Inhibition of complement C1s improves severe hemolytic anemia in cold agglutinin disease: a first-in-human trial.

Cold agglutinin disease is a difficult-to-treat autoimmune hemolytic anemia in which immunoglobulin M antibodies bind to erythrocytes and fix complement, resulting in predominantly extravascular hemolysis. This trial tested the hypothesis that the anti-C1s antibody sutimlimab would ameliorate hemolytic anemia. Ten patients with cold agglutinin disease participated in the phase 1b component of a first-in-human trial. Patients received a test dose of 10-mg/kg sutimlimab followed by a full dose of 60 mg/kg 1 to 4 days later and 3 additional weekly doses of 60 mg/kg. All infusions were well tolerated without premedication. No drug-related serious adverse events were observed. Seven of 10 patients with cold agglutinin disease responded with a hemoglobin increase >2 g/dL. Sutimlimab rapidly increased hemoglobin levels by a median of 1.6 g/dL within the first week, and by a median of 3.9 g/dL (interquartile range, 1.3-4.5 g/dL; 95% confidence interval, 2.1-4.5) within 6 weeks (P = .005). Sutimlimab rapidly abrogated extravascular hemolysis, normalizing bilirubin levels within 24 hours in most patients and normalizing haptoglobin levels in 4 patients within 1 week. Hemolytic anemia recurred when drug levels were cleared from the circulation 3 to 4 weeks after the last dose of sutimlimab. Reexposure to sutimlimab in a named patient program recapitulated the control of hemolytic anemia. All 6 previously transfused patients became transfusion-free during treatment. Sutimlimab was safe, well tolerated, and rapidly stopped C1s complement-mediated hemolysis in patients with cold agglutinin disease, significantly increasing hemoglobin levels and precluding the need for transfusions. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02502903.

Time to onset of analgesia following local infiltration of liposome bupivacaine in healthy volunteers: a randomized, single-blind, sequential cohort, crossover study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Bupivacaine liposome injectable suspension is a novel, prolonged-release formulation of bupivacaine. The time to onset of analgesia following an injection of liposome bupivacaine compared with placebo (normal saline) was investigated using a novel incisional pain model. Bupivacaine HCl was used as a positive control, compared with placebo to verify the validity of the study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this Phase 1, single-blind, crossover study, healthy volunteers (n = 132) were randomized to four sequential cohorts to receive subcutaneous normal saline in one arm and either liposome bupivacaine 40 mg or bupivacaine HCl 7.5 mg in the other. At 30, 15, 5, and 2 minutes after study drug administration for Cohorts 1 - 4 respectively, an incision was made in each arm and 18% acetic acid solution was applied to elicit pain. The primary outcome measure was a subject's assessment of pain intensity on a 100 mm visual analog scale. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences in pain intensity scores between liposome bupivacaine and normal saline were observed at 30, 15, 5, and 2 minutes postdose; similar findings were reported for bupivacaine HCl vs. normal saline. Both liposome bupivacaine and bupivacaine HCl were well tolerated and achieved > 30% pain reduction, normalized to placebo, within 5 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that liposome bupivacaine offers time to onset characteristics similar to traditional bupivacaine HCl: clinically meaningful analgesia within 2 minutes after administration and substantial analgesia by 5 minutes.

Maintenance of response to oral octreotide compared with injectable somatostatin receptor ligands in patients with acromegaly: a phase 3, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite biochemically responding to injectable somatostatin receptor ligands (iSRLs), many patients with acromegaly experience treatment burdens. We aimed to assess maintenance of biochemical response and symptomatic control with oral octreotide capsules versus iSRLs in patients with acromegaly who previously tolerated and responded to both. METHODS: This global, open-label, randomised controlled phase 3 trial was done in 29 clinical sites in Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Russia, Serbia, Spain, and the USA. Eligible patients were adults aged 18-75 years with acromegaly who were receiving iSRLs (long-acting octreotide or lanreotide autogel) for at least 6 months before baseline with a stable dose for at least 4 months, and were deemed to be biochemically responding (insulin-like growth factor I [IGF-I] <1·3 × upper limit of normal [ULN] and mean integrated growth hormone <2·5 ng/mL). In the 26-week run-in phase, all patients received oral octreotide (40 mg a day, optional titration to 60 or 80 mg a day). Eligibility for the randomised treatment phase was completion of the run-in phase as a biochemical responder (IGF-I <1·3 × ULN and mean integrated growth hormone <2·5 ng/mL at week 24) and investigator assessment of acromegaly being adequately controlled. Patients were randomly assigned (3:2) to oral octreotide capsules or iSRL at the same dose and interval as before enrolment. Randomisation and drug dispensing were conducted through a qualified randomisation service provider (eg, interactive web or voice response system). The primary endpoint was a non-inferiority assessment (margin -20 percentage points) of proportion of participants maintaining biochemical response throughout the randomised treatment phase (IGF-I <1·3 × ULN using time-weighted average; assessed by comparing the lower bound of the 2-sided 95% CI for the difference in biochemical response between groups). IGF-I was assessed once a month during the run-in and randomised treatment phases (single sample). Efficacy and safety assessments were performed on the randomised population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02685709. FINDINGS: Between Feb 11, 2016, and Aug 20, 2020, 218 patients were assessed for eligibility. 72 patients were excluded, and 146 participants were enrolled into the run-in phase. 116 patients completed the run-in phase and 30 participants discontinued treatment. 92 participants were randomly assigned to oral octreotide (n=55) or iSRL (n=37). 50 (91%) of 55 participants who received oral octreotide (95% CI 44-53) and 37 (100%) of 37 participants who received iSRLs (34-37) maintained biochemical response. The lower bound of the 2-sided 95% CI for the adjusted difference in proportions between the two treatment groups achieved the prespecified non-inferiority criterion of -20% (95% CI -19·9 to 0·5). 19 (35%) of 55 participants in the oral octreotide group and 15 (41%) of 37 participants in the iSRL group had treatment-related adverse events; the most common of which in both groups were gastrointestinal. INTERPRETATION: Oral octreotide was non-inferior to iSRL treatment, and might be a favourable alternative to iSRLs for many patients with acromegaly. FUNDING: Chiasma. TRANSLATION: For the Russian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Durable biochemical response and safety with oral octreotide capsules in acromegaly.

Objective: The objective of this study is to report results from the open-label extension (OLE) of the OPTIMAL trial of oral octreotide capsules (OOC) in adults with acromegaly, evaluating the long-term durability of therapeutic response. Design: The study design is an OLE of a double-blind placebo-controlled (DPC) trial. Methods: Patients completing the 36-week DPC period on the study drug (OOC or placebo) or meeting predefined withdrawal criteria were eligible for OLE enrollment at 60 mg/day OOC dose, with the option to titrate to 40 or 80 mg/day. The OLE is ongoing; week 48 results are reported. Results: Forty patients were enrolled in the OLE, 20 each having received OOC or placebo, with 14 and 5 patients completing the DPC period as responders, respectively. Ninety percent of patients completing the DPC period on OOC and 70% of those completing on placebo completed 48 weeks of the OLE. Maintenance of response in the OLE (i.e. insulin-like growth factor I (IGF1) ≤ 1.0 × upper limit of normal (ULN)) was achieved by 92.6% of patients who responded to OOC during the DPC period. Mean IGF1 levels were maintained between the end of the DPC period (0.91 × ULN; 95% CI: 0.784, 1.045) and week 48 of the OLE (0.90 × ULN; 95% CI: 0.750, 1.044) for those completing the DPC period on OOC. OOC safety was consistent with previous findings, with no increased adverse events (AEs) associated with the higher dose and improved gastrointestinal tolerability observed over time. Conclusions: Patients with acromegaly maintained long-term biochemical response while receiving OOC, with no new AEs observed with prolonged OOC exposure.

Bupivacaine extended-release liposome injection for prolonged postsurgical analgesia in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Bupivacaine extended-release liposome injection is a novel formulation of bupivacaine designed to achieve long-acting postoperative analgesia. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the magnitude and duration of postoperative analgesia from a single dose of bupivacaine extended-release injection with placebo administered intraoperatively in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy. DESIGN: This evaluation was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled phase 3 study. SETTINGS: Data were obtained from 13 centers in the Republic of Georgia, Poland, and Serbia. PATIENTS: Included in this study were patients aged 18 to 86 years undergoing excisional hemorrhoidectomy. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received either a single dose of bupivacaine extended-release 300 mg or placebo administered intraoperatively via wound infiltration. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The cumulative pain score was assessed by measurement of the area under the curve of pain intensity through 72 hours after study drug administration. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine patients were randomly assigned and treated; 186 completed the study. Pain intensity scores were significantly lower in the bupivacaine extended-release group in comparison with the group receiving placebo (141.8 vs 202.5, P < .0001). More patients in the bupivacaine extended-release group remained opioid free from 12 hours (59%) to 72 hours (28%) after surgery compared with patients receiving placebo (14% and 10%; P < .0008 through 72 h). The mean total amount of opioids consumed through 72 hours was 22.3 mg and 29.1 mg in the bupivacaine extended-release and placebo groups (P ≤ .0006). The median time to first opioid use was 14.3 hours in the bupivacaine extended-release group vs 1.2 hours in the placebo group (P < .0001). A greater proportion of patients in the bupivacaine extended-release group were satisfied with their postsurgical analgesia (95% vs 73%, P = .0007) than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Bupivacaine extended-release demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in pain through 72 hours, decreased opioid requirements, delayed time to first opioid use, and improved patient satisfaction compared with placebo after hemorrhoidectomy.

Maintenance of Acromegaly Control in Patients Switching From Injectable Somatostatin Receptor Ligands to Oral Octreotide.

PURPOSE: The phase 3 CHIASMA OPTIMAL trial (NCT03252353) evaluated efficacy and safety of oral octreotide capsules (OOCs) in patients with acromegaly who previously demonstrated biochemical control while receiving injectable somatostatin receptor ligands (SRLs). METHODS: In this double-blind study, patients (N = 56) stratified by prior SRL dose were randomly assigned 1:1 to OOC or placebo for 36 weeks. The primary end point was maintenance of biochemical control at the end of treatment (mean insulin-like growth factor 1 [IGF-1] ≤ 1.0 × upper limit of normal [ULN]; weeks 34 and 36). Time to loss of IGF-1 response and proportion requiring reversion to injectable SRLs were assessed as broader control measures. RESULTS: Mean IGF-1 measurements were 0.80 and 0.97 × ULN for OOC and 0.84 and 1.69 × ULN for placebo, at baseline and end of treatment, respectively. Mean growth hormone (GH) changed from 0.66 to 0.60 ng/mL for OOCs and 0.90 to 2.57 ng/mL for placebo. Normalization of IGF-1 levels (≤ 1.0 × ULN) was maintained in 58.2% for OOCs vs 19.4% for placebo (P = .008); GH levels were maintained (< 2.5 ng/mL) in 77.7% for OOC vs 30.4% for placebo (P = .0007). Median time to loss of response (IGF-1 > 1.0 or ≥ 1.3 × ULN definitions) for patients receiving placebo was 16 weeks; for patients receiving OOCs, it was not reached for both definitions during the 36-week trial (P < .0001). Of the patients in the OOC group, 75% completed the trial on oral therapy. The OOC safety profile was consistent with previous SRL experience. CONCLUSIONS: OOCs may be an effective therapy for patients with acromegaly who previously were treated with injectable SRLs.

The safety of liposome bupivacaine following various routes of administration in animals.

BACKGROUND: This report presents results from four preclinical studies evaluating safety and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of liposome bupivacaine following intravascular (intravenous [IV], intra-arterial [IA]), epidural, and intrathecal administration in dogs. METHODS: Intravascular administration was initially tested in a pilot study to determine maximum tolerated doses, and then in an expanded study of systemic adverse effects and PKs. An epidural study compared properties of liposome bupivacaine alone and in combination with lidocaine/epinephrine vs bupivacaine HCl. Another study assessed effects after intrathecal administration. RESULTS: In the initial intravascular studies, maximum doses at which no meaningful adverse events were observed with liposome bupivacaine were higher than for bupivacaine HCl (4.5 mg/kg IV vs 0.75 mg/kg IV, and 1.5 mg/kg IA vs 0.1 mg/kg IA, respectively). In the expanded intravascular study, there was no mortality or changes in pathology; adverse clinical signs included convulsions, lying on side, and decreased muscle tone (all were transient). In the epidural study, liposome bupivacaine was well tolerated at doses up to the highest dose tested (40 mg), with no evidence of spinal cord damage and with less motor blockade than bupivacaine HCl 15 mg. Intrathecal administration of liposome bupivacaine 40 mg was not associated with meaningful safety concerns and resulted in less motor blockade than bupivacaine HCl 15 mg. PK analyses showed that maximum plasma bupivacaine levels following administration of liposome bupivacaine (4.5 mg/kg IV and 40 mg epidural) were similar to maximum plasma bupivacaine levels following a threefold lower dose of bupivacaine HCl (1.5 mg/kg IV and 15 mg epidural). CONCLUSION: Liposome bupivacaine has a favorable safety profile compared with bupivacaine HCl when administered to dogs via intravascular, epidural, and intrathecal routes. This favorable safety profile is likely related to the liposome-bound nature of bupivacaine in the liposome bupivacaine formulation.

Evaluating therapeutic benefit in postsurgical analgesia requires global assessment: an example from liposome bupivacaine in hemorrhoidectomy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Interpreting analgesic efficacy based solely on measures of pain intensity can be misleading. Here, we use data from an adult hemorrhoidectomy study to demonstrate the importance of evaluating pain intensity scores with other outcome measures in interpreting analgesic study results. METHODOLOGY: We looked for coordinated outcome measures including pain intensity at rest using a numeric rating scale (NRS), postsurgical consumption of rescue medication, subject-reported results from the Brief Pain Inventory, subject satisfaction with postsurgical analgesia, and adverse events. RESULTS: The analgesic efficacy of liposome bupivacaine was reflected in a significant reduction in pain intensity scores at each timed assessment during the first 12 to 24 hours after surgery (mean NRS at 12 hours: liposome bupivacaine, 2.2; placebo, 2.9; P = 0.04), and less consumption of opioid rescue medications thereafter through 72 hours postsurgery (mean total amount of opioids consumed: liposome bupivacaine, 10 mg; placebo, 18 mg; P = 0.0006). These observations are supported by results of other outcome measures, including time to first use of opioid rescue medication, pain-related interference of subject functionality, and subject satisfaction with postsurgical analgesia. CONCLUSION: Liposome bupivacaine produced superior analgesia when compared with placebo at early postoperative time points, but appropriate use of rescue medication diminished this effect after 12 hours. However, based on our assessment of multiple outcome measures used in the study, it appears that the therapeutic benefit associated with the tested analgesic lasted throughout the 72-hour study period.

Bupivacaine liposome injectable suspension compared with bupivacaine HCl for the reduction of opioid burden in the postsurgical setting.

OBJECTIVE: Assess comparative efficacy of liposome bupivacaine administered at doses ≤266 mg and bupivacaine HCl administered at doses ≤200 mg for postsurgical analgesia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Analysis of pooled efficacy and safety data from nine double-blind, placebo or active (bupivacaine HCl) controlled multimodal analgesia studies using a single dose of liposome bupivacaine or comparator, given via administration into the surgical site before end of surgery (i.e., inguinal hernia repair, total knee arthroplasty, hemorrhoidectomy, breast augmentation, or bunionectomy). Data from study arms that received liposome bupivacaine doses ≤266 mg were included. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pooled data analysis includes nine studies: Study 1 - NCT01203644; Study 2 - NCT00485433; Study 3 - NCT00485693; Study 4 - NCT00529126; Study 5 - NCT00745290; Study 6 - NCT00744848; Study 7 - NCT00813111; Study 8 - NCT00890721; Study 9 - NCT00890682. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures included area under the curve (AUC) of pain intensity scores assessed by numeric rating scale (NRS) through 72 h postsurgery, time to first use of rescue opioid medications, total amount (mg) of opioid medications used, and occurrence of opioid-related adverse events (ORAEs). Incidence of overall AEs was also assessed. RESULTS: Mean cumulative pain score (AUC of NRS through 72 h) was significantly lower with liposome bupivacaine (283) compared with bupivacaine HCl (329, p = 0.039). Median time from administration of study drug to first use of opioid rescue medication was significantly longer for liposome bupivacaine (10 h vs 3 h, p < 0.0001). Liposome bupivacaine was associated with a significant reduction in opioid use (12 mg vs 19 mg; p < 0.0001) and incidence of ORAEs (20% vs 36%; p < 0.0001), compared with bupivacaine HCl. CONCLUSIONS: In this pooled analysis from nine studies representing five different surgical procedures, liposome bupivacaine administered at doses ≤266 mg in a multimodal setting was associated with statistically significant and clinically meaningful lower cumulative pain score at 72 h, delayed and less consumption of opioids, and fewer ORAEs than bupivacaine HCl.

Efficacy profile of liposome bupivacaine, a novel formulation of bupivacaine for postsurgical analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Liposome bupivacaine is a novel formulation of the local anesthetic bupivacaine, designed to provide prolonged postsurgical analgesia. This analysis examined pooled efficacy data as reflected in cumulative pain scores from 10 randomized, double-blind liposome bupivacaine clinical studies in which the study drug was administered via local wound infiltration. METHODS: A total of 823 patients were exposed to liposome bupivacaine in 10 local wound infiltration studies at doses ranging from 66 mg to 532 mg in five surgical settings; 446 patients received bupivacaine HCl (dose: 75-200 mg) and 190 received placebo. Efficacy measures were assessed through 72 hours after surgery. RESULTS: Overall, 45% of patients were male and 19% were ≥65 years of age. In the analysis of cumulative pain intensity scores through 72 hours, liposome bupivacaine was associated with lower pain scores than the comparator in 16 of 19 treatment arms assessed, achieving statistically significant differences compared with bupivacaine HCl (P < 0.05) in five of 17 treatment arms. These results were supported by results of other efficacy measures, including time to first use of opioid rescue medication, proportion of patients avoiding opioid rescue medication, total postsurgical consumption of opioid rescue medication, and patient/care provider satisfaction with postoperative analgesia. Local infiltration of liposome bupivacaine resulted in significant systemic plasma levels of bupivacaine, which could persist for 96 hours; systemic plasma levels of bupivacaine following administration of liposome bupivacaine were not correlated with local efficacy. Liposome bupivacaine and bupivacaine HCl were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Based on this integrated analysis of multiple efficacy measures, liposome bupivacaine appears to be a potentially useful therapeutic option for prolonged reduction of postsurgical pain in soft tissue and orthopedic surgeries.

Pharmacokinetics in animals and humans of a first-in-class peptide deformylase inhibitor.

BB-83698, a potent and selective inhibitor of peptide deformylase, was the first compound of this novel antibacterial class to progress to clinical trials. Single- and/or multiple-dose studies with doses ranging from 10 to 50 mg of BB-83698/kg of body weight were done with mice, rats, and dogs. Intravenous pharmacokinetics were characterized by low to moderate clearances and moderate volumes of distribution for all species. In dogs, but not in rodents, central nervous system (CNS) effects were dose limiting for intravenously administered BB-83698 and were suspected to be related to a high maximum concentration of the agent in plasma (Cmax) rather than to total systemic exposure. Controlled infusion studies with dogs demonstrated that CNS effects could be avoided without compromising systemic exposure by reducing the Cmax. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, five-way-crossover, single-dose-escalation, phase I study to explore the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of intravenous BB-83698 at doses ranging from 10 to 475 mg was performed with healthy male volunteers. Systemic exposures were generally in linear relationships with administered doses in animals and humans. Pharmacokinetics were consistent, predictable, and exhibited good allometric scaling among all species (r2 >0.98). Moreover, BB-83698 dosing in humans proceeded to a predicted efficacious exposure (the area under the concentration-time curve/MIC ratio, up to 184) without any clinically significant adverse effects.