Dupilumab in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (LIBERTY-CSU CUPID): Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by recurrent pruritic wheals (hives) and/or angioedema. Patients with CSU could remain symptomatic despite standard-of-care H1 antihistamines (H1-AH) or anti-IgE (omalizumab) treatment. Dupilumab blocks IL-4/IL-13 signaling and is approved for multiple type 2/atopic indications. OBJECTIVE: We conducted two phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials comparing dupilumab with placebo in patients with symptomatic CSU despite H1-AH. METHODS: In LIBERTY-CSU CUPID Study A, patients were omalizumab-naive (n = 138, aged ≥6 years). In Study B, patients were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders (n = 108, aged ≥12 years). The primary end point was either change from baseline over 7 days in the Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) or Itch Severity Score (ISS7) at week 24, with the other as a key secondary end point, depending on regional regulatory requirements. Studies were pooled for safety assessment. RESULTS: In Study A, UAS7 and ISS7 improved with dupilumab versus placebo (difference -8.5 [95% CI, -13.2 to -3.9; P = .0003] and -4.2 [95% CI, -6.6 to -1.8; P = .0005]). In Study B, tested at α = 0.043 after interim analysis, UAS7 improved (difference -5.8 [95% CI, -11.4 to -0.3; P = .0390]), with a numerical trend in ISS7 (difference -2.9 [95% CI, -5.7 to -0.07; nominal P = .0449, not significant]). Pooled safety data were consistent between dupilumab and placebo and with the known dupilumab safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab reduced urticaria activity by reducing itch and hives severity in omalizumab-naive patients with CSU uncontrolled with H1-AH. Although the primary end point for Study B was not met, dupilumab effects were small in patients who were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders.

Blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide are prognostic and predictive biomarkers in childhood asthma.

BACKGROUND: Blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (Feno) are prognostic biomarkers for exacerbations and predict lung function responses to dupilumab in adolescents and adults with asthma. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the relationship between baseline blood eosinophils and Feno and response to dupilumab in children with asthma. METHODS: Children aged 6 to 11 years with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma (n = 408) were randomized to receive dupilumab 100/200 mg by body weight or volume-matched placebo every 2 weeks for 52 weeks. Annualized exacerbation rate (AER) reduction and least squares mean change in prebronchodilator percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (ppFEV1) at week 12 were assessed according to cutoff baseline levels for Feno (<20 ppb vs ≥20 ppb) and blood eosinophil count (<150, ≥150 to <300, ≥300 to <500, and ≥500 cells/µL). Quadrant analyses in populations defined by biomarker thresholds and spline models across continuous end points assessed the relationship with Feno and eosinophil count. Interaction testing evaluated the independent roles of Feno and blood eosinophils as predictive markers. RESULTS: Exacerbation risk and magnitude of AER reduction increased in subgroups with higher baseline biomarker levels. Quadrant analyses revealed that disease of patients with either elevated Feno or eosinophil counts demonstrated a clinical response to dupilumab. Interaction testing indicated blood eosinophil counts or Feno independently added value as predictive biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: In children with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma, blood eosinophil counts and Feno are clinically relevant biomarkers to identify those at risk for asthma exacerbations, as well as those with disease with clinical response to dupilumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Liberty Asthma VOYAGE ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02948959.

Assessment of long-term safety and efficacy of dupilumab in children with asthma (LIBERTY ASTHMA EXCURSION): an open-label extension study.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab efficacy and safety in children aged 6-11 years with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma were shown in the VOYAGE study-a 52-week, multinational, multicentre, phase 3 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of dupilumab in children with moderate-to-severe asthma who previously participated in the VOYAGE study. METHODS: 365 of 408 children with moderate-to-severe asthma from VOYAGE enrolled in EXCURSION, a 52 week, open-label extension study conducted at 70 centres across 17 countries. 240 children continued with add-on dupilumab (dosed according to bodyweight: 100 mg for those weighing ≤30 kg and 200 mg for those weighing more than 30 kg at EXCURSION baseline) once every 2 weeks administered by subcutaneous injection (dupilumab/dupilumab group) and 125 children on placebo during VOYAGE initiated dupilumab (100 or 200 mg, according to bodyweight), once every 2 weeks administered by subcutaneous injection (placebo/dupilumab group). Following a protocol amendment, for a subset of children weighing 30 kg or less, the dose was changed to 300 mg once every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint for the open-label extension study was the number and proportion of patients with any treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) during the 52-week study period in the overall population (defined as children aged 6-11 years old with moderate-to-severe asthma who previously completed VOYAGE). Statistical analyses were descriptive. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03560466; EXCURSION). FINDINGS: Children who completed VOYAGE were eligible to enrol in EXCURSION between June 21, 2018 and Aug 18, 2020. During EXCURSION, the safety profile and proportion of patients reporting TEAEs were consistent with those observed during the parent study (VOYAGE). In the overall population, 232 (63·6%) of 365 patients experienced at least one TEAE (dupilumab/dupilumab: 147 [61·3%]; placebo/dupilumab: 85 [68·0%]). The most frequently reported TEAEs were nasopharyngitis, pharyngitis, and upper respiratory tract infections. INTERPRETATION: In EXCURSION, long-term treatment with dupilumab was well tolerated with an acceptable safety profile. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

Dupilumab for COPD with Type 2 Inflammation Indicated by Eosinophil Counts.

BACKGROUND: In some patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), type 2 inflammation may increase exacerbation risk and may be indicated by elevated blood eosinophil counts. Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key drivers of type 2 inflammation. METHODS: In a phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned patients with COPD who had a blood eosinophil count of at least 300 per microliter and an elevated exacerbation risk despite the use of standard triple therapy to receive dupilumab (300 mg) or placebo subcutaneously once every 2 weeks. The primary end point was the annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations of COPD. Key secondary and other end points that were corrected for multiplicity were the change in the prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and in the scores on the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; range, 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating a better quality of life) and the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS-COPD; range, 0 to 40, with lower scores indicating less severe symptoms). RESULTS: A total of 939 patients underwent randomization: 468 to the dupilumab group and 471 to the placebo group. The annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.93) with dupilumab and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.93 to 1.30) with placebo (rate ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.86; P<0.001). The prebronchodilator FEV1 increased from baseline to week 12 by a least-squares (LS) mean of 160 ml (95% CI, 126 to 195) with dupilumab and 77 ml (95% CI, 42 to 112) with placebo (LS mean difference, 83 ml; 95% CI, 42 to 125; P<0.001), a difference that was sustained through week 52. At week 52, the SGRQ score had improved by an LS mean of -9.7 (95% CI, -11.3 to -8.1) with dupilumab and -6.4 (95% CI, -8.0 to -4.8) with placebo (LS mean difference, -3.4; 95% CI, -5.5 to -1.3; P = 0.002). The E-RS-COPD score at week 52 had improved by an LS mean of -2.7 (95% CI, -3.2 to -2.2) with dupilumab and -1.6 (95% CI, -2.1 to -1.1) with placebo (LS mean difference, -1.1; 95% CI, -1.8 to -0.4; P = 0.001). The numbers of patients with adverse events that led to discontinuation of dupilumab or placebo, serious adverse events, and adverse events that led to death were balanced in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with COPD who had type 2 inflammation as indicated by elevated blood eosinophil counts, those who received dupilumab had fewer exacerbations, better lung function and quality of life, and less severe respiratory symptoms than those who received placebo. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; BOREAS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03930732.).

Dupilumab in patients with prurigo nodularis: two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials.

Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with intensely pruritic nodules. The LIBERTY-PN PRIME and PRIME2 phase 3 trials enrolled adults with PN with ≥20 nodules and severe itch uncontrolled with topical therapies. Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13. Patients were randomized 1:1 to 300 mg dupilumab or placebo subcutaneously every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was pruritus improvement, measured by proportion of patients with a ≥4-point reduction in Worst Itch Numeric Rating Scale (WI-NRS) from baseline at week 24 (PRIME) or week 12 (PRIME2). Key secondary endpoints included nodule number reduction to ≤5 at week 24. PRIME and PRIME2 enrolled 151 and 160 patients, respectively. Both trials met all the pre-specified primary and key secondary endpoints. A ≥4-point WI-NRS reduction at week 24 in the dupilumab and placebo arms was achieved by 60.0% and 18.4% of patients, respectively, in PRIME (95% confidence interval (CI), 27.8-57.7 for the difference, P < 0.001) and at week 12 by 37.2% and 22.0% of patients, respectively, in PRIME2 (95% CI, 2.3-31.2; P = 0.022). Dupilumab demonstrated clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in itch and skin lesions versus placebo in PN. Safety was consistent with the known dupilumab safety profile.ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT04183335 and NCT04202679 .

Dupilumab Efficacy in Patients Stratified by Baseline Treatment Intensity and Lung Function.

PURPOSE: The Phase 3 LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST study in patients aged ≥12 years with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma demonstrated the efficacy and safety of dupilumab 200 mg and 300 mg every 2 weeks (q2w) vs matched placebo in the overall population. This post hoc analysis assessed dupilumab efficacy by disease severity as evidenced by baseline % predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Severe asthma exacerbation rates, change from baseline in FEV1, asthma control, quality of life, and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels over the 52-week treatment period were assessed in patients with elevated type 2 inflammation biomarkers stratified by ICS dose and FEV1% predicted at baseline. RESULTS: In patients with elevated baseline eosinophils, dupilumab 200 mg and 300 mg q2w vs placebo reduced severe exacerbation rates by 50% (P=0.06) and 67% (P=0.001), respectively, in those with medium-dose ICS/FEV1% predicted 60-90%, and by 59% (P<0.001) and 47% (P=0.006) in those with high-dose ICS/FEV1% predicted <60%, improved pre-bronchodilator FEV1 at Week 12 by 0.16L (P=0.005) and 0.08L (P=0.13), and by 0.20L (P=0.003) and 0.21L (P<0.001), respectively, in the same subgroups. Dupilumab vs placebo also improved asthma control and quality of life and suppressed FeNO levels in all patient subgroups with similar results observed irrespective of baseline biomarker status or disease severity. CONCLUSION: Dupilumab reduced severe exacerbations and improved lung function, asthma control and quality of life in patients with elevated baseline eosinophils irrespective of baseline ICS dose or FEV1% predicted.

Mometasone furoate improves congestion in patients with moderate-to-severe seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: A recent survey estimated that 85% of patients with allergic rhinitis experience nasal congestion. This symptom considerably impacts quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) in subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) experiencing moderate-to-severe nasal congestion. METHODS: Data were obtained from 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of MFNS 200 microg once daily in patients with SAR. Subject-evaluated nasal congestion score data (score range 0-3) from subjects receiving MFNS or placebo were analyzed as a pool and grouped according to baseline score (all pts. with scores >2.5, >2.75, or 3.0). The 2-week average change in score from baseline was analyzed. RESULTS: Significant improvements in mean nasal congestion score were seen with MFNS (n = 490) versus placebo (n = 492; p < 0.001). Overall, there was a 27% improvement in this score in patients receiving MFNS versus 13% with placebo. MFNS produced significant reductions in the nasal congestion score compared with placebo, even in patients with the most severe baseline congestion (0.98 vs 0.52; p < 0.001). Improvements in scores from baseline of 32%, 33%, and 34% were seen with MFNS versus 22%, 21%, and 18% with placebo (for baseline scores of >2.5, >2.75, or 3.0, respectively), confirming the effectiveness of MFNS regardless of congestion severity. This represents an improvement approximating a decrease from severe to moderate congestion or from moderate-to-severe to mild-to-moderate congestion. MFNS was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: MFNS 200 microg once daily produces statistically significant improvements in nasal congestion score compared with placebo, alleviating severe congestion in patients with moderate-to-severe SAR.