Lentiviral haematopoietic stem-cell gene therapy for early-onset metachromatic leukodystrophy: long-term results from a non-randomised, open-label, phase 1/2 trial and expanded access.

BACKGROUND: Effective treatment for metachromatic leukodystrophy (MLD) remains a substantial unmet medical need. In this study we investigated the safety and efficacy of atidarsagene autotemcel (arsa-cel) in patients with MLD. METHODS: This study is an integrated analysis of results from a prospective, non-randomised, phase 1/2 clinical study and expanded-access frameworks. 29 paediatric patients with pre-symptomatic or early-symptomatic early-onset MLD with biochemical and molecular confirmation of diagnosis were treated with arsa-cel, a gene therapy containing an autologous haematopoietic stem and progenitor cell (HSPC) population transduced ex vivo with a lentiviral vector encoding human arylsulfatase A (ARSA) cDNA, and compared with an untreated natural history (NHx) cohort of 31 patients with early-onset MLD, matched by age and disease subtype. Patients were treated and followed up at Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy. The coprimary efficacy endpoints were an improvement of more than 10% in total gross motor function measure score at 2 years after treatment in treated patients compared with controls, and change from baseline of total peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) ARSA activity at 2 years after treatment compared with values before treatment. This phase 1/2 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01560182. FINDINGS: At the time of analyses, 26 patients treated with arsa-cel were alive with median follow-up of 3·16 years (range 0·64-7·51). Two patients died due to disease progression and one due to a sudden event deemed unlikely to be related to treatment. After busulfan conditioning, all arsa-cel treated patients showed sustained multilineage engraftment of genetically modified HSPCs. ARSA activity in PBMCs was significantly increased above baseline 2 years after treatment by a mean 18·7-fold (95% CI 8·3-42·2; p<0·0001) in patients with the late-infantile variant and 5·7-fold (2·6-12·4; p<0·0001) in patients with the early-juvenile variant. Mean differences in total scores for gross motor function measure between treated patients and age-matched and disease subtype-matched NHx patients 2 years after treatment were significant for both patients with late-infantile MLD (66% [95% CI 48·9-82·3]) and early-juvenile MLD (42% [12·3-71·8]). Most treated patients progressively acquired motor skills within the predicted range of healthy children or had stabilised motor performance (maintaining the ability to walk). Further, most displayed normal cognitive development and prevention or delay of central and peripheral demyelination and brain atrophy throughout follow-up; treatment benefits were particularly apparent in patients treated before symptom onset. The infusion was well tolerated and there was no evidence of abnormal clonal proliferation or replication-competent lentivirus. All patients had at least one grade 3 or higher adverse event; most were related to conditioning or to background disease. The only adverse event related to arsa-cel was the transient development of anti-ARSA antibodies in four patients, which did not affect clinical outcomes. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with arsa-cel resulted in sustained, clinically relevant benefits in children with early-onset MLD by preserving cognitive function and motor development in most patients, and slowing demyelination and brain atrophy. FUNDING: Orchard Therapeutics, Fondazione Telethon, and GlaxoSmithKline.

Recommendations for benefit-risk assessment methodologies and visual representations.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to draw on the practical experience from the PROTECT BR case studies and make recommendations regarding the application of a number of methodologies and visual representations for benefit-risk assessment. METHODS: Eight case studies based on the benefit-risk balance of real medicines were used to test various methodologies that had been identified from the literature as having potential applications in benefit-risk assessment. Recommendations were drawn up based on the results of the case studies. RESULTS: A general pathway through the case studies was evident, with various classes of methodologies having roles to play at different stages. Descriptive and quantitative frameworks were widely used throughout to structure problems, with other methods such as metrics, estimation techniques and elicitation techniques providing ways to incorporate technical or numerical data from various sources. Similarly, tree diagrams and effects tables were universally adopted, with other visualisations available to suit specific methodologies or tasks as required. Every assessment was found to follow five broad stages: (i) Planning, (ii) Evidence gathering and data preparation, (iii) Analysis, (iv) Exploration and (v) Conclusion and dissemination. CONCLUSIONS: Adopting formal, structured approaches to benefit-risk assessment was feasible in real-world problems and facilitated clear, transparent decision-making. Prior to this work, no extensive practical application and appraisal of methodologies had been conducted using real-world case examples, leaving users with limited knowledge of their usefulness in the real world. The practical guidance provided here takes us one step closer to a harmonised approach to benefit-risk assessment from multiple perspectives.

Randomized study of dual versus single ritonavir-enhanced protease inhibitors for protease inhibitor-experienced patients with HIV.

PURPOSE: To compare activity and safety of a regimen containing lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) + fosamprenavir (FPV) to regimens with LPV/r or FPV + r and to test the hypothesis that a ritonavir-enhanced dual protease inhibitor (PI) regimen has better antiviral activity. METHOD: This study was a multicenter, open-label, randomized study. HIV-infected adults with prior PI failure were selectively randomized based on prior PI experience to either LPV/r, FPV + r, or LPV/r + FPV. All patients received tenofovir DF and 1 to 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar across arms. Study enrollment and follow-up were stopped early (N = 56) because pharmacokinetic analyses showed significantly lower LPV and FPV exposures in the dual-PI arm. At Week 24, proportions achieving >1 log10 decline in HIV RNA or <50 copies/mL in the dual-PI versus single-PI arms combined were 75% vs. 61% in intent-to-treat (ITT, p = .17) and 100% vs. 64% in as-treated (AT) analyses (p = .02), respectively. Median CD4+ T cell/mm3 increases were 81 vs. 41 (ITT, p = .4) and 114 vs. 43 (AT, p = .08), respectively. Clinical events and toxicity rates were not different between arms. CONCLUSION: The trial was unable to show a difference between dual versus single PIs in ITT analyses but favored dual PIs in AT analyses.

Phase IIIb safety results from an expanded-access protocol of talimogene laherparepvec for patients with unresected, stage IIIB-IVM1c melanoma.

Talimogene laherparepvec is a genetically modified herpes simplex virus-1-based oncolytic immunotherapy for the local treatment of unresectable cutaneous, subcutaneous, and nodal tumors in patients with melanoma recurrence following surgery. We aim to describe the safety of talimogene laherparepvec. Intralesional talimogene laherparepvec was administered at less than or equal to 4 ml×10 PFU/ml at protocol day 1, then less than or equal to 4 ml×10 PFU/ml 21 days later, and then every 14 days. Treatment continued until complete response, absence of injectable tumors, progressive disease, intolerance, or US Food and Drug Administration approval. Adverse events were graded during and 30 days after the end of treatment. Lesions suspected to have herpetic origin were tested for talimogene laherparepvec DNA by quantitative PCR (qPCR). Between September 2014 and October 2015, 41 patients were enrolled with stage IIIB (22%), IIIC (37%), IVM1a (34%), IVM1b (5%), and IVM1c (2%) melanoma. The median age was 72 (range: 32-96) years and 54% of the patients were men. Patients had an ECOG performance status of 0 (68%) or 1 (32%). The median treatment duration was 13.1 (3.0-41.1) weeks. Treatment-related adverse events of greater than or equal to grade 3 were reported in three (7.3%) patients and included vomiting, upper abdominal pain, chills, hyperhidrosis, nausea, pyrexia, and wound infection. Suspected herpetic lesions were swabbed in five (12%) patients. One of the five tested positive for talimogene laherparepvec DNA by qPCR, but this lesion had been injected previously with talimogene laherparepvec. During the study, five patients completed treatment because of complete response per investigators. In the clinical practice setting, talimogene laherparepvec has a safety profile comparable to that observed in previous clinical trials. Talimogene laherparepvec (IMLYGIC) is now approved in the US, European Union, and Australia.

Combining fosamprenavir with lopinavir/ritonavir substantially reduces amprenavir and lopinavir exposure: ACTG protocol A5143 results.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate fosamprenavir/lopinavir (LPV)/ritonavir (RTV), fosamprenavir/RTV, or LPV/RTV in antiretroviral treatment-experienced patients. Lack of drug interaction data prompted a pharmacokinetic substudy to minimize subject risk. DESIGN: Multi-center, open-label, selectively randomized, steady-state pharmacokinetic study in HIV-infected subjects. METHODS: A planned independent interim review occurred after at least eight subjects were randomized to each arm. Subjects received twice daily LPV/RTV 400/100 mg (arm A; n = 8); fosamprenavir/RTV 700/100 mg (arm B; n = 8) or LPV/RTV/fosamprenavir 400/100/700 mg (arm C; n = 17). Plasma samples were collected over 12 h between study weeks 2 and 4. Pharmacokinetic parameters were compared based on a one-sided t-test on log-transformed data with a Peto stopping boundary (P < 0.001). RESULTS: Amprenavir mean area under the curve over 12 h (AUC0-12 h) and concentration at 12 h (C12 h) (microg/ml) were, respectively, 42.7 microg x h/ml (range, 33.1-55.1) and 2.4 microg/ml (range, 1.4-3.2) in arm B and 17.4 microg x h/ml (range, 4.6-41.3) and 0.9 microg/ml (range, 0.2-2.7) in arm C: geometric mean ratio (GMR) arm C:B was 0.36 [99.9% upper confidence boundary (UCB), 0.64] and 0.31 (99.9% h UCB, 0.61), respectively (P < or = 0.0001). Lopinavir AUC0-12 h and C12 h were, respectively, 95.3 microg x h/ml (range, 60.3-119.3) and 6.3 microg/ml (range, 2.2-9.2) in arm A and 54.4 microg x h/ml (range, 23.5-112.2) and 3.0 microg/ml (range, 0.4-7.9) in arm C: GMR arm C:A of 0.52 (99.9% UCB, 0.89) and 0.39 (99.9% UCB, 0.98), respectively (P < or = 0.0008). Ritonavir exposure was not significantly different between arms. CONCLUSION: APV and LPV exposures are significantly reduced using LPV/RTV/fosamprenavir, possibly increasing the risk of virologic failure. Consequently, A5143 was closed to enrollment.

A randomized trial of treatment interruption before optimized antiretroviral therapy for persons with drug-resistant HIV: 48-week virologic results of ACTG A5086.

BACKGROUND: The role of structured treatment interruption (STI) before optimized antiretroviral therapy (ART) in patients with drug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) is uncertain. METHODS: AIDS Clinical Trial Group protocol A5086 was a prospective trial of 41 patients with multiple drug class-resistant HIV who were randomized to undergo a 16-week STI followed by optimized ART (STI) or immediate optimized ART (no STI). The primary end point was the proportion of subjects with HIV-1 RNA loads <400 copies/mL 48 weeks after randomization. RESULTS: Of 39 evaluable patients, 4 (19%) in the STI arm and 6 (33%) in the no STI arm had HIV-1 RNA loads <400 copies/mL at 48 weeks (P=.44). Median changes from baseline in CD4+ cell counts and HIV-1 RNA loads were similar for both arms. Standard genotypes at the end of STI showed nearly complete reversion to wild-type virus in a minority of patients (n=5; 28%). Virus with 3-drug class resistance reemerged even when ART included only 1 or 2 drug classes. Single-genome sequencing showed that each genome encoded resistance mutations for 3 drug classes. CONCLUSIONS: A 16-week STI before optimized ART did not improve virologic response. Genetic analyses strongly suggest that virologic failure resulted from the reemergence of virus present before STI that encoded 3-drug class resistance on the same genome.