Onasemnogene abeparvovec gene therapy for symptomatic infantile-onset spinal muscular atrophy type 1 (STR1VE-EU): an open-label, single-arm, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Spinal muscular atrophy is a rare, autosomal recessive, neuromuscular disease caused by biallelic loss of the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene, resulting in motor neuron dysfunction. In this STR1VE-EU study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of onasemnogene abeparvovec gene replacement therapy in infants with spinal muscular atrophy type 1, using broader eligibility criteria than those used in STR1VE-US. METHODS: STR1VE-EU was a multicentre, single-arm, single-dose, open-label phase 3 trial done at nine sites (hospitals and universities) in Italy (n=4), the UK (n=2), Belgium (n=2), and France (n=1). We enrolled patients younger than 6 months (180 days) with spinal muscular atrophy type 1 and the common biallelic pathogenic SMN1 exon 7-8 deletion or point mutations, and one or two copies of SMN2. Patients received a one-time intravenous infusion of onasemnogene abeparvovec (1·1 × 1014 vector genomes [vg]/kg). The outpatient follow-up consisted of assessments once per week starting at day 7 post-infusion for 4 weeks and then once per month until the end of the study (at age 18 months or early termination). The primary outcome was independent sitting for at least 10 s, as defined by the WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study, at any visit up to the 18 months of age study visit, measured in the intention-to-treat population. Efficacy was compared with the Pediatric Neuromuscular Clinical Research (PNCR) natural history cohort. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03461289 (completed). FINDINGS: From Aug 16, 2018, to Sept 11, 2020, 41 patients with spinal muscular atrophy were assessed for eligibility. The median age at onasemnogene abeparvovec dosing was 4·1 months (IQR 3·0-5·2). 32 (97%) of 33 patients completed the study and were included in the ITT population (one patient was excluded despite completing the study because of dosing at 181 days). 14 (44%, 97·5% CI 26-100) of 32 patients achieved the primary endpoint of functional independent sitting for at least 10 s at any visit up to the 18 months of age study visit (vs 0 of 23 untreated patients in the PNCR cohort; p<0·0001). 31 (97%, 95% CI 91-100) of 32 patients in the ITT population survived free from permanent ventilatory support at 14 months compared with six (26%, 8-44) of 23 patients in the PNCR natural history cohort (p<0·0001). 32 (97%) of 33 patients had at least one adverse event and six (18%) had adverse events that were considered serious and related to onasemnogene abeparvovec. The most common adverse events were pyrexia (22 [67%] of 33), upper respiratory infection (11 [33%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase (nine [27%]). One death, unrelated to the study drug, occurred from hypoxic-ischaemic brain damage because of a respiratory tract infection during the study. INTERPRETATION: STR1VE-EU showed efficacy of onasemnogene abeparvovec in infants with symptomatic spinal muscular atrophy type 1. No new safety signals were identified, but further studies are needed to show long-term safety. The benefit-risk profile of onasemnogene abeparvovec seems favourable for this patient population, including those with severe disease at baseline. FUNDING: Novartis Gene Therapies.

Onasemnogene abeparvovec gene therapy for symptomatic infantile-onset spinal muscular atrophy in patients with two copies of SMN2 (STR1VE): an open-label, single-arm, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Spinal muscular atrophy type 1 is a motor neuron disorder resulting in death or the need for permanent ventilation by age 2 years. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of onasemnogene abeparvovec (previously known as AVXS-101), a gene therapy delivering the survival motor neuron gene (SMN), in symptomatic patients (identified through clinical examination) with infantile-onset spinal muscular atrophy. METHODS: STR1VE was an open-label, single-arm, single-dose, phase 3 trial done at 12 hospitals and universities in the USA. Eligible patients had to be younger than 6 months and have spinal muscular atrophy with biallelic SMN1 mutations (deletion or point mutations) and one or two copies of SMN2. Patients received a one-time intravenous infusion of onasemnogene abeparvovec (1·1 × 1014 vector genomes per kg) for 30-60 min. During the outpatient follow-up, patients were assessed once per week, beginning at day 7 post-infusion for 4 weeks and then once per month until the end of the study (age 18 months or early termination). Coprimary efficacy outcomes were independent sitting for 30 s or longer (Bayley-III item 26) at the 18 month of age study visit and survival (absence of death or permanent ventilation) at age 14 months. Safety was assessed through evaluation of adverse events, concomitant medication usage, physical examinations, vital sign assessments, cardiac assessments, and laboratory evaluation. Primary efficacy endpoints for the intention-to-treat population were compared with untreated infants aged 6 months or younger (n=23) with spinal muscular atrophy type 1 (biallelic deletion of SMN1 and two copies of SMN2) from the Pediatric Neuromuscular Clinical Research (PNCR) dataset. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03306277 (completed). FINDINGS: From Oct 24, 2017, to Nov 12, 2019, 22 patients with spinal muscular atrophy type 1 were eligible and received onasemnogene abeparvovec. 13 (59%, 97·5% CI 36-100) of 22 patients achieved functional independent sitting for 30 s or longer at the 18 month of age study visit (vs 0 of 23 patients in the untreated PNCR cohort; p<0·0001). 20 patients (91%, 79-100]) survived free from permanent ventilation at age 14 months (vs 6 [26%], 8-44; p<0·0001 in the untreated PNCR cohort). All patients who received onasemnogene abeparvovec had at least one adverse event (most common was pyrexia). The most frequently reported serious adverse events were bronchiolitis, pneumonia, respiratory distress, and respiratory syncytial virus bronchiolitis. Three serious adverse events were related or possibly related to the treatment (two patients had elevated hepatic aminotransferases, and one had hydrocephalus). INTERPRETATION: Results from this multicentre trial build on findings from the phase 1 START study by showing safety and efficacy of commercial grade onasemnogene abeparvovec. Onasemnogene abeparvovec showed statistical superiority and clinically meaningful responses when compared with observations from the PNCR natural history cohort. The favourable benefit-risk profile shown in this study supports the use of onasemnogene abeparvovec for treatment of symptomatic patients with genetic or clinical characteristics predictive of infantile-onset spinal muscular atrophy type 1. FUNDING: Novartis Gene Therapies.

Phase I dose escalation and pharmacokinetic evaluation of two different schedules of LY2334737, an oral gemcitabine prodrug, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: This Phase-I-study aimed to determine the recommended Phase-II-dosing-schedule of LY2334737, an oral gemcitabine prodrug, in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors. Pharmacokinetics, cytokeratin-18 (CK18) levels, genetic polymorphisms, and antitumor activity were additionally evaluated. METHODS: Patients received escalating doses of LY2334737 either every other day for 21 days (d) followed by 7 days-drug-free period (QoD-arm) or once daily for 7 days every other week (QD-arm). The 28 days-cycles were repeated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation was succeeded by a dose-confirmation phase (12 additional patients to be enrolled on the maximum tolerated dose [MTD]). RESULTS: Forty-one patients received QoD- (40-100 mg) and 32 QD-dosing (40-90 mg). On QoD, 3/9 patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) on the 100 mg dose (2 × G3 diarrhea, 1 × G3 transaminase increase); 1 additional DLT (G3 diarrhea) occurred during dose confirmation at 90 mg (12 patients). On QD, 1 patient each experienced DLTs on 60 mg (G3 transaminase increase) and 80 mg (G3 prolonged QTcF-interval); 2/7 patients had 3 DLTs on the 90 mg dose (diarrhea, edema, liver-failure; all G3). The MTD was established at 90 mg for the QoD-arm. Seven patients on QoD and 4 on QD achieved SD (no CR + PR). Pharmacokinetics showed a dose-proportional increase in exposure of LY2334737 and dFdC without accumulation after repeated dosing. Significant increases in CK18 levels were observed. Genetic polymorphism of the cytidine deaminase gene (rs818202) could be associated with ≥ G3 hepatotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Both schedules displayed linear pharmacokinetics and acceptable safety profiles. The recommended dose and schedule of LY2334737 for subsequent Phase-II-studies is 90 mg given QoD for 21 day.

A phase 2, placebo-controlled study of the opioid receptor antagonist LY2196044 for the treatment of alcohol dependence.

BACKGROUND: Endogenous opioid-mediated reward pathways may play a role in the development and maintenance of alcohol dependence. This study tested whether LY2196044, an opioid receptor antagonist, in combination with medical management would reduce drinking in alcohol-dependent patients. METHODS: This was a multicenter, outpatient, randomized, double-blind, parallel, and placebo-controlled trial with a 16-week treatment period. Patients (N = 375) were alcohol-dependent, treatment-seeking adults. Patients were randomly assigned to once-daily LY2196044 (final doses of 125 or 250 mg/d) or placebo. DNA samples were collected at baseline. At each visit, patients underwent safety assessments, laboratory testing, efficacy measures, and medical management. Blood samples were also obtained for pharmacokinetic testing. The primary measure was the change from baseline in the percent heavy drinking days (HDD). Secondary efficacy measures were percent days abstinent per month and number of drinks per day. RESULTS: The treatment difference in change from baseline in % HDD between LY2196044 and placebo was not statistically significant (-43.02 vs. -38.72%, respectively; p = 0.12). There was a trend toward greater change from baseline in the percent days abstinent per month for the LY2196044 group compared with the placebo group (33.49 vs. 28.12%, respectively; p = 0.051). The decrease from baseline for mean number of drinks per day was statistically significantly greater in the LY2196044 group compared with the placebo group (-5.37 vs. -4.66 drinks per day, respectively; p = 0.013). LY2196044-treated patients who were dopamine receptor type 4-variable number tandem repeat L carriers had greater reductions in % HDD (p = 0.0565), increased percent days abstinent (p = 0.0496), and reduced drinks per day (p = 0.0069) than placebo-treated L carriers. The safety profile for LY2196044 appeared similar to that of other opioid antagonists. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this proof-of-concept clinical trial warrant further evaluation of LY2196044 for the treatment of alcohol dependence.

Predictive toxicology: benchmarking molecular descriptors and statistical methods.

The development of drugs depends on finding compounds that have beneficial effects with a minimum of toxic effects. The measurement of toxic effects is typically time-consuming and expensive, so there is a need to be able to predict toxic effects from the compound structure. Predicting toxic effects is expected to be challenging because there are usually multiple toxic mechanisms involved. In this paper, combinations of different chemical descriptors and popular statistical methods were applied to the problem of predictive toxicology. Four data sets were collected and cleaned, and four different sets of chemical descriptors were calculated for the compounds in each of the four data sets. Three statistical methods (recursive partitioning, neural networks, and partial least squares) were used to attempt to link chemical descriptors to the response. Good predictions were achieved in the two smaller data sets; we found for large data sets that the results were less effective, indicating that new chemical descriptors or statistical methods are needed. All of the methods and descriptors worked to a degree, but our work hints that certain descriptors work better with specific statistical methods so there is a need for better understanding and for continued methods development.