Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Bimekizumab in Moderate to Severe Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A Phase 2, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory disease with a high burden for patients and limited existing therapeutic options.

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bimekizumab, a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin 17A and 17F in individuals with moderate to severe HS.

Design, setting, and participants

This phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial with an active reference arm was performed from September 22, 2017, to February 21, 2019. The study included a 2- to 4-week screening period, a 12-week treatment period, and a 20-week safety follow-up. Of 167 participants screened at multiple centers, 90 were enrolled. Eligible participants were 18 to 70 years of age with a diagnosis of moderate to severe HS 12 months or more before baseline.

Interventions

Participants with HS were randomized 2:1:1 to receive bimekizumab (640 mg at week 0, 320 mg every 2 weeks), placebo, or reference arm adalimumab (160 mg at week 0, 80 mg at week 2, and 40 mg every week for weeks 4-10).

Main outcomes and measures

The prespecified primary efficacy variable was the proportion of participants with a 50% or greater reduction from baseline in the total abscess and inflammatory nodule count with no increase in abscess or draining fistula count (Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response [HiSCR] at week 12. Exploratory variables included proportion achieving a modified HiSCR with 75% reduction of HiSCR criteria (HiSCR75) or a modified HiSCR with 90% reduction of HiSCR criteria (HiSCR90), change in Patient's Global Assessment of Pain, and Dermatology Life Quality Index total scores.

Results

Eighty-eight participants received at least 1 dose of study medication (61 [69%] female; median age, 36 years; range, 18-69 years). Seventy-three participants completed the study, including safety follow-up. Bimekizumab demonstrated a higher HiSCR rate vs placebo at week 12 (57.3% vs 26.1%; posterior probability of superiority equaled 0.998, calculated using bayesian analysis). Bimekizumab demonstrated greater clinical improvements compared with placebo. Improvements in the International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score (IHS4) were seen at week 12 with bimekizumab (mean [SD] IHS4, 16.0 [18.0]) compared with placebo (mean [SD] IHS4, 40.2 [32.6]). More bimekizumab-treated participants achieved positive results on stringent outcome measures compared with placebo. At week 12, 46% of bimekizumab-treated participants achieved HiSCR75 and 32% achieved HiSCR90, whereas 10% of placebo-treated participants achieved HiSCR75 and none achieved HiSCR90; in adalimumab-treated participants, 35% achieved HiSCR75 and 15% achieved HiSCR90. One participant withdrew because of adverse events. Serious adverse events occurred in 2 of 46 bimekizumab-treated participants (4%), 2 of 21 placebo-treated participants (10%), and 1 of 21 adalimumab-treated participants (5%).

Conclusions and relevance

In this phase 2 randomized clinical trial, bimekizumab demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements across all outcome measures, including stringent outcomes. Bimekizumab's safety profile was consistent with studies of other indications, supporting further evaluation in participants with HS.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03248531.

SUBMITTER: Glatt S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8374742 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSurgery is a mainstay in the management of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS). Adalimumab is the first drug approved for HS.ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in combination with wide-excision surgery followed by secondary intention healing.Design, setting, and participantsThe Safety and Efficacy of Adalimumab for Hidradenitis Suppurativa Peri-Surgically (SHARPS) trial was a phase 4, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of adalimumab in conjunction with surgery. Patients were enrolled in 45 sites across 20 countries from July 18, 2016, to February 2, 2019, with the last patient visit on October 16, 2019. Eligible patients (aged 18-65 years) had moderate to severe HS that required radical surgery in an axillary or inguinal region and had 2 other anatomical regions affected, with 1 or more regions at Hurley stage II or III. Analysis was conducted in November 2019.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1 to receive continuous adalimumab, 40 mg, or placebo during presurgery (12 weeks), perioperative (2 weeks), and postoperative (10 weeks) periods.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving HS clinical response across all body regions at week 12.ResultsOverall, 103 patients were randomized to adalimumab and 103 to matching placebo. Among all patients, 51% (n = 106) were women, 94% (n = 193) were White, and the mean (SD) age was 37.6 (11.3) years. At week 12, significantly more patients receiving adalimumab (49 of 103 [48%]) vs placebo (35 of 103 [34%]; P = .049) achieved HS clinical response across all body regions (treatment difference, 14% [95% CI, 0%-27%]). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 74 of 103 patients (72%) and 69 of 103 patients (67%) in the adalimumab and placebo groups, respectively. No increased risk of postoperative wound infection, complication, or hemorrhage was observed with adalimumab vs placebo. Two deaths occurred in the adalimumab group; neither was considered as having a reasonable possibility of relationship to study drug.Conclusions and relevanceAdalimumab was efficacious in conjunction with wide-excision surgery followed by secondary intention healing, with no need to interrupt treatment prior to surgery. These data support further investigation of adalimumab as an adjuvant therapy to surgery in patients with moderate to severe HS.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02808975.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Neramexane is a new substance that exhibits antagonistic properties at ?9?10 cholinergic nicotinic receptors and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors, suggesting potential efficacy in the treatment of tinnitus. METHODS:A total of 431 outpatients with moderate to severe subjective tinnitus (onset 3-18 months before screening) were assigned randomly to receive either placebo or neramexane mesylate (25 mg/day, 50 mg/day and 75 mg/day) for 16 weeks, with assessment at 4-week intervals. The primary (intention-to-treat) efficacy analysis was based on the change from baseline in Week 16 in the total score of the adapted German short version of the validated Tinnitus Handicap Inventory questionnaire (THI-12). RESULTS:Compared with placebo, the largest improvement was achieved in the 50 mg/d neramexane group, followed by the 75 mg/d neramexane group. This treatment difference did not reach statistical significance at the pre-defined endpoint in Week 16 (p = 0.098 for 50 mg/d; p = 0.289 for 75 mg/d neramexane), but consistent numerical superiority of both neramexane groups compared with placebo was observed. Four weeks after the end of treatment, THI-12 scores in the 50 mg/d group were significantly better than those of the controls. Secondary efficacy variables supported this trend, with p values of < 0.05 for the 50 mg/d neramexane group associated with the functional-communicational subscores of the THI-12 and the assessments of tinnitus annoyance and tinnitus impact on life as measured on an 11-point Likert-like scale. No relevant changes were observed for puretone threshold, for tinnitus pitch and loudness match, or for minimum masking levels. The 25 mg/d neramexane group did not differ from placebo. Neramexane was generally well tolerated and had no relevant influence on laboratory values, electrocardiography and vital signs. Dizziness was the most common adverse event and showed a clear dose-dependence. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrated the safety and tolerability of neramexane treatment in patients with moderate to severe tinnitus. The primary efficacy variable showed a trend towards improvement of tinnitus suffering in the medium- and high-dose neramexane groups. This finding is in line with consistent beneficial effects observed in secondary assessment variables. These results allow appropriate dose selection for further studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00405886.

Project description:IntroductionWe evaluated the anti-interleukin-36 receptor antibody spesolimab in patients with moderate-to-severe palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP).MethodsThis phase IIb trial comprised a loading dose period to week (W) 4, then maintenance dosing to W52. Patients were randomised 2:1:1:1:2 to subcutaneous spesolimab 3000 mg to W4 then 600 mg every 4 weeks (q4w), spesolimab 3000 mg to W4 then 300 mg q4w, spesolimab 1500 mg to W4 then 600 mg q4w, spesolimab 1500 mg to W4, 300 mg q4w to W16 then 300 mg every 8 weeks (q8w), or placebo switching to spesolimab 600 mg q4w at W16. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change from baseline in Palmoplantar Pustular Area and Severity Index (PPP ASI) at W16. Secondary endpoints included a Palmoplantar Pustular Physician's Global Assessment (PPP PGA) score of 0/1. Safety (including adverse events [AEs], local tolerability) was assessed.Results152 patients were treated. The primary endpoint was not met; mean differences for spesolimab versus placebo ranged from - 14.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: - 31.5%, 2.2%) to - 5.3% (95% CI: - 19.1%, 8.6%); none reached significance. At W16, 23 (21.1%) and two (4.7%) patients in the combined spesolimab and placebo groups, respectively, achieved PPP PGA 0/1 (mean difference 16.4%; 95% CI: 3.8%, 25.7%), increasing to 59 (54.1%; combined spesolimab) and 12 (27.9%; placebo switch to spesolimab) patients at W52. Non-Asian patients had significant improvements in the primary endpoint (mean difference - 17.7%; nominal P = 0.0394) and PPP PGA 0/1 at W16 with spesolimab versus placebo. Rates of AEs and AE-related discontinuations were similar for spesolimab and placebo. Local tolerability events and injection-site reactions were more frequent with spesolimab than placebo.ConclusionThe primary objective to demonstrate a non-flat dose-response relationship and proof-of-concept was not achieved; improvements with spesolimab occurred in secondary endpoints and in non-Asian patients, indicating potential modest benefits. Spesolimab was generally well tolerated (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04015518).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Weekly adalimumab (Humira® ) is approved for the treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) based on the 12-week placebo-controlled periods of the two phase III PIONEER trials. OBJECTIVES:Using PIONEER integrated trial results, we aimed to evaluate the optimal medium-term adalimumab maintenance dosing strategy for moderate-to-severe HS. METHODS:Each trial had two double-blind periods; 12-week Period A and 24-week Period B. Patients randomized to adalimumab 40 mg every week (ADAew) (Period A), were rerandomized in Period B to ADAew (ADAew/ew), ADA every other week (ADAew/eow), or placebo (ADAew/pbo). Placebo-randomized patients were reassigned in Period B to ADAew (PIONEER I) or placebo (PIONEER II). The primary outcome was HS Clinical Response (HiSCR). Patients who lost response during Period B were discontinued from the study and offered an option to enter the open-label extension (OLE) to receive ADAew. Results are reported across the two study periods, and data were combined from the two study periods and the OLE. RESULTS:For week-12 HiSCR achievers, the HiSCR week-36 rate was 48·1% (ADAew/ew) vs. 46·2% (ADAew/eow) and 32·1% (ADAew/pbo). Combining (post hoc) these patients with week-12 partial responders further differentiated outcomes in Period B (ADAew/ew 55·7% vs. ADAew/eow 40·0% and ADAew/pbo 30·1%). Period-B adverse-event rates were ADAew/ew 59·6% vs. ADAew/eow 57·4% and ADAew/pbo 65·0%. One patient (ADAew/ew) reported a serious infection. CONCLUSIONS:Weekly adalimumab treatment, effective throughout 36 weeks, was the optimal maintenance medium-term dosing regimen for this population. At least partial response after 12 weeks with continued weekly dosing had better outcomes than dose reduction or interruption. Patients who do not show at least a partial response to weekly adalimumab by week 12 are unlikely to benefit from continued therapy. No new safety risks were identified. What's already known about this topic? Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory disease, commonly misinterpreted as an infection and treated with long-term antibiotic regimens or surgical incisions. Based on the chronicity of HS and the lack of evidence for efficacious and safe long-term HS treatments, it is important to evaluate medium- to long-term therapies for HS. Weekly adalimumab (Humira® ) is approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe HS based on the two phase III PIONEER trials. What does this study add? This study pooled data from the two PIONEER trials, providing a more robust assessment of outcomes. After at least partial treatment success with weekly adalimumab short-term therapy (12 weeks), continuing weekly dosing during the subsequent 24 weeks had better outcomes than dose reduction or treatment interruption. Patients who do not show at least a partial response to weekly adalimumab by week 12 are unlikely to benefit from continued therapy.

Project description:This phase 3 trial is the first to evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment with the systemic TNF-? inhibitor, adalimumab, for Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.In the 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled Period A, patients were randomized 4 : 1 to receive adalimumab 40 mg every-other-week (following a single 80 mg dose), or placebo every-other-week. In the subsequent 12-week, open-label, Period B, all patients received adalimumab 40 mg every-other-week starting at week 13, following a single, blinded dose at week 12 of adalimumab 80 mg or matching placebo (for patients receiving placebo or adalimumab in Period A respectively). In Period A, efficacy was analysed for all randomized patients and safety for all patients receiving ?1 dose of the study drug.For the 425 patients in this study (87 placebo; 338 adalimumab), a higher percentage randomized to adalimumab achieved the primary endpoint of ?75% improvement from baseline in PASI score (PASI 75) at week 12: placebo 11.5% (10/87); adalimumab 77.8% (263/338; P < 0.001). Physician's Global Assessment of clear to minimal was achieved at week 12 by 14.9% placebo (13/87) and 80.5% adalimumab (272/338; P < 0.001). For patients who received adalimumab at any time during the study (All-adalimumab Population), treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported by 63.4%; the most common was upper respiratory infection (16.1%). Serious AEs were reported by 3.5% of the All-adalimumab Population, and serious infectious AEs by 1.2%, which include lung infection, pneumonia and tuberculosis [2 (0.5%) patients each]. There was one death (chronic heart failure).In these Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, a significantly greater percentage treated with adalimumab compared with placebo achieved efficacy endpoints at week 12 and efficacy was sustained to week 24. Safety results were consistent with the known adalimumab safety profile; no new safety signals were identified in the 24 weeks of treatment.

Project description:IntroductionThis study is part of the registrational program for intravenously administered (IV) tramadol in the USA and compared the analgesic benefit and tolerability of two doses of IV tramadol (50 mg and 25 mg) to placebo in adult patients undergoing bunionectomy, an orthopedic surgical model.MethodsThis was a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, three-arm, randomized, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, parallel-group trial to evaluate IV tramadol in the management of postoperative pain following bunionectomy. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1:1 ratio) to IV tramadol 50 mg, 25 mg, or placebo. Primary endpoint was summary of pain intensity differences over 48 h (SPID48). Key secondary endpoints included SPID24, total consumption of rescue analgesia, and patient global assessment of efficacy (PGA). Safety assessments included treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs), clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, and electrocardiograms (ECGs). Assessment of the dose-response was an important objective of the study.ResultsThe study established a dose response, with IV tramadol 50 mg demonstrating statistically significant benefit (p < 0.05) over placebo for primary and all key secondary efficacy endpoints, whereas tramadol 25 mg demonstrated intermediate results between the 50 mg and placebo arms. IV tramadol 50 mg was well tolerated; most common TEAEs were nausea and vomiting; and there were no meaningful differences among treatments for vital signs, ECG, and laboratory assessments. The largest proportion of patients completed tramadol 50 mg (98.6%) compared to tramadol 25 mg (91.8%) and placebo (88.2%).ConclusionIV tramadol 50 mg was effective and well tolerated as treatment for postoperative pain following bunionectomy surgery, while IV tramadol 25 mg, although well tolerated, was judged an ineffective dose for the treatment of pain in this setting. IV tramadol 50 mg was further developed in the registrational program for the USA.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03290378.