ISABELA Studies: Plasma Exposure and Target Engagement Do Not Explain the Lack of Efficacy of Ziritaxestat in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.

Autotaxin (ATX) contributes to the production of lysophosphatidic acid (LPA), which is associated with fibrosis development in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). The ATX inhibitor ziritaxestat failed to reduce decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) in patients with IPF in ISABELA 1 and 2 (NCT03711162 and NCT03733444), two identically designed phase III studies. In the current analysis, we evaluated pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data from the pooled ISABELA studies to determine whether the lack of efficacy could be attributed to insufficient exposure and/or target engagement. Nonlinear mixed effect modeling was performed to predict ziritaxestat exposure in individual patients and describe its effect on LPA C18:2 levels. We assessed whether there was a correlation between ziritaxestat and ATX concentration and evaluated the relationship between LPA C18:2 reduction and change from baseline in FVC. Ziritaxestat exposure in patients with IPF was numerically lower in those who received ziritaxestat on top of pirfenidone than in those who received ziritaxestat on top of nintedanib or ziritaxestat alone. In most patients, LPA C18:2 reduction was comparable to that reported in healthy volunteers. ATX concentrations increased over time and correlated weakly with ziritaxestat exposure and LPA C18:2 reduction. No correlation between reduction in LPA C18:2 and change from baseline in FVC was apparent. Based on these evaluations, exposure and target engagement are not thought to have contributed to the lack of efficacy observed. We hypothesize that the lack of efficacy of ziritaxestat in the ISABELA program, despite adequate LPA reduction, could be due to the involvement of an alternative pro-fibrotic pathway.

Ziritaxestat, a Novel Autotaxin Inhibitor, and Lung Function in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: The ISABELA 1 and 2 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: There is a major need for effective, well-tolerated treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of the autotaxin inhibitor ziritaxestat in patients with IPF. Design, Setting, and Participants: The 2 identically designed, phase 3, randomized clinical trials, ISABELA 1 and ISABELA 2, were conducted in Africa, Asia-Pacific region, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, and North America (26 countries). A total of 1306 patients with IPF were randomized (525 patients at 106 sites in ISABELA 1 and 781 patients at 121 sites in ISABELA 2). Enrollment began in November 2018 in both trials and follow-up was completed early due to study termination on April 12, 2021, for ISABELA 1 and on March 30, 2021, for ISABELA 2. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 600 mg of oral ziritaxestat, 200 mg of ziritaxestat, or placebo once daily in addition to local standard of care (pirfenidone, nintedanib, or neither) for at least 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the annual rate of decline for forced vital capacity (FVC) at week 52. The key secondary outcomes were disease progression, time to first respiratory-related hospitalization, and change from baseline in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score (range, 0 to 100; higher scores indicate poorer health-related quality of life). Results: At the time of study termination, 525 patients were randomized in ISABELA 1 and 781 patients in ISABELA 2 (mean age: 70.0 [SD, 7.2] years in ISABELA 1 and 69.8 [SD, 7.1] years in ISABELA 2; male: 82.4% and 81.2%, respectively). The trials were terminated early after an independent data and safety monitoring committee concluded that the benefit to risk profile of ziritaxestat no longer supported their continuation. Ziritaxestat did not improve the annual rate of FVC decline vs placebo in either study. In ISABELA 1, the least-squares mean annual rate of FVC decline was -124.6 mL (95% CI, -178.0 to -71.2 mL) with 600 mg of ziritaxestat vs -147.3 mL (95% CI, -199.8 to -94.7 mL) with placebo (between-group difference, 22.7 mL [95% CI, -52.3 to 97.6 mL]), and -173.9 mL (95% CI, -225.7 to -122.2 mL) with 200 mg of ziritaxestat (between-group difference vs placebo, -26.7 mL [95% CI, -100.5 to 47.1 mL]). In ISABELA 2, the least-squares mean annual rate of FVC decline was -173.8 mL (95% CI, -209.2 to -138.4 mL) with 600 mg of ziritaxestat vs -176.6 mL (95% CI, -211.4 to -141.8 mL) with placebo (between-group difference, 2.8 mL [95% CI, -46.9 to 52.4 mL]) and -174.9 mL (95% CI, -209.5 to -140.2 mL) with 200 mg of ziritaxestat (between-group difference vs placebo, 1.7 mL [95% CI, -47.4 to 50.8 mL]). There was no benefit with ziritaxestat vs placebo for the key secondary outcomes. In ISABELA 1, all-cause mortality was 8.0% with 600 mg of ziritaxestat, 4.6% with 200 mg of ziritaxestat, and 6.3% with placebo; in ISABELA 2, it was 9.3% with 600 mg of ziritaxestat, 8.5% with 200 mg of ziritaxestat, and 4.7% with placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: Ziritaxestat did not improve clinical outcomes compared with placebo in patients with IPF receiving standard of care treatment with pirfenidone or nintedanib or in those not receiving standard of care treatment. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03711162 and NCT03733444.

Exposure-Response Modeling and Simulation of Progression-Free Survival and Adverse Events of Sorafenib Treatment in Patients With Advanced Thyroid Cancer.

Sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC), renal cell carcinoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma. In the phase III DECISION trial in patients with DTC, sorafenib exposure and the incidence of some adverse events (AEs) were higher than in previous trials; therefore, we analyzed exposure-response relationships, including progression-free survival (PFS) and selected AEs in patients with DTC. A novel, stratified prediction-corrected visual predictive check (pc-VPC) was developed to show robustness of the exposure-response relationships. Time-to-event simulations confirmed the benefit of the recommended dosing schedule of 800 mg/day: initial doses of 800 mg/day were associated with the highest PFS, whereas lower doses (600 or 400 mg/day) were associated with improved tolerability but reduced PFS. A simulated dose-reduction strategy of 800 mg/day for an initial two cycles followed by dose reductions seemed likely to maintain efficacy while possibly mitigating selected AEs (e.g., diarrhea and hand-foot skin reactions).

A Clinical Phase II Study to Assess Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Waterfree Cyclosporine Formulation for Treatment of Dry Eye Disease.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of waterfree cyclosporine formulation (CyclASol) at 2 concentrations (0.1% and 0.05% of cyclosporine [CsA]) to vehicle when applied twice daily for 16 weeks in patients with dry eye disease (DED). An open-label Restasis (Allergan, Irvine, CA) arm was included to allow a direct comparison with an approved therapy. DESIGN: An exploratory phase II, multicenter, randomized, vehicle-controlled clinical trial, double-masked between CyclASol and vehicle with an open-label comparator. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and seven eligible patients with a history of dry eye disease were randomized 1:1:1:1 to 1 of 4 treatment arms (CyclASol 0.05%, n = 51; CyclASol 0.1%, n = 51; vehicle, n = 52, and Restasis, n = 53). METHODS: After a 2-week run-in period with twice-daily dosing of Systane Balance (Alcon, Fort Worth, TX), patients were randomized to the respective treatment arm and dosed twice daily for 16 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The study was set up to explore efficacy on a number of sign and symptom end points including total and subregion corneal fluorescein staining, conjunctival staining, visual analog scale (VAS) for dry eye symptoms VAS severity, and Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire. RESULTS: CyclASol showed a consistent reduction in corneal and conjunctival staining compared with both vehicle and Restasis over the 16-week treatment period, with an early onset of effect (at day 14). A mixed-effects model-based approach demonstrated that the CyclASol drug effect was statistically significant over vehicle (total corneal staining P < 0.1, central corneal staining P < 0.001, conjunctival staining P < 0.01). This model-based analysis suggests a significant CyclASol effect for OSDI as symptom parameter (P < 0.01). The numbers of ocular adverse events were low in all treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: CyclASol showed efficacy, safety, and tolerability at 2 concentrations in moderate-to-severe DED. In a direct head-to-head against open-label Restasis, CyclASol was found to have an earlier onset of action, as early as after 2 weeks of treatment, in relieving the signs of DED, as measured by corneal and conjunctival staining. The central region of the cornea, an important area for visual function in dry eye sufferers, was shown to have the most benefit from treatment. Excellent safety, tolerability, and comfort profile supports this new CsA formulation as having a positive benefit-to-risk ratio.

Single-cell quantification of IL-2 response by effector and regulatory T cells reveals critical plasticity in immune response.

Understanding how the immune system decides between tolerance and activation by antigens requires addressing cytokine regulation as a highly dynamic process. We quantified the dynamics of interleukin-2 (IL-2) signaling in a population of T cells during an immune response by combining in silico modeling and single-cell measurements in vitro. We demonstrate that IL-2 receptor expression levels vary widely among T cells creating a large variability in the ability of the individual cells to consume, produce and participate in IL-2 signaling within the population. Our model reveals that at the population level, these heterogeneous cells are engaged in a tug-of-war for IL-2 between regulatory (T(reg)) and effector (T(eff)) T cells, whereby access to IL-2 can either increase the survival of T(eff) cells or the suppressive capacity of T(reg) cells. This tug-of-war is the mechanism enforcing, at the systems level, a core function of T(reg) cells, namely the specific suppression of survival signals for weakly activated T(eff) cells but not for strongly activated cells. Our integrated model yields quantitative, experimentally validated predictions for the manipulation of T(reg) suppression.