favored acetaminophen ER as follows: least squares (LS) mean change from baseline for WOMAC physical function subscale score was significantly greater for acetaminophen ER than for placebo (P = 0.011); LS mean patient's global assessment of response to therapy was significantly greater for acetaminophen ER than for placebo (P = 0.010); and LS mean change from baseline for WOMAC pain subscale score was marginally greater for acetaminophen ER than for placebo (P = 0.054). LS mean change from baseline for secondary endpoints through week 12 also favored acetaminophen ER compared with placebo: significantly for WOMAC stiffness subscale score (P = 0.004), significantly for WOMAC total index score (P = 0.013), and marginally for Nottingham Health Profile energy subscale score (P = 0.057). The percentage of patients with any adverse event was similar for both treatment groups. Hepatic transaminases exceeded 3 × ULN in seven acetaminophen ER patients and one placebo patient. Elevations were attributed to health conditions in three of seven acetaminophen ER patients; elevations in the remaining four patients returned to or toward normal. CONCLUSIONS: Acetaminophen ER 1300 mg, a nonprescription drug, given three times daily, can provide effective relief of signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis of the hip or knee and was well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00240799.

Fulranumab for treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of fulranumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against nerve growth factor, in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP). METHODS: In this phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients with moderate to severe DPNP were randomized to treatments with fulranumab (1, 3, or 10 mg) or placebo administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks. RESULTS: Because of early study termination (clinical hold) by the US Food and Drug Administration, 77 (intent-to-treat) of the planned 200 patients were enrolled. The primary endpoint, the mean reduction of average daily pain at week 12 compared with baseline, showed a positive dose-response relationship (p = 0.014, 1-sided); the pair-wise comparison between the 10-mg group and placebo was significant (unadjusted p = 0.040, 2-sided). An exploratory responder analysis revealed that a greater proportion of patients in the 10-mg group reported ≥30% reduction in the average DPNP intensity compared with placebo at week 12 (p = 0.006). Although not statistically significant, several secondary endpoints showed directionally similar results to the primary efficacy dose-response relationship. During the combined efficacy and safety extension phases, the top 3 treatment-emergent adverse events in the combined fulranumab group were arthralgia (11%), edema peripheral (11%), and diarrhea (9%). No cases of joint replacement or death were reported. CONCLUSION: Despite early study termination, fulranumab treatment resulted in dose-dependent efficacy and was generally well tolerated. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that in patients with DPNP, fulranumab 10 mg reduces pain by 1.2 points on an 11-point scale compared with placebo.