Anti-GM-CSF otilimab versus tofacitinib or placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional or biologic DMARDs: two phase 3 randomised trials (contRAst 1 and contRAst 2).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy and safety of otilimab, an antigranulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor antibody, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Two phase 3, double-blind randomised controlled trials including patients with inadequate responses to methotrexate (contRAst 1) or conventional synthetic/biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cs/bDMARDs; contRAst 2). Patients received background csDMARDs. Through a testing hierarchy, subcutaneous otilimab (90/150 mg once weekly) was compared with placebo for week 12 endpoints (after which, patients receiving placebo switched to active interventions) or oral tofacitinib (5 mg two times per day) for week 24 endpoints. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology response ≥20% (ACR20) at week 12. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat populations comprised 1537 (contRAst 1) and 1625 (contRAst 2) patients. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: proportions of ACR20 responders were statistically significantly greater with otilimab 90 mg and 150 mg vs placebo in contRAst 1 (54.7% (p=0.0023) and 50.9% (p=0.0362) vs 41.7%) and contRAst 2 (54.9% (p<0.0001) and 54.5% (p<0.0001) vs 32.5%). Secondary endpoints: in both trials, compared with placebo, otilimab increased the proportion of Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) low disease activity (LDA) responders (not significant for otilimab 150 mg in contRAst 1), and reduced Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) scores. Benefits with tofacitinib were consistently greater than with otilimab across multiple endpoints. Safety outcomes were similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although otilimab demonstrated superiority to placebo in ACR20, CDAI LDA and HAQ-DI, improved symptoms, and had an acceptable safety profile, it was inferior to tofacitinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03980483, NCT03970837.

Anti-GM-CSF otilimab versus sarilumab or placebo in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to targeted therapies: a phase III randomised trial (contRAst 3).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy and safety of otilimab, an anti-granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor antibody, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic (cs) and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and/or Janus kinase inhibitors. METHODS: ContRAst 3 was a 24-week, phase III, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Patients received subcutaneous otilimab (90/150 mg once weekly), subcutaneous sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks) or placebo for 12 weeks, in addition to csDMARDs. Patients receiving placebo were switched to active interventions at week 12 and treatment continued to week 24. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology ≥20% response (ACR20) at week 12. RESULTS: Overall, 549 patients received treatment. At week 12, there was no significant difference in the proportion of ACR20 responders with otilimab 90 mg and 150 mg versus placebo (45% (p=0.2868) and 51% (p=0.0596) vs 38%, respectively). There were no significant differences in Clinical Disease Activity Index, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, pain Visual Analogue Scale or Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scores with otilimab versus placebo at week 12. Sarilumab demonstrated superiority to otilimab in ACR20 response and secondary end points. The incidence of adverse or serious adverse events was similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Otilimab demonstrated an acceptable safety profile but failed to achieve the primary end point of ACR20 and improve secondary end points versus placebo or demonstrate non-inferiority to sarilumab in this patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04134728.

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Atazanavir in HIV-1-Infected Children Treated With Atazanavir Powder and Ritonavir: Combined Analysis of the PRINCE-1 and -2 Studies.

BACKGROUND: Two clinical studies (PRINCE-1 and -2) in HIV-1-infected children assessed the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of dual nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitor background therapy plus once-daily atazanavir (ATV) powder formulation boosted with ritonavir (ATV + RTV). Here, we present a combined analysis of ATV pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics across these studies. METHODS: Intensive 24-hour pharmacokinetic profiles at steady state compared ATV exposures (area under the concentration-time curve in one dosing interval) in 5 ATV + RTV baseline weight-band dosing categories, with historic data in adults receiving ATV + RTV 300/100 mg capsules. Repeated ATV Ctrough measurements over 48 weeks explored relationships between ATV composite Ctrough quartiles (CCQs) with virologic efficacy and key safety parameters. RESULTS: Of 146 children included in this combined analysis, 49.3% were male, 56.8% were Black/African American and 62.3% were antiretroviral experienced. Proportions with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 48 were 13/32, 24/32, 19/32 and 13/28 in the lowest through highest ATV CCQs, respectively. Mean changes from baseline in total bilirubin at week 48 were +0.3, +0.5, +0.6 and +1.0 mg/dL in the lowest through highest ATV CCQs, respectively. Corresponding proportions with adverse events of hyperbilirubinemia by week 48 were 1/36, 4/36, 5/36 and 13/35, respectively. Changes from baseline in total amylase or electrocardiogram parameters and adverse events of diarrhea did not vary by ATV CCQs. CONCLUSIONS: Weight-band dosing of ATV + RTV plus optimized dual nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors in young HIV-1-infected children achieved similar ATV exposure to that in adults; no unexpected safety findings occurred, and with the exception of lower virologic suppression in the lowest ATV CCQ, there was no apparent trend in virologic suppression across ATV CCQs.

Pharmacokinetic, Pharmacodynamic, and Safety Profile of a Novel Anti-CD28 Domain Antibody Antagonist in Healthy Subjects.

We report pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of a novel anti-CD28 domain antibody antagonist (lulizumab pegol) in healthy subjects following single- or multiple-dose administration. A minimal anticipated biological effect level approach was used to select a 0.01 mg starting dose for a single-ascending-dose (SAD), double-blind, first-in-human study. Part 1 included 9 intravenous (IV; 0.01-100 mg) and 3 subcutaneous (SC; 9-50 mg) doses or placebo. In part 2, a keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH) immunization was performed in 16 subjects/panel, who received 1 of 3 IV doses (9-100 mg) or placebo. In a double-blind, multiple-ascending-dose (MAD) study, subjects received SC lulizumab 6.25 mg every 2 weeks, 12.5 mg weekly, 37.5 mg weekly, or placebo. Among 180 treated subjects, 169 completed the studies. Peak concentrations and areas under the curve from time 0 to infinity increased dose proportionally. Estimated SC bioavailability was 68.2%. Receptor occupancy of approximately ≥80% was maintained for ≥2 weeks at ≥9-mg doses (SAD) and throughout the dosing interval (MAD). IV doses ≥9 mg inhibited antibody production against KLH for 2 weeks. No significant cytokine or immune cell changes were observed. No immunogenicity responses persisted, and there was no correlation to adverse events. Headache occurred in 21 SAD and 4 MAD subjects receiving lulizumab; in the MAD study 5 lulizumab subjects experienced infections. Lulizumab IV or SC was safe at all doses studied, without evidence of cytokine release.

A Review of Daclatasvir Drug-Drug Interactions.

The treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has been revolutionized in recent years by the development of direct-acting antiviral regimens that do not contain peginterferon (pegIFN) and/or ribavirin (RBV). While direct-acting antiviral-based regimens have been shown to be greatly superior to pegIFN/RBV-based regimens in terms of efficacy and safety, they have a greater susceptibility to drug-drug interactions (DDIs). Daclatasvir (DCV)-the benchmark pangenotypic nonstructural protein 5A inhibitor-has been shown to be efficacious and generally well tolerated in partnership with other HCV direct-acting antivirals, including sofosbuvir, asunaprevir (ASV), and ASV plus beclabuvir. DCV may be the object of a DDI via the induction or inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and/or P-glycoprotein (P-gp) by the concomitant medication, or the precipitant of a DDI via DCV-based induction/inhibition of CYP 3A4 or inhibition of P-gp, organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1/B3, and/or breast cancer resistance protein. This article presents an overview of the drug interaction studies conducted during the clinical development of DCV, the findings of these studies that led to the guidance on concomitant medication use and dosage along with any required DCV dose modifications, and the use of the known metabolic pathway of DCV to guide concomitant dosing where direct drug-drug studies have not been conducted. The robust characterization of the DCV clinical pharmacology program has demonstrated that DCV has few or no clinically relevant DDIs with medications with which it is likely to be co-administered, and the majority of DDIs that do occur can be predicted and easily managed. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Single-dose pharmacokinetics and safety of daclatasvir in subjects with renal function impairment.

BACKGROUND: Daclatasvir (DCV) is a pangenotypic inhibitor of the HCV NS5A replication complex approved in Japan and Europe for combination treatment of HCV. AI444-063 was an open-label, two-stage, adaptive study assessing DCV pharmacokinetics and safety in HCV-uninfected subjects with renal impairment. METHODS: Stage 1 included 12 subjects with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on dialysis and 12 healthy controls (creatinine clearance [CLcr]≥90 ml/min, Cockcroft-Gault) matched by sex, age and weight. All participants received a single DCV 60-mg dose on day 1. DCV plasma levels were measured through day 4. Prespecified criteria for study expansion (ESRD versus control area under the curve extrapolated to infinite time [AUC∞] geometric mean ratio [GMR] upper 90% CI>1.5) were met; therefore, 12 subjects with moderate or severe renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate, 30-59 and 15-29 ml/min/1.73m(2), respectively) were included in stage 2. RESULTS: All 36 participants (30 male, mean age 54 years) completed the study. DCV AUC∞ was higher in ESRD subjects versus controls (GMR 1.264, 90% CI 0.989, 1.616). Compared with normal CLcr (90 ml/min), GMR and 90% CI for unbound DCV AUC∞ at CLcr 60, 30 and 15 ml/min were 1.18 (1.07, 1.30), 1.39 (1.14, 1.70) and 1.51 (1.18, 1.94), respectively. DCV was generally well tolerated in subjects with normal renal function, ESRD, or moderate or severe renal impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Observed DCV exposure increases were within the normal range of variability and were not associated with an elevated risk of adverse events. DCV can be administered in subjects with renal impairment, including ESRD, without dose modification. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01830205.

A randomized trial in healthy subjects to assess the bioequivalence of an atazanavir/cobicistat fixed-dose combination tablet versus administration as separate agents.

BACKGROUND: Cobicistat (COBI) is an alternative pharmacoenhancer to ritonavir. A fixed-dose combination (FDC) tablet containing atazanavir (ATV) and COBI has been developed for the treatment of HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: This open-label, single-centre, single-dose, crossover study, randomized 64 healthy subjects to one of eight treatment sequences. Under light meal conditions, maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) to infinity (AUCINF) and AUC to the last measurable concentration (AUC0-T) for ATV and COBI administered as an FDC of ATV/COBI (300/150 mg) were compared to those following administration as separate agents given together; bioequivalence was concluded if the 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios fell within the predetermined range of 0.80, 1.25. ATV and COBI pharmacokinetic parameters following administration as the FDC or as separate agents were also compared under fasted conditions. The effect of food (light and high-fat meals) on the pharmacokinetics of ATV and COBI for the FDC was also assessed. RESULTS: ATV and COBI administered in an FDC tablet were bioequivalent to the individual agents when given with a light meal. Under fasted conditions, pharmacokinetic parameters for ATV and COBI were similar for the individual components and the FDC. For the FDC, systemic exposure to ATV increased with a light meal compared to fasted conditions, and ATV concentration 24 h post-dose was similar with a light meal compared with a high-fat meal. CONCLUSIONS: ATV/COBI (300/150 mg) FDC tablet was bioequivalent to coadministration as separate agents with a light meal in healthy subjects. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01837719.

Evaluation of drug-drug interaction between daclatasvir and methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone.

INTRODUCTION: Daclatasvir (DCV) is a potent hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS5A replication complex inhibitor with pangenotypic (1-6) activity in vitro. Methadone (MET) and buprenorphine (BUP) are opioid medications used to treat opioid addiction; patients on HCV therapy may require MET or BUP treatment. The effect of DCV on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of MET or BUP/naloxone (NLX) was assessed in subjects on stable MET or BUP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An open-label, two-part study assessed the effect of steady-state oral administration of DCV on the PK of MET (Part 1, P1) or BUP/NAL (Part 2, P2). Safety/tolerability and pharmacodynamics (PD, opioid withdrawal scales/overdose assessment) were also assessed. Subjects (P1, N=14; P2, N=11) received daily single-dose oral MET (40-120mg) or BUP/NLX (8/2-24/6mg) based on their prescribed stable dose throughout, in addition to DCV (60mg QD) on Days 2-9. Serial PK sampling occurred predose and postdose till 24 hours on Day 1 (MET/BUP) and Day 10 (MET/BUP/DCV). Noncompartmental PK were derived. Geometric mean ratios (GMR) and 90% confidence intervals (90% CI) for MET/BUP/norBUP Cmax and AUCTAU were derived from linear mixed effects models. RESULTS: Subjects were aged 19-39 years, mostly white (P1, 93%; P2, 100%) and male (P1, 71%; P2, 91%). All subjects completed the study. No clinically meaningful effect was demonstrated as the GMR and 90% CIs fell within the prespecified interval (P1, 0.7-1.4; P2, 0.5-2.0: see Table 1). DCV coadministration was well-tolerated: overall, six (43%) subjects had adverse events (AEs) (all mild and resolved without treatment). DCV had no clinically significant effect on the PD of MET or BUP/NLX. CONCLUSIONS: Steady-state administration of DCV 60mg QD had no clinically meaningful effect on the PK of MET or BUP/NLX and was generally well-tolerated, suggesting that no dose adjustments will be required.