Stephanie Korn

Mepolizumab for severe eosinophilic asthma (DREAM): a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND Some patients with severe asthma have recurrent asthma exacerbations associated with eosinophilic airway inflammation. Early studies suggest that inhibition of eosinophilic airway inflammation with mepolizumab-a monoclonal antibody against interleukin 5-is associated with a reduced risk of exacerbations. We aimed to establish efficacy, safety, and patient characteristics associated with the response to mepolizumab. METHODS We undertook a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at 81 centres in 13 countries between Nov 9, 2009, and Dec 5, 2011. Eligible patients were aged 12-74 years, had a history of recurrent severe asthma exacerbations, and had signs of eosinophilic inflammation. They were randomly assigned (in a 1:1:1:1 ratio) to receive one of three doses of intravenous mepolizumab (75 mg, 250 mg, or 750 mg) or matched placebo (100 mL 0·9% NaCl) with a central telephone-based system and computer-generated randomly permuted block schedule stratified by whether treatment with oral corticosteroids was required. Patients received 13 infusions at 4-week intervals. The primary outcome was the rate of clinically significant asthma exacerbations, which were defined as validated episodes of acute asthma requiring treatment with oral corticosteroids, admission, or a visit to an emergency department. Patients, clinicians, and data analysts were masked to treatment assignment. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01000506. FINDINGS 621 patients were randomised: 159 were assigned to placebo, 154 to 75 mg mepolizumab, 152 to 250 mg mepolizumab, and 156 to 750 mg mepolizumab. 776 exacerbations were deemed to be clinically significant. The rate of clinically significant exacerbations was 2·40 per patient per year in the placebo group, 1·24 in the 75 mg mepolizumab group (48% reduction, 95% CI 31-61%; p<0·0001), 1·46 in the 250 mg mepolizumab group (39% reduction, 19-54%; p=0·0005), and 1·15 in the 750 mg mepolizumab group (52% reduction, 36-64%; p<0·0001). Three patients died during the study, but the deaths were not deemed to be related to treatment. INTERPRETATION Mepolizumab is an effective and well tolerated treatment that reduces the risk of asthma exacerbations in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. FUNDING GlaxoSmithKline.

Reslizumab for inadequately controlled asthma with elevated blood eosinophil counts: results from two multicentre, parallel, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND Elevated numbers of blood eosinophils are a risk factor for asthma exacerbations. Reslizumab is a humanised anti-interleukin 5 monoclonal antibody that disrupts eosinophil maturation and promotes programmed cell death. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of reslizumab in patients with inadequately controlled, moderate-to-severe asthma. METHODS We did two duplicate, multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials. Both trials enrolled patients with asthma aged 12-75 years (from 128 clinical research centres in study 1 and 104 centres in study 2) from Asia, Australia, North America, South America, South Africa, and Europe, whose asthma was inadequately controlled by medium-to-high doses of inhaled corticosteroid based therapy and who had blood eosinophils of 400 cells per μL or higher and one or more exacerbations in the previous year. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either intravenous reslizumab (3·0 mg/kg) or placebo every 4 weeks for 1 year by computerised central randomisation. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment during the study. Each patient received a specific volume of study drug (reslizumab or matching placebo) on the basis of the patients body weight and randomly assigned treatment group. Additionally, the sponsors clinical personnel involved in the study were masked to the study drug identity until the database was locked for analysis and the treatment assignment revealed. The primary outcome was the annual frequency of clinical asthma exacerbations and was analysed by intention to treat. We assessed safety outcomes in the patients who had received one or more dose of the drug. The trials have been completed and are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01287039 (study 1) and NCT01285323 (study 2). FINDINGS Study 1 was done between April 12, 2011, and March 3, 2014 and study 2 between March 22, 2011, and April 9, 2014. Of 2597 patients screened, 953 were randomly assigned to receive either reslizumab (n=477 [245 in study 1 and 232 in study 2]) or placebo (n=476 [244 and 232]). In both studies, patients receiving reslizumab had a significant reduction in the frequency of asthma exacerbations (study 1: rate ratio [RR] 0·50 [95% CI 0·37-0·67]; study 2: 0·41 [0·28-0·59]; both p<0·0001) compared with those receiving placebo. Common adverse events on reslizumab were similar to placebo. The most common adverse events were worsening asthma symptoms (127 [52%] for placebo and 97 [40%] for reslizumab in study 1; 119 [51%] for placebo and 67 [29%] for reslizumab for study 2), upper respiratory tract infections (32 [13%] and 39 [16%]; 16 [7%] and eight [3%]), and nasopharyngitis (33 [14%] and 28 [11%]; 56 [24%] and 45 [19%]). Two patients in the reslizumab group had anaphylactic reactions; both responded to standard treatment at the study centre and resolved, and the patients were withdrawn from the study. INTERPRETATION These results support the use of reslizumab in patients with asthma and elevated blood eosinophil counts who are inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroid-based therapy. FUNDING Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D.

Benralizumab, an anti-interleukin-5 receptor α monoclonal antibody, as add-on treatment for patients with severe, uncontrolled, eosinophilic asthma (CALIMA): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Benralizumab is a humanised, afucosylated, anti-interleukin-5 receptor α monoclonal antibody that induces direct, rapid, and nearly complete depletion of eosinophils. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of benralizumab as add-on therapy for patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma and elevated blood eosinophil counts. METHODS In this randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (CALIMA) undertaken at 303 sites in 11 countries, we enrolled patients aged 12-75 years with severe asthma uncontrolled by medium-dosage to high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β₂-agonists (ICS plus LABA) and a history of two or more exacerbations in the previous year. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 56 weeks of benralizumab 30 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), benralizumab 30 mg every 8 weeks (Q8W; first three doses 4 weeks apart), or placebo (all subcutaneous injection). Patients were stratified (2:1) by baseline blood eosinophil counts 300 cells per μL or greater and less than 300 cells per μL, respectively. Patients and study centre staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was annual exacerbation rate ratio versus placebo for patients receiving high-dosage ICS plus LABA with baseline blood eosinophils 300 cells per μL or greater (intention-to-treat analysis). Key secondary endpoints were pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and total asthma symptom score. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01914757. FINDINGS Between Aug 21, 2013, and March 16, 2015, 2505 patients were enrolled, of whom 1306 patients were randomised; 425 patients were randomly assigned to and received benralizumab 30 mg Q4W, 441 to benralizumab 30 mg Q8W, and 440 to placebo. 728 patients were included in the primary analysis population. Benralizumab resulted in significantly lower annual exacerbation rates with the Q4W regimen (rate 0·60 [95% CI 0·48-0·74], rate ratio 0·64 [95% CI 0·49-0·85], p=0·0018, n=241) and Q8W regimen (rate 0·66 [95% CI 0·54-0·82], rate ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·54-0·95], p=0·0188, n=239) compared with placebo (rate 0·93 [95% CI 0·77-1·12], n=248). Benralizumab also significantly improved pre-bronchodilator FEV1 (Q4W and Q8W) and total asthma symptom score (Q8W only) in these patients. The most common adverse events were nasopharyngitis (90 [21%] in the Q4W group, 79 [18%] in the Q8W group, and 92 [21%] in the placebo group) and worsening asthma (61 [14%] in the Q4W group, 47 [11%] in the Q8W group, and 68 [15%] in the group). INTERPRETATION Benralizumab significantly reduced annual exacerbation rates and was generally well tolerated for patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma with blood eosinophils 300 cells per μL or greater. Our data further refine the patient population likely to receive the greatest benefit from benralizumab treatment. FUNDING AstraZeneca and Kyowa Hakko Kirin.

Efficacy and safety of tralokinumab in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial

BACKGROUND Interleukin 13 is a central mediator of asthma. Tralokinumab is a human interleukin-13 neutralising monoclonal antibody. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two dosing regimens of tralokinumab in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma. METHODS We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 2b study at 98 sites in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia. Patients aged 18-75 years with severe asthma and two to six exacerbations in the previous year were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice-response or web-response system, to one of two dosing regimen groups (every 2 weeks, or every 2 weeks for 12 weeks then every 4 weeks) and further randomised (2:1), via computer-generated permuted-block randomisation (block size of six), to receive tralokinumab 300 mg or placebo for 1 year. All participants received high-dose fluticasone and salmeterol and continued other pre-study controller drugs. Treatment was administered by an unmasked study investigator not involved in the management of patients; all other study site personnel, patients, the study funder, and data analysts were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the annual asthma exacerbation rate at week 52 in the intention-to-treat population. Key secondary endpoints included prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (ACQ-6), and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire-Standardised Version (AQLQ[S]). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01402986. FINDINGS Between Oct 4, 2011, and Feb 22, 2014, we randomly assigned 452 patients to receive placebo (n=151) or tralokinumab every 2 weeks (n=150) or every 4 weeks (n=151), of whom 383 (85%) completed the treatment period up to week 52. The annual asthma exacerbation rate at week 52 was similar between patients receiving tralokinumab every 2 weeks (0.91 per patient per year [95% CI 0.76-1.08]) and every 4 weeks (0.97 [0.81-1.14]), and those receiving placebo (0.90 [0.75-1.08]). At week 52, percentage changes in annual asthma exacerbation rate were not significant with tralokinumab every 2 weeks or every 4 weeks versus placebo (6% [95% CI -31 to 33; p=0.709] and -2% [-46 to 29; p=0.904], respectively), with positive changes showing a decrease in exacerbation rate and negative changes showing an increase. Prebronchodilator FEV1 was significantly increased compared with placebo for tralokinumab every 2 weeks (change from baseline 7.3% [95% CI 2.6-12.0]; p=0.003), but not every 4 weeks (1.8% [-2.9 to 6.6]; p=0.448); however, we did not identify significant changes in the other key secondary endpoints. In a post-hoc subgroup analysis of patients not on long-term oral corticosteroids and with baseline FEV1 reversibility of 12% or greater, we noted a non-significant improvement in asthma exacerbation rate (44% [95% CI -22 to 74]; p=0.147) and significant improvements in key secondary endpoints (FEV1 12.2% [1.7-22.7]; p=0.022; ACQ-6 -0.55 [-1.07 to -0.04]; p=0.036; and AQLQ[S] 0.70 [0.12-1.28]; p=0.019) in patients given tralokinumab every 2 weeks (n=33) compared with placebo (n=48). In patients in this subgroup who also had baseline serum dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) higher than the population baseline median, we noted additional improvements in prebronchodilator FEV1, ACQ-6, and AQLQ(S), and, in those with periostin concentrations higher than the median, we noted improvements in asthma exacerbation rate, prebronchodilator FEV1, and ACQ-6. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between the tralokinumab and placebo groups. Treatment-emergent serious adverse events regarded as related to the study drug were pneumonia (one [1%] patient in the placebo group), pneumococcal pneumonia (one [1%] in the tralokinumab every 2 weeks group), angioedema (one [1%] in the placebo group), and worsening asthma (one [1%] in the tralokinumab every 2 weeks group and two [1%] in the tralokinumab every 4 weeks group). INTERPRETATION In this phase 2b study, both tralokinumab regimens had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile but did not significantly reduce asthma exacerbation rates in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma. Improvement in FEV1 with tralokinumab given every 2 weeks and results of post-hoc subgroup analyses suggested a possible treatment effect in a defined population of patients with severe uncontrolled asthma. This effect is being further investigated in ongoing phase 3 trials, along with the potential utility of DPP-4 and periostin as biomarkers of interleukin-13 pathway activation. FUNDING MedImmune.

Allergen-induced asthmatic responses modified by a GATA3-specific DNAzyme.

BACKGROUND The most prevalent phenotype of asthma is characterized by eosinophil-dominated inflammation that is driven by a type 2 helper T cell (Th2). Therapeutic targeting of GATA3, an important transcription factor of the Th2 pathway, may be beneficial. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of SB010, a novel DNA enzyme (DNAzyme) that is able to cleave and inactivate GATA3 messenger RNA (mRNA). METHODS We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial of SB010 involving patients who had allergic asthma with sputum eosinophilia and who also had biphasic early and late asthmatic responses after laboratory-based allergen provocation. A total of 40 patients could be evaluated; 21 were assigned to receive 10 mg of SB010, and 19 were assigned to receive placebo, with each study drug administered by means of inhalation once daily for 28 days. An allergen challenge was performed before and after the 28-day period. The primary end point was the late asthmatic response as quantified by the change in the area under the curve (AUC) for forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). RESULTS After 28 days, SB010 attenuated the mean late asthmatic response by 34%, as compared with the baseline response, according to the AUC for FEV1, whereas placebo was associated with a 1% increase in the AUC for FEV1 (P=0.02). The early asthmatic response with SB010 was attenuated by 11% as measured by the AUC for FEV1, whereas the early response with placebo was increased by 10% (P=0.03). Inhibition of the late asthmatic response by SB010 was associated with attenuation of allergen-induced sputum eosinophilia and with lower levels of tryptase in sputum and lower plasma levels of interleukin-5. Allergen-induced levels of fractional exhaled nitric oxide and airway hyperresponsiveness to methacholine were not affected by either SB010 or placebo. CONCLUSIONS Treatment with SB010 significantly attenuated both late and early asthmatic responses after allergen provocation in patients with allergic asthma. Biomarker analysis showed an attenuation of Th2-regulated inflammatory responses. (Funded by Sterna Biologicals and the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01743768.).

Specific IgE against Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxins: an independent risk factor for asthma.

BACKGROUND The role of IgE in patients with severe asthma is not fully understood. OBJECTIVE We sought to investigate whether IgE to Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxins might be relevant to disease severity in adult asthmatic patients. METHODS Specific IgE antibody concentrations in serum against enterotoxins, grass pollen (GP), and house dust mite allergens and total IgE levels were measured in adult cohorts of 69 control subjects, 152 patients with nonsevere asthma, and 166 patients with severe asthma. Severe asthma was defined as inadequately controlled disease despite high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus at least 2 other controller therapies, including oral steroids. RESULTS Enterotoxin IgE positivity was significantly greater in patients with severe asthma (59.6%) than in healthy control subjects (13%, P< .001). Twenty-one percent of patients with severe asthma with enterotoxin IgE were considered nonatopic. Logistic regression analyses demonstrated significantly increased risks for enterotoxin IgE-positive subjects to have any asthma (OR, 7.25; 95% CI, 2.7-19.1) or severe asthma (OR, 11.09; 95% CI, 4.1-29.6) versus enterotoxin IgE-negative subjects. The presence of GP or house dust mite IgE antibodies was not associated with either significantly increased risk for asthma or severity. Oral steroid use and hospitalizations were significantly increased in patients with enterotoxin IgE and nonatopic asthma. GP IgE was associated with a higher FEV(1) percent predicted value, and enterotoxin IgE was associated with a lower FEV(1) percent predicted value. CONCLUSIONS Staphylococcal enterotoxin IgE antibodies, but not IgE against inhalant allergens, are risk factors for asthma severity. We hypothesize that the presence of enterotoxin IgE in serum indicates the involvement of staphylococcal superantigens in the pathophysiology of patients with severe asthma.

Omalizumab in patients with severe persistent allergic asthma in a real-life setting in Germany

Omalizumab is a humanized monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibody indicated in Europe for the treatment of uncontrolled severe persistent allergic (IgE-mediated) asthma despite optimal therapy with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2) agonists. Between 2005 and 2007 280 patients (58% female, mean age 44+/-16 yrs., 46% on oral corticosteroids, median serum IgE level 235IU/ml) who met the EU criteria for add-on therapy with anti-IgE were treated prospectively with omalizumab by 134 physicians as part of a post-marketing surveillance trial and were followed-up for 6 months. The median follow-up time was 195 days, the patients were treated with a median dose of 450mg omalizumab every 4 weeks. After 6 months there was a marked effect of omalizumab treatment on daily (-76%) and nocturnal symptoms (-84%), exacerbations (-82%), unscheduled health care contacts (-81%), hospitalizations (-78%) and quality of life (Mini-AQLQ: score increase from 2.9 to 4.5). Overall, efficacy of omalizumab was rated as excellent or good by the majority of physicians (82%) and patients (86%). In 19 patients (7%) omalizumab-related adverse events were recorded. This post-marketing surveillance trial confirms the marked and clinically relevant effect of omalizumab on asthma symptoms and level of asthma control in the majority of patients with severe persistent allergic (IgE-mediated) asthma in a real-life situation.

Indacaterol once-daily provides superior efficacy to salmeterol twice-daily in COPD: a 12-week study.

BACKGROUND Indacaterol is a novel, inhaled once-daily ultra-long-acting β(2)-agonist for the treatment of COPD. METHODS This 12-week randomised, parallel-group study compared the efficacy of indacaterol 150 μg once-daily to salmeterol 50 μg twice-daily in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Assessments included FEV(1) standardised area under curve (AUC) from 5 min to 11 h 45 min at Week 12 (primary endpoint), 24-h trough FEV(1) (mean of 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min post-dose) at Week 12 (key secondary endpoint), FEV(1) and FVC measured over 24-h, transition dyspnoea index (TDI) and rescue medication use. RESULTS Of 1123 patients randomised 92.1% completed. Mean ± SD age was 62.8±8.78 years, post-bronchodilator FEV(1) 51.8±12.32% predicted, FEV(1)/FVC 50.6±9.54%. At Week 12, FEV(1) AUC(5 min-11 h 45 min) for indacaterol was statistically superior (p<0.001) to salmeterol (adjusted mean difference [95% CI] 57 [35, 79] mL), as was 24-h trough FEV(1) (60 [37, 83] mL, p<0.001). Indacaterol also showed statistical superiority over salmeterol in terms of FEV(1) and FVC measured over 24-h at Week 12. For TDI at Week 12, the mean total score was statistically superior for indacaterol versus salmeterol (difference 0.63 [0.30, 0.97], p<0.001), as was the percentage of patients with a clinically relevant (i.e., ≥1 point) change from baseline (69.4% vs 62.7%, p<0.05). For rescue medication, patients on indacaterol used fewer puffs/day (difference -0.18 [-0.36, 0.00] puffs/day, p<0.05) and had a greater percentage of days with no rescue use (difference 4.4 [0.6, 8.2], p<0.05). CONCLUSION Once-daily indacaterol provided statistically superior bronchodilation with an improvement in breathlessness and rescue use compared with twice-daily salmeterol. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00821093.

S2k-Leitlinie zur Diagnostik und Therapie von Patienten mit Asthma

The present guideline is a new version and an update of the guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma, which replaces the previous version for german speaking countries from the year 2006. The wealth of new data on the pathophysiology and the phenotypes of asthma, and the expanded spectrum of diagnostic and therapeutic options necessitated a new version and an update. This guideline presents the current, evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma, for children and adolescents as well as for adults with asthma.

Effect of QVA149 on lung volumes and exercise tolerance in COPD patients: The BRIGHT study

INTRODUCTION QVA149 is a novel, inhaled, once-daily dual bronchodilator containing a fixed-dose combination of the long-acting β2-agonist indacaterol and the long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium (NVA237), for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study evaluated the effects of QVA149 on exercise tolerance, hyperinflation, lung function and lung volumes versus placebo and tiotropium. METHODS Patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized to QVA149 110/50 μg, placebo or tiotropium 18 μg once daily in a blinded, 3-period crossover study for 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was exercise endurance time at Day 21 for QVA149 versus placebo. RESULTS Eighty-five patients were randomized; 86% completed the study. QVA149 significantly improved exercise endurance time at Day 21 compared with placebo (least squares mean treatment difference 60 s [p = 0.006]). No significant improvements in exercise endurance time at Day 21 between QVA149 and tiotropium were found. Dynamic inspiratory capacity (IC) at exercise isotime, trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s, residual volume and functional residual capacity showed significant improvements with QVA149 from Day 1 of treatment that were maintained throughout the study. The safety profiles were similar across groups. CONCLUSIONS In patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, once-daily QVA149 significantly improved exercise endurance time compared with placebo which was associated with sustained reductions of lung hyperinflation as indicated by significant improvement in IC at rest and during exercise. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01294787. TAKE HOME MESSAGE Dual bronchodilation with QVA149 decreases lung hyperinflation and improves exercise tolerance and lung function in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.