A Randomized, Phase 2 Study of 24-h Efficacy and Tolerability of Netarsudil in Ocular Hypertension and Open-Angle Glaucoma.

INTRODUCTION: Pharmacotherapy to lower intraocular pressure (IOP) is a mainstay of treatment aimed at delaying progression of visual field loss in ocular hypertension (OHT) and open-angle glaucoma (OAG), but some topical treatments are less effective in controlling IOP at night. Peak IOP may be related to glaucoma progression and can occur outside office hours. A phase 2 study was conducted to evaluate the IOP-lowering efficacy of netarsudil across the diurnal and nocturnal periods. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-masked, single-center, vehicle-controlled, 9-day study. After washout of any prior ocular hypotensive agents, 12 patients with OHT or OAG underwent baseline IOP assessment at 15:00, 18:00, 21:00, 00:00, 03:00, 06:00, 09:00, and 12:00 h on day 1/day 2. Participants were then randomized in a 2:1 ratio to netarsudil ophthalmic solution 0.02% (n = 8) or vehicle (n = 4) for 7 days of self-administered dosing each evening. IOP was assessed at the same time points on day 8/day 9. All measurements were conducted with a Perkins tonometer in habitual positions by day (seated) and at night (supine). RESULTS: Baseline mean 24-h IOP was 22.4 mmHg in the netarsudil group and 22.9 mmHg in the vehicle group. Netarsudil was associated with a reduction in mean nocturnal IOP (measurements at 21:00, 00:00, 03:00, 06:00 h) of 3.5 mmHg, which was significant relative to baseline nocturnal IOP (P < 0.001) and the reduction in the vehicle group (0.4 mmHg; P < 0.001 vs. netarsudil). Reduction in mean diurnal IOP with netarsudil (3.5 mmHg) was the same as the nocturnal reduction and statistically significant versus baseline (P < 0.001) and the vehicle group (0.9 mmHg; P < 0.01). The magnitude of IOP reductions with netarsudil was consistent at each time point assessed over the 24-h period. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Netarsudil exhibited consistent IOP-lowering efficacy over a 24-h period in this short-term study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02874846.

When pressure inside the eye (called intraocular pressure [IOP]) builds up, a patient may develop a condition known as glaucoma, in which damage to the optic nerve and possibly irreversible vision loss occur. Glaucoma can be preceded in some patients by a condition called ocular hypertension (OHT). Patients with OHT and the most common type of glaucoma (open-angle glaucoma [OAG]) should be treated to lower their IOP and decrease the risk for progressive visual loss. Several studies that have evaluated 24-h IOP control have indicated that some eye drops lower IOP less effectively at night than during the day. A pilot study was conducted in 12 patients with OHT or OAG to evaluate netarsudil's IOP lowering effect during the day and at night. After a week of treatment with netarsudil or a similar eye drop that did not contain the active drug, patients who took netarsudil experienced the same decrease in IOP at night as during the day. IOP was statistically lower with netarsudil than with the drug-free comparator both during the day and at night. Although this was a small study in 12 patients, the results are of interest because they suggest that netarsudil might consistently reduce IOP over a 24-h period.

One Year of Netarsudil and Latanoprost Fixed-Dose Combination for Elevated Intraocular Pressure: Phase 3, Randomized MERCURY-1 Study.

PURPOSE: A phase 3 trial (MERCURY-1) investigated efficacy and safety of a once-daily, fixed-dose combination (FDC) of netarsudil and latanoprost, compared with each active component, in reducing elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT). A planned 3-month analysis demonstrated the superiority of netarsudil/latanoprost FDC over its individual active components at every assessment. Herein, the 12-month efficacy and safety of netarsudil/latanoprost FDC are reported. DESIGN: Double-masked, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients had unmedicated IOP >20 to <36 mmHg in both eyes at 8:00 am and met other standard criteria for OAG or OHT. METHODS: Randomization to once-daily netarsudil 0.02%/latanoprost 0.005% FDC (n = 238), netarsudil 0.02% only (n = 243), or latanoprost 0.005% only (n = 237). Patients instilled study drug into each eye between 8:00 pm and 10:00 pm. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: IOP was obtained at 8:00 am, 10:00 am, and 4:00 pm on day 1 (baseline); at weeks 2 and 6; and at months 3, 6, 9, and 12. Ocular and systemic safety were evaluated up to month 12. RESULTS: Netarsudil/latanoprost FDC maintained statistically superior IOP lowering compared to its components at every assessment for 12 months. Least squares mean diurnal IOP (± standard error) at month 12 was 16.2 ± 0.23 mmHg for netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, 17.9 ± 0.20 mmHg for netarsudil, and 17.6 ± 0.18 mmHg for latanoprost (P < 0.05 for netarsudil/latanoprost FDC versus each comparator). The safety profile of netarsudil/latanoprost FDC was consistent with its individual components. The proportion of patients who experienced at least 1 adverse event (AE) was 82.8% (197/238) in the netarsudil/latanoprost FDC group, 78.2% (190/243) in the netarsudil group, and 54.0% (128/237) in the latanoprost group. The most common AE was conjunctival hyperemia, mostly of mild severity, with an incidence of 63.0% in the netarsudil/latanoprost FDC treatment group compared with 51.4% in the netarsudil group and 21.9% in the latanoprost group. CONCLUSIONS: Results at 12 months revealed superior efficacy for netarsudil/latanoprost FDC compared with the individual components, netarsudil and latanoprost, at every time point assessed and an ocular tolerability profile similar to that of netarsudil alone.

Long-term gene expression in dividing and nondividing cells using SV40-derived vectors.

Among the goals of gene therapy is long-term expression of delivered transgenes. Recombinant Tagdeleted SV40 vectors (rSV40s) are especially well suited for this purpose. rSV40s deliver transgene expression that endures for extended periods of time in tissue culture and in vivo, in both dividing and nondividing cells. These vectors are particularly effective in transducing some cell types that have been almost unapproachable using other gene delivery systems, such as quiescent hematopoietic progenitor cells and their differentiated derivatives. Other cellular targets include neurons, brain microglia, hepatocytes, dendritic cells, vascular endothelium, and others. Because rSV40s do not elicit neutralizing antibodies they are useful for in vivo gene delivery in settings where more than one administration may be desirable. The key characteristics of these vectors include their high production titers and therefore suitability for large cell pools, effectiveness in delivering intracellular proteins, and untranslated RNAs, maintenance of transgene expression at constant levels for extended times, suitability for constitutive or conditional promoters and for combinatorial gene delivery and ability to integrate into genomes of both dividing and nondividing cells.

What they are, how they work and why they do what they do? The story of SV40-derived gene therapy vectors and what they have to offer.

The natural function of viruses is to deliver their genetic material to cells. Among the most effective of viruses in doing that is Simian Virus-40 (SV40). The properties that make SV40 a successful virus make it an attractive candidate for use as a gene delivery vehicle: high titer replication, infectivity for almost all nucleated cell types whether the cells are dividing or resting, potential for integration into cellular DNA, a peculiar pathway for entering cells that bypasses the cells' antigen processing apparatus, very high stability, and the apparent ability to activate expression of its own capsid genes in trans. Exploiting these and other characteristics of wild type (wt) SV40, increasing numbers of laboratories are studying recombinant (r) SV40-derived vectors. Among the uses to which these vectors have been applied are: delivering therapy to inhibit HIV, hepatitis C virus (HCV) and other viruses; correction of inherited hepatic and other protein deficiencies; immunizing against lentiviral and other antigens; treatment of inherited and acquired diseases of the central nervous system; protecting the lung and other organs from free radical-induced injury; and many others. The effectiveness of these vectors is a reflection of the adaptive evolution that produced their parent virus, wt SV40. This article explores how and why these vectors work, their strengths and their limitations, and provides a functional model for their exploitation for experimental and clinical applications.

Durable cytotoxic immune responses against gp120 elicited by recombinant SV40 vectors encoding HIV-1 gp120 +/- IL-15.

BACKGROUND: A vaccine that elicits durable, powerful anti-HIV immunity remains an elusive goal. In these studies we tested whether multiple treatments with viral vector-delivered HIV envelope antigen (gp120), with and without IL-15, could help to approach that goal. For this purpose, we used recombinant Tag-deleted SV40-derived vectors (rSV40s), since they do not elicit neutralizing antibody responses, and so can be given multiply without loss of transduction efficiency. METHODS: SV(gp120) carried the coding sequences for HIV-1NL4-3 Env, and SV(mIL-15) carried the cDNA for mouse IL-15. Singly, and in combination, these two vectors were given monthly to BALB/cJ mice. Cytotoxic immunity and cytotoxic memory were tested in direct cytotoxicity assays using unselected effector cells. Antibody vs. gp120 was measured in a binding assay. In both cases, targets were P815 cells that were stably transfected with gp120. RESULTS: Multiple injections of SV(gp120) elicited powerful anti-gp120 cytolytic activity (>70% specific lysis) by unselected spleen cells. Cells from multiply-immunized mice that were rested 1 year after their last injections still showed >60% gp120-specific lysis. Anti-gp120 antibody was first detected after 2 monthly injections of SV(gp120) and remained elevated thereafter. Adding SV(mIL-15) to the immunization regimen dramatically accelerated the development of memory cytolytic responses, with >/= 50% specific lysis seen 1 month after two treatments. IL-15 did not alter the development of antibody responses. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, rSV40s encoding antigens and immunostimulatory cytokines may be useful tools for priming and/or boosting immune responses against HIV.

Immune responses against SIV envelope glycoprotein, using recombinant SV40 as a vaccine delivery vector.

Vaccination protocols using viral gene delivery vectors have often generated relatively weak responses, largely owing to difficulties in boosting immune responses effectively following the primary injection. Because recombinant gene delivery vectors derived from SV40 permit multiple inoculations, to yield incremental immune responses, we tested the use of rSV40s to deliver lentiviral envelope antigens for immunization. An rSV40 carrying SIVmac239 envelope glycoprotein gp130 cDNA (SV(gp130)) was given multiple times to BALB/c mice, with or without a prior priming inoculation using vaccinia virus carrying the same SIV envelope cDNA (VVenvSIV). Sera from these mice were tested for antibodies binding gp130, applying a novel cell-based ELISA protocol that used as targets cloned P815 cells stably transfected with plasmid-derived gp130 cDNA. The same gp130-expressing clone of P815 cells, labeled with 51Cr was used as targets for direct lymphocyte-mediated cytolytic assays using spleen and popliteal lymph node cells as effectors. After six inoculations with SV(gp130), mice made detectable anti-gp130 antibody responses, but high levels of splenic and popliteal lymph node cytotoxic activity were apparent after as few as three injections of SV(gp130) (>40% specific lysis). A single primary inoculation with VVenvSIV preceding SV(gp130) boosts significantly enhanced antibody responses against SIV gp130, but had little effect on cytotoxic lymphocyte responses. Thus, rSV40 vectors may be useful vehicles for delivering lentiviral envelope antigens to elicit protective humoral and cell-mediated immune responses.