Effectiveness of omalizumab across different dosing regimens in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma.

For patients with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma, omalizumab is approved for subcutaneous administration according to a recommended dosing table based on weight and total immunoglobulin E (IgE) level. The aim of this analysis was to assess asthma outcomes including quality of life in patients with allergic asthma initiated on omalizumab in the PROSPERO trial; patients were stratified by where their IgE and body weight fell on the approved dosing table. Patient groups were defined as Inside Dosing Table: patients whose IgE and weight fell within the approved dosing table (n = 506); Insufficient Data to Recommend a Dose: patients who fell into the section of the approved dosing table where not enough clinical data were available to make dosing recommendations (n = 72); and Outside Dosing Table: patients who fell outside the approved dosing table due to baseline IgE and/or weight (n = 209). Overall, asthma and quality of life outcomes were improved after omalizumab initiation for both patients who fall within the recommended dosing table or those who fall outside the recommended dosing table. Our results suggest that omalizumab treatment may be effective in a wide range of patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01922037.

Effect of omalizumab on lung function and eosinophil levels in adolescents with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma.

BACKGROUND: Omalizumab improves clinical outcomes in patients with asthma. Several studies have shown lung function improvements with omalizumab; however, this has not been examined exclusively in adolescents. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of omalizumab on lung function and eosinophil counts in adolescents with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis, data from adolescents aged 12 to 17 years from 8 randomized trials of omalizumab were pooled (studies 008, 009, and 011, and SOLAR, INNOVATE, ALTO, ETOPA, and EXTRA). Changes from baseline to end of study in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), percent predicted FEV1 (ppFEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), and blood eosinophil counts were assessed by fitting an analysis of covariance model and calculating least squares mean (LSM) difference for omalizumab vs placebo. RESULTS: A total of 340 adolescents were identified (omalizumab, n = 203 [59.7%]; placebo, n = 137 [40.3%]). Omalizumab increased all baseline lung function variables more than placebo by end of study: LSM treatment differences (95% confidence interval) were 3.0% (0.2%-5.7%; P = .035), 120.9 mL (30.6-211.2 mL; P = .009), and 101.5 mL (8.3-194.6 mL; P = .033) for ppFEV1, absolute FEV1, and FVC, respectively. The LSM difference demonstrated a greater reduction in eosinophil counts for omalizumab vs placebo: -85.9 cells/µL (-137.1 to -34.6 cells/µL; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Omalizumab was associated with lung function improvements and circulating eosinophil counts reductions in adolescents with moderate-to-severe uncontrolled asthma. Findings emphasize the effect of omalizumab in young patients and the need to optimize treatment early in the disease course. https://clinicaltrials.gov/: NCT00314574, NCT00046748, NCT00401596.

Asthma Exacerbations and Triggers in Children in TENOR: Impact on Quality of Life.

BACKGROUND: Data examining associations between asthma exacerbations, triggers, and asthma-related quality of life (QOL) in children with severe/difficult-to-treat asthma are unavailable. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate real-world data on relationships between asthma exacerbations, triggers, and QOL in children using data from TENOR (The Epidemiology and Natural History of Asthma Outcomes and Treatment Regimens), a 3-year observational study of patients with severe/difficult-to-treat asthma, including those aged 6 to 12 years. METHODS: QOL was examined using the Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAQLQ) and defined exacerbations hierarchically (descending order of severity): hospitalization, emergency department visit, steroid burst, no exacerbation, using the highest value from months 6 and 12. One-way ANOVA was used to test for differences in PAQLQ domain scores at month 12 across exacerbation severity, total number of asthma exacerbations, and number of baseline asthma triggers. Mantel-Haenszel chi-square test was used to test the association between the number of triggers and exacerbation hierarchy. RESULTS: Greater severity of asthma exacerbations was associated with significantly (P < .001) lower mean PAQLQ domain scores, indicating poorer QOL. A higher number of asthma exacerbations was associated with significantly (P < .001) lower mean PAQLQ domain scores. PAQLQ scores were significantly lower with higher numbers of baseline triggers. Higher baseline number of asthma triggers was associated with greater severity (P = .05) and number of asthma exacerbations (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A higher number of asthma triggers at baseline was associated with greater asthma severity and number of asthma exacerbations and lower QOL in children with severe/difficult-to-treat asthma.

Baseline asthma burden, comorbidities, and biomarkers in omalizumab-treated patients in PROSPERO.

BACKGROUND: Patients included in clinical trials do not necessarily reflect the real-world population. OBJECTIVE: To understand the characteristics, including disease and comorbidity burden, of patients with asthma receiving omalizumab in a real-world setting. METHODS: The Prospective Observational Study to Evaluate Predictors of Clinical Effectiveness in Response to Omalizumab (PROSPERO) was a US-based, multicenter, single-arm, and prospective study. Patients (≥12 years of age) with allergic asthma initiating omalizumab treatment based on physician-assessed need were included and followed for 12 months. Exacerbations, health care use, adverse events, and Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores were assessed monthly. Biomarkers (blood eosinophils, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, and periostin) were evaluated and patient-reported outcomes (Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire for 12 Years and Older [AQLQ+12] and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Asthma questionnaire [WPAI:Asthma]) were completed at baseline and months 6 and 12. The Mini Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (MiniRQLQ) was completed at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS: Most of the 806 enrollees (91.4%) were adults (mean age 47.3 years, SD 17.4), white (70.3%), and female (63.5%). Allergic comorbidity was frequently reported (84.2%), as were hypertension (35.5%) and depression (22.1%). In the 12 months before study entry, 22.1% of patients reported at least 1 asthma-related hospitalization, 60.7% reported at least 2 exacerbations, and 83.3% reported ACT scores no higher than 19 (uncontrolled asthma). Most patients had low biomarker levels based on prespecified cut-points. Baseline mean patient-reported outcome scores were 4.0 (SD 1.4) for AQLQ+12, 2.7 (SD 1.4) for MiniRQLQ, and 47.7 (SD 28.9) for WPAI:Asthma percentage of activity impairment and 33.5 (SD 28.7) for percentage of overall work impairment. CONCLUSION: The population initiating omalizumab in PROSPERO reported poorly controlled asthma and a substantial disease burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01922037.

ADDRESS (ADministration of DRotrecogin alfa [activated] in Early stage Severe Sepsis) long-term follow-up: one-year safety and efficacy evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate that drotrecogin alfa (activated) has an acceptable safety profile 1 yr from randomization. DESIGN: One-year follow-up of patients participating in a placebo-controlled clinical study of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in severe sepsis patients at low risk of death (the ADDRESS study). SETTING: The study was conducted at 516 hospitals in 34 countries. PATIENTS: The study included 2,640 patients. INTERVENTIONS: One-year follow-up was performed as an addendum to the placebo-controlled ADDRESS study. Treatment groups were compared using the chi-square test and Kaplan-Meier estimates. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Survival status at 1 yr was obtained for 90% of patients enrolled in the study (n = 2,376). The difference in mortality rate between drotrecogin alfa (activated) and placebo patients was numerically smaller at 1 yr (34.2% and 34.0%, respectively, p = .94) than at 28 days (18.5% and 17.0%, respectively, p = .34). In the subgroups defined by organ dysfunction class (single or multiple) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (<25 or >or=25), the differences in mortality rate between treatment groups at 1 yr were consistent with those observed at 28 days; no significant differences in mortality rates between treatment groups were observed. No additional serious adverse events were reported during the period between hospital discharge and 1 yr. CONCLUSIONS: No increased risk of death or evidence of harm at 1 yr was associated with drotrecogin alfa (activated) administration in patients with severe sepsis at lower risk of death.

International INtegrated Database for the Evaluation of severe sePsis and drotrecogin alfa (activated) THerapy: component trials and statistical methods for INDEPTH.

OBJECTIVES: To better understand the effects of drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) in severe sepsis patients, and the natural progression of severe sepsis, by creating a database of severe sepsis patients using the appropriate statistical analysis methods to integrate data from various trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patient-level data from five severe sepsis trials, conducted by the same sponsor (Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA), were combined in an integrated database. Patients from various studies were included and received either DrotAA at 24 microg/kg/h for 96 hours (n = 3228) or placebo (n = 1231), in addition to standard supportive care. The following adjustments to the analyses were made to allow for the combined, and thus non-randomized, nature of the data: (1) differences in observed outcomes between studies were investigated to assess the extent of study-to-study variation before combining study-level data across trials for statistical analysis; (2) random study effects were included in models for patient-level data to capture potential extraneous study-to-study variation; and (3) propensity scores were computed and included as covariates in models for patient-level data to adjust for the nonrandomized nature of the data. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar across the studies, supporting the combination of study-level data across trials. Comparing aggregate event rates between the two treatment arms yielded a relative risk for mortality (DrotAA versus placebo) of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-0.88), p < 0.0001. For patient-level analyses, after adjustment for 13 independent variables and random study effects, the odds ratio for mortality in the DrotAA versus placebo patients was 0.71 (95% CI 0.59-0.86), p = 0.0003. With adjustment for 13 independent variables and propensity score, the odds ratio was 0.79 (95% CI 0.67-0.93), p = 0.006. Limitations of this integrated database include the modest total number of the trials in the database and the fact that only one component trial in the database contributed data from both placebo and DrotAA-treated patients. SUMMARY: A robust severe sepsis database was developed which will be suitable for future studies on the progression of severe sepsis and the mechanism of action of DrotAA. Initial analysis of data from INDEPTH provides additional evidence that treatment of severe sepsis patients with DrotAA is associated with a sustained survival advantage throughout 28-day follow-up.

Use of an integrated clinical trial database to evaluate the effect of timing of drotrecogin alfa (activated) treatment in severe sepsis.

INTRODUCTION: Several studies have indicated that early identification and treatment of patients with severe sepsis using standard supportive care improves outcomes. Earlier treatment with drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) may also improve outcomes in severe sepsis. Using a recently constructed integrated severe sepsis database, our objectives in this study were to describe the influence of baseline clinical characteristics on timing of DrotAA treatment in patients with severe sepsis, to evaluate the efficacy of DrotAA with respect to timing of administration, and to examine the association between early intervention with DrotAA and patient outcomes, using adjustments for imbalances. METHODS: The database comprises data from 4,459 patients with severe sepsis (DrotAA, n = 3,228; placebo, n = 1,231) included in five clinical trials conducted in tertiary care institutions in 28 countries. Placebo data came only from randomized trials, whereas data for the DrotAA group came from randomized (PROWESS) and open-label/observational (ENHANCE) trials. RESULTS: Increased time-to-treatment with DrotAA was significantly associated with more organ dysfunction, greater need of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor use, or recent surgery. Earlier treatment was associated with higher baseline Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) scores. Adjusted and unadjusted survival analyses suggested that compared with placebo, DrotAA treatment provided a potential survival benefit, regardless of time to treatment. Survival curves of DrotAA patients treated early compared with those treated late began to separate at 14 days. By 28 days, patients treated earlier had higher survival than those treated later (76.4% versus 73.5%, p = 0.03). Sepsis-induced multiorgan dysfunction was the most common cause of death followed by refractory shock and respiratory failure. Modeling of the treatment effect, as a function of time to treatment, suggested increased benefit with earlier treatment. CONCLUSION: Using an integrated database of five severe sepsis trials and appropriate statistical adjustments to reduce sources of potential bias, earlier treatment with DrotAA seemed to be associated with a lower risk-adjusted mortality than later treatment. These data suggest that earlier treatment with DrotAA may provide most benefit for appropriate patients.

Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis and a low risk of death.

BACKGROUND: In November 2001, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) for adults who had severe sepsis and a high risk of death. The FDA required a study to evaluate the efficacy of DrotAA for adults who had severe sepsis and a low risk of death. METHODS: We randomly assigned adult patients with severe sepsis and a low risk of death (defined by an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation [APACHE II] score <25 or single-organ failure) to receive an intravenous infusion of placebo or DrotAA (24 microg per kilogram of body weight per hour) for 96 hours in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. The prospectively defined primary end point was death from any cause and was assessed 28 days after the start of the infusion. In-hospital mortality within 90 days after the start of the infusion was measured, and safety information was collected. RESULTS: Enrollment in the trial was terminated early because of a low likelihood of meeting the prospectively defined objective of demonstrating a significant reduction in the 28-day mortality rate with the use of DrotAA. The study enrolled 2640 patients and collected data on 2613 (1297 in the placebo group and 1316 in the DrotAA group) at the 28-day follow-up. There were no statistically significant differences between the placebo group and the DrotAA group in 28-day mortality (17.0 percent in the placebo group vs. 18.5 percent in the DrotAA group; P=0.34; relative risk, 1.08; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.92 to 1.28) or in in-hospital mortality (20.5 percent vs. 20.6 percent; P=0.98; relative risk, 1.00; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.16). The rate of serious bleeding was greater in the DrotAA group than in the placebo group during both the infusion (2.4 percent vs. 1.2 percent, P=0.02) and the 28-day study period (3.9 percent vs. 2.2 percent, P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The absence of a beneficial treatment effect, coupled with an increased incidence of serious bleeding complications, indicates that DrotAA should not be used in patients with severe sepsis who are at low risk for death, such as those with single-organ failure or an APACHE II score less than 25.