RESUMEN
Background: Telazorlimab is a humanized anti-OX40 monoclonal antibody being studied for treatment of T-cell-mediated diseases. Objective: This randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2b dose-range finding study investigated efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity of telazorlimab in subjects with atopic dermatitis. Methods: In this 2-part study (NCT03568162), adults (≥18 years) with moderate-to-severe disease were randomized to various regimens of subcutaneous telazorlimab or placebo for 16 weeks' blinded treatment, followed by 38 weeks' open-label treatment and 12 weeks' drug-free follow-up. Telazorlimab treatment groups (following a loading dose) in part 1 were 300 mg every 2 weeks; 300 mg every 4 weeks; or 75 mg every 4 weeks. Part 2 evaluated telazorlimab 600 mg every 2 weeks. The primary end point was percentage change from baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) at week 16. Safety assessments included incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. Results: The study randomized 313 subjects in part 1 and 149 in part 2. At 16 weeks, the least squares mean percentage change from baseline in EASI was significantly greater in subjects receiving telazorlimab 300 mg every 2 weeks (part 1) and 600 mg every 2 weeks (part 2) versus placebo (-54.4% vs -34.2% for part 1 and -59.0% vs -41.8% for part 2, P = .008 for both). Telazorlimab was well tolerated, with similar distribution of adverse events between telazorlimab- and placebo-treated subjects in both part 1 and part 2. Conclusion: Telazorlimab, administered subcutaneously at 300 mg every 2 weeks or 600 mg every 2 weeks following a loading dose, was well tolerated and induced significant and progressive clinical improvement in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of molnupiravir for intra-household post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) of COVID-19. METHODS: MOVe-AHEAD was a randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial comparing molnupiravir (800 mg twice daily for 5 days) with placebo. Eligible participants were adult, unvaccinated, asymptomatic household contacts of patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. The primary efficacy endpoint was the incidence of COVID-19 through day 14 in modified intention-to-treat (MITT) participants (those who received ≥1 dose of study intervention) without detectable SARS-CoV-2 at baseline, termed the MITT-VN population. Superiority of molnupiravir was prespecified as a stratified one-sided p-value of <0.0249 for the treatment difference in this endpoint. RESULTS: The MITT population comprised 763 participants randomized to molnupiravir and 764 to placebo; 83.6% had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at baseline. In the MITT-VN population, COVID-19 rates through day 14 were 6.5% with molnupiravir and 8.5% with placebo (one-sided p-value: 0.0848). In the molnupiravir arm, 25/35 of confirmed COVID-19 events (71.4%) occurred after completion of treatment (versus 17/49 [34.7%] for placebo). Adverse event rates were low and similar between molnupiravir and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Molnupiravir was well-tolerated but did not meet the prespecified superiority criterion, possibly influenced in part by the high pre-existing immunity in the trial population.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Nemolizumab, a new monoclonal antibody that targets the receptor alpha of the neuroimmune cytokine interleukin-31 (IL-31), has shown efficacy in atopic dermatitis (AD) in adults. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of nemolizumab in adolescents with moderate to severe AD as well as the relationship between nemolizumab concentrations and clinical efficacy and the effect of nemolizumab on protein biomarkers. METHODS: Open-label, 16-week study of nemolizumab in patients aged 12-17 years with moderate to severe AD (baseline EASI ≥ 16, IGA ≥ 3, and BSA ≥ 10%) and associated pruritus with baseline average daily peak pruritus numeric rating scale (PP-NRS) intensity of at least 4. Nemolizumab was administered subcutaneously as a loading dose of 60 mg at baseline, followed by 30 mg every 4 weeks until week 12 with background topical corticosteroids (TCS) or calcineurin inhibitors (TCI). Subsequently patients were followed for 8 weeks more. Stratum corneum (SC) and plasma samples were collected for biomarker assessments. RESULTS: Twenty patients participated, with a mean age of 14.8 ± 1.6 years. The PK of nemolizumab was described by a one-compartment model with linear elimination, a first-order absorption, and a mean half-life of 16.7 ± 4.1 days. Mean trough concentrations ranged from 2935 ± 1029 ng/mL to 3292 ± 2018 ng/mL over the 16-week treatment period. There was a marked improvement in rash, itch, and sleep with a decrease from baseline to week 16 in EASI by 66.5 ± 32.5%, in PP-NRS by 43.2 ± 37%, and in sleep disturbance numeric rating scale by 53.5 ± 47.8%. The popPK and PK/PD analyses confirmed that model-predicted exposure and efficacy of nemolizumab were similar in adolescents compared to adults receiving the same dosing regimens. Age did not impact PK parameters, while the main source of PK variability was body weight. Analyses of SC samples identified a panel of AD-related pro-inflammatory biomarkers that were upregulated in lesional skin (compared to non-lesional skin) and correspondingly downregulated in clinical responders to nemolizumab (based on EASI75 and PP-NRS ≥ 4). Four biomarkers (CCL20, CCL22, CCL27, and VEGF) had changes that were 1.9-3.5-fold higher in EASI responders than in EASI non-responders (all p < 0.05). Analysis showed no significant correlation between plasma biomarkers and clinical scores. Adverse events were experienced by 33.3% of subjects (n = 6) and were primarily mild or moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Nemolizumab PK and safety profiles in adolescents with moderate to severe AD are consistent with previous nemolizumab studies in adults. PK/PD models demonstrate similar exposure-response profiles in 12- to 17-year-old adolescents and adults for three clinical endpoints (EASI, IGA, and PP-NRS). Nemolizumab treatment reversed AD-related pro-inflammatory biomarkers in skin, indicating that the neuroimmune cytokine IL-31 is an important mediator of multiple pathways in AD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03921411.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Tezepelumab is an anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin monoclonal antibody in development for the treatment of severe asthma. This study assessed the functionality and performance of an accessorized pre-filled syringe (APFS) and an autoinjector (AI) for administration of tezepelumab in the clinic and at home. METHODS: This phase 3, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study (PATH-HOME, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03968978) was conducted in patients aged 12-80 years with asthma that was uncontrolled despite treatment with medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus at least one additional controller medication. Patients received six subcutaneous doses of tezepelumab 210 mg via APFS or AI. The first dose was administered by a healthcare professional, and patients or caregivers administered subsequent doses. First, second, third and final doses were administered in the clinic; fourth and fifth doses were administered at home. The primary endpoint was the proportion of successful administrations of tezepelumab. Secondary endpoints included the functionality and performance of the devices, Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-6 score, pharmacokinetics and safety. RESULTS: Overall, 216 patients were randomized (APFS, n=111; AI, n=105). Tezepelumab was successfully administered via APFS by 91.7% of the participants (100/109) and via AI by 92.4% (97/105). Overall, 95.4-97.1% of at-home administrations were successful across device groups. Malfunction occurred in 6 of 655 dispensed APFSs and 5 of 624 dispensed AIs. Clinically meaningful improvements in ACQ-6 score were observed after 24 weeks in 81.1% and 76.2% of the patients in the APFS and AI groups, respectively. Tezepelumab pharmacokinetics were consistent between device groups and with previous studies. The most common adverse event was nasopharyngitis (9.3%). Injection-site reactions occurred in 5.7% and 0% of the patients in the AI and APFS groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the APFS and AI were functional and reliable, and performed equally well at home and in the clinic.
