Aficamten for Symptomatic Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: One of the major determinants of exercise intolerance and limiting symptoms among patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is an elevated intracardiac pressure resulting from left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. Aficamten is an oral selective cardiac myosin inhibitor that reduces left ventricular outflow tract gradients by mitigating cardiac hypercontractility. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned adults with symptomatic obstructive HCM to receive aficamten (starting dose, 5 mg; maximum dose, 20 mg) or placebo for 24 weeks, with dose adjustment based on echocardiography results. The primary end point was the change from baseline to week 24 in the peak oxygen uptake as assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing. The 10 prespecified secondary end points (tested hierarchically) were change in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS), improvement in the New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, change in the pressure gradient after the Valsalva maneuver, occurrence of a gradient of less than 30 mm Hg after the Valsalva maneuver, and duration of eligibility for septal reduction therapy (all assessed at week 24); change in the KCCQ-CSS, improvement in the NYHA functional class, change in the pressure gradient after the Valsalva maneuver, and occurrence of a gradient of less than 30 mm Hg after the Valsalva maneuver (all assessed at week 12); and change in the total workload as assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing at week 24. RESULTS: A total of 282 patients underwent randomization: 142 to the aficamten group and 140 to the placebo group. The mean age was 59.1 years, 59.2% were men, the baseline mean resting left ventricular outflow tract gradient was 55.1 mm Hg, and the baseline mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 74.8%. At 24 weeks, the mean change in the peak oxygen uptake was 1.8 ml per kilogram per minute (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2 to 2.3) in the aficamten group and 0.0 ml per kilogram per minute (95% CI, -0.5 to 0.5) in the placebo group (least-squares mean between-group difference, 1.7 ml per kilogram per minute; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.4; P<0.001). The results for all 10 secondary end points were significantly improved with aficamten as compared with placebo. The incidence of adverse events appeared to be similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with symptomatic obstructive HCM, treatment with aficamten resulted in a significantly greater improvement in peak oxygen uptake than placebo. (Funded by Cytokinetics; SEQUOIA-HCM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05186818.).

Efficacy and Safety of Aficamten in Symptomatic Nonobstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Results From the REDWOOD-HCM Trial, Cohort 4.

BACKGROUND: This open-label phase 2 trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of aficamten in patients with nonobstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (nHCM). METHODS: Patients with symptomatic nHCM (left ventricular outflow tract obstruction gradient ≤ 30 mmHg, left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≥ 60%, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] > 300 pg/mL) received aficamten 5-15 mg once daily (doses adjusted according to echocardiographic LVEF) for 10 weeks. RESULTS: We enrolled 41 patients (mean ± SD age 56 ± 16 years; 59% female). At Week 10, 22 (55%) patients experienced an improvement of ≥ 1 New York Heart Association class; 11 (29%) became asymptomatic. Clinically relevant improvements in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Scores occurred in 22 (55%) patients. Symptom relief was paralleled by reductions in NT-proBNP levels (56%; P < 0.001) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (22%; P < 0.005). Modest reductions in LVEF (mean ± SD) of -5.4% ± 10 to 64.6% ± 9.1 were observed. Three (8%) patients had asymptomatic reduction in LVEF < 50% (range: 41%-48%), all returning to normal after 2 weeks of washout. One patient with prior history of aborted sudden cardiac death experienced a fatal arrhythmia during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Aficamten administration for symptomatic nHCM was generally safe and was associated with improvements in heart failure symptoms and cardiac biomarkers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04219826.

Relationship between quantitative strength and functional outcomes in the phase 2 FORTITUDE-ALS trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship among measurements of strength, function, and quality of life in an amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) clinical trial. METHODS: In the FORTITUDE-ALS clinical trial (NCT03160898), 456 participants in the full-analysis set were treated with either reldesemtiv or placebo for 12 weeks; this post hoc analysis included all participants regardless of treatment assignments. Assessments included slow vital capacity (SVC), the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R), and the 5-item ALS Assessment Questionnaire (ALSAQ-5). Muscle strength was measured quantitatively with hand-held dynamometry, and grip strength with a dedicated dynamometer. The relationship between strength and ALSFRS-R fine and gross motor domain scores, or responses to ALSAQ-5 questions on hand function and walking, was assessed with Spearman's rank correlation. The relationship between mean upper- or lower-extremity muscle strength and specific ALSFRS-R domains was modeled using principal-components analysis. RESULTS: Upper-extremity muscle strength and hand grip were highly correlated with ALSFRS-R fine motor scores and the ALSAQ-5 hand function question. Similarly, lower-extremity strength correlated well with ALSFRS-R gross motor domain and the ALSAQ-5 walking question. For SVC, correlation was poor with the ALSFRS-R respiratory domain, but stronger with the total score, potentially reflecting the insensitivity of the respiratory questions in the scale. Upper- and lower-extremity strength were both strong predictors of ALSFRS-R domain scores. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of data from an ALS clinical trial, muscle strength quantified by dynamometry was strongly correlated with functional capacity. These results suggest that muscle strength directly relates to specific functions of importance to people with ALS.

Exercise Capacity in Patients With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: SEQUOIA-HCM Baseline Characteristics and Study Design.

Patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) have increased risk of arrhythmia, stroke, heart failure, and sudden death. Contemporary management of oHCM has decreased annual hospitalization and mortality rates, yet patients have worsening health-related quality of life due to impaired exercise capacity and persistent residual symptoms. Here we consider the design of clinical trials evaluating potential oHCM therapies in the context of SEQUOIA-HCM (Safety, Efficacy, and Quantitative Understanding of Obstruction Impact of Aficamten in HCM). This large, phase 3 trial is now fully enrolled (N = 282). Baseline characteristics reflect an ethnically diverse population with characteristics typical of patients encountered clinically with substantial functional and symptom burden. The study will assess the effect of aficamten vs placebo, in addition to standard-of-care medications, on functional capacity and symptoms over 24 weeks. Future clinical trials could model the approach in SEQUOIA-HCM to evaluate the effect of potential therapies on the burden of oHCM. (Safety, Efficacy, and Quantitative Understanding of Obstruction Impact of Aficamten in HCM [SEQUOIA-HCM]; NCT05186818).

COURAGE-ALS: a randomized, double-blind phase 3 study designed to improve participant experience and increase the probability of success.

Objective: To determine the target population and optimize the study design of the phase 3 clinical trial evaluating reldesemtiv in participants with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).Methods: We evaluated the phase 2 study of reldesemtiv, FORTITUDE-ALS, to inform eligibility criteria and design features that would increase trial efficiency and reduce participant burden of the phase 3 trial.Results: In FORTITUDE-ALS, the effect of reldesemtiv was particularly evident among participants in the intermediate- and fast-progressing tertiles for pre-study disease progression. These participants most often had symptom onset ≤24 months and an ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) total score ≤44 at baseline. Compared with the overall FORTITUDE-ALS population, the subgroup meeting these criteria declined by fewer ALSFRS-R points at 12 weeks (difference of least-squares mean [SE] versus placebo 1.84 [0.49] and 0.87 [0.35] for the overall population). These inclusion criteria will be used for the phase 3 clinical trial, COURAGE-ALS, in which the primary outcome is the change in ALSFRS-R total score at week 24. We also measure durable medical equipment use and evaluate strength in muscles expected to change rapidly. To reduce participant burden, study visits are often remote, and strength evaluation is simplified to reduce time and effort.Conclusions: In COURAGE-ALS, the phase 3 clinical trial to evaluate reldesemtiv, the sensitivity of detecting a potential treatment effect may be increased by defining eligibility criteria that limit the proportion of participants who have slower disease progression. Implementing remote visits and simplifying strength measurements will reduce both site and participant burden.ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT03160898 (FORTITUDE-ALS) and NCT04944784 (COURAGE-ALS).

Health utilities and quality-adjusted life years for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis receiving reldesemtiv or placebo in FORTITUDE-ALS.

AIMS: To estimate the health utilities and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) receiving reldesemtiv versus placebo in FORTITUDE-ALS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of clinical trial data from FORTITUDE-ALS (NCT03160898). This Phase IIb, double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 12-week trial evaluated reldesemtiv in patients with ALS. Health utilities from the five-level version of the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) were estimated using ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) scores collected during the trial. QALYs were estimated using the area under the curve method. RESULTS: The full analysis set consisted of 456 patients (reldesemtiv n = 342, placebo n = 114), who received at least one dose of the double-blind study drug, and had ALSFRS-R assessed at baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment. The difference in EQ-5D-5L utility least-squares (LS) mean change from baseline to week 12 for reldesemtiv versus placebo, adjusted for baseline values, was statistically significant (0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.01, 0.05; p = .0008). The incremental QALY of reldesemtiv versus placebo adjusted for baseline utility values showed a modest, but statistically significant, difference (0.004, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.007; p = .0058). CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis of FORTITUDE-ALS suggests that reldesemtiv showed a modest but significant benefit in health utilities and QALYs compared with placebo. Future long-term studies that include direct collection of EQ-5D-5L data will be needed to confirm our findings. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03160898.

Phase 2 Study of Aficamten in Patients With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction is a major determinant of heart failure symptoms in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM). Aficamten, a next-in-class cardiac myosin inhibitor, may lower gradients and improve symptoms in these patients. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of aficamten in patients with oHCM. METHODS: Patients with oHCM and LVOT gradients ≥30 mm Hg at rest or ≥50 mm Hg with Valsalva were randomized 2:1 to receive aficamten (n = 28) or placebo (n = 13) in 2 dose-finding cohorts. Doses were titrated based on gradients and ejection fraction (EF). Safety and changes in gradient, EF, New York Heart Association functional class, and cardiac biomarkers were assessed over a 10-week treatment period and after a 2-week washout. RESULTS: From baseline to 10 weeks, aficamten reduced gradients at rest (mean difference: -40 ± 27 mm Hg, and -43 ± 37 mm Hg in Cohorts 1 and 2, P = 0.0003 and P = 0.0004 vs placebo, respectively) and with Valsalva (-36 ± 27 mm Hg and -53 ± 44 mm Hg, P = 0.001 and <0.0001 vs placebo, respectively). There were modest reductions in EF (-6% ± 7.5% and -12% ± 5.9%, P = 0.007 and P < 0.0001 vs placebo, respectively). Symptomatic improvement in ≥1 New York Heart Association functional class was observed in 31% on placebo, and 43% and 64% on aficamten in Cohorts 1 and 2, respectively (nonsignificant). With aficamten, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide was reduced (62% relative to placebo, P = 0.0002). There were no treatment interruptions and adverse events were similar between treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Aficamten resulted in substantial reductions in LVOT gradients with most patients experiencing improvement in biomarkers and symptoms. These results highlight the potential of sarcomere-targeted therapy for treatment of oHCM.

Efficacy of omecamtiv mecarbil in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction according to N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level: insights from the GALACTIC-HF trial.

AIM: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is predictive of both outcomes and response to treatment in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The aim of this study was to examine the effect of the cardiac myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil according to baseline NT-proBNP level in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure trial (GALACTIC-HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: The primary outcome was the composite of a worsening heart failure event (urgent clinic visit, emergency department visit, or hospitalization) or cardiovascular death. We prespecified analysis of the effect of treatment according to baseline NT-proBNP (≤ median, > median), excluding individuals with atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL). Of the 8232 patients analysed, 8206 had an available baseline NT-proBNP measurement. Among the 5971 patients not in AF/AFL, the median (Q1-Q3) NT-proBNP level was 1675 (812-3579) pg/ml. Hazard ratios (HR) for the effect of omecamtiv mecarbil, compared with placebo, for the primary endpoint in patients without AF/AFL were: ≤ median 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.09), > median 0.81 (0.73-0.90) (p-interaction = 0.095); for the overall population (including patients with AF/AFL) the HRs were ≤ median 1.01 (0.90-1.15) and > median 0.88 (0.80-0.96) (p-interaction = 0.035). There was an interaction between treatment and NT-proBNP, examined as a continuous variable, with greater effect of omecamtiv mecarbil on the primary outcome in patients with a higher baseline NT-proBNP (p-interaction = 0.086). CONCLUSIONS: In GALACTIC-HF, the benefit of omecamtiv mecarbil appeared to be larger in patients with higher baseline NT-proBNP levels, especially in patients without AF/AFL. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02929329; EudraCT number, 2016-002299-28.

MiToS and King's staging as clinical outcome measures in ALS: a retrospective analysis of the FORTITUDE-ALS trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the Milano-Torino staging (MiToS) and King's staging systems as potential outcome measures for clinical trials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) by assessing these outcomes in FORTITUDE-ALS. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the phase 2b FORTITUDE-ALS trial (NCT03160898), a double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of reldesemtiv in patients with ALS. The treatment period was 12 weeks, with a follow-up assessment at week 16. Patients were retrospectively classified into MiToS and King's stages. Outcomes were the mean time maintaining baseline stage and risk of progression from the baseline stage to a later stage. RESULTS: The full analysis set consisted of 456 patients randomized 3:1 (reldesemtiv n = 342, placebo n = 114) who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug and had at least one post-baseline assessment. At baseline, MiToS and King's stages were balanced between the reldesemtiv and placebo groups: >99% of patients were in MiToS stage 0 or 1 and King's stage 1, 2 or 3. Time of maintaining the baseline stage was similar in both groups, for each staging system. The two staging systems exhibited considerably disparate results for risk of progression from baseline to a later stage: hazard ratio (HR) = 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38, 0.99) for MiToS and HR = 0.96 (95% CI 0.63, 1.44) for King's. CONCLUSION: This exploratory analysis showed the feasibility of MiToS and King's staging as potential outcome measures in ALS. Additional studies of these staging systems are needed to further explore their utility in ALS clinical trials.

Effect of Omecamtiv Mecarbil on Exercise Capacity in Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: The METEORIC-HF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Exercise limitation is a cardinal manifestation of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but is not consistently improved by any of the current guideline-directed medical therapies. Objective: To determine whether omecamtiv mecarbil, a novel direct myosin activator that improves cardiac performance and reduces the risk for cardiovascular death or first HF event in HFrEF, can improve peak exercise capacity in patients with chronic HFrEF. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial of patients with HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%), New York Heart Association class II-III symptoms, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level of 200 pg/mL or greater, and baseline peak oxygen uptake (V̇o2) of 75% or less of predicted. Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio (omecamtiv mecarbil to placebo) between March 2019 and May 2021 at 63 sites in North America and Europe, with the last patient visit occurring on November 29, 2021. Interventions: Omecamtiv mecarbil (n = 185) or matching placebo (n = 91), given orally twice daily at a dose of 25 mg, 37.5 mg, or 50 mg based on target plasma levels, for 20 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was a change in exercise capacity (peak V̇o2) from baseline to week 20. Secondary end points included total workload, ventilatory efficiency, and daily physical activity as determined by accelerometry. Results: Among 276 patients who were randomized (median age, 64 years; IQR, 55-70 years; 42 women [15%]), 249 (90%) completed the trial. The median left ventricular ejection fraction was 28% (IQR, 21-33) and the median baseline peak V̇o2 was 14.2 mL/kg/min (IQR, 11.6-17.4) in the omecamtiv mecarbil group and 15.0 mL/kg/min (IQR, 12.0-17.2) in the placebo group. Mean change in peak V̇o2 did not differ significantly between the omecamtiv mecarbil and placebo groups (mean, -0.24 mL/kg/min vs 0.21 mL/kg/min; least square mean difference, -0.45 mL/kg/min [95% CI, -1.02 to 0.13]; P = .13). Adverse events included dizziness (omecamtiv mecarbil: 4.9%, placebo: 5.5%), fatigue (omecamtiv mecarbil: 4.9%, placebo: 4.4%), heart failure events (omecamtiv mecarbil: 4.9%, placebo: 4.4%), death (omecamtiv mecarbil: 1.6%, placebo: 1.1%), stroke (omecamtiv mecarbil: 0.5%, placebo: 1.1%), and myocardial infarction (omecamtiv mecarbil: 0%, placebo: 1.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with chronic HFrEF, omecamtiv mecarbil did not significantly improve exercise capacity over 20 weeks compared with placebo. These findings do not support the use of omecamtiv mecarbil for treatment of HFrEF for improvement of exercise capacity. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03759392.

Developments in Exercise Capacity Assessment in Heart Failure Clinical Trials and the Rationale for the Design of METEORIC-HF.

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a highly morbid condition for which exercise intolerance is a major manifestation. However, methods to assess exercise capacity in HFrEF vary widely in clinical practice and in trials. We describe advances in exercise capacity assessment in HFrEF and a comparative analysis of how various therapies available for HFrEF impact exercise capacity. Current guideline-directed medical therapy has indirect effects on cardiac performance with minimal impact on measured functional capacity. Omecamtiv mecarbil is a novel selective cardiac myosin activator that directly increases cardiac contractility and in a phase 3 cardiovascular outcomes study significantly reduced the primary composite end point of time to first heart failure event or cardiovascular death in patients with HFrEF. The objective of the METEORIC-HF trial (Multicenter Exercise Tolerance Evaluation of Omecamtiv Mecarbil Related to Increased Contractility in Heart Failure) is to assess the effect of omecamtiv mecarbil versus placebo on multiple components of functional capacity in HFrEF. The primary end point is to test the effect of omecamtiv mecarbil compared with placebo on peak oxygen uptake as measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing after 20 weeks of treatment. METEORIC-HF will provide state-of-the-art assessment of functional capacity by measuring ventilatory efficiency, circulatory power, ventilatory anaerobic threshold, oxygen uptake recovery kinetics, daily activity, and quality-of-life assessment. Thus, the METEORIC-HF trial will evaluate the potential impact of increased myocardial contractility with omecamtiv mecarbil on multiple important measures of functional capacity in ambulatory patients with symptomatic HFrEF. Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03759392.

Prescription and acceptance of durable medical equipment in FORTITUDE-ALS, a study of reldesemtiv in ALS: post hoc analyses of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

Objective: To evaluate the possible effect of reldesemtiv, a fast skeletal muscle troponin activator, on prescription and acceptance of durable medical equipment (DME) in the FORTITUDE-ALS trial. Methods: Health economic outcome information was collected in FORTITUDE-ALS (NCT03160898); sites recorded if and when DME, specifically manual or power wheelchairs, gastrostomy tubes, noninvasive ventilators, or augmentative language devices, was prescribed by a physician and accepted by the patient (DME-PAP) during the trial. Acceptance was defined as the patient agreeing the item was needed. Cox regression analysis compared time to DME-PAP for each reldesemtiv dose with placebo. Post hoc analyses evaluated all reldesemtiv doses compared with placebo. Results: At least one DME item was prescribed and accepted by 33/114 (28.9%) of placebo patients, 19/112 (17.0%) of patients receiving reldesemtiv 150 mg bid, 24/113 (21.2%) receiving 300 mg bid, and 29/117 (24.8%) receiving 450 mg bid. The proportion of new DME-PAP was significantly lower in patients receiving reldesemtiv 150 mg bid vs placebo (17.0% vs 28.9%, p = 0.032). The hazard ratio versus placebo for accepting at least one DME item for all reldesemtiv doses combined was 0.61 (confidence interval: 0.39, 0.96, p = 0.032). 25% of placebo patients were prescribed and agreed to obtain a DME item by 84 days; this threshold was met for reldesemtiv-treated patients at 120 days. Conclusions: Results suggest ALS patients receiving reldesemtiv may have lower risk of and delayed need for DME related to impaired mobility, breathing, swallowing, or speaking; this delay is consistent with other measures indicating delay in disease progression.

Noninvasive ventilation use by patients enrolled in VITALITY-ALS.

Objectives: To evaluate the prescribing practices of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and patient compliance during VITALITY-ALS. Methods: VITALITY-ALS enrolled patients with a slow vital capacity (SVC) ≥70% of predicted who were not using NIV at screening. Physicians prescribed NIV without restriction following randomization. Reason(s) for NIV prescription, dates prescribed and initiated, and compliance were recorded. Compliance was recorded as prescribed but never initiated, used ≥2 h/24 h, used ≥4 h/24 h, or used ≥22 h/24 h. In addition to other outcome measures, SVC and the revised ALS functional rating scale (ALSFRS-R) were performed at all visits. Patients were followed up to 56 weeks. Results: 565 patients were randomized and dosed with placebo or tirasemtiv in VITALITY-ALS; 195 (34.5%) were prescribed NIV: of these, 78.5% used it for ≥2 h/24 h, 71.3% for ≥4 h/24 h, and 11.8% for ≥22 h/24 h. The three most common reasons NIV was prescribed were decline in vital capacity, respiratory symptoms, and sleep-related symptoms. During the trial, 179/565 (31.7%) patients had a decline of SVC below 50%; of these patients, 122/179 (68.2%) were prescribed NIV. Reasons for prescribing NIV were different for patients from North America compared with Europe. Conclusions: Despite allowing for NIV initiation at any point following randomization in VITALITY-ALS, only slightly more than two out of three patients whose SVC fell below 50% were prescribed NIV; this was similar in Europe and in North America. Underutilization of NIV could influence survival outcomes in patients with ALS including those involved in clinical trials.

Reldesemtiv in Patients with Spinal Muscular Atrophy: a Phase 2 Hypothesis-Generating Study.

This phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled, hypothesis-generating study evaluated the effects of oral reldesemtiv, a fast skeletal muscle troponin activator, in patients with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). Patients ≥ 12 years of age with type II, III, or IV SMA were randomized into 2 sequential, ascending reldesemtiv dosing cohorts (cohort 1: 150 mg bid or placebo [2:1]; cohort 2: 450 mg bid or placebo [2:1]). The primary objective was to determine potential pharmacodynamic effects of reldesemtiv on 8 outcome measures in SMA, including 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and maximum expiratory pressure (MEP). Changes from baseline to weeks 4 and 8 were determined. Pharmacokinetics and safety were also evaluated. Patients were randomized to reldesemtiv 150 mg, 450 mg, or placebo (24, 20, and 26, respectively). The change from baseline in 6MWD was greater for reldesemtiv 450 mg than for placebo at weeks 4 and 8 (least squares [LS] mean difference, 35.6 m [p = 0.0037] and 24.9 m [p = 0.058], respectively). Changes from baseline in MEP at week 8 on reldesemtiv 150 and 450 mg were significantly greater than those on placebo (LS mean differences, 11.7 [p = 0.038] and 13.2 cm H2O [p = 0.03], respectively). For 6MWD and MEP, significant changes from placebo were seen in the highest reldesemtiv peak plasma concentration quartile (Cmax > 3.29 µg/mL; LS mean differences, 43.3 m [p = 0.010] and 28.8 cm H2O [p = 0.0002], respectively). Both dose levels of reldesemtiv were well tolerated. Results suggest reldesemtiv may offer clinical benefit and support evaluation in larger SMA patient populations.

A Phase 2, Double-Blind, Randomized, Dose-Ranging Trial Of Reldesemtiv In Patients With ALS.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate safety, dose response, and preliminary efficacy of reldesemtiv over 12 weeks in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Methods: Patients (≤2 years since diagnosis) with slow upright vital capacity (SVC) of ≥60% were randomized 1:1:1:1 to reldesemtiv 150, 300, or 450 mg twice daily (bid) or placebo; active treatment was 12 weeks with 4-week follow-up. Primary endpoint was change in percent predicted SVC at 12 weeks; secondary measures included ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) and muscle strength mega-score. Results: Patients (N = 458) were enrolled; 85% completed 12-week treatment. The primary analysis failed to reach statistical significance (p = 0.11); secondary endpoints showed no statistically significant effects (ALSFRS-R, p = 0.09; muscle strength mega-score, p = 0.31). Post hoc analyses pooling all active reldesemtiv-treated patients compared against placebo showed trends toward benefit in all endpoints (progression rate for SVC, ALSFRS-R, and muscle strength mega-score (nominal p values of 0.10, 0.01 and 0.20 respectively)). Reldesemtiv was well tolerated, with nausea and fatigue being the most common side effects. A dose-dependent decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate was noted, and transaminase elevations were seen in approximately 5% of patients. Both hepatic and renal abnormalities trended toward resolution after study drug discontinuation. Conclusions: Although the primary efficacy analysis did not demonstrate statistical significance, there were trends favoring reldesemtiv for all three endpoints, with effect sizes generally regarded as clinically important. Tolerability was good; modest hepatic and renal abnormalities were reversible. The impact of reldesemtiv on patients with ALS should be assessed in a pivotal Phase 3 trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03160898).

Gains Across WHO Dimensions of Function After Robot-Based Therapy in Stroke Subjects.

BACKGROUND: Studies examining the effects of therapeutic interventions after stroke often focus on changes in loss of body function/structure (impairment). However, improvements in activities limitations and participation restriction are often higher patient priorities, and the relationship that these measures have with loss of body function/structure is unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study measured gains across WHO International Classification of Function (ICF) dimensions and examined their interrelationships. METHODS: Subjects were recruited 11 to 26 weeks after hemiparetic stroke. Over a 3-week period, subjects received 12 sessions of intensive robot-based therapy targeting the distal arm. Each subject was assessed at baseline and at 1 month after end of therapy. RESULTS: At baseline, subjects (n = 40) were 134.7 ± 32.4 (mean ± SD) days poststroke and had moderate-severe arm motor deficits (arm motor Fugl-Meyer score of 35.6 ± 14.4) that were stable. Subjects averaged 2579 thumb movements and 1298 wrist movements per treatment session. After robot therapy, there was significant improvement in measures of body function/structure (Fugl-Meyer score) and activity limitations (Action Research Arm Test, Barthel Index, and Stroke Impact Scale-Hand), but not participation restriction (Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale). Furthermore, while the degree of improvement in loss of body function/structure was correlated with improvement in activity limitations, neither improvement in loss of body function/structure nor improvement in activity limitations was correlated with change in participation restriction. CONCLUSIONS: After a 3-week course of robotic therapy, there was improvement in body function/structure and activity limitations but no reduction in participation restriction.

A phase III trial of tirasemtiv as a potential treatment for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Objective: To assess the efficacy of tirasemtiv, a fast skeletal muscle troponin activator, vs. placebo in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Methods: VITALITY-ALS (NCT02496767) was a multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Participants tolerating 2 weeks of open-label tirasemtiv (125 mg twice daily) were randomized 3:2:2:2 to placebo or one of three target tirasemtiv dose levels, using an escalating dosage protocol lasting 28 days. The primary outcome measure was changed in slow vital capacity (SVC) at 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included a change in muscle strength and time to respiratory milestones of disease progression. Results: Of 744 participants, 565 tolerated open-label tirasemtiv and received randomized treatment. By 24 weeks, 23 (12.2%) placebo-treated participants discontinued study treatment vs. 129 (34.2%) randomized to tirasemtiv. SVC declined by 14.4% (95% CI: −16.8, −11.9) in the placebo group and 13.4% (95% CI: −15.3, −11.6) in the tirasemtiv group (p = 0.56). Secondary endpoints did not show significant differences. However, participants who tolerated tirasemtiv at their randomized dose showed a numeric trend toward a dose-related slowing of decline in SVC (p = 0.11). Dizziness, fatigue, nausea, weight loss, and insomnia occurred more frequently on tirasemtiv. Serious adverse events were similar across groups. Conclusions: Tirasemtiv did not alter the decline of SVC or significantly impact secondary outcome measures. Poor tolerability of tirasemtiv may have contributed to this result. However, participants tolerating their intended dose exhibited a trend toward treatment benefit on SVC, suggesting the underlying mechanism of action may still hold promise, as is being tested with a different fast skeletal muscle troponin activator (NCT03160898).

Improved stratification of ALS clinical trials using predicted survival.

INTRODUCTION: In small trials, randomization can fail, leading to differences in patient characteristics across treatment arms, a risk that can be reduced by stratifying using key confounders. In ALS trials, riluzole use (RU) and bulbar onset (BO) have been used for stratification. We hypothesized that randomization could be improved by using a multifactorial prognostic score of predicted survival as a single stratifier. METHODS: We defined a randomization failure as a significant difference between treatment arms on a characteristic. We compared randomization failure rates when stratifying for RU and BO ("traditional stratification") to failure rates when stratifying for predicted survival using a predictive algorithm. We simulated virtual trials using the PRO-ACT database without application of a treatment effect to assess balance between cohorts. We performed 100 randomizations using each stratification method - traditional and algorithmic. We applied these stratification schemes to a randomization simulation with a treatment effect using survival as the endpoint and evaluated sample size and power. RESULTS: Stratification by predicted survival met with fewer failures than traditional stratification. Stratifying predicted survival into tertiles performed best. Stratification by predicted survival was validated with an external dataset, the placebo arm from the BENEFIT-ALS trial. Importantly, we demonstrated a substantial decrease in sample size required to reach statistical power. CONCLUSIONS: Stratifying randomization based on predicted survival using a machine learning algorithm is more likely to maintain balance between trial arms than traditional stratification methods. The methodology described here can translate to smaller, more efficient clinical trials for numerous neurological diseases.