Randomized Phase II Study of the Safety and Efficacy of Semorinemab in Participants With Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer Disease: Lauriet.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Accumulation of tau pathology in Alzheimer disease (AD) correlates with cognitive decline. Anti-tau immunotherapies were proposed as potential interventions in AD. While antibodies targeting N-terminal tau failed to demonstrate clinical efficacy in prodromal-to-mild AD, their utility at other disease stages was not evaluated in prior studies. Lauriet is a phase 2 study of an anti-tau monoclonal antibody, semorinemab, in patients with mild-to-moderate AD. METHODS: The phase 2 Lauriet study included a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind period, during which participants with mild-to-moderate AD received 4,500 mg of IV semorinemab or placebo every 4 weeks for 48 or 60 weeks. Participants who chose to continue in the subsequent optional open-label extension received 4,500 mg of semorinemab every 4 weeks for up to 96 weeks. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were change from baseline to week 49 or 61 on the 11-item version of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog11) and the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) scale. Secondary efficacy endpoints included change from baseline on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB). Safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamic effects were also evaluated. RESULTS: Between December 3, 2018, and February 27, 2020, 624 individuals were screened, 272 participants were randomized, and 238 were included in the modified intent-to-treat population (received ≥1 dose(s) of study medication and underwent baseline and ≥1 postbaseline assessment(s)). Baseline characteristics were well balanced. At week 49, the semorinemab arm demonstrated a 42.2% reduction (-2.89 points, 95% CI -4.56 to -1.21, p = 0.0008) in decline on the ADAS-Cog11 (coprimary endpoint) relative to the placebo arm. However, no treatment effects were observed on the ADCS-ADL scale (coprimary endpoint; absolute difference between the 2 treatment arms in the ADCS-ADL score change from baseline of -0.83 points, 95% CI -3.39 to 1.72, p = 0.52) or on the MMSE or CDR-SB (secondary endpoints). Semorinemab was safe and well tolerated. DISCUSSION: Based on the results of the prespecified coprimary endpoints, this study was negative. While semorinemab had a significant effect on cognition measured by the ADAS-Cog11, this effect did not extend to improved functional or global outcomes. These results may warrant further exploration of semorinemab or other anti-tau therapies in mild-to-moderate AD. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that semorinemab does not slow functional decline in patients with mild-to-moderate AD. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: The Lauriet study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03828747, and EudraCT 2018-003398-87.

Safety and Efficacy of Semorinemab in Individuals With Prodromal to Mild Alzheimer Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Neurofibrillary tangles composed of aggregated tau protein are one of the neuropathological hallmarks of Alzheimer disease (AD) and correlate with clinical disease severity. Monoclonal antibodies targeting tau may have the potential to ameliorate AD progression by slowing or stopping the spread and/or accumulation of pathological tau. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the monoclonal anti-tau antibody semorinemab in prodromal to mild AD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial was conducted between October 18, 2017, and July 16, 2020, at 97 sites in North America, Europe, and Australia. Individuals aged 50 to 80 years (inclusive) with prodromal to mild AD, Mini-Mental State Examination scores between 20 and 30 (inclusive), and confirmed ß-amyloid pathology (by positron emission tomography or cerebrospinal fluid) were included. Interventions: During the 73-week blinded study period, participants received intravenous infusions of placebo or semorinemab (1500 mg, 4500 mg, or 8100 mg) every 2 weeks for the first 3 infusions and every 4 weeks thereafter. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were change from baseline on the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes score from baseline to week 73 and assessments of the safety and tolerability for semorinemab compared with placebo. Results: In the modified intent-to-treat cohort (n = 422; mean [SD] age, 69.6 [7.0] years; 235 women [55.7%]), similar increases were seen on the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes score in the placebo (n = 126; Δ = 2.19 [95% CI, 1.74-2.63]) and semorinemab (1500 mg: n = 86; Δ = 2.36 [95% CI, 1.83-2.89]; 4500 mg: n = 126; Δ = 2.36 [95% CI, 1.92-2.79]; 8100 mg: n = 84; Δ = 2.41 [95% CI, 1.88-2.94]) arms. In the safety-evaluable cohort (n = 441), similar proportions of participants experienced adverse events in the placebo (130 [93.1%]) and semorinemab (1500 mg: 89 [88.8%]; 4500 mg: 132 [94.7%]; 8100 mg: 90 [92.2%]) arms. Conclusions and Relevance: In participants with prodromal to mild AD in this randomized clinical trial, semorinemab did not slow clinical AD progression compared with placebo throughout the 73-week study period but did demonstrate an acceptable and well-tolerated safety profile. Additional studies of anti-tau antibodies may be needed to determine the clinical utility of this therapeutic approach. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03289143.

Patient Preference and Treatment Satisfaction With a Port Delivery System for Ranibizumab vs Intravitreal Injections in Patients With Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The port delivery system (PDS) with ranibizumab has demonstrated noninferior and equivalent efficacy compared with monthly intravitreal injections of ranibizumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agent, in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), but evaluating patient preference is important to help inform clinical decision-making. Objective: Evaluate treatment satisfaction for ranibizumab delivered via PDS vs intravitreal injections as well as patient preference among those assigned to PDS. Design, Setting, and Participants: Archway was a phase 3 randomized active-comparator open-label clinical trial conducted at 78 sites in the US. Patients 50 years and older with nAMD diagnosed within 9 months of screening with a documented response to anti-VEGF therapy were included. Of 619 patients screened, 418 were enrolled; 415 were included in the primary analysis and 234 were included in the secondary exploratory analysis. The Archway study ran from September 12, 2019, through primary readout on May 22, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized 3:2 to PDS with ranibizumab, 100 mg/mL, with fixed refill exchanges every 24 weeks or intravitreal ranibizumab injections, 0.5 mg, every 4 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Treatment satisfaction was measured using the Macular Disease Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire in the PDS and intravitreal injection arms at week 40. Patient preference was assessed using the content-validated PDS Patient Preference Questionnaire (PPPQ), which measured the proportion of patients in the PDS arm with monthly monitoring who preferred treatment with the PDS at week 40 over previous intravitreal injections or concurrent fellow-eye injections. Both outcomes were exploratory end points. Results: The mean (SD) age of participants at baseline was 75.0 (7.9) years; 234 participants (59%) were women and 162 (41%) were men. At week 40, differences in overall treatment satisfaction scores were minimal for the PDS and intravitreal injection arms (mean, 68.0; 95% CI, 67.4-68.6; n = 237 and mean, 66.1; 95% CI, 64.9-67.3; n = 159, respectively; difference, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.7-3.1). A total of 234 of 248 patients (94.4%) in the PDS arm were included in the PPPQ analysis. At week 40, almost all patients in the PDS arm preferred treatment via PDS (218 of 234 [93.2%]) vs previous intravitreal injections (3 of 234 [1.3%]), including 172 of 234 (73.5%) with a very strong preference for the PDS. In patients who received concurrent fellow-eye injections (n = 78), 72 (92.3%) preferred the PDS. Conclusions and Relevance: Although PDS treatment was preferred by almost all patients assigned to PDS over previous intravitreal injections, both delivery methods have high treatment satisfaction. These findings provide further evidence for the PDS as a meaningful alternative treatment option for patients with nAMD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03677934.