Results of a Phase 2b Trial With GB001, a Prostaglandin D2 Receptor 2 Antagonist, in Moderate to Severe Eosinophilic Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Prostaglandin D2 receptor 2 (DP2) antagonists inhibit prostaglandin D2-induced effects, including recruitment and activation of cells driving asthma pathogenesis. However, challenges identifying target population and end points persist. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the effect of the DP2 antagonist GB001 on asthma worsening in patients with moderate to severe eosinophilic asthma? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this phase IIb, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, parallel-group, multicenter study, GB001 or placebo was added to standard-of-care treatment in patients with moderate to severe asthma with a blood eosinophil count ≥ 250 cells/µL. Patients aged ≥ 18 years to < 75 years received one of four once-daily treatments (GB001 20 mg, 40 mg, or 60 mg or placebo). The primary end point was the proportion of patients who experienced asthma worsening by 24 weeks. Efficacy analyses were performed for the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses for patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. RESULTS: A total of 480 patients were treated. The ORs for asthma worsening for GB001 20 mg, 40 mg, and 60 mg vs placebo were 0.674 (95% CI, 0.398-1.142), 0.677 (95% CI, 0.399-1.149), and 0.651 (95% CI, 0.385-1.100), respectively. Analysis according to baseline blood eosinophil levels and/or fractional exhaled nitric oxide did not show greater treatment effects with higher values. Elevated liver aminotransferase levels and adverse events leading to discontinuation were more frequent for GB001 60 mg than with placebo, GB001 20 mg, and GB001 40 mg. INTERPRETATION: Although GB001 did not significantly reduce the odds of asthma worsening, reductions favoring GB001 were observed. Treatment effects were consistent regardless of high/low type 2 phenotype. The overall safety profile was acceptable, although GB001 60 mg was associated with risk of liver injury. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03683576; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Randomised clinical trial: a phase 1b study of GB004, an oral HIF-1α stabiliser, for treatment of ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: Epithelial barrier dysfunction contributes to a dysregulated intestinal immune response in ulcerative colitis (UC). GB004 is an orally administered, small molecule, gut-targeted stabiliser of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α, a transcription factor with protective roles at the epithelial layer of the inflamed gut. AIMS: To evaluate safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and efficacy of GB004 in patients with active UC. METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomised patients 2:1 to receive an oral solution of GB004 120 mg or placebo once daily for 28 days. Eligible patients had a Robarts Histopathology Index score ≥4 with neutrophils in the epithelium, total Mayo Clinic score 3-12, Mayo Clinic endoscopic subscore ≥1, and blood in the stool, despite treatment with 5-aminosalicylates, corticosteroids or immunosuppressants. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were randomised. GB004 120 mg for 28 days was generally well-tolerated. Adverse events occurred in 27.3% (3/11) and 39.1% (9/23) of patients in the placebo and GB004 groups respectively. Nausea and dysgeusia were most commonly reported in the GB004 group (0% for placebo and 21.7% [5/23] and 13.0% [3/23] respectively for GB004). There were no treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths. GB004 exhibited minimal accumulation, with higher colonic concentrations relative to plasma. Exploratory pharmacodynamic and efficacy analyses demonstrated GB004 target engagement and numerically higher proportions of patients achieving improvement in multiple measures of disease activity, respectively, at day 28 for GB004 compared to placebo. CONCLUSION: Results from this phase 1b trial support evaluation of the full therapeutic potential of GB004 for the treatment of UC. A phase 2 study (NCT04556383) is ongoing. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03860896.

A phase 2 study to evaluate the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of DP2 antagonist GB001 and to explore biomarkers of airway inflammation in mild-to-moderate asthma.

BACKGROUND: GB001 is an oral antagonist of the prostaglandin D2 receptor that may inhibit recruitment and activation of airway eosinophils, reducing airway inflammation. OBJECTIVE: To assess GB001 safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics from a Phase 2 study and explore the association between type 2 biomarkers (fractional exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophils) and asthma control markers following GB001 administration. METHODS: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study evaluating 36 patients with mild-to-moderate atopic asthma. Patients receiving fluticasone propionate ≤500 mcg/day or equivalent were randomized (2:1) to GB001 (30 mg) or placebo once daily for 28 days. Safety, pharmacokinetics, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, asthma control questionnaire and rescue medication use were assessed. Clinical outcomes were analysed post hoc by baseline fractional exhaled nitric oxide (<35 and ≥35 ppb) and blood eosinophil (<250 and ≥250 cells/µL) subgroups. RESULTS: GB001 was well tolerated and rapidly absorbed with a 14.5-hour terminal half-life. Overall, GB001 demonstrated greater improvement relative to placebo in forced expiratory volume in 1 second at Day 28 (102 mL [95% CI: -110, 314]). Greater effects on forced expiratory volume in 1 second were observed in the high baseline fractional exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophil subgroups (207 mL [95% CI: -283, 698];133 mL [95% CI: -422, 687], respectively). These effects were observed as early as Day 2 (229 mL [95% CI: -170, 628]; 163 mL [95% CI: -223, 550] for the high baseline fractional exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophil subgroups, respectively) and were sustained through treatment completion. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: GB001 was well tolerated, with the estimated half-life supporting once-daily (QD) dosing. GB001 may have a rapid and sustained effect on lung function, particularly in patients with type 2 phenotype. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Safety and efficacy of ozanimod versus interferon beta-1a in relapsing multiple sclerosis (RADIANCE): a multicentre, randomised, 24-month, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ozanimod is a sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulator, which selectively binds to sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor subtypes 1 and 5 with high affinity. In the RADIANCE phase 2 study in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis, ozanimod was associated with better efficacy than placebo on MRI measures and was well tolerated. The RADIANCE phase 3 study aimed to confirm the safety and efficacy of ozanimod versus interferon beta-1a in individuals with relapsing multiple sclerosis. METHODS: We did a 24-month, multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy phase 3 trial in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis at 147 medical centres and clinical practices in 21 countries. Participants were aged 18-55 years, had multiple sclerosis according to 2010 McDonald criteria, a relapsing clinical course, brain MRI lesions consistent with multiple sclerosis, an expanded disability status scale score of 0·0-5·0, and either at least one relapse within 12 months before screening or at least one relapse within 24 months before screening plus at least one gadolinium-enhancing lesion within the 12 months before randomisation. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via an interactive voice response system to daily oral ozanimod 1·0 mg or 0·5 mg or weekly intramuscular interferon beta-1a 30 µg. Participants, investigators, and study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was annualised relapse rate (ARR) over 24 months. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population of all participants who received study drug and safety was assessed in all randomly assigned participants who received study drug, grouped by highest dose of ozanimod received. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02047734, and EudraCT, 2012-002714-40. FINDINGS: Between Dec 27, 2013, and March 31, 2015, we screened 1695 participants, of which 375 did not meet inclusion criteria. 1320 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to a group, of whom 1313 received study drug (433 assigned to ozanimod 1·0 mg, 439 assigned to ozanimod 0·5 mg, and 441 assigned to interferon beta-1a) and 1138 (86·7%) completed 24 months of treatment. Adjusted ARRs were 0·17 (95% CI 0·14-0·21) with ozanimod 1·0 mg, 0·22 (0·18-0·26) with ozanimod 0·5 mg, and 0·28 (0·23-0·32) with interferon beta-1a, with rate ratios versus interferon beta-1a of 0·62 (95% CI 0·51-0·77; p<0·0001) for ozanimod 1·0 mg and 0·79 (0·65 to 0·96; p=0·0167) for ozanimod 0·5 mg. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was higher in the interferon beta-1a group (365 [83·0%] of 440 participants) than in the ozanimod 1·0 mg group (324 [74·7%] of 434) or the ozanimod 0·5 mg group (326 [74·3%] of 439). More participants in the interferon beta-1a group had treatment-emergent adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation than in the ozanimod groups. Incidences of infections and serious treatment-emergent adverse events were similar across treatment groups. No cases of ozanimod-related symptomatic reduction in heart rate and no second-degree or third-degree cases of atrioventricular block were reported. INTERPRETATION: In this 24-month phase 3 study in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis, ozanimod was well tolerated and associated with a significantly lower rate of clinical relapses than intramuscular interferon beta-1a. These findings show the potential of ozanimod as an effective oral therapy for individuals with relapsing multiple sclerosis. FUNDING: Celgene International II.

Safety and efficacy of ozanimod versus interferon beta-1a in relapsing multiple sclerosis (SUNBEAM): a multicentre, randomised, minimum 12-month, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ozanimod, a sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulator, selectively binds to receptor subtypes 1 and 5 with high affinity. The RADIANCE phase 2 study showed that ozanimod had better efficacy than placebo on MRI measures, with a favourable safety profile, in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis. The SUNBEAM study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ozanimod versus intramuscular interferon beta-1a in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis. METHODS: SUNBEAM was a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled phase 3 trial done at 152 academic medical centres and clinical practices in 20 countries. We enrolled participants aged 18-55 years with relapsing multiple sclerosis, baseline expanded disability status scale (EDSS) score of 0·0-5·0, and either at least one relapse within the 12 months before screening or at least one relapse within 24 months plus at least one gadolinium-enhancing lesion within 12 months before screening. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1 by a blocked algorithm stratified by country and baseline EDSS score to at least 12 months treatment of either once-daily oral ozanimod 1·0 mg or 0·5 mg or weekly intramuscular interferon beta-1a 30 µg. Participants, investigators, and study staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was annualised relapse rate (ARR) during the treatment period and was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all participants according to the highest dose of ozanimod received. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02294058 and EudraCT, number 2014-002320-27. FINDINGS: Between Dec 18, 2014, and Nov 12, 2015, 1346 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to ozanimod 1·0 mg (n=447), ozanimod 0·5 mg (n=451), or interferon beta-1a (n=448). 91 (6·8%) participants discontinued the study drug (29 in the ozanimod 1·0 mg group; 26 in the ozanimod 0·5 mg group; and 36 in the interferon beta-1a group). Adjusted ARRs were 0·35 (0·28-0·44) for interferon beta-1a, 0·18 (95% CI 0·14-0·24) for ozanimod 1·0 mg (rate ratio [RR] of 0·52 [0·41-0·66] vs interferon beta-1a; p<0·0001), and 0·24 (0·19-0·31) for ozanimod 0·5 mg (RR 0·69 [0·55-0·86] vs interferon beta-1a; p=0·0013). Few ozanimod-treated participants discontinued treatment because of adverse events (13 [2·9%] who received ozanimod 1·0 mg; seven [1·5%] who received ozanimod 0·5 mg; and 16 [3·6%] who received interferon beta-1a). No first-dose, clinically significant bradycardia or second-degree or third-degree atrioventricular block was reported. The incidence of serious adverse events was low and similar across treatment groups (13 [2·9%] participants who received ozanimod 1·0 mg; 16 [3·5%] who received ozanimod 0·5 mg; and 11 [2·5%] who received interferon beta-1a). No serious opportunistic infections occurred in ozanimod-treated participants. INTERPRETATION: In participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis treated for at least 12 months, ozanimod was well tolerated and demonstrated a significantly lower relapse rate than interferon beta-1a. These findings provide support for ozanimod as an oral therapy for individuals with relapsing multiple sclerosis. FUNDING: Celgene International II.

Oral BG-12 (dimethyl fumarate) for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a review of DEFINE and CONFIRM. Evaluation of: Gold R, Kappos L, Arnold D, et al. Placebo-controlled phase 3 study of oral BG-12 for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1098-107; and Fox RJ, Miller DH, Phillips JT, et al. Placebo-controlled phase 3 study of oral BG-12 or glatiramer in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1087-97.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system involving inflammation, chronic demyelination and axonal loss. MS affects more than 2 million people worldwide. AREAS COVERED: This article aims to summarize the findings from two pivotal 2-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III studies of BG-12 (dimethyl fumarate) for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS): DEFINE (Determination of the Efficacy and Safety of Oral Fumarate in RRMS) and CONFIRM (Comparator and an Oral Fumarate in RRMS). Results from both studies demonstrated that BG-12 provides clinical and radiological efficacy over 2 years across a range of outcomes. These results were apparent as early as 12 weeks and sustained over the course of both studies. BG-12 was found to have an acceptable safety profile, with a similar overall incidence of adverse events across all treatment groups. EXPERT OPINION: The combination of robust efficacy, ease of administration and established safety profile is unique to a new therapy in MS. Findings from the pivotal Phase III studies support BG-12 as a potential initial oral treatment for patients with RRMS or as an alternative to other currently available therapies.

Placebo-controlled phase 3 study of oral BG-12 or glatiramer in multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: BG-12 (dimethyl fumarate) is in development as an oral treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, which is commonly treated with parenteral agents (interferon or glatiramer acetate). METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized study, we investigated the efficacy and safety of oral BG-12, at a dose of 240 mg two or three times daily, as compared with placebo in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. An active agent, glatiramer acetate, was also included as a reference comparator. The primary end point was the annualized relapse rate over a period of 2 years. The study was not designed to test the superiority or noninferiority of BG-12 versus glatiramer acetate. RESULTS: At 2 years, the annualized relapse rate was significantly lower with twice-daily BG-12 (0.22), thrice-daily BG-12 (0.20), and glatiramer acetate (0.29) than with placebo (0.40) (relative reductions: twice-daily BG-12, 44%, P<0.001; thrice-daily BG-12, 51%, P<0.001; glatiramer acetate, 29%, P=0.01). Reductions in disability progression with twice-daily BG-12, thrice-daily BG-12, and glatiramer acetate versus placebo (21%, 24%, and 7%, respectively) were not significant. As compared with placebo, twice-daily BG-12, thrice-daily BG-12, and glatiramer acetate significantly reduced the numbers of new or enlarging T(2)-weighted hyperintense lesions (all P<0.001) and new T(1)-weighted hypointense lesions (P<0.001, P<0.001, and P=0.002, respectively). In post hoc comparisons of BG-12 versus glatiramer acetate, differences were not significant except for the annualized relapse rate (thrice-daily BG-12), new or enlarging T(2)-weighted hyperintense lesions (both BG-12 doses), and new T(1)-weighted hypointense lesions (thrice-daily BG-12) (nominal P<0.05 for each comparison). Adverse events occurring at a higher incidence with an active treatment than with placebo included flushing and gastrointestinal events (with BG-12) and injection-related events (with glatiramer acetate). There were no malignant neoplasms or opportunistic infections reported with BG-12. Lymphocyte counts decreased with BG-12. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, BG-12 (at both doses) and glatiramer acetate significantly reduced relapse rates and improved neuroradiologic outcomes relative to placebo. (Funded by Biogen Idec; CONFIRM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00451451.).

Adrenal masses: characterization with combined unenhanced and delayed enhanced CT.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of a dedicated adrenal computed tomographic (CT) protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-six adrenal masses were evaluated with a protocol consisting of unenhanced CT, and, for those with attenuation values greater than 10 HU, contrast material-enhanced and delayed enhanced CT. Attenuation values and enhancement washout calculations were obtained. An adenoma was diagnosed if a mass had an attenuation value of 10 HU or less at unenhanced CT or a percentage enhancement washout value of 60% or higher. RESULTS: The final diagnosis was adenoma in 127 masses and non-adenoma in 39. Masses measuring more than 10 HU on unenhanced CT scans were confirmed at biopsy (n = 28) or were examined for stability or change in size at follow-up CT performed at a minimum interval of 6 months (n = 33). Thirty-six (92%) of 39 non-adenomas and 124 (98%) of 127 adenomas were correctly characterized. The sensitivity and specificity of this protocol were 98% and 92%, respectively. This protocol correctly characterized 160 (96%) of 166 masses. CONCLUSION: With a combination of unenhanced and delayed enhanced CT, nearly all adrenal masses can be correctly categorized as adenomas or non-adenomas.