Impact of patient support programmes among patients with severe asthma treated with biological therapies: a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison.

INTRODUCTION: Effective treatment of severe asthma requires patient adherence to inhaled and biological medications. Previous work has shown that patient support programmes (PSP) can improve adherence in patients with chronic diseases, but the impact of PSPs in patients with severe asthma treated with biologics has not been thoroughly investigated. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review to understand the impact of PSPs on treatment adherence, asthma control and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with severe asthma. Embase, MEDLINE and EconLit databases were searched for studies published from 2003 (the year of the first biological approval for severe asthma) to June 2023 that described PSP participation among patients with severe asthma on biological treatment. Direct pooling of outcomes was not possible due to the heterogeneity across studies, so an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) was performed to determine the effect of PSP participation on treatment discontinuation. The ITC used patient-level data from patients treated with benralizumab either enrolled in a PSP (VOICE study, Connect 360 PSP) or not enrolled in a PSP (Benralizumab Patient Access Programme study) in the UK. FINDINGS: 25 records of 21 studies were selected. Six studies investigated the impact of PSPs on treatment adherence, asthma control or HRQoL. All six studies reported positive outcomes for patients enrolled in PSPs; the benefits of each PSP were closely linked to the services provided. The ITC showed that patients in the Connect 360 PSP group were less likely to discontinue treatment compared with the non-PSP group (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.57, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PSPs contribute to positive clinical outcomes in patients with severe asthma on biological treatment. Future analyses will benefit from thorough descriptions of PSP services, and study designs that allow direct comparisons of patient outcomes with and without a PSP.

Benralizumab efficacy and safety in severe asthma: A randomized trial in Asia.

BACKGROUND: Benralizumab is indicated as add-on therapy in patients with uncontrolled, severe eosinophilic asthma; it has not yet been evaluated in a large Asian population with asthma in a clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of benralizumab in patients with severe asthma in Asia. METHODS: MIRACLE (NCT03186209) was a randomized, Phase 3 study in China, South Korea, and the Philippines. Patients aged 12-75 years with severe asthma receiving medium-to-high-dose inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonists, stratified (2:1) by baseline blood eosinophil count (bEOS) (≥300/µL; <300/µL), were randomized (1:1) to benralizumab 30 mg or placebo. Endpoints included annual asthma exacerbation rate (AAER; primary endpoint), change from baseline at Week 48 in pre-bronchodilator (BD) forced expiratory volume in 1 second (pre-BD FEV1) and total asthma symptom score (TASS). Safety was evaluated ≤ Week 56. RESULTS: Of 695 patients randomized, 473 had baseline bEOS ≥300/µL (benralizumab n = 236; placebo n = 237). In this population, benralizumab significantly reduced AAER by 74% (rate ratio 0.26 [95% CI 0.19, 0.36], p < 0.0001) and significantly improved pre-BD FEV1 (least squares difference [LSD] 0.25 L [95% CI 0.17, 0.34], p < 0.0001) and TASS (LSD -0.25 [-0.45, -0.05], p = 0.0126) versus placebo. In patients with baseline bEOS <300/µL, there were numerical improvements in AAER, pre-BD FEV1, and TASS with benralizumab versus placebo. The frequency of adverse events was similar for benralizumab (76%) and placebo (80%) in the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: MIRACLE data reinforces the efficacy and safety of benralizumab for severe eosinophilic asthma in an Asian population, consistent with the global Phase 3 results.

Benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma by previous biologic use and key clinical subgroups: real-world XALOC-1 programme.

BACKGROUND: Pivotal Phase 3 trials and real-world studies have demonstrated benralizumab's overall efficacy and safety in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA). Additional large-cohort data are needed to confirm its real-world effectiveness in SEA according to previous biologic use and key baseline characteristics important for treatment selection. METHODS: XALOC-1 is a large, multinational, retrospective, observational, real-world study programme of benralizumab in adults with SEA. This 48-week integrated analysis assessed annualised exacerbation rate (AER), maintenance oral corticosteroid (mOCS) use, asthma symptom control and lung function during a 12-month baseline period and up to 48 weeks after benralizumab initiation. Subgroup analyses were based on previous biologic use and key baseline clinical characteristics (mOCS use, blood eosinophil count, exacerbation history, age at asthma diagnosis, fractional exhaled nitric oxide level and presence of atopy and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps). RESULTS: Of 1002 patients analysed, 380 were biologic-experienced. At Week 48, 71.3% were exacerbation-free (versus 17.2% at baseline); relative reduction in AER was 82.7% overall and 72.9% in biologic-experienced patients; rates were maintained across all key clinical characteristic subgroups. Of patients using mOCS at baseline (n=274), 47.4% (130/274) eliminated their use by Week 48; the mean reduction from baseline in daily dose was 51.2% and, notably, 34.9% in biologic-experienced patients (n=115). Clinically significant improvements in asthma symptom control and lung function were observed. CONCLUSION: In this large, real-world programme, SEA patients treated with benralizumab had substantial improvements in clinical outcomes irrespective of previous biologic use and key clinical characteristics important to therapeutic decision-making in clinical practice.

Benralizumab in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma and Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps: The Real-World, Multi-Country RANS Observational Study.

Purpose: Real-world evidence of benralizumab effectiveness on nasal polyps (NP) and asthma outcomes in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) and comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis with NP are limited. The objective of this study was to assess NP and asthma outcomes in benralizumab-treated patients with SEA and comorbid NP in a real-world setting. Patients and Methods: RANS was a retrospective, multi-country observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05180357) using medical chart reviews of adults with SEA and comorbid NP. Total NP Score (NPS), SinoNasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) total score, annualized exacerbation rate (AER), and 6-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-6) and Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores during the 12 months pre-index (baseline) and post-index (follow-up) were measured. Clinically meaningful improvement from baseline following treatment, in terms of total NPS (≥1-point reduction), SNOT-22 total (≥8.9-point reduction), ACQ-6 (≥0.5-point reduction) or ACT (≥3-point increase) scores, were reported. Results: A total of 233 patients were included. Baseline mean (standard deviation [SD]) NPS and SNOT-22 total scores were 3.8 (2.4) and 47.5 (22.6), respectively. The mean change (95% confidence interval [CI]) from baseline was -1.2 (-1.7, -0.6) for NPS, and -19.8 (-23.6, -15.9) for SNOT-22. The AER (95% CI) was 1.2 (0.96, 1.41) at baseline and 0.2 (0.13, 0.28) at follow-up. Mean (SD) ACQ-6 and ACT scores were 1.6 (1.3) and 15.0 (5.2) at baseline and 0.8 (1.0) and 22.0 (3.9) at follow-up, respectively. The proportion of patients who achieved clinically meaningful improvements in NPS, SNOT-22 total, ACQ-6, and ACT scores was 49.1%, 67.6%, 56.6%, and 81.1%, respectively. Conclusion: In this real-world study, improvements in NP and asthma outcomes in patients with SEA and comorbid NP were observed during the 12 months following benralizumab initiation.

Patient adherence and response time in electronic patient-reported outcomes: insights from three longitudinal clinical trials.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to collect data on disease symptoms in support of clinical trial endpoints. Clinical studies can last a year or more, and the patients' adherence and response time to daily at-home questionnaires may vary significantly over time. The aim of this study was to understand patterns and changes in patients' completion of daily PROMs during longitudinal clinical studies. METHODS: Data were collected from 1342 patients randomized into three respiratory clinical trials (NCT03401229, NCT03347279, and NCT03406078). PROMs were completed by patients using electronic handheld devices that collected the starting and completion times. A Bayesian generalized linear mixed-effects model was used to identify unbiased coefficients associated with PROM adherence and response time using patient, site, and calendar features as covariates. RESULTS: Adherence decreased over time after randomization, and the rate of decrease was higher in younger patients. The 14-day pre-randomization adherence was correlated with adherence throughout the study. Patients were also more adherent during working days compared to non-working days. Oldest patients took twice as long to complete PROMs throughout the study; however, the response time for all patients decreased during the first month of the study regardless of age. Response time increased 7 days before and after the date of a scheduled clinic visit and when a patient-reported higher symptom burden. CONCLUSION: Detailed analyses of adherence and response time for daily PROMs in clinical trials can provide significant insights about trends of patient behavior in longitudinal clinical studies with high baseline adherence.

Assessing asthma symptoms in children: qualitative research supporting the development of the Pediatric Asthma Diary-Child (PAD-C) and Pediatric Asthma Diary-Observer (PAD-O).

BACKGROUND: Pediatric asthma has been identified by regulators, clinicians, clinical trial sponsors, and caregivers as an area in need of novel fit-for-purpose clinical outcome assessments (COAs) developed in accordance with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) regulatory guidance for evaluating clinical benefit in treatment trials. To address this gap, the Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Consortium's Pediatric Asthma Working Group has continued development of 2 COAs to assess asthma signs and symptoms in pediatric asthma clinical trials to support efficacy endpoints: a PRO measure, the Pediatric Asthma Diary-Child (PAD-C) for children 8-11 years old (y.o.) and an observer-reported outcome measure, the Pediatric Asthma Diary-Observer (PAD-O) for caregivers of children 4-11 y.o. This qualitative research aimed to generate evidence regarding the content validity of the PAD-C and PAD-O. METHODS: Semi-structured combined concept elicitation and cognitive interviews were conducted with a diverse sample of U.S. participants (15 children 8-11 y.o. and 30 caregivers of children 4-11 y.o.). All children had clinician-diagnosed mild to severe asthma. Interviews explored the experience of pediatric asthma and assessed the understanding and relevance of both measures. Interviews were conducted across 3 iterative rounds to allow for modifications. RESULTS: Concept elicitation findings demonstrated that the core sign/symptom and impact concepts assessed in the PAD-C (cough, hard to breathe, out of breath, wheezing, chest tightness, and nighttime awakenings/symptoms) and PAD-O (cough, difficulty breathing, short of breath, wheezing, and nighttime awakenings/signs) correspond to those most frequently reported by participants; concept saturation was achieved. All PAD-C and PAD-O instructions and core items were well understood and considered relevant by most participants. Feedback from participants, the Pediatric Asthma Working Group, advisory panel, and FDA supported modifications to the measures, including addition of 1 new item to both measures and removal of 1 caregiver item. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide strong support for the content validity of both measures. The cross-sectional measurement properties of both measures and their user experience and feasibility in electronic format will be assessed in a future quantitative pilot study with qualitative exit interviews, intended to support the reliability, construct validity, final content, and, ultimately, FDA qualification of the measures.

Pediatric asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases in children. However, there are problems of underdiagnosis, poor disease management, and undertreatment for many pediatric asthma patients, pressuring healthcare systems worldwide. Evaluating asthma symptoms is an important part of the development of treatments for pediatric asthma. However, there are few clinical outcome assessments (COAs) developed in line with regulatory guidance to directly assess symptom severity and evaluate the benefit of new treatments in children with asthma. In this study, we continued the development of the Pediatric Asthma Diary­Child (PAD-C) and the Pediatric Asthma Diary­Observer (PAD-O), according to regulatory guidance, to assess asthma signs and symptoms in children 4 through 11 years old and address this unmet need. The study aimed to explore the experience of pediatric asthma and assess how well-understood and relevant the measures are. Three rounds of qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 children 8 through 11 years old and 30 caregivers of children 4 through 11 years old with asthma. Results show that both measures are well-understood and assess the relevant and important aspects of pediatric asthma reported by children and caregivers. Findings provide evidence supporting the PAD-C and PAD-O as measures of symptom severity and their future use in pediatric asthma treatment trials. Further research is underway to evaluate their measurement properties and assess the user experience and feasibility of electronic completion, to ultimately support the PAD-C and PAD-O in an ongoing COA qualification process by the United States Food and Drug Administration.

Psychometric Validation and Meaningful Change Thresholds of the New Nasal Polyposis Symptom Diary.

OBJECTIVES: The Nasal Polyposis Symptom Diary (NPSD) is a novel and short patient-reported outcome (PRO) tool specifically developed to assess important and relevant symptoms reported by patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). We evaluated the psychometric properties of 4 predefined NPSD-derived scores intended to support symptom-improvement assessments of investigational therapies for inclusion in product labeling. METHODS: Five hundred eighteen patients with severe CRSwNP from a Phase III clinical trial (NCT03401229) completed the NPSD, comprising 11 items: 8 symptom-specific, 2 symptom-impact, and 1 optional medication-compliance. The psychometric characteristics of 3 single-item symptom scores (Nasal Blockage Score [NBS], Nasal Congestion Score [NCS], and Difficulty with Sense of Smell Score [DSS]) and a Total Symptom Score (TSS, summary of the 8 symptom-specific items) were evaluated for reliability, validity, and ability to detect change. Within-patient meaningful change thresholds (MCTs) were established using anchor- and distribution-based methods. Comparative PROs included the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S). RESULTS: The TSS exhibited strong internal consistency (Cronbach α = .88) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient >.80). Correlation between the TSS and SNOT-22 total score indicated good convergent validity (r = .70). All 4 NPSD scores demonstrated known-groups validity (significant differences among subgroups of patients with predetermined disease severity levels based on PGI-S categories) and were sensitive to detect change in patients' clinical status (significant differences among subgroups of patients with reported changes between 2 time-points in PGI-S and Patient Global Impression of Change scores). MCTs for improvement were established at 1.0 point for NBS, NCS, and DSS, and 4.0 points for TSS. CONCLUSION: These findings support the reliability, validity, and suitability of the 4 NPSD-derived scores for evaluating treatment effect on CRSwNP symptoms and their use in clinical trials with predetermined MCTs for improvement.

The Bronchiectasis Exacerbation Diary: a novel patient-reported outcome for non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis.

Bronchiectasis is a chronic, progressive lung disease believed to result from a vicious cycle of infection and inflammation, with symptoms of chronic cough with sputum production, chronic fatigue, rhinosinusitis, chest pain, breathlessness and haemoptysis. There are currently no established instruments to monitor daily symptoms and exacerbations for use in clinical trials. Following a literature review and three expert clinician interviews, we conducted concept elicitation interviews with 20 patients with bronchiectasis to understand their personal disease experience. Findings from literature and clinician feedback were used to develop a draft version of the Bronchiectasis Exacerbation Diary (BED), which was designed to monitor key symptoms on a daily basis and during exacerbations. Patients were eligible to be interviewed if they were US residents aged ≥18 years, had a computed tomography scan-confirmed diagnosis of bronchiectasis with ≥two exacerbations in the previous 2 years and had no other uncontrolled respiratory conditions. Four waves of five patient interviews each were conducted. Patients (n=20) had a mean±SD age of 53.9±12.8 years, and most were female (85%) and white (85%). A total of 33 symptoms and 23 impacts arose from the patient concept elicitation interviews. The BED was revised and finalised based upon patient feedback. The final BED is a novel, eight-item patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument for monitoring key exacerbation symptoms on a daily basis with content validity established through comprehensive qualitative research and direct patient insight. The BED PRO development framework will be completed following psychometric evaluations of the data from a phase 3 bronchiectasis clinical trial.

The effects of benralizumab on airway geometry and dynamics in severe eosinophilic asthma: a single-arm study design exploring a functional respiratory imaging approach.

BACKGROUND: Severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) is characterised by elevated blood/sputum eosinophil counts and airway inflammation, which can lead to mucus plug-mediated airway obstruction, increased exacerbation frequency, declines in lung function, and death. Benralizumab targets the alpha-subunit of the interleukin-5 receptor found on eosinophils, leading to rapid and near complete eosinophil depletion. This is expected to result in reduced eosinophilic inflammation, reduced mucus plugging and improved airway patency and airflow distribution. METHODS: BURAN is an interventional, single-arm, open-label, uncontrolled, prospective, multicentre study during which participants will receive three 30 mg subcutaneous doses of benralizumab at 4-week intervals. This study will use functional respiratory imaging (FRI), a novel, quantitative method of assessing patients' lung structure and function based on detailed, three-dimensional models of the airways, with direct comparison of images taken at Weeks 0 and 13. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with established SEA who may be receiving oral corticosteroids and/or other asthma controller medications, who are inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting ß2-agonist therapies and who have had ≥ 2 asthma exacerbations in the previous 12 months will be included. The objectives of BURAN are to describe changes in airway geometry and dynamics, measured by specific image-based airway volume and other FRI endpoints, following benralizumab therapy. Outcomes will be evaluated using descriptive statistics. Changes in FRI parameters, mucus plugging scores and central/peripheral ratio will be quantified as mean percent change from baseline (Week 0) to Week 13 (± 5 days) and statistical significance will be evaluated using paired t-tests. Relationships between FRI parameters/mucus plugging scores and conventional lung function measurements at baseline will be assessed with linear regression analyses for associations between outcomes, scatterplots to visualise the relationship, and correlation coefficients (Spearman's rank and Pearson's) to quantify the strength of these associations. CONCLUSIONS: The BURAN study will represent one of the first applications of FRI-a novel, non-invasive, highly sensitive method of assessing lung structure, function and health-in the field of biologic respiratory therapies. Findings from this study will increase understanding of cellular-level eosinophil depletion mechanisms and improvements in lung function and asthma control following benralizumab treatment. Trial registration EudraCT: 2022-000152-11 and NCT05552508.

Efficacy and safety of benralizumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic inflammation has been implicated in the pathogenesis, severity, and treatment responsiveness of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of benralizumab-mediated eosinophil depletion for treating CRSwNP. METHODS: The phase 3 OSTRO study enrolled patients with severe CRSwNP who were symptomatic despite treatment with intranasal corticosteroids and who had a history of systemic corticosteroid (SCS) use and/or surgery for nasal polyps (NP). Patients were randomized 1:1 to treatment with benralizumab 30 mg or placebo every 4 weeks for the first 3 doses and every 8 weeks thereafter. Coprimary end points were change from baseline to week 40 in NP score (NPS) and patient-reported mean nasal blockage score reported once every 2 weeks. RESULTS: The study population comprised 413 randomized patients (207 in the benralizumab group and 206 in the placebo group). Benralizumab significantly improved NPS and nasal blockage score compared to placebo at week 40 (P ≤ .005). Improvements in Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 score at week 40, time to first NP surgery and/or SCS use for NP, and time to first NP surgery were not statistically significant between treatment groups. Nominal significance was obtained for improvement in difficulty in sense of smell score at week 40 (P = .003). Subgroup analyses suggested influences of comorbid asthma, number of NP surgeries, sex, body mass index, and baseline blood eosinophil count on treatment effects. Benralizumab was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Benralizumab, when added to standard-of-care therapy, reduced NPS, decreased nasal blockage, and reduced difficulty with sense of smell compared to placebo in patients with CRSwNP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03401229.

Measuring the patient experience of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis: qualitative development of a novel symptom diary.

BACKGROUND: This qualitative study assessed the experience of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (NP) to inform the development of a novel symptom diary for clinical study use. METHODS: Concept elicitation and cognitive interviews were conducted with patients who had a physician-verified diagnosis of NP and a history of intranasal corticosteroid use. Concepts were identified via open-ended and follow-up questions. Relative symptom/impact disturbance level was assessed using a scale of 0 (not at all disturbing) to 10 (extremely disturbing). RESULTS: Patients (n = 30) attributed numerous symptoms and impacts to NP; the most prevalent and disturbing were nasal congestion (identified by 100% of patients; average disturbance rating = 7.9), nasal blockage/obstruction (97%; 8.2), difficulty with sense of smell (97%; 7.6), facial pressure (90%; 6.2), postnasal drip (87%; 6.5), runny nose (87%; 6.2), facial pain (80%; 6.3), and headache (77%; 6.5). These symptoms, along with the impact of NP on sleep and daily activities, were included in the Nasal Polyposis Symptom Diary (NPSD). Cognitive interviews confirmed that patients understood the NPSD items and could select a response reflective of their experience at its worst over the past 24 hours using a four-point scale (none, mild, moderate, or severe). CONCLUSION: The most relevant and disturbing symptoms, according to patients with NP, were included in the NPSD. Interviews confirmed the suitability of NPSD in capturing the daily experience of patients. These findings support the content validity of the NPSD as a suitable tool for capturing NP symptoms and impacts.

Predicting response to benralizumab in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: analyses of GALATHEA and TERRANOVA studies.

BACKGROUND: Benralizumab did not significantly reduce exacerbations compared with placebo in the phase 3 GALATHEA and TERRANOVA trials of benralizumab for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We aimed to identify clinical and physiological characteristics of patients with COPD that could help to identify people who are likely to have the greatest treatment effect with benralizumab. METHODS: We analysed individual study and pooled results from GALATHEA and TERRANOVA. At study enrolment, patients from GALATHEA and TERRANOVA were aged 40-85 years, had moderate to very severe airflow limitation, had elevated blood eosinophil counts, and at least two exacerbations or one severe exacerbation in the previous year despite dual inhaled therapy (inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting ß2-agonists or long-acting ß2-agonists plus long-acting muscarinic antagonists) or triple inhaled therapy (inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting ß2-agonists plus long-acting muscarinic antagonists). We analysed data for 3910 patients who received benralizumab (30 mg or 100 mg subcutaneously every 8 weeks; first three doses every 4 weeks) or placebo with dual or triple therapy to identify factors consistently associated with annual exacerbation rate reduction. We evaluated the annual exacerbation rate for benralizumab versus placebo as the primary endpoint. GALATHEA and TERRANOVA are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02138916 and NCT02155660, respectively. FINDINGS: For 2665 patients with elevated blood eosinophil counts, treatment effect with benralizumab every 8 weeks at 100 mg, but not at 30 mg, occurred for patients with a history of more frequent exacerbations, poorer baseline lung function, or greater baseline lung function improvement with short-acting bronchodilators. Patients with baseline blood eosinophil counts of 220 cells per µL or greater with: three or more exacerbations in the previous year receiving benralizumab every 8 weeks versus placebo, had rate ratios (RRs) of 0·69 (95% CI 0·56-0·83) for 100 mg and 0·86 (0·71-1·04) for 30 mg; postbronchodilator FEV1 of less than 40% had RRs of 0·76 (0·64-0·91) for 100 mg and 0·90 (0·76-1·06) for 30 mg; and postbronchodilator response of at least 15% had RRs of 0·67 (0·54-0·83) for 100 mg and 0·87 (0·71-1·07) for 30 mg. When combined factors were examined, patients with elevated baseline blood eosinophil counts, with three or more exacerbations in the previous year, and who were receiving triple therapy were identified as likely to benefit from benralizumab 100 mg every 8 weeks versus placebo (RR 0·70 [95% CI 0·56-0·88]). Benralizumab 30 mg every 8 weeks did not benefit patients meeting these criteria compared with placebo (RR 0·99 [95% CI 0·79-1·23]). INTERPRETATION: Elevated blood eosinophil counts combined with clinical characteristics identified a subpopulation of patients with COPD who had reductions in exacerbations with benralizumab treatment. These hypothesis-generating analyses identified the potential efficacy of benralizumab 100 mg for this subpopulation. These findings require prospective evaluation in clinical trials. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Benralizumab for the Prevention of COPD Exacerbations.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of benralizumab, an interleukin-5 receptor alpha-directed cytolytic monoclonal antibody, for the prevention of exacerbations in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are not known. METHODS: In the GALATHEA and TERRANOVA trials, we enrolled patients with COPD (at a ratio of approximately 2:1 on the basis of eosinophil count [≥220 per cubic millimeter vs. <220 per cubic millimeter]) who had frequent exacerbations despite receiving guideline-based inhaled treatment. Patients were randomly assigned to receive benralizumab (30 or 100 mg in GALATHEA; 10, 30, or 100 mg in TERRANOVA) every 8 weeks (every 4 weeks for the first three doses) or placebo. The primary end point was the treatment effect of benralizumab, measured as the annualized COPD exacerbation rate ratio (benralizumab vs. placebo) at week 56 in patients with baseline blood eosinophil counts of 220 per cubic millimeter or greater. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: In GALATHEA, the estimates of the annualized exacerbation rate were 1.19 per year (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.36) in the 30-mg benralizumab group, 1.03 per year (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19) in the 100-mg benralizumab group, and 1.24 per year (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.42) in the placebo group; the rate ratio as compared with placebo was 0.96 for 30 mg of benralizumab (P = 0.65) and 0.83 for 100 mg of benralizumab (P = 0.05). In TERRANOVA, the estimates of the annualized exacerbation rate for 10 mg, 30 mg, and 100 mg of benralizumab and for placebo were 0.99 per year (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.13), 1.21 per year (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.37), 1.09 per year (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.23), and 1.17 per year (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.32), respectively; the corresponding rate ratios were 0.85 (P = 0.06), 1.04 (P = 0.66), and 0.93 (P = 0.40). At 56 weeks, none of the annualized COPD exacerbation rate ratios for any dose of benralizumab as compared with placebo reached significance in either trial. Types and frequencies of adverse events were similar with benralizumab and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Add-on benralizumab was not associated with a lower annualized rate of COPD exacerbations than placebo among patients with moderate to very severe COPD, a history of frequent moderate or severe exacerbations, and blood eosinophil counts of 220 per cubic millimeter or greater (Funded by AstraZeneca [GALATHEA and TERRANOVA] and Kyowa Hakko Kirin [GALATHEA]; GALATHEA and TERRANOVA ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02138916 and NCT02155660.).

Benralizumab does not impair antibody response to seasonal influenza vaccination in adolescent and young adult patients with moderate to severe asthma: results from the Phase IIIb ALIZE trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Benralizumab is a humanized, afucosylated monoclonal antibody against the IL-5Rα. Initial monthly followed by every-other-month injections result in rapid and nearly complete eosinophil depletion. We evaluated whether three doses of benralizumab modifies antibody response to seasonal influenza vaccination for adolescent/young adult patients with moderate to severe asthma. METHODS: ALIZE (NCT02814643) was a Phase IIIb randomized controlled trial of patients aged 12-21 years receiving medium- to high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß2-agonists. Patients received benralizumab 30 mg or placebo at Weeks 0, 4, and 8, plus tetravalent influenza vaccination at Week 8. At Week 12, strain-specific antibody responses following vaccination were assessed for four influenza antigens by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) assays. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients were randomized and received benralizumab (n=51) or placebo (n=52). There were no consistent differences in HAI or MN antibody responses at Week 12 between patients receiving benralizumab or placebo. HAI geometric mean fold rises (GMFRs) for all influenza strains tested were 3.3-4.2 for benralizumab vs 3.4-3.9 for placebo; MN GMFRs were 2.8-5.1 for benralizumab vs 3.2-4.4 for placebo. A ≥4-fold rise in HAI from Weeks 8 to 12 occurred in 44.0%-56.0% and 30.6%-49.0% of patients receiving benralizumab and placebo, respectively. At Week 12, 78.0%-100% vs 79.6%-100% of patients receiving benralizumab and placebo, respectively, achieved a ≥40 HAI antibody titer. There were no significant safety findings. CONCLUSION: Benralizumab did not impair the antibody response to seasonal virus vaccination in adolescents and young adult patients with moderate to severe asthma.

Time reproduction performance is associated with age and working memory in high-functioning youth with autism spectrum disorder.

Impaired temporal processing has historically been viewed as a hallmark feature of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Recent evidence suggests temporal processing deficits may also be characteristic of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, little is known about the factors that impact temporal processing in children with ASD. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of co-morbid attention problems, working memory (WM), age, and their interactions, on time reproduction in youth with and without ASD. Twenty-seven high-functioning individuals with ASD and 25 demographically comparable typically developing individuals (ages 9-17; 85% male) were assessed on measures of time reproduction, auditory WM, and inattention/hyperactivity. The time reproduction task required depression of a computer key to mimic interval durations of 4, 8, 12, 16, or 20 sec. Mixed effects regression analyses were used to model accuracy and variability of time reproduction as functions of diagnostic group, interval duration, age, WM, and inattention/hyperactivity. A significant group by age interaction was detected for accuracy, with the deficit in the ASD group being greater in younger children. There was a significant group by WM interaction for consistency, with the effects of poor WM on performance consistency being more pronounced in youth with ASD. All participants tended to underestimate longer interval durations and to be less consistent for shorter interval durations; these effects appeared more pronounced in those who were younger or who had poorer WM performance. Inattention/hyperactivity symptoms in the ASD group were not related to either accuracy or consistency. This study highlights the potential value of temporal processing as an intermediate trait of relevance to multiple neurodevelopmental disorders.

Alternative views on setting clinical trial futility criteria.

A feature increasingly utilized in clinical trial practice is to allow a study to stop early when it seems unlikely to achieve its primary efficacy objectives. This is commonly referred to as stopping for futility, and can be motivated by ethical and financial considerations. A number of methods for addressing futility have been described in the literature, including rules based upon conditional power, predictive probability, beta spending functions, and others. We consider futility stopping from the point of view of quantifying and providing an objective sensible balance between risks of incorrect decisions (e.g., stopping trials which should continue, and continuing trials which should stop), and discuss how specific considerations within a trial can lead to choice of a sensible scheme. This approach is not specific to any particular scales in the literature such as those just mentioned, and we describe interrelationships among criteria expressed on different scales. As futility may be evaluated multiple times in a long-term trial and the amount of information available at scheduled interim analyses may be difficult to predict in advance, we present a specific optimality criterion and discuss which of the familiar scales tend to produce schemes simple to describe and implement, and with better behavior across different timepoints at which futility might be evaluated.

The impact of neurocognitive impairment on occupational recovery of clinically stable patients with bipolar disorder: a prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Many patients with bipolar disorder do not regain their premorbid level of occupational functioning even after mood episodes have resolved. The reasons for this are not well understood. We evaluated the relationship between neurocognition and occupational function in bipolar disorder patients, following symptomatic recovery. METHODS: A total of 79 previously employed adults with bipolar I disorder who achieved symptomatic recovery (i.e., at least six weeks clinically euthymic) following a manic episode underwent a neurocognitive evaluation and assessment of occupational functioning. Study participants were evaluated every three months thereafter for up to nine months. Factor analysis was applied to reduce the initial set of neurocognitive variables to five domains: episodic memory, working memory/attention, executive function, visual scanning, and speed of processing. Multiple logistic regression models were used to examine the joint predictive values of these domains for determining occupational recovery. RESULTS: At the time of symptomatic recovery, four of five neurocognitive factors were significant predictors of concomitant occupational recovery and the fifth, executive function, showed a trend in the same direction. For those not occupationally recovered at baseline, longitudinal analyses revealed that changes between baseline and the three-month follow-up timepoint in most cognitive domains were robust and highly significant predictors of occupational recovery at three months. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that better neurocognitive function in multiple domains and improvement in these domains over time are strongly predictive of subsequent occupational recovery. Treatments that target cognitive deficit may therefore have potential for improving long-term vocational functioning in bipolar illness.