Baricitinib versus Placebo or Adalimumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is an oral, reversible inhibitor of the Janus kinases JAK1 and JAK2 that may have therapeutic value in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: We conducted a 52-week, phase 3, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial in which 1307 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who were receiving background therapy with methotrexate were randomly assigned to one of three regimens in a 3:3:2 ratio: placebo (switched to baricitinib after 24 weeks), 4 mg of baricitinib once daily, or 40 mg of adalimumab (an anti-tumor necrosis factor α monoclonal antibody) every other week. End-point measures evaluated after adjustment for multiplicity included 20% improvement according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20 response) (the primary end point), the Disease Activity Score for 28 joints (DAS28), the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, and the Simplified Disease Activity Index at week 12, as well as radiographic progression of joint damage as measured by the van der Heijde modification of the total Sharp score (mTSS) (range, 0 to 448, with higher scores indicating greater structural joint damage) at week 24. RESULTS: More patients had an ACR20 response at week 12 with baricitinib than with placebo (primary end point, 70% vs. 40%, P<0.001). All major secondary objectives were met, including inhibition of radiographic progression of joint damage, according to the mTSS at week 24 with baricitinib versus placebo (mean change from baseline, 0.41 vs. 0.90; P<0.001) and an increased ACR20 response rate at week 12 with baricitinib versus adalimumab (70% vs. 61%, P=0.014). Adverse events, including infections, were more frequent through week 24 with baricitinib and adalimumab than with placebo. Cancers were reported in five patients (two who received baricitinib and three who received placebo). Baricitinib was associated with reductions in neutrophil counts and increases in levels of creatinine and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had had an inadequate response to methotrexate, baricitinib was associated with significant clinical improvements as compared with placebo and adalimumab. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Incyte; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01710358 .).

Baricitinib in Patients with Refractory Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: In phase 2 studies, baricitinib, an oral Janus kinase 1 and 2 inhibitor, reduced disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had not previously received treatment with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). METHODS: In this phase 3 study involving 527 patients with an inadequate response to or unacceptable side effects associated with one or more tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, other biologic DMARDs, or both, we randomly assigned the patients in a 1:1:1 ratio to baricitinib at a dose of 2 or 4 mg daily or placebo for 24 weeks. End points, tested hierarchically at week 12 to control type 1 error, were the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response (primary end point), the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, the 28-joint Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP), and a Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) score of 3.3 or less (on a scale of 0.1 to 86.0, with a score of 3.3 or less indicating remission). Comparisons with placebo were made first with the 4-mg dose of baricitinib and then with the 2-mg dose. RESULTS: Significantly more patients receiving baricitinib at the 4-mg dose than those receiving placebo had an ACR20 response at week 12 (55% vs. 27%, P<0.001). Differences between the higher-dose baricitinib group and the placebo group were also significant for the HAQ-DI score and the DAS28-CRP but not for an SDAI score of 3.3 or less. Adverse-event rates through 24 weeks were higher for patients receiving the 2-mg dose of baricitinib and those receiving the 4-mg dose than for patients receiving placebo (71% and 77%, respectively, vs. 64%), including infections (44% and 40%, vs. 31%). The rates of serious adverse events were 4%, 10%, and 7% in the three groups, respectively. Two nonmelanoma skin cancers and two major adverse cardiovascular events, including a fatal stroke, occurred in the higher-dose group. Baricitinib was associated with a small reduction in neutrophil levels and increases in serum creatinine and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to biologic DMARDs, baricitinib at a daily dose of 4 mg was associated with clinical improvement at 12 weeks. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Incyte; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01721044.).

Dose reduction of baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis achieving sustained disease control: results of a prospective study.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the effects of dose step-down in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who achieved sustained disease control with baricitinib 4 mg once a day. METHODS: Patients who completed a baricitinib phase 3 study could enter a long-term extension (LTE). In the LTE, patients who received baricitinib 4 mg for ≥15 months and maintained CDAI low disease activity (LDA) or remission (REM) were blindly randomised to continue 4 mg or taper to 2 mg. Patients could rescue (to 4 mg) if needed. Efficacy and safety were assessed through 48 weeks. RESULTS: Patients in both groups maintained LDA (80% 4 mg; 67% 2 mg) or REM (40% 4 mg; 33% 2 mg) over 48 weeks. However, dose reduction resulted in small, statistically significant increases in disease activity at 12, 24 and 48 weeks. Dose reduction also produced earlier and more frequent relapse (loss of step-down criteria) over 48 weeks compared with 4 mg maintenance (23% 4 mg vs 37% 2 mg, p=0.001). Rescue rates were 10% for baricitinib 4 mg and 18% for baricitinib 2 mg. Dose reduction was associated with a numerically lower rate of non-serious infections (30.6 for baricitinib 4 mg vs 24.9 for 2 mg). Rates of serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar across groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a large randomised, blinded phase 3 study, maintenance of RA control following induction of sustained LDA/REM with baricitinib 4 mg was greater with continued 4 mg than after taper to 2 mg. Nonetheless, most patients tapered to 2 mg could maintain LDA/REM or recapture with return to 4 mg if needed.

Lipid profile and effect of statin treatment in pooled phase II and phase III baricitinib studies.

OBJECTIVES: Lipid profiles are altered by active disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and may be further modified by treatment with Janus kinase inhibitors and other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. METHODS: Lipid data were analysed from phase II and III studies of 4 mg (n=997) and 2 mg (n=479) oral baricitinib administered once daily in patients with moderate-to-severe active RA. Lipoprotein particle size and number and GlycA were evaluated with nuclear magnetic resonance in one phase III study. The effect of statin therapy on lipid levels was evaluated in patients on statins at baseline and in patients who initiated statins during the study. RESULTS: Treatment with baricitinib was associated with increased levels of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglycerides, but no significant change in LDL-C:HDL-C ratio. Lipid levels plateaued after 12 weeks of treatment. Baricitinib treatment increased large LDL and decreased small, dense LDL particle numbers and GlycA. Lipid changes from baseline were not significantly different between baseline statin users and non-users. In patients who initiated statin therapy during the study, LDL-C, triglycerides (baricitinib 4 mg only) and apolipoprotein B decreased to pre-baricitinib levels; HDL-C and apolipoprotein A-I levels remained elevated. CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib was associated with increased LDL-C, HDL-C and triglyceride levels, but did not alter the LDL-C:HDL-C ratio. Evaluation of cardiovascular event rates during long-term treatment is warranted to further characterise these findings and their possible clinical implications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00902486, NCT01469013, NCT01185353, NCT01721044, NCT01721057, NCT01711359, NCT01710358, NCT01885078.

Response to baricitinib based on prior biologic use in patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis.

Objective: RA patients who have failed biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) represent an unmet medical need. We evaluated the effects of baseline characteristics, including prior bDMARD exposure, on baricitinib efficacy and safety. Methods: RA-BEACON patients (previously reported) had moderate to severe RA with insufficient response to one or more TNF inhibitor and were randomized 1:1:1 to once-daily placebo or 2 or 4 mg baricitinib. Prior bDMARD use was allowed. The primary endpoint was a 20% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR20) at week 12 for 4 mg vs placebo. An exploratory, primarily post hoc, subgroup analysis evaluated efficacy at weeks 12 and 24 by ACR20 and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ⩽10. An interaction P-value ⩽0.10 was considered significant, with significance at both weeks 12 and 24 given more weight. Results: The odds ratios predominantly favored baricitinib over placebo and were generally similar to those in the overall study (3.4, 2.4 for ACR20 weeks 12 and 24, respectively). Significant quantitative interactions were observed for baricitinib 4 mg vs placebo at weeks 12 and 24: ACR20 by region (larger effect Europe) and CDAI ⩽10 by disease duration (larger effect ⩾10 years). No significant interactions were consistently observed for ACR20 by age; weight; disease duration; seropositivity; corticosteroid use; number of prior bDMARDs, TNF inhibitors or non-TNF inhibitors; or a specific prior TNF inhibitor. Treatment-emergent adverse event rates, including infections, appeared somewhat higher across groups with greater prior bDMARD use. Conclusion: Baricitinib demonstrated a consistent, beneficial treatment effect in bDMARD-refractory patients across subgroups based on baseline characteristics and prior bDMARD use. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/), NCT01721044.

JAK1/JAK2 inhibition by baricitinib in diabetic kidney disease: results from a Phase 2 randomized controlled clinical trial.

Background: Inflammation signaled by Janus kinases (JAKs) promotes progression of diabetic kidney disease (DKD). Baricitinib is an oral, reversible, selective inhibitor of JAK1 and JAK2. This study tested the efficacy of baricitinib versus placebo on albuminuria in adults with Type 2 diabetes at high risk for progressive DKD. Methods: In this Phase 2, double-blind, dose-ranging study, participants were randomized 1:1:1:1:1 to receive placebo or baricitinib (0.75 mg daily; 0.75 mg twice daily; 1.5 mg daily; or 4 mg daily), for 24 weeks followed by 4-8 weeks of washout. Results: Participants (N = 129) were 63±9.1 (mean±standard deviation) years of age, 27.1% (35/129) women and 11.6% (15/129) African-American race. Baseline hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was 7.3±1% and estimated glomerular filtration rate was 45.0±12.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 with first morning urine albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR) of 820 (407-1632) (median; interquartile range) mg/g. Baricitinib, 4 mg daily, decreased morning UACR by 41% at Week 24 compared with placebo (ratio to baseline 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.38-0.93, P = 0.022). UACR was decreased at Weeks 12 and 24 and after 4-8 weeks of washout. Baricitinib 4 mg decreased inflammatory biomarkers over 24 weeks (urine C-X-C motif chemokine 10 and urine C-C motif ligand 2, plasma soluble tumor necrosis factor receptors 1 and 2, intercellular adhesion molecule 1 and serum amyloid A). The only adverse event rate that differed between groups was anemia at 32.0% (8/25) for baricitinib 4 mg daily versus 3.7% (1/27) for placebo. Conclusions: Baricitinib decreased albuminuria in participants with Type 2 diabetes and DKD. Further research is required to determine if baricitinib reduces DKD progression.

Efficacy and safety of baricitinib in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: A 52-week, randomized, single-blind, extension study.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long-term (64 weeks; 52-week extension of a 12-week study) baricitinib treatment in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate therapy. METHODS: Patients (N = 145) with active RA were randomized to placebo, 1mg, 2mg, 4mg, or 8mg baricitinib for the first 12 weeks. During the 52-week extension period, patients on 4mg or 8mg baricitinib remained on the same dose and all other patients were re-randomized to 4mg or 8mg baricitinib. Most patients on 8mg baricitinib were switched to 4mg by week 64 (protocol amendment); data analysis was based on the treatment group at the beginning of the extension period. RESULTS: Increases in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response rates (ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70) observed during the first 12 weeks were maintained during the extension period, accompanied by improvements in ACR core components. At week 64, a large proportion of patients (>40%) had low disease activity. Most treatment-related adverse events were mild or moderate; herpes zoster was the most common reason (11/27 patients) for discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety profile of baricitinib was maintained during long-term treatment of Japanese patients with RA and background methotrexate therapy. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01469013; Funding: Eli Lilly and Incyte.

Drotrecogin alfa (activated) in adults with septic shock.

BACKGROUND: There have been conflicting reports on the efficacy of recombinant human activated protein C, or drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA), for the treatment of patients with septic shock. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, we assigned 1697 patients with infection, systemic inflammation, and shock who were receiving fluids and vasopressors above a threshold dose for 4 hours to receive either DrotAA (at a dose of 24 µg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or placebo for 96 hours. The primary outcome was death from any cause 28 days after randomization. RESULTS: At 28 days, 223 of 846 patients (26.4%) in the DrotAA group and 202 of 834 (24.2%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk in the DrotAA group, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.28; P=0.31). At 90 days, 287 of 842 patients (34.1%) in the DrotAA group and 269 of 822 (32.7%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19; P=0.56). Among patients with severe protein C deficiency at baseline, 98 of 342 (28.7%) in the DrotAA group had died at 28 days, as compared with 102 of 331 (30.8%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.17; P=0.54). Similarly, rates of death at 28 and 90 days were not significantly different in other predefined subgroups, including patients at increased risk for death. Serious bleeding during the treatment period occurred in 10 patients in the DrotAA group and 8 in the placebo group (P=0.81). CONCLUSIONS: DrotAA did not significantly reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days, as compared with placebo, in patients with septic shock. (Funded by Eli Lilly; PROWESS-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00604214.).

Safety and efficacy of baricitinib at 24†weeks in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have had an inadequate response to methotrexate.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate baricitinib (LY3009104, formerly INCB028050), a novel, oral inhibitor of JAK1/JAK2 in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite treatment with methotrexate. METHODS: In this phase IIb study, 301 patients were randomised 2:1:1:1:1 to receive once daily doses of placebo or 1, 2, 4 or 8 mg baricitinib for 12 weeks. Patients assigned to 2, 4 and 8 mg baricitinib continued blinded treatment for an additional 12 weeks. Patients assigned to placebo or 1 mg baricitinib were reassigned to 2 mg twice daily or 4 mg once daily baricitinib between weeks 12-24. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in the combined 4 and 8 mg groups achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response versus placebo at week 12. RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the combined baricitinib 4 and 8 mg groups compared with placebo achieved an ACR20 response at week 12 (76% vs 41%, p<0.001). At week 12, significant differences versus placebo were also observed in patients achieving ACR50, ACR70 and remission as measured by Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts, Clinical Disease Activity Index and Simplified Disease Activity Index. Patients receiving 2, 4, or 8 mg baricitinib maintained or improved in all measures through 24 weeks. Similar proportions of patients experienced at least one adverse event in the placebo and baricitinib groups. Serious infections developed in three patients receiving baricitinib. No cases of tuberculosis, herpes zoster, opportunistic infections or deaths were reported. Dose-dependent decreases in haemoglobin were observed with baricitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib improved the signs and symptoms of RA in methotrexate inadequate responders with active disease. Baricitinib was well tolerated with no unexpected safety findings through week 24. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01185353.

Batoclimab as induction and maintenance therapy in patients with myasthenia gravis: rationale and study design of a phase 3 clinical trial.

Introduction: Batoclimab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits the neonatal fragment crystallisable receptor, has shown promising phase 2 clinical trial results in patients with generalised myasthenia gravis (gMG). Methods and analysis: In this phase 3, randomised, quadruple-blind, placebo-controlled study, adults with gMG will be randomised 1:1:1 to induction therapy with batoclimab 680 mg, batoclimab 340 mg, or placebo, administered once weekly (QW) for 12 weeks as a subcutaneous injection. The primary endpoint is the change from baseline to week 12 on the Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) score. Batoclimab-treated patients achieving a ≥2-point improvement from baseline on MG-ADL at week 10 or week 12 will be re-randomised to maintenance treatment with batoclimab 340 mg QW, batoclimab 340 mg every other week (Q2W), or placebo for 12 weeks; batoclimab-treated patients with a <2-point improvement at week 10 and week 12 will be switched to placebo for the maintenance period and discontinued thereafter. Placebo-treated patients from the induction period will be re-randomised to batoclimab 340 mg QW or Q2W in the maintenance period. All patients who complete the maintenance period and achieve a ≥2-point improvement from baseline in MG-ADL during ≥1 of the final 2 visits of the induction and/or maintenance periods will continue their current batoclimab dose (or switch to batoclimab 340 mg QW for those on placebo) for a 52-week long-term extension (LTE-1). Patients who complete LTE-1 may enter a second, optional 52-week LTE (LTE-2). Ethics and dissemination: This trial is being conducted in accordance with the International Council for Harmonisation Guideline for Good Clinical Practice, the Declaration of Helsinki, and each site's Institutional Review Board/Independent Ethics Committee. All patients must provide written informed consent. Results from this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and global conferences. Trial registration number: NCT05403541.

Subcutaneous batoclimab in generalized myasthenia gravis: Results from a Phase 2a trial with an open-label extension.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety, tolerability, and key pharmacodynamic effects of subcutaneous batoclimab, a fully human anti-neonatal Fc receptor monoclonal antibody, in patients with generalized myasthenia gravis and anti-acetylcholine receptor antibodies. METHODS: A Phase 2a, proof-of-concept, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial is described. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive once-weekly subcutaneous injections of batoclimab 340 mg, batoclimab 680 mg, or matching placebo for 6 weeks. Subsequently, all patients could enter an open-label extension study where they received batoclimab 340 mg once every 2 weeks for 6 weeks. Primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, and change from baseline in total immunoglobulin G, immunoglobulin G subclasses, and anti-acetylcholine receptor antibodies at 6 weeks post-baseline. Secondary endpoints included changes from baseline to 6 weeks post-baseline for Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living, Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis, Myasthenia Gravis Composite, and revised 15-item Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life scores. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were randomized to batoclimab 680 mg (n = 6), batoclimab 340 mg (n = 5), or placebo (n = 6). Batoclimab was associated with significantly greater reductions in total immunoglobulin G and anti-acetylcholine receptor antibodies from baseline to 6 weeks post-baseline than placebo. Reductions in immunoglobulin G subclasses were generally consistent with total immunoglobulin G. While clinical measures showed directionally favorable improvements over time, the study was not powered to draw conclusions about therapeutic efficacy. No safety issues were identified. INTERPRETATION: The safety profile, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary clinical benefits observed in this study support further investigation of subcutaneous batoclimab injections as a potential patient-administered therapy for seropositive generalized myasthenia gravis.

Proof-of-concept and Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trials of an FcRn Inhibitor, Batoclimab, for Thyroid Eye Disease.

CONTEXT: Inhibition of the neonatal fragment crystallizable receptor (FcRn) reduces pathogenic thyrotropin receptor antibodies (TSH-R-Ab) that drive pathology in thyroid eye disease (TED). OBJECTIVE: We report the first clinical studies of an FcRn inhibitor, batoclimab, in TED. DESIGN: Proof-of-concept (POC) and randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trials. SETTING: Multicenter. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with moderate-to-severe, active TED. INTERVENTION: In the POC trial, patients received weekly subcutaneous injections of batoclimab 680 mg for 2 weeks, followed by 340 mg for 4 weeks. In the double-blind trial, patients were randomized 2:2:1:2 to weekly batoclimab (680 mg, 340 mg, 255 mg) or placebo for 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME: Change from baseline in serum anti-TSH-R-Ab and total IgG (POC); 12-week proptosis response (randomized trial). RESULTS: The randomized trial was terminated because of an unanticipated increase in serum cholesterol; therefore, data from 65 of the planned 77 patients were analyzed. Both trials showed marked decreases in pathogenic anti-TSH-R-Ab and total IgG serum levels (P < .001) with batoclimab. In the randomized trial, there was no statistically significant difference with batoclimab vs placebo in proptosis response at 12 weeks, although significant differences were observed at several earlier timepoints. In addition, orbital muscle volume decreased (P < .03) at 12 weeks, whereas quality of life (appearance subscale) improved (P < .03) at 19 weeks in the 680-mg group. Batoclimab was generally well tolerated, with albumin reductions and increases in lipids that reversed upon discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide insight into the efficacy and safety of batoclimab and support its further investigation as a potential therapy for TED.

Cytochrome p-450 polymorphisms and response to clopidogrel.

BACKGROUND: Clopidogrel requires transformation into an active metabolite by cytochrome P-450 (CYP) enzymes for its antiplatelet effect. The genes encoding CYP enzymes are polymorphic, with common alleles conferring reduced function. METHODS: We tested the association between functional genetic variants in CYP genes, plasma concentrations of active drug metabolite, and platelet inhibition in response to clopidogrel in 162 healthy subjects. We then examined the association between these genetic variants and cardiovascular outcomes in a separate cohort of 1477 subjects with acute coronary syndromes who were treated with clopidogrel in the Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition with Prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TRITON-TIMI) 38. RESULTS: In healthy subjects who were treated with clopidogrel, carriers of at least one CYP2C19 reduced-function allele (approximately 30% of the study population) had a relative reduction of 32.4% in plasma exposure to the active metabolite of clopidogrel, as compared with noncarriers (P<0.001). Carriers also had an absolute reduction in maximal platelet aggregation in response to clopidogrel that was 9 percentage points less than that seen in noncarriers (P<0.001). Among clopidogrel-treated subjects in TRITON-TIMI 38, carriers had a relative increase of 53% in the composite primary efficacy outcome of the risk of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke, as compared with noncarriers (12.1% vs. 8.0%; hazard ratio for carriers, 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07 to 2.19; P=0.01) and an increase by a factor of 3 in the risk of stent thrombosis (2.6% vs. 0.8%; hazard ratio, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.19 to 8.00; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Among persons treated with clopidogrel, carriers of a reduced-function CYP2C19 allele had significantly lower levels of the active metabolite of clopidogrel, diminished platelet inhibition, and a higher rate of major adverse cardiovascular events, including stent thrombosis, than did noncarriers.

Cytochrome P450 genetic polymorphisms and the response to prasugrel: relationship to pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Both clopidogrel and prasugrel require biotransformation to active metabolites by cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes. Among persons treated with clopidogrel, carriers of reduced-function CYP2C19 alleles have significantly lower levels of active metabolite, diminished platelet inhibition, and higher rates of adverse cardiovascular events. The effect of CYP polymorphisms on the clinical outcomes in patients treated with prasugrel remains unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: The associations between functional variants in CYP genes, plasma concentrations of active drug metabolite, and platelet inhibition in response to prasugrel were tested in 238 healthy subjects. We then examined the association of these genetic variants with cardiovascular outcomes in a cohort of 1466 patients with acute coronary syndromes allocated to treatment with prasugrel in the Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition With Prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 38 trial. Among the healthy subjects, no significant attenuation of the pharmacokinetic or the pharmacodynamic response to prasugrel was observed in carriers versus noncarriers of at least 1 reduced-function allele for any of the CYP genes tested (CYP2C19, CYP2C9, CYP2B6, CYP3A5, and CYP1A2). Consistent with these findings, in subjects with acute coronary syndromes treated with prasugrel, no significant associations were found between any of the tested CYP genotypes and risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Common functional CYP genetic variants do not affect active drug metabolite levels, inhibition of platelet aggregation, or clinical cardiovascular event rates in persons treated with prasugrel. These pharmacogenetic findings are in contrast to observations with clopidogrel, which may explain, in part, the different pharmacological and clinical responses to the 2 medications.

Population pharmacokinetic analyses to evaluate the influence of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on exposure of prasugrel active metabolite in TRITON-TIMI 38.

Serial pharmacokinetic (PK) sampling in 1159 patients from TRITON-TIMI 38 was undertaken. A multilinear regression model was used to quantitatively predict prasugrel's active metabolite (Pras-AM) concentrations from its 2 downstream inactive metabolites. Population-based methods were then applied to Pras-AM concentration data to characterize the PK. The potential influence of body weight, body mass index, age, sex, renal function, diabetes, tobacco use, and other disease status on Bayesian estimates of Pras-AM exposures was assessed. The PK of Pras-AM was adequately described by a multicompartmental model and consistent with results from previous studies. The systemic exposure of prasugrel was not appreciably affected by body mass index, gender, diabetes, smoking, and renal impairment. Pras-AM mean exposure in patients weighing <60 kg (4.1%) was 30% (90% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.45) higher than exposure in patients > or =60 kg. Mean Pras-AM exposures for patients > or =75 years (10.5%) were 19% (90% CI: 1.11-1.28) higher compared with patients <75 years.

Interleukin-8 as a stratification tool for interventional trials involving pediatric septic shock.

RATIONALE: Interventional clinical trials involving children with septic shock would benefit from an efficient preenrollment stratification strategy. OBJECTIVES: To test the predictive value of interleukin (IL)-8 for 28-day mortality in pediatric septic shock. METHODS: A training data set (n = 40) identified a serum IL-8 of greater than 220 pg/ml as having a 75% sensitivity and specificity for predicting 28-day mortality. This cutoff was then subjected to a series of validation steps. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Subjects were drawn from two large, independent pediatric septic shock databases. Prospective application of the IL-8 cutoff to validation data set 1 (n = 139) demonstrated 78% sensitivity and 64% specificity for 28-day mortality. A serum IL-8 level of 220 pg/ml or less, however, had a negative predictive value for 28-day mortality of 95% in validation data set 1, which was subsequently applied to an independently generated data set of children with septic shock (validation set 2, n = 193). A serum IL-8 level of 220 pg/ml or less had a negative predictive value for 28-day mortality of 94% when applied to validation set 2. CONCLUSIONS: A serum IL-8 level of 220 pg/ml or less, obtained within 24 hours of admission, predicts a high likelihood of survival in children with septic shock. We propose that IL-8 can be used to exclude such patients from interventional clinical trials and ultimately derive a study population with a more favorable risk to benefit ratio when subjected to a study agent.

MRI and Dose Selection in a Phase II Trial of Baricitinib with Conventional Synthetic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used in a phase IIb study of baricitinib in patients with RA to support dose selection for the phase III program. METHODS: Three hundred one patients with active RA who were taking stable methotrexate were randomized 2:1:1:1:1 to placebo or once-daily baricitinib (1, 2, 4, or 8 mg) for up to 24 weeks. One hundred fifty-four patients with definitive radiographic erosion had MRI of the hand/wrist at baseline and at weeks 12 and 24. Two expert radiologists, blinded to treatment and visit order, scored images for synovitis, osteitis, bone erosion, and cartilage loss. Combined inflammation (osteitis + 3× synovitis score) and total joint damage (erosion + 2.5× cartilage loss score) scores were calculated. Treatment groups were compared using ANCOVA adjusting for baseline scores. RESULTS: Mean changes from baseline to Week 12 for synovitis were -0.10, -1.50, and -1.60 for patients treated with placebo, baricitinib 4 mg, and baricitinib 8 mg, respectively (p = 0.003 vs placebo for baricitinib 4 and 8 mg). Mean changes for osteitis were 0.00, -3.20, and -2.10 (p = 0.001 vs placebo for baricitinib 4 mg and p = 0.037 for 8 mg), respectively. Mean changes for bone erosion were 0.90, 0.10, and 0.40 (p = 0.089 for 4 mg and p = 0.275 for 8 mg), respectively, in these treatment groups. CONCLUSION: MRI findings in this subgroup of patients suggest suppression of synovitis, osteitis, and combined inflammation by baricitinib 4 and 8 mg. This corroborates previously demonstrated clinical efficacy of baricitinib and increases confidence that baricitinib 4 mg could reduce the radiographic progression in phase III studies. [Clinical trial registration number (www.ClinicalTrials.gov): NCT01185353].

Comparison of baricitinib, upadacitinib, and tofacitinib mediated regulation of cytokine signaling in human leukocyte subpopulations.

BACKGROUND: The in vitro pharmacology of baricitinib, upadacitinib, and tofacitinib was evaluated to understand differences among these JAK inhibitors (JAKis) at the cellular level. METHODS: Peripheral blood mononuclear cells from healthy donors were incubated with different JAKis, levels of phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription (pSTAT) were measured following cytokine stimulation, and half maximum inhibitory concentration (IC50) values were calculated in phenotypically gated leukocyte subpopulations. Therapeutic dose relevance of the in vitro analysis was assessed using calculated mean concentration-time profiles over 24 h obtained from JAKi-treated subjects. Time above IC50 and average daily percent inhibition of pSTAT formation were calculated for each JAKi, cytokine, and cell type. RESULTS: Distinct JAKis displayed different in vitro pharmacologic profiles. For example, tofacitinib and upadacitinib were the most potent inhibitors of the JAK1/3-dependent cytokines tested (interleukin [IL]-2, IL-4, IL-15, and IL-21) with lower IC50 values and increased time above IC50 translating to a greater overall inhibition of STAT signaling during the dosing interval. All JAKis tested inhibited JAK1/2-dependent cytokines (e.g., IL-6 and interferon [IFN]-γ), the JAK1/tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2)-dependent cytokines IL-10 and IFN-α, the JAK2/2-dependent cytokines IL-3 and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), and the JAK2/TYK2-dependent cytokine granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), but often to significantly differing degrees. CONCLUSIONS: Different JAKis modulated distinct cytokine pathways to varying degrees, and no agent potently or continuously inhibited an individual cytokine signaling pathway throughout the dosing interval. Notably, baricitinib inhibited JAK1/3 signaling to a lesser extent than upadacitinib and tofacitinib, while upadacitinib, baricitinib, and tofacitinib inhibited the signaling of JAK2/2-dependent cytokines, including GM-CSF and IL-3, as well as the signaling of the JAK2/TYK2-dependent cytokine G-CSF.

Safety Profile of Baricitinib in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis with over 2 Years Median Time in Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Baricitinib is an oral, once-daily selective Janus kinase (JAK1/JAK2) inhibitor for adults with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We evaluated baricitinib's safety profile through 288 weeks (up to September 1, 2016) with an integrated database [8 phase III/II/Ib trials, 1 longterm extension (LTE)]. METHODS: The "all-bari-RA" group included patients who received any baricitinib dose. Placebo comparison was based on the 6 studies with 4 mg and placebo up to Week 24 ("placebo-4 mg" dataset). Dose response assessment was based on 4 studies with 2 mg and 4 mg including LTE data ("2 mg-4 mg-extended"). The uncommon events description used the non-controlled all-bari-RA. RESULTS: There were 3492 patients who received baricitinib for 6637 total patient-years (PY) of exposure (median 2.1 yrs, maximum 5.5 yrs). No differences in rates of death, adverse events leading to drug discontinuation, malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), or serious infections were seen for 4 mg versus placebo or for 4 mg versus 2 mg. Infections including herpes zoster were significantly more frequent for 4 mg versus placebo. Deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism were reported with 4 mg but not placebo [all-bari-RA incidence rate (IR) 0.5/100 PY]; the IR did not differ between doses (0.5 vs 0.6/100 PY, 2 mg vs 4 mg, respectively) or compared to published RA rates. All-bari-RA had 6 cases of lymphoma (IR 0.09/100 PY), 3 gastrointestinal perforations (0.05/100 PY), 10 cases of tuberculosis (all in endemic areas; 0.15/100 PY), and 22 all-cause deaths (0.33/100 PY). IR for malignancies (0.8/100 PY) and MACE (0.5/100 PY) were low and did not increase with prolonged exposure. CONCLUSION: In this integrated analysis of patients with moderate to severe active RA with exposure up to 5.5 years, baricitinib has an acceptable safety profile in the context of demonstrated efficacy. Trial registration numbers: NCT01185353, NCT00902486, NCT01469013, NCT01710358, NCT01721044, NCT01721057, NCT01711359, and NCT01885078 at clinicaltrials.gov.

Drotrecogin alfa (activated) in children with severe sepsis: a multicentre phase III randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) is used for the treatment of adults with severe sepsis who have a high risk of dying. A phase 1b open-label study has indicated that the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of DrotAA are similar in children and adults. We initiated the RESOLVE (REsearching severe Sepsis and Organ dysfunction in children: a gLobal perspectiVE) trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of the drug in children. METHODS: Children aged between 38 weeks' corrected gestational age and 17 years with sepsis-induced cardiovascular and respiratory failure were randomly assigned to receive placebo or DrotAA (24 microg/kg/h) for 96 h. We used a prospectively defined, novel primary endpoint of Composite Time to Complete Organ Failure Resolution (CTCOFR) score. Secondary endpoints were 28-day mortality, major amputations, and safety. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00049764. FINDINGS: 477 patients were enrolled; 237 received placebo, and 240 DrotAA. Our results showed no significant difference between groups in CTCOFR score (p=0.72) or in 28-day mortality (placebo 17.5%; DrotAA, 17.2%; p=0.93). Although there was no difference in overall serious bleeding events during the 28-day study period (placebo 6.8%; DrotAA 6.7%; p=0.97), there were numerically more instances of CNS bleeding in the DrotAA group (11 [4.6%], vs 5 [2.1%] in placebo, p=0.13), particularly in children younger than 60 days. For CTCOFR score days 1-14, correlation coefficient was -0.016 (95% CI -0.106 to 0.74); relative risk for 28-day mortality was 1.06 (95% CI 0.66 to 1.46) for DrotAA compared with placebo. INTERPRETATION: Although we did not record any efficacy of DrotAA in children with severe sepsis, serious bleeding events were similar between groups and the overall safety profile acceptable, except in children younger than 60 days. However, we gained important insights into clinical and laboratory characteristics of childhood severe sepsis, and have identified issues that need to be addressed in future trials in critically ill children.