Patient-level indirect treatment comparison of lanadelumab versus pdC1-INH i.v. in hereditary angioedema patients: PATCH study.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is an autosomal dominant inherited disease in which patients suffer from local attacks primarily affecting skin and gastrointestinal tract, and sometimes even the upper respiratory tract leading to asphyxiation. Since head-to-head trials between authorized treatments are lacking, this study compares efficacy and safety of lanadelumab and intravenous plasma-derived C1-esterase inhibitor (pdC1-INH i.v.) in HAE patients on long-term prophylaxis by means of an indirect treatment comparison. METHODS: Efficacy and safety of lanadelumab against pdC1-INH i.v. were analyzed in a fully prespecified indirect comparison based on individual patient data (n = 231) from the HELP and CHANGE clinical trials. Primary and secondary efficacy endpoints were compared using a generalized linear model for count data. Confounding variables were identified a priori via systematic literature research and validated by clinical experts. Adjustment of confounders was implemented using a conditional regression model. RESULTS: Lanadelumab showed a statistically significant improvement in reduction of HAE attack rates compared to pdC1-INH i.v. across multiple endpoints: Monthly attack rate of patients treated with lanadelumab was less than half compared to pdC1-INH i.v. (Rate ratio: 0.486; 95% CI: 0.253, 0.932). Monthly rate of laryngeal attacks was found to be five times lower for lanadelumab (Rate ratio: 0.2; 95% CI: 0.044, 0.915) and monthly rate of acute treated HAE attacks among lanadelumab patients was about one third of the attack rate of pdC1-INH i.v. patients (Rate ratio: 0.366; 95% CI: 0.185, 0.727). CONCLUSION: This study contributes to current knowledge in the treatment of HAE by indicating a statistically significant reduction of HAE attacks under lanadelumab compared to pdC1-INH i.v.

Real-world reporting rates of administration-site reactions with on-demand treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks.

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is characterized by recurrent and unpredictable episodes of subcutaneous and/or submucosal swelling. Objective: To characterize the real-world treatment burden associated with existing on-demand therapies, we analyzed administration-site adverse drug reactions (ADR) associated with approved on-demand HAE therapies reported in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Methods: We searched the FAERS database from October 1, 2009, to March 31, 2022, for reports of all FDA-approved on-demand therapies for HAE: plasma-derived C1-inhibitor (pdC1-INH), ecallantide, icatibant, and recombinant C1-inhibitor (rhC1-INH). ADRs in which the drug was listed as the "primary suspect" were recorded for each drug. ADR preferred terms were grouped into 18 ADR domains based on semantic and/or clinical similarity, and the number of reports for each drug was calculated per year from the time of approval through March 2022, and descriptive results were presented. Preferred terms associated with administration-site ADRs identified from clinical trials and denoted on approved HAE drug U.S. package inserts were examined in a complementary analysis. Results: The highest reported rates of administration-site ADRs per year were site pain (17.9 reports per year), site erythema (7.4 per year), and site swelling (6.7 per year). RhC1-INH was the only drug for which access-site complications and/or malfunctions were reported (9.5 per year). PdC1-INH had the highest rate of incorrect route of product administration (3.7 per year). PdC1-INH showed statistically significant elevated reporting rate of injection-site reactions (reporting odds ratio [ROR] 3.59 [2.36-5.46]; empirical Bayesian geometric mean [EBGM] 1.97 [1.39]). Icatibant and rhC1-INH showed a statistical trend toward an increased reporting rate of administration-site reactions. Conclusion: Real-world data from FAERS were generally consistent with adverse events reported in clinical trials and suggest that patients experience substantial treatment burden associated with FDA-approved parenteral on-demand therapies for HAE attacks. It should be noted that ADR rates are not exposure adjusted and are based on spontaneous reporting.

A safety review of prophylaxis drugs for adolescent patients with hereditary angioedema.

INTRODUCTION: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is characterized by recurrent subcutaneously and/or submucosally localized edematous swellings. The first symptoms often appear in childhood, and they may become more frequent and severe in puberty. Since the appearance of HAE attacks is unpredictable regarding the localization and the frequency, the attacks put a significant burden on the patients and crucially impacts their quality of life. AREAS COVERED: This review article analyzes the safety data acquired from the clinical trials conducted with the currently available medicinal products for the prophylactic treatment of hereditary angioedema due to C1 inhibitor deficiency and the safety data of observatory studies based on clinical practice. A review of the published literature was conducted using the PubMed database, clinical trials from ClinicalTrials.gov, and abstracts published at scientific conferences. EXPERT OPINION: The currently available therapeutic products have a good safety and efficiency profile and the international guidelines recommend them as first-line treatments. The choice should be made based on the evaluation of the availability and the preference of the patient.

Healthcare utilization of patients with hereditary angioedema treated with lanadelumab and subcutaneous C1-inhibitor concentrate.

Background: New hereditary angioedema (HAE) treatments have become available in recent years for the treatment of HAE due to C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) deficiency, including two subcutaneous (SC) options: a monoclonal antibody (lanadelumab) and a plasma-derived C1-INH concentrate (SC-C1-INH). Limited real-world data on these therapies have been reported. Objective: The objective was to describe new users of lanadelumab and SC-C1-INH, including demographics, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), costs, and treatment patterns before and after beginning treatment. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study that used an administrative claims data base. Two mutually exclusive cohorts of adult (ages ≥18 years) new users of lanadelumab or SC-C1-INH with ≥180 days of continuous use were identified. HCRU, costs, and treatment patterns were assessed in the 180-day period before the index date (new treatment use) and up to 365 days after the index date. HCRU and costs were calculated as annualized rates. Results: Forty-seven patients who used lanadelumab and 38 patients who used SC-C1-INH were identified. The most frequently used on-demand HAE treatments at baseline were the same for both cohorts: bradykinin B2 antagonists (48.9% of the patients on lanadelumab, 52.6% of the patients on SC-C1-INH) and C1-INHs (40.4% of the patients on lanadelumab, 57.9% of the patients on SC-C1-INH). More than 33% of the patients continued to fill on-demand medications after treatment initiation. Annualized angioedema-associated emergency department visits and hospitalizations decreased after initiation of treatment, from 1.8 to 0.6 for the patients on lanadelumab and from 1.3 to 0.5 for the patients on SC-C1-INH. Annualized total healthcare costs after treatment initiation in the database were $866,639 and $734,460 for the lanadelumab and SC-C1-INH cohorts, respectively. Pharmacy costs accounted for >95% of these total costs. Conclusion: Although HCRU decreased after the initiation of treatment, angioedema-associated emergency department visits and hospitalizations and on-demand treatment fills were not completely eliminated. This indicates ongoing disease and treatment burden despite use of modern HAE medicines.

Interventions for the long-term prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition that causes acute attacks of swelling, pain and reduced quality of life. People with Type I HAE (approximately 80% of all HAE cases) have insufficient amounts of C1 esterase inhibitor (C1-INH) protein; people with Type II HAE (approximately 20% of all cases) may have normal C1-INH concentrations, but, due to genetic mutations, these do not function properly. A few people, predominantly females, experience HAE despite having normal C1-INH levels and C1-INH function (rare Type III HAE). Several new drugs have been developed to treat acute attacks and prevent recurrence of attacks. There is currently no systematic review and meta-analysis that included all preventive medications for HAE. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of interventions for the long-term prevention of HAE attacks in people with Type I, Type II or Type III HAE. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 3 August 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials in children or adults with HAE that used medications to prevent HAE attacks. The comparators could be placebo or active comparator, or both; approved and experimental drug trials were eligible for inclusion. There were no restrictions on dose, frequency or intensity of treatment. The minimum length of four weeks of treatment was required for inclusion; this criterion excluded the acute treatment of HAE attacks. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. HAE attacks (number of attacks per person, per population) and change in number of HAE attacks; 2. mortality and 3. serious adverse events (e.g. hepatic dysfunction, hepatic toxicity and deleterious changes in blood tests). Our secondary outcomes were 4. quality of life; 5. severity of breakthrough attacks; 6. disability and 7. adverse events (e.g. weight gain, mild psychological changes and body hair). We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 15 studies (912 participants) that met the inclusion criteria. The studies included people with Type I and II HAE. The studies investigated avoralstat, berotralstat, subcutaneous C1-INH, plasma-derived C1-INH, nanofiltered C1-INH, recombinant human C1-INH, danazol, and lanadelumab for the prevention of HAE attacks. We did not find any studies on the use of tranexamic acid for prevention of HAE attacks. All drugs except avoralstat reduced the number of HAE attacks compared with placebo. For breakthrough attacks that occurred despite prophylactic treatment, intravenous and subcutaneous forms of C1-INH and lanadelumab reduced attack severity. It is not known whether other drugs have a similar effect, as the severity of breakthrough attacks in people taking drugs other than C1-INH and lanadelumab was not reported. For quality of life, avoralstat, berotralstat, C1-INH (all forms) and lanadelumab increased quality of life compared with placebo; there were no data for danazol. Four studies reported on changes in disability during treatment with C1-INH, berotralstat and lanadelumab; all three drugs decreased disability compared with placebo. Adverse events, including serious adverse events, did not occur at a rate higher than placebo. However, serious adverse event data and other adverse event data were not available for danazol, which prevented us from drawing conclusions about the absolute or relative safety of this drug. No deaths were reported in the included studies. The analysis was limited by the small number of studies, the small number of participants in each study and the lack of data on older drugs, therefore the certainty of the evidence is low. Given the rarity of HAE, it is not surprising that drugs were rarely directly compared, which does not allow conclusions on the comparative efficacy of the various drugs for people with HAE. Finally, we did not identify any studies that included people with Type III HAE. Therefore, we cannot draw any conclusions about the efficacy or safety of any drug in people with this form of HAE. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The available data suggest that berotralstat, C1-INH (subcutaneous, plasma-derived, nanofiltered and recombinant), danazol and lanadelumab are effective in lowering the risk or incidence (or both) of HAE attacks. In addition, C1-INH and lanadelumab decrease the severity of breakthrough attacks (data for other drugs were not available). Avoralstat, berotralstat, C1-INH (all forms) and lanadelumab increase quality of life and do not increase the risk of adverse events, including serious adverse events. It is possible that danazol, subcutaneous C1-INH and recombinant human C1-INH are more effective than berotralstat and lanadelumab in reducing the risk of breakthrough attacks, but the small number of studies and the small size of the studies means that the certainty of the evidence is low. This and the lack of head-to-head trials prevented us from drawing firm conclusions on the relative efficacy of the drugs.

Is Icatibant Safe for the Treatment of Hereditary Angioedema During Pregnancy?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a disorder affecting bradykinin regulation presenting as recurrent cutaneous or mucosal swelling. Treatment options include plasma-derived or human-recombinant C1-inhibitor, icatibant, or ecallantide. Due to the lack of knowledge and experience on the topic, the treatment of choice in pregnancy is plasma-derived C1-inhibitor, and reporting any new experience is recommended. This review presents current guidelines for HAE treatment with a focus on pregnancy and reviews all experience with icatibant use during pregnancy. RECENT FINDINGS: Our experience of treating a pregnant nC1-INH HAE patient with icatibant is presented, with no adverse effects or abnormalities, to add to the growing knowledge of icatibant use during pregnancy. Considering the limited number of attacks that our patient usually experiences, which continued at more or less the same frequency during pregnancy, we feel icatibant to be a safe choice for on-demand HAE treatment during pregnancy for such cases.

Isolated angioedema: A review of classification and update on management.

OBJECTIVE: To review the various types of angioedema including diagnosis and treatment. DATA SOURCES: PubMed search of articles in the English language of various types of angioedema. STUDY SELECTIONS: Articles on the subject matter were selected and reviewed. RESULTS: Herein, a case-based approach is presented for discussing the major types of angioedema, including the following: hereditary angioedema types I and II and normal complement, acquired angioedema, angiotensin-converting enzyme-induced angioedema, and histaminergic and nonhistaminergic angioedema. Emerging treatments of hereditary angioedema including targets of prekallikrein, DNA vector technology replacing C1-INH protein, and CRIPSR technology targeting prekallikrein among many others are explored. In addition, other causes and mimickers of angioedema are briefly reviewed. Finally, a novel algorithm is proposed to help guide the treating physician through the workup and management of patients with suspected idiopathic angioedema unresponsive to conventional therapy with antihistamines. CONCLUSION: Over the years, many strides have been made in both understanding the pathophysiology of various types of angioedema and expansion of treatment options. It is important for clinicians to be aware of current and emerging treatment options. We provide a novel practical algorithm to guide clinicians in challenging cases of idiopathic angioedema refractory to antihistamines.

Prophylactic use of an anti-activated factor XII monoclonal antibody, garadacimab, for patients with C1-esterase inhibitor-deficient hereditary angioedema: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema is associated with dysregulation of the kallikrein-kinin system. Factor XII (FXII) is a key initiator of the kallikrein-kinin system, which produces bradykinin, a central mediator of angioedema. Garadacimab (CSL Behring) is a first-in-class, fully human, immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody targeting activated FXII, intended to prevent attacks in patients with C1-esterase inhibitor-deficient hereditary angioedema (HAE-C1-INH). We aimed to investigate garadacimab as a treatment every 4 weeks for patients with HAE-C1-INH. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, patients with HAE-C1-INH were recruited from 12 research centres in Canada, Germany, Israel, and the USA. Eligible patients were aged 18-65 years and must have had at least four attacks of any severity over a consecutive 2-month period during the 3 months before screening or initiation of previous hereditary angioedema prophylaxis. After a run-in period of 4-8 weeks, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1), using an interactive response technology via block randomisation (block sizes of 1-4), to either placebo or 75 mg, 200 mg, or 600 mg garadacimab. Patients were given an initial intravenous loading dose, and then, on day 6 and every 4 weeks for 12 weeks, they were given a subcutaneous dose of their allocated treatment. The primary endpoint was the number of monthly attacks in the intention-to-treat population (defined as all patients who underwent screening, provided consent, and were assigned to treatment) during the 12-week subcutaneous administration period assessed in the 200 mg and 600 mg garadacimab groups versus placebo. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose or partial dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03712228. FINDINGS: Between Oct 29, 2018, and Aug 28, 2019, 54 patients were screened, of whom 32 were randomly assigned to either placebo (n=8) or 75 mg (n=9), 200 mg (n=8), or 600 mg (n=7) garadacimab. The median age was 39·5 years (28·0-52·5) and 18 (56%) of 32 patients were female and 14 (34%) were male. The median number of monthly attacks during the 12-week subcutaneous treatment period was 4·6 (IQR 3·1-5·0) with placebo, 0·0 (0·0-0·4) with 75 mg garadacimab, 0·0 (0·0-0·0) with 200 mg garadacimab, and 0·3 (0·0-0·7) with 600 mg garadacimab. Compared with placebo, the rate of attacks was significantly reduced with garadacimab at 200 mg (reduced by 100% [95% CI 98-101]; p=0·0002) and 600 mg (reduced by 93% [54-110]; p=0·0003). No serious adverse events, deaths, or adverse events of special interest (anaphylaxis, thromboembolic events, and bleeding events) were observed. INTERPRETATION: Garadacimab 200 mg and 600 mg every 4 weeks significantly reduced the number of monthly attacks versus placebo and was well tolerated during the study. Garadacimab is an efficacious, subcutaneous prophylaxis in patients with HAE-C1-INH and warrants phase 3 evaluation. FUNDING: CSL Behring.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of icatibant and C1 esterase/kallikrein inhibitor in severe COVID-19: study protocol for a three-armed randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, enters the cells through a mechanism dependent on its binding to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), a protein highly expressed in the lungs. The putative viral-induced inhibition of ACE2 could result in the defective degradation of bradykinin, a potent inflammatory substance. We hypothesize that increased bradykinin in the lungs is an important mechanism driving the development of pneumonia and respiratory failure in COVID-19. METHODS: This is a phase II, single-center, three-armed parallel-group, open-label, active control superiority randomized clinical trial. One hundred eighty eligible patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive either the inhibitor of C1e/kallikrein 20 U/kg intravenously on day 1 and day 4 plus standard care; or icatibant 30 mg subcutaneously, three doses/day for 4 days plus standard care; or standard care alone, as recommended in the clinical trials published to date, which includes supplemental oxygen, non-invasive and invasive ventilation, antibiotic agents, anti-inflammatory agents, prophylactic antithrombotic therapy, vasopressor support, and renal replacement therapy. DISCUSSION: Accumulation of bradykinin in the lungs is a common side effect of ACE inhibitors leading to cough. In animal models, the inactivation of ACE2 leads to severe acute pneumonitis in response to lipopolysaccharide (LPS), and the inhibition of bradykinin almost completely restores the lung structure. We believe that inhibition of bradykinin in severe COVID-19 patients could reduce the lung inflammatory response, impacting positively on the severity of disease and mortality rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry Universal Trial Number (UTN) U1111-1250-1843. Registered on May/5/2020.

Recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor (conestat alfa) in the prevention of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized, parallel-group, open-label, multi-center pilot trial (PROTECT-COVID-19).

OBJECTIVES: Conestat alfa, a recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor, is a multi-target inhibitor of inflammatory cascades including the complement, the kinin-kallikrein and the contact activation system. The study objective is to investigate the efficacy and safety of conestat alfa in improving disease severity and short-term outcome in COVID-19 patients with pulmonary disease. TRIAL DESIGN: This study is an investigator-initiated, randomized (2:1 ratio), open-label, parallel-group, controlled, multi-center, phase 2a clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: This trial is conducted in 3 hospitals in Switzerland, 1 hospital in Brazil and 1 hospital in Mexico (academic and non-academic). All patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization for at least 3 calendar days for severe COVID-19 will be screened for study eligibility. INCLUSION CRITERIA: - Signed informed consent - Age 18-85 years - Evidence of pulmonary involvement on CT scan or X-ray of the chest - Duration of symptoms associated with COVID-19 ≤ 10 days - At least one of the following risk factors for progression to mechanical ventilation on the day of enrolment: 1) Arterial hypertension 2) ≥ 50 years 3) Obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) 4) History of cardiovascular disease 5) Chronic pulmonary disease 6) Chronic renal disease 7) C-reactive protein > 35mg/L 8) Oxygen saturation at rest of ≤ 94% when breathing ambient air Exclusion criteria: - Incapacity or inability to provide informed consent - Contraindications to the class of drugs under investigation (C1 esterase inhibitor) - Treatment with tocilizumab or another IL-6R or IL-6 inhibitor before enrolment - History or suspicion of allergy to rabbits - Pregnancy or breast feeding - Active or anticipated treatment with any other complement inhibitor - Liver cirrhosis (any Child-Pugh score) - Admission to an ICU on the day or anticipated within the next 24 hours of enrolment - Invasive or non-invasive ventilation - Participation in another study with any investigational drug within the 30 days prior to enrolment - Enrolment of the study investigators, their family members, employees and other closely related or dependent persons INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Patients randomized to the experimental arm will receive conestat alfa in addition to standard of care (SOC). Conestat alfa (8400 U followed by 4200 U every 8 hours) will be administered as a slow intravenous injection (5-10 minutes) over a 72-hour period (i.e. 9 administrations in total). The first conestat alfa treatment will be administered on the day of enrolment. The control group will receive SOC only. SOC treatment will be administered according to local institutional guidelines, including supplemental oxygen, antibiotics, corticosteroids, remdesivir, and anticoagulation. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint of this trial is disease severity on day 7 after enrolment assessed by an adapted WHO Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement (score 0 will be omitted and score 6 and 7 will be combined) from 1 (no limitation of activities) to 7 (death). Secondary outcomes include (i) the time to clinical improvement (time from randomization to an improvement of two points on the WHO ordinal scale or discharge from hospital) within 14 days after enrolment, (ii) the proportion of participants alive and not having required invasive or non-invasive ventilation at 14 days after enrolment and (iii) the proportion of subjects without an acute lung injury (defined by PaO2/FiO2 ratio of ≤300mmHg) within 14 days after enrolment. Exploratory outcomes include virological clearance, C1 esterase inhibitor pharmacokinetics and changes in routine laboratory parameters and inflammatory proteins. RANDOMISATION: Subjects will be randomised in a 2:1 ratio to treatment with conestat alfa in addition to SOC or SOC only. Randomization is performed via an interactive web response system (SecuTrial®). BLINDING (MASKING): In this open-label trial, participants, caregivers and outcome assessors are not blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): We will randomise approximately 120 individuals (80 in the active treatment arm, 40 in the SOC group). Two interim analyses after 40 and 80 patients are planned according to the Pocock adjusted levels αp = 0.0221. The results of the interim analysis will allow adjustment of the sample size (Lehmacher, Wassmer, 1999). TRIAL STATUS: PROTECT-COVID-19 protocol version 3.0 (July 07 2020). Participant recruitment started on July 30 2020 in one center (Basel, Switzerland, first participant included on August 06 2020). In four of five study centers patients are actively recruited. Participation of the fifth study center (Mexico) is anticipated by mid December 2020. Completion of trial recruitment depends on the development of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, number: NCT04414631 , registered on 4 June 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Oral berotralstat for the prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema attacks in patients in Japan: A phase 3 randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: With no approved treatments in Japan for the prevention of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks, there is a significant unmet need for long-term prophylactic therapies for Japanese patients with HAE. Berotralstat (BCX7353) is an oral, once-daily, highly selective inhibitor of plasma kallikrein in development for prophylaxis of angioedema attacks in HAE patients. METHODS: APeX-J is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 3-part trial conducted in Japan (University Hospital Medical Information Network identifier, UMIN000034869; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03873116). Patients with a clinical diagnosis of type 1 or 2 HAE underwent a prospective run-in period of 56 days to determine eligibility, allowing enrollment of those with ≥2 expert-confirmed angioedema attacks. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) and stratified by baseline attack rate (≥2 vs. <2 expert-confirmed attacks/month between screening and randomization) to receive once-daily berotralstat 110 mg, berotralstat 150 mg, or placebo. The primary endpoint was the rate of expert-confirmed angioedema attacks during dosing in the 24-week treatment period. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were randomized to receive once-daily berotralstat 110 mg (n = 6), berotralstat 150 mg (n = 7), or placebo (n = 6). Treatment with berotralstat 150 mg significantly reduced HAE attacks relative to placebo (1.11 vs. 2.18 attacks/month, p = .003). The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in berotralstat-treated patients (n = 13) were nasopharyngitis (n = 4, 31%), abdominal pain, cough, diarrhea, and pyrexia (n = 2 each, 15%). CONCLUSIONS: Orally administered, once-daily berotralstat 150 mg significantly reduced the frequency of HAE attacks and was safe and well tolerated, supporting its use as a prophylactic therapy in patients with type 1 or 2 HAE in Japan.

Long-Term Efficacy of Subcutaneous C1 Inhibitor in Pediatric Patients with Hereditary Angioedema.

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) due to C1 inhibitor (C1INH) deficiency is characterized by recurrent attacks of edema of the skin and mucosal tissues. Symptoms usually present during childhood (mean age at first attack, 10 years). Earlier symptom onset may predict a more severe disease course. Subcutaneous (SC) C1INH is indicated for routine prophylaxis to prevent HAE attacks in adolescents and adults. We analyzed the long-term efficacy of C1INH (SC) in subjects ≤17 years old treated in an open-label extension (OLE) of the pivotal phase III Clinical Study for Optimal Management of Preventing Angioedema with Low-Volume Subcutaneous C1 Inhibitor Replacement Therapy (COMPACT) trial. Methods: Eligible subjects (age ≥6 years, with ≥4 attacks over 2 consecutive months before entry into the OLE or placebo-controlled COMPACT trial) were treated with C1INH (SC) 40 or 60 IU/kg twice weekly for 52-140 weeks. Subgroup analyses by age (≤17 vs. >17 years) were performed for key efficacy endpoints. Results: Ten subjects were ≤17 years old [mean (range) age, 13.3 (8-16) years, 3 subjects <12 years old; exposure range, 51-133 weeks]. All 10 pediatric subjects experienced ≥50% reduction (mean, 93%) in number of attacks versus the prestudy period, with a 97% reduction in the median number of attacks/month (0.11). All subjects had <1 attack/4-week period and 4 had <1 attack/year (1 subject was attack free). No subject discontinued treatment due to a treatment-related adverse event. Conclusions: Data from pediatric subjects treated with C1INH (SC) for up to 2.55 years and adult subjects revealed similar efficacy. C1INH (SC) is effective and well tolerated as long-term prophylaxis in children, adolescents, and adults with HAE.

Long-term safety and efficacy of subcutaneous C1-inhibitor in older patients with hereditary angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Patients aged 65 years and older with hereditary angioedema (HAE) owing to C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) deficiency may have an altered response to treatment and are at higher risk for treatment-related adverse events (AEs) because of comorbidities and polypharmacy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous C1 esterase inhibitor (C1-INH) in patients aged 65 years and older treated in an open-label extension of a phase 3 trial. METHODS: Eligible patients (≥4 attacks for more than 2 consecutive months) were randomized to receive twice-weekly subcutaneous C1-INH with a dosage of 40 IU/kg or 60 IU/kg for 52 to 140 weeks. Safety end points and efficacy outcomes were evaluated for patients aged 65 years and above and younger than 65 years. RESULTS: Of the 126 patients treated, 10 were 65 years and older (mean age [range], 68 [65-72 years]). A total of 8 of 10 patients had multiple comorbidities, and 6 of these 10 patients were taking more than 5 non-HAE-related drugs concomitantly. AEs occurring in more than 1 patient included injection site bruising (n = 2, related), injection site pain (n = 2, related), urinary tract infection (n = 2, unrelated), and diarrhea (n = 2, unrelated). No thromboembolic events or cases of anaphylaxis were reported. Two patients aged 65 years and older experienced unrelated serious AEs (dehydration and hypokalemia in 1 and pneumonia and an HAE attack leading to hospitalization in another). A total of 6 of 9 evaluable patients were responders, with a greater than or equal to 50% reduction in HAE attacks vs prestudy; 6 of 10 patients had less than 1 attack over 4 weeks and 3 were attack-free (median attack rate, 0.52 attacks per month). CONCLUSION: Subcutaneous C1-INH was well-tolerated and effective in the management of HAE in patients aged 65 years and older with multiple comorbid conditions and polypharmacy.

A Randomized Trial of Recombinant Human C1-Esterase-Inhibitor in the Prevention of Contrast-Induced Kidney Injury.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the efficacy profile and safety of recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor (rhC1INH) in the prevention of contrast-associated acute kidney injury after elective coronary angiography. BACKGROUND: Contrast-associated acute kidney injury is caused by tubular cytotoxicity and ischemia/reperfusion injury. rhC1INH is effective in reducing renal ischemia/reperfusion injury in experimental models. METHODS: In this placebo-controlled, double-blind, single-center trial 77 patients with chronic kidney disease were randomized to receive 50 IU/kg rhC1INH before and 4 h after elective coronary angiography or placebo. The primary outcome was the peak change of urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin within 48 h, a surrogate marker of kidney injury. RESULTS: Median peak change of urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin was lower in the rhC1INH group (4.7 ng/ml vs. 22.5 ng/ml; p = 0.038) in the per-protocol population but not in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, and in patients with percutaneous coronary interventions (median, 1.8 ng/ml vs. 26.2 ng/ml; p = 0.039 corresponding to a median proportion peak change of 11% vs. 205%; p = 0.002). The incidence of a cystatin C increase ≥10% within 24 h was lower in the rhC1INH group (16% vs. 33%; p = 0.045), whereas the frequency of contrast-associated acute kidney injury was comparable. Adverse events during a 3-month follow-up were similarly distributed. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of rhC1INH before coronary angiography may attenuate renal injury as reflected by urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin and cystatin C. The safety profile of rhC1INH was favorable in a patient population with multiple comorbidities. (Recombinant Human C1 Esterase Inhibitor in the Prevention of Contrast-induced Nephropathy in High-risk Subjects [PROTECT]; NCT02869347).

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of home treatment with the recombinant human C1-inhibitor in hereditary angioedema resulting from C1-inhibitor deficiency.

OBJECTIVE: Conestat alpha, a C1-inhibitor produced by recombinant technology (rhC1-INH) is an acute treatment for edematous attacks occurring in hereditary angioedema (HAE) with C1-inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE). Our study evaluated the efficacy and safety of rhC1-INH administered during HAE attacks, and for short-term prophylaxis (STP). MATERIALS & METHOD: Our prospective study analyzed the course of 544 HAE attacks experienced by the 21 C1-INH-HAE patients treated, as well as the outcome of 97 instances of STP implemented with rhC1-INH. Using a purpose-designed questionnaire, the patients recorded relevant, treatment-related information. RESULTS: Time to the administration of rhC1-INH was 90.0 min (median) after the onset of HAE attacks. The symptoms started to improve as early as 60 min after the injection of rhC1-INH, and the attack resolved 730.0 min after treatment. The interval between the onset of the HAE attack and the administration of rhC1-INH correlated with time until the onset of improvement (R = 0.2053 p < 0.0001), and with time to the complete resolution of symptoms (R = 0.2805, p < 0.0001). Nine patients received STP with rhC1-INH in 97 instances. STP successfully prevented the HAE attack within 72 h of the event on 93/97 occasions. No local and serious systemic adverse events/effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with rhC1-INH is effective and safe both for acute management, and for STP. Following the onset of an HAE attack, early administration of rhC1-INH may reduce time to the improvement and to the complete resolution of symptoms. Repeated administration of rhC1-INH does not impair its efficacy.

C1 esterase inhibitor in pediatric cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass plays a vital role in activation of the complement system.

Our prospective study was therefore designed to determine which part of the systemic inflammatory response after cardiac operations resulted from Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) in neonates and infants. After approval by the human ethical committee of the Gunma Children's Medical Center (GCMC) and informed consent of the parents, 40 consecutive term congenital heart disease patients aged until 1 year who underwent long CPB time (> 3 h) at surgery were included in the prospective study between January 2012 and December 2014. C1 esterase inhibitor (C1-inh) drug (@Berinert) was generously provided by CSL Behring (King of Prussia, PA). The C1-inh (20 IU/kg) was given intravenously 60 min after CPB. Blood samples for complement factors were obtained before and 48 h after administration of C1-inh. Six patients did not survive and their data were not included. Of 34 patients included, median age was 6.5 months, median body weight was 6050 g, and 16 (47%) were female. According to the Mann-Whitney U test, there were no differences between the two groups concerning demographic and intraoperative data, postoperative chemical data. C1q concentration was only significant lower in patients with C1-inh non-treated group than in patients with C1-inh treated group. But, the consumption of C1q, C3, C4, CH50, and C1-inh in patients with C1-inhibitor non-treated group was observed early postoperatively. There is a significant difference in the values before and after C1-inh treatment between the two groups. The lower value in the C1-inh-treated group is explained by the activation of the classical pathway through the replenishment of complements by C1-inh treatment. This study proposes the administration of C1-inh is an effective therapy to reduce the activation and improve the clinical capillary leak syndrome.

Three-Year Outcomes of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study Assessing Safety and Efficacy of C1 Esterase Inhibitor for Prevention of Delayed Graft Function in Deceased Donor Kidney Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Delayed graft function is related to ischemia-reperfusion injury and may be complement dependent. We previously reported from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial that treatment with C1 esterase inhibitor was associated with a shorter duration of delayed graft function and higher eGFR at 1 year. Here, we report longer-term outcomes from this trial. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This is a post hoc analysis of a phase 1/2, randomized, controlled trial enrolling 70 recipients of deceased donor kidney transplants at risk for delayed graft function (NCT02134314). Subjects were randomized to receive C1 esterase inhibitor 50 U/kg (n=35) or placebo (n=35) intraoperatively and at 24 hours. The cumulative incidence functions method was used to compare graft failure and death over 3.5 years. eGFR slopes were compared using a linear mixed effects model. RESULTS: Three deaths occurred among C1 esterase inhibitor-treated patients compared with none receiving placebo. Seven graft failures developed in the placebo group compared with one among C1 esterase inhibitor-treated recipients; the cumulative incidence of graft failure was lower over 3.5 years among C1 esterase inhibitor-treated recipients compared with placebo (P=0.03). Although no difference in eGFR slopes was observed between groups (P for group-time interaction =0.12), eGFR declined in placebo-treated recipients (-4 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per year; 95% confidence interval, -8 to -0.1) but was stable in C1 esterase inhibitor-treated patients (eGFR slope: 0.5 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per year; 95% confidence interval, -4 to 5). At 3.5 years, eGFR was 56 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (95% confidence interval, 42 to 70) in the C1 esterase inhibitor group versus 35 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (95% confidence interval, 21 to 48) in the placebo group, with an estimated mean eGFR difference of 21 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (95% confidence interval, 2 to 41 ml/min per 1.73 m2). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of patients at risk for ischemia-reperfusion injury and delayed graft function with C1 esterase inhibitor was associated with a lower incidence of graft failure.

Update on C1 Esterase Inhibitor in Human Solid Organ Transplantation.

Complement plays important roles in both ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) of solid organ allografts. One approach to possibly improve outcomes after transplantation is the use of C1 inhibitor (C1-INH), which blocks the first step in both the classical and lectin pathways of complement activation and also inhibits the contact, coagulation, and kinin systems. C1-INH can also directly block leukocyte-endothelial cell adhesion. C1-INH contrasts with eculizumab and other distal inhibitors, which do not affect C4b or C3b deposition or noncomplement pathways. Authors of reports on trials in kidney transplant recipients have suggested that C1-INH treatment may reduce IRI and delayed graft function, based on decreased requirements for dialysis in the first month after transplantation. This effect was particularly marked with grafts with Kidney Disease Profile Index ≥ 85. Other clinical studies and models suggest that C1-INH may decrease sensitization and donor-specific antibody production and might improve outcomes in AMR, including in patients who are refractory to other modalities. However, the studies have been small and often only single-center. This article reviews clinical data and ongoing trials with C1-INH in transplant recipients, compares the results with those of other complement inhibitors, and summarizes potentially productive directions for future research.