Risdiplam in types 2 and 3 spinal muscular atrophy: A randomised, placebo-controlled, dose-finding trial followed by 24 months of treatment.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is caused by reduced levels of survival of motor neuron (SMN) protein due to deletions and/or mutations in the SMN1 gene. Risdiplam is an orally administered molecule that modifies SMN2 pre-mRNA splicing to increase functional SMN protein. METHODS: SUNFISH Part 1 was a dose-finding study conducted in 51 individuals with types 2 and 3 SMA aged 2-25 years. A dose-escalation method was used to identify the appropriate dose for the subsequent pivotal Part 2. Individuals were randomized (2:1) to risdiplam or placebo at escalating dose levels for a minimum 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled period, followed by treatment for 24 months. The dose selection for Part 2 was based on safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic data. Exploratory efficacy was also measured. RESULTS: There was no difference in safety findings for all assessed dose levels. A dose-dependent increase in blood SMN protein was observed; a median twofold increase was obtained within 4 weeks of treatment initiation at the highest dose level. The increase in SMN protein was sustained over 24 months of treatment. Exploratory efficacy showed improvement or stabilization in motor function. The pivotal dose selected for Part 2 was 5 mg for patients with a body weight ≥20 kg or 0.25 mg/kg for patients with a body weight <20 kg. CONCLUSIONS: SUNFISH Part 1 demonstrated a twofold increase in SMN protein after treatment with risdiplam. The observed safety profile supported the initiation of the pivotal Part 2 study. The long-term efficacy and safety of risdiplam are being assessed with ongoing treatment.

MedDRA Labeling Groupings to Improve Safety Communication in Product Labels.

The granularity and structure of the International Council for Harmonisation's (ICH) Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) are useful for precise coding of adverse events (AEs) for data analysis. In product labeling for healthcare practitioners, however, the granularity of MedDRA Preferred Terms (PTs) can obscure the communication of adverse reactions (ARs). Driven by a focus on patient safety, business needs, and regulatory guidance, many sponsors and regulators have begun to develop institution-specific approaches to clustering similar AR terms in medical product prescribing information on a product-by-product basis. However, there are no agreed upon conventions that describe which AR terms may be appropriate to group together. In order to improve safety communication to patients and healthcare providers, there is an urgent need for a harmonized international approach to the creation and use of groups of MedDRA PTs which we refer to as "MedDRA Labeling Groupings (MLGs)" in medical product prescribing information. Given its long-standing contributions towards the design of Standardised MedDRA Queries (SMQs), the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) convened an Expert Working Group (EWG) with involvement of multiple major stakeholders to produce a consensus document on principles and points to consider in the development of MLGs. The CIOMS MLG EWG identified variations in grouping of MedDRA PTs in product labels, and in the current document, proposes a strategy for improving the communication of drug safety labeling. It is envisaged that the use of these consensus recommendations would be voluntary and applied to product labels in a manner that is consistent with existing regulatory frameworks.

An expanded access program of risdiplam for patients with Type 1 or 2 spinal muscular atrophy.

OBJECTIVE: The US risdiplam expanded access program (EAP; NCT04256265) was opened to provide individuals with Type 1 or 2 spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) who had no satisfactory treatment options access to risdiplam prior to commercial availability. The program was designed to collect safety data during risdiplam treatment. METHODS: Patients were enrolled from 23 non-preselected sites across 17 states and treated with risdiplam orally once daily. Eligible patients had a 5q autosomal recessive Type 1 or 2 SMA diagnosis, were aged ≥2 months at enrollment, and were ineligible for available and approved SMA treatments or could not continue treatment due to a medical condition, lack/loss of efficacy, or the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Overall, 155 patients with Type 1 (n = 73; 47.1%) or 2 SMA (n = 82; 52.9%) were enrolled and 149 patients (96.1%) completed the EAP (defined as obtaining access to commercial risdiplam, if desired). The median treatment duration was 4.8 months (range, 0.3-9.2 months). The median patient age was 11 years (range, 0-50 years), and most patients (n = 121; 78%) were previously treated with a disease-modifying therapy. The most frequently reported adverse events were diarrhea (n = 10; 6.5%), pyrexia (n = 7; 4.5%), and upper respiratory tract infection (n = 5; 3.2%). The most frequently reported serious adverse event was pneumonia (n = 3; 1.9%). No deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: In the EAP, the safety profile of risdiplam was similar to what was reported in pivotal risdiplam clinical trials. These safety data provide further support for the use of risdiplam in the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with SMA.

Safety profile of oseltamivir during the 2009 influenza pandemic.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the safety of oseltamivir during the 2009 influenza pandemic. METHODS: Case reports were obtained from the Roche safety database. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) during the pandemic (1 May 2009 to 31 December 2009) was compared with that beforehand (during previous influenza seasons) for USA and Japan only, as exposure data in other countries were collected inconsistently. Events with significantly higher reporting during the pandemic (lower bound of 95%CI for crude rate ratio >1) were analyzed further. RESULTS: Global exposure in the pandemic and prepandemic periods was 18.3 and 64.7 million patients, respectively. In USA and Japan, exposure was 15.5 (1382 cases, 2225 events) and 62.0 million (8387 cases, 12,749 events), respectively. AEs with significantly higher reporting during the pandemic were generally consistent with influenza and its complications and/or with the circulation of a novel virus strain. As might be expected in a pandemic, mortality increased (crude rate ratio, 2.83; 95%CI, 2.23-3.59) versus the prepandemic period. Medical review of serious AEs (fatal or non-fatal outcome) found that most were consistent with pre-existing risk factors, underlying disease, and/or progression of influenza or its complications. Analysis of the remainder did not suggest a causal link with oseltamivir. A review of AEs in previously underexposed subpopulations did not support an association with oseltamivir. CONCLUSIONS: During the first 8 months of the 2009 influenza pandemic, AEs reported in patients exposed to oseltamivir were consistent with the drug's labeled safety profile, underlying medical conditions, or infection with the pandemic virus.

Safety of enfuvirtide in combination with an optimized background of antiretrovirals in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected adults over 48 weeks.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral tolerability is a critical factor contributing to treatment outcome. The T-20 Versus Optimized Background Regimen Only (TORO) studies assessed the safety and efficacy of enfuvirtide in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: A total of 997 patients were randomized at a 2:1 ratio to an optimized background antiretroviral regimen plus enfuvirtide (n = 663) or an optimized background regimen alone (control group; n = 334). Control patients could switch to enfuvirtide on virologic failure. RESULTS: In total, 26.5% of patients randomized to enfuvirtide and 36.6% to the control group discontinued study treatment before week 48; the percentage of patients withdrawn for safety reasons (including adverse events [AEs], deaths, and laboratory abnormalities) was 14.0% in the enfuvirtide group and 11.6% in the control group. Injection site reactions (ISRs) occurred in 98% of enfuvirtide patients and led to treatment discontinuation in 4.4%. Treatment-related (defined as possibly, probably, or remotely) AE rates per 100 patient-years were lower with enfuvirtide (96.2) than in the control group (149.9); diarrhea, nausea, and fatigue, the most frequently reported AEs, were significantly less frequent with enfuvirtide than in the control group. Pneumonia was significantly more frequent in patients treated with enfuvirtide (6.7 vs. 0.6 events per 100 patient-years), although the incidence was within expected ranges for this population. Lymphadenopathy was also higher in enfuvirtide-treated patients (7.1 vs. 1.2 events per 100 patient-years) for control patients. CONCLUSION: The addition of enfuvirtide to an optimized background regimen does not exacerbate AEs commonly associated with antiretrovirals. ISRs limited treatment in <5% of patients.