Gerhard Krammer

Canakinumab for acute gouty arthritis in patients with limited treatment options: results from two randomised, multicentre, active-controlled, double-blind trials and their initial extensions

Objectives Gouty arthritis patients for whom non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and colchicine are inappropriate have limited treatment options. Canakinumab, an anti-interleukin-1β monoclonal antibody, may be an option for such patients. The authors assessed the efficacy/safety of one dose of canakinumab 150 mg (n=230) or triamcinolone acetonide (TA) 40 mg (n=226) at baseline and upon a new flare in frequently flaring patients contraindicated for, intolerant of, or unresponsive to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or colchicine. Core study co-primary endpoints were pain intensity 72 h postdose (0–100 mm visual analogue scale and time to first new flare. Methods Two 12-week randomised, multicentre, active-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group core studies with double-blind 12-week extensions (response in acute flare and in prevention of episodes of re-flare in gout (β-RELIEVED and β-RELIEVED-II)). Results 82.6% patients had comorbidities. Mean 72-h visual analogue scale pain score was lower with canakinumab (25.0 mm vs 35.7 mm; difference, −10.7 mm; 95% CI −15.4 to −6.0; p<0.0001), with significantly less physician-assessed tenderness and swelling (ORs=2.16 and 2.74; both p≤0.01) versus TA. Canakinumab significantly delayed time to first new flare, reduced the risk of new flares by 62% versus TA (HR: 0.38; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.57) in the core studies and by 56% (HR: 0.44; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.60; both p≤0.0001) over the entire 24-week period, and decreased median C-reactive protein levels (p≤0.0001 at 72 h and 7 days). Over the 24-week period, adverse events were reported in 66.2% (canakinumab) and 52.8% (TA) and serious adverse events were reported in 8.0% (canakinumab) and 3.5% (TA) of patients. Adverse events reported more frequently with canakinumab included infections, low neutrophil count and low platelet count. Conclusion Canakinumab provided significant pain and inflammation relief and reduced the risk of new flares in these patients with acute gouty arthritis.

Canakinumab reduces the risk of acute gouty arthritis flares during initiation of allopurinol treatment: results of a double-blind, randomised study

Objective This study assessed the efficacy and safety of canakinumab, a fully human anti-interleukin 1β monoclonal antibody, for prophylaxis against acute gouty arthritis flares in patients initiating urate-lowering treatment. Methods In this double-blind, double-dummy, dose-ranging study, 432 patients with gouty arthritis initiating allopurinol treatment were randomised 1:1:1:1:1:1:2 to receive: a single dose of canakinumab, 25, 50, 100, 200, or 300 mg subcutaneously; 4×4-weekly doses of canakinumab (50+50+25+25 mg subcutaneously); or daily colchicine 0.5 mg orally for 16 weeks. Patients recorded details of flares in diaries. The study aimed to determine the canakinumab dose having equivalent efficacy to colchicine 0.5 mg at 16 weeks. Results A dose-response for canakinumab was not apparent with any of the four predefined dose-response models. The estimated canakinumab dose with equivalent efficacy to colchicine was below the range of doses tested. At 16 weeks, there was a 62% to 72% reduction in the mean number of flares per patient for canakinumab doses ≥50 mg versus colchicine based on a negative binomial model (rate ratio: 0.28–0.38, p≤0.0083), and the percentage of patients experiencing ≥1 flare was significantly lower for all canakinumab doses (15% to 27%) versus colchicine (44%, p<0.05). There was a 64% to 72% reduction in the risk of experiencing ≥1 flare for canakinumab doses ≥50 mg versus colchicine at 16 weeks (hazard ratio (HR): 0.28–0.36, p≤0.05). The incidence of adverse events was similar across treatment groups. Conclusions Single canakinumab doses ≥50 mg or four 4-weekly doses provided superior prophylaxis against flares compared with daily colchicine 0.5 mg.

Less Small-Bowel Injury With Lumiracoxib Compared With Naproxen Plus Omeprazole

BACKGROUND & AIMS The selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor lumiracoxib has been shown to reduce endoscopically detected ulcers and ulcer complications in the upper gastrointestinal tract compared with nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. We investigated whether lumiracoxib would reduce small-bowel injury compared with naproxen plus omeprazole. METHODS Healthy volunteers were randomized to receive lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily, naproxen 500 mg twice daily plus omeprazole 20 mg once daily, or placebo in a 16-day double-blind, parallel-group study. Small-bowel mucosal injury and inflammation were assessed by video capsule endoscopy, the lactulose:L-rhamnose permeability assessment, and the fecal calprotectin test. RESULTS Of 152 randomized subjects, 139 completed the study with valid video capsule endoscopies (lumiracoxib, n = 47; naproxen plus omeprazole, n = 45; placebo, n = 47). Compared with placebo, an increased number of subjects on naproxen plus omeprazole had small-bowel mucosal breaks (77.8% vs 40.4%, P < .001), with increased permeability (P = .023) and increased fecal calprotectin (increase, 96.8 vs 14.5 mg/kg for placebo; P < .001). With lumiracoxib, 27.7% of subjects had small-bowel mucosal breaks (P = .196 vs placebo; P < .001 vs naproxen), there was no increase in permeability (P = .157 vs placebo; P = .364 vs naproxen), and no increase in fecal calprotectin (-5.7 mg/kg; P = .377 vs placebo; P < .001 vs naproxen). CONCLUSIONS As assessed by 3 different measures, acute small-bowel injury on lumiracoxib treatment is less frequent than with naproxen plus omeprazole and similar to placebo.

Efficacy, safety and tolerability of lumiracoxib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

A randomised, double‐blind study was performed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of lumiracoxib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patients received lumiracoxib 200 mg once daily (o.d.) (n = 280), lumiracoxib 400 mg o.d. (n = 281), naproxen 500 mg twice daily (n = 279) or placebo (n = 284) for 26 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was response to treatment according to ACR20 criteria (adjusted for prohibited concomitant or excessive rescue medication use and discontinuations due to unsatisfactory therapeutic response) at week 13. Safety and tolerability was also assessed. Significantly more patients receiving lumiracoxib than placebo were responders according to ACR20 criteria at week 13 (41.1 and 42.7% for lumiracoxib 200 and 400 mg o.d., respectively; 32.4% for placebo; both p < 0.05). The proportion responding to naproxen (39.1%) was not significantly different from placebo. Prespecified gastrointestinal adverse events were more frequent with naproxen than with either lumiracoxib dose or placebo. Lumiracoxib is therefore an effective and well‐tolerated therapy for RA.

Effect on blood pressure of lumiracoxib versus ibuprofen in patients with osteoarthritis and controlled hypertension: a randomized trial.

Objectives Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs vary in their impact on blood pressure and the effect of lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily has not been studied previously. To examine whether lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily would result in lower 24-h mean systolic ambulatory blood pressure than ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily in osteoarthritis patients with controlled hypertension, a 4-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study was conducted in 79 centres in nine countries. Methods Hypertensive osteoarthritis patients of 50 years at least whose office blood pressure was less than 140/90 mmHg on stable antihypertensive treatment were randomized to lumiracoxib (n = 394) 100 mg once daily or ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily (n = 393) and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed at baseline and end of study. The primary outcome measure was a comparison of the change in 24-h mean systolic ambulatory blood pressure from baseline to week 4. Secondary analyses included other blood pressure-related endpoints and efficacy (pain) measurements. Results Compared with baseline, the 24-h mean systolic ambulatory blood pressure (least square mean) decreased in lumiracoxib-treated patients (−2.7 mmHg) and increased in ibuprofen-treated patients (+2.2 mmHg) at 4 weeks, estimated difference −5.0 mmHg (95% confidence interval −6.1 to −3.8) in favour of lumiracoxib. The 24-h mean diastolic ambulatory blood pressure changes were −1.5 mmHg (lumiracoxib), +0.5 mmHg (ibuprofen), difference −2.0 mmHg (95% confidence interval −2.7 to −1.3). Efficacy results were comparable. Conclusions Treatment with lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily resulted in clinically significant lower blood pressure compared with ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily in osteoarthritis patients with well controlled hypertension.

Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous and Intravenous Loading Dose Regimens of Secukinumab in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from a Randomized Phase II Study.

Objective. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of secukinumab, a fully human antiinterleukin-17A monoclonal antibody, administered with an intravenous (IV) or subcutaneous (SC) loading regimen versus placebo, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. In this phase II, double-blind, double-dummy, 52-week study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01359943), 221 patients with inadequate response to methotrexate were randomized (2:2:1) to secukinumab, IV loading 10 mg/kg at baseline, Weeks 2 and 4, then SC 150 mg every 4 weeks (n = 88); secukinumab SC loading 150 mg once weekly for 5 weeks, then every 4 weeks (n = 89); or a matching placebo (followed by secukinumab 150 mg every 4 weeks starting Week 16; n = 44). The primary endpoint was superior efficacy of pooled secukinumab versus placebo using American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20) at Week 12. Results. The primary efficacy endpoint was not met: ACR20 response at Week 12 was 49.2% for pooled secukinumab versus 40.9% for placebo (p = 0.3559). These variables improved significantly with pooled secukinumab versus placebo at Week 12 (all p < 0.05): the 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28), patient’s and physician’s global assessment of disease activity, patient’s assessment of RA pain, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels. Results of continuous efficacy outcomes were similar between the IV and SC loading regimens. The most frequent adverse events were infections, with similar rates across secukinumab and placebo. Conclusion. Although the primary endpoint (ACR20) was not met, secukinumab demonstrated improved efficacy in reducing disease activity over placebo as measured by DAS28 and other secondary endpoints.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of canakinumab in patients with gouty arthritis

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the anti‐interleukin (IL)‐1β monoclonal antibody, canakinumab, in gouty arthritis patients from three studies are reported. Canakinumab has low serum clearance (0.214 L/day), low steady‐state volume of distribution (7.44 L), a 25.8‐day half‐life, and approximately 60% subcutaneous absolute bioavailability in a typical 93‐kg patient. Creatinine clearance had a small positive impact on serum canakinumab clearance that is not likely to be clinically relevant. Binding to circulating IL‐1β was demonstrated by increases in total serum IL‐1β following canakinumab dosing. Total IL‐1β kinetics and canakinumab pharmacokinetics were characterized by a population‐based pharmacokinetic‐binding model, where the estimated apparent in vivo dissociation constant (signifying binding affinity of canakinumab to circulating IL‐1β) was 0.99 nmol/L in gouty arthritis patients. Canakinumab treatment provided rapid, sustained decreases in C‐reactive protein and serum amyloid A, provided superior pain relief to triamcinolone acetonide, and increased time to first recurrent attack (P ≤ 0.01 favoring all canakinumab doses vs. triamcinolone acetonide).

The effects of lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily vs. ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily on the blood pressure profiles of hypertensive osteoarthritis patients taking different classes of antihypertensive agents

Aims:  To examine whether the blood pressure (BP) profiles of lumiracoxib and high‐dose ibuprofen differed in patients treated with different classes of antihypertensive medications.

Clinical trial: comparison of the gastrointestinal safety of lumiracoxib with traditional nonselective nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs early after the initiation of treatment – findings from the Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Event Trial

Background  The large (n = 18 325) Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Event Trial (TARGET) study demonstrated a significant gastrointestinal benefit with lumiracoxib 400 mg o.d. (4× the recommended dose in osteoarthritis) vs. naproxen 500 mg b.d. or ibuprofen 800 mg t.d.s.

A 6-week, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, clinical safety study of lumiracoxib and rofecoxib in osteoarthritis patients

BackgroundLumiracoxib is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor effective in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) with a superior gastrointestinal (GI) safety profile as compared to traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs, ibuprofen and naproxen). This safety study compared the GI tolerability, the blood pressure (BP) profile and the incidence of oedema with lumiracoxib and rofecoxib in the treatment of OA. Rofecoxib was withdrawn worldwide due to an associated increased risk of CV events and lumiracoxib has been withdrawn from Australia, Canada, Europe and a few other countries following reports of suspected adverse liver reactions.MethodsThis randomised, double-blind study enrolled 309 patients (aged greater than or equal to 50 years) with primary OA across 51 centres in Europe. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either lumiracoxib 400 mg od (four times the recommended dose in OA) (n = 154) or rofecoxib 25 mg od (n = 155). The study was conducted for 6 weeks and assessments were performed at Weeks 3 and 6. The primary safety measures were the incidence of predefined GI adverse events (AEs) and peripheral oedema. The secondary safety measures included effect of treatment on the mean sitting systolic and diastolic blood pressure (msSBP and msDBP). Tolerability of lumiracoxib 400 mg was assessed by the incidence of AEs.ResultsLumiracoxib and rofecoxib displayed similar GI safety profiles with no statistically significant difference in predefined GI AEs between the two groups (43.5% vs. 37.4%, respectively). The incidence and severity of individual predefined GI AEs was comparable between the two groups. The incidence of peripheral oedema was low and identical in both the groups (n = 9, 5.8%). Only one patient in the lumiracoxib group and three patients in the rofecoxib group had a moderate or severe event. At Week 6 there was a significantly lower msSBP and msDBP in the lumiracoxib group compared to the rofecoxib group (p < 0.05). A similar percentage of patients in both groups showed an improvement in target joint pain and disease activity. The tolerability profile was similar in both the treatment groups.ConclusionLumiracoxib 400 mg od (four times the recommended dose in OA) provided a comparable GI safety profile to rofecoxib 25 mg od (therapeutic dose). However, lumiracoxib was associated with a significantly better BP profile as compared to rofecoxib.Trial registration number -NCT00637949