Dupilumab for Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Patients 1 to 11 Years of Age.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 pathways and has shown efficacy in five different atopic diseases marked by type 2 inflammation, including eosinophilic esophagitis in adults and adolescents. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 2:2:1:1 ratio, patients 1 to 11 years of age with active eosinophilic esophagitis who had had no response to proton-pump inhibitors to 16 weeks of a higher-exposure or lower-exposure subcutaneous dupilumab regimen or to placebo (two groups) (Part A). At the end of Part A, eligible patients in each dupilumab group continued the same regimen and those in the placebo groups were assigned to higher-exposure or lower-exposure dupilumab for 36 weeks (Part B). At each level of exposure, dupilumab was administered in one of four doses tiered according to baseline body weight. The primary end point was histologic remission (peak esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count, ≤6 per high-power field) at week 16. Key secondary end points were tested hierarchically. RESULTS: In Part A, histologic remission occurred in 25 of the 37 patients (68%) in the higher-exposure group, in 18 of the 31 patients (58%) in the lower-exposure group, and in 1 of the 34 patients (3%) in the placebo group (difference between the higher-exposure regimen and placebo, 65 percentage points [95% confidence interval {CI}, 48 to 81; P<0.001]; difference between the lower-exposure regimen and placebo, 55 percentage points [95% CI, 37 to 73; P<0.001]). The higher-exposure dupilumab regimen led to significant improvements in histologic, endoscopic, and transcriptomic measures as compared with placebo. The improvements in histologic, endoscopic, and transcriptomic measures between baseline and week 52 in all the patients were generally similar to the improvements between baseline and week 16 in the patients who received dupilumab in Part A. In Part A, the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019, nausea, injection-site pain, and headache was at least 10 percentage points higher among the patients who received dupilumab (at either dose) than among those who received placebo. Serious adverse events were reported in 3 patients who received dupilumab during Part A and in 6 patients overall during Part B. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab resulted in histologic remission in a significantly higher percentage of children with eosinophilic esophagitis than placebo. The higher-exposure dupilumab regimen also led to improvements in measures of key secondary end points as compared with placebo. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; EoE KIDS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04394351.).

Dupilumab for COPD with Blood Eosinophil Evidence of Type 2 Inflammation.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation, has shown efficacy and safety in a phase 3 trial involving patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and type 2 inflammation and an elevated risk of exacerbation. Whether the findings would be confirmed in a second phase 3 trial was unclear. METHODS: In a phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned patients with COPD who had a blood eosinophil count of 300 cells per microliter or higher to receive subcutaneous dupilumab (300 mg) or placebo every 2 weeks. The primary end point was the annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations. Key secondary end points, analyzed in a hierarchical manner to adjust for multiplicity, included the changes from baseline in the prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at weeks 12 and 52 and in the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating better quality of life) total score at week 52. RESULTS: A total of 935 patients underwent randomization: 470 were assigned to the dupilumab group and 465 to the placebo group. As prespecified, the primary analysis was performed after a positive interim analysis and included all available data for the 935 participants, 721 of whom were included in the analysis at week 52. The annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.06) with dupilumab and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.60) with placebo; the rate ratio as compared with placebo was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.82; P<0.001). The prebronchodilator FEV1 increased from baseline to week 12 with dupilumab (least-squares mean change, 139 ml [95% CI, 105 to 173]) as compared with placebo (least-squares mean change, 57 ml [95% CI, 23 to 91]), with a significant least-squares mean difference at week 12 of 82 ml (P<0.001) and at week 52 of 62 ml (P = 0.02). No significant between-group difference was observed in the change in SGRQ scores from baseline to 52 weeks. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups and consistent with the established profile of dupilumab. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COPD and type 2 inflammation as indicated by elevated blood eosinophil counts, dupilumab was associated with fewer exacerbations and better lung function than placebo. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; NOTUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04456673.).

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.

Immunomodulatory and clinical effects of receptor-interacting protein kinase 1 (RIPK1) inhibitor eclitasertib (SAR443122) in patients with severe COVID-19: a phase 1b, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Targeting receptor-interacting serine/threonine protein kinase 1 could mitigate the devastating sequelae of the hyperinflammatory state observed in severe cases of COVID-19. This study explored the immunomodulatory and clinical effects of the receptor-interacting serine/threonine protein kinase 1 inhibitor SAR443122 (eclitasertib) in patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: In this Phase 1b, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study (NCT04469621) a total of 82 patients were screened, of whom 68 patients were eligible and randomized (2:1) to receive eclitasertib 600 mg (300 mg twice daily) or placebo up to 14 days. Primary outcome was relative change in C-reactive protein from baseline to Day 7. Time to clinical improvement using 7-point ordinal scale, ventilator/respiratory failure-free days, change in SpO2/FiO2 ratio, and biomarkers of severe COVID-19 were explored. RESULTS: Geometric mean ratio (point estimate [90% confidence interval]) of the relative change from baseline in C-reactive protein with eclitasertib vs. placebo on Day 7 was 0.85 (0.49-1.45; p = 0.30). Median time to 50% decrease in C-reactive protein from baseline was 3 days vs. 5 days (p = 0.056) with eclitasertib vs. placebo. Median time to ≥ 2-point improvement on 7-point clinical symptoms scale was 8 days vs. 10 days with eclitasertib vs. placebo (p = 0.38). Mean ventilator/respiratory failure-free days, change in baseline-adjusted SpO2/FiO2 ratio, and clinical biomarkers showed consistent numerical improvements with eclitasertib vs. placebo. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders and condition aggravated/worsened COVID-19 pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: Eclitasertib was well tolerated with consistent trends toward more rapid resolution of inflammatory biomarkers and clinical improvement in severe COVID-19 patients than placebo. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04469621, first posted on clinicaltrials.gov on July 14, 2020.

Dupilumab treatment improves signs, symptoms, quality of life, and work productivity in patients with atopic hand and foot dermatitis: Results from a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite high disease burden, systemic treatment options for patients with atopic hand and/or foot dermatitis (H/F AD) are limited. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate efficacy and safety of dupilumab in H/F AD using specific instruments for assessing disease severity on hands and feet. METHODS: In this multicenter phase 3 trial, adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe H/F AD were randomized to dupilumab monotherapy (regimen approved for generalized AD), or matched placebo. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients achieving Hand and Foot Investigator's Global Assessment score 0 or 1 at week 16. Secondary prespecified endpoints assessed the severity and extent of signs, symptom intensity (itch, pain), quality of life, and sleep. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients (adults = 106, adolescents = 27) were randomized to dupilumab (n = 67) or placebo (n = 66). At week 16, significantly more patients receiving dupilumab (n = 27) than placebo (n = 11) achieved Hand and Foot Investigator's Global Assessment score 0 or 1 (40.3% vs 16.7%; P = .003). All other prespecified endpoints were met. Safety was consistent with the known AD dupilumab profile. LIMITATIONS: Short-term, 16-week treatment period. CONCLUSION: Dupilumab monotherapy resulted in significant improvements across different domains of H/F AD with acceptable safety, supporting dupilumab as a systemic treatment approach for this often difficult to treat condition.

Sarilumab for Relapse of Polymyalgia Rheumatica during Glucocorticoid Taper.

BACKGROUND: More than half of patients with polymyalgia rheumatica have a relapse during tapering of glucocorticoid therapy. Previous studies have suggested that interleukin-6 blockade may be clinically useful in the treatment of polymyalgia rheumatica. Sarilumab, a human monoclonal antibody, binds interleukin-6 receptor α and efficiently blocks the interleukin-6 pathway. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive 52 weeks of a twice-monthly subcutaneous injection of either sarilumab (at a dose of 200 mg) plus a 14-week prednisone taper or placebo plus a 52-week prednisone taper. The primary outcome at 52 weeks was sustained remission, which was defined as the resolution of signs and symptoms of polymyalgia rheumatica by week 12 and sustained normalization of the C-reactive protein level, absence of disease flare, and adherence to the prednisone taper from weeks 12 through 52. RESULTS: A total of 118 patients underwent randomization (60 to receive sarilumab and 58 to receive placebo). At week 52, sustained remission occurred in 28% (17 of 60 patients) in the sarilumab group and in 10% (6 of 58 patients) in the placebo group (difference, 18 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 4 to 32; P = 0.02). The median cumulative glucocorticoid dose at 52 weeks was significantly lower in the sarilumab group than in the placebo group (777 mg vs. 2044 mg; P<0.001). The most common adverse events with sarilumab as compared with placebo were neutropenia (15% vs. 0%), arthralgia (15% vs. 5%), and diarrhea (12% vs. 2%). More treatment-related discontinuations were observed in the sarilumab group than in the placebo group (12% vs. 7%). CONCLUSIONS: Sarilumab showed significant efficacy in achieving sustained remission and reducing the cumulative glucocorticoid dose in patients with a relapse of polymyalgia rheumatica during glucocorticoid tapering. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; SAPHYR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03600818.).

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 .

Clinical Efficacy among Patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps and Clinical Features of Obstructive Lung Disease: Post Hoc Analysis of the Phase III SINUS-24 and SINUS-52 Studies.

Purpose: To provide a descriptive summary of clinical efficacy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and clinical features of obstructive lung disease in the Phase III dupilumab studies SINUS-24 and SINUS-52 (NCT02912468, NCT02898454). Patients and Methods: Patients met a "broad" definition of having clinical features of obstructive lung disease with any of 3 criteria: (i) pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) <0.70 and smoking history; (ii) patient-reported medical history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); or (iii) asthma with >10 pack-years' smoking history. A "narrow" definition including criteria (i) or (ii) was also analyzed. CRSwNP and HRQoL measures were evaluated in all patients and lung function (FEV1; FEV1/FVC ratio) was captured and analyzed only in those patients who had a self-reported history of asthma. Results: Across both studies, 131 patients met the "broad" definition, of whom 90 also had asthma, and 115 patients met the "narrow" definition, of whom 74 had asthma. CRSwNP outcomes and HRQoL were improved with dupilumab vs placebo in both the broad and narrow subgroups. Among the 90 patients who met the broad definition and had asthma, dupilumab improved pre-bronchodilator FEV1 and FEV1/FVC ratio at Week 16 (least squares mean differences vs placebo: 0.38 L [95% confidence interval: 0.17, 0.59; p = 0.0004] and 4.8% [1.7%, 7.9%; p = 0.0024], respectively) sustained through Week 24. Similar results were seen in the "narrow" subgroup with asthma. Conclusion: In a population of patients with CRSwNP and clinical features of obstructive lung disease, dupilumab improved CRSwNP and HRQoL outcomes, and, among those with a history of asthma, also improved lung function. These results support further analyses of dupilumab in patients with evidence of type 2 inflammation and obstructive lung disease such as COPD.

Dupilumab in Adults and Adolescents with Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling, which have key roles in eosinophilic esophagitis. METHODS: We conducted a three-part, phase 3 trial in which patients 12 years of age or older underwent randomization in a 1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg or placebo (Part A) or in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 300 mg of dupilumab either weekly or every 2 weeks or weekly placebo (Part B) up to week 24. Eligible patients who completed Part A or Part B continued the trial in Part C, in which those who completed Part A received dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg up to week 52 (the Part A-C group); Part C that included the eligible patients from Part B is ongoing. The two primary end points at week 24 were histologic remission (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) and the change from baseline in the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score (range, 0 to 84, with higher values indicating more frequent or more severe dysphagia). RESULTS: In Part A, histologic remission occurred in 25 of 42 patients (60%) who received weekly dupilumab and in 2 of 39 patients (5%) who received placebo (difference, 55 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 40 to 71; P<0.001). In Part B, histologic remission occurred in 47 of 80 patients (59%) with weekly dupilumab, in 49 of 81 patients (60%) with dupilumab every 2 weeks, and in 5 of 79 patients (6%) with placebo (difference between weekly dupilumab and placebo, 54 percentage points; 95% CI, 41 to 66 [P<0.001]; difference between dupilumab every 2 weeks and placebo, 56 percentage points; 95% CI, 43 to 69 [not significant per hierarchical testing]). The mean (±SD) DSQ scores at baseline were 33.6±12.41 in Part A and 36.7±11.22 in Part B; the scores improved with weekly dupilumab as compared with placebo, with differences of -12.32 (95% CI, -19.11 to -5.54) in Part A and -9.92 (95% CI, -14.81 to -5.02) in Part B (both P<0.001) but not with dupilumab every 2 weeks (difference in Part B, -0.51; 95% CI, -5.42 to 4.41). Serious adverse events occurred in 9 patients during the Part A or B treatment period (in 7 who received weekly dupilumab, 1 who received dupilumab every 2 weeks, and 1 who received placebo) and in 1 patient in the Part A-C group during the Part C treatment period who received placebo in Part A and weekly dupilumab in Part C. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with eosinophilic esophagitis, subcutaneous dupilumab administered weekly improved histologic outcomes and alleviated symptoms of the disease. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03633617.).

Dupilumab in children aged 6 months to younger than 6 years with uncontrolled atopic dermatitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Current systemic treatments for children younger than 6 years with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis that is uncontrolled with topical therapies might have suboptimal efficacy and safety. Dupilumab is approved for older children and adults with atopic dermatitis and for other type 2 inflammatory conditions. We aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of dupilumab with concomitant low-potency topical corticosteroids in children aged 6 months to younger than 6 years with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 trial was conducted in 31 hospitals, clinics, and academic institutions in Europe and North America. Eligible patients were aged 6 months to younger than 6 years, with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (Investigator's Global Assessment [IGA] score 3-4) diagnosed according to consensus criteria of the American Academy of Dermatology, and an inadequate response to topical corticosteroids. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to subcutaneous placebo or dupilumab (bodyweight ≥5 kg to <15 kg: 200 mg; bodyweight ≥15 kg to <30 kg: 300 mg) every 4 weeks plus low-potency topical corticosteroids (hydrocortisone acetate 1% cream) for 16 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by age, baseline bodyweight, and region. Patient allocation was done via a central interactive web response system, and treatment allocation was masked. The primary endpoint at week 16 was the proportion of patients with IGA score 0-1 (clear or almost clear skin). The key secondary endpoint (coprimary endpoint for the EU and EU reference market) at week 16 was the proportion of patients with at least a 75% improvement from baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75). Primary analyses were done in the full analysis set (ie, all randomly assigned patients, as randomly assigned) and safety analyses were done in all patients who received any study drug. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03346434. FINDINGS: Between June 30, 2020, and Feb 12, 2021, 197 patients were screened for eligibility, 162 of whom were randomly assigned to receive dupilumab (n=83) or placebo (n=79) plus topical corticosteroids. At week 16, significantly more patients in the dupilumab group than in the placebo group had IGA 0-1 (23 [28%] vs three [4%], difference 24% [95% CI 13-34]; p<0·0001) and EASI-75 (44 [53%] vs eight [11%], difference 42% [95% CI 29-55]; p<0·0001). Overall prevalence of adverse events was similar in the dupilumab group (53 [64%] of 83 patients) and placebo group (58 [74%] of 78 patients). Conjunctivitis incidence was higher in the dupilumab group (four [5%]) than the placebo group (none). No dupilumab-related adverse events were serious or led to treatment discontinuation. INTERPRETATION: Dupilumab significantly improved atopic dermatitis signs and symptoms versus placebo in children younger than 6 years. Dupilumab was well tolerated and showed an acceptable safety profile, similar to results in older children and adults. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

AZD5634, an inhaled ENaC inhibitor, in healthy subjects and patients with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Epithelial sodium channel (ENaC) inhibitors may offer clinical benefit in cystic fibrosis (CF); however, data are limited. We report the outcomes of a Phase I (NCT02679729) and a Phase Ib (NCT02950805) study of AZD5634, a novel inhaled ENaC inhibitor. METHODS: A Phase I, first-in-human, single-blind, placebo-controlled, single ascending dose, sequential dose group study assessed the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of AZD5634 in healthy subjects (n=53) in part A following inhaled doses up to 1700 µg, and, in part B, following administration of single inhaled (1700 µg) and intravenous (65 µg) doses. A Phase Ib, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose, 2-way cross-over study assessed the effects of a single dose (600 µg) of inhaled AZD5634 on mucociliary clearance (MCC), pharmacokinetics and safety and tolerability in patients with CF (n=11). Nasal potential difference (NPD) was assessed as an in situ target engagement exploratory biomarker. RESULTS: Absolute bioavailability of AZD5634 after inhalation was approximately 3%, indicating minimal distribution into the systemic circulation. Urinary excretion was a minor elimination pathway. Administration of inhaled AZD5634 did not improve MCC in CF patients, but AZD5634 inhibited ENaC in the nasal epithelium, as measured by NPD. AZD5634 was safe and well tolerated in both studies. CONCLUSIONS: AZD5634 showed favorable pharmacokinetics and safety in healthy subjects and patients with CF. However, despite achieving target engagement, proof of mechanism was not achieved after a single dose in patients with CF. Further evaluation into multiple dose studies is warranted to explore its therapeutic potential.

Olfactory Outcomes With Dupilumab in Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps.

BACKGROUND: Loss of smell (LoS) is one of the most troublesome and difficult-to-treat symptoms of severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of dupilumab on sense of smell in severe CRSwNP. METHODS: In the randomized SINUS-24 and SINUS-52 studies, adults with severe CRSwNP received dupilumab 300 mg subcutaneously or matching placebo every 2 weeks for 24 or 52 weeks, respectively. Smell was assessed using daily patient-reported LoS score (0-3) and University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT; 0-40). Data from the 2 studies were pooled through week 24. Relationships between patient phenotypes and smell outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: We randomized 724 patients (286 placebo, 438 dupilumab); mean CRSwNP duration was 11 years; 63% had prior sinonasal surgery. Mean baseline LoS was 2.74. Dupilumab produced rapid improvement in LoS, evident by day 3, which improved progressively throughout the study periods (least squares mean difference vs placebo -0.07 [95% CI -0.12 to -0.02]; nominal P < .05 at day 3, and -1.04 [-1.17 to -0.91]; P < .0001 at week 24). Dupilumab improved mean UPSIT by 10.54 (least squares mean difference vs placebo 10.57 [9.40-11.74]; P < .0001) at week 24 from baseline (score 13.90). Improvements were unaffected by CRSwNP duration, prior sinonasal surgery, or comorbid asthma and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-exacerbated respiratory disease. Baseline olfaction scores correlated with all measured local and systemic type 2 inflammatory markers except serum total immunoglobulin E. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab produced rapid and sustained improvement in sense of smell, alleviating a cardinal symptom of severe CRSwNP.

Dupilumab in Children with Uncontrolled Moderate-to-Severe Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Children with moderate-to-severe asthma continue to have disease complications despite the receipt of standard-of-care therapy. The monoclonal antibody dupilumab has been approved for the treatment of adults and adolescents with asthma as well as with other type 2 inflammatory diseases. METHODS: In this 52-week phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned 408 children between the ages of 6 and 11 years who had uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma to receive a subcutaneous injection of dupilumab (at a dose of 100 mg for those weighing ≤30 kg and 200 mg for those weighing >30 kg) or matched placebo every 2 weeks. All the children continued to receive a stable dose of standard background therapy. The primary end point was the annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations. Secondary end points included the change from baseline in the percentage of predicted prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (ppFEV1) at week 12 and in the score on the Asthma Control Questionnaire 7 Interviewer-Administered (ACQ-7-IA) at week 24. End points were evaluated in the two primary efficacy populations who had either a type 2 inflammatory asthma phenotype (≥150 blood eosinophils per cubic millimeter or a fraction of exhaled nitric oxide of ≥20 ppb at baseline) or a blood eosinophil count of at least 300 cells per cubic millimeter at baseline. RESULTS: In patients with the type 2 inflammatory phenotype, the annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations was 0.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22 to 0.42) with dupilumab and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.54 to 1.03) with placebo (relative risk reduction in the dupilumab group, 59.3%; 95% CI, 39.5 to 72.6; P<0.001). The mean (±SE) change from baseline in the ppFEV1 was 10.5±1.0 percentage points with dupilumab and 5.3±1.4 percentage points with placebo (mean difference, 5.2 percentage points; 95% CI, 2.1 to 8.3; P<0.001). Dupilumab also resulted in significantly better asthma control than placebo (P<0.001). Similar results were observed in the patients with an eosinophil count of at least 300 cells per cubic millimeter at baseline. The incidence of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among children with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma, those who received add-on dupilumab had fewer asthma exacerbations and better lung function and asthma control than those who received placebo. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; Liberty Asthma VOYAGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02948959.).

Baseline FeNO as a prognostic biomarker for subsequent severe asthma exacerbations in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma receiving placebo in the LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST study: a post-hoc analysis.

BACKGROUND: Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) has potential as a prognostic biomarker in asthma, but its prognostic value among other recognised indicators is unclear. We assessed the added prognostic value of baseline FeNO to blood eosinophil count and prior severe asthma exacerbations for subsequent exacerbations. METHODS: In this post-hoc analysis of the 52-week, double-blind, phase 3 LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST study, we identified 620 patients with moderate-to-severe asthma who were randomly assigned to placebo; had uncontrolled asthma with inhaled glucocorticoids plus up to two controllers; one or more exacerbations in the previous year; FEV1 percent predicted 40-80%; FEV1 reversibility of 12% or higher and 200 mL; Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-5) score of 1·5 or higher; and complete data on baseline type 2 biomarkers (FeNO, eosinophils, and total IgE) with no baseline minimum requirement. Annualised severe exacerbation rate was assessed by baseline FeNO (<25 ppb, ≥25 to <50 ppb, ≥50 ppb; negative binomial model) and cross-classified by baseline blood eosinophils (<150 cells per µL, ≥150 to <300 cells per µL, ≥300 cells per µL) and prior exacerbations (one, two or more), all adjusted for baseline ACQ-5, postbronchodilator FEV1, and other clinical characteristics. Post-hoc analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST STUDY is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02414854, and is complete. FINDINGS: Patients with baseline FeNO of 50 ppb or higher (n=144) had a 1·54-times higher exacerbation rate than patients with FeNO of less than 25 ppb (n=291; relative risk 1·54 [95% CI 1·11-2·14]; p=0·0097). Patients with baseline FeNO of 25 to <50 ppb (n=185) had a 1·33-times higher exacerbation rate than patients with FeNO of less than 25 ppb (1·33 [0·99-1·78]; p=0·0572). Patients with baseline FeNO of 25 ppb or higher, a blood eosinophil count of 150 cells per µL or higher, and two or more prior exacerbations (n=157) had an exacerbation rate 3·62-times higher than patients with FeNO of less than 25 ppb, a blood eosinophil count of less than 150 cells per µL, and one prior exacerbation (n=116; 3·62 [1·67-7·81]; p=0·0011). INTERPRETATION: In uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma, higher baseline FeNO levels were associated with greater risk of severe asthma exacerbations, particularly in combination with elevated eosinophil count and prior exacerbations, supporting the added value of FeNO as a prognostic biomarker. Further research is needed to confirm FeNO as an independent predictor for asthma exacerbations. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

Dupilumab suppresses type 2 inflammatory biomarkers across multiple atopic, allergic diseases.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 inflammation is common in numerous atopic/allergic diseases and can be identified by elevated biomarker levels. Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation. OBJECTIVE: Assessment of dupilumab effect on type 2 inflammatory biomarkers in atopic dermatitis (AD), asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). METHODS: Data were extracted from three randomized placebo-controlled trials of dupilumab in AD (NCT02277743, N = 671; NCT02277769, N = 708; NCT02260986, N = 740); and one each in asthma (NCT02414854, N = 1902); CRSwNP (NCT02898454, N = 448); and EoE (NCT02379052, N = 47). Biomarkers assessed were serum thymus and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC), plasma eotaxin-3, serum total immunoglobulin E (IgE), serum periostin and blood eosinophil count. RESULTS: Dupilumab versus placebo significantly suppressed most type 2 inflammatory biomarker levels across all studies/indications where data were assessed. Reductions in serum TARC, plasma eotaxin-3 and serum periostin occurred rapidly, whereas reductions in serum total IgE were more gradual. Across diseases, at the end of treatment, median percentage change from baseline in TARC levels ranged from -24.8% to -88.6% (placebo +2.6% to -53.6%); -38.2% to -51.5% (placebo +8.3% to -0.16%) in eotaxin-3; -24.8% to -76.7% (placebo +8.3% to -4.4%) in total IgE; and -13.6% to -41.1% (placebo +10.1% to -6.94%) in periostin levels. Blood eosinophil responses to dupilumab varied by disease, with minimal changes in AD in the SOLO studies (median percentage change from baseline to end of treatment: 0% [95% CI: -15.8, 0]); transient increases followed by decreases to below-baseline levels in asthma (-14.6% [-20.0, -7.7]) and CRSwNP (-29.4% [-40.0, -16.3]); and significant decreases in EoE (-50.0% [-50.0, -33.3]). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Dupilumab reduced levels of type 2 biomarkers across clinical studies in patients with AD, asthma, CRSwNP and EoE.

Seven Pillars of Small Airways Disease in Asthma and COPD: Supporting Opportunities for Novel Therapies.

Identification of pathologic changes in early and mild obstructive lung disease has shown the importance of the small airways and their contribution to symptoms. Indeed, significant small airways dysfunction has been found prior to any overt airway obstruction being detectable by conventional spirometry techniques. However, most therapies for the treatment of obstructive lung disease target the physiological changes and associated symptoms that result from chronic lung disease, rather than directly targeting the specific underlying causes of airflow disruption or the drivers of disease progression. In addition, although spirometry is the current standard for diagnosis and monitoring of response to therapy, the most widely used measure, FEV1 , does not align with the pathologic changes in early or mild disease and may not align with symptoms or exacerbation frequency in the individual patient. Newer functional and imaging techniques allow more effective assessment of small airways dysfunction; however, significant gaps in our understanding remain. Improving our knowledge of the role of small airways dysfunction in early disease in the airways, along with the identification of novel end points to measure subclinical changes in this region (ie, those not captured as symptoms or identified through standard FEV1), may lead to the development of novel therapies that directly combat early airways disease processes with a view to slowing disease progression and reversing damage. This expert opinion paper discusses small airways disease in the context of asthma and COPD and highlights gaps in current knowledge that impede earlier identification of obstructive lung disease and the development and standardization of novel small airways-specific end points for use in clinical trials.

Sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. METHODS: We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04327388; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. FINDINGS: Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference -1·7 [-9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [-6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI -7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group. INTERPRETATION: This trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

Dupilumab improves upper and lower airway disease control in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and asthma.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and type 2 asthma share the same inflammatory pathophysiology and are frequent comorbidities. Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin 4 and interleukin 13, which are key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation. OBJECTIVE: We report the effect of dupilumab vs placebo on outcome measures of the upper and lower airways and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in the pooled population of patients with CRSwNP and comorbid asthma from the phase 3 SINUS-24 (NCT02912468) and SINUS-52 (NCT02898454) studies. METHODS: In these randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, patients received subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg (n = 438) or placebo (n = 286) every 2 weeks on a background of mometasone furoate nasal spray. Changes from baseline at week 24 in the upper and lower airway outcome measures are reported. RESULTS: Of the 724 patients randomized, 428 (59.1%) had comorbid asthma. In patients with asthma at week 24, dupilumab vs placebo improved the nasal polyp score (-2.04), patient-reported nasal congestion score (-1.04), Lund-Mackay computed tomography scan score (-6.43), peak nasal inspiratory flow (46.15 L/min), and 22-item sinonasal outcome test score (-21.42; all P < .001). The forced expiratory volume in 1 second and 6-item asthma control questionnaire scores were also markedly improved with dupilumab vs placebo. The most common adverse events (nasopharyngitis, headache, injection-site erythema, worsening of nasal polyposis, and asthma) were more frequent with placebo than dupilumab. CONCLUSION: Dupilumab improved upper and lower airway outcome measures and HRQoL in patients with severe CRSwNP and comorbid asthma and was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02912468 (SINUS-24) and NCT02898454 (SINUS-52).