Anti-GM-CSF otilimab versus tofacitinib or placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional or biologic DMARDs: two phase 3 randomised trials (contRAst 1 and contRAst 2).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy and safety of otilimab, an antigranulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor antibody, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Two phase 3, double-blind randomised controlled trials including patients with inadequate responses to methotrexate (contRAst 1) or conventional synthetic/biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cs/bDMARDs; contRAst 2). Patients received background csDMARDs. Through a testing hierarchy, subcutaneous otilimab (90/150 mg once weekly) was compared with placebo for week 12 endpoints (after which, patients receiving placebo switched to active interventions) or oral tofacitinib (5 mg two times per day) for week 24 endpoints. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology response ≥20% (ACR20) at week 12. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat populations comprised 1537 (contRAst 1) and 1625 (contRAst 2) patients. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: proportions of ACR20 responders were statistically significantly greater with otilimab 90 mg and 150 mg vs placebo in contRAst 1 (54.7% (p=0.0023) and 50.9% (p=0.0362) vs 41.7%) and contRAst 2 (54.9% (p<0.0001) and 54.5% (p<0.0001) vs 32.5%). Secondary endpoints: in both trials, compared with placebo, otilimab increased the proportion of Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) low disease activity (LDA) responders (not significant for otilimab 150 mg in contRAst 1), and reduced Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) scores. Benefits with tofacitinib were consistently greater than with otilimab across multiple endpoints. Safety outcomes were similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although otilimab demonstrated superiority to placebo in ACR20, CDAI LDA and HAQ-DI, improved symptoms, and had an acceptable safety profile, it was inferior to tofacitinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03980483, NCT03970837.

Anti-GM-CSF otilimab versus sarilumab or placebo in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to targeted therapies: a phase III randomised trial (contRAst 3).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy and safety of otilimab, an anti-granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor antibody, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic (cs) and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and/or Janus kinase inhibitors. METHODS: ContRAst 3 was a 24-week, phase III, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Patients received subcutaneous otilimab (90/150 mg once weekly), subcutaneous sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks) or placebo for 12 weeks, in addition to csDMARDs. Patients receiving placebo were switched to active interventions at week 12 and treatment continued to week 24. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology ≥20% response (ACR20) at week 12. RESULTS: Overall, 549 patients received treatment. At week 12, there was no significant difference in the proportion of ACR20 responders with otilimab 90 mg and 150 mg versus placebo (45% (p=0.2868) and 51% (p=0.0596) vs 38%, respectively). There were no significant differences in Clinical Disease Activity Index, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, pain Visual Analogue Scale or Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scores with otilimab versus placebo at week 12. Sarilumab demonstrated superiority to otilimab in ACR20 response and secondary end points. The incidence of adverse or serious adverse events was similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Otilimab demonstrated an acceptable safety profile but failed to achieve the primary end point of ACR20 and improve secondary end points versus placebo or demonstrate non-inferiority to sarilumab in this patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04134728.

MRI of the joint and evaluation of the granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor-CCL17 axis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving otilimab: a phase 2a randomised mechanistic study.

BACKGROUND: Otilimab is a human monoclonal antibody that inhibits granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), a driver in many immune-mediated inflammatory conditions. We evaluated the effect of otilimab on the GM-CSF-chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 17 (CCL17) axis and synovitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: This phase 2a, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was done at nine sites across the USA, Poland, and Germany. Patients aged 18 years or older with rheumatoid arthritis per American College of Rheumatology-European League Against Rheumatism 2010 criteria and receiving stable methotrexate were randomly assigned (3:1) by an interactive response technology system to either subcutaneous otilimab 180 mg or placebo once weekly for 5 weeks, then every other week until week 10 (within a 12-week treatment period), followed by a 10-week safety follow-up. Randomisation was stratified by early rheumatoid arthritis (≤2 years since diagnosis) and established rheumatoid arthritis (>2 years since diagnosis). Patients and study personnel (except for an unblinded coordinator or nurse who prepared and administered the study drug) were blinded to treatment assignment; the syringe was shielded during administration. Patients were enrolled by study investigators and allocated to a treatment by central randomisation on the basis of a schedule generated by the sponsor. The primary endpoint was change over time (assessed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 22 of follow-up) in 112 biomarkers, including target engagement biomarkers and those that may be indicative of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity and response to otilimab. Secondary endpoints were change from baseline in synovitis, osteitis and erosion assessed by rheumatoid arthritis MRI scoring system (RAMRIS) and rheumatoid arthritis MRI quantitative score (RAMRIQ), and safety evaluation. The primary, secondary, and safety endpoints were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Biomarker and MRI endpoints were analysed for differences between treatment groups using a repeated measures model. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02799472. FINDINGS: Between Aug 9, 2016, and Oct 30, 2017, 39 patients were randomly assigned and included in the analysis (otilimab n=28; placebo n=11). In the otilimab group, mean serum concentrations of GM-CSF-otilimab complex peaked at week 4 (138·4 ng/L, 95% CI 90·0-212·9) but decreased from week 6-12. CCL17 concentrations decreased from baseline to week 1, remained stable to week 8, and returned to baseline at week 12; least-squares mean ratio to baseline was 0·65 (95% CI 0·49-0·86; coefficient of variation 13·60) at week 2, 0·68 (0·53-0·88; 12·51) at week 4, 0·78 (0·60-1·00; 12·48) at week 6, and 0·68 (0·54-0·85; 11·21) at week 8. No meaningful change in CCL17 concentrations was observed with placebo. In the otilimab group, the least-squares mean ratio to baseline in MMP-degraded type I collagen was 0·86-0·91 over weeks 1-8, returning to baseline at week 12; concentrations remained above baseline at all timepoints in the placebo group. There were no observable differences between otilimab and placebo for all other biomarkers. At week 12, least-squares mean change in RAMRIS synovitis score from baseline was -1·3 (standard error [SE] 0·6) in the otilimab group and 0·8 (1·2) with placebo; RAMRIQ synovitis score showed a least-squares mean change from baseline of -1417·0 µl (671·5) in the otilimab group and -912·3 µl (1405·8) with placebo. Compared with placebo, otilimab did not show significant reductions from baseline to week 12 in RAMRIS synovitis, osteitis and bone erosion, or in RAMRIQ synovitis and erosion damage. Adverse events were reported in 11 (39%) of 28 otilimab-treated and four (36%) of 11 placebo-treated patients, most commonly cough in the otilimab group (2 [7%] of 28; not reported in placebo group), and pain in extremity (four [36%] of 11) and rheumatoid arthritis (two [18%] of 11) in the placebo group (not reported in otilimab group). There were no serious adverse events or deaths. INTERPRETATION: Serum concentrations of GM-CSF-otilimab complex indicated that target engagement was achieved with initial weekly dosing, but not sustained with every other week dosing. CCL17 might be a pharmacodynamic biomarker for otilimab activity in future studies. Otilimab was well tolerated and, despite suboptimal exposure, showed some evidence for improved synovitis over 12 weeks in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Efficacy, patient-reported outcomes, and safety of the anti-granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor antibody otilimab (GSK3196165) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised, phase 2b, dose-ranging study.

BACKGROUND: The human monoclonal antibody otilimab inhibits granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), a key driver in immune-mediated inflammatory conditions. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and key patient-reported outcomes related to pain in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis receiving otilimab. METHODS: This phase 2b, dose-ranging, multicentre, placebo-controlled study was done at 64 sites across 14 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with rheumatoid arthritis who were receiving stable methotrexate were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1) to subcutaneous placebo or otilimab 22·5 mg, 45 mg, 90 mg, 135 mg, or 180 mg, plus methotrexate, once weekly for 5 weeks, then every other week until week 50. The randomisation schedule was generated by the sponsor, and patients were assigned to treatment by interactive response technology. Randomisation was blocked (block size of six) but was not stratified. Investigators, patients, and the sponsor were blinded to treatment. An unblinded administrator prepared and administered the study drug. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved disease activity score for 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) <2·6 at week 24. Patients who were not in the otilimab 180 mg group, without a good or moderate European League Against Rheumatism response (week 12) or with DAS28-CRP >3·2 (week 24) escaped to otilimab 180 mg. Patients who escaped were treated as non-responders in their original assigned group. Safety endpoints were incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events, infections, and pulmonary events. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02504671. FINDINGS: Between July 23, 2015, and Dec 29, 2017, 222 patients were randomly assigned (37 to each group). 86 (49%) of 175 escaped to otilimab 180 mg at week 12 and 57 (69%) of 83 at week 24. At week 24, the proportion of patients with DAS28-CRP <2·6 was two (5%) of 37 in the otilimab 22·5 mg group, six (16%) of 37 in the 45 mg group, seven (19%) of 37 in the 90 mg group, five (14%) of 37 in the 135 mg group, five (14%) of 37 in the 180 mg, and one (3%) of 37 in the placebo group. The largest difference was achieved with otilimab 90 mg (16·2%; odds ratio [OR] 8·39, 95% CI 0·98-72·14; p=0·053). Adverse events were reported pre-escape in 19-24 (51-65%) patients and post escape in 10-17 (40-61%) patients across otilimab dose groups and in 18 (49%) of 37 and 22 (67%) of 33 in the placebo group. The most common adverse event was nasopharyngitis: 3-9 (8-24%) in otilimab groups and one (3%) in the placebo group pre-escape and 1-3 (4-10%) in otilimab groups and seven (21%) in the placebo group post escape. Pre-escape serious adverse events were foot fracture (otilimab 45 mg); arthralgia, myocardial infarction, dizziness (otilimab 90 mg); oesophageal spasm, acute pyelonephritis (otilimab 22·5 mg), and uterine leiomyoma (otilimab 135 mg). Post-escape serious adverse events were ankle fracture (placebo) and rheumatoid arthritis (otilimab 135 mg). There were no deaths or pulmonary events of clinical concern, and rates of serious infection were low. INTERPRETATION: Otilimab plus methotrexate was well tolerated and, despite not achieving the primary endpoint of DAS28-CRP remission, there were improvements compared with placebo in disease activity scores. Of note, patients reported significant improvement in pain and physical function, supporting further clinical development of otilimab in rheumatoid arthritis. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Efficacy and safety of namilumab, a human monoclonal antibody against granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) ligand in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with either an inadequate response to background methotrexate therapy or an inadequate response or intolerance to an anti-TNF (tumour necrosis factor) biologic therapy: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Namilumab (AMG203), an immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that binds with high affinity to granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), was evaluated in a phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to investigate the efficacy and safety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR) or anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy (TNF-IR). METHODS: Subcutaneous namilumab (20, 80, or 150 mg) or placebo was administered at baseline and weeks 2, 6, and 10 in patients on stable background methotrexate therapy who were with MTX-IR or TNF-IR. Primary endpoint was mean change from baseline in the 28-joint Disease Activity Score, C-reactive protein version (DAS28-CRP) at week 12 comparing each of the three doses of namilumab to placebo. Safety and tolerability were assessed by adverse events (AEs) and pulmonary parameters. Results were analysed using the per-protocol population. RESULTS: One hundred eight patients from Europe and Japan (48.4 ± 12.02 years old; 77.8% female; mean DAS28-CRP 5.60-5.79; rheumatoid factor/anti-citrullinated protein antibodies + 75%) were randomized to placebo or namilumab 20, 80, or 150 mg (n = 27, 28, 25, and 28, respectively). Ninety-two were MTX-IR; 16 were TNF-IR. At week 12, a statistically significant difference in DAS28-CRP (p = 0.005) was seen for namilumab 150 mg versus placebo and separation was seen as early as week 2 for namilumab 150 mg (p < 0.05), with higher ACR50 and response rates versus placebo at week 12. A dose-response effect was observed across the DAS28-CRP endpoint with separation versus placebo evident from week 2. The most common treatment-emergent AEs were nasopharyngitis (18.5%, 17.9%, 4.0%, 14.3%), dyspnoea (0.0%, 3.6%, 8.0%, 10.7%), bronchitis (7.4%, 3.6%, 4.0%, 3.6%), and headache (3.7%, 3.6%, 12.0%, 0.0%) for placebo and 20, 80, or 150 mg of namilumab, respectively. No serious infections were observed. One serious AE (myocardial infarction) was observed with 150 mg of namilumab. There was no apparent dose relationship for AEs. A biomarker-based disease activity score showed a dose-dependent decrease at week 12. CONCLUSIONS: This phase II study demonstrates the benefit of inhibiting macrophage activity targeting the GM-CSF for RA. The study met its primary endpoint with a clear dose-response effect. An acceptable tolerability profile was demonstrated over the 12-week study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NEXUS; NCT02379091 , submitted November 28, 2014.

Efficacy and safety of mavrilimumab in Japanese subjects with rheumatoid arthritis: findings from a Phase IIa study.

OBJECTIVE: A phase IIa study investigated efficacy and safety/tolerability of ascending doses of mavrilimumab (anti-granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor [GM-CSFR]α monoclonal antibody) in adult subjects with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis from Japan and Europe. Findings from the Japanese population are presented. METHODS: Fifty-one subjects received mavrilimumab (10-100 mg) or placebo subcutaneously every other week for 12 weeks, followed by a 12-week follow-up period. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects achieving a Disease Activity Score using 28 joints (DAS28)-C-reactive protein (CRP) response (decrease > 1.2 from baseline). Secondary endpoints included DAS28-CRP remission, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response. RESULTS: By Week 12, more mavrilimumab- versus placebo-treated subjects achieved a DAS28-CRP response (50.0% vs. 23.5%, p = 0.081); a significant response was seen in the 30 mg and 100 mg dose groups (both 75.0% vs. 23.5%, p = 0.028). The 100 mg group also demonstrated statistically significant HAQ-DI and ACR20 responses at Week 12. Results were generally consistent between Japanese and European populations. Overall, adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate in intensity with one serious AE of pneumonia, considered possibly treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS: A rapid and clinically meaningful response was seen in subjects treated with GM-CSFRα blockade with mavrilimumab, supporting further investigation of mavrilimumab for the treatment of RA in Japanese subjects.