Concordance and discordance in SLE clinical trial outcome measures: analysis of three anifrolumab phase 2/3 trials.

OBJECTIVES: In the anifrolumab systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) trial programme, there was one trial (TULIP-1) in which BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) responses favoured anifrolumab over placebo, but the SLE Responder Index (SRI(4)) treatment difference was not significant. We investigated the degree of concordance between BICLA and SRI(4) across anifrolumab trials in order to better understand drivers of discrepant SLE trial results. METHODS: TULIP-1, TULIP-2 (both phase 3) and MUSE (phase 2b) were randomised, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (300 mg every 4 weeks, 48 weeks; TULIP-1/TULIP-2: n=180; MUSE: n=99) or placebo (TULIP-1: n=184, TULIP-2: n=182; MUSE: n=102). Week 52 BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes were assessed for each patient. RESULTS: Most patients (78%-85%) had concordant BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes (Cohen's Kappa 0.6-0.7, nominal p<0.001). Dual BICLA/SRI(4) response rates favoured anifrolumab over placebo in TULIP-1, TULIP-2 and MUSE (all nominal p≤0.004). A discordant TULIP-1 BICLA non-responder/SRI(4) responder subgroup was identified (40/364, 11% of TULIP-1 population), comprising more patients receiving placebo (n=28) than anifrolumab (n=12). In this subgroup, placebo-treated patients had lower baseline disease activity, joint counts and glucocorticoid tapering rates, and more placebo-treated patients had arthritis response than anifrolumab-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Across trials, most patients had concordant BICLA/SRI(4) outcomes and dual BICLA/SRI(4) responses favoured anifrolumab. A BICLA non-responder/SRI(4) responder subgroup was identified where imbalances of key factors driving the BICLA/SRI(4) discordance (disease activity, glucocorticoid taper) disproportionately favoured the TULIP-1 placebo group. Careful attention to baseline disease activity and monitoring glucocorticoid taper variation will be essential in future SLE trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT02446912 and NCT02446899.

Two-Year, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Belimumab in Lupus Nephritis.

BACKGROUND: In adults with active lupus nephritis, the efficacy and safety of intravenous belimumab as compared with placebo, when added to standard therapy (mycophenolate mofetil or cyclophosphamide-azathioprine), are unknown. METHODS: In a phase 3, multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 104-week trial conducted at 107 sites in 21 countries, we assigned adults with biopsy-proven, active lupus nephritis in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous belimumab (at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight) or matching placebo, in addition to standard therapy. The primary end point at week 104 was a primary efficacy renal response (a ratio of urinary protein to creatinine of ≤0.7, an estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] that was no worse than 20% below the value before the renal flare (pre-flare value) or ≥60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area, and no use of rescue therapy), and the major secondary end point was a complete renal response (a ratio of urinary protein to creatinine of <0.5, an eGFR that was no worse than 10% below the pre-flare value or ≥90 ml per minute per 1.73 m2, and no use of rescue therapy). The time to a renal-related event or death was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 448 patients underwent randomization (224 to the belimumab group and 224 to the placebo group). At week 104, significantly more patients in the belimumab group than in the placebo group had a primary efficacy renal response (43% vs. 32%; odds ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 2.3; P = 0.03) and a complete renal response (30% vs. 20%; odds ratio, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.7; P = 0.02). The risk of a renal-related event or death was lower among patients who received belimumab than among those who received placebo (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.77; P = 0.001). The safety profile of belimumab was consistent with that in previous trials. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with active lupus nephritis, more patients who received belimumab plus standard therapy had a primary efficacy renal response than those who received standard therapy alone. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; BLISS-LN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01639339.).

Medicine Based Evidence for Individualized Decision Making: Case Study of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: To guide management decisions for an index patient, evidence is required from comparisons between approximate matches to the profile of the index case, where some matches contain responses to treatment and others act as controls. METHODS: We describe a method for constructing clinically relevant histories/profiles using data collected but unreported from 2 recent phase 3 randomized controlled trials assessing belimumab in subjects with clinically active and serologically positive systemic lupus erythematosus. Outcome was the Systemic lupus erythematosus Responder Index (SRI) measured at 52 weeks. RESULTS: Among 1175 subjects, we constructed an algorithm utilizing 11 trajectory variables including 4 biological, 2 clinical, and 5 social/behavioral. Across all biological and social/behavioral variables, the proportion of responders based on the SRI whose value indicated clinical worsening or no improvement ranged from 27.5% to 42.3%. Kappa values suggested poor agreement, indicating that each biological and patient-reported outcome provides different information than gleaned from the SRI. CONCLUSION: The richly detailed patient profiles needed to guide decision-making in clinical practice are sharply at odds with the limited information utilized in conventional randomized controlled trial analyses.

Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Belimumab in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Fifty-Two-Week Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous (SC) belimumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: Patients with moderate-to-severe SLE (score of ≥8 on the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment [SELENA] version of the SLE Disease Activity Index [SLEDAI]) were randomized 2:1 to receive weekly SC belimumab 200 mg or placebo by prefilled syringe in addition to standard SLE therapy for 52 weeks. The primary end point was the SLE Responder Index (SRI4) at week 52. Secondary end points were reduction in the corticosteroid dosage and time to severe flare. Safety was assessed according to the adverse events (AEs) reported and the laboratory test results. RESULTS: Of 839 patients randomized, 836 (556 in the belimumab group and 280 in the placebo group) received treatment. A total of 159 patients withdrew before the end of the study. At entry, mean SELENA-SLEDAI scores were 10.5 in the belimumab group and 10.3 in the placebo group. More patients who received belimumab were SRI4 responders than those who received placebo (61.4% versus 48.4%; odds ratio [OR] 1.68 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.25-2.25]; P = 0.0006). In the belimumab group, both time to and risk of severe flare were improved (median 171.0 days versus 118.0 days; hazard ratio 0.51 [95% CI 0.35-0.74]; P = 0.0004), and more patients were able to reduce their corticosteroid dosage by ≥25% (to ≤7.5 mg/day) during weeks 40-52 (18.2% versus 11.9%; OR 1.65 [95% CI 0.95-2.84]; P = 0.0732), compared with placebo. AE incidence was comparable between treatment groups; serious AEs were reported by 10.8% of patients taking belimumab and 15.7% of those taking placebo. A worsening of IgG hypoglobulinemia by ≥2 grades occurred in 0.9% of patients taking belimumab and 1.4% of those taking placebo. CONCLUSION: In patients with moderate-to-severe SLE, weekly SC doses of belimumab 200 mg plus standard SLE therapy significantly improved their SRI4 response, decreased severe disease flares as compared with placebo, and had a safety profile similar to placebo plus standard SLE therapy.

Belimumab in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: high disease activity predictors of response.

OBJECTIVES: To identify factors that predict response to belimumab treatment in the phase 3 BLISS trials of autoantibody-positive systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and further analyse clinical efficacy in various patient subsets. METHODS: The BLISS trials compared belimumab 1 and 10 mg/kg versus placebo, all plus standard SLE therapy, over 52 or 76 weeks. Pooled subgroup analyses of week 52 SLE responder index rates (the primary endpoint in both trials) were performed based on demographic characteristics and baseline disease activity indicators. Pooled multivariate analysis was performed to determine predictors of response and treatment effect. RESULTS: Pooled univariate and multivariate analyses (N=1684) identified baseline factors associated with an increased benefit of belimumab versus placebo. These factors included the Safety Of Estrogens In Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment-Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SELENA-SLEDAI) ≥10, low complement, anti-dsDNA positivity and corticosteroid use. Efficacy outcomes were assessed in the low complement/anti-dsDNA-positive and SELENA-SLEDAI ≥10 subgroups. Week 52 SLE Responder Index rates in the low complement/anti-dsDNA-positive subgroup were 31.7%, 41.5% (p=0.002) and 51.5% (p<0.001) with placebo and belimumab 1 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg, respectively; corresponding rates in the SELENA-SLEDAI ≥10 subgroup were 44.3%, 58.0% (p<0.001) and 63.2% (p<0.001). Further analysis of secondary endpoints in the low complement/anti-dsDNA-positive subgroup showed that compared with placebo, belimumab produced greater benefits regarding severe flares, corticosteroid use and health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that belimumab has greater therapeutic benefit than standard therapy alone in patients with higher disease activity, anti-dsDNA positivity, low complement or corticosteroid treatment at baseline. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: identifiers NCT00424476 and NCT00410384.

A randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (Study SB-767905/012) of alvimopan for opioid-induced bowel dysfunction in patients with non-cancer pain.

UNLABELLED: Gastrointestinal (GI) side effects are common with opioid medication, and constipation affects ∼40% of patients. Such symptoms considerably impair patients' quality of life. Alvimopan is an orally administered, systemically available, peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor (PAM-OR) antagonist approved in the US for short-term, in-hospital management of postoperative ileus in patients undergoing bowel resection. This double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted as part of a recently discontinued clinical program, in which alvimopan was being developed for opioid-induced constipation (OIC). Patients (N = 518) receiving opioids for non-cancer pain were randomized to receive alvimopan .5 mg once daily, alvimopan .5 mg twice daily, or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients experiencing ≥ 3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs; bowel movements with no laxative use in the previous 24 hours) per week over the treatment period and an average increase from baseline of ≥ 1 SBM per week. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the alvimopan .5 mg twice-daily group met the primary endpoint compared with placebo (72% versus 48%, P < .001). Treatment with alvimopan twice daily improved a number of other symptoms compared with placebo and reduced the requirement for rescue laxative use. The opioid-induced bowel dysfunction Symptoms Improvement Scale (SIS) responder rate was 40.4% in the alvimopan .5 mg twice daily group, versus 18.6% with placebo (P < .001). In general, alvimopan .5 mg once daily produced qualitatively similar but numerically smaller responses than twice-daily treatment. Active treatment did not increase the requirement for opioid medication or increase average pain intensity scores. Over the 12-week treatment period, alvimopan appeared to be well tolerated. PERSPECTIVE: These results demonstrate the potential for a PAM-OR antagonist to improve the symptoms of OIC without antagonizing opioid analgesia.

A randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (Study SB-767905/013) of alvimopan for opioid-induced bowel dysfunction in patients with non-cancer pain.

UNLABELLED: The balance between the pain relief provided by opioid analgesics and the side effects caused by such agents is of particular significance to patients who take opioids for the long-term relief of non-cancer pain. The spectrum of signs and symptoms affecting the gastrointestinal (GI) tract associated with opioid use is known as opioid-induced bowel dysfunction. Alvimopan is an orally administered, systemically available, peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor (PAM-OR) antagonist, approved in the US for the management of postoperative ileus in patients undergoing bowel resection (short-term, in-hospital use only). Alvimopan was under clinical development for long-term treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) but this program has been discontinued. This double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, part of the former OIC development program, enrolled patients (N = 485) receiving opioids for non-cancer pain. Patients were randomized to receive alvimopan .5 mg once daily, alvimopan .5 mg twice daily, or placebo, for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who experienced ≥ 3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs; bowel movements with no laxative use in the previous 24 hours) per week over the treatment period, and an average increase from baseline of ≥ 1 SBM per week. There were greater proportions of SBM responders in both alvimopan treatment groups (63% in both groups) compared with placebo (56%), although these differences were not statistically significant. Secondary efficacy analyses indicated that alvimopan was numerically superior to placebo in improving opioid-induced bowel dysfunction symptoms and patients' global assessment of opioid-induced bowel dysfunction, and reduced the requirement for rescue laxatives. Active treatment was well tolerated and alvimopan did not antagonize opioid analgesia. PERSPECTIVE: Although the primary endpoint was not met in this study, the magnitude of alvimopan-induced improvements versus baseline, together with previous study results, suggest that a PAM-OR antagonist has the potential to improve OIC.

Alvimopan, a peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor (PAM-OR) antagonist for the treatment of opioid-induced bowel dysfunction: results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-finding study in subjects taking opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

Our objective was to investigate the efficacy and safety of alvimopan, a peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor (PAM-OR) antagonist, in subjects with non-cancer pain and opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OBD), and to identify at least one treatment regimen that improves OBD. Following a 2-week baseline period, 522 subjects reporting <3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs)/week (with >or=25% accompanied by a sensation of incomplete evacuation, straining, or lumpy hard stools), requiring analgesia equivalent to >or=30 mg oral morphine/day were randomized to alvimopan 0.5mg twice daily (BID), 1mg once daily (QD), 1mg BID, or placebo for 6 weeks. Compared with placebo, there was a statistically and clinically significant increase in mean weekly SBM frequency over the initial 3 weeks of treatment (primary endpoint) with alvimopan 0.5mg BID (+1.71 mean SBMs/week), alvimopan 1mg QD (+1.64) and alvimopan 1mg BID (+2.52); P<0.001 for all comparisons. Increased SBM frequency and additional treatment effects, including improvements in symptoms such as straining, stool consistency, incomplete evacuation, abdominal bloating/discomfort, and decreased appetite, were sustained over 6 weeks. The most frequently reported adverse events were abdominal pain, nausea, and diarrhea, occurring more frequently in the higher dosage groups. The alvimopan 0.5mg BID regimen demonstrated the best benefit-to-risk profile for managing OBD with alvimopan in this study population, with a side effect profile similar to that of placebo. There was no evidence of opioid analgesia antagonism. Competitive peripheral antagonism of opioids with alvimopan can restore GI function and relieve OBD without compromising analgesia.