Efficacy and Safety of Rituximab-Based Treatments in Angioedema With Acquired C1-Inhibitor Deficiency.

BACKGROUND: Angioedema (AE) due to acquired C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) deficiency (AAE-C1-INH) is related to excessive consumption of C1-INH or to anti-C1-INH antibodies, and is frequently associated with lymphoproliferative syndromes or monoclonal gammopathies. Standard of care for prophylactic treatment in this condition is not established. Rituximab may be effective to prevent attacks, especially if the lymphoid hemopathy is controlled, but data are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy of rituximab in AAE-C1-INH. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study was carried out in France, including patients with AAE-C1-INH treated with rituximab between April 2005 and July 2019. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients with AAE-C1-INH were included in the study, and 23 of them had an anti-C1-INH antibody. A lymphoid malignancy was identified in 39 patients, and a monoclonal gammopathy in 9. There was no associated condition in 7 cases. Thirty patients received rituximab alone or in association with chemotherapy (n = 25). Among 51 patients with available follow-up, 34 patients were in clinical remission and 17 patients had active AE after a median follow-up of 3.9 years (interquartile range, 1.5-7.7). Three patients died. The presence of anti-C1-INH antibodies was associated with a lower probability of AE remission (hazard ratio, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.12-0.67]; P = .004). Relapse was less frequent in patients with lymphoma (risk ratio, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.09-0.80]; P = .019) and in patients treated with rituximab and chemotherapy (risk ratio, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.12-0.79]; P = .014). CONCLUSIONS: Rituximab is an efficient and well-tolerated therapeutic option in AE, especially in lymphoid malignancies and in the absence of detectable anti-C1-INH antibodies.

Long-term prophylaxis in hereditary angioedema management: Current practices in France and unmet needs.

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is characterized by unpredictable and potentially life-threatening attacks of cutaneous and submucosal swelling. Over the past decade, new agents, based on a better understanding of the underlying biologic mechanisms of HAE, have changed the face of long-term prophylaxis (LTP). Objective: The objective was to describe current practices and unmet needs with regard to LTP for HAE in expert centers in France. Methods: The study was conducted in France in 2020. Based on their experience with patients with HAE who had visited their center at least once in the past 3 years, physicians from 25 centers who are expert in the management of HAE were requested to fill in a questionnaire that encapsulated their active patient list, criteria for prescribing LTP, and medications used. They were asked about potential unmet needs with currently available therapies. They were asked to express their expectations with regard to the future of HAE management. Results: Analysis was restricted to 20 centers that had an active patient file and agreed to participate. There were 714 patients with C1 inhibitor (C1-INH) deficiency, of whom 423 (59.2%) were treated with LTP. Altered quality of life triggered the decision to start LTP, as did the frequency and severity of attacks. Ongoing LTP included androgens (28.4%), progestins (25.8%), lanadelumab (25.3%), tranexamic acid (14.2%), intravenous C1-INHs (5.6%), and recombinant C1-INH (0.7%). Twenty-nine percent of the patents with LTP were considered to still have unmet needs. Physicians' concerns varied among therapies: poor tolerability for androgens and progestins, a lack of efficacy for tranexamic acid and progestins, dosage form, and high costs for C1-INHs and lanadelumab. Physicians' expectations encompassed more-efficacious and better-tolerated medications, easier treatment administration for the sake of improved quality of life of patients, and less-expensive therapies. Conclusion: Despite the recent enrichment of the therapeutic armamentarium for LTP, physicians still expressed unmet needs with currently available therapies.

Long-term prophylaxis with lanadelumab for HAE: authorization for temporary use in France.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is associated with a heavy burden of illness. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate use of lanadelumab in a French Authorization for Temporary Use (ATU) program. METHODS: ATU requests were made between October 12, 2018, and March 13, 2019; patients were followed through September 23, 2019. At entry, patients received lanadelumab 300 mg every 2 weeks. HAE attack characteristics were evaluated at day (D) 0 and months (M) 3 and 6. Patients completed the Angioedema Quality of Life (AE-QoL) questionnaire at initiation and monthly and the Angioedema Activity Score questionnaire daily in 28 day cycles (AAS28). RESULTS: In total, 77 patients received ≥ 1 lanadelumab dose; 69 had ≥ 1 quarterly follow-up visit (analyzed population). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) lanadelumab exposure was 240.4 (53.7) days. Lanadelumab dose was modified in 12 patients (mostly to every 4 weeks). For the analyzed population, compared with attacks/month (mean [SD]) within 6 months before ATU (2.68 [2.54]), fewer attacks occurred between initiation and first visit (0.16 [0.42]; P < 0.001) or last visit (0.16 [0.42]; P < 0.001); D15 and last visit (0.15 [0.41]); and D70 and last visit (0.17 [0.70]). AE-QoL total and domain scores were significantly higher at initiation versus M3 and M6; 55% and 65% of patients, respectively, achieved a minimal clinically important difference from D0 to M3 and D0 to M6. Proportion of patients with AAS28 of 0 was higher during M3 (90%) and M6 (83%) than initiation (59%). The most frequently reported adverse events included headache (7.3%) and injection site pain (6.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Lanadelumab reduced attack rates, improved quality of life, and was generally well tolerated.