Pamrevlumab for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: The ZEPHYRUS-1 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Current treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis slow the rate of lung function decline, but may be associated with adverse events that affect medication adherence. In phase 2 trials, pamrevlumab (a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds to and inhibits connective tissue growth factor activity) attenuated the progression of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis without substantial adverse events. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of pamrevlumab for patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 3 randomized clinical trial including 356 patients aged 40 to 85 years with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis who were not receiving antifibrotic treatment with nintedanib or pirfenidone at enrollment. Patients were recruited from 117 sites in 9 countries between July 18, 2019, and July 29, 2022; the last follow-up encounter occurred on August 28, 2023. Interventions: Pamrevlumab (30 mg/kg administered intravenously every 3 weeks; n = 181) or placebo (n = 175) for 48 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was absolute change in forced vital capacity (FVC) from baseline to week 48. There were 5 secondary outcomes (including time to disease progression, which was defined as a decline of ≥10% in predicted FVC or death). The exploratory outcomes included patient-reported symptoms. Adverse events were reported. Results: Among 356 patients (mean age, 70.5 years; 258 [72.5%] were men; 221 [62.1%] were White), 277 (77.8%) completed the trial. There was no significant between-group difference for absolute change in FVC from baseline to week 48 (least-squares mean, -260 mL [95% CI, -350 to -170 mL] in the pamrevlumab group vs -330 mL [95% CI, -430 to -230 mL] in the placebo group; mean between-group difference, 70 mL [95% CI, -60 to 190 mL], P = .29). There were no significant between-group differences in any of the secondary outcomes or in the patient-reported outcomes. In the pamrevlumab group, there were 160 patients (88.4%) with treatment-related adverse events and 51 patients (28.2%) with serious adverse events vs 151 (86.3%) and 60 (34.3%), respectively, in the placebo group. During the study, 23 patients died in each group (12.7% in the pamrevlumab group vs 13.1% in the placebo group). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis treated with pamrevlumab or placebo, there was no statistically significant between-group difference for the primary outcome of absolute change in FVC from baseline to week 48. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03955146.

Roxadustat for anemia in patients with end-stage renal disease incident to dialysis.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of roxadustat versus epoetin alfa for the treatment of chronic kidney disease-related anemia in patients new to dialysis. METHODS: HIMALAYAS was a Phase 3, open-label, epoetin alfa-controlled trial. Eligible adults were incident to hemodialysis/peritoneal dialysis for 2 weeks to ≤4 months prior to randomization and had mean hemoglobin (Hb) ≤10.0 g/dL. Primary endpoints were mean Hb (g/dL) change from baseline averaged over Weeks 28-52 regardless of rescue therapy [non-inferiority criterion: lower limit of 95% confidence interval (CI) for treatment difference >-0.75] and percentage of patients achieving an Hb response between Weeks 1 and 24 censored for rescue therapy (non-inferiority margin for between-group difference -15%). Adverse events were monitored. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population included patients randomized to roxadustat (n = 522) or epoetin alfa (n = 521). Mean (standard deviation) Hb changes from baseline averaged over Weeks 28-52 were 2.57 (1.27) and 2.36 (1.21) in the roxadustat and epoetin alfa groups. Roxadustat was non-inferior [least squares mean difference: 0.18 (95% CI 0.08, 0.29)] to epoetin alfa. Percentages of patients with an Hb response were 88.2% and 84.4% in the roxadustat and epoetin alfa groups, respectively. Roxadustat was non-inferior to epoetin alfa [treatment-group difference 3.5% (95% CI -0.7%, 7.7%)]. Adverse event rates were comparable between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Roxadustat was efficacious for correcting and maintaining Hb levels compared with epoetin alfa. Roxadustat had an acceptable safety profile.

Roxadustat (FG-4592) Versus Epoetin Alfa for Anemia in Patients Receiving Maintenance Hemodialysis: A Phase 2, Randomized, 6- to 19-Week, Open-Label, Active-Comparator, Dose-Ranging, Safety and Exploratory Efficacy Study.

BACKGROUND: Roxadustat (FG-4592) is an oral hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl-hydroxylase inhibitor that promotes erythropoiesis through increasing endogenous erythropoietin, improving iron regulation, and reducing hepcidin. STUDY DESIGN: Phase 2, randomized (3:1), open-label, active-comparator, safety and efficacy study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients with stable end-stage renal disease treated with hemodialysis who previously had hemoglobin (Hb) levels maintained with epoetin alfa. INTERVENTION: Part 1: 6-week dose-ranging study in 54 individuals of thrice-weekly oral roxadustat doses versus continuation of intravenous epoetin alfa. Part 2: 19-week treatment in 90 individuals in 6 cohorts with various starting doses and adjustment rules (1.0-2.0mg/kg or tiered weight based) in individuals with a range of epoetin alfa responsiveness. Intravenous iron was prohibited. OUTCOMES: Primary end point was Hb level response, defined as end-of-treatment Hb level change (ΔHb) of -0.5g/dL or greater from baseline (part 1) and as mean Hb level ≥ 11.0g/dL during the last 4 treatment weeks (part 2). MEASUREMENTS: Hepcidin, iron parameters, cholesterol, and plasma erythropoietin (the latter in a subset). RESULTS: Baseline epoetin alfa doses were 138.3±51.3 (SD) and 136.3±47.7U/kg/wk in part 1 and 152.8±80.6 and 173.4±83.7U/kg/wk in part 2, in individuals randomly assigned to roxadustat and epoetin alfa, respectively. Hb level responder rates in part 1 were 79% in pooled roxadustat 1.5 to 2.0mg/kg compared to 33% in the epoetin alfa control arm (P=0.03). Hepcidin level reduction was greater at roxadustat 2.0mg/kg versus epoetin alfa (P<0.05). In part 2, the average roxadustat dose requirement for Hb level maintenance was ∼1.7mg/kg. The least-squares-mean ΔHb in roxadustat-treated individuals was comparable to that in epoetin alfa-treated individuals (about -0.5g/dL) and the least-squares-mean difference in ΔHb between both treatment arms was -0.03 (95% CI, -0.39 to 0.33) g/dL (mixed effect model-repeated measure). Roxadustat significantly reduced mean total cholesterol levels, not observed with epoetin alfa. No safety concerns were raised. LIMITATIONS: Short treatment duration and small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 study of anemia therapy in patients with end-stage renal disease on maintenance hemodialysis therapy, roxadustat was well tolerated and effectively maintained Hb levels.

Roxadustat (FG-4592): Correction of Anemia in Incident Dialysis Patients.

Safety concerns with erythropoietin analogues and intravenous (IV) iron for treatment of anemia in CKD necessitate development of safer therapies. Roxadustat (FG-4592) is an orally bioavailable hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor that promotes coordinated erythropoiesis through HIF-mediated transcription. We performed an open-label, randomized hemoglobin (Hb) correction study in anemic (Hb≤10.0 g/dl) patients incident to hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). Sixty patients received no iron, oral iron, or IV iron while treated with roxadustat for 12 weeks. Mean±SD baseline Hb was 8.3±1.0 g/dl in enrolled patients. Roxadustat at titrated doses increased mean Hb by ≥2.0 g/dl within 7 weeks regardless of baseline iron repletion status, C-reactive protein level, iron regimen, or dialysis modality. Mean±SEM maximal change in Hb from baseline (ΔHb(max)), the primary endpoint, was 3.1±0.2 g/dl over 12 weeks in efficacy-evaluable patients (n=55). In groups receiving oral or IV iron, ΔHb(max) was similar and larger than in the no-iron group. Hb response (increase in Hb of ≥1.0 g/dl from baseline) was achieved in 96% of efficacy-evaluable patients. Mean serum hepcidin decreased significantly 4 weeks into study: by 80% in HD patients receiving no iron (n=22), 52% in HD and PD patients receiving oral iron (n=21), and 41% in HD patients receiving IV iron (n=9). In summary, roxadustat was well tolerated and corrected anemia in incident HD and PD patients, regardless of baseline iron repletion status or C-reactive protein level and with oral or IV iron supplementation; it also reduced serum hepcidin levels.

A clinical evaluation committee assessment of recombinant human tissue factor pathway inhibitor (tifacogin) in patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this analysis was to determine the potential efficacy of recombinant human tissue factor pathway inhibitor (tifacogin) in a subpopulation of patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) from a phase III study of severe sepsis. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with suspected pneumonia was conducted by an independent clinical evaluation committee (CEC) blinded to treatment assignment. The CEC reanalyzed data from patients enrolled in an international multicenter clinical trial of sepsis who had a diagnosis of pneumonia as the probable source of sepsis. The primary efficacy measure was all-cause 28-day mortality. RESULTS: Of 847 patients identified on case report forms with a clinical diagnosis of pneumonia, 780 (92%) were confirmed by the CEC to have pneumonia. Of confirmed pneumonia cases, 496 (63.6%) met the definition for CAP. In the CEC CAP population, the mortality rates of the tifacogin and placebo groups were 70/251 (27.9%) and 80/245 (32.7%), respectively. The strongest signals were seen in patients with CAP not receiving concomitant heparin, having microbiologically confirmed infection, or having the combination of documented infection and no heparin. The reduction in mortality in this narrowly defined subgroup when treated with tifacogin compared with placebo was statistically significant (17/58 [29.3%] with tifacogin and 28/54 [51.9%] with placebo; unadjusted P value of less than 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Tifacogin administration did not significantly reduce mortality in any severe CAP patient. Exploratory analyses showed an improved survival in patients who did not receive concomitant heparin with microbiologically confirmed infections. These data support the rationale of an ongoing phase III study exploring the potential benefit of tifacogin in severe CAP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00084071.

Efficacy and safety of tifacogin (recombinant tissue factor pathway inhibitor) in severe sepsis: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: The expression and release of tissue factor is a major trigger for the activation of coagulation in patients with sepsis. Tissue factor pathway inhibitor (TFPI) forms a complex with tissue factor and blood protease factors leading to inhibition of thrombin generation and fibrin formation. OBJECTIVES: To determine if administration of tifacogin (recombinant TFPI) provides mortality benefit in patients with severe sepsis and elevated international normalized ratio (INR) and to assess tifacogin safety in severe sepsis, including patients with low INR. DESIGN AND SETTING: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial conducted from March 21, 2000, through September 27, 2001, in 245 hospitals in 17 countries in North America, Europe, and Israel. PATIENTS: The primary efficacy population consisted of 1754 patients (> or =18 years) with severe sepsis and a high INR (> or =1.2) randomly assigned to intravenous infusion of either tifacogin (0.025 mg/kg per hour for 96 hours, n = 880) or placebo (arginine citrate buffer, n = 874), and 201 patients with a low INR (<1.2) randomly assigned to receive the same dose of either tifacogin or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: All-cause 28-day mortality. RESULTS: Overall mortality at 28 days in the tifacogin-treated group (n = 880) vs the placebo group (n = 874) for high INR was 34.2% vs 33.9%, respectively (P =.88, Pearson chi2 test; P =.75, logistic regression model). None of the protocol-specified secondary end points differed between the tifacogin vs placebo groups. An analysis on the first 722 patients demonstrated a mortality rate of 38.9% for placebo vs 29.1% for tifacogin (P =.006, Pearson chi2 test). Tifacogin significantly attenuated prothrombin fragment 1.2 and thrombin:antithrombin complex levels (P<.001, 2-sample t test) in patients with high and low INR. Overall mortality was lower in the tifacogin response in patients with low INR (12%; n = 83) vs placebo (22.9%; n = 118) (P =.051, Pearson chi2 test; P =.03, logistic regression model). There was an increase in serious adverse events with bleeding in the tifacogin group in both cohorts (6.5% tifacogin and 4.8% placebo for high INR; 6.0% tifacogin and 3.3% placebo for low INR). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with tifacogin had no effect on all-cause mortality in patients with severe sepsis and high INR. Tifacogin administration was associated with an increase in risk of bleeding, irrespective of baseline INR.