Efficacy and Safety of Bimagrumab in Sporadic Inclusion Body Myositis: Long-term Extension of RESILIENT.

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term (2 years) effects of bimagrumab in participants with sporadic inclusion body myositis (sIBM). METHODS: Participants (aged 36-85 years) who completed the core study (RESILIENT [Efficacy and Safety of Bimagrumab/BYM338 at 52 Weeks on Physical Function, Muscle Strength, Mobility in sIBM Patients]) were invited to join an extension study. Individuals continued on the same treatment as in the core study (10 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, 1 mg/kg bimagrumab or matching placebo administered as IV infusions every 4 weeks). The co-primary outcome measures were 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and safety. RESULTS: Between November 2015 and February 2017, 211 participants entered double-blind placebo-controlled period of the extension study. Mean change in 6MWD from baseline was highly variable across treatment groups, but indicated progressive deterioration from weeks 24-104 in all treatment groups. Overall, 91.0% (n = 142) of participants in the pooled bimagrumab group and 89.1% (n = 49) in the placebo group had ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (AE). Falls were slightly higher in the bimagrumab 3 mg/kg group vs 10 mg/kg, 1 mg/kg, and placebo groups (69.2% [n = 36 of 52] vs 56.6% [n = 30 of 53], 58.8% [n = 30 of 51], and 61.8% [n = 34 of 55], respectively). The most frequently reported AEs in the pooled bimagrumab group were diarrhea 14.7% (n = 23), involuntary muscle contractions 9.6% (n = 15), and rash 5.1% (n = 8). Incidence of serious AEs was comparable between the pooled bimagrumab and the placebo group (18.6% [n = 29] vs 14.5% [n = 8], respectively). CONCLUSION: Extended treatment with bimagrumab up to 2 years produced a good safety profile and was well-tolerated, but did not provide clinical benefits in terms of improvement in mobility. The extension study was terminated early due to core study not meeting its primary endpoint. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02573467. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with sIBM, long-term treatment with bimagrumab was safe, well-tolerated, and did not provide meaningful functional benefit. The study is rated Class IV because of the open-label design of extension treatment period 2.

Safety and efficacy of intravenous bimagrumab in inclusion body myositis (RESILIENT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial.

BACKGROUND: Inclusion body myositis is an idiopathic inflammatory myopathy and the most common myopathy affecting people older than 50 years. To date, there are no effective drug treatments. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of bimagrumab-a fully human monoclonal antibody-in individuals with inclusion body myositis. METHODS: We did a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (RESILIENT) at 38 academic clinical sites in Australia, Europe, Japan, and the USA. Individuals (aged 36-85 years) were eligible for the study if they met modified 2010 Medical Research Council criteria for inclusion body myositis. We randomly assigned participants (1:1:1:1) using a blocked randomisation schedule (block size of four) to either bimagrumab (10 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, or 1 mg/kg) or placebo matched in appearance to bimagrumab, administered as intravenous infusions every 4 weeks for at least 48 weeks. All study participants, the funder, investigators, site personnel, and people doing assessments were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome measure was 6-min walking distance (6MWD), which was assessed at week 52 in the primary analysis population and analysed by intention-to-treat principles. We used a multivariate normal repeated measures model to analyse data for 6MWD. Safety was assessed by recording adverse events and by electrocardiography, echocardiography, haematological testing, urinalysis, and blood chemistry. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01925209; this report represents the final analysis. FINDINGS: Between Sept 26, 2013, and Jan 6, 2016, 251 participants were enrolled to the study, of whom 63 were assigned to each bimagrumab group and 62 were allocated to the placebo group. At week 52, 6MWD change from baseline did not differ between any bimagrumab dose and placebo (least squares mean treatment difference for bimagrumab 10 mg/kg group, 17·6 m, SE 14·3, 99% CI -19·6 to 54·8; p=0·22; for 3 mg/kg group, 18·6 m, 14·2, -18·2 to 55·4; p=0·19; and for 1 mg/kg group, -1·3 m, 14·1, -38·0 to 35·4; p=0·93). 63 (100%) participants in each bimagrumab group and 61 (98%) of 62 in the placebo group had at least one adverse event. Falls were the most frequent adverse event (48 [76%] in the bimagrumab 10 mg/kg group, 55 [87%] in the 3 mg/kg group, 54 [86%] in the 1 mg/kg group, and 52 [84%] in the placebo group). The most frequently reported adverse events with bimagrumab were muscle spasms (32 [51%] in the bimagrumab 10 mg/kg group, 43 [68%] in the 3 mg/kg group, 25 [40%] in the 1 mg/kg group, and 13 [21%] in the placebo group) and diarrhoea (33 [52%], 28 [44%], 20 [32%], and 11 [18%], respectively). Adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported in four (6%) participants in each bimagrumab group compared with one (2%) participant in the placebo group. At least one serious adverse event was reported by 21 (33%) participants in the 10 mg/kg group, 11 (17%) in the 3 mg/kg group, 20 (32%) in the 1 mg/kg group, and 20 (32%) in the placebo group. No significant adverse cardiac effects were recorded on electrocardiography or echocardiography. Two deaths were reported during the study, one attributable to subendocardial myocardial infarction (secondary to gastrointestinal bleeding after an intentional overdose of concomitant sedatives and antidepressants) and one attributable to lung adenocarcinoma. Neither death was considered by the investigator to be related to bimagrumab. INTERPRETATION: Bimagrumab showed a good safety profile, relative to placebo, in individuals with inclusion body myositis but did not improve 6MWD. The strengths of our study are that, to the best of our knowledge, it is the largest randomised controlled trial done in people with inclusion body myositis, and it provides important natural history data over 12 months. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma.

Inferring the long duration response to levodopa in Parkinson's disease.

INTRODUCTION: The long duration response to levodopa in Parkinson's disease outlasts drug elimination by days to weeks. Though a substantive part of anti-parkinsonian motor benefit, it cannot easily be observed. OBJECTIVES: To infer the magnitude of the long duration response during the first decade of Parkinson's disease and identify factors that influence it. METHODS: Serial practically defined off scores of 24 patients from a longitudinal study of levodopa short duration response were used to establish their rate of motor progression. A line of notional untreated disability (as if drug treatment had never been given) with the same progression gradient was the basis for calculation of the long duration response. Predictors of mean long duration response amplitude were identified using a multiple linear regression model. RESULTS: Over a mean treatment period of 16.6 ±â€¯4.4 years, annual increase in motor disability was 2.3% of the maximum score. The long duration response composed 49% of total levodopa response during the first decade of treatment, and this proportion was significantly higher soon after commencing levodopa (p = 0.001). Higher pre-treatment motor score (r = 0.60) and lower MMSE (r = 0.60) were the main predictors of a larger long duration response. There was little correlation between long and short duration responses. CONCLUSIONS: Long duration responses contribute almost half of the total levodopa benefit during the first decade of treatment. An appreciation of both long and short duration components of drug symptomatic effects is important in clinical trial design to investigate possible neuroprotective treatments.

Study of levodopa response in Parkinson's disease: Observations on rates of motor progression.

INTRODUCTION: It is important to understand how the rate of motor progression in PD relates to dopaminergic treatment. METHODS: The methods for this study comprised prospective defined off state measurements of the levodopa response at 3-year intervals over a mean 13.3-year period in 34 patients enrolled before treatment initiation. RESULTS: Despite worsening of on and off scores, the magnitude of the l-dopa short-duration response is maintained as the disease progresses. A linear mixed-effects regression analysis of off phase motor scores showed a yearly deterioration of 2.3% of the maximum disability score. Greater motor disability at the commencement of treatment was an independent predictor of faster progression. Demented patients had worse motor function than those without dementia (P = 0.02), and motor deficit appeared to accelerate toward the end of the disease course in patients who had died. CONCLUSIONS: These observations should inform clinical trial design for drugs with possible neuroprotective properties.

Longitudinal study of levodopa in Parkinson's disease: effects of the advanced disease phase.

Thirty-four patients have been studied from the time of initiation of pharmacological treatment in a long-term prospective study of levodopa effects and disease progression in Parkinson's disease. Objective motor scoring of the response to levodopa in defined off states was performed every 3 years. The mean time from the initiation of levodopa treatment to the most recent measurements was 18.2 years. Of 8 patients who are still alive, only 3 had none of the features of the advanced disease phase (dementia, hallucinations, frequent falling). Off-phase motor function worsened at a yearly rate of 1.9% of the maximum disability score, although the plots of the serial scores showed that the magnitude of the levodopa response is well preserved. There was little difference in the rate of progression between patients with tremor-dominant and non-tremor-dominant motor subtypes. Those who developed dementia had more rapid deterioration of motor scores, with significantly worse off-phase (P = .008) and on-phase (P = .03) motor function. A graph of serial scores of patients who have died, aligned for time of death, showed an upward curving trend of motor disability in the last 5 years of the disease course. Its advanced phase may reveal that Parkinson's disease has an exponential pattern of progression.

Longitudinal study of the levodopa motor response in Parkinson's disease: relationship between cognitive decline and motor function.

In this prospective study of 34 patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), measurements of the short duration levodopa motor response have been performed every 3 years in defined off states. The mean time from initiation of levodopa treatment was 14.8 years, and 17 patients survived to the latest assessment stage. Off phase motor function worsened at a yearly rate of 2.2% of the maximum disability score. The magnitude of the levodopa response is well preserved as the disease progresses, and patients who developed motor fluctuations maintained better on phase motor function than nonfluctuators (P = 0.01). Ten patients, of whom 5 survive, developed dementia. There was no difference in pretreatment disability or initial levodopa response between demented and nondemented subjects. However, dementia was associated with worse on and off motor disability scores after 11 and 14 years (P < 0.001), and a smaller levodopa response magnitude after 14 years (P = 0.008). The plot of sequential scores shows the association between cognitive decline and accelerating increase in motor disability. This suggests that the advanced phase of PD, when Lewy body pathology involves the cerebral cortex, progresses in an exponential rather than linear fashion.

Motor response to levodopa and the evolution of motor fluctuations in the first decade of treatment of Parkinson's disease.

Thirty-four patients with Parkinson's disease were followed for a mean period of 8 years from the time of initiation of levodopa medication. Levodopa response was charted from the starting point of pharmacological treatment to give a longitudinal point of view of the changes that evolve as the disease progresses. Objective measurements of the motor response to levodopa test-doses were made at approximately three yearly intervals. Motor fluctuations developed in 58% of the patient group after a mean treatment period of 35 months. Dyskinesia developed in parallel with fluctuations but appeared on average 7 months before symptomatic wearing-off effects of levodopa doses. The patients with motor fluctuations had significantly better responses to levodopa. By contrast, nonfluctuators were more prone to develop increasing midline motor disability affecting speech, gait and balance. Comparison of test-dose and pretreatment scores suggested that a substantial long-duration response to levodopa remains after many years of treatment, and that lateralized motor deficits show a stronger long duration response than midline ones. Motor fluctuations are a consequence of disease progression but their early development is, on balance, associated with better long-term functional ability because these patients have the greater capacity to respond to pharmacological treatment.