Risdiplam-Treated Infants with Type 1 Spinal Muscular Atrophy versus Historical Controls.

BACKGROUND: Type 1 spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a progressive neuromuscular disease characterized by an onset at 6 months of age or younger, an inability to sit without support, and deficient levels of survival of motor neuron (SMN) protein. Risdiplam is an orally administered small molecule that modifies SMN2 pre-messenger RNA splicing and increases levels of functional SMN protein in blood. METHODS: We conducted an open-label study of risdiplam in infants with type 1 SMA who were 1 to 7 months of age at enrollment. Part 1 of the study (published previously) determined the dose to be used in part 2 (reported here), which assessed the efficacy and safety of daily risdiplam as compared with no treatment in historical controls. The primary end point was the ability to sit without support for at least 5 seconds after 12 months of treatment. Key secondary end points were a score of 40 or higher on the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Infant Test of Neuromuscular Disorders (CHOP-INTEND; range, 0 to 64, with higher scores indicating better motor function), an increase of at least 4 points from baseline in the CHOP-INTEND score, a motor-milestone response as measured by Section 2 of the Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination (HINE-2), and survival without permanent ventilation. For the secondary end points, comparisons were made with the upper boundary of 90% confidence intervals for natural-history data from 40 infants with type 1 SMA. RESULTS: A total of 41 infants were enrolled. After 12 months of treatment, 12 infants (29%) were able to sit without support for at least 5 seconds, a milestone not attained in this disorder. The percentages of infants in whom the key secondary end points were met as compared with the upper boundary of confidence intervals from historical controls were 56% as compared with 17% for a CHOP-INTEND score of 40 or higher, 90% as compared with 17% for an increase of at least 4 points from baseline in the CHOP-INTEND score, 78% as compared with 12% for a HINE-2 motor-milestone response, and 85% as compared with 42% for survival without permanent ventilation (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The most common serious adverse events were pneumonia, bronchiolitis, hypotonia, and respiratory failure. CONCLUSIONS: In this study involving infants with type 1 SMA, risdiplam resulted in higher percentages of infants who met motor milestones and who showed improvements in motor function than the percentages observed in historical cohorts. Longer and larger trials are required to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of risdiplam in infants with type 1 SMA. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; FIREFISH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02913482.).

Risdiplam in Type 1 Spinal Muscular Atrophy.

BACKGROUND: Type 1 spinal muscular atrophy is a rare, progressive neuromuscular disease that is caused by low levels of functional survival of motor neuron (SMN) protein. Risdiplam is an orally administered, small molecule that modifies SMN2 pre-messenger RNA splicing and increases levels of functional SMN protein. METHODS: We report the results of part 1 of a two-part, phase 2-3, open-label study of risdiplam in infants 1 to 7 months of age who had type 1 spinal muscular atrophy, which is characterized by the infant not attaining the ability to sit without support. Primary outcomes were safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics (including the blood SMN protein concentration), and the selection of the risdiplam dose for part 2 of the study. Exploratory outcomes included the ability to sit without support for at least 5 seconds. RESULTS: A total of 21 infants were enrolled. Four infants were in a low-dose cohort and were treated with a final dose at month 12 of 0.08 mg of risdiplam per kilogram of body weight per day, and 17 were in a high-dose cohort and were treated with a final dose at month 12 of 0.2 mg per kilogram per day. The baseline median SMN protein concentrations in blood were 1.31 ng per milliliter in the low-dose cohort and 2.54 ng per milliliter in the high-dose cohort; at 12 months, the median values increased to 3.05 ng per milliliter and 5.66 ng per milliliter, respectively, which represented a median of 3.0 times and 1.9 times the baseline values in the low-dose and high-dose cohorts, respectively. Serious adverse events included pneumonia, respiratory tract infection, and acute respiratory failure. At the time of this publication, 4 infants had died of respiratory complications. Seven infants in the high-dose cohort and no infants in the low-dose cohort were able to sit without support for at least 5 seconds. The higher dose of risdiplam (0.2 mg per kilogram per day) was selected for part 2 of the study. CONCLUSIONS: In infants with type 1 spinal muscular atrophy, treatment with oral risdiplam led to an increased expression of functional SMN protein in the blood. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02913482.).

Risdiplam in types 2 and 3 spinal muscular atrophy: A randomised, placebo-controlled, dose-finding trial followed by 24 months of treatment.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is caused by reduced levels of survival of motor neuron (SMN) protein due to deletions and/or mutations in the SMN1 gene. Risdiplam is an orally administered molecule that modifies SMN2 pre-mRNA splicing to increase functional SMN protein. METHODS: SUNFISH Part 1 was a dose-finding study conducted in 51 individuals with types 2 and 3 SMA aged 2-25 years. A dose-escalation method was used to identify the appropriate dose for the subsequent pivotal Part 2. Individuals were randomized (2:1) to risdiplam or placebo at escalating dose levels for a minimum 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled period, followed by treatment for 24 months. The dose selection for Part 2 was based on safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic data. Exploratory efficacy was also measured. RESULTS: There was no difference in safety findings for all assessed dose levels. A dose-dependent increase in blood SMN protein was observed; a median twofold increase was obtained within 4 weeks of treatment initiation at the highest dose level. The increase in SMN protein was sustained over 24 months of treatment. Exploratory efficacy showed improvement or stabilization in motor function. The pivotal dose selected for Part 2 was 5 mg for patients with a body weight ≥20 kg or 0.25 mg/kg for patients with a body weight <20 kg. CONCLUSIONS: SUNFISH Part 1 demonstrated a twofold increase in SMN protein after treatment with risdiplam. The observed safety profile supported the initiation of the pivotal Part 2 study. The long-term efficacy and safety of risdiplam are being assessed with ongoing treatment.

Safety and efficacy of once-daily risdiplam in type 2 and non-ambulant type 3 spinal muscular atrophy (SUNFISH part 2): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Risdiplam is an oral small molecule approved for the treatment of patients with spinal muscular atrophy, with approval for use in patients with type 2 and type 3 spinal muscular atrophy granted on the basis of unpublished data. The drug modifies pre-mRNA splicing of the SMN2 gene to increase production of functional SMN. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of risdiplam in patients with type 2 or non-ambulant type 3 spinal muscular atrophy. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients aged 2-25 years with confirmed 5q autosomal recessive type 2 or type 3 spinal muscular atrophy were recruited from 42 hospitals in 14 countries across Europe, North America, South America, and Asia. Participants were eligible if they were non-ambulant, could sit independently, and had a score of at least 2 in entry item A of the Revised Upper Limb Module. Patients were stratified by age and randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either daily oral risdiplam, at a dose of 5·00 mg (for individuals weighing ≥20 kg) or 0·25 mg/kg (for individuals weighing <20 kg), or daily oral placebo (matched to risdiplam in colour and taste). Randomisation was conducted by permutated block randomisation with a computerised system run by an external party. Patients, investigators, and all individuals in direct contact with patients were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in the 32-item Motor Function Measure total score at month 12. All individuals who were randomly assigned to risdiplam or placebo, and who did not meet the prespecified missing item criteria for exclusion, were included in the primary efficacy analysis. Individuals who received at least one dose of risdiplam or placebo were included in the safety analysis. SUNFISH is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908685. Recruitment is closed; the study is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Oct 9, 2017, and Sept 4, 2018, 180 patients were randomly assigned to receive risdiplam (n=120) or placebo (n=60). For analysis of the primary endpoint, 115 patients from the risdiplam group and 59 patients from the placebo group were included. At month 12, the least squares mean change from baseline in 32-item Motor Function Measure was 1·36 (95% CI 0·61 to 2·11) in the risdiplam group and -0·19 (-1·22 to 0·84) in the placebo group, with a treatment difference of 1·55 (0·30 to 2·81, p=0·016) in favour of risdiplam. 120 patients who received risdiplam and 60 who received placebo were included in safety analyses. Adverse events that were reported in at least 5% more patients who received risdiplam than those who received placebo were pyrexia (25 [21%] of 120 patients who received risdiplam vs ten [17%] of 60 patients who received placebo), diarrhoea (20 [17%] vs five [8%]), rash (20 [17%] vs one [2%]), mouth and aphthous ulcers (eight [7%] vs 0), urinary tract infection (eight [7%] vs 0), and arthralgias (six [5%] vs 0). The incidence of serious adverse events was similar between treatment groups (24 [20%] of 120 patients in the risdiplam group; 11 [18%] of 60 patients in the placebo group), with the exception of pneumonia (nine [8%] in the risdiplam group; one [2%] in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Risdiplam resulted in a significant improvement in motor function compared with placebo in patients aged 2-25 years with type 2 or non-ambulant type 3 spinal muscular atrophy. Our exploratory subgroup analyses showed that motor function was generally improved in younger individuals and stabilised in older individuals, which requires confirmation in further studies. SUNFISH part 2 is ongoing and will provide additional evidence regarding the long-term safety and efficacy of risdiplam. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Risdiplam treatment has not led to retinal toxicity in patients with spinal muscular atrophy.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of ophthalmologic safety with focus on retinal safety in patients with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) treated with risdiplam (EVRYSDI®), a survival of motor neuron 2 splicing modifier associated with retinal toxicity in monkeys. Risdiplam was approved recently for the treatment of patients with SMA, aged ≥ 2 months in the United States, and is currently under Health Authority review in the EU. METHODS: Subjects included patients with SMA aged 2 months-60 years enrolled in the FIREFISH, SUNFISH, and JEWELFISH clinical trials for risdiplam. Ophthalmologic assessments, including functional assessments (age-appropriate visual acuity and visual field) and imaging (spectral domain optical coherence tomography [SD-OCT], fundus photography, and fundus autofluorescence [FAF]), were conducted at baseline and every 2-6 months depending on study and assessment. SD-OCT, FAF, fundus photography, and threshold perimetry were evaluated by an independent, masked reading center. Adverse events (AEs) were reported throughout the study. RESULTS: A total of 245 patients receiving risdiplam were assessed. Comprehensive, high-quality, ophthalmologic monitoring assessing retinal structure and visual function showed no retinal structural or functional changes. In the youngest patients, SD-OCT findings of normal retinal maturation were observed. AEs involving eye disorders were not suggestive of risdiplam-induced toxicity and resolved with ongoing treatment. INTERPRETATION: Extensive ophthalmologic monitoring conducted in studies in patients with SMA confirmed that risdiplam does not induce ophthalmologic toxicity in pediatric or adult patients with SMA at the therapeutic dose. These results suggest that safety ophthalmologic monitoring is not needed in patients receiving risdiplam, as also reflected in the United States Prescribing Information for risdiplam.

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy: current treatment options and future perspectives.

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is a rare but debilitating and frequently fatal viral disease of the central nervous system, primarily affecting individuals with chronically and severely suppressed immune systems. The disease was relatively obscure until the outbreak of HIV/AIDS, when it presented as one of the more frequent opportunistic infections in this immune deficiency syndrome. It attracted additional attention from the medical and scientific community following the discovery of significant PML risk associated with natalizumab, a monoclonal antibody used for treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. This was followed by association of PML with other immunosuppressive or immunomodulating drugs. PML is currently untreatable disease with poor outcomes, so it is a significant concern when developing new immunotherapies. Current prophylaxis and treatment of PML are focused on immune reconstitution, restoration of immune responses to JC virus infection, and eventual suppression of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome. This approach was successful in reducing the incidence of PML and improved survival of PML patients with HIV infection. However, the outcome for the majority of PML patients, regardless of their medical history, is still relatively poor. There is a high unmet need for both prophylaxis and treatment of PML. The aim of this review is to discuss potential drug candidates for prophylaxis and treatment of PML with a critical review of previously conducted and completed PML treatment studies as well as to provide perspectives for future therapies.

Absence of an interaction between iron and mycophenolate mofetil absorption.

AIM: To determine whether concomitant iron affects the absorption of mycophenolate mofetil. METHODS: An open-label, single centre, randomized, crossover trial was conducted in 16 healthy males. Fasting subjects received mycophenolate mofetil alone (treatment A) or co-administered with iron (treatment B). RESULTS: The mycophenolic acid AUC(0,24 h) for treatments A and B were 42.5 +/- 10.5 and 44.7 +/- 12.4 microg ml(-1) h, respectively. anova modelling showed the relative bioavailability of mycophenolate mofetil to be similar for the two treatments (90% confidence interval 0.92, 1.19). CONCLUSIONS: There was no interaction between mycophenolate mofetil and iron supplements administered concomitantly to healthy fasting subjects.