Efficacy and safety of dupilumab with concomitant topical corticosteroids in Japanese pediatric patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in Japanese patients aged ≥6 months to <18 years old with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis not adequately controlled with existing therapies. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study, patients received dupilumab (n = 30) or placebo (n = 32) with concomitant topical corticosteroids for 16 weeks, then all patients received dupilumab from 16 to 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with ≥75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score from baseline (EASI-75) to Week 16. Key secondary endpoints included changes in EASI score, proportion of patients with investigator global assessment (IGA) scores of 0/1, and changes in worst daily itch numerical rating scale (NRS) scores (evaluated in patients aged ≥6 to <12 years [n = 35]). RESULTS: At Week 16, more patients achieved EASI-75 with dupilumab than placebo (43.3% vs 18.8%; P = 0.0304), and the least squares mean (LSM) difference in percent change in EASI scores at Week 16 of dupilumab vs placebo was -39.4% (P = 0.0003). However, no significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving IGA scores of 0/1 at Week 16 with dupilumab versus placebo were seen (10.0% vs 9.4%; P = 0.8476). The percent change in worst daily itch NRS scores at Week 16 was higher with dupilumab (LSM difference: -33.3%; nominal P = 0.0117). Dupilumab was well tolerated; no new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab showed consistent efficacy and was well tolerated in Japanese patients aged ≥6 months to <18 years with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis previously insufficiently controlled with existing therapies.

Dupilumab for COPD with Blood Eosinophil Evidence of Type 2 Inflammation.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation, has shown efficacy and safety in a phase 3 trial involving patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and type 2 inflammation and an elevated risk of exacerbation. Whether the findings would be confirmed in a second phase 3 trial was unclear. METHODS: In a phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned patients with COPD who had a blood eosinophil count of 300 cells per microliter or higher to receive subcutaneous dupilumab (300 mg) or placebo every 2 weeks. The primary end point was the annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations. Key secondary end points, analyzed in a hierarchical manner to adjust for multiplicity, included the changes from baseline in the prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at weeks 12 and 52 and in the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating better quality of life) total score at week 52. RESULTS: A total of 935 patients underwent randomization: 470 were assigned to the dupilumab group and 465 to the placebo group. As prespecified, the primary analysis was performed after a positive interim analysis and included all available data for the 935 participants, 721 of whom were included in the analysis at week 52. The annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.06) with dupilumab and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.60) with placebo; the rate ratio as compared with placebo was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.82; P<0.001). The prebronchodilator FEV1 increased from baseline to week 12 with dupilumab (least-squares mean change, 139 ml [95% CI, 105 to 173]) as compared with placebo (least-squares mean change, 57 ml [95% CI, 23 to 91]), with a significant least-squares mean difference at week 12 of 82 ml (P<0.001) and at week 52 of 62 ml (P = 0.02). No significant between-group difference was observed in the change in SGRQ scores from baseline to 52 weeks. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups and consistent with the established profile of dupilumab. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COPD and type 2 inflammation as indicated by elevated blood eosinophil counts, dupilumab was associated with fewer exacerbations and better lung function than placebo. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; NOTUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04456673.).

Study Design of a Phase 2/3 Randomized Controlled Trial of Dupilumab in Adults with Bullous Pemphigoid: LIBERTY-BP ADEPT.

BACKGROUND: Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is a rare, autoimmune, blistering skin disease associated with high disease burden, profoundly decreased quality of life and increased morbidity. Emerging evidence supports an important role for type 2 inflammation in disease pathogenesis. Current management relies on topical and/or systemic corticosteroids, non-selective immunosuppressants and antibiotics with anti-inflammatory properties, which are all limited by side effects and toxicities. Therefore, targeted, efficacious and safe therapies are needed. Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation. Several reports of patients successfully treated with dupilumab have been published; however, dupilumab has not been formally assessed in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. OBJECTIVES: We report the design of LIBERTY-BP ADEPT, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in adults with BP. METHODS: LIBERTY-BP ADEPT comprises a 35-day screening, 52-week treatment and 12-week follow-up period. Approximately 98 adults aged 18-90 years with moderate-to-severe BP are being enrolled at 51 sites on 4 continents and randomized 1:1 to subcutaneous dupilumab or placebo every 2 weeks. All participants will receive concomitant oral corticosteroids (OCS). PLANNED OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients achieving complete remission off steroid therapy at week 36. Key secondary endpoints include total cumulative OCS dose to week 36, percent change and proportion of patients with ≥ 4-point reduction in the weekly average of daily Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale from baseline to week 36 and percent change in Bullous Pemphigoid Area Index score from baseline to week 36. CONCLUSION: The trial results will provide evidence on whether the efficacy and safety of dupilumab support its use as a potential novel treatment approach for BP and will provide new insights into the role of type 2 inflammation in BP pathogenesis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04206553.

Differential modulation of allergic rhinitis nasal transcriptome by dupilumab and allergy immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Nasal epithelial cells are important regulators of barrier function and immune signaling; however, in allergic rhinitis (AR) these functions can be disrupted by inflammatory mediators. We aimed to better discern AR disease mechanisms using transcriptome data from nasal brushing samples from individuals with and without AR. METHODS: Data were drawn from a feasibility study of individuals with and without AR to Timothy grass and from a clinical trial evaluating 16 weeks of treatment with the following: dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds interleukin (IL)-4Rα and inhibits type 2 inflammation by blocking signaling of both IL-4/IL-13; subcutaneous immunotherapy with Timothy grass (SCIT), which inhibits allergic responses through pleiotropic effects; SCIT + dupilumab; or placebo. Using nasal brushing samples from these studies, we defined distinct gene signatures in nasal tissue of AR disease and after nasal allergen challenge (NAC) and assessed how these signatures were modulated by study drug(s). RESULTS: Treatment with dupilumab (normalized enrichment score [NES] = -1.73, p = .002) or SCIT + dupilumab (NES = -2.55, p < .001), but not SCIT alone (NES = +1.16, p = .107), significantly repressed the AR disease signature. Dupilumab (NES = -2.55, p < .001), SCIT (NES = -2.99, p < .001), and SCIT + dupilumab (NES = -3.15, p < .001) all repressed the NAC gene signature. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate type 2 inflammation is an important contributor to the pathophysiology of AR disease and that inhibition of the type 2 pathway with dupilumab may normalize nasal tissue gene expression.

Dupilumab treatment improves signs, symptoms, quality of life, and work productivity in patients with atopic hand and foot dermatitis: Results from a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite high disease burden, systemic treatment options for patients with atopic hand and/or foot dermatitis (H/F AD) are limited. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate efficacy and safety of dupilumab in H/F AD using specific instruments for assessing disease severity on hands and feet. METHODS: In this multicenter phase 3 trial, adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe H/F AD were randomized to dupilumab monotherapy (regimen approved for generalized AD), or matched placebo. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients achieving Hand and Foot Investigator's Global Assessment score 0 or 1 at week 16. Secondary prespecified endpoints assessed the severity and extent of signs, symptom intensity (itch, pain), quality of life, and sleep. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients (adults = 106, adolescents = 27) were randomized to dupilumab (n = 67) or placebo (n = 66). At week 16, significantly more patients receiving dupilumab (n = 27) than placebo (n = 11) achieved Hand and Foot Investigator's Global Assessment score 0 or 1 (40.3% vs 16.7%; P = .003). All other prespecified endpoints were met. Safety was consistent with the known AD dupilumab profile. LIMITATIONS: Short-term, 16-week treatment period. CONCLUSION: Dupilumab monotherapy resulted in significant improvements across different domains of H/F AD with acceptable safety, supporting dupilumab as a systemic treatment approach for this often difficult to treat condition.

Assessment of long-term safety and efficacy of dupilumab in children with asthma (LIBERTY ASTHMA EXCURSION): an open-label extension study.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab efficacy and safety in children aged 6-11 years with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma were shown in the VOYAGE study-a 52-week, multinational, multicentre, phase 3 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of dupilumab in children with moderate-to-severe asthma who previously participated in the VOYAGE study. METHODS: 365 of 408 children with moderate-to-severe asthma from VOYAGE enrolled in EXCURSION, a 52 week, open-label extension study conducted at 70 centres across 17 countries. 240 children continued with add-on dupilumab (dosed according to bodyweight: 100 mg for those weighing ≤30 kg and 200 mg for those weighing more than 30 kg at EXCURSION baseline) once every 2 weeks administered by subcutaneous injection (dupilumab/dupilumab group) and 125 children on placebo during VOYAGE initiated dupilumab (100 or 200 mg, according to bodyweight), once every 2 weeks administered by subcutaneous injection (placebo/dupilumab group). Following a protocol amendment, for a subset of children weighing 30 kg or less, the dose was changed to 300 mg once every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint for the open-label extension study was the number and proportion of patients with any treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) during the 52-week study period in the overall population (defined as children aged 6-11 years old with moderate-to-severe asthma who previously completed VOYAGE). Statistical analyses were descriptive. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03560466; EXCURSION). FINDINGS: Children who completed VOYAGE were eligible to enrol in EXCURSION between June 21, 2018 and Aug 18, 2020. During EXCURSION, the safety profile and proportion of patients reporting TEAEs were consistent with those observed during the parent study (VOYAGE). In the overall population, 232 (63·6%) of 365 patients experienced at least one TEAE (dupilumab/dupilumab: 147 [61·3%]; placebo/dupilumab: 85 [68·0%]). The most frequently reported TEAEs were nasopharyngitis, pharyngitis, and upper respiratory tract infections. INTERPRETATION: In EXCURSION, long-term treatment with dupilumab was well tolerated with an acceptable safety profile. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

Dupilumab demonstrated efficacy and was well tolerated regardless of prior use of swallowed topical corticosteroids in adolescent and adult patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis: a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 LIBERTY EoE TREET study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of long-term dupilumab on histological, symptomatic and endoscopic aspects of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) in adolescent and adult patients with and without prior use of swallowed topical corticosteroids (STC) or prior inadequate response, intolerance or contraindication to STC. DESIGN: Pre-specified analysis of data from the phase 3 LIBERTY EoE TREET study on patients who received dupilumab 300 mg once a week or placebo for 24 weeks (W24) in parts A and B, and an additional 28 weeks (W52) in part C. Patients were categorised as with/without prior STC use and with/without inadequate/intolerance/contraindication to STC. The proportion of patients achieving ≤6 eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf), absolute change in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score, mean change in Endoscopic Reference Score and Histologic Scoring System grade/stage scores were assessed for each subgroup. RESULTS: Regardless of prior STC use, dupilumab increased the proportion of patients achieving ≤6 eos/hpf and improved DSQ score versus placebo at W24, with improvements maintained or improved at W52. The DSQ score and the proportion of patients achieving ≤6 eos/hpf after switching from placebo to dupilumab at W24 were similar to those observed in the dupilumab group at W24, regardless of prior STC use or inadequate/intolerance/contraindication to STC. Improvements in other outcomes with dupilumab were similar in patients with/without prior STC use or inadequate/intolerance/contraindication to STC. CONCLUSION: Dupilumab 300 mg once a week demonstrated efficacy and was well tolerated in patients with EoE regardless of prior STC use or inadequate response, intolerance and/or contraindication to STC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03633617.

Efficacy and safety of dupilumab up to 52 weeks in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis (LIBERTY EoE TREET study): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term management options that specifically target the underlying inflammation in eosinophilic oesophagitis are needed. Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)-4/IL-13; we aimed to assess its long-term efficacy and safety in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis enrolled in part B of the LIBERTY EoE TREET study who continued to part C (part B-C). METHODS: LIBERTY EoE TREET was a three-part, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study conducted at 65 hospitals and private clinics across ten countries in Australia, Canada, Europe, and the USA. Adults or adolescents (aged ≥12 years) with a diagnosis of eosinophilic oesophagitis by endoscopic biopsy (peak oesophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count ≥15 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]) from at least one oesophageal region despite 8 weeks of high-dose proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and a Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score of at least 10 at baseline were eligible. In part B, patients were randomly (1:1:1) assigned to receive subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg either weekly or every 2 weeks or weekly placebo until week 24. Randomisation was done centrally by interactive voice response system/web response system (IVRS/IWRS) in blocks and stratified according to age (<18 years vs ≥18 years) and use of PPI at randomisation (yes vs no). Patients, study sponsors, and investigators involved in the study were masked to the randomisation outcome. Eligible patients who received placebo in part B and continued to part C were randomly assigned again (1:1) to either weekly dupilumab (placebo/weekly dupilumab group) or dupilumab every 2 weeks (placebo/dupilumab every 2 weeks), with matching placebo alternating with dupilumab doses. Patients who were randomly assigned to one of the dupilumab dose regimens in part B remained on the same regimen in part C for an additional 28 weeks (weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group or dupilumab every 2 weeks/dupilumab every 2 weeks group). Treatment assignment in part C was managed by IVRS/IWRS to maintain blinding of treatment assignment in part B. The primary endpoint of this trial has been reported; here, we report the week 52 outcomes of part B-C. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the part C safety-analysis set, which included all patients who were randomised in part B, entered part C, and received any study drug in part C. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03633617. FINDINGS: Between Aug 12, 2019, and March 11, 2021, 240 patients were randomly assigned into part B, of whom 227 (74 in placebo group, 74 in weekly dupilumab group, and 79 in dupilumab every 2 weeks group) continued into part B-C and were included in the current analysis. 37 patients switched from placebo to weekly dupilumab, and 37 from placebo to dupilumab every 2 weeks; 74 patients continued on weekly dupilumab and 79 continued on dupilumab every 2 weeks. Of the patients who entered part B-C, 75 (33%) were adolescents, 145 (64%) male, 82 (36%) female, and 206 (91%) White. At week 52, 55 (85%) patients in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, 25 (68%) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, 54 (74%) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and 23 (72%) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group achieved a peak oesophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count of 6 eos/hpf or less. Mean percent change from part B baseline in peak eosinophil count was -95·9% (95% CI -96·9 to -94·9) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -84·2% (-98·3 to -70·2) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -84·8% (-94·3 to -75·2) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -91·2% (-95·9 to -86·5) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. At week 52, mean change from part B baseline in eosinophilic oesophagitis Histology Scoring System (HSS) grade score was -1·0 point (95% CI -1·1 to -0·9) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group; mean change in eosinophilic oesophagitis HSS stage score was -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group. Similar improvements were observed in the every 2 weeks dupilumab groups. Mean absolute change from part B baseline in DSQ score was -30·3 points (95% CI -34·5 to -26·1) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -27·3 points (-32·1 to -22·4) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -20·9% (-25·4 to -16·3) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -23·7% (-29·1 to -18·3) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. Mean change from part B baseline in endoscopic reference score was -5·4 points (95% CI -6·1 to -4·6) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -6·1 points (-7·3 to -4·9) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -5·2% (-6·0 to -4·4) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -4·3% (-5·4 to -3·1) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. During part B-C, one (3%) patient in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, one (1%) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, and one (3%) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group received rescue medication. One (3%) patient in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group and one (1%) in the dupilumab every 2 weeks/dupilumab every 2 weeks group underwent a rescue oesophageal dilation procedure. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were injection-site reactions (ten [14%] in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and four [11%] in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group). INTERPRETATION: Improvements in histological, symptomatic, endoscopic, and molecular features of eosinophilic oesophagitis observed after 24 weeks of weekly dupilumab treatment were maintained or continued to improve to week 52. These findings reinforce the importance of weekly dupilumab, rather than every 2 weeks, for the improvement of symptoms in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Dupilumab for COPD with Type 2 Inflammation Indicated by Eosinophil Counts.

BACKGROUND: In some patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), type 2 inflammation may increase exacerbation risk and may be indicated by elevated blood eosinophil counts. Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key drivers of type 2 inflammation. METHODS: In a phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned patients with COPD who had a blood eosinophil count of at least 300 per microliter and an elevated exacerbation risk despite the use of standard triple therapy to receive dupilumab (300 mg) or placebo subcutaneously once every 2 weeks. The primary end point was the annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations of COPD. Key secondary and other end points that were corrected for multiplicity were the change in the prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and in the scores on the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; range, 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating a better quality of life) and the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS-COPD; range, 0 to 40, with lower scores indicating less severe symptoms). RESULTS: A total of 939 patients underwent randomization: 468 to the dupilumab group and 471 to the placebo group. The annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.93) with dupilumab and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.93 to 1.30) with placebo (rate ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.86; P<0.001). The prebronchodilator FEV1 increased from baseline to week 12 by a least-squares (LS) mean of 160 ml (95% CI, 126 to 195) with dupilumab and 77 ml (95% CI, 42 to 112) with placebo (LS mean difference, 83 ml; 95% CI, 42 to 125; P<0.001), a difference that was sustained through week 52. At week 52, the SGRQ score had improved by an LS mean of -9.7 (95% CI, -11.3 to -8.1) with dupilumab and -6.4 (95% CI, -8.0 to -4.8) with placebo (LS mean difference, -3.4; 95% CI, -5.5 to -1.3; P = 0.002). The E-RS-COPD score at week 52 had improved by an LS mean of -2.7 (95% CI, -3.2 to -2.2) with dupilumab and -1.6 (95% CI, -2.1 to -1.1) with placebo (LS mean difference, -1.1; 95% CI, -1.8 to -0.4; P = 0.001). The numbers of patients with adverse events that led to discontinuation of dupilumab or placebo, serious adverse events, and adverse events that led to death were balanced in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with COPD who had type 2 inflammation as indicated by elevated blood eosinophil counts, those who received dupilumab had fewer exacerbations, better lung function and quality of life, and less severe respiratory symptoms than those who received placebo. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; BOREAS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03930732.).

Dupilumab in Adults and Adolescents with Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling, which have key roles in eosinophilic esophagitis. METHODS: We conducted a three-part, phase 3 trial in which patients 12 years of age or older underwent randomization in a 1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg or placebo (Part A) or in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 300 mg of dupilumab either weekly or every 2 weeks or weekly placebo (Part B) up to week 24. Eligible patients who completed Part A or Part B continued the trial in Part C, in which those who completed Part A received dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg up to week 52 (the Part A-C group); Part C that included the eligible patients from Part B is ongoing. The two primary end points at week 24 were histologic remission (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) and the change from baseline in the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score (range, 0 to 84, with higher values indicating more frequent or more severe dysphagia). RESULTS: In Part A, histologic remission occurred in 25 of 42 patients (60%) who received weekly dupilumab and in 2 of 39 patients (5%) who received placebo (difference, 55 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 40 to 71; P<0.001). In Part B, histologic remission occurred in 47 of 80 patients (59%) with weekly dupilumab, in 49 of 81 patients (60%) with dupilumab every 2 weeks, and in 5 of 79 patients (6%) with placebo (difference between weekly dupilumab and placebo, 54 percentage points; 95% CI, 41 to 66 [P<0.001]; difference between dupilumab every 2 weeks and placebo, 56 percentage points; 95% CI, 43 to 69 [not significant per hierarchical testing]). The mean (±SD) DSQ scores at baseline were 33.6±12.41 in Part A and 36.7±11.22 in Part B; the scores improved with weekly dupilumab as compared with placebo, with differences of -12.32 (95% CI, -19.11 to -5.54) in Part A and -9.92 (95% CI, -14.81 to -5.02) in Part B (both P<0.001) but not with dupilumab every 2 weeks (difference in Part B, -0.51; 95% CI, -5.42 to 4.41). Serious adverse events occurred in 9 patients during the Part A or B treatment period (in 7 who received weekly dupilumab, 1 who received dupilumab every 2 weeks, and 1 who received placebo) and in 1 patient in the Part A-C group during the Part C treatment period who received placebo in Part A and weekly dupilumab in Part C. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with eosinophilic esophagitis, subcutaneous dupilumab administered weekly improved histologic outcomes and alleviated symptoms of the disease. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03633617.).

Short-Term Subcutaneous Allergy Immunotherapy and Dupilumab are Well Tolerated in Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) has been proven as an effective therapy against some allergens for seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) patients unresponsive to intranasal corticosteroids and/or antihistamines but carries risk of systemic allergic reactions. Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation in multiple diseases. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCIT+dupilumab vs SCIT alone. METHODS: This phase 2a, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group study conducted in 103 adults with grass pollen-induced SAR (NCT03558997) randomized patients 1:1:1:1 to SCIT, dupilumab (300 mg every 2 weeks), SCIT+dupilumab, or placebo. SCIT was administered using an 8-week cluster protocol followed by 8 weeks of maintenance injections. Primary endpoint was change from pre-treatment baseline in area under the curve (AUC) in total nasal symptom score (TNSS) 0-1 h following nasal allergen challenge (NAC) with timothy grass extract at Week 17. RESULTS: Although 16 weeks of treatment with SCIT+dupilumab did not significantly improve TNSS AUC (0-1 h) following NAC at Week 17 vs SCIT (least squares mean -56.76% vs -52.03%), a higher proportion of SCIT+dupilumab-treated patients (61.5%) achieved SCIT maintenance dose vs SCIT (46.2%). A lower proportion of SCIT+dupilumab-treated patients (7.7%) required epinephrine rescue treatment vs SCIT (19.2%). There were significantly fewer withdrawals in the SCIT+dupilumab group than in the SCIT group (n = 2 [7.7%] vs n = 8 [30.8%]; P = 0.0216); the majority of SCIT group withdrawals were due to SCIT-related intolerability, compared with no discontinuations from the SCIT+dupilumab group. CONCLUSION: In SAR patients, 16 weeks of SCIT+dupilumab may improve SCIT tolerability but did not incrementally reduce post-allergen challenge nasal symptoms compared with SCIT alone. CLINICAL STUDY NUMBER: NCT03558997.

The Efficacy, Tolerability, and Joint Safety of Fasinumab in Osteoarthritis Pain: A Phase IIb/III Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess the efficacy, general safety, and joint safety of fasinumab, an anti-nerve growth factor monoclonal antibody, in osteoarthritis (OA) hip and/or knee pain. METHODS: Patients with moderate-to-severe OA pain (knee or hip) and history of inadequate response or intolerance to analgesics were randomized to receive fasinumab (at 1 mg, 3 mg, 6 mg, or 9 mg) or placebo every 4 weeks over 16 weeks and were followed up to week 36. Efficacy end points were the change from baseline to week 16 in the pain and physical function subscale scores of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index (WOMAC), and patient global assessment (PGA) of OA. Joints were monitored at scheduled assessments (by plain film radiography and magnetic resonance imaging) during treatment and follow-up, and if prompted, at the time of active joint symptoms. RESULTS: Of the 421 patients randomized, 342 completed the 36-week study. All doses of fasinumab yielded statistically significant and clinically important reductions in pain compared to placebo (least squares mean difference in WOMAC pain subscale scores at week 16 ranging -0.78 to -1.40), without any clear dose dependence. Physical function and PGA scores improved in parallel. Treatment-emergent adverse event rates were 17% with fasinumab and 10% with placebo, and 4% and 1% of patients, respectively, discontinued treatment. Arthropathies (25 in total, 7% of fasinumab-treated patients and 1% of placebo-treated patients) occurred in a dose-dependent manner, with 2 occurring in patients receiving the lowest dose of fasinumab and 10 in patients receiving the highest dose. Most of the arthropathies (16 of 25) were discovered with scheduled radiographs and not based on symptoms. Destructive arthropathy (in 1 of 337 treated patients) occurred in 1 patient who was receiving 6 mg fasimumab. CONCLUSION: Fasinumab provided improvements in OA pain and function, even in those benefitting little from previous analgesics. The observed benefit-to-risk relationship favors further clinical development to explore the lowest doses of fasinumab in patients with knee or hip OA.

The global development and clinical efficacy of sublingual tablet immunotherapy for allergic diseases.

Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is a treatment option for respiratory allergy that is complementary to pharmacotherapy, with a distinct mechanism of action. Alternative methods to subcutaneous administration of AIT that enable patients to safely self-administer AIT is considered an unmet clinical need. The sublingual immunotherapy tablet (SLIT-tablet) is an orally disintegrating pharmaceutical formulation (oral lyophilisate) containing standardized allergens. SLIT-tablets have been developed for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) of cedar-pollen, grass-pollen, ragweed-pollen, tree-pollen, and house dust mite allergies. It is a once-daily tablet treatment to be self-administered after the first dose has been provided under the supervision of a physician with experience in the diagnosis and treatment of allergic diseases. Once the first dose is adequately tolerated, subsequent doses may be self-administered. SLIT-tablets have proven efficacy for allergic rhinitis (AR) with and without conjunctivitis (C) and allergic asthma (AA) in adults, children, and poly-sensitized allergic patients. Meta-analyses indicate that SLIT-tablets have superior or similar efficacy compared with anti-allergic pharmacotherapies for seasonal AR and superior efficacy for perennial AR. SLIT-tablets have also demonstrated clinically relevant improvements of asthma, with significant reductions in the following: daily inhaled corticosteroid use, risk of asthma exacerbations, and asthma symptoms. SLIT-tablets are generally well tolerated, with a low risk of systemic allergic reactions. The most common treatment-related adverse events are mild-moderate oral reactions. Current evidence supports SLIT-tablets to be considered as an alternative or add-on treatment to pharmacotherapy for AR/C and asthma. Future SLIT developments may include early intervention to prevent the development or progression of allergic disease in children.

Coseasonal Initiation of Allergen Immunotherapy: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether allergen immunotherapy (AIT) can be safely initiated during the pollen season (coseasonal initiation [CSI]) because of a potential increased risk of systemic allergic reactions. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review publications reporting the safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) CSI to validate or invalidate the perception of increased safety risk. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, Literatura Latino Americana em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), and Cochrane Library databases were searched without limits for studies of any design reporting SCIT or SLIT CSI for pollen allergen. Congress abstracts were included. RESULTS: Nineteen eligible studies were identified: 8 SCIT (n = 947 subjects total; n = 340 double-blind placebo-controlled [DBPC]) and 11 SLIT (n = 2668 subjects total; n = 565 DBPC). Study characteristics and safety reporting were heterogeneous. No epinephrine administrations were reported. Discontinuation frequencies were 6% or less and 10% or less with SCIT and SLIT CSI, respectively. In SCIT studies, systemic allergic reaction frequency was 0% to 7% with "up to peak season" or CSI, 0% to 6% with "after peak season" or out-of-season initiation, and 0% to 7% with placebo. In SCIT studies, serious treatment-related adverse event (AE) frequency with CSI ranged from 0% to 2%; few severe AEs were reported. In SLIT studies, systemic allergic reaction frequency ranged from 0% to 4% with CSI, 0% with out-of-season initiation, and 0% to 2% with placebo. Overall, 2 serious treatment-related AEs with SLIT CSI were reported. Severe AE frequency in SLIT studies ranged from 0% to 8% with CSI, 0% to 12% with out-of-season initiation, and 0% to 8% with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: No increase in AEs of concern was observed with SCIT or SLIT CSI; however, additional data with standardized regimens and doses are needed.

Sequential Treatment Initiation with Timothy Grass and Ragweed Sublingual Immunotherapy Tablets Followed by Simultaneous Treatment Is Well Tolerated.

BACKGROUND: Dual treatment with grass and ragweed sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets has not been studied. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the safety and tolerability of dual grass and ragweed SLIT-tablet administration. METHODS: This open-label, multicenter trial (NCT02256553) enrolled North American adults (N = 102) allergic to grass and ragweed. The trial had 3 periods, each of 2 weeks duration. In period 1, subjects received once-daily timothy grass SLIT tablet (2800 bioequivalent allergen unit; Merck, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ/ALK, Hørsholm, Denmark). In period 2, subjects received a short ragweed SLIT tablet (12 Ambrosia artemisiifolia 1-U; Merck/ALK) every morning and a grass SLIT tablet every evening. In period 3, subjects received once-daily grass and ragweed SLIT tablets within 5 minutes (simultaneous intake). The primary end point was the proportion of subjects with 1 or more local swelling events in each period. Secondary end points were the proportion of subjects with 1 or more local adverse events (AEs), that discontinued the treatment because of AEs, and subjects with 1 or more local AEs requiring treatment. RESULTS: No severe swellings, systemic allergic reactions, asthma attacks, or reactions requiring epinephrine were reported. Most (99%) AEs were graded mild to moderate. The proportions of subjects with 1 or more local swelling events were 14%, 22%, and 15% for periods 1, 2, and 3, respectively. For periods 1, 2, and 3, the proportions of subjects with 1 or more local AEs were 71%, 69%, and 56%, respectively; the proportions discontinuing the treatment because of treatment-related AEs were 5%, 1%, and 2%, and the proportions with 1 or more local AEs requiring treatment were 4%, 4%, and 1%. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, a 4-week sequential SLIT-tablet dosing schedule followed by simultaneous intake of timothy grass and ragweed tablets was well tolerated.

Safety of house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy standardized quality tablet in children allergic to house dust mites.

BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets could be an important alternative to subcutaneous immunotherapy for house dust mite (HDM) allergy in children. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the safety, tolerability, and duration of local adverse events (AEs) of an HDM SLIT tablet (MK-8237; Merck, ALK Abellò, and Torii) in North American children 12 to 17 years old with HDM allergic rhinitis with and without conjunctivitis and with or without asthma. METHODS: In this phase 1, multicenter, double-blinded, randomized trial (NCT01678807), children received placebo, HDM SLIT tablet 6 standardized quality (SQ) HDM, or 12 SQ-HDM once daily for 28 days. The primary end point was the proportion of subjects with treatment-emergent AEs receiving active treatment vs placebo. The secondary end point was the proportion of subjects who discontinued owing to AEs. RESULTS: In total 195 subjects were randomized. The 2 HDM SLIT tablet doses were well tolerated. No anaphylactic reactions, systemic allergic reactions, AEs requiring epinephrine, serious AEs, or local swellings in the mouth or throat assessed as severe were reported. The proportion of subjects with treatment-emergent AEs was 54% with 6 SQ-HDM and 57% with 12 SQ-HDM (nonsignificant vs 43% with placebo). Local AEs were the most commonly reported treatment-emergent AEs. On day 1, the median duration of individual local AEs ranged from 1 to 43 minutes. The proportion of subjects who discontinued owing to AEs was 0%, 6.2%, and 6.2%, and who experienced treatment-related AEs was 25%, 45%, and 52% for the placebo, 6 SQ-HDM, and 12 SQ-HDM groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: The 6 and 12 SQ-HDM doses of the HDM SLIT tablet MK-8237 were well tolerated, and local AEs were of short duration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01678807.

Short ragweeds is highly cross-reactive with other ragweeds.

BACKGROUND: The most widespread ragweed (Ambrosia) species in North America are short ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia; Amb a), giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida; Amb t), and western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya; Amb p). Varied geographic distributions of ragweed species raise questions regarding the need for ragweed species-specific allergen immunotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine allergenic cross-reactivity among ragweed species by immunologic analyses of sera from subjects allergic to ragweed from North America and Europe. METHODS: Sera were collected from 452 subjects allergic to ragweed who participated in Amb a sublingual immunotherapy tablet clinical trials. All subjects had positive skin prick test and serum IgE against Amb a. Ragweed-specific IgE (pre treatment) and IgG4 (post treatment) were measured by ImmunoCAP. IgE inhibition studies among Amb a, Amb t, and Amb p were conducted. Using pooled sera from another ragweed-allergic population, IgE inhibition studies of 7 less widespread Ambrosia species also were conducted. RESULTS: A strong correlation between Amb a vs Amb p and Amb t serum IgE levels was observed. In the vast majority of pretreatment sera, Amb a inhibited Amb a, Amb p, and Amb t IgE reactivity by more than 90%. Strong correlations were observed between Amb a vs Amb p and Amb t post-treatment IgG4 levels. In pooled sera, Amb a extract inhibited the binding of serum IgE to all 10 ragweed species by 98%-100%. CONCLUSION: In a population of subjects allergic to Amb a, substantial allergenic cross-reactivity among Amb a, Amb p, and Amb t was demonstrated. These in vitro data suggest that an Amb a-based single-species ragweed allergen immunotherapy may be therapeutically active in patients exposed to diverse ragweed pollens. TRIAL REGISTRY: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00770315, NCT00783198, and NCT00330083.

Timothy specific IgE levels are associated with efficacy and safety of timothy grass sublingual immunotherapy tablet.

BACKGROUND: Regional pollen allergen exposure differences may induce variable sensitization profiles that could affect allergen immunotherapy efficacy and safety. OBJECTIVE: To describe sensitization profiles against timothy grass allergen components (Phl p) in North American subjects screened for a timothy grass sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablet trial and evaluate grass SLIT tablet efficacy and safety based on pretreatment Phl p IgE levels. METHODS: Serum-specific IgE was measured post hoc by ImmunoCAP ISAC from subjects screened (N = 1,905) for study P08067 (NCT01385371) conducted in Canada and 5 US regions. Subjects exhibited positivity for timothy grass by skin prick testing and serum IgE. Average total combined symptom plus medication score during the entire pollen season and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were determined in randomized subjects (n = 1,140) by pretreatment Phl p IgE levels (group 1, ≤33rd percentile; group 2, >33rd-67th percentile; group 3, >67th percentile; or undetectable). RESULTS: Most screened subjects were sensitized to Phl p 1 (73%) and Phl p 5 (51%). The highest mean IgE levels and largest proportions of subjects with positive reactions for Phl p 1 and Phl p 5 were found in Canada and the western United States. Improvements in total combined symptom plus medication score vs placebo by Phl p 5 IgE groups 1 to 3 were 7.7%, 23.9%, and 35.4%, respectively, and 18.7% for subjects with undetectable Phl p 5 IgE. TRAE incidences with the grass SLIT tablet by Phl p 5 IgE groups 1 to 3 were 56.1%, 66.4%, and 74.5%, respectively, and 49.7% in subjects with undetectable Phl p 5 IgE. Similar, but less pronounced, trends for efficacy and TRAEs were observed for Phl p 1 and Phl p 6 IgE. CONCLUSION: Sensitization profiles varied by region. Trends toward higher efficacy and increased TRAE incidence in subjects with higher pretreatment Phl p IgE levels were observed. TRIAL REGISTRY: www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT01385371.