Benralizumab versus Mepolizumab for Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is a vasculitis characterized by eosinophilic inflammation. Benralizumab, a monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-5α receptor expressed on eosinophils, may be an option for treating EGPA. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, phase 3, randomized, active-controlled noninferiority trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of benralizumab as compared with mepolizumab. Adults with relapsing or refractory EGPA who were receiving standard care were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive benralizumab (30 mg) or mepolizumab (300 mg) subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. The primary end point was remission at weeks 36 and 48 (prespecified noninferiority margin, -25 percentage points). Secondary end points included the accrued duration of remission, time to first relapse, oral glucocorticoid use, eosinophil count, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients underwent randomization (70 assigned to each group). The adjusted percentage of patients with remission at weeks 36 and 48 was 59% in the benralizumab group and 56% in the mepolizumab group (difference, 3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -13 to 18; P = 0.73 for superiority), showing noninferiority but not superiority of benralizumab to mepolizumab. The accrued duration of remission and the time to first relapse were similar in the two groups. Complete withdrawal of oral glucocorticoids during weeks 48 through 52 was achieved in 41% of the patients who received benralizumab and 26% of those who received mepolizumab. The mean (±SD) blood eosinophil count at baseline was 306.0±225.0 per microliter in the benralizumab group and 384.9±563.6 per microliter in the mepolizumab group, decreasing to 32.4±40.8 and 71.8±54.4 per microliter, respectively, at week 52. Adverse events were reported in 90% of the patients in the benralizumab group and 96% of those in the mepolizumab group; serious adverse events were reported in 6% and 13%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Benralizumab was noninferior to mepolizumab for the induction of remission in patients with relapsing or refractory EGPA. (Funded by AstraZeneca; MANDARA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04157348.).

Efficacy and safety of benralizumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic inflammation has been implicated in the pathogenesis, severity, and treatment responsiveness of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of benralizumab-mediated eosinophil depletion for treating CRSwNP. METHODS: The phase 3 OSTRO study enrolled patients with severe CRSwNP who were symptomatic despite treatment with intranasal corticosteroids and who had a history of systemic corticosteroid (SCS) use and/or surgery for nasal polyps (NP). Patients were randomized 1:1 to treatment with benralizumab 30 mg or placebo every 4 weeks for the first 3 doses and every 8 weeks thereafter. Coprimary end points were change from baseline to week 40 in NP score (NPS) and patient-reported mean nasal blockage score reported once every 2 weeks. RESULTS: The study population comprised 413 randomized patients (207 in the benralizumab group and 206 in the placebo group). Benralizumab significantly improved NPS and nasal blockage score compared to placebo at week 40 (P ≤ .005). Improvements in Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 score at week 40, time to first NP surgery and/or SCS use for NP, and time to first NP surgery were not statistically significant between treatment groups. Nominal significance was obtained for improvement in difficulty in sense of smell score at week 40 (P = .003). Subgroup analyses suggested influences of comorbid asthma, number of NP surgeries, sex, body mass index, and baseline blood eosinophil count on treatment effects. Benralizumab was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Benralizumab, when added to standard-of-care therapy, reduced NPS, decreased nasal blockage, and reduced difficulty with sense of smell compared to placebo in patients with CRSwNP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03401229.

The novel bronchodilator navafenterol: a phase 2a, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial in COPD.

BACKGROUND: Navafenterol (AZD8871) belongs to a new class of bronchodilator, the single-molecule muscarinic antagonist and ß-agonist, developed for the treatment of COPD. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy, pharmacokinetics and safety of navafenterol versus placebo and an active comparator treatment for moderate-to-severe COPD. METHODS: This phase 2a, randomised, multicentre (Germany and UK), double-blind, double-dummy, three-way complete crossover study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03645434) compared 2 weeks' treatment of once-daily navafenterol 600 µg via inhalation with placebo and a fixed-dose combination bronchodilator (umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI); 62.5 µg/25 µg) in participants with moderate-to-severe COPD. The primary outcome was change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) on day 15. Secondary end-points included change from baseline in peak FEV1; change from baseline in Breathlessness, Cough and Sputum Scale (BCSS); change from baseline in COPD Assessment Tool (CAT); adverse events; and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: 73 participants were randomised. After 14 days, trough FEV1 was significantly improved with navafenterol compared with placebo (least-squares (LS) mean difference 0.202 L; p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in FEV1 between navafenterol and UMEC/VI (LS mean difference -0.046 L; p=0.075). COPD symptoms (CAT and BCSS) showed significantly greater improvements with both active treatments versus placebo (all p<0.005). Novel objective monitoring (VitaloJAK) showed that cough was reduced with both active treatments compared with placebo. Safety profiles were similar across the treatment groups and no serious adverse events were reported in the navafenterol treatment period. CONCLUSION: Once-daily navafenterol was well tolerated, improved lung function and reduced COPD-related symptoms, similar to an established once-daily fixed-dose combination bronchodilator.

Characterization of Clinical Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion and Pharmacokinetics of Velsecorat Using an Intravenous Microtracer Combined with an Inhaled Dose in Healthy Subjects.

This open-label, single-period study describes the human absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and pharmacokinetics of velsecorat (AZD7594). Healthy subjects received inhaled velsecorat (non-radiolabeled; 720 µg) followed by intravenous infusion of carbon 14 (14C)-velsecorat (30 µg). Plasma, urine, and feces were collected up to 168 hours post-dose. Objectives included identification and quantification of velsecorat and its metabolites (i.e., drug-related material) in plasma and excreta, and determining the elimination pathways of velsecorat by measuring the rate and route of excretion, plasma half-life (t1/2), clearance, volume of distribution and mean recovery of radioactivity. On average, 76.0% of administered 14C dose was recovered by the end of the sampling period (urine = 24.4%; feces = 51.6%), with no unchanged compound recovered in excreta, suggesting that biliary excretion is the main elimination route. Compared with intravenous 14C-velsecorat, inhaled velsecorat had a longer t1/2 (27 versus 2 hours), confirming that plasma elimination is absorption-rate-limited from the lungs. Following intravenous administration, t1/2 of 14C-drug-related material was longer than for unchanged velsecorat, and 20% of the 14C plasma content was related to unchanged velsecorat. The geometric mean plasma clearance of velsecorat was high (70.7 l/h) and the geometric mean volume of distribution at steady state was 113 l. Velsecorat was substantially metabolized via O-dealkylation of the indazole ether followed by sulfate conjugation, forming the M1 metabolite, the major metabolite in plasma. There were 15 minor metabolites. Velsecorat was well tolerated, and these results support the progression of velsecorat to phase 3 studies. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This study describes the human pharmacokinetics and metabolism of velsecorat, a selective glucocorticoid receptor modulator, evaluated via co-administration of a radiolabeled intravenous microtracer dose and a non-radiolabeled inhaled dose. This study provides a comprehensive assessment of the disposition of velsecorat in humans. It also highlights a number of complexities associated with determining human absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion for velsecorat, related to the inhaled route, the high metabolic clearance, sequential metabolite formation and the low intravenous dose.

Characterisation of pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability in a first-in-human study for AZD8154, a novel inhaled selective PI3Kγδ dual inhibitor targeting airway inflammatory disease.

AIMS: This 3-part, randomised, phase 1 first-in-human study (NCT03436316) investigated the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics (PK) of AZD8154, a dual phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) γδ inhibitor developed as a novel inhaled anti-inflammatory treatment for respiratory disease. METHODS: Healthy men, and women of nonchildbearing potential, were enrolled to receive single and multiple ascending inhaled doses of AZD8154 in parts 1 and 3 of the study, respectively, while part 2 characterised the systemic PK after a single intravenous (IV) dose. In part 1, participants received 0.1-7.7 mg AZD8154 in 6 cohorts. In part 2, participants were given 0.15 mg AZD8154 as an IV infusion. In part 3, AZD8154 was given in 3 cohorts of 0.6, 1.8 and 3.1 mg, with a single dose on Day 1 followed by repeated once-daily doses on Days 4-12. RESULTS: In total, 78 volunteers were randomised. All single inhaled, single IV and multiple inhaled doses were shown to be well tolerated without any safety concerns. A population PK model, using nonlinear mixed-effect modelling, was developed to describe the PK of AZD8154. The terminal mean half-life of AZD8154 was 18.0-32.0 hours. The geometric mean of the absolute pulmonary bioavailability of AZD8154 via the inhaled route was 94.1%. CONCLUSION: AZD8154 demonstrated an acceptable safety profile, with no reports of serious adverse events and no clinically significant drug-associated safety concerns reported in healthy volunteers. AZD8154 demonstrated prolonged lung retention and a half-life supporting once-daily dosing.

A Phase 2a, Double-Blind, Placebo-controlled Randomized Trial of Inhaled TLR9 Agonist AZD1419 in Asthma.

Rationale: To examine the potential of TLR9 (Toll-like receptor 9) activation to modulate the type 2 immune response in asthma.Objectives: To evaluate efficacy and safety of AZD1419, an inhaled TLR9 agonist, in a phase 2a, randomized, double-blind trial.Methods: Adult patients with asthma with a history of elevated eosinophils (>250 cells/µl) were randomized 1:1 to receive 13 once-weekly doses of inhaled AZD1419 (1, 4, or 8 mg; n = 40) or placebo (n = 41). Inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß2-agonist were tapered down and then discontinued. The last four doses of AZD1419 were given without maintenance medication, followed by a 40-week observation period. Primary endpoint was time to loss of asthma control (LOC).Measurements and Main Results: AZD1419 induced a T-helper cell type 1-type IFN response with a sustained reduction in markers of type 2 inflammation. However, there were no statistically significant differences between AZD1419 and placebo for time to LOC, proportion of patients with LOC, changes in Asthma Control Questionnaire-five-item version, exacerbations, reliever use, FEV1, peak expiratory flow, or fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO). LOC was predicted by an early rise in FeNO in 63% of patients. Despite withdrawal of maintenance treatment, 24 patients completed the study without LOC; AZD1419 n = 11, placebo n = 13. Adverse events were balanced across groups, with no deaths or serious adverse events judged as causally related to AZD1419.Conclusions: AZD1419 was safe and well tolerated but did not lead to improved asthma control, despite reducing markers of type 2 inflammation. Results suggest that a novel accelerated step-down approach based on FeNO is possible for patients with well-controlled asthma.

Physical activity end-points in trials of chronic respiratory diseases: summary of evidence.

Background: Physical activity contributes to improving respiratory symptoms. However, validated end-points are few, and there is limited consensus about what is a clinically meaningful improvement for patients. This review summarises the evidence to date on the range of physical activity end-points used in COPD, asthma and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) whilst evaluating their appropriateness as end-points in trials and their relation to patients' everyday life. Methods: Trials reporting physical activity end-points were collected using Citeline's database Trialtrove; this was supplemented by searches in PubMed. Results: The daily-patient-reported outcome (PRO)active and clinical visit-PROactive physical activity composite end-points appeared superior at capturing the full experience of physical activity in patients with COPD and were responsive to bronchodilator intervention. Time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity is a recently validated end-point for IPF that correlates with exercise capacity and quality of life. Step count appears the best available physical activity measure for asthma, which consistently declines with worse disease status. However, evidence suggests a time lag before significant improvement in step count is seen which may reflect the impact of human behaviour on physical activity. Conclusions: Physical activity represents a challenging domain to accurately measure. This is the first review evaluating physical activity measures used specifically within the respiratory field. Whilst physical activity can be effectively captured using PROactive in patients with COPD, this review highlights the unmet need for novel patient-focused end-points in asthma and IPF which would offer opportunities to develop efficacious medicines with impact on patients' therapeutic care and quality of life.