Vancomycin, metronidazole, or tolevamer for Clostridium difficile infection: results from two multinational, randomized, controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a common complication of antibiotic therapy that is treated with antibiotics, contributing to ongoing disruption of the colonic microbiota and CDI recurrence. Two multinational trials were conducted to compare the efficacy of tolevamer, a nonantibiotic, toxin-binding polymer, with vancomycin and metronidazole. METHODS: Patients with CDI were randomly assigned in a 2:1:1 ratio to oral tolevamer 9 g (loading dose) followed by 3 g every 8 hours for 14 days, vancomycin 125 mg every 6 hours for 10 days, or metronidazole 375 mg every 6 hours for 10 days. The primary endpoint was clinical success, defined as resolution of diarrhea and absence of severe abdominal discomfort for more than 2 consecutive days including day 10. RESULTS: In a pooled analysis, 563 patients received tolevamer, 289 received metronidazole, and 266 received vancomycin. Clinical success of tolevamer was inferior to both metronidazole and vancomycin (P < .001), and metronidazole was inferior to vancomycin (P = .02; 44.2% [n = 534], 72.7% [n = 278], and 81.1% [n = 259], respectively). Clinical success in patients with severe CDI who received metronidazole was 66.3% compared with vancomycin, which was 78.5%. (P = .059). A post-hoc multivariate analysis that excluded tolevamer found 3 factors that were strongly associated with clinical success: vancomycin treatment, treatment-naive status, and mild or moderate CDI severity. Adverse events were similar among the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Tolevamer was inferior to antibiotic treatment of CDI, and metronidazole was inferior to vancomycin. Trial Registration. clinicaltrials.gov NCT00106509 and NCT00196794.

European Adrenal Insufficiency Registry (EU-AIR): a comparative observational study of glucocorticoid replacement therapy.

BACKGROUND: Increased morbidity and mortality associated with conventional glucocorticoid replacement therapy for primary adrenal insufficiency (primary AI; estimated prevalence 93-140/million), secondary AI (estimated prevalence, 150-280/million, respectively) or congenital adrenal hyperplasia (estimated prevalence, approximately 65/million) may be due to the inability of typical glucocorticoid treatment regimens to reproduce the normal circadian profile of plasma cortisol. A once-daily modified-release formulation of hydrocortisone has been developed to provide a plasma cortisol profile that better mimics the daytime endogenous profile of cortisol. Here, we describe the protocol for the European Adrenal Insufficiency Registry (EU-AIR), an observational study to assess the long-term safety of modified-release hydrocortisone compared with conventional glucocorticoid replacement therapies in routine clinical practice (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01661387). METHODS: Patients enrolled in EU-AIR have primary or secondary AI and are receiving either modified-release or conventional glucocorticoid replacement therapy. The primary endpoints of EU-AIR are the incidence of intercurrent illness, adrenal crisis and serious adverse events (SAEs), as well as the duration of SAEs and dose changes related to SAEs. Data relating to morbidity, mortality, adverse drug reactions, dosing and concomitant therapies will be collected. Patient diaries will record illness-related dose changes between visits. All decisions concerning medical care are made by the registry physician and patient. Enrolment is targeted at achieving 3600 patient-years of treatment (1800 patient-years per group) for the primary analysis, which is focused on determining the non-inferiority of once-daily modified-release replacement therapy compared with conventional glucocorticoid therapy. RESULTS: Recruitment began in August 2012 and, as of March 2014, 801 patients have been enrolled. Fifteen centres are participating in Germany, the UK and Sweden, with recruitment soon to be initiated in the Netherlands. CONCLUSIONS: EU-AIR will provide a unique opportunity not only to collect long-term safety data on a modified-release preparation of glucocorticoid but also to evaluate baseline data on conventional glucocorticoid replacement. Such data should help to improve the treatment of AI.

Quality of life in patients with hereditary angioedema receiving therapy for routine prevention of attacks.

Patients with hereditary angioedema (HAE) have impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL), but the effect of preventative treatment strategies on HRQoL has not been evaluated. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of routine prevention therapy with nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (C1 INH-nf; human) on the HRQoL of patients with HAE. Thiry-six-item Short Form (SF-36) Version 1.0 questionnaires were administered at the beginning and end of two 12-week treatment periods in this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Patients (n = 22) received intravenous injections of 1000 U of C1 INH-nf or placebo every 3-4 days for 12 weeks and then crossed over to the other treatment arm for a second 12-week period. Patients could receive open-label C1 INH-nf (1000 U) for the acute treatment of angioedema attacks in either arm of the study. Sixteen patients had evaluable SF-36 data. Mean physical component summary scores (PCSs) were 36.41 at baseline, 37.06 at the end of the placebo period, and 43.92 at the end of the C1 INH-nf period. Mean mental component summary scores (MCSs) were 49.90, 44.98, and 54.00, respectively. Least square mean differences (95% confidence intervals) between C1 INH-nf and placebo in norm-based SF-36 scores at the end of each treatment period were 6.55 (1.48, 11.62; p = 0.015) for PCS and 8.70 (1.67, 15.72; p = 0.019) for MCS. In a clinical trial setting, patients with HAE had significantly better HRQoL after 12 weeks of C1 INH-nf for routine prevention compared with acute treatment of individual angioedema attacks in the absence of routine prevention while on placebo. This study was a part of the clinical trial NCT01005888 registered in www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Nanofiltered C1-esterase inhibitor for the acute management and prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks due to C1-inhibitor deficiency in children.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use of Cinryze (nanofiltered C1-esterase inhibitor [C1 INH-nf]) for the acute management and prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks in the subgroup of children and adolescents who participated in 2 placebo-controlled and 2 open-label extension studies. STUDY DESIGN: In the acute-attack treatment studies, the efficacy of 1000 U of C1 INH-nf (with an additional 1000 U given 1 hour later if needed) was assessed based on the time to the start of symptomatic relief and the proportion of patients experiencing relief within 4 hours of therapy. In the prophylaxis studies, C1 INH-nf 1000 U was given twice weekly, and efficacy was based on the frequency of attacks. RESULTS: Across 4 studies, 46 children received a total of 2237 C1 INH-nf infusions. The median time to the start of unequivocal relief in the acute-attack treatment study (n = 12) was 30 minutes with C1 INH-nf, compared with 2 hours for placebo. In the open-label extension (n = 22), clinical relief began within 4 hours of therapy in 89% of attacks. In the prophylaxis study (n = 4), the number of attacks was reduced by approximately 2-fold with C1 INH-nf compared with placebo. In the prophylaxis open-label extension (n = 23), the median monthly attack rate decreased from 3.0 before treatment to 0.39 with C1 INH-nf use. CONCLUSION: In children, C1 INH-nf was well tolerated, provided relief from symptoms of hereditary angioedema attacks, and reduced the rate of attacks.

Nanofiltered C1 esterase inhibitor (human) for hereditary angioedema attacks in pregnant women.

Data are limited on hereditary angioedema (HAE) in pregnant women and the safety and efficacy of therapies for treatment and prevention of HAE attacks during pregnancy. Prospective studies are unlikely given the rarity of HAE and ethical considerations regarding enrollment of pregnant female subjects in clinical trials. A retrospective analysis of clinical trial and compassionate-use data was conducted to identify subjects who received nanofiltered C1 esterase inhibitor (C1 INH-nf; human) during pregnancy. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of human C1 INH-nf for treatment and prevention of HAE attacks in pregnant women. Data from pregnant subjects enrolled in either open-label extensions of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of C1 INH-nf or in a compassionate-use program were retrospectively analyzed for efficacy (e.g., total attacks, attack frequency during prophylaxis, and monthly attack rates) and safety (e.g., pregnancy outcomes and adverse events). C1 INH-nf was administered as acute treatment, preprocedural prophylaxis, or routine prophylaxis. C1 INH-nf prophylaxis substantially reduced monthly attack rates. Of 16 subjects, 13 delivered 14 healthy neonates (1 set of twins). Two adverse fetal outcomes were reported; neither was considered by the principal investigator to be related to C1 INH-nf. One subject's pregnancy outcome was unknown. This analysis shows a favorable risk-benefit profile for C1 INH-nf for managing HAE during pregnancy. NCT Identifier: NCT00438815; NCT00462709.

Nanofiltered C1 esterase inhibitor (human) for the treatment of acute attacks of hereditary angioedema: an open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare disease caused by C1INH gene mutations, which leads to a deficiency or dysfunction of C1 inhibitor (C1 INH), resulting in recurrent episodes of severe and potentially life-threatening edema. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of repeat use of nanofiltered C1 esterase inhibitor (human) (C1 INH-nf) for the short-term treatment of HAE attacks. METHODS: In this open-label study, patients received C1 INH-nf, 1,000 U intravenously, for the treatment of HAE attacks. Efficacy end points included the proportion of attacks with unequivocal relief of the defining symptom within 1 and 4 hours after receiving study drug and time to beginning of relief of the defining symptom. Safety was monitored through adverse event reporting, vital signs measurements, and laboratory testing. RESULTS: A total of 113 patients were enrolled in the study from September 21, 2006, through March 31, 2009, and received 885 doses of C1 INH-nf. A total of 609 HAE attacks were treated with C1 INH-nf, and the numbers of attacks achieving unequivocal relief of the defining symptom within 1 and 4 hours after the start of the first dose were 412 (68%) and 529 (87%), respectively. Of 101 patients treated for an attack during the study period, 80 achieved unequivocal relief of their first attack within 4 hours after study medication (response rate, 79%); median time to the beginning of unequivocal relief was 0.75 hour. C1 INH-nf was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This open-label study demonstrates the efficacy and safety of C1 INH-nf for short-term treatment of HAE attacks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00438815.

Preprocedural administration of nanofiltered C1 esterase inhibitor to prevent hereditary angioedema attacks.

Patients with hereditary angioedema (HAE) may have attacks triggered by dental, medical, or surgical procedures. This analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of preprocedural administration of nanofiltered C1 esterase inhibitor (C1 INH-nf; human) for the prevention of HAE attacks during and after dental, medical, or surgical procedures. Data were reviewed retrospectively from two acute treatment trials in which at least 1000 U of C1 INH-nf was administered i.v. within 24 hours before an emergency or noncosmetic medical, surgical, or dental procedure. Dosing data, HAE attacks reported within 72 hours, and adverse events (AEs) reported within 7 days after a preprocedural dose of C1 INH-nf were analyzed to assess efficacy and safety. Forty-one unique subjects (8 children and 33 adults) received C1 INH-nf for 91 procedures (40 in children and 51 in adults). The majority of procedures (56%) involved dental work and 44% involved a variety of surgical or medical procedures. A single 1000-U dose of C1 INH-nf was administered for 96% of procedures. An HAE attack did not occur within 72 hours after C1 INH-nf dosing for 98% (89/91) of procedures. Two HAE attacks were reported after the procedure, and both were treated with C1 INH-nf and achieved relief. None of the reported AEs were judged to be related to C1 INH-nf or were associated with an HAE attack. This analysis supports the efficacy and safety of preprocedural administration of C1 INH-nf for the prevention of HAE attacks.

Health-Related Quality of Life as Measured by the 12-Item Short-Form Survey Among Adults With Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia who Received Either Lefamulin or Moxifloxacin in 2 Phase III Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Interest in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as part of benefit-risk assessment for new drug approvals is increasing. Lefamulin is the first intravenous (IV) and oral pleuromutilin antibiotic for treatment of adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). Assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was prospectively incorporated in its CABP trials (Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia [LEAP] 1 and 2) via the 12-Item Short-Form Survey (SF-12), a widely used PRO that measures general health status in 8 domains. METHODS: HRQoL was evaluated by SF-12 at baseline and test of cure (TOC; 5-10 days after the last study drug dose) in patients who received lefamulin or moxifloxacin in LEAP 1 (IV/oral treatment) and LEAP 2 (oral-only treatment). SF-12 outcomes included the 8 domains, physical component and mental component summary scores, and the Short-Form Six-Dimension health utility score. RESULTS: Analysis included 1215 patients (lefamulin: n = 607; moxifloxacin: n = 608). At baseline, all mean SF-12 scores in both treatment groups were well below the United States reference mean. Clinically meaningful and significant improvements from baseline to TOC were observed in all SF-12 scores. No significant differences in mean score improvements from baseline to TOC between treatment groups were observed. SF-12 score improvements at TOC across predefined subgroups were comparable between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that adults with CABP experienced comparable HRQoL improvements with lefamulin relative to moxifloxacin, and treatment with either agent resulted in returns to population norm HRQoL levels. These data suggest that lefamulin is a potential alternative to moxifloxacin for treatment of adults with CABP.

Post Hoc Assessment of Time to Clinical Response Among Adults Hospitalized with Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia Who Received Either Lefamulin or Moxifloxacin in 2 Phase III Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Clinical Trials.

Time to clinical response, a proxy for hospital "discharge readiness," was compared between CABP inpatients who received lefamulin or moxifloxacin in the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) trials. The analysis included 926 inpatients. A short and comparable median time to clinical response (4 days) was observed in both treatment groups.

Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab for Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: New therapeutic options for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) are needed. This study evaluated dual checkpoint combination therapy in patients with mPDAC. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the anti-PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) antibody using either durvalumab monotherapy or in combination with the anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 antibody using durvalumab plus tremelimumab therapy in patients with mPDAC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Part A of this multicenter, 2-part, phase 2 randomized clinical trial was a lead-in safety, open-label study with planned expansion to part B pending an efficacy signal from part A. Between November 26, 2015, and March 23, 2017, 65 patients with mPDAC who had previously received only 1 first-line fluorouracil-based or gemcitabine-based treatment were enrolled at 21 sites in 6 countries. Efficacy analysis included the intent-to-treat population; safety analysis included patients who received at least 1 dose of study treatment and for whom any postdose data were available. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received durvalumab (1500 mg every 4 weeks) plus tremelimumab (75 mg every 4 weeks) combination therapy for 4 cycles followed by durvalumab therapy (1500 mg every 4 weeks) or durvalumab monotherapy (1500 mg every 4 weeks) for up to 12 months or until the onset of progressive disease or unacceptable toxic effects. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Safety and efficacy were measured by objective response rate, which was used to determine study expansion to part B. The threshold for expansion was an objective response rate of 10% for either treatment arm. RESULTS: Among 65 randomized patients, 34 (52%) were men and median age was 61 (95% CI, 37-81) years. Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events occurred in 7 of 32 patients (22%) receiving combination therapy and in 2 of 32 patients (6%) receiving monotherapy; 1 patient randomized to the monotherapy arm did not receive treatment owing to worsened disease. Fatigue, diarrhea, and pruritus were the most common adverse events in both arms. Overall, 4 of 64 patients (6%) discontinued treatment owing to treatment-related adverse events. Objective response rate was 3.1% (95% CI, 0.08-16.22) for patients receiving combination therapy and 0% (95% CI, 0.00-10.58) for patients receiving monotherapy. Low patient numbers limited observation of the associations between treatment response and PD-L1 expression or microsatellite instability status. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Treatment was well tolerated, and the efficacy of durvalumab plus tremelimumab therapy and durvalumab monotherapy reflected a population of patients with mPDAC who had poor prognoses and rapidly progressing disease. Patients were not enrolled in part B because the threshold for efficacy was not met in part A. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02558894.

Escalating doses of C1 esterase inhibitor (CINRYZE) for prophylaxis in patients with hereditary angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (human) is approved in the United States for routine prophylaxis of angioedema attacks in patients with hereditary angioedema, a rare disease caused by a deficiency of functional C1 inhibitor. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety of escalating doses of nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (human) in patients who were not adequately controlled on the indicated dose (1000 U every 3 or 4 days). METHODS: Eligible patients had >1 attack/month over the 3 months before the trial. Doses were escalated to 1500 U every 3 or 4 days for 12 weeks, at which point, the patients were evaluated. If treatment was successful (≤1 attack/mo) or at the investigator's discretion, the patients entered a 3-month follow-up period. The patients with an average of >1 attack/month were eligible for further escalation to 2000 U and then 2500 U. RESULTS: Twenty patients started at 1500 U; 13 were escalated to 2000 U, and 12 were escalated to 2500 U. Eighteen patients reported adverse events. Two patients reported 4 serious adverse events (cerebral cystic hygroma, laryngeal angioedema attack, anemia, and bile duct stone) that were considered by investigators to be unrelated to treatment. Notably, there were no systemic thrombotic events or discontinuations due to adverse events. Fourteen patients were treated successfully (70%), continued to the follow-up period at the investigator's discretion, or experienced a reduction in attacks of >1.0/month. CONCLUSIONS: Dose escalation of nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (human) up to 2500 U was well tolerated and reduced attack frequency in the majority of patients.

Nanofiltered C1 esterase inhibitor for treatment of laryngeal attacks in patients with hereditary angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Laryngeal edema is a life-threatening manifestation of hereditary angioedema (HAE), an autosomal-dominant disorder caused by quantitative or functional C1 esterase inhibitor (C1 INH) deficiency. The preparation of nanofiltered C1 INH (C1 INH-nf) used in this study is indicated for routine prophylaxis against angioedema attacks in the United States and for treatment, preprocedure prevention, and routine prevention of HAE in Europe. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of C1 INH-nf when used for the treatment of laryngeal attacks. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of an open-label treatment study evaluated the effectiveness of C1 INH-nf in the treatment of laryngeal attacks in patients with HAE. Outcomes included unequivocal or clinical relief rates and time from treatment to onset of relief. Data were compiled from this and three other studies for post hoc dosing and tolerability analyses. In all studies, C1 INH-nf at 1000 U was administered i.v., with a second 1000-U dose given after 60 minutes if indicated. RESULTS: In the open-label treatment study, 60 (50/84) and 77% (65/84) of attacks achieved unequivocal relief within 1 and 4 hours, respectively, after treatment. Time to unequivocal relief was shorter with prompt treatment. When C1 INH-nf was administered within 4 hours of symptom onset, clinical relief was achieved in 94% (45/48) of attacks within 4 hours after treatment. Of 265 attacks from the four studies, 62% received two 1000-U doses of C1 INH-nf. No serious adverse events occurring within 7 days after treatment were attributed to study drug, and only one patient required intubation after receiving C1 INH-nf (14.5 hours after symptom onset). CONCLUSION: This analysis supports that C1 INH-nf is an effective and well-tolerated therapy for laryngeal angioedema attacks.