Efficacy and safety of ligelizumab in adults and adolescents with chronic spontaneous urticaria: results of two phase 3 randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) do not achieve complete control of their symptoms with current available treatments. In a dose-finding phase 2b study, ligelizumab improved urticaria symptoms in patients with H1-antihistamine (H1-AH) refractory CSU. Here, we report the efficacy and safety outcomes from two ligelizumab phase 3 studies. METHODS: PEARL-1 and PEARL-2 were identically designed randomised, double-blind, active-controlled and placebo-controlled parallel-group studies. Patients aged 12 years or older with moderate-to-severe H1-AH refractory CSU were recruited from 347 sites in 46 countries and randomly allocated in a 3:3:3:1 ratio via Interactive Response Technology to 72 mg ligelizumab, 120 mg ligelizumab, 300 mg omalizumab, or placebo, dosed every 4 weeks, for 52 weeks. Patients allocated to placebo received 120 mg ligelizumab from week 24. The primary endpoint was change-from-baseline (CFB) in weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) at week 12, and was analysed in all eligible adult patients according to the treatment assigned at random allocation. Safety was assessed throughout the study in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. The studies were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03580369 (PEARL-1) and NCT03580356 (PEARL-2). Both trials are now complete. FINDINGS: Between Oct 17, 2018, and Oct 26, 2021, 2057 adult patients were randomly allocated across both studies (72 mg ligelizumab n=614; 120 mg ligelizumab n=616; 300 mg omalizumab n=618, and placebo n=209). A total of 1480 (72%) of 2057 were female, and 577 (28%) of 2057 were male. Mean UAS7 at baseline across study groups ranged from 29·37 to 31·10. At week 12, estimated treatment differences in mean CFB-UAS7 were as follows: for 72 mg ligelizumab versus placebo, -8·0 (95% CI -10·6 to -5·4; PEARL-1), -10·0 (-12·6 to -7·4; PEARL-2); 72 mg ligelizumab versus omalizumab 0·7 (-1·2 to 2·5; PEARL-1), 0·4 (-1·4 to 2·2; PEARL-2); 120 mg ligelizumab versus placebo -8·0 (-10·5 to -5·4; PEARL-1), -11·1 (-13·7 to -8·5; PEARL-2); 120 mg ligelizumab versus omalizumab 0·7 (-1·1 to 2·5; PEARL-1), -0·7 (-2·5 to 1·1; PEARL-2). Both doses of ligelizumab were superior to placebo (p<0·0001), but not to omalizumab, in both studies. No new safety signals were identified for ligelizumab or omalizumab. INTERPRETATION: In the phase 3 PEARL studies, ligelizumab demonstrated superior efficacy versus placebo but not versus omalizumab. The safety profile of ligelizumab was consistent with previous studies. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma.

Assessment of HAE prophylaxis transition from androgen therapy to berotralstat: A subset analysis of the APeX-S trial.

Background: Given the recent approval of oral berotralstat in several countries for hereditary angioedema (HAE) prophylaxis, transition from long-term androgens to berotralstat may occur in clinical practice. The open-label, Phase II APeX-S trial provided an opportunity to assess the safety and effectiveness of berotralstat in patients previously treated with differing durations of androgens and shorter transition periods. Therefore, we examined the safety, effectiveness, and impact on quality of life of berotralstat after prior androgen use in patients from the APeX-S trial. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevations were also examined because of the association with androgen exposure and hepatic function impairment. Methods: We conducted an analysis of a subset of 39 patients from the APeX-S trial aged ≥12 years with HAE due to C1 inhibitor deficiency (HAE-C1-INH) with prior androgen use who discontinued androgen therapy within <60 days of receiving berotralstat. Patients received daily berotralstat (150 mg) and were divided into subgroups for this analysis based on time between androgen discontinuation and berotralstat commencement (<14 days versus 14 to <60 days). Results: Berotralstat was generally well tolerated, with nasopharyngitis (21%), upper respiratory tract infection (15%), nausea (15%), diarrhea (15%), and abdominal pain (10%) being the most common adverse events occurring in ≥10% of the total subset. Only 7/145 (5%) of all APeX-S study patients with a prior history of androgen therapy experienced ALT elevations, 6 of which were grade 3 or 4 toxicities. All 7 patients recovered without sequelae and belonged to the subgroup of patients who transitioned <14 days after discontinuing androgens (n = 18). A reduction in monthly attack rate versus Month 1 was observed over 12 months for all patients who transitioned from prior androgen therapy to berotralstat prophylaxis in under 60 days, irrespective of duration of prior androgen therapy or timing of transition (N = 39). Similarly, meaningful patient-reported improvements from both Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication scores were achieved, with a sustained benefit shown over the berotralstat treatment period. Conclusions: Berotralstat treatment led to sustained HAE symptom control irrespective of duration of prior androgen therapy or timing of transition. Most patients safely transitioned from long-term androgens to berotralstat. Although occurring in a small group of patients, liver-related adverse events following berotralstat treatment may be associated with a shorter androgen washout period, but further research is required to confirm this. Clinical trial registration: NCT03472040. Retrospectively registered March 21, 2018.

Allergic rhinitis: Review of the diagnosis and management: South African Allergic Rhinitis Working Group.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) has a significant impact on the community as a whole with regard to quality of life and its relationship to allergic multi-morbidities. Appropriate diagnosis, treatment and review of the efficacy of interventions can ameliorate these effects. Yet, the importance of AR is often overlooked, and appropriate therapy is neglected. The availability of effective medications and knowledge as to management are often lacking in both public and private health systems. METHODS: This review is based on a comprehensive literature search and detailed discussions by the South African Allergic Rhinitis Working Group (SAARWG). RESULTS: The working group provided up-to-date recommendations on the epidemiology, pathology, diagnosis and management of AR, appropriate to the South African setting. CONCLUSION: Allergic rhinitis causes significant, often unappreciated, morbidity. It is a complex disease related to an inflammatory response to environmental allergens. Therapy involves education, evaluation of allergen sensitisation, pharmacological treatment, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) and evaluation of the success of interventions. Regular use of saline; the important role of intranasal corticosteroids, including those combined with topical antihistamines and reduction in the use of systemic steroids are key. Practitioners should have a thorough knowledge of associated morbidities and the need for specialist referral.Contribution: This review summarises the latest developments in the diagnosis and management of AR such that it is a resource that allows easy access for family practitioners and specialists alike.

Effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine in health-care workers in South Africa (the Sisonke study): results from a single-arm, open-label, phase 3B, implementation study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the effectiveness of a single dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine (Johnson & Johnson) in health-care workers in South Africa during two waves of the South African COVID-19 epidemic. METHODS: In the single-arm, open-label, phase 3B implementation Sisonke study, health-care workers aged 18 years and older were invited for vaccination at one of 122 vaccination sites nationally. Participants received a single dose of 5 × 1010 viral particles of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine. Vaccinated participants were linked with their person-level data from one of two national medical insurance schemes (scheme A and scheme B) and matched for COVID-19 risk with an unvaccinated member of the general population. The primary outcome was vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19, defined as COVID-19-related admission to hospital, hospitalisation requiring critical or intensive care, or death, in health-care workers compared with the general population, ascertained 28 days or more after vaccination or matching, up to data cutoff. This study is registered with the South African National Clinical Trial Registry, DOH-27-022021-6844, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04838795, and the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202102855526180, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Feb 17 and May 17, 2021, 477 102 health-care workers were enrolled and vaccinated, of whom 357 401 (74·9%) were female and 119 701 (25·1%) were male, with a median age of 42·0 years (33·0-51·0). 215 813 vaccinated individuals were matched with 215 813 unvaccinated individuals. As of data cutoff (July 17, 2021), vaccine effectiveness derived from the total matched cohort was 83% (95% CI 75-89) to prevent COVID-19-related deaths, 75% (69-82) to prevent COVID-19-related hospital admissions requiring critical or intensive care, and 67% (62-71) to prevent COVID-19-related hospitalisations. The vaccine effectiveness for all three outcomes were consistent across scheme A and scheme B. The vaccine effectiveness was maintained in older health-care workers and those with comorbidities including HIV infection. During the course of the study, the beta (B.1.351) and then the delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns were dominant, and vaccine effectiveness remained consistent (for scheme A plus B vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related hospital admission during beta wave was 62% [95% CI 42-76] and during delta wave was 67% [62-71], and vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related death during beta wave was 86% [57-100] and during delta wave was 82% [74-89]). INTERPRETATION: The single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine shows effectiveness against severe COVID-19 disease and COVID-19-related death after vaccination, and against both beta and delta variants, providing real-world evidence for its use globally. FUNDING: National Treasury of South Africa, the National Department of Health, Solidarity Response Fund NPC, The Michael & Susan Dell Foundation, The Elma Vaccines and Immunization Foundation, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Delabeling Delayed Drug Hypersensitivity: How Far Can You Safely Go?

Delayed immune-mediated adverse drug reactions (IM-ADRs) are defined as reactions occurring more than 6 hours after dosing. They include heterogeneous clinical phenotypes that are typically T-cell-mediated reactions with distinct mechanisms across a wide spectrum of severity from benign exanthems through to life-threatening cutaneous or organ-specific diseases. For mild reactions such as benign exanthem, considerations for delabeling are similar to immediate reactions and may include a graded or single-dose drug challenge with or without preceding skin or patch testing. Evaluation of challenging cases such as the patient who is on multiple drugs at the time a severe delayed IM-ADR occurs should prioritize clinical ascertainment of the most likely phenotype and implicated drug(s). Although not widely available and validated, procedures such as patch testing, delayed intradermal skin testing, and laboratory-based functional drug assays or genetic (human leukocyte antigen) testing may provide valuable information to further help risk stratify patients and identify the likely implicated and/or cross-reactive drug(s). The decision to use a drug challenge as a diagnostic or delabeling tool in a patient with a severe delayed IM-ADR should weigh the risk-benefit ratio, balancing the severity and priority for the treatment of the underlying, and the availability of alternative efficacious and safe treatments.

Antibiotic allergy.

Antibiotics are the commonest cause of life-threatening immune-mediated drug reactions that are considered off-target, including anaphylaxis, and organ-specific and severe cutaneous adverse reactions. However, many antibiotic reactions documented as allergies were unknown or not remembered by the patient, cutaneous reactions unrelated to drug hypersensitivity, drug-infection interactions, or drug intolerances. Although such reactions pose negligible risk to patients, they currently represent a global threat to public health. Antibiotic allergy labels result in displacement of first-line therapies for antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment. A penicillin allergy label, in particular, is associated with increased use of broad-spectrum and non-ß-lactam antibiotics, which results in increased adverse events and antibiotic resistance. Most patients labelled as allergic to penicillins are not allergic when appropriately stratified for risk, tested, and re-challenged. Given the public health importance of penicillin allergy, this Review provides a global update on antibiotic allergy epidemiology, classification, mechanisms, and management.

Early morning urine collection to improve urinary lateral flow LAM assay sensitivity in hospitalised patients with HIV-TB co-infection.

BACKGROUND: Urine LAM testing has been approved by the WHO for use in hospitalised patients with advanced immunosuppression. However, sensitivity remains suboptimal. We therefore examined the incremental diagnostic sensitivity of early morning urine (EMU) versus random urine sampling using the Determine® lateral flow lipoarabinomannan assay (LF-LAM) in HIV-TB co-infected patients. METHODS: Consenting HIV-infected inpatients, screened as part of a larger prospective randomized controlled trial, that were treated for TB, and could donate matched random and EMU samples were included. Thus paired sample were collected from the same patient, LF-LAM was graded using the pre-January 2014, with grade 1 and 2 manufacturer-designated cut-points (the latter designated grade 1 after January 2014). Single sputum Xpert-MTB/RIF and/or TB culture positivity served as the reference standard (definite TB). Those treated for TB but not meeting this standard were designated probable TB. RESULTS: 123 HIV-infected patients commenced anti-TB treatment and provided matched random and EMU samples. 33% (41/123) and 67% (82/123) had definite and probable TB, respectively. Amongst those with definite TB LF-LAM sensitivity (95%CI), using the grade 2 cut-point, increased from 12% (5-24; 5/43) to 39% (26-54; 16/41) with random versus EMU, respectively (p = 0.005). Similarly, amongst probable TB, LF-LAM sensitivity increased from 10% (5-17; 8/83) to 24% (16-34; 20/82) (p = 0.001). LF-LAM specificity was not determined. CONCLUSION: This proof of concept study indicates that EMU could improve the sensitivity of LF-LAM in hospitalised TB-HIV co-infected patients. These data have implications for clinical practice.

Effect on mortality of point-of-care, urine-based lipoarabinomannan testing to guide tuberculosis treatment initiation in HIV-positive hospital inpatients: a pragmatic, parallel-group, multicountry, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: HIV-associated tuberculosis is difficult to diagnose and results in high mortality. Frequent extra-pulmonary presentation, inability to obtain sputum, and paucibacillary samples limits the usefulness of nucleic-acid amplification tests and smear microscopy. We therefore assessed a urine-based, lateral flow, point-of-care, lipoarabinomannan assay (LAM) and the effect of a LAM-guided anti-tuberculosis treatment initiation strategy on mortality. METHODS: We did a pragmatic, randomised, parallel-group, multicentre trial in ten hospitals in Africa--four in South Africa, two in Tanzania, two in Zambia, and two in Zimbabwe. Eligible patients were HIV-positive adults aged at least 18 years with at least one of the following symptoms of tuberculosis (fever, cough, night sweats, or self-reported weightloss) and illness severity necessitating admission to hospital. Exclusion criteria included receipt of any anti-tuberculosis medicine in the 60 days before enrolment. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to either LAM plus routine diagnostic tests for tuberculosis (smear microscopy, Xpert-MTB/RIF, and culture; LAM group) or routine diagnostic tests alone (no LAM group) using computer-generated allocation lists in blocks of ten. All patients were asked to provide a urine sample of at least 30 mL at enrolment, and trained research nurses did the LAM test in patients allocated to this group using the Alere Determine tuberculosis LAM Ag lateral flow strip test (Alere, USA) at the bedside on enrolment. On the basis of a positive test result, the nurses made a recommendation for initiating anti-tuberculosis treatment. The attending physician made an independent decision about whether to start treatment or not. Neither patients nor health-care workers were masked to group allocation and test results. The primary endpoint was 8-week all-cause mortality assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (those who received their allocated intervention). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01770730. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2013, and Oct 2, 2014, we screened 8728 patients and randomly assigned 2659 to treatment (1336 to LAM, 1323 to no LAM). 108 patients did not receive their allocated treatment, mainly because they did not meet the inclusion criteria, and 23 were excluded from analysis, leaving 2528 in the final modified intention-to-treat analysis (1257 in the LAM group, 1271 in the no LAM group). Overall all-cause 8-week mortality occurred in 578 (23%) patients, 261 (21%) in LAM and 317 (25%) in no LAM, an absolute reduction of 4% (95% CI 1-7). The risk ratio adjusted for country was 0·83 (95% CI 0·73-0·96), p=0·012, with a relative risk reduction of 17% (95% CI 4-28). With the time-to-event analysis, there were 159 deaths per 100 person-years in LAM and 196 per 100 person-years in no LAM (hazard ratio adjusted for country 0·82 [95% CI 0·70-0·96], p=0·015). No adverse events were associated with LAM testing. INTERPRETATION: Bedside LAM-guided initiation of anti-tuberculosis treatment in HIV-positive hospital inpatients with suspected tuberculosis was associated with reduced 8-week mortality. The implementation of LAM testing is likely to offer the greatest benefit in hospitals where diagnostic resources are most scarce and where patients present with severe illness, advanced immunosuppression, and an inability to self-expectorate sputum. FUNDING: European Developing Clinical Trials Partnership, the South African Medical Research Council, and the South African National Research Foundation.