Safety of the standardized quality tree sublingual immunotherapy tablet: Pooled safety analysis of clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The standardized quality (SQ) tree sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet has recently been approved for treatment of tree pollen allergy. Healthcare workers should be provided with detailed safety data for clinical use. OBJECTIVE: To assess the tolerability and safety of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet (12 SQ-Bet) in adults and adolescents. METHODS: Safety data were pooled from three double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trials (2 phase-II/1 phase-III) including adults and adolescents 12-65 years with allergic rhinitis and/or conjunctivitis treated before and during one pollen season once-daily with 12 SQ-Bet (n = 471) or placebo (n = 458): EudraCT no: 2012-000031-59; NCT02481856; EudraCT 2015-004821-15. RESULTS: The most frequently reported investigational medicinal product (IMP)-related AEs with 12 SQ-Bet were oral pruritis (39% of subjects) and throat irritation (29%). IMP-related AEs were mainly mild or moderate in severity, and the majority resolved without treatment and did not lead to treatment interruption/discontinuation. With 12 SQ-Bet, oral pruritus was more frequent among subjects with pollen food syndrome (PFS) (45%) than without PFS (29%). The 12 SQ-Bet did not seem to induce an increased risk of asthma: 7 events were reported in 7 subjects with 12 SQ-Bet and 11 in 10 subjects with placebo. No differences were seen in the risk of moderate-to-severe IMP-related AEs regardless of age, PFS status and asthma medical history. CONCLUSIONS: The 12 SQ tree SLIT-tablet was well tolerated in tree pollen allergic subjects with no major safety concerns detected. This safety profile supports daily at-home sublingual administration once the first dose is tolerated when administered under medical supervision.

Nasal allergen challenge and environmental exposure chamber challenge: A randomized trial comparing clinical and biological responses to cat allergen.

BACKGROUND: The direct-instillation nasal allergen challenge (NAC) and the environmental exposure chamber (EEC) are 2 methods of conducting controlled allergen provocations. The clinical and biological comparability of these methods has not been thoroughly investigated. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare clinical and immunologic responses to cat allergen in NAC versus EEC. METHODS: Twenty-four participants were randomized to receive either NAC followed by a 2-day challenge in an EEC or a 2-day challenge in an EEC followed by NAC. Challenges were separated by 28-day washout periods. We measured total nasal symptom scores, peak nasal inspiratory flow, nasal (0-8 hours) and serum cytokines, serum antibodies, peripheral blood antigen-specific T lymphocytes, and gene expression in nasal scrapings. The primary outcome was the total nasal symptom score area under the curve for the first 3 hours after allergen exposure in NAC or after initiation of exposure in EEC. RESULTS: Both challenges increased IL-5 and IL-13 in nasal fluids and serum and resulted in altered nasal cell expression of gene modules related to mucosal biology and transcriptional regulation. Changes in gene modules, more so than cytokine measurements, showed significant associations with total nasal symptom score and peak nasal inspiratory flow. Overall, EEC exposure generated larger responses and more early terminations compared with NAC. Although the 2 challenges did not correlate in symptom magnitude or temporality, striking correlations were observed in cytokine levels. CONCLUSIONS: Although clinical outcomes of NAC and EEC were temporally different and nonequivalent in magnitude, immunologic responses were similar. Selection of a particular allergen challenge method should depend on considerations of study objectives and cost.

A birch sublingual allergy immunotherapy tablet reduces rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms when exposed to birch and oak and induces IgG4 to allergens from all trees in the birch homologous group.

BACKGROUND: This randomized, double-blind trial was conducted to determine the optimal dose for clinical efficacy of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet. An environmental exposure chamber (EEC) was used to reduce variability of allergen exposure and allow investigation of symptom reduction towards different species from the birch homologous group in separate EEC sessions. METHODS: Eligible subjects (N = 219) were randomized to receive treatment with placebo or the SQ tree SLIT-tablet (2, 7, or 12 DU) for 24 weeks. EEC pollen challenges were conducted outside the birch pollen season and included four birch and two oak EEC sessions. The primary efficacy endpoint was the average allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) total symptom score (TSS) after 24 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: There was a statistically significantly lower TSS during the 24-week birch EEC session for 7 DU and 12 DU compared to placebo with relative differences of 24% (P = 0.03) and 25% (P = 0.02). For the 24-week oak EEC session, there was a statistically significant difference for 12 DU (24%, P = 0.03). IgE and IgG4 measurements supported these findings and demonstrated cross-reactivity to all other species within the birch homologous group. Treatment was well-tolerated with the most frequently reported adverse reactions being the local reactions in the oral cavity of mild-to-moderate severity. CONCLUSION: This trial demonstrates that the SQ tree SLIT-tablet reduce ARC symptoms triggered by birch or oak pollen. The optimal dose for further development was 12 DU. Clinical and immunological findings suggest that the tablet may be used to treat allergies to all species within the birch homologous group.

First clinical trials of novel ENaC targeting therapy, SPX-101, in healthy volunteers and adults with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: ENaC inhibition has been investigated as a CF treatment; however, small molecule inhibitors of ENaC lack efficacy and/or have shown dose-limiting hyperkalemia. SPX-101 is a novel, investigational small peptide (SPLUNC1 mimetic) that regulates ENaC density with the potential for efficacy without systemic effects. METHODS: Two trials are presented: The first was a Phase 1, 2-part, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, ascending-dose study of nebulized SPX-101 in healthy adults. Part 1 evaluated 4 single doses of SPX-101 ranging from 20 to 240 mg. Part 2 evaluated a 14-day regimen of SPX-101 at 4 doses of SPX-101 ranging from 10 to 120 mg BID. Pharmacokinetics, adverse events, spirometry, vital signs, electrocardiograms, pulse oximetry, and clinical laboratory values were assessed. The second trial was a tolerability-confirming, Phase 1b, open-label study conducted in 5 adult subjects with CF. Ascending doses of SPX-101 inhalation solution (10 mg-120 mg BID) were administered for 7 days. Safety was assessed as described above. RESULTS: All 64 healthy volunteers (32 in each Part) completed the single and multiple dose study. SPX-101 was well tolerated with little/no systemic exposure and with no hyperkalemia. Adverse events were generally mild with reported respiratory events associated with the purported pharmacological activity of SPX-101. Tolerability of SPX-101 was similarly observed in adults with CF; all 5 subjects treated with SPX-101 completed the study. CONCLUSIONS: SPX-101 was well-tolerated across a range of doses and had little/no systemic exposure in healthy adults and adults with CF, thus supporting further study in patients with CF. CLINICALTRIAL. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT03056989.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of standardized ragweed sublingual-liquid immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy with liquid extracts provides an appealing alternative to subcutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC), but a lack of robust evidence has deterred its use in North America. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and tolerability of standardized glycerinated short ragweed sublingual allergen immunotherapy liquid (RW-SAIL) extract in subjects with ragweed-related ARC. METHODS: This phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in North America. Subjects (age range, 18-55 years) with or without asthma were selected based on ARC symptom severity and erythema skin prick reaction to short ragweed. Subjects self-administered the maximum tolerated dose of RW-SAIL (n = 218) or placebo (n = 211) daily beginning approximately 8 to 16 weeks before and through the end of the ragweed pollen season. The primary end point was subject-assessed total combined daily rhinoconjunctivitis symptom and medication scores (TCS). RESULTS: During the entire season, there was a 43% decrease in TCS in subjects treated with RW-SAIL compared with placebo. Similar decreases were observed in TCS between the 2 groups during peak season (42%) and in daily symptom scores during the entire (42%) and peak (41%) seasons. The occurrence of adverse events was similar between the treatment groups; most were mild in severity. Treatment-related oromucosal local application site reactions occurred early and were transient and self-limited. No anaphylaxis occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first successful North American confirmatory phase 3 clinical trial to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a sublingual standardized ragweed allergen immunotherapy liquid extract for the treatment of ARC.

Fel d 1-derived peptide antigen desensitization shows a persistent treatment effect 1 year after the start of dosing: a randomized, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is an increasingly common source of morbidity, with sensitivity to cats accounting for 10% to 15% of disease burden. Allergy to cats is also a major risk factor for the development of asthma. OBJECTIVES: We sought to probe the persistence of the treatment effect of a novel F el d 1-derived peptide antigen desensitization (Cat-PAD) 1 year after the start of treatment in subjects with cat allergy-induced rhinoconjunctivitis after standardized allergen challenge. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial, subjects attended an environmental exposure chamber in which they were exposed to cat allergen before and after treatment with 2 different regimens of Cat-PAD over a 3-month period. Clinical efficacy was assessed as a change in total rhinoconjunctivitis symptom scores 18 to 22 weeks and 50 to 54 weeks after the start of treatment. RESULTS: Treatment with Cat-PAD showed greater efficacy with 4 administrations of a 6-nmol dose 4 weeks apart than with 8 administrations of a 3-nmol dose 2 weeks apart. The treatment effect of 6 nmol persisted 1 year after the start of treatment and was significantly different from that of 3 nmol (P = .0342) and placebo (P = .0104). The treatment effect was apparent on both nasal and ocular symptoms at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: A short course of Cat-PAD improves the ocular and nasal components of rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms in subjects with cat allergy, with the treatment effect persisting 1 year after the start of treatment.

A randomized, placebo-controlled study to evaluate safety and pharmacokinetics of inhaled ribavirin.

Ribavirin is an inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase inhibitor. Studies suggest ribavirin aerosol could be a safe and efficacious treatment option in the fight against coronaviruses. However, current treatment is long (12-18 h per day, 3-7 days), limiting clinical utility. A reduction in treatment time would reduce treatment burden. We aimed to evaluate safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of four, single-dose regimens of ribavirin aerosol in healthy volunteers. Thirty-two subjects were randomized, to four cohorts of aerosolized ribavirin (active) or placebo. Cohort 1 received 50 mg/ml ribavirin/placebo (10 ml total volume); cohort 2, 50 mg/ml ribavirin/placebo (20 ml total volume); cohort 3, 100 mg/ml ribavirin/placebo (10 ml total volume); and cohort 4, 100 mg/ml ribavirin/placebo (20 ml total volume). Intense safety monitoring and PK sampling took place on days 1, 2, 3, and 40. Subjects were (mean ± SD, active vs. placebo) aged 57 ± 4.5 vs. 60 ± 2.5 years; 83% vs. 88% were female; and 75% vs. 50% were Caucasian. Some 12.5% (3/24) and 25% (2/8) experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) (two moderate; five mild) in the active and placebo groups, respectively. No clinically significant safety concerns were reported. Mean maximum observed concentration (Cmax ) and area under the curve (AUC) values were higher in cohort 4, whereas cohorts 2 and 3 showed similar PK values. Ribavirin absorption reached Cmax within 2 h across cohorts. Four single-dose regimens of ribavirin aerosol demonstrated systemic exposure with minimal systemic effects. Results support continued clinical development of ribavirin aerosol as a treatment option in patients with coronaviruses.

Onset of Action of the Fixed Combination Intranasal Azelastine-Fluticasone Propionate in an Allergen Exposure Chamber.

BACKGROUND: A fixed-dose combination of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone propionate (MP-AzeFlu) is the most effective treatment of allergic rhinitis, but its onset of action requires further investigation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the onset of action of MP-AzeFlu with the free combination of oral loratadine (LORA) and intranasal fluticasone propionate (INFP). METHODS: In this single-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, 3-period crossover trial, allergic rhinitis symptoms were induced in asymptomatic patients by ragweed pollen challenge in an allergen environmental exposure chamber. Patients received single-dose MP-AzeFlu, LORA/INFP, or placebo and were monitored for 4 hours. The primary outcome was onset of action measured by total nasal symptom score (TNSS). Secondary measures were total ocular symptom score (TOSS), total score of the 7 nasal and ocular symptoms (T7SS), and the global visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: The full analysis set included 82 patients, of which 78 completed all treatments. TNSS was significantly reduced versus placebo from 5 minutes for MP-AzeFlu and 150 minutes for LORA/INFP onward (both P < .05) till the end of assessment (0-4 hours). MP-AzeFlu reduced TNSS to a greater extent at each time point from 5 to 90 minutes (P < .05) and over the entire assessment interval (P ≤ .005) versus LORA/INFP or placebo. No statistically significant difference between LORA/INFP and placebo was observed over the assessment interval (P = .182). The onset of action of MP-AzeFlu assessed by TOSS, T7SS, and VAS was 10 minutes, 2 hours earlier than with LORA/INFP. CONCLUSION: MP-AzeFlu had a more rapid onset of action (5 minutes) and was more effective than LORA/INFP.

Onset of action of ciclesonide once daily in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Ciclesonide is an intranasal corticosteroid approved for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the time to onset of action of ciclesonide, 200 microg/d, in patients with seasonal AR (SAR). METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study conducted in an environmental exposure chamber, 509 adults with at least a 2-year history of SAR completed 1 to 5 priming sessions of ragweed pollen exposure (mean [SD] of 3,500 [500] grains/m3). Patients with successful priming visits (defined as patient-assessed instantaneous total nasal symptom scores [TNSSs] > or =6 and rhinorrhea or nasal congestion scores -2) received a single dose of intranasal ciclesonide, 200 microg (n = 255), or placebo (n = 254). The difference in the change from baseline in TNSSs between the ciclesonide and placebo groups was measured hourly 1 to 12 hours after study drug administration. RESULTS: At hour 6, the mean treatment difference in TNSSs between ciclesonide and placebo was 0.53 (95% confidence interval, 0.03-1.03; P = .02). Significant treatment differences in favor of ciclesonide were also observed at 2 additional time points: hour 10 (P = .01) and hour 12 (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm that intranasal ciclesonide, 200 microg/d, has an onset of action of 6 hours in patients with SAR.