Efficacy and Safety of Donidalorsen for Hereditary Angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema is a rare disorder characterized by episodic, potentially life-threatening swelling caused by kallikrein-kinin dysregulation. Long-term prophylaxis can stabilize this system. Donidalorsen, an antisense oligonucleotide, specifically reduces prekallikrein expression. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned patients with hereditary angioedema to receive donidalorsen (80 mg subcutaneously) or placebo once every 4 or 8 weeks. The primary end point was the time-normalized number of investigator-confirmed hereditary angioedema attacks per 4 weeks (attack rate) from week 1 to week 25. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients received donidalorsen every 4 weeks (45 patients), donidalorsen every 8 weeks (23 patients), or placebo (22 patients). The least-squares mean time-normalized attack rate was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.73) in the 4-week group, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.59) in the 8-week group, and 2.26 (95% CI, 1.66 to 3.09) in the placebo group. The mean attack rate from week 1 to week 25 was 81% lower (95% CI, 65 to 89) in the 4-week group than in the placebo group (P<0.001) and 55% lower (95% CI, 22 to 74) in the 8-week group than in the placebo group (P = 0.004); the median reduction in the attack rate from baseline was 90% in the 4-week group, 83% in the 8-week group, and 16% in the placebo group. The mean attack rate during weeks 5 to 25 was 87% lower (95% CI, 72 to 94) in the 4-week group than in the placebo group (P<0.001) and 60% lower (95% CI, 25 to 79) in the 8-week group than in the placebo group. Donidalorsen administered every 4 weeks resulted in an improvement in the least-squares mean total score for the change at week 25 on the Angioedema Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (scores range from 0 to 100, with a score of 100 indicating the worst possible quality of life) that was 18.6 points (95% CI, 9.5 to 27.7) better than that with placebo (P<0.001). The most common adverse events were erythema at the injection site, headache, and nasopharyngitis; 98% of adverse events were mild or moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Donidalorsen treatment reduced the hereditary angioedema attack rate, a finding that supports potential prophylactic use for hereditary angioedema. (Funded by Ionis Pharmaceuticals; OASIS-HAE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05139810.).

Garadacimab for hereditary angioedema attack prevention: long-term efficacy, quality of life, and safety data from a phase 2, randomised, open-label extension study.

BACKGROUND: Garadacimab is a fully human immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody targeting activated factor XII. This study evaluated long-term efficacy, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and safety data for garadacimab in adults with hereditary angioedema. METHODS: This global phase 2 study comprised a treatment period 1 (TP1: 12 weeks, double-blind, placebo-controlled) and a treatment period 2 (TP2: ≥44-week open-label extension). Patients aged 18-65 years with clinically confirmed hereditary angioedema were eligible. In TP1, 32 patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive subcutaneous garadacimab (75 mg, 200 mg, or 600 mg) or placebo every 4 weeks (once monthly). Randomisation was done using interactive response technology via block randomisation (block sizes 1-4). Subsequently, six additional patients in TP1 were assigned to open-label garadacimab 400 mg every 2 weeks. At the start of TP2, patients were re-randomised (if receiving placebo, garadacimab 75 mg, or garadacimab 400 mg) or continued to receive garadacimab 200 mg or garadacimab 600 mg once monthly. After a protocol amendment on March 20, 2020, patients originally assigned to the 600 mg dose were down-titrated to 200 mg at their next visit. The primary endpoint (published previously) was monthly attack rate for patients receiving 200 mg or 600 mg garadacimab in TP1 in the intention-to-treat population. Here, we assessed the impact of garadacimab on patient-reported and investigator-reported outcomes and HRQoL as well as long-term efficacy and safety. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03712228, and is completed. FINDINGS: Of 54 patients screened between Oct 29, 2018, and Aug 28, 2019, 32 randomised and six open-label patients completed TP1 and entered TP2 (20 in the garadacimab 200 mg group; 18 in the garadacimab 600 mg group; total 38 patients). Median age was 39·0 years (IQR 27·0-53·0), and 21 patients (55%) were female and 17 (45%) were male. In TP2, the median garadacimab exposure was 87·9 weeks (IQR 50·0-106·6) in the garadacimab 200 mg group and 44·1 weeks (24·1-56·1) in the garadacimab 600 mg group. Median monthly attack rates were 0·0 (IQR 0·0-0·1) in the garadacimab 200 mg group and 0·1 (0·0-0·4) in the garadacimb 600 mg group. Median reduction in monthly attack rate versus run-in was 100% (IQR 98-100) with garadacimab 200 mg. HRQoL improvements observed during TP1 with garadacimab were sustained throughout TP2. TP2 safety signals were consistent with TP1. Two patients experienced serious adverse events of diverticular perforation and asthma (not garadacimab-related). Treatment-emergent adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in severity. The most common adverse events were headache (nine of 38, 24%) and abdominal pain (seven of 38, 18%). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Once-monthly garadacimab for more than 2 years in patients with hereditary angioedema was well tolerated and efficacious in reducing monthly attack rate and improving HRQoL. These results reveal the potential of long-term prophylactic treatment with 200 mg once-monthly garadacimab towards complete disease control of patients with hereditary angioedema. FUNDING: CSL Behring.

Definition, acronyms, nomenclature, and classification of angioedema (DANCE): AAAAI, ACAAI, ACARE, and APAAACI DANCE consensus.

BACKGROUND: Angioedema (AE) manifests with intermittent, localized, self-limiting swelling of the subcutaneous and/or submucosal tissue. AE is heterogeneous, can be hereditary or acquired, may occur only once or be recurrent, may exhibit wheals or not, and may be due to mast cell mediators, bradykinin, or other mechanisms. Several different taxonomic systems are currently used, making it difficult to compare the results of studies, develop multicenter collaboration, and harmonize AE treatment. OBJECTIVE: We developed a consensus on the definition, acronyms, nomenclature, and classification of AE (DANCE). METHODS: The initiative involved 91 experts from 35 countries and was endorsed by 53 scientific and medical societies, and patient organizations. A consensus was reached by online discussion and voting using the Delphi process over a period of 16 months (June 2021 to November 2022). RESULTS: The DANCE initiative resulted in an international consensus on the definition, classification, and terminology of AE. The new consensus classification features 5 types and endotypes of AE and a harmonized vocabulary of abbreviations/acronyms. CONCLUSION: The DANCE classification complements current clinical guidelines and expert consensus recommendations on the diagnostic assessment and treatment of AE. DANCE does not replace current clinical guidelines, and expert consensus algorithms and should not be misconstrued in a way that affects reimbursement of medicines prescribed by physicians using sound clinical judgment. We anticipate that this new AE taxonomy and nomenclature will harmonize and facilitate AE research and clinical studies, thereby improving patient care.

A Core Outcome Set for Efficacy of Acute Treatment of Hereditary Angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials investigating drugs for the acute treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks have assessed many different outcomes. This heterogeneity limits the comparability of trial results and may lead to selective outcome reporting bias and a high burden on trial participants. OBJECTIVE: To achieve consensus on a core outcome set composed of key outcomes that ideally should be used in all clinical efficacy trials involving the acute treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks. METHODS: We conducted a Delphi consensus study involving all relevant parties: patients with hereditary angioedema, hereditary angioedema expert clinicians and clinical researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory bodies. Two Internet-based survey rounds were conducted. In round 1, panelists indicated the importance of individual outcomes used in clinical trials on a 9-point Likert scale. Based on these results, a core outcome set was developed and voted on by panelists in round 2. RESULTS: A total of 58 worldwide panelists completed both rounds. The first round demonstrated high importance scores and substantial agreement among the panelists. In the second round, a consensus of 90% or greater was achieved on a core outcome set consisting of five key outcomes: change in overall symptom severity at one predetermined time point between 15 minutes and 4 hours after treatment, time to end of progression of all symptoms, the need for rescue medication during the entire attack, impairment of daily activities, and treatment satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This international study obtained a high level of consensus on a core outcome set for the acute treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks, consisting of five key outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of garadacimab, a factor XIIa inhibitor for hereditary angioedema prevention (VANGUARD): a global, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema is a rare and potentially life-threatening genetic disease that is associated with kallikrein-kinin system dysregulation. Garadacimab (CSL312), a novel, fully-human monoclonal antibody that inhibits activated factor XII (FXIIa), is being studied for the prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-monthly subcutaneous administrations of garadacimab as prophylaxis for hereditary angioedema. METHODS: VANGUARD was a pivotal, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial that recruited patients (aged ≥12 years) with type I or type II hereditary angioedema across seven countries (Canada, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Japan, the Netherlands, and the USA). Eligible patients were randomly assigned (3:2) to receive garadacimab or placebo for 6 months (182 days) by an interactive response technology (IRT) system. Randomisation was stratified by age (≤17 years vs >17 years) and baseline attack rate (1 to <3 attacks per month vs ≥3 attacks per month) for the adult group. The randomisation list and code were kept by the IRT provider during the study, with no access by site staff and funding representatives. All patients and investigational site staff, and representatives from the funder (or their delegates) with direct interaction with the study sites or patients, were masked to treatment assignment in a double-blind fashion. Randomly assigned patients received a 400-mg loading dose of subcutaneous garadacimab as two 200-mg injections or volume-matched placebo on day 1 of the treatment period, followed by five additional self-administered (or caregiver-administered) monthly doses of 200-mg subcutaneous garadacimab or volume-matched placebo. The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed time-normalised number of hereditary angioedema attacks (number of hereditary angioedema attacks per month) during the 6-month treatment period (day 1 to day 182). Safety was evaluated in patients who received at least one dose of garadacimab or placebo. The study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register, 2020-000570-25 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04656418. FINDINGS: Between Jan 27, 2021, and June 7, 2022, we screened 80 patients, 76 of whom were eligible to enter the run-in period of the study. Of 65 eligible patients with type I or type II hereditary angioedema, 39 were randomly assigned to garadacimab and 26 to placebo. One patient was randomly assigned in error and did not enter the treatment period (no dose of study drug received), resulting in 39 patients assigned to garadacimab and 25 patients assigned to placebo being included. 38 (59%) of 64 participants were female and 26 (41%) were male. 55 (86%) of 64 participants were White, six (9%) were Asian (Japanese), one (2%) was Black or African American, one (2%) was Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and one (2%) was listed as other. During the 6-month treatment period (day 1 to day 182), the mean number of investigator-confirmed hereditary angioedema attacks per month was significantly lower in the garadacimab group (0·27, 95% CI 0·05 to 0·49) than in the placebo group (2·01, 1·44 to 2·57; p<0·0001), corresponding to a percentage difference in means of -87% (95% CI -96 to -58; p<0·0001). The median number of hereditary angioedema attacks per month was 0 (IQR 0·00-0·31) for garadacimab and 1·35 (1·00-3·20) for placebo. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were upper-respiratory tract infections, nasopharyngitis, and headaches. FXIIa inhibition was not associated with an increased risk of bleeding or thromboembolic events. INTERPRETATION: Monthly garadacimab administration significantly reduced hereditary angioedema attacks in patients aged 12 years and older compared with placebo and had a favourable safety profile. Our results support the use of garadacimab as a potential prophylactic therapy for the treatment of hereditary angioedema in adolescents and adults. FUNDING: CSL Behring.

The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema - The 2021 revision and update.

Hereditary Angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease for which early diagnosis and effective therapy are critical. This revision and update of the global WAO/EAACI guideline on the diagnosis and management of HAE provides up-to-date guidance for the management of HAE. For this update and revision of the guideline, an international panel of experts reviewed the existing evidence, developed 28 recommendations, and established consensus by an online DELPHI process. The goal of these recommendations and guideline is to help physicians and their patients in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1-inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1-inhibitor (type 2), by providing guidance on common and important clinical issues, such as: 1) How should HAE be diagnosed? 2) When should HAE patients receive prophylactic on top of on-demand treatment and what treatments should be used? 3) What are the goals of treatment? 4) Should HAE management be different for special HAE patient groups such as children or pregnant/breast feeding women? 5) How should HAE patients monitor their disease activity, impact, and control? It is also the intention of this guideline to help establish global standards for the management of HAE and to encourage and facilitate the use of recommended diagnostics and therapies for all patients.

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.

The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema-The 2021 revision and update.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease for which early diagnosis and effective therapy are critical. This revision and update of the global WAO/EAACI guideline on the diagnosis and management of HAE provides up-to-date guidance for the management of HAE. For this update and revision of the guideline, an international panel of experts reviewed the existing evidence, developed 28 recommendations, and established consensus by an online DELPHI process. The goal of these recommendations and guideline is to help physicians and their patients in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1 inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1 inhibitor (type 2), by providing guidance on common and important clinical issues, such as: (1) How should HAE be diagnosed? (2) When should HAE patients receive prophylactic on top of on-demand treatment and what treatments should be used? (3) What are the goals of treatment? (4) Should HAE management be different for special HAE patient groups such as children or pregnant/breast-feeding women? and (5) How should HAE patients monitor their disease activity, impact, and control? It is also the intention of this guideline to help establish global standards for the management of HAE and to encourage and facilitate the use of recommended diagnostics and therapies for all patients.

Long-term safety and effectiveness of berotralstat for hereditary angioedema: The open-label APeX-S study.

BACKGROUND: Berotralstat (BCX7353) is an oral, once-daily inhibitor of plasma kallikrein recently approved for prevention of angioedema attacks in adults and adolescents with hereditary angioedema (HAE). The objective of this report is to summarize results from an interim analysis of an ongoing long-term safety study of berotralstat in patients with HAE. METHODS: APeX-S is an ongoing, phase 2, open-label study conducted in 22 countries (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03472040). Eligible patients with a clinical diagnosis of HAE due to C1 inhibitor deficiency (HAE-C1-INH) were centrally allocated to receive berotralstat 150 or 110 mg once daily. The primary objective was to determine long-term safety and the secondary objective was to evaluate effectiveness. RESULTS: Enrolled patients (N = 227) received berotralstat 150 mg (n = 127) or 110 mg (n = 100) once daily. The median (range) duration of exposure was 342 (11-540) and 307 (14-429) days for the 150-mg and 110-mg groups, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 91% (n = 206) of patients. The most common TEAEs across treatment groups were upper respiratory tract infection (n = 91, 40%), abdominal pain (n = 57, 25%), headache (n = 40, 18%), and diarrhea (n = 31, 14%) and were mostly mild to moderate. Fifty percent (n = 113) of patients had at least one drug-related adverse event (AE; 150 mg, n = 57 [45%]; 110 mg, n = 56 [56%]), and discontinuations due to AEs occurred in 19 (8%) patients (150 mg, n = 13 [10%]; 110 mg, n = 6 [6%]). Three (1.3%) patients experienced a drug-related serious TEAE. Among patients who received berotralstat through 48 weeks (150 mg, n = 73; 110 mg, n = 30), median HAE attack rates were low in month 1 (150 mg, 1.0 attacks/month; 110 mg, 0.5 attacks/month) and remained low through 12 months (0 attacks/month in both dose groups). Mean HAE attack rates followed a similar trend, and no evidence for patient tolerance to berotralstat emerged. In both dose groups, angioedema quality of life scores showed clinically meaningful changes from baseline. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, both berotralstat doses, 150  and 110 mg once daily, were generally well tolerated. Effectiveness results support the durability and robustness of berotralstat as prophylactic therapy in patients with HAE. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03472040).

Mitigating Disparity in Health-care Resources Between Countries for Management of Hereditary Angioedema.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare genetic disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of skin and mucosal edema. The main treatment goal is to enable a "normal life" for all patients. However, due to high costs, there are limited options for the management of HAE in most developing and low-income countries. As a result, most of the recommended first-line treatments are not available. In this review, we attempt to highlight the disparities in health-care resources for the management of patients with HAE amongst different countries. Data was collected from HAE experts in countries who provide tabulated information regarding management and availability of HAE treatments in their countries. We reviewed the two most recent international HAE guidelines. Using India, the world's second most populous country, as a paradigm for HAE management in lower-income countries, we reviewed the evidence for second-line and non-recommended practices reported by HAE experts. Results suggest significant inequities in provision of HAE services and treatments. HAE patients in low-income countries do not have access to life-saving acute drugs or recently developed highly effective prophylactic medications. Most low-income countries do not have specialized HAE services or diagnostic facilities, resulting in consequent long delays in diagnosis. Suggestions for optimizing the use of limited resources as a basis for future discussion and reaching a global consensus are provided. There is an urgent need to improve HAE services, diagnostics and treatments currently available to lower-income countries. We recommend that all HAE stakeholders support the need for global equity and access to these essential measures.

New Instrument for the Evaluation of Prodromes and Attacks of Hereditary Angioedema (HAE-EPA).

A disease-specific, patient-reported outcome instrument suitable for evaluation of prodromes and attacks of hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a clinical unmet need. We constructed such instrument and examined its validity, acceptability, and discriminative ability. Sixty-six patients participated in a survey addressing their demographics, social, and medical status. Discriminant content validity involved: (1) construct definition by in-depth cognitive debriefing interviews, (2) item selection identifying relevant categories, and (3) judgment of the format whereby questionnaires were tested on experienced patients and its content/reliability was validated. Prodromes and attacks affecting certain body systems (domains) were organized in "clusters". Internal consistency, content, and convergent validities were analyzed. Analyses of variance and regression models were used to evaluate the discriminative ability of the instrument to differentiate between attacks and prodromes. The study demonstrates very high internal consistency (Cronbach's α: attacks 0.88-0.98, prodromes 0.78-0.98). Analysis of variance confirmed significant differences between all dimensions and in pre-defined clusters (F (4, 61) = 45.74, p < 0.001, Eta2 = 0.77). Significant correlations were found between dimensions of prodromes and attacks. Prodromes are associated but differentiated from attacks. Correlations in severity were high for all domains. Interactions were found between prodromes and patients' experience in illness. In conclusion, the new Prodrome-Attack Evaluation questionnaire (HAE-EPA) is capable of distinguishing attacks and prodromes of HAE, as well as determining associations between the two interrelated phenomena. The new instrument achieves the required discriminative ability, acceptability, and content validity/reliability and therefore can be used as a reliable tool for the investigation of prodromes, attacks, and their relationships.

The Enigma of Prodromes in Hereditary Angioedema (HAE).

A prodrome is a premonitory set of signs and symptoms indicating the onset of a disease. Prodromes are frequently reported by hereditary angioedema (HAE) patients, antedating attacks by a few hours or even longer. In some studies, high incidence of prodromes was reported by patients, with considerable number being able to predict oncoming attacks. Regrettably, prodromes have never received a consensual definition and have not been properly investigated in a systematic fashion. Therefore, their nature remains elusive and their contribution to the diagnosis and treatment of disorders is uncertain. The term "prodrome," as used in various pathologies, denotes different meanings, timing, and duration, so it may not be equally suitable for all clinical situations. Perception of a prodrome is unique for each individual patient depending on self-experience. As modern drugs delegate the administration decision to the patients, early detection of a developing attack may help mitigate its severity and allow deployment of appropriate therapy. New diagnostic instruments were recently developed that can assist in defining the attributes of prodromes and their association with attacks. We will review the prodrome phenomenon as exhibited in certain clinical situations, with an emphasis on prodromes of HAE.

Biomarkers in Hereditary Angioedema.

A biomarker is a defined characteristic measured as an indicator of normal, biologic, pathogenic processes, or biological responses to an exposure or intervention. Diagnostic biomarkers are used to detect a disease or a subtype of a disease; monitoring biomarkers are measured serially to assess a medical condition; response biomarkers are used to check biologic response following a medical intervention; predictive biomarkers are used to identify patients who are more likely to respond to a medical intervention; and prognostic biomarkers are used to assess the future likelihood of a clinical event. Although biomarkers have been extensively investigated and validated in many diseases and pathologies, very few are currently useful for the diagnosis, evaluation of disease activity, and treatment of hereditary angioedema (HAE). Pathophysiologic pathways involved in HAE reveal a plethora of molecules from the complement, coagulation, and fibrinolysis systems or from the vascular endothelium, which may serve as biomarkers. The most promising candidates, together with their laboratory readout systems, should be evaluated with regard to their analytical and clinical validity and utility. To be highly specific, such biomarkers should be linked to the pathomechanisms of HAE, particularly the bradykinin-generating cascade. Additionally, major advances in high-throughput omics-based technologies may facilitate the discovery of new candidate biomarkers in the future. This review will cover the existing as well as future potential biomarkers that will support the diagnosis, monitor disease activity, and can be used to assess the efficacy of new avenues of therapy of HAE and other forms of angioedema.

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.