Long-term safety of mepolizumab for the treatment of hypereosinophilic syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Hypereosinophilic syndromes (HESs) are chronic disorders that require long-term therapy to suppress eosinophilia and clinical manifestations. Corticosteroids are usually effective, yet many patients become corticosteroid refractory or develop corticosteroid toxicity. Mepolizumab, a humanized monoclonal anti-IL-5 antibody, showed corticosteroid-sparing effects in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of FIP1L1/PDGFRA-negative, corticosteroid-responsive subjects with HESs. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated long-term safety and efficacy of mepolizumab (750 mg) in HES. METHODS: MHE100901 is an open-label extension study. The primary end point was the frequency of adverse events (AEs). Optimal dosing frequency, corticosteroid-sparing effect of mepolizumab, and development of antimepolizumab antibodies were also explored. RESULTS: Seventy-eight subjects received 1 to 66 mepolizumab infusions each (including mepolizumab infusions received in the placebo-controlled trial). Mean exposure was 251 weeks (range, 4-302 weeks). The most common dosing interval was 9 to 12 weeks. The incidence of AEs was 932 events per 100 subject-years in the first year, declining to 461 events per 100 subject-years after 48 months. Serious AEs, including 1 death, were reported by the investigator as possibly due to mepolizumab in 3 subjects. The median daily prednisone dose decreased from 20.0 to 0 mg in the first 24 weeks. The median average daily dose for all subjects over the course of the study was 1.8 mg. Sixty-two percent of subjects were prednisone free without other HES medications for ≥ 12 consecutive weeks. No neutralizing antibodies were detected. Twenty-four subjects withdrew before study completion for death (n = 4), lack of efficacy (n = 6), or other reasons. CONCLUSION: Mepolizumab was well tolerated and effective as a long-term corticosteroid-sparing agent in PDGFRA-negative HES.

Treatment of patients with the hypereosinophilic syndrome with mepolizumab.

BACKGROUND: The hypereosinophilic syndrome is a group of diseases characterized by persistent blood eosinophilia, defined as more than 1500 cells per microliter with end-organ involvement and no recognized secondary cause. Although most patients have a response to corticosteroids, side effects are common and can lead to considerable morbidity. METHODS: We conducted an international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of an anti-interleukin-5 monoclonal antibody, mepolizumab, in patients with the hypereosinophilic syndrome. Patients were negative for the FIP1L1-PDGFRA fusion gene and required prednisone monotherapy, 20 to 60 mg per day, to maintain a stable clinical status and a blood eosinophil count of less than 1000 per microliter. Patients received either intravenous mepolizumab or placebo while the prednisone dose was tapered. The primary end point was the reduction of the prednisone dose to 10 mg or less per day for 8 or more consecutive weeks. RESULTS: The primary end point was reached in 84% of patients in the mepolizumab group, as compared with 43% of patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 2.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.59 to 5.26; P<0.001) with no increase in clinical activity of the hypereosinophilic syndrome. A blood eosinophil count of less than 600 per microliter for 8 or more consecutive weeks was achieved in 95% of patients receiving mepolizumab, as compared with 45% of patients receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 3.53; 95% CI, 1.94 to 6.45; P<0.001). Serious adverse events occurred in seven patients receiving mepolizumab (14 events, including one death; mean [+/-SD] duration of exposure, 6.7+/-1.9 months) and in five patients receiving placebo (7 events; mean duration of exposure, 4.3+/-2.6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that treatment with mepolizumab, an agent designed to target eosinophils, can result in corticosteroid-sparing for patients negative for FIP1L1-PDGFRA who have the hypereosinophilic syndrome. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00086658 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Placebo response in two long-term randomized psoriasis studies that were negative for rosiglitazone.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has suggested that the thiazolidinedione rosiglitazone may possess anti-psoriatic activity. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of rosiglitazone with that of placebo in the treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis. METHODS: Two large-scale, randomized, double-blind, multicenter studies (study A, n = 1563; study B, n = 1032) were conducted over 52 weeks (plus optional 44 weeks safety extension) in an outpatient setting. The subjects (aged 18-75 years) had moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis affecting >or=10% body surface area (BSA) with plaques of any elevation above normal-appearing skin (or >or=6% BSA involvement with marked elevation) and had not used phototherapy during the previous month or thiazolidinediones within the previous 3 months. Rosiglitazone was administered as 2, 4, or 8 mg tablets once daily. The main outcome measure was the proportion of subjects achieving >or=75% improvement from baseline in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 26. RESULTS: Rosiglitazone was well tolerated but no more effective than placebo for moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. However, there was a large placebo response unrelated to concomitant rescue medication. Interestingly, subjects had been advised to expect a long period before onset of action. At week 26 and across both studies for subjects receiving placebo, the PASI 75 was 9% (48/506) and the PASI 50 (proportion of subjects who achieved at least 50% improvement from baseline) was 27% (135/506). In addition, few subjects withdrew from placebo or rosiglitazone treatment because of 'lack of efficacy' and the majority persisted in the year-long study. CONCLUSION: While these large-scale, robust studies demonstrated that rosiglitazone is not active in psoriasis, they also showed that for a large proportion of subjects receiving placebo, the expectation of a successful treatment, the favorable adverse effect profile of the drug, and the supportive environment of a clinical study conferred beneficial effects. These results may have implications for the design of future placebo-controlled studies in patients with psoriasis.

Effects of nabumetone, celecoxib, and ibuprofen on blood pressure control in hypertensive patients on angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs interfere with certain antihypertensive therapies. In a double-blind study, 385 hypertensive patients stabilized on an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor were treated with nabumetone, celecoxib, ibuprofen, or placebo for 4 weeks. Ibuprofen caused significantly greater increases in systolic (P < .001) and diastolic (P < .01) blood pressures (BPs) compared to placebo, but not nabumetone or celecoxib. The proportion of patients with systolic BP increases of clinical concern at end point was significantly higher (P < .001) for the ibuprofen group (16.7%; 15 of 90), but not for the nabumetone group (5.5%; 5 of 91) or the celecoxib group (4.6%; 4 of 87) compared to the placebo group (1.1%; 1 of 91).

An open label study to establish dosing recommendations for nabumetone in juvenile rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Once-a-day dosing with nabumetone has been shown to be effective in adults with rheumatoid arthritis. We establish dosing recommendations for nabumetone in children and adolescents with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (JRA). METHODS: An open label, multicenter study was conducted in children with JRA aged 2-16 years, weighing > 14 kg, and requiring nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) for control of symptoms. NSAID were discontinued one day prior to study initiation to minimize disease flare. Patients received nabumetone 30 mg/kg once daily (as a tablet or a slurry) for 12 weeks. Efficacy assessment evaluations were performed at Weeks 1, 3, 6, and 12, based on the mean change from baseline at the study endpoint for 6 standard rheumatology variables. An overall assessment of efficacy was determined based on the percentage of patients who did not experience a flare, using the 6 rheumatology variables. Since this was an open label study, only descriptive statistics were obtained for efficacy variables. Routine safety assessments were completed for all patients. RESULTS: In total, 99 patients with JRA were enrolled and 89 completed the study; mean age was 9.2 years. The proportion of nabumetone treated patients with no flare in disease activity during the nabumetone treatment period was 92/99 (93%). Improvement was noted in each efficacy assessment, although statistical evaluations were not performed. The adverse event profile was similar to that reported for nabumetone in adults with RA. CONCLUSION: Nabumetone 30 mg/kg/day (up to 2000 mg/day) demonstrated a safe profile with no loss of efficacy compared to previous treatment in children with JRA. The dose can be administered by suspending tablets in warm water to create a slurry.