Meta-analysis of risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in adults with type 2 diabetes treated with bexagliflozin.

AIM: To explore the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) associated with exposure to bexagliflozin. METHODS: The analysis included 4090 participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) enrolled in nine phase 2 and 3 double-blind randomized controlled trials. All potential MACE were adjudicated by a blinded committee. The primary endpoint for the meta-analysis was the hazard ratio (HR) for the time to first occurrence of non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular (CV) death or hospitalization for unstable angina (MACE+), tested for non-inferiority to a ratio of 1.8. The secondary endpoints were time to first occurrence of (i) non-fatal stroke, non-fatal MI or CV death (MACE), tested for non-inferiority to a ratio of 1.3; and (ii) CV death or hospitalization for heart failure, tested for superiority. RESULTS: The HR for the primary endpoint of MACE+ was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58, 1.09), which fulfilled the non-inferiority objective with a P value of less than 0.0001. Non-inferiority for the first key secondary endpoint of MACE was also shown (HR = 0.82; 95% CI 0.59, 1.13; P = 0.0023). Superiority for time to CV death or first hospitalization for heart failure was not shown. CONCLUSIONS: Bexagliflozin did not increase the risk of MACE in participants with T2D when compared with placebo or active control. Both the preapproval and postapproval thresholds for CV safety were met and bexagliflozin has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.

Bexagliflozin as an adjunct to metformin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in adults: A 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

AIM: To evaluate the relative safety and effectiveness of bexagliflozin as an adjunct to metformin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: In total, 317 participants were randomized to receive bexagliflozin or placebo plus metformin. The primary endpoint was the change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to week 24, with secondary endpoints for systolic blood pressure (SBP), fasting plasma glucose and weight loss. An open label arm enrolled participants with HbA1c >10.5% and was analysed separately. RESULTS: The mean change in HbA1c was -1.09% (95% CI -1.24%, -0.94%) in the bexagliflozin arm and -0.56% (-0.71%, -0.41%) in the placebo arm, a difference of -0.53% (-0.74%, -0.32%; p < .0001). Excluding observations after rescue medication, the intergroup difference was -0.70% (-0.92, -0.48; p < .0001). The open label group change in HbA1c was -2.82% (-3.23%, -2.41%). Placebo-adjusted changes from baseline SBP, fasting plasma glucose and body mass were -7.07 mmHg (-9.83, -4.32; p < .0001), -1.35 mmol/L (-1.83, -0.86; p < .0001) and -2.51 kg (-3.45, -1.57; p < .0001). Adverse events affected 42.4% and 47.2% of subjects in the bexagliflozin and placebo arms, respectively; fewer subjects in the bexagliflozin arm experienced serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Bexagliflozin produced clinically meaningful improvement in glycaemic control, estimated glomerular filtration rate and SBP when added to metformin in a population of adults with diabetes.

Real-world effectiveness of benralizumab in US subspecialist-treated adults with severe asthma: Findings from CHRONICLE.

BACKGROUND: Patients with eosinophilic severe asthma (SA) have an increased risk of asthma exacerbations. Benralizumab is approved for eosinophilic SA, and there is great value in understanding real-world effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis was to examine the effectiveness of benralizumab in a real-world cohort of subspecialist-treated US patients with eosinophilic SA. METHODS: CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional study of subspecialist-treated US adults with SA receiving biologics, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or those persistently uncontrolled by high-dose inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For this analysis, eligible patients enrolled from February 2018 to February 2021, had received ≥ 1 dose of benralizumab, and had study data for ≥ 3 months before and after benralizumab initiation. The primary analysis included patients with prior exacerbations reported and 12 months of outcomes data before and after initiation. Patient outcomes occurring 6-12 months before and after initiation were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 317 patients had ≥ 3 months of follow-up before and after first benralizumab dose. For patients with 12 months (n = 107) and 6-12 months (n = 166) of data, significant reductions were observed in annualized rates of exacerbations (62%; P < 0.001 and 65%; P < 0.001, respectively), with similar reductions in the rates of hospitalizations and emergency department visits. Benralizumab recipients with blood eosinophil counts (BEC) of ≥ 300/ µL and < 300/ µL at baseline and 12 months of data also had significant reductions in exacerbations (68%; P < 0.001, 61%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This real-world, noninterventional analysis reinforces the clinical value of benralizumab in the management of patients with eosinophilic SA.

Number of patient-reported asthma triggers predicts uncontrolled disease among specialist-treated patients with severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe asthma (SA) experience a high disease burden, often precipitated by exposure to disease triggers. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence and effects of patient-reported triggers on asthma disease burden in a cohort of subspecialist-treated patients with SA in the United States. METHODS: CHRONICLE is an observational study of adults with SA receiving biologics or maintenance systemic corticosteroids or whose disease is uncontrolled on high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids and additional controllers. Data were analyzed for patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2021. This analysis evaluated patient-reported triggers from a 17-category survey and associations with multiple measures of disease burden. RESULTS: Among 2793 enrolled patients, 1434 (51%) completed the trigger questionnaire. The median trigger number per patient was 8 (interquartile range, 5-10). The most frequent triggers were weather or air changes, viral infections, seasonal allergies, perennial allergies, and exercise. Patients reporting more triggers experienced more poorly controlled disease, worse quality of life, and reduced work productivity. The annualized rates of exacerbations and asthma hospitalizations increased by 7% and 17%, respectively, for each additional trigger (both P < .001). For all measures, trigger number was a stronger predictor of disease burden than blood eosinophil count. CONCLUSION: Among US specialist-treated patients with SA, asthma trigger number was positively and significantly associated with greater uncontrolled disease burden across multiple measures, which highlights the importance of understanding patient-reported triggers in SA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03373045.

A 24-week, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial comparing bexagliflozin with sitagliptin as an adjunct to metformin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in adults.

AIM: To compare the relative safety and effectiveness of bexagliflozin and sitagliptin as adjuncts to metformin for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Participants (n = 386) were randomized to receive bexagliflozin (20 mg) or sitagliptin (100 mg) in addition to their existing doses of metformin. The primary endpoint was the non-inferiority of bexagliflozin to sitagliptin for change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. Changes from baseline to week 24 in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body mass (in subjects with baseline body mass index ≥25 kg m-2 ) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: The mean change from baseline to week 24 in HbA1c was -0.74 (95% CI -0.86%, -0.62%) in the bexagliflozin arm and -0.82% (95% CI -0.93%, -0.71%) in the sitagliptin arm, establishing non-inferiority. The changes from baseline FPG, body mass and SBP were -1.82 mmol L-1 , -3.35 kg and -4.23 mmHg in the bexagliflozin arm and -1.45 mmol L-1 , -0.81 kg and -1.90 mmHg in the sitagliptin arm, respectively. These differences were significant for the first two measures (one-sided P = 0.0123, P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0276, respectively.) Adverse events were experienced by 47.1% of subjects in the bexagliflozin arm and 56.0% of subjects taking sitagliptin. Serious adverse events affected 3.7% of subjects in the bexagliflozin arm and 2.1% of subjects in the sitagliptin arm. CONCLUSIONS: Bexagliflozin was non-inferior to sitagliptin and provided benefits over sitagliptin in FPG and body mass. Adverse event incidences in the two arms were similar.

Safety and Effectiveness of Bexagliflozin in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Stage 3a/3b CKD.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Hyperglycemia exacerbates the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD), but most glucose-lowering therapies do not address morbidities associated with CKD. Sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors offer potential benefits to patients with diabetes and CKD, but their effectiveness may be diminished with decreased kidney function. We aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of bexagliflozin, a novel SGLT2 inhibitor, in patients with type 2 diabetes and CKD. STUDY DESIGN: Phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, multinational, randomized trial. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 54 sites across 4 countries. Patients with CKD stage 3a or 3b, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hemoglobin A1c level of 7.0% to 10.5% and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 30 to 59mL/min/1.73m2 who were taking oral hypoglycemic agents for 8 weeks. INTERVENTIONS: Bexagliflozin, 20mg, daily versus placebo for 24 weeks. OUTCOMES: Primary outcome was change in percent hemoglobin A1c from baseline to week 24. Secondary end points included changes in body weight, systolic blood pressure, albuminuria, and hemoglobin A1c level stratified by CKD stage. RESULTS: 312 patients across 54 sites were analyzed. Bexagliflozin lowered hemoglobin A1c levels by 0.37% (95% CI, 0.20%-0.54%); P<0.001 compared to placebo. Patients with CKD stages 3a (eGFR, 45-<60mL/min/1.73m2) and 3b (eGFR, 30-<45mL/min/1.73m2) experienced reductions in hemoglobin A1c levels of 0.31% (P=0.007) and 0.43% (P=0.002), respectively. Bexagliflozin decreased body weight (1.61kg; P<0.001), systolic blood pressure (3.8mm Hg; P=0.02), fasting plasma glucose level (0.76mmol/L; P=0.003), and albuminuria (geometric mean ratio reduction of 20.1%; P=0.03). Urinary tract infection and genital mycotic infections were more common in the bexagliflozin group; otherwise, frequencies of adverse events were comparable between groups. LIMITATIONS: Not designed to evaluate the impact of treatment on long-term kidney disease and cardiovascular outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Bexagliflozin reduces hemoglobin A1c levels in patients with diabetes and stage 3a/3b CKD and appears to be well tolerated. Additional observed benefits included reductions in body weight, systolic blood pressure, and albuminuria. FUNDING: Trial was sponsored by Theracos Sub, LLC.

Health-related quality of life data from a phase 3, international, randomized, open-label, multicenter study in patients with previously treated mantle cell lymphoma treated with ibrutinib versus temsirolimus.

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare, aggressive, incurable B-cell malignancy. Ibrutinib has been shown to be highly active for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) MCL. The RAY trial (MCL3001) was a phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicenter study that compared ibrutinib with temsirolimus in patients with R/R MCL. Active disease is frequently associated with impaired functional status and reduced well-being. Therefore, the current study employed two patient-reported outcome instruments, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) and the EQ-5D-5L, to assess symptoms, well-being, health status, and health-related quality of life of patients on treatment within the RAY trial. We found that patients on ibrutinib had substantial improvement in FACT-Lym subscale and total scores, and had improvement in EQ-5D-5L utility and VAS scores compared with temsirolimus patients, indicating a superior well-being. These improvements in well-being correlated with clinical response, indicating that better health-related quality of life was associated with decreased disease burden.

The effect of eflornithine 13.9% cream on the bother and discomfort due to hirsutism.

Although unwanted facial hair often leads to anxiety and avoidance of social situations, evaluation of treatment outcomes in clinical trials has relied largely on measures external to the patient such as the extent of hair growth or an expert physician's assessment, neglecting to include patient reported outcomes (PRO). To assess the level of bother caused by a dermatological condition (hirsutism) and changes brought on by treatment, the instrument ESTEEM was developed by expanding the Bother Assessment in Skin Conditions (BASC) scale to six questions to cover the discomfort felt in four social situations and bother due to removing facial hair. Each question elicits responses on a visual analog scale. Women participating in two randomized clinical trials evaluated a new treatment (eflornithine 13.9% cream). Analyses examined the level of bother at each visit, the changes with treatment, the correlations with the Physician's Global Assessment, and the effect size. Hirsutism bothers patients considerably. The mean for overall bother was 89% and the mean discomfort in social situations exceeded 80% in nearly all cases. Treatment led to significant reductions in bother on all six items with effect sizes ranging from 0.46 to 1.62. Eflornithine is an effective treatment for unwanted facial hair in women, as reported by the patients. ESTEEM addresses the specific concerns of women with hirsutism.

Costimulation blockade with belatacept in renal transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Renal transplantation is the standard of care for patients with end-stage renal disease. Although maintenance immunosuppression with calcineurin inhibitors yields excellent one-year survival, it is associated over the long term with high rates of death and graft loss, owing in part to the adverse renal, cardiovascular, and metabolic effects of these agents. The use of potentially less toxic agents, such as belatacept, a selective blocker of T-cell activation, may improve outcomes. METHODS: We randomly assigned renal-transplant recipients to receive an intensive or a less-intensive regimen of belatacept or cyclosporine. All patients received induction therapy with basiliximab, mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids. The primary objective was to demonstrate the noninferiority of belatacept over cyclosporine in the incidence of acute rejection at six months (with an upper bound of the 95 percent confidence interval around the treatment difference of less than 20 percent). RESULTS: At six months, the incidence of acute rejection was similar among the groups: 7 percent for intensive belatacept, 6 percent for less-intensive belatacept, and 8 percent for cyclosporine. At 12 months, the glomerular filtration rate was significantly higher with both intensive and less-intensive belatacept than it was with cyclosporine (66.3, 62.1, and 53.5 ml per minute per 1.73 m2, respectively), and chronic allograft nephropathy was less common with both regimens of belatacept than with cyclosporine (29 percent, 20 percent, and 44 percent, respectively). Lipid levels and blood-pressure values were similar or slightly lower in the belatacept groups, despite the greater use of lipid-lowering and antihypertensive medications in the cyclosporine group. CONCLUSIONS: Belatacept, an investigational selective costimulation blocker, did not appear to be inferior to cyclosporine as a means of preventing acute rejection after renal transplantation. Belatacept may preserve the glomerular filtration rate and reduce the rate of chronic allograft nephropathy.