ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema is a rare disorder characterized by episodic, potentially life-threatening swelling caused by kallikrein-kinin dysregulation. Long-term prophylaxis can stabilize this system. Donidalorsen, an antisense oligonucleotide, specifically reduces prekallikrein expression. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned patients with hereditary angioedema to receive donidalorsen (80 mg subcutaneously) or placebo once every 4 or 8 weeks. The primary end point was the time-normalized number of investigator-confirmed hereditary angioedema attacks per 4 weeks (attack rate) from week 1 to week 25. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients received donidalorsen every 4 weeks (45 patients), donidalorsen every 8 weeks (23 patients), or placebo (22 patients). The least-squares mean time-normalized attack rate was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.73) in the 4-week group, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.59) in the 8-week group, and 2.26 (95% CI, 1.66 to 3.09) in the placebo group. The mean attack rate from week 1 to week 25 was 81% lower (95% CI, 65 to 89) in the 4-week group than in the placebo group (P<0.001) and 55% lower (95% CI, 22 to 74) in the 8-week group than in the placebo group (P = 0.004); the median reduction in the attack rate from baseline was 90% in the 4-week group, 83% in the 8-week group, and 16% in the placebo group. The mean attack rate during weeks 5 to 25 was 87% lower (95% CI, 72 to 94) in the 4-week group than in the placebo group (P<0.001) and 60% lower (95% CI, 25 to 79) in the 8-week group than in the placebo group. Donidalorsen administered every 4 weeks resulted in an improvement in the least-squares mean total score for the change at week 25 on the Angioedema Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (scores range from 0 to 100, with a score of 100 indicating the worst possible quality of life) that was 18.6 points (95% CI, 9.5 to 27.7) better than that with placebo (P<0.001). The most common adverse events were erythema at the injection site, headache, and nasopharyngitis; 98% of adverse events were mild or moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Donidalorsen treatment reduced the hereditary angioedema attack rate, a finding that supports potential prophylactic use for hereditary angioedema. (Funded by Ionis Pharmaceuticals; OASIS-HAE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05139810.).
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary , Humans , Male , Female , Double-Blind Method , Angioedemas, Hereditary/drug therapy , Adult , Middle Aged , Injections, Subcutaneous , Young Adult , Oligonucleotides, Antisense/adverse effects , Oligonucleotides, Antisense/therapeutic use , Aged , Adolescent , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema is characterized by recurrent and unpredictable swellings that are disabling and potentially fatal. Selective inhibition of plasma prekallikrein production by antisense oligonucleotide treatment (donidalorsen) may reduce the frequency of attacks and the burden of disease. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, patients with hereditary angioedema with C1 inhibitor deficiency to receive four subcutaneous doses of either donidalorsen (80 mg) or placebo, with one dose administered every 4 weeks. The primary end point was the time-normalized number of investigator-confirmed angioedema attacks per month (attack rate) between week 1 (baseline) and week 17. Secondary end points included quality of life, as measured with the Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating worse quality of life), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients were enrolled, of whom 14 were randomly assigned to receive donidalorsen and 6 to receive placebo. The mean monthly rate of investigator-confirmed angioedema attacks was 0.23 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08 to 0.39) among patients receiving donidalorsen and 2.21 (95% CI, 0.58 to 3.85) among patients receiving placebo (mean difference, -90%; 95% CI, -96 to -76; P<0.001). The mean change from baseline to week 17 in the Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire score was -26.8 points in the donidalorsen group and -6.2 points in the placebo group (mean difference, -20.7 points; 95% CI, -32.7 to -8.7). The incidence of mild-to-moderate adverse events was 71% among patients receiving donidalorsen and 83% among those receiving placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with hereditary angioedema, donidalorsen treatment resulted in a significantly lower rate of angioedema attacks than placebo in this small, phase 2 trial. (Funded by Ionis Pharmaceuticals; ISIS 721744-CS2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04030598.).
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary , Oligonucleotides, Antisense , Prekallikrein , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Angioedemas, Hereditary/drug therapy , Disease-Free Survival , Drug Administration Schedule , Oligonucleotides, Antisense/adverse effects , Oligonucleotides, Antisense/therapeutic use , Patient Acuity , Prekallikrein/antagonists & inhibitors , Prekallikrein/genetics , Quality of Life , RNA, Messenger/antagonists & inhibitorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema is a rare and potentially life-threatening genetic disease that is associated with kallikrein-kinin system dysregulation. Garadacimab (CSL312), a novel, fully-human monoclonal antibody that inhibits activated factor XII (FXIIa), is being studied for the prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-monthly subcutaneous administrations of garadacimab as prophylaxis for hereditary angioedema. METHODS: VANGUARD was a pivotal, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial that recruited patients (aged ≥12 years) with type I or type II hereditary angioedema across seven countries (Canada, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Japan, the Netherlands, and the USA). Eligible patients were randomly assigned (3:2) to receive garadacimab or placebo for 6 months (182 days) by an interactive response technology (IRT) system. Randomisation was stratified by age (≤17 years vs >17 years) and baseline attack rate (1 to <3 attacks per month vs ≥3 attacks per month) for the adult group. The randomisation list and code were kept by the IRT provider during the study, with no access by site staff and funding representatives. All patients and investigational site staff, and representatives from the funder (or their delegates) with direct interaction with the study sites or patients, were masked to treatment assignment in a double-blind fashion. Randomly assigned patients received a 400-mg loading dose of subcutaneous garadacimab as two 200-mg injections or volume-matched placebo on day 1 of the treatment period, followed by five additional self-administered (or caregiver-administered) monthly doses of 200-mg subcutaneous garadacimab or volume-matched placebo. The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed time-normalised number of hereditary angioedema attacks (number of hereditary angioedema attacks per month) during the 6-month treatment period (day 1 to day 182). Safety was evaluated in patients who received at least one dose of garadacimab or placebo. The study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register, 2020-000570-25 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04656418. FINDINGS: Between Jan 27, 2021, and June 7, 2022, we screened 80 patients, 76 of whom were eligible to enter the run-in period of the study. Of 65 eligible patients with type I or type II hereditary angioedema, 39 were randomly assigned to garadacimab and 26 to placebo. One patient was randomly assigned in error and did not enter the treatment period (no dose of study drug received), resulting in 39 patients assigned to garadacimab and 25 patients assigned to placebo being included. 38 (59%) of 64 participants were female and 26 (41%) were male. 55 (86%) of 64 participants were White, six (9%) were Asian (Japanese), one (2%) was Black or African American, one (2%) was Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and one (2%) was listed as other. During the 6-month treatment period (day 1 to day 182), the mean number of investigator-confirmed hereditary angioedema attacks per month was significantly lower in the garadacimab group (0·27, 95% CI 0·05 to 0·49) than in the placebo group (2·01, 1·44 to 2·57; p<0·0001), corresponding to a percentage difference in means of -87% (95% CI -96 to -58; p<0·0001). The median number of hereditary angioedema attacks per month was 0 (IQR 0·00-0·31) for garadacimab and 1·35 (1·00-3·20) for placebo. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were upper-respiratory tract infections, nasopharyngitis, and headaches. FXIIa inhibition was not associated with an increased risk of bleeding or thromboembolic events. INTERPRETATION: Monthly garadacimab administration significantly reduced hereditary angioedema attacks in patients aged 12 years and older compared with placebo and had a favourable safety profile. Our results support the use of garadacimab as a potential prophylactic therapy for the treatment of hereditary angioedema in adolescents and adults. FUNDING: CSL Behring.
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary , Adult , Adolescent , Humans , Male , Female , Angioedemas, Hereditary/drug therapy , Angioedemas, Hereditary/prevention & control , Treatment Outcome , Antibodies, Monoclonal , Double-Blind MethodABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a potentially fatal disease characterized by unpredictable, recurrent, often disabling swelling attacks. In a randomized phase 2 study, donidalorsen reduced HAE attack frequency and improved patient quality-of-life (ISIS721744-CS2, NCT04030598). We report the 2-year interim analysis of the phase 2 open-label extension (OLE) study (ISIS 721744-CS3, NCT04307381). METHODS: In the OLE, the on-treatment study period consisted of fixed (weeks 1-13, donidalorsen 80 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks [Q4W]) and flexible (weeks 17-105, donidalorsen 80 mg Q4W, 80 mg every 8 weeks [Q8W], or 100 mg Q4W) dosing periods. The primary outcome was incidence and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The secondary outcomes included efficacy, pharmacodynamic, and quality-of-life assessments. RESULTS: Seventeen patients continued in the OLE study. No serious TEAEs or TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation were reported. Mean monthly HAE attack rate was 96% lower than the study run-in baseline rate (mean, 0.06/month; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.10; median, 0.04 on-treatment vs. mean, 2.70/month; 95% CI, 1.94-3.46; median, 2.29 at baseline). Mean monthly attack rate for Q8W dosing (n = 8) was 0.29 (range, 0.0-1.7; 95% CI, -0.21 to 0.79; median, 0.00). Mean plasma prekallikrein and D-dimer concentrations decreased, and Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire total score improved from baseline to week 105 with donidalorsen. CONCLUSION: The 2-year interim results of this phase 2 OLE study of donidalorsen in patients with HAE demonstrated no new safety signals; donidalorsen was well tolerated. There was durable efficacy with a 96% reduction in HAE attacks.
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary , Oligonucleotides , Humans , Angioedemas, Hereditary/drug therapy , Prekallikrein , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare genetic disorder characterized by unpredictable and potentially life-threatening episodes of swelling in various parts of the body. These attacks can be painful and debilitating, and affect a patient's quality of life. Every patient who experiences an attack should be treated with on-demand medication to mitigate attack severity and duration. Many patients with HAE also receive long-term prophylaxis to reduce the frequency and severity of edema episodes. Although long-term prophylaxis reduces the disease burden for patients with HAE, available intravenous and subcutaneous treatments are accompanied by a significant treatment burden because of the logistical, emotional, and physical challenges posed by their long-term parenteral nature. Androgens are an effective oral prophylactic treatment; however, they are associated with significant adverse events and are not suitable for all patients. Thus, the HAE community has expressed interest in the development of alternative oral prophylactic therapies for preventing HAE attacks. Objective: Here, we review the phase II and III clinical data of berotralstat (BCX7353), which was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in December 2020. Results: Berotralstat is an oral, second-generation, synthetic, small-molecule plasma kallikrein inhibitor taken once daily for the prevention of HAE attacks in patients ages ≥ 12 years. Results from the APeX studies (APeX-1 NCT02870972, APeX-2 NCT03485911, APeX-S NCT03472040, APex-J NCT03873116) demonstrated the efficacy of berotralstat as long-term prophylaxis for patients with HAE, which showed a reduction in the attack rate and on-demand medication usage. Berotralstat was well tolerated, and gastrointestinal treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild and self-limited. Conclusion: Oral berotralstat is an effective and safe long-term prophylactic treatment for patients with HAE that will provide patients unable to tolerate parenteral therapies with the option of disease control. Berotralstat may be associated with reduced treatment burden compared with injectable therapies, highlighting the importance of patient preference with regard to the administration route of their HAE prophylactic treatment.
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary/prevention & control , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Pyrazoles/administration & dosage , Serine Proteinase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Administration, Oral , Humans , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema is a disabling, potentially fatal condition caused by deficiency (type I) or dysfunction (type II) of the C1 inhibitor protein. In a phase 2 trial, the use of CSL830, a nanofiltered C1 inhibitor preparation that is suitable for subcutaneous injection, resulted in functional levels of C1 inhibitor activity that would be expected to provide effective prophylaxis of attacks. METHODS: We conducted an international, prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of self-administered subcutaneous CSL830 in patients with type I or type II hereditary angioedema who had had four or more attacks in a consecutive 2-month period within 3 months before screening. We randomly assigned the patients to one of four treatment sequences in a crossover design, each involving two 16-week treatment periods: either 40 IU or 60 IU of CSL830 per kilogram of body weight twice weekly followed by placebo, or vice versa. The primary efficacy end point was the number of attacks of angioedema. Secondary efficacy end points were the proportion of patients who had a response (≥50% reduction in the number of attacks with CSL830 as compared with placebo) and the number of times that rescue medication was used. RESULTS: Of the 90 patients who underwent randomization, 79 completed the trial. Both doses of CSL830, as compared with placebo, reduced the rate of attacks of hereditary angioedema (mean difference with 40 IU, -2.42 attacks per month; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.38 to -1.46; and mean difference with 60 IU, -3.51 attacks per month; 95% CI, -4.21 to -2.81; P<0.001 for both comparisons). Response rates were 76% (95% CI, 62 to 87) in the 40-IU group and 90% (95% CI, 77 to 96) in the 60-IU group. The need for rescue medication was reduced from 5.55 uses per month in the placebo group to 1.13 uses per month in the 40-IU group and from 3.89 uses in the placebo group to 0.32 uses per month in the 60-IU group. Adverse events (most commonly mild and transient local site reactions) occurred in similar proportions of patients who received CSL830 and those who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with hereditary angioedema, the prophylactic use of a subcutaneous C1 inhibitor twice weekly significantly reduced the frequency of acute attacks. (Funded by CSL Behring; COMPACT EudraCT number, 2013-000916-10 , and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01912456 .).
Subject(s)
Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/administration & dosage , Hereditary Angioedema Types I and II/prevention & control , Adult , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/adverse effects , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/metabolism , Cross-Over Studies , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Female , Hereditary Angioedema Types I and II/classification , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Male , Risk , Self Administration , Severity of Illness IndexABSTRACT
Hereditary angioedema is a rare, autosomal dominant genetic disorder that leads to sporadic episodes of swelling, which can affect any part of the body. With a prevalence of 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 50,000, there are other, more common causes of angioedema. Differentiating between bradykinin-mediated and histamine-mediated causes of swelling remains a major challenge. It is critical to develop an appropriate differential diagnosis, work through the various conditions, and obtain the pertinent laboratory evaluation to rule in or out the proposed diagnosis. As an autosomal dominant genetic disorder, there is a 50% chance with each pregnancy of passing on the genetic mutation in the SERPING1 gene. This review addressed the differential diagnosis to consider, the appropriate laboratory evaluation, and the importance of family screening.
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary/diagnosis , Bradykinin/metabolism , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/genetics , Angioedemas, Hereditary/genetics , Diagnosis, Differential , Diagnostic Screening Programs , Diagnostic Tests, Routine , Genetic Testing , Histamine/metabolism , HumansABSTRACT
Importance: Current treatments for long-term prophylaxis in hereditary angioedema have limitations. Objective: To assess the efficacy of lanadelumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits active plasma kallikrein, in preventing hereditary angioedema attacks. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 41 sites in Canada, Europe, Jordan, and the United States. Patients were randomized between March 3, 2016, and September 9, 2016; last day of follow-up was April 13, 2017. Randomization was 2:1 lanadelumab to placebo; patients assigned to lanadelumab were further randomized 1:1:1 to 1 of the 3 dose regimens. Patients 12 years or older with hereditary angioedema type I or II underwent a 4-week run-in period and those with 1 or more hereditary angioedema attacks during run-in were randomized. Interventions: Twenty-six-week treatment with subcutaneous lanadelumab 150 mg every 4 weeks (n = 28), 300 mg every 4 weeks (n = 29), 300 mg every 2 weeks (n = 27), or placebo (n = 41). All patients received injections every 2 weeks, with those in the every-4-week group receiving placebo in between active treatments. Main Outcome and Measures: Primary efficacy end point was the number of investigator-confirmed attacks of hereditary angioedema over the treatment period. Results: Among 125 patients randomized (mean age, 40.7 years [SD, 14.7 years]; 88 females [70.4%]; 113 white [90.4%]), 113 (90.4%) completed the study. During the run-in period, the mean number of hereditary angioedema attacks per month in the placebo group was 4.0; for the lanadelumab groups, 3.2 for the every-4-week 150-mg group; 3.7 for the every-4-week 300-mg group; and 3.5 for the every-2-week 300-mg group. During the treatment period, the mean number of attacks per month for the placebo group was 1.97; for the lanadelumab groups, 0.48 for the every-4-week 150-mg group; 0.53 for the every-4-week 300-mg group; and 0.26 for the every-2-week 300-mg group. Compared with placebo, the mean differences in the attack rate per month were -1.49 (95% CI, -1.90 to -1.08; P < .001); -1.44 (95% CI, -1.84 to -1.04; P < .001); and -1.71 (95% CI, -2.09 to -1.33; P < .001). The most commonly occurring adverse events with greater frequency in the lanadelumab treatment groups were injection site reactions (34.1% placebo, 52.4% lanadelumab) and dizziness (0% placebo, 6.0% lanadelumab). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with hereditary angioedema type I or II, treatment with subcutaneous lanadelumab for 26 weeks significantly reduced the attack rate compared with placebo. These findings support the use of lanadelumab as a prophylactic therapy for hereditary angioedema. Further research is needed to determine long-term safety and efficacy. Trial Registration: EudraCT Identifier: 2015-003943-20; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02586805.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Hereditary Angioedema Types I and II/prevention & control , Plasma Kallikrein/antagonists & inhibitors , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Child , Double-Blind Method , Female , Hereditary Angioedema Types I and II/classification , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Quality of Life , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use of Cinryze (nanofiltered C1-esterase inhibitor [C1 INH-nf]) for the acute management and prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks in the subgroup of children and adolescents who participated in 2 placebo-controlled and 2 open-label extension studies. STUDY DESIGN: In the acute-attack treatment studies, the efficacy of 1000 U of C1 INH-nf (with an additional 1000 U given 1 hour later if needed) was assessed based on the time to the start of symptomatic relief and the proportion of patients experiencing relief within 4 hours of therapy. In the prophylaxis studies, C1 INH-nf 1000 U was given twice weekly, and efficacy was based on the frequency of attacks. RESULTS: Across 4 studies, 46 children received a total of 2237 C1 INH-nf infusions. The median time to the start of unequivocal relief in the acute-attack treatment study (n = 12) was 30 minutes with C1 INH-nf, compared with 2 hours for placebo. In the open-label extension (n = 22), clinical relief began within 4 hours of therapy in 89% of attacks. In the prophylaxis study (n = 4), the number of attacks was reduced by approximately 2-fold with C1 INH-nf compared with placebo. In the prophylaxis open-label extension (n = 23), the median monthly attack rate decreased from 3.0 before treatment to 0.39 with C1 INH-nf use. CONCLUSION: In children, C1 INH-nf was well tolerated, provided relief from symptoms of hereditary angioedema attacks, and reduced the rate of attacks.
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary/drug therapy , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/therapeutic use , Hereditary Angioedema Types I and II/drug therapy , Adolescent , Angioedemas, Hereditary/prevention & control , Child , Child, Preschool , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/administration & dosage , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/adverse effects , Filtration , Hereditary Angioedema Types I and II/complications , Humans , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this article is to discuss the importance of differentiating hereditary angioedema (HAE) from other types of angioedema, describe advances in HAE management, especially long-term prophylaxis (LTP), and offer practical recommendations for dermatologists. COMMENTARY: While HAE is rare, dermatologists are likely to encounter patients with this condition at some point over the course of their clinical practice due to the fact that HAE episodes typically involve subcutaneous swelling and sometimes erythema marginatum. HAE is characterized by recurrent episodes of painful and/or disabling bradykinin-mediated angioedema. Unfortunately, HAE is commonly mistaken for other conditions such as allergic and other mast cell-mediated angioedema, but has very different treatment requirements. Delayed diagnosis of HAE can result in years of avoidable debilitating symptoms, inappropriate treatment, potentially unnecessary invasive intervention, and reduced quality of life, and can be life threatening. Thus, timely identification of HAE is essential to ensure appropriate clinical management. Patients with HAE have either deficiency or dysfunction of the C1 inhibitor (C1INH) protein that inhibits proteases in the contact, complement, and fibrinolytic systems. Pathway-specific HAE treatments include C1INH replacement, kallikrein inhibitors, and bradykinin receptor antagonists. Treatment options for managing acute attacks include C1INH replacement (plasma-derived or recombinant formulations), icatibant (kallikrein inhibitor), and ecallantide (bradykinin B2 receptor antagonist). In the past 5 years, several new options for LTP have been approved, including a subcutaneous plasma-derived C1INH formulation and two kallikrein inhibitors (lanadelumab; berotralstat). Optimal management of HAE entails the creation of a comprehensive management plan that addresses both acute and long-term patient needs and includes input from an HAE expert and the patient/caregivers.
ABSTRACT
Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) due to C1 inhibitor (C1INH) deficiency is characterized by recurrent attacks of edema of the skin and mucosal tissues. Symptoms usually present during childhood (mean age at first attack, 10 years). Earlier symptom onset may predict a more severe disease course. Subcutaneous (SC) C1INH is indicated for routine prophylaxis to prevent HAE attacks in adolescents and adults. We analyzed the long-term efficacy of C1INH (SC) in subjects ≤17 years old treated in an open-label extension (OLE) of the pivotal phase III Clinical Study for Optimal Management of Preventing Angioedema with Low-Volume Subcutaneous C1 Inhibitor Replacement Therapy (COMPACT) trial. Methods: Eligible subjects (age ≥6 years, with ≥4 attacks over 2 consecutive months before entry into the OLE or placebo-controlled COMPACT trial) were treated with C1INH (SC) 40 or 60 IU/kg twice weekly for 52-140 weeks. Subgroup analyses by age (≤17 vs. >17 years) were performed for key efficacy endpoints. Results: Ten subjects were ≤17 years old [mean (range) age, 13.3 (8-16) years, 3 subjects <12 years old; exposure range, 51-133 weeks]. All 10 pediatric subjects experienced ≥50% reduction (mean, 93%) in number of attacks versus the prestudy period, with a 97% reduction in the median number of attacks/month (0.11). All subjects had <1 attack/4-week period and 4 had <1 attack/year (1 subject was attack free). No subject discontinued treatment due to a treatment-related adverse event. Conclusions: Data from pediatric subjects treated with C1INH (SC) for up to 2.55 years and adult subjects revealed similar efficacy. C1INH (SC) is effective and well tolerated as long-term prophylaxis in children, adolescents, and adults with HAE.
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary/drug therapy , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/administration & dosage , Adolescent , Angioedemas, Hereditary/diagnosis , Angioedemas, Hereditary/genetics , Child , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/adverse effects , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/genetics , Disease Progression , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Male , Severity of Illness Index , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: For prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks, replacement therapy with human C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) treatment is approved and available as intravenous [C1-INH(IV)] (Cinryze®) and subcutaneous [C1-INH(SC)] HAEGARDA® preparations. In the absence of a head-to-head comparative study of the two treatment modalities, an indirect comparison of data from 2 independent but similar clinical trials was undertaken. METHODS: Two similar randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies were identified which evaluated either C1-INH(SC) (COMPACT; NCT01912456; 16 weeks) or C1-INH(IV) (CHANGE; NCT01005888; 14 weeks) vs. placebo (on-demand treatment only) for routine prevention of HAE attacks. Individual patient data from each trial were used to conduct an indirect comparison of treatment effects. Attack reductions (absolute and percent of mean/median number of monthly HAE attacks reduction over placebo) were compared between the two C1-INH formulations at approved/recommended doses: C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg twice weekly (n = 45) and 1000 U of C1-INH(IV) twice weekly (n = 22). Point estimates were adjusted using mixed and quantile regression models that controlled for study design. RESULTS: The absolute mean monthly numbers of HAE attack reductions were 3.6 (95% CI 2.9, 4.2) for C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg vs. placebo and 2.3 (1.4, 3.3) for C1-INH(IV) vs. placebo; between-product difference, 1.3 (0.1, 2.4; P = 0.034). The mean percent reduction in monthly attack rate was significantly greater with C1-INH(SC) as compared with C1-INH(IV) (84% vs. 51%; P < 0.001). The percentages of subjects experiencing ≥ 50%, ≥ 70%, and ≥ 90% reductions in monthly HAE attack rates versus placebo were significantly higher with C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg as compared to C1-INH(IV) 1000 U (≥ 50% reduction: 91% vs. 50%, odds ratio [OR] = 10.33, P = 0.003; ≥ 70% reduction: 84% vs. 46%, OR = 6.19, P = 0.005; ≥ 90% reduction: 57% vs. 18%, OR = 6.04, P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of an indirect study comparison, this analysis suggests greater attack reduction with twice-weekly C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg as compared to twice-weekly C1-INH(IV) 1000 U for the routine prevention of HAE attacks.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Real-world data on usage and associated outcomes with hereditary angioedema (HAE)-specific medications introduced to the United States (US) market since 2009 are very limited. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate real-world treatment patterns of HAE-specific medications in the US and to assess their impact on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). This analysis used IMS PharMetrics PlusTM database records (2006-2014) of patients with HAE, ≥1 insurance claim for an HAE-specific medication, and continuous insurance enrollment for ≥3 months following the first HAE prescription claim. RESULTS: Of 631 total patients, 434 (68.8%) reported C1-INH(IV) use; 396 (62.8%) reported using ecallantide and/or icatibant. There were 306 episodes of prophylactic use of C1-INH(IV) (defined by continuous refills averaging ≥1500 IU/week for ≥13 weeks) in 155 patients; use of ≥1 on-demand rescue medication was implicated during 53% (163/306) of those episodes. Sixty-eight (20.2%) of 336 C1-INH(IV) users eligible for the HCRU analysis were hospitalized at least once, and 191 (56.8%) visited the emergency department (ED). Eighteen patients (5.4%) had a central venous access device (CVAD); of these, 5 (27.7%) required hospitalization and 14 (77.7%) had an ED visit. The adjusted relative risk of hospitalization and/or ED visits for patients with a CVAD was 2.6 (95% CI: 0.17, 39.23) compared to C1-INH(IV) users without a CVAD. CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread availability of modern HAE medications in the US, we identified a subset of patients requiring long-term prophylaxis who continue to be burdened by frequent rescue medication usage and/or complications related to the use of CVADs for intravenous HAE medication.
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary/drug therapy , Angioedemas, Hereditary/epidemiology , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/therapeutic use , Bradykinin/analogs & derivatives , Bradykinin/therapeutic use , Bradykinin B2 Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/therapeutic use , Complement Inactivating Agents/therapeutic use , Humans , Peptides/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema with C1-inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) impairs health-related quality of life (HRQoL). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess HRQoL outcomes in patients self-administering subcutaneous C1-INH (C1-INH[SC]; HAEGARDA) for routine prevention of HAE attacks. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of data from the placebo-controlled, crossover phase III COMPACT study (Clinical Studies for Optimal Management of Preventing Angioedema with Low-Volume Subcutaneous C1-Inhibitor Replacement Therapy). Ninety patients with C1-INH-HAE were randomized to 1 of 4 treatment sequences: C1-INH(SC) 40 or 60 IU/kg twice weekly for 16 weeks, preceded or followed by 16 weeks of twice weekly placebo injections. All HAE attacks were treated with open-label on-demand treatment as necessary. HRQoL assessments at week 14 (last visit) included the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI), and the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). RESULTS: Compared with placebo (on-demand treatment alone), treatment with twice weekly C1-INH(SC) (both doses combined) was associated with better EQ-5D visual analog scale general health, less HADS anxiety, less WPAI presenteeism, work productivity loss, and activity impairment, and greater TSQM effectiveness and overall treatment satisfaction. More patients self-reported a "good/excellent" response during routine prevention with C1-INH(SC) compared with on-demand only (placebo prophylaxis) management. For each HRQoL measure, a greater proportion of patients had a clinically meaningful improvement during C1-INH(SC) treatment compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with frequent HAE attacks, a treatment strategy of routine prevention with self-administered twice weekly C1-INH(SC) had a greater impact on improving multiple HAE-related HRQoL impairments, most notably anxiety and work productivity, compared with on-demand treatment alone (placebo prophylaxis).
Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary/prevention & control , Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein/administration & dosage , Quality of Life , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Angioedemas, Hereditary/epidemiology , Child , Cross-Over Studies , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Self Administration , Surveys and Questionnaires , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (human) is approved in the United States for routine prophylaxis of angioedema attacks in patients with hereditary angioedema, a rare disease caused by a deficiency of functional C1 inhibitor. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety of escalating doses of nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (human) in patients who were not adequately controlled on the indicated dose (1000 U every 3 or 4 days). METHODS: Eligible patients had >1 attack/month over the 3 months before the trial. Doses were escalated to 1500 U every 3 or 4 days for 12 weeks, at which point, the patients were evaluated. If treatment was successful (≤1 attack/mo) or at the investigator's discretion, the patients entered a 3-month follow-up period. The patients with an average of >1 attack/month were eligible for further escalation to 2000 U and then 2500 U. RESULTS: Twenty patients started at 1500 U; 13 were escalated to 2000 U, and 12 were escalated to 2500 U. Eighteen patients reported adverse events. Two patients reported 4 serious adverse events (cerebral cystic hygroma, laryngeal angioedema attack, anemia, and bile duct stone) that were considered by investigators to be unrelated to treatment. Notably, there were no systemic thrombotic events or discontinuations due to adverse events. Fourteen patients were treated successfully (70%), continued to the follow-up period at the investigator's discretion, or experienced a reduction in attacks of >1.0/month. CONCLUSIONS: Dose escalation of nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (human) up to 2500 U was well tolerated and reduced attack frequency in the majority of patients.