Safety and efficacy of arimoclomol for inclusion body myositis: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Inclusion body myositis is the most common progressive muscle wasting disease in people older than 50 years, with no effective drug treatment. Arimoclomol is an oral co-inducer of the cellular heat shock response that was safe and well-tolerated in a pilot study of inclusion body myositis, reduced key pathological markers of inclusion body myositis in two in-vitro models representing degenerative and inflammatory components of this disease, and improved disease pathology and muscle function in mutant valosin-containing protein mice. In the current study, we aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of arimoclomol in people with inclusion body myositis. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study enrolled adults in specialist neuromuscular centres in the USA (11 centres) and UK (one centre). Eligible participants had a diagnosis of inclusion body myositis fulfilling the European Neuromuscular Centre research diagnostic criteria 2011. Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive either oral arimoclomol 400 mg or matching placebo three times daily (1200 mg/day) for 20 months. The randomisation sequence was computer generated centrally using a permuted block algorithm with randomisation numbers masked to participants and trial staff, including those assessing outcomes. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline to month 20 in the Inclusion Body Myositis Functional Rating Scale (IBMFRS) total score, assessed in all randomly assigned participants, except for those who were randomised in error and did not receive any study medication, and those who did not meet inclusion criteria. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02753530, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Aug 16, 2017 and May 22, 2019, 152 participants with inclusion body myositis were randomly assigned to arimoclomol (n=74) or placebo (n=78). One participant was randomised in error (to arimoclomol) but not treated, and another (assigned to placebo) did not meet inclusion criteria. 150 participants (114 [76%] male and 36 [24%] female) were included in the efficacy analyses, 73 in the arimoclomol group and 77 in the placebo group. 126 completed the trial on treatment (56 [77%] and 70 [90%], respectively) and the most common reason for treatment discontinuation was adverse events. At month 20, mean IBMFRS change from baseline was not statistically significantly different between arimoclomol and placebo (-3·26, 95% CI -4·15 to -2·36 in the arimoclomol group vs -2·26, -3·11 to -1·41 in the placebo group; mean difference -0·99 [95% CI -2·23 to 0·24]; p=0·12). Adverse events leading to discontinuation occurred in 13 (18%) of 73 participants in the arimoclomol group and four (5%) of 78 participants in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in 11 (15%) participants in the arimoclomol group and 18 (23%) in the placebo group. Elevated transaminases three times or more of the upper limit of normal occurred in five (7%) participants in the arimoclomol group and one (1%) in the placebo group. Tubulointerstitial nephritis was observed in one (1%) participant in the arimoclomol group and none in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Arimoclomol did not improve efficacy outcomes, relative to placebo, but had an acceptable safety profile in individuals with inclusion body myositis. This is one of the largest trials done in people with inclusion body myositis, providing data on disease progression that might be used for subsequent clinical trial design. FUNDING: US Food and Drug Administration Office of Orphan Products Development and Orphazyme.

Patient preference for virtual versus in-person visits in neuromuscular clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: It is unknown if patients with neuromuscular diseases prefer in-person or virtual telemedicine visits. We studied patient opinions and preference on virtual versus in-person visits, and the factors influencing such preferences. METHODS: Telephone surveys, consisting of 11 questions, of patients from 10 neuromuscular centers were completed. RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty surveys were completed. Twenty-six percent of respondents preferred virtual visits, while 50% preferred in-person visits. Sixty-four percent reported physical interaction as "very important." For receiving a new diagnosis, 55% preferred in-person vs 35% reporting no preference. Forty percent were concerned about a lack of physical examination vs 20% who were concerned about evaluating vital signs. Eighty four percent reported virtual visits were sufficiently private. Sixty eight percent did not consider expenses a factor in their preference. Although 92% were comfortable with virtual communication technology, 55% preferred video communications, and 19% preferred phone calls. Visit preference was not significantly associated with gender, diagnosis, disease severity, or symptom management. Patients who were concerned about a lack of physical exam or assessment of vitals had significantly higher odds of selecting in-person visits than no preference. DISCUSSION: Although neither technology, privacy, nor finance burdened patients in our study, more patients preferred in-person visits than virtual visits and 40% were concerned about a lack of physical examination. Interactions that occur with in-person encounters had high importance for patients, reflecting differences in the perception of the patient-physician relationship between virtual and in-person visits.

Mechanics of dystrophin deficient skeletal muscles in very young mice and effects of age.

The MDX mouse is an animal model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, a human disease marked by an absence of the cytoskeletal protein, dystrophin. We hypothesized that 1) dystrophin serves a complex mechanical role in skeletal muscles by contributing to passive compliance, viscoelastic properties, and contractile force production and 2) age is a modulator of passive mechanics of skeletal muscles of the MDX mouse. Using an in vitro biaxial mechanical testing apparatus, we measured passive length-tension relationships in the muscle fiber direction as well as transverse to the fibers, viscoelastic stress-relaxation curves, and isometric contractile properties. To avoid confounding secondary effects of muscle necrosis, inflammation, and fibrosis, we used very young 3-wk-old mice whose muscles reflected the prefibrotic and prenecrotic state. Compared with controls, 1) muscle extensibility and compliance were greater in both along fiber direction and transverse to fiber direction in MDX mice and 2) the relaxed elastic modulus was greater in dystrophin-deficient diaphragms. Furthermore, isometric contractile muscle stress was reduced in the presence and absence of transverse fiber passive stress. We also examined the effect of age on the diaphragm length-tension relationships and found that diaphragm muscles from 9-mo-old MDX mice were significantly less compliant and less extensible than those of muscles from very young MDX mice. Our data suggest that the age of the MDX mouse is a determinant of the passive mechanics of the diaphragm; in the prefibrotic/prenecrotic stage, muscle extensibility and compliance, as well as viscoelasticity, and muscle contractility are altered by loss of dystrophin.

Efficacy and Safety of Bimagrumab in Sporadic Inclusion Body Myositis: Long-term Extension of RESILIENT.

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term (2 years) effects of bimagrumab in participants with sporadic inclusion body myositis (sIBM). METHODS: Participants (aged 36-85 years) who completed the core study (RESILIENT [Efficacy and Safety of Bimagrumab/BYM338 at 52 Weeks on Physical Function, Muscle Strength, Mobility in sIBM Patients]) were invited to join an extension study. Individuals continued on the same treatment as in the core study (10 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, 1 mg/kg bimagrumab or matching placebo administered as IV infusions every 4 weeks). The co-primary outcome measures were 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and safety. RESULTS: Between November 2015 and February 2017, 211 participants entered double-blind placebo-controlled period of the extension study. Mean change in 6MWD from baseline was highly variable across treatment groups, but indicated progressive deterioration from weeks 24-104 in all treatment groups. Overall, 91.0% (n = 142) of participants in the pooled bimagrumab group and 89.1% (n = 49) in the placebo group had ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (AE). Falls were slightly higher in the bimagrumab 3 mg/kg group vs 10 mg/kg, 1 mg/kg, and placebo groups (69.2% [n = 36 of 52] vs 56.6% [n = 30 of 53], 58.8% [n = 30 of 51], and 61.8% [n = 34 of 55], respectively). The most frequently reported AEs in the pooled bimagrumab group were diarrhea 14.7% (n = 23), involuntary muscle contractions 9.6% (n = 15), and rash 5.1% (n = 8). Incidence of serious AEs was comparable between the pooled bimagrumab and the placebo group (18.6% [n = 29] vs 14.5% [n = 8], respectively). CONCLUSION: Extended treatment with bimagrumab up to 2 years produced a good safety profile and was well-tolerated, but did not provide clinical benefits in terms of improvement in mobility. The extension study was terminated early due to core study not meeting its primary endpoint. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02573467. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with sIBM, long-term treatment with bimagrumab was safe, well-tolerated, and did not provide meaningful functional benefit. The study is rated Class IV because of the open-label design of extension treatment period 2.

Minimal manifestation status and prednisone withdrawal in the MGTX trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether sustained minimal manifestation status (MMS) with complete withdrawal of prednisone is better achieved in thymectomized patients with myasthenia gravis (MG). METHODS: This study is a post hoc analysis of data from a randomized trial of thymectomy in MG (Thymectomy Trial in Non-Thymomatous Myasthenia Gravis Patients Receiving Prednisone Therapy [MGTX]). MGTX was a multicenter, randomized, rater-blinded 3-year trial that was followed by a voluntary 2-year extension for patients with acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibody-positive MG without thymoma. Patients were randomized 1:1 to thymectomy plus prednisone vs prednisone alone. Participants were age 18-65 years at enrollment with disease duration less than 5 years. All patients received oral prednisone titrated up to 100 mg on alternate days until they achieved MMS, which prompted a standardized prednisone taper as long as MMS was maintained. The achievement rate of sustained MMS (no symptoms of MG for 6 months) with complete withdrawal of prednisone was compared between the thymectomy plus prednisone and prednisone alone groups. RESULTS: Patients with MG in the thymectomy plus prednisone group achieved sustained MMS with complete withdrawal of prednisone more frequently (64% vs 38%) and quickly compared to the prednisone alone group (median time 30 months vs no median time achieved, p < 0.001) over the 5-year study period. Prednisone-associated adverse symptoms were more frequent in the prednisone alone group and distress level increased with higher doses of prednisone. CONCLUSIONS: Thymectomy benefits patients with MG by increasing the likelihood of achieving sustained MMS with complete withdrawal of prednisone. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00294658. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that for patients with generalized MG with AChR antibody, those receiving thymectomy plus prednisone are more likely to attain sustained MMS and complete prednisone withdrawal than those on prednisone alone.

Safety and efficacy of intravenous bimagrumab in inclusion body myositis (RESILIENT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial.

BACKGROUND: Inclusion body myositis is an idiopathic inflammatory myopathy and the most common myopathy affecting people older than 50 years. To date, there are no effective drug treatments. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of bimagrumab-a fully human monoclonal antibody-in individuals with inclusion body myositis. METHODS: We did a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (RESILIENT) at 38 academic clinical sites in Australia, Europe, Japan, and the USA. Individuals (aged 36-85 years) were eligible for the study if they met modified 2010 Medical Research Council criteria for inclusion body myositis. We randomly assigned participants (1:1:1:1) using a blocked randomisation schedule (block size of four) to either bimagrumab (10 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, or 1 mg/kg) or placebo matched in appearance to bimagrumab, administered as intravenous infusions every 4 weeks for at least 48 weeks. All study participants, the funder, investigators, site personnel, and people doing assessments were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome measure was 6-min walking distance (6MWD), which was assessed at week 52 in the primary analysis population and analysed by intention-to-treat principles. We used a multivariate normal repeated measures model to analyse data for 6MWD. Safety was assessed by recording adverse events and by electrocardiography, echocardiography, haematological testing, urinalysis, and blood chemistry. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01925209; this report represents the final analysis. FINDINGS: Between Sept 26, 2013, and Jan 6, 2016, 251 participants were enrolled to the study, of whom 63 were assigned to each bimagrumab group and 62 were allocated to the placebo group. At week 52, 6MWD change from baseline did not differ between any bimagrumab dose and placebo (least squares mean treatment difference for bimagrumab 10 mg/kg group, 17·6 m, SE 14·3, 99% CI -19·6 to 54·8; p=0·22; for 3 mg/kg group, 18·6 m, 14·2, -18·2 to 55·4; p=0·19; and for 1 mg/kg group, -1·3 m, 14·1, -38·0 to 35·4; p=0·93). 63 (100%) participants in each bimagrumab group and 61 (98%) of 62 in the placebo group had at least one adverse event. Falls were the most frequent adverse event (48 [76%] in the bimagrumab 10 mg/kg group, 55 [87%] in the 3 mg/kg group, 54 [86%] in the 1 mg/kg group, and 52 [84%] in the placebo group). The most frequently reported adverse events with bimagrumab were muscle spasms (32 [51%] in the bimagrumab 10 mg/kg group, 43 [68%] in the 3 mg/kg group, 25 [40%] in the 1 mg/kg group, and 13 [21%] in the placebo group) and diarrhoea (33 [52%], 28 [44%], 20 [32%], and 11 [18%], respectively). Adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported in four (6%) participants in each bimagrumab group compared with one (2%) participant in the placebo group. At least one serious adverse event was reported by 21 (33%) participants in the 10 mg/kg group, 11 (17%) in the 3 mg/kg group, 20 (32%) in the 1 mg/kg group, and 20 (32%) in the placebo group. No significant adverse cardiac effects were recorded on electrocardiography or echocardiography. Two deaths were reported during the study, one attributable to subendocardial myocardial infarction (secondary to gastrointestinal bleeding after an intentional overdose of concomitant sedatives and antidepressants) and one attributable to lung adenocarcinoma. Neither death was considered by the investigator to be related to bimagrumab. INTERPRETATION: Bimagrumab showed a good safety profile, relative to placebo, in individuals with inclusion body myositis but did not improve 6MWD. The strengths of our study are that, to the best of our knowledge, it is the largest randomised controlled trial done in people with inclusion body myositis, and it provides important natural history data over 12 months. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma.

Long-term effect of thymectomy plus prednisone versus prednisone alone in patients with non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis: 2-year extension of the MGTX randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The Thymectomy Trial in Non-Thymomatous Myasthenia Gravis Patients Receiving Prednisone (MGTX) showed that thymectomy combined with prednisone was superior to prednisone alone in improving clinical status as measured by the Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) score in patients with generalised non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis at 3 years. We investigated the long-term effects of thymectomy up to 5 years on clinical status, medication requirements, and adverse events. METHODS: We did a rater-blinded 2-year extension study at 36 centres in 15 countries for all patients who completed the randomised controlled MGTX and were willing to participate. MGTX patients were aged 18 to 65 years at enrolment, had generalised non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis of less than 5 years' duration, had acetylcholine receptor antibody titres of 1·00 nmol/L or higher (or concentrations of 0·50-0·99 nmol/L if diagnosis was confirmed by positive edrophonium or abnormal repetitive nerve stimulation, or abnormal single fibre electromyography), had Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America Clinical Classification Class II-IV disease, and were on optimal anticholinesterase therapy with or without oral corticosteroids. In MGTX, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either thymectomy plus prednisone or prednisone alone. All patients in both groups received oral prednisone at doses titrated up to 100 mg on alternate days until they achieved minimal manifestation status. The primary endpoints of the extension phase were the time-weighted means of the QMG score and alternate-day prednisone dose from month 0 to month 60. Analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00294658. It is closed to new participants, with follow-up completed. FINDINGS: Of the 111 patients who completed the 3-year MGTX, 68 (61%) entered the extension study between Sept 1, 2009, and Aug 26, 2015 (33 in the prednisone alone group and 35 in the prednisone plus thymectomy group). 50 (74%) patients completed the 60-month assessment, 24 in the prednisone alone group and 26 in the prednisone plus thymectomy group. At 5 years, patients in the thymectomy plus prednisone group had significantly lower time-weighted mean QMG scores (5·47 [SD 3·87] vs 9·34 [5·08]; p=0·0007) and mean alternate-day prednisone doses (24 mg [SD 21] vs 48 mg [29]; p=0·0002) than did those in the prednisone alone group. 14 (42%) of 33 patients in the prednisone group, and 12 (34%) of 35 in the thymectomy plus prednisone group, had at least one adverse event by month 60. No treatment-related deaths were reported during the extension phase. INTERPRETATION: At 5 years, thymectomy plus prednisone continues to confer benefits in patients with generalised non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis compared with prednisone alone. Although caution is appropriate when generalising our findings because of the small sample size of our study, they nevertheless provide further support for the benefits of thymectomy in patients with generalised non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.

Randomized Trial of Thymectomy in Myasthenia Gravis.

BACKGROUND: Thymectomy has been a mainstay in the treatment of myasthenia gravis, but there is no conclusive evidence of its benefit. We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial comparing thymectomy plus prednisone with prednisone alone. METHODS: We compared extended transsternal thymectomy plus alternate-day prednisone with alternate-day prednisone alone. Patients 18 to 65 years of age who had generalized nonthymomatous myasthenia gravis with a disease duration of less than 5 years were included if they had Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America clinical class II to IV disease (on a scale from I to V, with higher classes indicating more severe disease) and elevated circulating concentrations of acetylcholine-receptor antibody. The primary outcomes were the time-weighted average Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis score (on a scale from 0 to 39, with higher scores indicating more severe disease) over a 3-year period, as assessed by means of blinded rating, and the time-weighted average required dose of prednisone over a 3-year period. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients underwent randomization between 2006 and 2012 at 36 sites. Patients who underwent thymectomy had a lower time-weighted average Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis score over a 3-year period than those who received prednisone alone (6.15 vs. 8.99, P<0.001); patients in the thymectomy group also had a lower average requirement for alternate-day prednisone (44 mg vs. 60 mg, P<0.001). Fewer patients in the thymectomy group than in the prednisone-only group required immunosuppression with azathioprine (17% vs. 48%, P<0.001) or were hospitalized for exacerbations (9% vs. 37%, P<0.001). The number of patients with treatment-associated complications did not differ significantly between groups (P=0.73), but patients in the thymectomy group had fewer treatment-associated symptoms related to immunosuppressive medications (P<0.001) and lower distress levels related to symptoms (P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Thymectomy improved clinical outcomes over a 3-year period in patients with nonthymomatous myasthenia gravis. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and others; MGTX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00294658.).

Efficacy and safety of dextromethorphan/quinidine at two dosage levels for diabetic neuropathic pain: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate dextromethorphan coadministered with quinidine as treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. DESIGN: In a 13-week, phase 3, randomized controlled trial, 379 adults with daily symmetric diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) leg pain for ≥3 months received double-blind placebo, dextromethorphan/quinidine (DMQ) 45/30 mg, or DMQ 30/30 mg, administered once daily for 7 days and twice daily thereafter. Efficacy measures included four pain rating scales applied daily using patient diaries, and another two applied at five clinic visits. RESULTS: On all six scales, DMQ 45/30 mg was significantly superior to placebo, including the primary efficacy analysis, which utilized mixed-effects modeling to test all scores on an 11-point numerical Pain Rating Scale (P < 0.0001). Sensitivity analyses gave consistent results. Efficacy vs placebo was also seen for diary ratings of present pain intensity, and pain interference with sleep and with activities (all P < 0.0001). Among clinic visit assessments, DMQ 45/30 mg demonstrated greater leg pain relief (P = 0.0002) and greater reduction of leg pain intensity (P = 0.0286) vs placebo. The efficacy of DMQ 30/30 mg was numerically less than for 45/30 mg but for most outcomes remained significantly greater vs placebo. Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate and of expected types. Discontinuation for adverse events in the DMQ groups was at least twice as common as placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Throughout a 13-week trial, DMQ was effective, with an acceptable safety profile, for treatment of DPN pain. Other fixed-dose combinations of DMQ should be studied to improve overall tolerability while maintaining significant efficacy.