Effect of avalglucosidase alfa on disease-specific and general patient-reported outcomes in treatment-naïve adults with late-onset Pompe disease compared with alglucosidase alfa: Meaningful change analyses from the Phase 3 COMET trial.

BACKGROUND: The Phase 3 COMET trial (NCT02782741) comparing avalglucosidase alfa and alglucosidase alfa included health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessments in treatment-naïve patients with late-onset Pompe disease (LOPD). Here, we further characterize results from disease-specific and general patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. METHODS: Adults who participated in the COMET trial receiving avalglucosidase alfa or alglucosidase alfa (both 20 mg/kg biweekly) during the 49-week double-blind treatment period were included in the analysis. Proportions of patients exceeding meaningful change thresholds at Week 49 were compared post hoc between treatment groups. PROs and their meaningful change thresholds included: Pompe Disease Severity Scale (PDSS; decrease 1.0-1.5 points), Pompe Disease Impact Scale (PDIS; decrease 1.0-1.5 points), Rasch-built Pompe-specific Activity Scale (R-PAct; change from unable to able to complete activity), 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12; physical component summary [PCS] score: increase ≥6 points, mental component summary [MCS] score: increase ≥7 points), EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L; improvement of ≥1 category), and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC; any improvement). RESULTS: The analysis included 99 adult patients (avalglucosidase alfa n = 50; alglucosidase alfa n = 49). Patients who received avalglucosidase alfa had significantly greater odds of achieving a meaningful change versus alglucosidase alfa for the PDSS Shortness of Breath (OR [95% CI] 11.79 [2.24; 62.18]), Fatigue/Pain (6.24 [1.20; 32.54]), Morning Headache (13.98 [1.71; 114.18]), and Overall Fatigue (5.88 [1.37; 25.11]) domains, and were significantly more likely to meet meaningful change thresholds across multiple PDSS domains (all nominal p < 0.05). A numerically greater proportion of patients in the avalglucosidase alfa group were able to complete selected activities of the R-PAct compared with the alglucosidase alfa group. Significantly greater proportions of patients who received avalglucosidase alfa achieved meaningful improvements for EQ-5D-5L usual activities dimension, EQ visual analog scale, and all four PGIC domains. The proportion of patients with improvements in SF-12 PCS and MCS was greater in the avalglucosidase alfa group versus alglucosidase alfa group, but was not significant (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These analyses show that avalglucosidase alfa improves multiple symptoms and aspects of daily functioning, including breathing and mobility. This supports the clinical relevance of the effects of avalglucosidase alfa on HRQoL for patients with LOPD.

Survival of patients with chronic acid sphingomyelinase deficiency (ASMD) in the United States: A retrospective chart review study.

Background: Acid sphingomyelinase deficiency (ASMD), historically known as Niemann-Pick disease type A, A/B, and B, is a rare lysosomal storage pathology with multisystemic clinical manifestations. The aims of this study were to estimate the survival probability in patients in the United States with chronic ASMD (ASMD types B and A/B), and to describe the disease characteristics of these patients. Methods: This observational retrospective study included medical chart records of patients with chronic ASMD with retrievable data abstracted by 69 participating physicians from 25 medical centers in the United States. Included patients had a date of ASMD diagnosis or first presentation to a physician for ASMD symptoms (whichever occurred first) between January 01, 1990, and February 28, 2021. Medical chart records were excluded if patients were diagnosed with ASMD type A. Eligible medical chart records were abstracted to collect demographic, medical and developmental history, and mortality data. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses from birth until death. Results: The overall study population (N = 110) included 69 patients with ASMD type B, nine with type A/B, and 32 with ASMD "non-type A" (ASMD subtype was unknown, but patients were confirmed as not having ASMD type A). The majority of patients were male with a median age at diagnosis of 3.8 years. Thirty-eight patients died during the study observation period, at a median age of 6.8 years. The median (95% confidence interval) survival age from birth was 21.3 (10.2; 60.4) years. At diagnosis or first presentation, 42.7% patients had ≥1 ASMD-related complication; splenic (30.0%) and hepatobiliary (20.9%) being the most common, and 40.9% required ≥1 medical visit due to complications. Conclusion: Patients with chronic ASMD in the United States have poor survival and significant burden of illness.

Measurement Properties of 2 Novel PROs, the Pompe Disease Symptom Scale and Pompe Disease Impact Scale, in the COMET Study.

Background and Objectives: The Pompe Disease Symptom Scale (PDSS) and Impact Scale (PDIS) were created to measure the severity of symptoms and functional limitations experienced by patients with late-onset Pompe disease (LOPD). The objectives of this analysis were to establish a scoring algorithm and to examine the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the measures using data from the COMET clinical trial. Methods: The COMET trial was a randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of avalglucosidase alfa and alglucosidase alfa in patients with LOPD aged 16-78 years at baseline. Adult participants (18 years or older) completed the PDSS and PDIS daily for 14 days at baseline and for 2 weeks before quarterly clinic visits for 1 year after randomization using an electronic diary. Data were pooled across treatment groups for the current analyses. Factor analysis and inter-item correlations were used to derive a scoring algorithm. Test-retest and internal consistency analyses examined the reliability of the measures. Correlations with criterion measures were used to evaluate validity and sensitivity to change. Anchor and distribution-based analyses were conducted to estimate thresholds for meaningful change. Results: Five multi-item domain scores were derived from the PDSS (Shortness of Breath, Overall Fatigue, Fatigue/Pain, Upper Extremity Weakness, Pain) and 2 from the PDIS (Mood, Difficulty Performing Activities). Internal consistency (Cronbach α > 0.90) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation >0.60) of the scores were supported. Cross-sectional and longitudinal correlations with the criterion measures generally supported the validity of the scores (r > 0.40). Within-patient meaningful change estimates ranging from 1.0 to 1.5 points were generated for the PDSS and PDIS domain scores. Discussion: The PDSS and PDIS are reliable and valid measures of LOPD symptoms and functional impacts. The measures can be used to evaluate burden of LOPD and effects of treatments in clinical trials, observational research, and clinical practice. Trial Registration Information: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02782741.

Cost analysis of the impact of caplacizumab in the treatment of acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura from a US hospital perspective.

AIM: This study aimed to model the financial impact of caplacizumab with therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) + immunosuppression for patients experiencing an acute acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (aTTP) episode versus TPE + immunosuppression, from a US hospital's perspective. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We developed an economic model to estimate the impact of caplacizumab on a US hospital's budget. Cost offsets from caplacizumab utilization targeted inpatient general ward days, intensive care unit (ICU) days, and TPE utilization. Costs and event probabilities were estimated from primary data analyses of the phase 3 HERCULES trial and peer-reviewed literature or other public sources. Plan reimbursement was obtained from 2019 Medicare Fee Schedules and adjusted to represent reimbursement from different US payers. Cost of ICU and general ward utilization were estimated from Medicare Provider Analysis and Review data analyses capturing hospital discharges. RESULTS: The model results indicate that caplacizumab leads to hospitalization cost savings of over $8,000 ($23,148 versus $14,904) along with TPE cost savings of over $14,000 ($37,150 versus $23,033) per patient. When the cost of caplacizumab and plan reimbursement are incorporated into the results, the per-patient cost of TPE + immunosuppression is $23,120 versus $70,068 for caplacizumab with TPE + immunosuppression, an incremental cost of $46,948. The model was robust to several scenario analyses; however, when limited to Medicare fee-for-service (FFS), the incremental cost of caplacizumab per patient was reduced to $4,852 due to add-on payments. CONCLUSIONS: Caplacizumab with TPE + immunosuppression is associated with an increase in costs; however, the increase is nominal among payers who provide an add-on payment consistent with that of Medicare FFS.

Burden of illness among Medicare and non-Medicare US populations with acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura.

BACKGROUND: Acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (aTTP) is a rare hematologic disorder that can lead to serious life-threatening medical complications. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe aTTP-related hospital resource utilization, cost, complications, and overall survival among US Medicare and non-Medicare populations following aTTP episodes prior to the US approval of caplacizumab. METHODS: This retrospective study utilized administrative claims data for Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) beneficiaries (100% sample) and a sample of commercial, managed Medicaid [MM], Medicare Advantage [MA] plan members from the Inovalon MORE2 Registry. aTTP patients ages 18+ were identified between 2010 and 2018 using a published validated algorithm: ≥1 hospitalization for thrombotic microangiopathy + therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE). 2,279 patients were identified; 65.2% were enrolled in Medicare FFS, 13.6% in commercial, 15.7% in MM, and 5.4% in MA. Mean hospitalization days for aTTP index episode ranged between 12 and 17 days; ∼60% of patients required intensive care. Mean payments for index hospitalization varied by payer [Medicare FFS: $29,024; MA: $12,860; commercial: $9,996 and MM: $10,470]. Among FFS patients, 15.7% died during initial hospitalization and 21.0% died within first 30 days of the event. During follow-up, 11.6-19.6% experienced aTTP-related exacerbation. Incidence rate of relapse and complications per 100 person-years was 5.6 [Medicare FFS: 3.6; MA: 8.7; commercial: 10.4 and MM: 14.7] and 16.7 [FFS: 15.5; MA: 20.5; commercial: 21.7 and MM: 19.1], respectively. Among Medicare patients with and without aTTP, mortality risk was 2.9 (95 % CI: 2.4-3.4) times higher for aTTP vs. non-aTTP patients. CONCLUSION: This is the first real-world study evaluating burden of illness among aTTP patients in the US across payer types. Despite being treated with TPE, patients with aTTP have lower survival rates in comparison to a matched cohort without aTTP. These findings highlight the need for more effective and novel therapies to reduce disease burden for this population.Key pointsIn US Medicare and managed care populations with aTTP between 2010 and 2018, aTTP can lead to significant utilization of ICU services due to clinical complications, and/or relapse following hospital discharge.Despite treatment with therapeutic plasma exchange, acute mortality remains high (15.7%) indicating the need for more effective and novel treatments.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of sarilumab combination therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with inadequate response to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors: systematic literature review and network meta-analyses.

Objective: To compare efficacy and safety of subcutaneous sarilumab 200 mg and 150 mg every 2 weeks plus conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (+csDMARDs) versus other targeted DMARDs+csDMARDs and placebo+csDMARDs, in inadequate responders to csDMARDs (csDMARD-IR) or tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFi-IR). Methods: Systematic literature review and network meta-analyses (NMA) conducted on 24 week efficacy and safety outcomes: Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index, modified total sharp score (mTSS, including 52 weeks), American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70, European League Against Rheumatism Disease Activity Score 28-joint count erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28)<2.6; serious infections/serious adverse events (including 52 weeks). Results: 53 trials were selected for NMA. csDMARD-IR: Sarilumab 200 mg+csDMARDs and 150 mg+csDMARDs were superior versus placebo+csDMARDs on all outcomes. Against most targeted DMARDs, sarilumab 200 mg showed no statistically significant differences, except superiority to baricitinib 2 mg, tofacitinib and certolizumab on 24 week mTSS. Sarilumab 150 mg was similar to all targeted DMARDs. TNFi-IR: Sarilumab 200 mg was similar to abatacept, golimumab, tocilizumab 4 mg and 8 mg/kg intravenously and rituximab on ACR20/50/70, superior to baricitinib 2 mg on ACR50 and DAS28<2.6 and to abatacept, golimumab, tocilizumab 4 mg/kg intravenously and rituximab on DAS28<2.6. Sarilumab 150 mg was similar to targeted DMARDs but superior to baricitinib 2 mg and rituximab on DAS28<2.6 and inferior to tocilizumab 8 mg on ACR20 and DAS28<2.6. Serious adverse events, including serious infections, appeared similar for sarilumab versus comparators. Conclusions: Results suggest that in csDMARD-IR and TNFi-IR (a smaller network), sarilumab+csDMARD had superior efficacy and similar safety versus placebo+csDMARDs and at least similar efficacy and safety versus other targeted DMARDs+csDMARDs.

Indirect Treatment Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab Monotherapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with Inadequate Response to Conventional Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of subcutaneous sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy administered every 2 weeks (q2w) versus other monotherapies of biologic, targeted and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs, tsDMARDs, csDMARDs) at recommended doses for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients who are intolerant of or inadequate responders to csDMARDs (csDMARD-IR). METHODS: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted on 24-week efficacy outcomes: Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 criteria, and European League Against Rheumatism Disease Activity Score 28-joint count erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28) < 2.6. In addition, serious infections and serious adverse events (SI/SAE) were examined at 24 weeks. RESULTS: Nine trials were selected for the NMA. Sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority versus adalimumab monotherapy on all efficacy outcomes and versus tofacitinib monotherapy on ACR20. Compared with csDMARDs, sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority on ACR 20/50/70 criteria and DAS28 < 2.6 but had similar efficacy on HAQ-DI. Efficacy of sarilumab 200 mg was similar versus certolizumab, etanercept, tofacitinib and tocilizumab 8 mg/kg monotherapy across all efficacy outcomes. SI/SAE appeared similar for sarilumab 200 mg versus all comparators. CONCLUSION: In csDMARD-IR patients, sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy has superior efficacy and similar safety versus csDMARDs, superior efficacy and similar safety versus adalimumab, and similar efficacy and safety versus bDMARDs and tsDMARDs. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Development and validation of an instrument to assess the risk of developing viral infections in Australian travelers during international travel.

BACKGROUND: Questionnaires are widely used for data collection in travel medicine studies, but there are no validated instruments that are available to researchers in this field. Our objective was to develop and validate a questionnaire to be used in a prospective study designed to estimate the risk of three viral infections in Australian travelers to Asia. METHODS: Qualitative nonexperimental cognitive methods, including cognitive review, task analysis, and cognitive interviews, were selected. A pilot study was performed to assess the instrument in the target population. RESULTS: Recalling dates related to travel or health events was observed and reported to be the most difficult task for travelers. The use of cues embedded into items and provision of memory prompts such as calendars improves the recall of dates during travel. There is a wide spectrum of accommodation, activities, and travel experiences, and item responses that were constructed as lists were useful as memory triggers, particularly for travelers with long and complicated itineraries. Cognitive interviews provided a valuable insight into how travelers used inferential and direct memory to recall travel events and their confidence in the accuracy of these processes. CONCLUSIONS: The development and validation of questionnaires improve the accuracy of the data collected and should be considered an integral part of the methodology of travel-related studies.

Risk of influenza-like illness in an acute health care setting during community influenza epidemics in 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2006-2007: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The person-to-person transmission of influenza-like illness (ILI) and influenza has been described mostly in long-term care units. Studies in acute hospital settings are rare and mostly retrospective. METHODS: We prospectively estimated the relative risk (RR) of hospital-acquired (HA) ILI during hospitalization according to in-hospital exposures to contagious individuals. Surveillance of ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza was undertaken at Edouard Herriot Hospital (1100 beds) during 3 influenza seasons. A total of 21 519 patients and 2153 health care workers (HCWs) from 2004 to 2007 were included. The RR of HA-ILI in patients was calculated according to exposure to other contagious patients and HCWs. RESULTS: For patients exposed to at least 1 contagious HCW compared with those with no documented exposure in the hospital, the RR of HA-ILI was 5.48 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.09-14.37); for patients exposed to at least 1 contagious patient, the RR was 17.96 (95% CI, 10.07-32.03); and for patients exposed to at least 1 contagious patient and 1 contagious HCW, the RR was 34.75 (95% CI, 17.70-68.25). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients exposed to potentially infectious patients and HCWs with ILI inside the hospital are at greater risk for HA-ILI. Such results identify priorities regarding preventive measures for seasonal or pandemic influenza.