Prevention of Hereditary Angioedema Attacks with a Subcutaneous C1 Inhibitor.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema is a disabling, potentially fatal condition caused by deficiency (type I) or dysfunction (type II) of the C1 inhibitor protein. In a phase 2 trial, the use of CSL830, a nanofiltered C1 inhibitor preparation that is suitable for subcutaneous injection, resulted in functional levels of C1 inhibitor activity that would be expected to provide effective prophylaxis of attacks. METHODS: We conducted an international, prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of self-administered subcutaneous CSL830 in patients with type I or type II hereditary angioedema who had had four or more attacks in a consecutive 2-month period within 3 months before screening. We randomly assigned the patients to one of four treatment sequences in a crossover design, each involving two 16-week treatment periods: either 40 IU or 60 IU of CSL830 per kilogram of body weight twice weekly followed by placebo, or vice versa. The primary efficacy end point was the number of attacks of angioedema. Secondary efficacy end points were the proportion of patients who had a response (≥50% reduction in the number of attacks with CSL830 as compared with placebo) and the number of times that rescue medication was used. RESULTS: Of the 90 patients who underwent randomization, 79 completed the trial. Both doses of CSL830, as compared with placebo, reduced the rate of attacks of hereditary angioedema (mean difference with 40 IU, -2.42 attacks per month; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.38 to -1.46; and mean difference with 60 IU, -3.51 attacks per month; 95% CI, -4.21 to -2.81; P<0.001 for both comparisons). Response rates were 76% (95% CI, 62 to 87) in the 40-IU group and 90% (95% CI, 77 to 96) in the 60-IU group. The need for rescue medication was reduced from 5.55 uses per month in the placebo group to 1.13 uses per month in the 40-IU group and from 3.89 uses in the placebo group to 0.32 uses per month in the 60-IU group. Adverse events (most commonly mild and transient local site reactions) occurred in similar proportions of patients who received CSL830 and those who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with hereditary angioedema, the prophylactic use of a subcutaneous C1 inhibitor twice weekly significantly reduced the frequency of acute attacks. (Funded by CSL Behring; COMPACT EudraCT number, 2013-000916-10 , and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01912456 .).

Long-term prophylaxis therapy in patients with hereditary angioedema with C1 inhibitor deficiency.

OBJECTIVE: To review the criteria for long-term prophylaxis therapy in patients with hereditary angioedema due to C1 inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE), describe how these criteria have evolved over time, and anticipate how criteria may change in the future with the availability of new C1-INH-HAE treatment options. DATA SOURCES: Treatment guidelines, consensus statements, and expert reviews. STUDY SELECTIONS: Manuscripts that described long-term prophylaxis therapy in patients with C1-INH-HAE were selected. RESULTS: Historically, patients with C1-INH-HAE were considered to be candidates for long-term prophylaxis therapy if they had at least 1 attack per month, had at least 5 days of disability per month because of C1-INH-HAE, or did not sufficiently respond to on-demand treatment. More recently, guidelines and reviews state that thresholds of number of attacks or days of disability are arbitrary and that treatment plans should be individualized to the patient's needs. Furthermore, all patients should have a comprehensive management plan that is reviewed periodically and should have at least 2 doses of on-demand treatment available. Prophylaxis therapy should be discussed as a potential treatment option for each patient; however, the decision for its use will depend on the patient's individual needs and the course of their symptoms. CONCLUSION: The criteria for long-term prophylaxis therapy in C1-INH-HAE have changed with the recognition that treatments should be individualized to the patient's needs and with the availability of new medications that have more favorable benefit-risk profiles, are easier to use, and improve patients' quality of life.