Conestat alfa 2,100unit powder and solvent for solution for injection vials

INTRODUCTION: Bintrafusp alfa, a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of the extracellular domain of TGF-βRII (a TGF-β "trap") fused to a human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody blocking programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has exhibited clinical activity in a phase 1 expansion cohort of patients with PD-L1-high advanced NSCLC. METHODS: This adaptive phase 3 trial (NCT03631706) compared the efficacy and safety of bintrafusp alfa versus pembrolizumab as first-line treatment in patients with PD-L1-high advanced NSCLC. Primary end points were progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 per independent review committee and overall survival. RESULTS: Patients (N = 304) were randomized one-to-one to receive either bintrafusp alfa or pembrolizumab (n = 152 each). The median follow-up was 14.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 13.1-16.0 mo) for bintrafusp alfa and 14.5 months (95% CI: 13.1-15.9 mo) for pembrolizumab. Progression-free survival by independent review committee was not significantly different between bintrafusp alfa and pembrolizumab arms (median = 7.0 mo [95% CI: 4.2 mo-not reached (NR)] versus 11.1 mo [95% CI: 8.1 mo-NR]; hazard ratio = 1.232 [95% CI: 0.885-1.714]). The median overall survival was 21.1 months (95% CI: 21.1 mo-NR) for bintrafusp alfa and 22.1 months (95% CI: 20.4 mo-NR) for pembrolizumab (hazard ratio = 1.201 [95% CI: 0.796-1.811]). Treatment-related adverse events were higher with bintrafusp alfa versus pembrolizumab; grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 42.4% versus 13.2% of patients, respectively. The study was discontinued at an interim analysis as it was unlikely to meet the primary end point. CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment with bintrafusp alfa did not exhibit superior efficacy compared with pembrolizumab in patients with PD-L1-high, advanced NSCLC.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Abstract Rationale A phase II trial reported clinical benefit over 28 weeks in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) who received zinpentraxin alfa. Objectives To investigate the efficacy and safety of zinpentraxin alfa in patients with IPF in a phase III trial. Methods This 52-week phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, pivotal trial was conducted at 275 sites in 29 countries. Patients with IPF were randomized 1:1 to intravenous placebo or zinpentraxin alfa 10 mg/kg every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was absolute change from baseline to Week 52 in FVC. Secondary endpoints included absolute change from baseline to Week 52 in percent predicted FVC and 6-minute walk distance. Safety was monitored via adverse events. Post hoc analysis of the phase II and phase III data explored changes in FVC and their impact on the efficacy results. Measurements and Main Results Of 664 randomized patients, 333 were assigned to placebo and 331 to zinpentraxin alfa. Four of the 664 randomized patients were never administered study drug. The trial was terminated early after a prespecified futility analysis that demonstrated no treatment benefit of zinpentraxin alfa over placebo. In the final analysis, absolute change from baseline to Week 52 in FVC was similar between placebo and zinpentraxin alfa (−214.89 ml and −235.72 ml; P = 0.5420); there were no apparent treatment effects on secondary endpoints. Overall, 72.3% and 74.6% of patients receiving placebo and zinpentraxin alfa, respectively, experienced one or more adverse events. Post hoc analysis revealed that extreme FVC decline in two placebo-treated patients resulted in the clinical benefit of zinpentraxin alfa reported by phase II. Conclusions Zinpentraxin alfa treatment did not benefit patients with IPF over placebo. Learnings from this program may help improve decision making around trials in IPF. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04552899).

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Background Pegunigalsidase alfa is a PEGylated α-galactosidase A enzyme replacement therapy. BALANCE ( NCT02795676 ) assessed non-inferiority of pegunigalsidase alfa versus agalsidase beta in adults with Fabry disease with an annualised estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) slope more negative than −2 mL/min/1.73 m 2 /year who had received agalsidase beta for ≥1 year. Methods Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive 1 mg/kg pegunigalsidase alfa or agalsidase beta every 2 weeks for 2 years. The primary efficacy analysis assessed non-inferiority based on median annualised eGFR slope differences between treatment arms. Results Seventy-seven patients received either pegunigalsidase alfa (n=52) or agalsidase beta (n=25). At baseline, mean (range) age was 44 (18–60) years, 47 (61%) patients were male, median eGFR was 74.5 mL/min/1.73 m 2 and median (range) eGFR slope was −7.3 (−30.5, 6.3) mL/min/1.73 m 2 /year. At 2 years, the difference between median eGFR slopes was −0.36 mL/min/1.73 m 2 /year, meeting the prespecified non-inferiority margin. Minimal changes were observed in lyso-Gb3 concentrations in both treatment arms at 2 years. Proportions of patients experiencing treatment-related adverse events and mild or moderate infusion-related reactions were similar in both groups, yet exposure-adjusted rates were 3.6-fold and 7.8-fold higher, respectively, with agalsidase beta than pegunigalsidase alfa. At the end of the study, neutralising antibodies were detected in 7 out of 47 (15%) pegunigalsidase alfa-treated patients and 6 out of 23 (26%) agalsidase beta-treated patients. There were no deaths. Conclusions Based on rate of eGFR decline over 2 years, pegunigalsidase alfa was non-inferior to agalsidase beta. Pegunigalsidase alfa had lower rates of treatment-emergent adverse events and mild or moderate infusion-related reactions. Trial registration number NCT02795676 .

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

Abstract Objectives Conestat alfa, a recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor, is a multi-target inhibitor of inflammatory cascades including the complement, the kinin-kallikrein and the contact activation system. The study objective is to investigate the efficacy and safety of conestat alfa in improving disease severity and short-term outcome in COVID-19 patients with pulmonary disease. Trial design This study is an investigator-initiated, randomized (2:1 ratio), open-label, parallel-group, controlled, multi-center, phase 2a clinical trial. Participants This trial is conducted in 3 hospitals in Switzerland, 1 hospital in Brazil and 1 hospital in Mexico (academic and non-academic). All patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization for at least 3 calendar days for severe COVID-19 will be screened for study eligibility. Inclusion criteria: - Signed informed consent - Age 18-85 years - Evidence of pulmonary involvement on CT scan or X-ray of the chest - Duration of symptoms associated with COVID-19 ≤ 10 days - At least one of the following risk factors for progression to mechanical ventilation on the day of enrolment: 1) Arterial hypertension 2) ≥ 50 years 3) Obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) 4) History of cardiovascular disease 5) Chronic pulmonary disease 6) Chronic renal disease 7) C-reactive protein > 35mg/L 8) Oxygen saturation at rest of ≤ 94% when breathing ambient air Exclusion criteria: - Incapacity or inability to provide informed consent - Contraindications to the class of drugs under investigation (C1 esterase inhibitor) - Treatment with tocilizumab or another IL-6R or IL-6 inhibitor before enrolment - History or suspicion of allergy to rabbits - Pregnancy or breast feeding - Active or anticipated treatment with any other complement inhibitor - Liver cirrhosis (any Child-Pugh score) - Admission to an ICU on the day or anticipated within the next 24 hours of enrolment - Invasive or non-invasive ventilation - Participation in another study with any investigational drug within the 30 days prior to enrolment - Enrolment of the study investigators, their family members, employees and other closely related or dependent persons Intervention and comparator Patients randomized to the experimental arm will receive conestat alfa in addition to standard of care (SOC). Conestat alfa (8400 U followed by 4200 U every 8 hours) will be administered as a slow intravenous injection (5-10 minutes) over a 72-hour period (i.e. 9 administrations in total). The first conestat alfa treatment will be administered on the day of enrolment. The control group will receive SOC only. SOC treatment will be administered according to local institutional guidelines, including supplemental oxygen, antibiotics, corticosteroids, remdesivir, and anticoagulation. Main outcomes The primary endpoint of this trial is disease severity on day 7 after enrolment assessed by an adapted WHO Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement (score 0 will be omitted and score 6 and 7 will be combined) from 1 (no limitation of activities) to 7 (death). Secondary outcomes include (i) the time to clinical improvement (time from randomization to an improvement of two points on the WHO ordinal scale or discharge from hospital) within 14 days after enrolment, (ii) the proportion of participants alive and not having required invasive or non-invasive ventilation at 14 days after enrolment and (iii) the proportion of subjects without an acute lung injury (defined by PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio of ≤300mmHg) within 14 days after enrolment. Exploratory outcomes include virological clearance, C1 esterase inhibitor pharmacokinetics and changes in routine laboratory parameters and inflammatory proteins. Randomisation Subjects will be randomised in a 2:1 ratio to treatment with conestat alfa in addition to SOC or SOC only. Randomization is performed via an interactive web response system (SecuTrial®). Blinding (masking) In this open-label trial, participants, caregivers and outcome assessors are not blinded to group assignment. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) We will randomise approximately 120 individuals (80 in the active treatment arm, 40 in the SOC group). Two interim analyses after 40 and 80 patients are planned according to the Pocock adjusted levels α p = 0.0221. The results of the interim analysis will allow adjustment of the sample size (Lehmacher, Wassmer, 1999). Trial Status PROTECT-COVID-19 protocol version 3.0 (July 07 2020). Participant recruitment started on July 30 2020 in one center (Basel, Switzerland, first participant included on August 06 2020). In four of five study centers patients are actively recruited. Participation of the fifth study center (Mexico) is anticipated by mid December 2020. Completion of trial recruitment depends on the development of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, number: NCT04414631 , registered on 4 June 2020 Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Background Conestat alfa (ConA), a recombinant human C1 inhibitor, may prevent thromboinflammation. Methods We conducted a randomized, open-label, multi-national clinical trial in which hospitalized adults at risk for progression to severe COVID-19 were assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either 3 days of ConA plus standard of care (SOC) or SOC alone. Primary and secondary endpoints were day 7 disease severity on the WHO Ordinal Scale, time to clinical improvement within 14 days, and safety, respectively. Results The trial was prematurely terminated because of futility after randomization of 84 patients, 56 in the ConA and 28 in the control arm. At baseline, higher WHO Ordinal Scale scores were more frequently observed in the ConA than in the control arm. On day 7, no relevant differences in the primary outcome were noted between the two arms ( p = 0.11). The median time to defervescence was 3 days, and the median time to clinical improvement was 7 days in both arms ( p = 0.22 and 0.56, respectively). Activation of plasma cascades and endothelial cells over time was similar in both groups. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was higher in the intervention arm (any AE, 30% with ConA vs. 19% with SOC alone; serious AE, 27% vs. 15%; death, 11% vs. 0%). None of these were judged as being related to the study drug. Conclusion The study results do not support the use of ConA to prevent COVID-19 progression. Clinical trial registration https://clinicaltrials.gov , identifier NCT04414631.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Fabry disease, a rare X-linked genetic disorder, results from pathogenic variants in GLA , leading to deficient lysosomal α-galactosidase A enzyme activity and multi-organ manifestations. Since 2001, enzyme replacement therapy (ERT), using agalsidase alfa or agalsidase beta, has been the mainstay treatment, albeit with limitations such as rapid clearance and immunogenicity. Pegunigalsidase alfa, a novel PEGylated recombinant alpha-galactosidase, offers promise as an alternative. Produced in plant cells, pegunigalsidase alfa exhibits enhanced stability, prolonged half-life, and reduced immunogenicity due to pegylation. A phase 1/2 clinical trial demonstrated Gb3 clearance from renal capillary endothelial cells and its 48-month extension study revealed notable outcomes in renal function preservation. Three phase 3 clinical trials (BRIDGE, BRIGHT, and BALANCE) have shown favorable efficacy and safety profile, although caution is warranted in interpreting the results of BRIDGE and BRIGHT which lacked control groups. In BALANCE, the pivotal phase 3 trial comparing pegunigalsidase alfa with agalsidase beta, an intention-to-treat analysis of the eGFR decline over 2 years showed that the intergroup difference [95%confidence interval] in the median slope was −0.36 mL/min/1.73 m 2 /year [−2.44; 1.73]. The confidence interval had a lower limit above the prespecified value of −3 mL/min/1.73 m 2 /year and included zero. Despite challenges such as occasional hypersensitivity reactions and immune-complex-mediated glomerulonephritis, pegunigalsidase alfa approval by the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration represents a significant addition to Fabry disease therapeutic landscape providing an option for patients in whom enzyme replacement therapy with current formulations is poorly tolerated or poorly effective.

Abstract licence: CC BY