Seralutinib in adults with pulmonary arterial hypertension (TORREY): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) remain high. Activation of platelet-derived growth factor receptor, colony stimulating factor 1 receptor, and mast or stem cell growth factor receptor kinases stimulates inflammatory, proliferative, and fibrotic pathways driving pulmonary vascular remodelling in PAH. Seralutinib, an inhaled kinase inhibitor, targets these pathways. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of seralutinib in patients with PAH receiving standard background therapy. METHODS: The TORREY trial was a phase 2, randomised, multicentre, multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients with PAH from 40 hospital and community sites were randomly assigned 1:1 via interactive response technologies to receive seralutinib (60 mg twice daily for 2 weeks, then increased to 90 mg twice daily as tolerated) or placebo by dry powder inhaler twice daily for 24 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by baseline pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; <800 dyne·s/cm5 and ≥800 dyne·s/cm5). Patients were eligible if classified as WHO Group 1 PH (PAH), WHO Functional Class II or III, with a PVR of 400 dyne·s/cm5 or more, and a 6 min walk distance of between 150 m and 550 m. The primary endpoint was change in PVR from baseline to 24 weeks. Analyses for efficacy endpoints were conducted in randomly assigned patients (intention-to-treat population). Safety analyses included all patients who received the study drug. TORREY was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04456998) and EudraCT (2019-002669-37) and is completed. FINDINGS: From Nov 12, 2020, to April 20, 2022, 151 patients were screened for eligibility, and following exclusions, 86 adults receiving PAH background therapy were randomly assigned to seralutinib (n=44; four male, 40 female) or placebo (n=42; four male, 38 female), and comprised the intention-to-treat population. At baseline, treatment groups were balanced except for a higher representation of WHO Functional Class II patients in the seralutinib group. The least squares mean change from baseline to week 24 in PVR was 21·2 dyne·s/cm5 (95% CI -37·4 to 79·8) for the placebo group and -74·9 dyne·s/cm5 (-139·7 to -10·2) for the seralutinib group. The least squares mean difference between the seralutinib and placebo groups for change in PVR was -96·1 dyne·s/cm5 (95% CI -183·5 to -8·8; p=0·03). The most common treatment-emergent adverse event in both treatment groups was cough: 16 (38%) of 42 patients in the placebo group; 19 (43%) of 44 patients in the seralutinib group. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with inhaled seralutinib significantly decreased PVR, meeting the primary endpoint of the study among patients receiving background therapy for PAH. FUNDING: Gossamer Bio.

TORREY, a Phase 2 study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of inhaled seralutinib for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Aberrant kinase signaling that involves platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) α/ß, colony stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R), and stem cell factor receptor (c-KIT) pathways may be responsible for vascular remodeling in pulmonary arterial hypertension. Targeting these specific pathways may potentially reverse the pathological inflammation, cellular proliferation, and fibrosis associated with pulmonary arterial hypertension progression. Seralutinib (formerly known as GB002) is a novel, potent, clinical stage inhibitor of PDGFRα/ß, CSF1R, and c-KIT delivered via inhalation that is being developed for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. Here, we report on an ongoing Phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT04456998) evaluating the efficacy and safety of seralutinib in subjects with World Health Organization Group 1 Pulmonary Hypertension who are classified as Functional Class II or III. A total of 80 subjects will be enrolled and randomized to receive either study drug or placebo for 24 weeks followed by an optional 72-week open-label extension study. The primary endpoint is the change from baseline to Week 24 in pulmonary vascular resistance by right heart catheterization. The secondary endpoint is the change in distance from baseline to Week 24 achieved in the 6-min walk test. A computerized tomography sub-study will examine the effect of seralutinib on pulmonary vascular remodelling. A separate heart rate monitoring sub-study will examine the effect of seralutinib on cardiac effort during the 6-min walk test.

HTX-019 via 2-min injection or 30-min infusion in healthy subjects.

AIM: HTX-019 (CINVANTI® [aprepitant injectable emulsion]) is a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist approved for preventing acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). HTX-019 is free of polysorbate 80 and other synthetic surfactants and showed bioequivalence to and a more favorable safety profile than fosaprepitant when administered as a 30-min infusion in healthy subjects. The shortage of small-volume parenteral solutions led to a recommendation to administer HTX-019 by intravenous push. The objectives were to evaluate pharmacokinetics, tolerability and safety following HTX-019 administration by injection versus infusion. MATERIALS & METHODS: Study comprised Part A, a pilot Phase I, single-center, randomized, pharmacokinetic, safety and tolerability, open-label study, followed by Part B, a two-sequence crossover study of HTX-019 130 mg in healthy adults, via injection and infusion. Blood samples were evaluated for aprepitant pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence. Safety evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs, clinical laboratory testing and electrocardiograms. RESULTS: In Part A, 24 subjects were randomly assigned to three cohorts (n = 8 per cohort) and received HTX-019 130 mg, administered intravenously over 15 min (cohort 1), 5 min (cohort 2) or 2 min (cohort 3). Progression to Part B occurred after acceptable tolerability was established in cohorts 2 and 3. In Part B, 50 randomized subjects received a 2-min injection (9 ml/min) and 30-min infusion (296 ml/h) of HTX-019 130 mg. Bioequivalence was demonstrated for HTX-019 injection and infusion. Both administration methods via a peripheral line were well tolerated; eight subjects experienced 11 TEAEs (six related) following injection and nine experienced 14 TEAEs (nine related) following infusion. Headache and fatigue were the most prevalent treatment-related TEAEs; one subject per group experienced feeling hot ≤30 min after drug administration. CONCLUSION: Pharmacokinetic and tolerability profiles of 2-min HTX-019 injection support this potential alternative administration method for CINV prevention.

Safety of HTX-019 (intravenous aprepitant) and fosaprepitant in healthy subjects.

AIM: Evaluate safety of HTX-019, a novel polysorbate 80- and synthetic surfactant-free intravenous formulation of neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist aprepitant for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. METHODS: Two open-label, randomized, two-way crossover studies evaluated treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in 200 healthy subjects. Subjects received HTX-019 130 mg (30-min infusion) and fosaprepitant 150 mg (20- or 30-min infusion), with ≥7-day washout between doses. RESULTS: Less than or equal to 30 min after start of infusion, TEAEs occurred in 5 (3%) HTX-019 and 30 (15%) fosaprepitant recipients. No HTX-019 recipients had infusion-site adverse events, versus 15 (8%) fosaprepitant recipients. Treatment-related dyspnea occurred in one HTX-019 and six fosaprepitant recipients. No severe/serious TEAEs occurred; all TEAEs resolved. CONCLUSION: HTX-019 may provide a safer aprepitant formulation than fosaprepitant for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prevention.

Bioequivalence of HTX-019 (aprepitant IV) and fosaprepitant in healthy subjects: a Phase I, open-label, randomized, two-way crossover evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Fosaprepitant, an intravenous (IV) aprepitant prodrug for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, is associated with systemic and infusion-site reactions attributed in part to its surfactant, polysorbate 80. HTX-019 is an IV aprepitant formulation free of polysorbate 80 and other synthetic surfactants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This open-label, single-dose, randomized, two-way crossover bioequivalence study compared pharmacokinetics and safety of HTX-019 and fosaprepitant. Healthy subjects received single-dose HTX-019 (130 mg) or fosaprepitant (150 mg) IV over 30 min, with ≥7-day washout between doses. Blood samples were evaluated for pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence; safety evaluation included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and serious adverse events. Ninety-seven of one hundred enrolled subjects completed the study. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between treatment sequences. For HTX-019, mean (percent coefficient of variation) area under the curve (AUC) from time 0 to time of last measurable plasma concentration (AUC0-t), AUC from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-inf), and plasma concentration at 12 h (C12 h) for HTX-019 were 43,729 h*ng/mL (32.7), 45,460 h*ng/mL (36.8), and 988.4 ng/mL (27.5), respectively; corresponding fosaprepitant values were 44,130 h*ng/mL (32.0), 46,163 h*ng/mL (36.6), and 1,022 ng/mL (28.5). Also, 90% CIs (94.186-101.354) were within bioequivalence bounds (80%-125%). Within 1 h following infusion start, one (1%) HTX-019 recipient reported one TEAE, while 20 (20%) fosaprepitant recipients reported 32 TEAEs. Dyspnea occurred in three fosaprepitant recipients (at <1 min in two subjects and at 18 min in one subject, considered study drug related) and one HTX-019 recipient (at 120 h, associated with a respiratory tract infection and considered not related to the study drug). No severe TEAEs, serious adverse events, or deaths occurred; all TEAEs resolved. CONCLUSION: HTX-019 was bioequivalent to fosaprepitant and may provide a safer alternative to fosaprepitant for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prophylaxis.

Safety and efficacy of the selective sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulator ozanimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis (RADIANCE): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Modulation of sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptors in a non-selective manner decreases disease activity in patients with multiple sclerosis but has potential safety concerns. We assessed the safety and efficacy of the oral selective S1P receptor modulator ozanimod in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. METHODS: RADIANCE is a combined phase 2/3 trial. Patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis were recruited from 55 academic and private multiple sclerosis clinics in 13 countries across Europe and the USA. Eligible participants were aged 18-55 years, had an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 0-5·0, and had either one or more relapses in the previous 12 months, or one or more relapses in the past 24 months and one or more gadolinium-enhancing lesions on MRI in the previous 12 months before screening. Participants were assigned by a computer-generated randomisation sequence in a 1:1:1 ratio to ozanimod (0·5 mg or 1 mg) or matching placebo once daily for 24 weeks by an independent, unmasked, statistical team. Trial participants, study site personnel, MRI assessors, steering committee members, and the study statistician were masked to treatment assignment. To attenuate first-dose cardiac effects, ozanimod was up-titrated from 0·25 mg to 0·5 mg or 1 mg over 8 days. The primary endpoint was the cumulative number of total gadolinium-enhancing MRI lesions measured by an independent MRI analysis centre at weeks 12-24 after treatment initiation. Analysis was by intention to treat. Here, we report results from the 24-week phase 2 trial. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01628393. The 2-year phase 3 trial is ongoing. FINDINGS: The first patient was randomised on Oct 18, 2012, and the final visit of the last randomised patient was on May 11, 2014. The intention-to-treat and safety population consisted of 258 participants, 88 were assigned placebo, 87 ozanimod 0·5 mg, and 83 ozanimod 1 mg; 252 (98%) patients completed the assigned treatment. The mean cumulative number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions at weeks 12-24 was 11·1 (SD 29·9) with placebo compared with 1·5 (3·7) with ozanimod 0·5 mg (odds ratio 0·16, 95% CI 0·08-0·30; p<0·0001) and 1·5 (3·4) with ozanimod 1 mg (odds ratio 0·11, 95% CI 0·06-0·21; p<0·0001). Three serious adverse events unrelated to treatment were reported in patients assigned ozanimod 0·5 mg: optic neuritis, somatoform autonomic dysfunction, and cervical squamous metaplasia (HPV-related). No serious infectious or cardiac adverse events were reported, and no cases of macular oedema arose. The most common adverse events in the ozanimod 0·5 mg and 1 mg groups compared with placebo were nasopharyngitis (11 and five vs 12), headache (five and three vs eight), and urinary-tract infections (six and two vs two). The maximum reduction in mean heart rate by Holter monitoring during the first 6 h in ozanimod-treated participants was less than 2 beats per min (bpm) compared with baseline, with no patient having a minimum hourly heart rate less than 45 bpm. Electrocardiograms and 24-h Holter monitoring showed no increased incidence of atrioventricular block or sinus pause with ozanimod. INTERPRETATION: Ozanimod significantly reduced MRI lesion activity in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis, with a favourable safety profile over a period of 24 weeks. These findings warrant phase 3 trials, which are ongoing. FUNDING: Receptos, Inc.

An open-label, 6-month study of allopurinol safety in gout: The LASSO study.

OBJECTIVES: Allopurinol is the most widely prescribed serum uric acid-lowering therapy (ULT) in gout. To achieve serum uric acid (sUA) concentrations associated with clinical benefit, allopurinol is serially uptitrated with sUA monitoring. Suboptimal dosing is a key contributor to poor clinical outcomes, but few data are available on the safety and efficacy of dose-titrated allopurinol, particularly at doses > 300 mg/d. The objective of this open-label study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of allopurinol under conditions where investigators were encouraged to titrate to optimal, medically appropriate doses. METHODS: Long-term Allopurinol Safety Study Evaluating Outcomes in Gout Patients (LASSO) was a large, 6-month, multicenter study of allopurinol (NCT01391325). Adults meeting American Rheumatism Association Criteria for Classification of Acute Arthritis of Primary Gout and ≥ 2 gout flares in the previous year were eligible. Investigators were encouraged (but not required) to titrate allopurinol doses to achieve target sUA < 6.0mg/dL. The primary objective was evaluation of the safety of dose-titrated allopurinol by clinical and laboratory examinations at monthly visits. Secondary objectives included sUA-lowering efficacy and gout flare frequency. RESULTS: Of 1735 patients enrolled, 1732 received ≥ 1 allopurinol doses. The maximal daily allopurinol dose during study was < 300 mg in 14.4%, 300 mg in 65.4%, and > 300 mg in 20.2% of patients; dosing duration was 115.5, 152.0, and 159.7 days, respectively. Overall, baseline demographic characteristics and comorbidity rates were similar across these three categories, but patients receiving > 300-mg maximal dose had more severe gout. Treatment-emergent adverse events possibly related to allopurinol occurred in 15.2%, 9.5%, and 11.4% of patients in the < 300-, 300-, and > 300-mg categories, respectively. Rash incidence was low (1.5%) and allopurinol hypersensitivity syndrome was not reported. No clinically meaningful changes occurred in laboratory values. sUA < 6.0mg/dL at month 6 was achieved by 35.9% of patients overall: 22.4%, 35.0%, and 48.3% in dosing categories < 300, 300, and > 300 mg, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This large multicenter study found that the allopurinol dose-titration strategy was well tolerated, without new safety signals emerging over 6 months. However, despite encouragement to treat to target, significant proportions of patients did not achieve target sUA.

Continued inhibition of structural damage over 2 years in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with rituximab in combination with methotrexate.

BACKGROUND: Rituximab inhibited structural damage at 1 year in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had had a previous inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. OBJECTIVE: To assess structural damage progression through 2 years. METHODS: Intention-to-treat patients with one post-baseline radiograph (rituximab n=281; placebo n=187) received background methotrexate (MTX) and were randomised to rituximab (2 x 1000 mg infusions, 2 weeks apart) or placebo; patients were eligible for rituximab re-treatment every 6 months. By week 104, 82% of the placebo population had received > or = 1 dose of rituximab. Radiographic end points included the change in total Sharp score (TSS), erosion and joint space narrowing scores at week 104. RESULTS: At week 104, significantly lower changes in TSS (1.14 vs 2.81; p<0.0001), erosion score (0.72 vs 1.80; p<0.0001) and joint space narrowing scores (0.42 vs 1.00; p<0.0009) were observed with rituximab plus MTX vs placebo plus MTX. Within the rituximab group, 87% who had no progression of joint damage at 1 year remained non-progressive at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Rituximab plus MTX demonstrated significant and sustained effects on joint damage progression in patients with RA and a previously inadequate response to TNF inhibitors.