Characterization of human placenta-derived exosome (pExo) as a potential osteoarthritis disease modifying therapeutic.

OBJECTIVE: Human placenta-derived exosomes (pExo) were generated, characterized, and evaluated as a therapeutic candidate for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: pExo was generated from full-term human placenta tissues by sequential centrifugation, purification, and sterile filtration. Upon analysis of particle size, cytokine composition, and exosome marker expression, pExo was further tested in cell-based assays to examine its effects on human chondrocytes. In vivo therapeutic efficacies were evaluated in a medial meniscal tear/medial collateral ligament tear (MCLT + MMT) rat model, in which animals received pExo injections intraarticularly and weight bearing tests during in-life stage while histopathology and immunohistochemistry were performed as terminal endpoints. RESULTS: pExo displayed typical particle size, expressed maker proteins of exosome, and contained proteins with pro-proliferative, pro-anabolic, anti-catabolic, or anti-inflammatory activities. In vitro, pExo promoted chondrocyte migration and proliferation dose-dependently, which may involve its activation of cell growth-related signaling pathways. Expression of inflammatory and catabolic genes induced in a cellular OA model was significantly suppressed by pExo. In the rat OA model, pExo alleviated pain burden, restored cartilage degeneration, and downregulated expressions of pro-inflammatory, catabolic, or apoptotic proteins in a dose-dependent manner. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that pExo has multiple potential therapeutic effects including symptom control and disease modifying characteristics. This may make it an attractive candidate for further development as an anti-OA therapeutic.

C reactive protein utilisation, a biomarker for early COVID-19 treatment, improves lenzilumab efficacy: results from the randomised phase 3 'LIVE-AIR' trial.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 severity is correlated with granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and C reactive protein (CRP) levels. In the phase three LIVE-AIR trial, lenzilumab an anti-GM-CSF monoclonal antibody, improved the likelihood of survival without ventilation (SWOV) in COVID-19, with the greatest effect in participants having baseline CRP below a median of 79 mg/L. Herein, the utility of baseline CRP to guide lenzilumab treatment was assessed. DESIGN: A subanalysis of the randomised, blinded, controlled, LIVE-AIR trial in which lenzilumab or placebo was administered on day 0 and participants were followed through Day 28. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalised COVID-19 participants (N=520) with SpO2 ≤94% on room air or requiring supplemental oxygen but not invasive mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: Lenzilumab (1800 mg; three divided doses, q8h, within 24 hours) or placebo infusion alongside corticosteroid and remdesivir treatments. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was the time-to-event analysis difference in SWOV through day 28 between lenzilumab and placebo treatments, stratified by baseline CRP. RESULTS: SWOV was achieved in 152 (90%; 95% CI 85 to 94) lenzilumab and 144 (79%; 72 to 84) placebo-treated participants with baseline CRP <150 mg/L (HR: 2.54; 95% CI 1.46 to 4.41; p=0.0009) but not with CRP ≥150 mg/L (HR: 1.04; 95% CI 0.51 to 2.14; p=0.9058). A statistically significant interaction between CRP and lenzilumab treatment was observed (p=0.044). Grade ≥3 adverse events with lenzilumab were comparable to placebo in both CRP strata. No treatment-emergent serious adverse events were attributed to lenzilumab. CONCLUSION: Hospitalised hypoxemic patients with COVID-19 with baseline CRP <150 mg/L derived the greatest clinical benefit from treatment with lenzilumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04351152; ClinicalTrials.gov.

Clinical and Economic Benefits of Lenzilumab Plus Standard of Care Compared with Standard of Care Alone for the Treatment of Hospitalized Patients with Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) from the Perspective of National Health Service England.

Purpose: To estimate the clinical and economic benefits of lenzilumab plus standard of care (SOC) compared with SOC alone in the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients from the National Health Service (NHS) England perspective. Methods: A cost calculator was developed to estimate the clinical benefits and costs of adding lenzilumab to SOC in newly hospitalized COVID-19 patients over 28 days. The LIVE-AIR trial results informed the clinical inputs: failure to achieve survival without ventilation (SWOV), mortality, time to recovery, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) use. Base case costs included drug acquisition and administration for lenzilumab and remdesivir and hospital resource costs based on the level of care required. Clinical and economic benefits per weekly cohort of newly hospitalized patients were also estimated. Results: In all populations examined, specified clinical outcomes were improved with lenzilumab plus SOC over SOC treatment alone. In a base case population aged <85 years with C-reactive protein (CRP) <150 mg/L, with or without remdesivir, adding lenzilumab to SOC was estimated to result in per-patient cost savings of £1162. In a weekly cohort of 4754 newly hospitalized patients, addition of lenzilumab to SOC could result in 599 IMV uses avoided, 352 additional lives saved, and over £5.5 million in cost savings. Scenario results for per-patient cost savings included: 1) aged <85 years, CRP <150 mg/L, and receiving remdesivir (£3127); 2) Black patients with CRP <150 mg/L (£9977); and 3) Black patients from the full population (£2369). Conversely, in the full mITT population, results estimated additional cost of £4005 per patient. Conclusion: Findings support clinical benefits for SWOV, mortality, time to recovery, time in ICU, time on IMV, and ventilator use, and an economic benefit from the NHS England perspective when adding lenzilumab to SOC for hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Clinical and economic benefits of lenzilumab plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the United States from the hospital perspective.

AIMS: Estimate the clinical and economic benefits of lenzilumab plus standard of care (SOC) compared with SOC alone in the treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia from the United States (US) hospital perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A per-patient cost calculator was developed to report the clinical and economic benefits associated with adding lenzilumab to SOC in newly hospitalized COVID-19 patients over 28 days. Clinical inputs were based on the LIVE-AIR trial, including failure to achieve survival without ventilation (SWOV), mortality, time to recovery, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) use. Base case costs included the anticipated list price of lenzilumab, drug administration, and hospital resource costs based on the level of care required. A scenario analysis examined projected one-year rehospitalization costs. RESULTS: In the base case and all scenarios, lenzilumab plus SOC improved all specified clinical outcomes relative to SOC alone. Lenzilumab plus SOC resulted in estimated cost savings of $3,190 per patient in a population aged <85 years with C-reactive protein (CRP) levels <150 mg/L and receiving remdesivir (base case). Per-patient cost savings were observed in the following scenarios: (1) aged <85 years with CRP <150 mg/L, with or without remdesivir ($1,858); (2) Black and African American patients with CRP <150 mg/L ($13,154); and (3) Black and African American patients from the full population, regardless of CRP level ($2,763). In the full modified intent-to-treat population, an additional cost of $4,952 per patient was estimated. When adding rehospitalization costs to the index hospitalization, a total per-patient cost savings of $5,154 was estimated. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the clinical benefits for SWOV, ventilator use, time to recovery, mortality, time in ICU, and time on IMV, in addition to an economic benefit from the US hospital perspective associated with adding lenzilumab to SOC for COVID-19 patients.

ROBUST: A Phase III Study of Lenalidomide Plus R-CHOP Versus Placebo Plus R-CHOP in Previously Untreated Patients With ABC-Type Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Patients with the activated B-cell-like (ABC) subtype of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) historically showed inferior survival with standard rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Phase II studies demonstrated that adding the immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide to R-CHOP improved outcomes in ABC-type DLBCL. The goal of the global, phase III ROBUST study was to compare lenalidomide plus R-CHOP (R2-CHOP) with placebo/R-CHOP in previously untreated, ABC-type DLBCL. METHODS: Histology and cell-of-origin type were prospectively analyzed by central pathology prior to random assignment and study treatment. Patients with ABC-DLBCL received lenalidomide oral 15 mg/d, days 1-14/21 plus standard R-CHOP21 versus placebo/R-CHOP21 for six cycles. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) per independent central radiology review. RESULTS: A total of 570 patients with ABC-DLBCL (n = 285 per arm) were stratified by International Prognostic Index score, age, and bulky disease, and randomly assigned to R2-CHOP or placebo/R-CHOP. Baseline demographics were similar between arms. Most patients completed six cycles of treatment: 74% R2-CHOP and 84% placebo/R-CHOP. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events for R2-CHOP versus placebo/R-CHOP were neutropenia (60% v 48%), anemia (22% v 14%), thrombocytopenia (17% v 11%), and leukopenia (14% v 15%). The primary end point of PFS was not met, with a hazard ratio of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.14) and P = .29; median PFS has not been reached for either arm. PFS trends favoring R2-CHOP over placebo/R-CHOP were seen in patients with higher-risk disease. CONCLUSION: ROBUST is the first DLBCL phase III study to integrate biomarker-driven identification of eligible ABC patients. Although the ROBUST trial did not meet the primary end point of PFS in all patients, the safety profile of R2-CHOP was consistent with individual treatments with no new safety signals.