Myosin Inhibition and Left Ventricular Diastolic Function in Patients With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Referred for Septal Reduction Therapy: Insights From the VALOR-HCM Study.

BACKGROUND: In the randomized phase 3 VALOR-HCM study (A Study to Evaluate Mavacamten in Adults With Symptomatic Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Who Are Eligible for Septal Reduction Therapy) of patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, mavacamten reduced the need for septal reduction therapy. Because mavacamten improves ventricular compliance, this sub-study examined the effects of treatment with this cardiac myosin inhibitor on diastolic function. METHODS: Symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients on maximally tolerated medical therapy referred for septal reduction therapy were randomized 1:1 to mavacamten or placebo. At baseline and week 16, a resting and stress echocardiogram was performed with interpretation by a core laboratory. In this exploratory substudy, the principal end point was the change in parameters used to define the grade of diastolic function in patients treated with mavacamten and placebo. A related objective was to assess the proportion of patients with an improvement in diastolic function grade. A secondary aim was to assess for correlation between diastolic function parameters and the secondary end points from VALOR-HCM: New York Heart Association class, quality of life, and cardiac biomarkers. RESULTS: Diastolic dysfunction grade was evaluable in 98 patients at baseline and week 16. Among patients treated with mavacamten, 29.4% (15 of 51) demonstrated improvement in diastolic function grade compared with 12.8% (6 of 47) patients with placebo (P=0.05). Average E/e' ratio decreased significantly in patients treated with mavacamten (-3.4±5.3) compared with placebo (0.57±3.5; P<0.001). Indexed left atrial volumes (mL/m2) also decreased significantly in patients who received mavacamten (-5.2±7.8) compared with placebo (-0.51±8.1; P=0.005). After adjustment for change in left ventricular outflow tract gradient and mitral regurgitation, mavacamten was significantly associated with a decrease in average E/e' ratio and indexed left atrial volumes. Change in average E/e' ratio was significantly correlated with the secondary end points from VALOR-HCM. CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory substudy, after 16 weeks of therapy, mavacamten improved diastolic function, and this change correlated with improvement in clinical and biomarker end points. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04349072.

Bronchodilator effect of single-dose formoterol administered by pressurized metered-dose inhaler in children with asthma aged 6 to <12 years receiving budesonide.

Dose-response of formoterol via pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) has not been determined in asthmatic pediatric patients aged 6 to <12 years. This study was designed to assess the bronchodilating dose-response of three formoterol pMDI doses in children with stable asthma aged 6 to <12 years receiving twice-daily (b.i.d.) budesonide 160 micrograms. A U.S., multicenter, five-way crossover study compared single doses of formoterol, a long-acting beta-agonist, via pMDI (2.25, 4.5, and 9 micrograms) or dry powder inhaler (12 micrograms; active comparator) and placebo, with a 3- to 14-day washout period between doses. Budesonide pMDI 160 micrograms, an inhaled corticosteroid, was given b.i.d. throughout the study. Fifty-four pediatric patients (mean age, 9.2 years; mean asthma history, 6.1 years) were randomized. All formoterol doses showed significantly higher average 12-hour forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1; area under the curve) versus placebo (primary efficacy). Formoterol pMDI 4.5 and 9 micrograms showed significantly greater average 12-hour FEV1 than formoterol 2.25 micrograms (p = 0.0007 and p = 0.0001, respectively). Formoterol also resulted in significant improvement in maximum FEV1 during the 12-hour treatment period (secondary efficacy) with formoterol 4.5-, 9-, and 12-microgram doses versus placebo and the formoterol 2.25-microgram dose. Bronchodilation was not maintained during the 12-hour dosing interval with formoterol 2.25 micrograms. No serious adverse events were reported. Formoterol pMDI showed generally dose-proportional pharmacokinetics to 9 micrograms, as determined by urinary excretion. Single doses of formoterol pMDI showed a dose-response, with formoterol 9 micrograms exhibiting a maximum response, in pediatric patients aged 6 to <12 years with persistent stable asthma maintained on b.i.d. budesonide pMDI 160 micrograms. Clinical trial NCT01136655, www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Long-term safety and asthma control measures with a budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler in African American asthmatic patients: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Information surrounding the long-term safety of combination inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß(2)-adrenergic agonist medications in African American asthmatic patients is limited. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess safety and asthma control with a budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) versus budesonide over 1 year in African American patients. METHODS: This 52-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3B safety study (NCT00419952) was conducted in 742 self-reported African American patients 12 years or older with moderate-to-severe asthma previously receiving medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids. After 2 weeks using a 320 µg twice-daily budesonide pMDI, patients were randomized 1:1 to 320/9 µg twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI or 320 µg twice-daily budesonide pMDI. RESULTS: Both treatments were well tolerated. Asthma exacerbation incidence and rate (per patient-treatment year) were lower with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide (incidence, 7.7% vs 14.0% [P= .006]; rate ratio, 0.615 [P= .002]). Time to first asthma exacerbation was longer (P= .018) with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide. The most common adverse events, regardless of study drug relationship, were headache (9.5% and 7.7%), nasopharyngitis (6.9% and 8.0%), sinusitis (4.0% and 6.3%), and viral upper respiratory tract infection (5.8% and 4.4%) for budesonide/formoterol and budesonide, respectively. Serious adverse events occurred in 12 and 15 patients, respectively; none were considered drug related. No substantial or unexpected patterns of abnormalities were observed in laboratory, electrocardiographic, or Holter monitoring assessments. Hospitalization caused by asthma exacerbation occurred in 0 and 4 patients in the budesonide/formoterol and budesonide groups, respectively. Pulmonary function and asthma control measures generally favored budesonide/formoterol. CONCLUSIONS: In this population budesonide/formoterol pMDI was well tolerated over 12 months, with a safety profile similar to that of budesonide; the asthma exacerbation rate was reduced by 38.5% versus budesonide.