Trial of Prasinezumab in Early-Stage Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Aggregated α-synuclein plays an important role in the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease. The monoclonal antibody prasinezumab, directed at aggregated α-synuclein, is being studied for its effect on Parkinson's disease. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned participants with early-stage Parkinson's disease in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive intravenous placebo or prasinezumab at a dose of 1500 mg or 4500 mg every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. The primary end point was the change from baseline to week 52 in the sum of scores on parts I, II, and III of the Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS; range, 0 to 236, with higher scores indicating greater impairment). Secondary end points included the dopamine transporter levels in the putamen of the hemisphere ipsilateral to the clinically more affected side of the body, as measured by 123I-ioflupane single-photon-emission computed tomography (SPECT). RESULTS: A total of 316 participants were enrolled; 105 were assigned to receive placebo, 105 to receive 1500 mg of prasinezumab, and 106 to receive 4500 mg of prasinezumab. The baseline mean MDS-UPDRS scores were 32.0 in the placebo group, 31.5 in the 1500-mg group, and 30.8 in the 4500-mg group, and mean (±SE) changes from baseline to 52 weeks were 9.4±1.2 in the placebo group, 7.4±1.2 in the 1500-mg group (difference vs. placebo, -2.0; 80% confidence interval [CI], -4.2 to 0.2; P = 0.24), and 8.8±1.2 in the 4500-mg group (difference vs. placebo, -0.6; 80% CI, -2.8 to 1.6; P = 0.72). There was no substantial difference between the active-treatment groups and the placebo group in dopamine transporter levels on SPECT. The results for most clinical secondary end points were similar in the active-treatment groups and the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in 6.7% of the participants in the 1500-mg group and in 7.5% of those in the 4500-mg group; infusion reactions occurred in 19.0% and 34.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Prasinezumab therapy had no meaningful effect on global or imaging measures of Parkinson's disease progression as compared with placebo and was associated with infusion reactions. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and Prothena Biosciences; PASADENA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03100149.).

MIRROS: a randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase III trial of cytarabine ± idasanutlin in relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia.

Patients with refractory or relapsed acute myeloid leukemia (R/R AML) have a poor prognosis, with a high unmet medical need. Idasanutlin is a small-molecule inhibitor of MDM2, a negative regulator of tumor suppressor p53. By preventing the p53-MDM2 interaction, idasanutlin allows for p53 activation, particularly in patients with TP53 wild-type (WT) status. MIRROS (NCT02545283) is a randomized Phase III trial evaluating idasanutlin + cytarabine versus placebo + cytarabine in R/R AML. The primary end point is overall survival in the TP53-WT population. Secondary end points include complete remission rate (cycle 1), overall remission rate (cycle 1) and event-free survival in the TP53-WT population. MIRROS has an innovative design that integrates a stringent interim analysis for futility; continuation criteria were met in mid-2017 and accrual is ongoing. Trial registration number: NCT02545283.

Integrating phase 2 into phase 3 based on an intermediate endpoint while accounting for a cure proportion-With an application to the design of a clinical trial in acute myeloid leukemia.

For a trial with primary endpoint overall survival for a molecule with curative potential, statistical methods that rely on the proportional hazards assumption may underestimate the power and the time to final analysis. We show how a cure proportion model can be used to get the necessary number of events and appropriate timing via simulation. If phase 1 results for the new drug are exceptional and/or the medical need in the target population is high, a phase 3 trial might be initiated after phase 1. Building in a futility interim analysis into such a pivotal trial may mitigate the uncertainty of moving directly to phase 3. However, if cure is possible, overall survival might not be mature enough at the interim to support a futility decision. We propose to base this decision on an intermediate endpoint that is sufficiently associated with survival. Planning for such an interim can be interpreted as making a randomized phase 2 trial a part of the pivotal trial: If stopped at the interim, the trial data would be analyzed, and a decision on a subsequent phase 3 trial would be made. If the trial continues at the interim, then the phase 3 trial is already underway. To select a futility boundary, a mechanistic simulation model that connects the intermediate endpoint and survival is proposed. We illustrate how this approach was used to design a pivotal randomized trial in acute myeloid leukemia and discuss historical data that informed the simulation model and operational challenges when implementing it.

Modeling of Parkinson's Disease Progression and Implications for Detection of Disease Modification in Treatment Trials.

Background: Objectively measuring Parkinson's disease (PD) signs and symptoms over time is critical for the successful development of treatments aimed at halting the disease progression of people with PD. Objective: To create a clinical trial simulation tool that characterizes the natural history of PD progression and enables a data-driven design of randomized controlled studies testing potential disease-modifying treatments (DMT) in early-stage PD. Methods: Data from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) were analyzed with nonlinear mixed-effect modeling techniques to characterize the progression of MDS-UPDRS part I (non-motor aspects of experiences of daily living), part II (motor aspects of experiences of daily living), and part III (motor signs). A clinical trial simulation tool was built from these disease models and used to predict probability of success as a function of trial design. Results: MDS-UPDRS part III progresses approximately 3 times faster than MDS-UPDRS part II and I, with an increase of 3 versus 1 points/year. Higher amounts of symptomatic therapy is associated with slower progression of MDS-UPDRS part II and III. The modeling framework predicts that a DMT effect on MDS-UPDRS part III could precede effect on part II by approximately 2 to 3 years. Conclusions: Our clinical trial simulation tool predicted that in a two-year randomized controlled trial, MDS-UPDRS part III could be used to evaluate a potential novel DMT, while part II would require longer trials of a minimum duration of 3 to 5 years underscoring the need for innovative trial design approaches including novel patient-centric measures.

To develop effective medicines that can slow down or stop the progression of Parkinson's disease (PD), it is important to accurately understand how the disease worsens over time. We used data from an observational study, led by the Michael J. Fox Foundation, called the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) to understand the natural progression of  PD. We simulated clinical trials on a computer using different scales to measure the progression of PD. We specifically looked at a physician-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part III, and at a patient-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part II of how PD symptoms worsen over time. To measure the effect of a new medicine slowing down the progression of PD using patient-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part II, we estimate that we may need to conduct a clinical trial of at least 3 to 5 years. On the other hand, to measure an effect using physician-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part III, the duration of the trial could be shorter than 2 years. We were also able to show that worsening recorded by the physician-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part III could be predictive of a later worsening recorded by the patient-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part II. We concluded that MDS-UPDRS part III may be a good endpoint for a clinical trial of a reasonable duration and that MDS-UPDRS part II could be measured in longer studies, for example, open-label extensions.

Sustained effect of prasinezumab on Parkinson's disease motor progression in the open-label extension of the PASADENA trial.

The Phase II trial of Anti-alpha-Synuclein Antibody in Early Parkinson's Disease (PASADENA) is an ongoing double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of prasinezumab in early-stage Parkinson's disease (PD). During the double-blind period, prasinezumab-treated individuals showed less progression of motor signs (Movement Disorders Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part III) than placebo-treated individuals. We evaluated whether the effect of prasinezumab on motor progression, assessed as a change in MDS-UPDRS Part III score in the OFF and ON states, and MDS-UPDRS Part II score, was sustained for 4 years from the start of the trial. We compared participants enrolled in the PASADENA open-label extension study with those enrolled in an external comparator arm derived from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative observational study. The PASADENA delayed-start (n = 94) and early-start (n = 177) groups showed a slower decline (a smaller increase in score) in MDS-UPDRS Part III scores in the OFF state (delayed start, -51%; early start, -65%), ON state (delayed start, -94%; early start, -118%) and MDS-UPDRS Part II (delayed start, -48%; early start, -40%) than did the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative external comparator (n = 303). This exploratory analysis, which requires confirmation in future studies, suggested that the effect of prasinezumab in slowing motor progression in PD may be sustained long term. PASADENA ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT03100149 .

Prasinezumab slows motor progression in rapidly progressing early-stage Parkinson's disease.

Prasinezumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds aggregated α-synuclein, is being investigated as a potential disease-modifying therapy in early-stage Parkinson's disease. Although in the PASADENA phase 2 study, the primary endpoint (Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) sum of Parts I + II + III) was not met, prasinezumab-treated individuals exhibited slower progression of motor signs than placebo-treated participants (MDS-UPDRS Part III). We report here an exploratory analysis assessing whether prasinezumab showed greater benefits on motor signs progression in prespecified subgroups with faster motor progression. Prasinezumab's potential effects on disease progression were assessed in four prespecified and six exploratory subpopulations of PASADENA: use of monoamine oxidase B inhibitors at baseline (yes versus no); Hoehn and Yahr stage (2 versus 1); rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (yes versus no); data-driven subphenotypes (diffuse malignant versus nondiffuse malignant); age at baseline (≥60 years versus <60 years); sex (male versus female); disease duration (>12 months versus <12 months); age at diagnosis (≥60 years versus <60 years); motor subphenotypes (akinetic-rigid versus tremor-dominant); and motor subphenotypes (postural instability gait dysfunction versus tremor-dominant). In these subpopulations, the effect of prasinezumab on slowing motor signs progression (MDS-UPDRS Part III) was greater in the rapidly progressing subpopulations (for example, participants who were diffuse malignant or taking monoamine oxidase B inhibitors at baseline). This exploratory analysis suggests that, in a trial of 1-year duration, prasinezumab might reduce motor progression to a greater extent in individuals with more rapidly progressing Parkinson's disease. However, because this was a post hoc analysis, additional randomized clinical trials are needed to validate these findings.

Murine double minute 2 inhibition alone or with cytarabine in acute myeloid leukemia: Results from an idasanutlin phase 1/1b study⋆.

The prognosis remains poor for patients with relapsed or refractory (r/r) acute myeloid leukemia; thus, novel therapies are needed. We evaluated idasanutlin-a new, potent murine double minute 2 antagonist-alone or with cytarabine in patients with r/r acute myeloid leukemia, de novo untreated acute myeloid leukemia unsuitable for standard treatment or with adverse features, or secondary acute myeloid leukemia in a multicenter, open-label, phase 1/1b trial. Primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose for expansion (RDE) and characterize the safety profile of idasanutlin monotherapy and combination therapy. Clinical activity and pharmacokinetics were secondary objectives. Two idasanutlin formulations were investigated: a microprecipitate bulk powder (MBP) and optimized spray-dried powder (SDP). Following dose escalation, patients (N = 122) received idasanutlin at the RDE in the extension cohorts. No formal MTD was identified. Idasanutlin was tolerable alone and in combination with cytarabine. The RDE was determined as 600 mg twice a day for the MBP formulation and 300 mg twice a day for the SDP formulation. Adverse events were mostly grade 1/2 (76.2 %). The most common any-grade adverse events were gastrointestinal (including diarrhea [90.2 %]). The early death rate across all patients was 14.8 %. Plasma idasanutlin exposure was dose related. In TP53 wild-type patients, composite complete remission rates were 18.9 % with monotherapy and 35.6 % with combination therapy. Based on these results, idasanutlin development continued with further investigation in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01773408.

Alectinib in Crizotinib-Refractory ALK-Rearranged Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase II Global Study.

PURPOSE: Crizotinib confers improved progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but progression invariably occurs. We investigated the efficacy and safety of alectinib, a potent and selective ALK inhibitor with excellent CNS penetration, in patients with crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Alectinib 600 mg was administered orally twice daily. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) by central independent review committee (IRC). RESULTS: Of the 138 patients treated, 84 patients (61%) had CNS metastases at baseline, and 122 were response evaluable (RE) by IRC. ORR by IRC was 50% (95% CI, 41% to 59%), and the median duration of response (DOR) was 11.2 months (95% CI, 9.6 months to not reached). In 96 patients (79%) previously treated with chemotherapy, the ORR was 45% (95% CI, 35% to 55%). Median IRC-assessed progression-free survival for all 138 patients was 8.9 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 11.3 months). CNS disease control rate was 83% (95% CI, 74% to 91%), and the median CNS DOR was 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 11.2 months). CNS ORR in 35 patients with baseline measurable CNS lesions was 57% (95% CI, 39% to 74%). Of the 23 patients with baseline CNS metastases (measurable or nonmeasurable) and no prior radiation, 10 (43%) had a complete CNS response. At 12 months, the cumulative CNS progression rate (24.8%) was lower than the cumulative non-CNS progression rate (33.2%) for all patients. Common adverse events were constipation (33%), fatigue (26%), and peripheral edema (25%); most were grade 1 to 2. CONCLUSION: Alectinib is highly active and well tolerated in patients with advanced, crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC, including those with CNS metastases.