METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial was done at 60 hospitals and clinics in 20 countries. Eligible study participants were aged between 12 and 75 years with a documented history of GPP as per the European Rare and Severe Psoriasis Expert Network criteria, with a history of at least two past GPP flares, and a GPP Physician Global Assessment (GPPGA) score of 0 or 1 at screening and random assignment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive subcutaneous placebo, subcutaneous low-dose spesolimab (300 mg loading dose followed by 150 mg every 12 weeks), subcutaneous medium-dose spesolimab (600 mg loading dose followed by 300 mg every 12 weeks), or subcutaneous high-dose spesolimab (600 mg loading dose followed by 300 mg every 4 weeks) over 48 weeks. The primary objective was to demonstrate a non-flat dose-response curve on the primary endpoint, time to first GPP flare.
FINDINGS: From June 8, 2020, to Nov 23, 2022, 157 patients were screened, of whom 123 were randomly assigned. 92 were assigned to receive spesolimab (30 high dose, 31 medium dose, and 31 low dose) and 31 to placebo. All patients were either Asian (79 [64%] of 123) or White (44 [36%]). Patient groups were similar in sex distribution (76 [62%] female and 47 [38%] male), age (mean 40·4 years, SD 15·8), and GPP Physician Global Assessment score. A non-flat dose-response relationship was established on the primary endpoint. By week 48, 35 patients had GPP flares; seven (23%) of 31 patients in the low-dose spesolimab group, nine (29%) of 31 patients in the medium-dose spesolimab group, three (10%) of 30 patients in the high-dose spesolimab group, and 16 (52%) of 31 patients in the placebo group. High-dose spesolimab was significantly superior versus placebo on the primary outcome of time to GPP flare (hazard ratio [HR]=0·16, 95% CI 0·05-0·54; p=0·0005) endpoint. HRs were 0·35 (95% CI 0·14-0·86, nominal p=0·0057) in the low-dose spesolimab group and 0·47 (0·21-1·06, p=0·027) in the medium-dose spesolimab group. We established a non-flat dose-response relationship for spesolimab compared with placebo, with statistically significant p values for each predefined model (linear p=0·0022, emax1 p=0·0024, emax2 p=0·0023, and exponential p=0·0034). Infection rates were similar across treatment arms; there were no deaths and no hypersensitivity reactions leading to discontinuation.
INTERPRETATION: High-dose spesolimab was superior to placebo in GPP flare prevention, significantly reducing the risk of a GPP flare and flare occurrence over 48 weeks. Given the chronic nature of GPP, a treatment for flare prevention is a significant shift in the clinical approach, and could ultimately lead to improvements in patient morbidity and quality of life.
FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: KEYNOTE-122 was an open-label, randomized study conducted at 29 sites, globally. Participants with platinum-pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic NPC were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to pembrolizumab or chemotherapy with capecitabine, gemcitabine, or docetaxel. Randomization was stratified by liver metastasis (present versus absent). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), analyzed in the intention-to-treat population using the stratified log-rank test (superiority threshold, one-sided P = 0.0187). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population.
RESULTS: Between 5 May 2016 and 28 May 2018, 233 participants were randomly assigned to treatment (pembrolizumab, n = 117; chemotherapy, n = 116); Most participants (86.7%) received study treatment in the second-line or later setting. Median time from randomization to data cut-off (30 November 2020) was 45.1 months (interquartile range, 39.0-48.8 months). Median OS was 17.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.7-22.9 months] with pembrolizumab and 15.3 months (95% CI 10.9-18.1 months) with chemotherapy [hazard ratio, 0.90 (95% CI 0.67-1.19; P = 0.2262)]. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 12 of 116 participants (10.3%) with pembrolizumab and 49 of 112 participants (43.8%) with chemotherapy. Three treatment-related deaths occurred: 1 participant (0.9%) with pembrolizumab (pneumonitis) and 2 (1.8%) with chemotherapy (pneumonia, intracranial hemorrhage).
CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab did not significantly improve OS compared with chemotherapy in participants with platinum-pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic NPC but did have manageable safety and a lower incidence of treatment-related adverse events.
METHODS: In a double-blind, phase III trial, 453 patients with advanced HCC and progression during or after treatment with or intolerance to sorafenib or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive pembrolizumab (200 mg) or placebo once every 3 weeks for ≤ 35 cycles plus best supportive care. The primary end point was overall survival (one-sided significance threshold, P = .0193 [final analysis]). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR; one-sided significance threshold, P = .0134 and .0091, respectively [second interim analysis]; RECIST version 1.1, by blinded independent central review).
RESULTS: Median overall survival was longer in the pembrolizumab group than in the placebo group (14.6 v 13.0 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.99; P = .0180). Median PFS was also longer in the pembrolizumab group than in the placebo group (2.6 v 2.3 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.92; P = .0032). ORR was greater in the pembrolizumab group (12.7% [95% CI, 9.1 to 17.0]) than in the placebo group (1.3% [95% CI, 0.2 to 4.6]; P < .0001). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 66.9% of patients (grade 3, 12.0%; grade 4, 1.3%; grade 5, 1.0%) in the pembrolizumab group and 49.7% of patients (grade 3, 5.9%; grade 4, 0%; grade 5, 0%) in the placebo group.
CONCLUSION: In patients from Asia with previously treated advanced HCC, pembrolizumab significantly prolonged overall survival and PFS, and ORR was greater versus placebo.
METHODS: We systematically searched five electronic databases (PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, Global Health, and PsycINFO) from date of inception to September 30, 2022, for studies reporting on the effect of bebtelovimab in SARS-CoV-2 infection, using a combination of search terms around -bebtelovimab‖, -LY-CoV1404‖, -LY3853113‖, and -coronavirus infection‖. All citations were screened independently by two researchers. Data were extracted and thematically analyzed based on study design by adhering to the stipulated scoping review approaches.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies were included, thirty-four non-clinical studies were narratively synthesized, and five clinical studies were meta-analyzed. The non-clinical studies revealed bebtelovimab not only potently neutralized wide-type SARS-CoV-2 and existing variants of concern such as B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.351 (Beta), P.1 (Gamma), and B.1.617.2 (Delta), but also retained appreciable activity against Omicron lineages, including BA.2.75, BA.4, BA.4.6, and BA.5. Unlike other monoclonal antibodies, bebtelovimab was able to bind to epitope of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein by exploiting loop mobility or by minimizing side-chain interactions. Pooled analysis from clinical studies depicted that the rates of hospitalization, ICU admission, and death were similar between bebtelovimab and other COVID-19 therapies. Bebtelovimab was associated with a low incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events.
CONCLUSION: Preclinical evidence suggests bebtelovimab be a potential treatment for COVID-19 amidst viral evolution. Bebtelovimab has comparable efficacy to other COVID-19 therapies without evident safety concerns.
METHODS: DRAGON study was conducted across 9 Asian countries or regions including mainland China, India, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. Patients (N = 557) with CM (aged 18-65 years) were randomised (1:1) to receive once-monthly subcutaneous erenumab 70 mg or matching placebo for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in monthly migraine days (MMD) from baseline to the last 4 weeks of the 12-week double-blind treatment phase (DBTP). Secondary endpoints included achievement of ≥ 50% reduction in MMD, change in monthly acute headache medication days, modified migraine disability assessment (mMIDAS), and safety. Study was powered for the primary endpoint of change from baseline in MMD.
RESULTS: At baseline, the mean (SD) age was 41.7 (± 10.9) years, and 81.5% (n = 454) patients were women. The mean migraine duration was 18.0 (± 11.6) years, and the mean MMD was 19.2 (± 5.4). 97.8% (n = 545) randomised patients completed the DBTP. Overall, demographics and baseline characteristics were balanced between the erenumab and placebo groups except for a slightly higher proportion of women in the placebo group. At Week 12, the adjusted mean change from baseline in MMD was - 8.2 days for erenumab and - 6.6 days for placebo, with a statistically significant difference for erenumab versus placebo (adjusted mean difference vs placebo: - 1.57 [95%CI: - 2.83, - 0.30]; P = 0.015). A greater proportion of patients treated with erenumab achieved ≥ 50% reduction in MMD versus placebo (47.0% vs 36.7%, P = 0.014). At Week 12, greater reductions in monthly acute headache medication days (- 5.34 vs - 4.66) and mMIDAS scores (- 14.67 vs - 12.93) were observed in patients treated with erenumab versus placebo. Safety and tolerability profile of erenumab was comparable to placebo, except the incidence of constipation (8.6% for erenumab vs 3.2% for placebo).
CONCLUSION: DRAGON study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of erenumab 70 mg in patients with CM from Asia. No new safety signals were observed during the DBTP compared with the previous trials.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03867201.