Literature DB >> 29066163

Safety and efficacy of eculizumab in anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive refractory generalised myasthenia gravis (REGAIN): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study.

James F Howard1, Kimiaki Utsugisawa2, Michael Benatar3, Hiroyuki Murai4, Richard J Barohn5, Isabel Illa6, Saiju Jacob7, John Vissing8, Ted M Burns9, John T Kissel10, Srikanth Muppidi11, Richard J Nowak12, Fanny O'Brien13, Jing-Jing Wang13, Renato Mantegazza14.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Complement is likely to have a role in refractory generalised myasthenia gravis, but no approved therapies specifically target this system. Results from a phase 2 study suggested that eculizumab, a terminal complement inhibitor, produced clinically meaningful improvements in patients with anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive refractory generalised myasthenia gravis. We further assessed the efficacy and safety of eculizumab in this patient population in a phase 3 trial.
METHODS: We did a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study (REGAIN) in 76 hospitals and specialised clinics in 17 countries across North America, Latin America, Europe, and Asia. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years, with a Myasthenia Gravis-Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) score of 6 or more, Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) class II-IV disease, vaccination against Neisseria meningitides, and previous treatment with at least two immunosuppressive therapies or one immunosuppressive therapy and chronic intravenous immunoglobulin or plasma exchange for 12 months without symptom control. Patients with a history of thymoma or thymic neoplasms, thymectomy within 12 months before screening, or use of intravenous immunoglobulin or plasma exchange within 4 weeks before randomisation, or rituximab within 6 months before screening, were excluded. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to either intravenous eculizumab or intravenous matched placebo for 26 weeks. Dosing for eculizumab was 900 mg on day 1 and at weeks 1, 2, and 3; 1200 mg at week 4; and 1200 mg given every second week thereafter as maintenance dosing. Randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice or web-response system with patients stratified to one of four groups based on MGFA disease classification. Where possible, patients were maintained on existing myasthenia gravis therapies and rescue medication was allowed at the study physician's discretion. Patients, investigators, staff, and outcome assessors were masked to treatment assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline to week 26 in MG-ADL total score measured by worst-rank ANCOVA. The efficacy population set was defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment groups who received at least one dose of study drug, had a valid baseline MG-ADL assessment, and at least one post-baseline MG-ADL assessment. The safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients who received eculizumab or placebo. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01997229.
FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2014, and Feb 19, 2016, we randomly assigned and treated 125 patients, 62 with eculizumab and 63 with placebo. The primary analysis showed no significant difference between eculizumab and placebo (least-squares mean rank 56·6 [SEM 4·5] vs 68·3 [4·5]; rank-based treatment difference -11·7, 95% CI -24·3 to 0·96; p=0·0698). No deaths or cases of meningococcal infection occurred during the study. The most common adverse events in both groups were headache and upper respiratory tract infection (ten [16%] for both events in the eculizumab group and 12 [19%] for both in the placebo group). Myasthenia gravis exacerbations were reported by six (10%) patients in the eculizumab group and 15 (24%) in the placebo group. Six (10%) patients in the eculizumab group and 12 (19%) in the placebo group required rescue therapy.
INTERPRETATION: The change in the MG-ADL score was not statistically significant between eculizumab and placebo, as measured by the worst-rank analysis. Eculizumab was well tolerated. The use of a worst-rank analytical approach proved to be an important limitation of this study since the secondary and sensitivity analyses results were inconsistent with the primary endpoint result; further research into the role of complement is needed. FUNDING: Alexion Pharmaceuticals.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29066163     DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30369-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Neurol        ISSN: 1474-4422            Impact factor:   44.182


  127 in total

1.  Ravulizumab (ALXN1210) vs eculizumab in C5-inhibitor-experienced adult patients with PNH: the 302 study.

Authors:  Austin G Kulasekararaj; Anita Hill; Scott T Rottinghaus; Saskia Langemeijer; Richard Wells; F Ataulfo Gonzalez-Fernandez; Anna Gaya; Jong Wook Lee; Emilio Ojeda Gutierrez; Caroline I Piatek; Jeff Szer; Antonio Risitano; Shinji Nakao; Eric Bachman; Lori Shafner; Andrew I Damokosh; Stephan Ortiz; Alexander Röth; Regis Peffault de Latour
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 2.  Update on therapy of chronic immune-mediated neuropathies.

Authors:  Chiara Briani; Dario Cocito; Marta Campagnolo; Pietro Emiliano Doneddu; Eduardo Nobile-Orazio
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2021-01-16       Impact factor: 3.307

Review 3.  Clinical promise of next-generation complement therapeutics.

Authors:  Dimitrios C Mastellos; Daniel Ricklin; John D Lambris
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2019-07-19       Impact factor: 84.694

4.  Comparison Between Rituximab Treatment for New-Onset Generalized Myasthenia Gravis and Refractory Generalized Myasthenia Gravis.

Authors:  Susanna Brauner; Ann Eriksson-Dufva; Max Albert Hietala; Thomas Frisell; Rayomand Press; Fredrik Piehl
Journal:  JAMA Neurol       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 18.302

Review 5.  Therapies Directed Against B-Cells and Downstream Effectors in Generalized Autoimmune Myasthenia Gravis: Current Status.

Authors:  Grayson Beecher; Brendan Nicholas Putko; Amanda Nicole Wagner; Zaeem Azfer Siddiqi
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 9.546

6.  Randomized phase 2 study of FcRn antagonist efgartigimod in generalized myasthenia gravis.

Authors:  James F Howard; Vera Bril; Ted M Burns; Renato Mantegazza; Malgorzata Bilinska; Andrzej Szczudlik; Said Beydoun; Francisco Javier Rodriguez De Rivera Garrido; Fredrik Piehl; Mariarosa Rottoli; Philip Van Damme; Tuan Vu; Amelia Evoli; Miriam Freimer; Tahseen Mozaffar; E Sally Ward; Torsten Dreier; Peter Ulrichts; Katrien Verschueren; Antonio Guglietta; Hans de Haard; Nicolas Leupin; Jan J G M Verschuuren
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2019-05-22       Impact factor: 9.910

Review 7.  Complementopathies and precision medicine.

Authors:  Eleni Gavriilaki; Robert A Brodsky
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 14.808

8.  High efficacy of rituximab for myasthenia gravis: a comprehensive nationwide study in Austria.

Authors:  Raffi Topakian; Fritz Zimprich; Stephan Iglseder; Norbert Embacher; Michael Guger; Karl Stieglbauer; Dieter Langenscheidt; Jakob Rath; Stefan Quasthoff; Philipp Simschitz; Julia Wanschitz; David Windisch; Petra Müller; Dierk Oel; Günther Schustereder; Stefan Einsiedler; Christian Eggers; Wolfgang Löscher
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 9.  Pain, Headache, and Other Non-motor Symptoms in Myasthenia Gravis.

Authors:  Olivia Tong; Leslie Delfiner; Steven Herskovitz
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2018-05-03

Review 10.  History of Myasthenia Gravis Revisited.

Authors:  Feza Deymeer
Journal:  Noro Psikiyatr Ars       Date:  2020-11-07       Impact factor: 1.339

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.