Targeting the rheumatoid arthritis synovial fibroblast via cyclin dependent kinase inhibition: An early phase trial

Introduction: Targeted biologic therapies demonstrate similar efficacies in rheumatoid arthritis despite distinct mechanisms of action. They also exhibit a ceiling effect, with 10% to 20% of patients achieving remission in clinical trials. None of these therapies target synovial fibroblasts, which drive and maintain synovitis. Seliciclib (R-roscovitine) is an orally available cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor that suppresses fibroblast proliferation, and is efficacious in preclinical arthritis models. We aim to determine the toxicity and preliminary efficacy of seliciclib in combination with biologic therapies, to inform its potential as an adjunctive therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. Methods and analysis: TRAFIC is a non-commercial, multi-center, rolling phase Ib/IIa trial investigating the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of seliciclib in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis receiving biologic therapies. All participants receive seliciclib with no control arm. The primary objective of part 1 (phase Ib) is to determine the maximum tolerated dose and safety of seliciclib over 4 weeks of dosing. Part 1 uses a restricted 1-stage Bayesian continual reassessment method based on a target dose-limiting toxicity probability of 35%. Part 2 (phase IIa) assesses the potential efficacy of seliciclib, and is designed as a single arm, single stage early phase trial based on a Fleming-A’Hern design using the maximum tolerated dose recommended from part 1. The primary response outcome after 12 weeks of therapy is a composite of clinical, histological and magnetic resonance imaging scores. Secondary outcomes include adverse events, pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic parameters, autoantibodies, and fatigue. Ethics and dissemination: The study has been reviewed and approved by the North East - Tyne & Wear South Research Ethics Committee (reference 14/NE/1075) and the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), United Kingdom. Results will be disseminated through publication in relevant peer-reviewed journals and presentation at national and international conferences. Trials Registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN36667085. Registered on September 26, 2014; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN36667085 Current protocol version: Protocol version 11.0 (March 21, 2019

The polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) inhibitor NMS-P937 is effective in a new model of disseminated primary CD56+ acute monoblastic leukaemia

CD56 is expressed in 15–20% of acute myeloid leukaemias (AML) and is associated with extramedullary diffusion, multidrug resistance and poor prognosis. We describe the establishment and characterisation of a novel disseminated model of AML (AML-NS8), generated by injection into mice of leukaemic blasts freshly isolated from a patient with an aggressive CD56+ monoblastic AML (M5a). The model reproduced typical manifestations of this leukaemia, including presence of extramedullary masses and central nervous system involvement, and the original phenotype, karyotype and genotype of leukaemic cells were retained in vivo. Recently Polo-Like Kinase 1 (PLK1) has emerged as a new candidate drug target in AML. We therefore tested our PLK1 inhibitor NMS-P937 in this model either in the engraftment or in the established disease settings. Both schedules showed good efficacy compared to standard therapies, with a significant increase in median survival time (MST) expecially in the established disease setting (MST = 28, 36, 62 days for vehicle, cytarabine and NMS-P937, respectively). Importantly, we could also demonstrate that NMS-P937 induced specific biomarker modulation in extramedullary tissues. This new in vivo model of CD56+ AML that recapitulates the human tumour lends support for the therapeutic use of PLK1 inhibitors in AML

Combination Therapy Is Superior to Sequential Monotherapy for the Initial Treatment of Hypertension:A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Guidelines for hypertension vary in their preference for initial combination therapy or initial monotherapy, stratified by patient profile; therefore, we compared the efficacy and tolerability of these approaches. Methods and Results: We performed a 1‐year, double‐blind, randomized controlled trial in 605 untreated patients aged 18 to 79 years with systolic blood pressure (BP) ≥150 mm Hg or diastolic BP ≥95 mm Hg. In phase 1 (weeks 0–16), patients were randomly assigned to initial monotherapy (losartan 50–100 mg or hydrochlorothiazide 12.5–25 mg crossing over at 8 weeks), or initial combination (losartan 50–100 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5–25 mg). In phase 2 (weeks 17–32), all patients received losartan 100 mg and hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 to 25 mg. In phase 3 (weeks 33–52), amlodipine with or without doxazosin could be added to achieve target BP. Hierarchical primary outcomes were the difference from baseline in home systolic BP, averaged over phases 1 and 2 and, if significant, at 32 weeks. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, and difference in home systolic BP responses between tertiles of plasma renin. Home systolic BP after initial monotherapy fell 4.9 mm Hg (range: 3.7–6.0 mm Hg) less over 32 weeks (P<0.001) than after initial combination but caught up at 32 weeks (difference 1.2 mm Hg [range: −0.4 to 2.8 mm Hg], P=0.13). In phase 1, home systolic BP response to each monotherapy differed substantially between renin tertiles, whereas response to combination therapy was uniform and at least 5 mm Hg more than to monotherapy. There were no differences in withdrawals due to adverse events. Conclusions: Initial combination therapy can be recommended for patients with BP >150/95 mm Hg. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00994617

Targeting synovial fibroblast proliferation in rheumatoid arthritis (TRAFIC): an open-label, dose-finding, phase 1b trial

Background Current rheumatoid arthritis therapies target immune inflammation and are subject to ceiling effects. Seliciclib is an orally available cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor that suppresses proliferation of synovial fibroblasts—cells not yet targeted in rheumatoid arthritis. Part 1 of this phase 1b/2a trial aimed to establish the maximum tolerated dose of seliciclib in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite ongoing treatment with TNF inhibitors, and to evaluate safety and pharmacokinetics. Methods Phase 1b of the TRAFIC study was a non-randomised, open-label, dose-finding trial done in rheumatology departments in five UK National Health Service hospitals. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) fulfilled the 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) or the 2010 ACR–European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis and had moderate to severe disease activity (a Disease Activity Score for 28 joints [DAS28] of ≥3·2) despite stable treatment with anti-TNF therapy for at least 3 months before enrolment. Participants were recruited sequentially to a maximum of seven cohorts of three participants each, designated to receive seliciclib 200 mg, 400 mg, 600 mg, 800 mg, or 1000 mg administered in 200 mg oral capsules. Sequential cohorts received doses determined by a restricted, one-stage Bayesian continual reassessment model, which determined the maximum tolerated dose (the primary outcome) based on a target dose-limiting toxicity rate of 35%. Seliciclib maximum concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration time curve 0–6 h (AUC0–6) were measured. This study is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN36667085. Findings Between Oct 8, 2015, and Aug 15, 2017, 37 patients were screened and 15 were enrolled to five cohorts and received seliciclib, after which the trial steering committee and the data monitoring committee determined that the maximum tolerated dose could be defined. In addition to a TNF inhibitor, ten (67%) enrolled patients were taking conventional synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs. The maximum tolerated dose of seliciclib was 400 mg, with an estimated dose-limiting toxicity probability of 0·35 (90% posterior probability interval 0·18–0·52). Two serious adverse events occurred (one acute kidney injury in a patient receiving the 600 mg dose and one drug-induced liver injury in a patient receiving the 400 mg dose), both considered to be related to seliciclib and consistent with its known safety profile. 65 non-serious adverse events occurred during the trial, 50 of which were considered to be treatment related. Most treatment-related adverse events were mild; 20 of the treatment-related non-serious adverse events contributed to dose-limiting toxicities. There were no deaths. Average Cmax and AUC0–6 were two-times higher in participants developing dose-limiting toxicities. Interpretation The maximum tolerated dose of seliciclib has been defined for rheumatoid arthritis refractory to TNF blockade. No unexpected safety concerns were identified to preclude ongoing clinical evaluation in a formal efficacy trial. Funding UK Medical Research Council, Cyclacel, Research into Inflammatory Arthritis Centre (Versus Arthritis), and the National Institute of Health Research Newcastle and Birmingham Biomedical Research Centres and Clinical Research Facilities

Future therapeutic targets in rheumatoid arthritis?

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by persistent joint inflammation. Without adequate treatment, patients with RA will develop joint deformity and progressive functional impairment. With the implementation of treat-to-target strategies and availability of biologic therapies, the outcomes for patients with RA have significantly improved. However, the unmet need in the treatment of RA remains high as some patients do not respond sufficiently to the currently available agents, remission is not always achieved and refractory disease is not uncommon. With better understanding of the pathophysiology of RA, new therapeutic approaches are emerging. Apart from more selective Janus kinase inhibition, there is a great interest in the granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor pathway, Bruton's tyrosine kinase pathway, phosphoinositide-3-kinase pathway, neural stimulation and dendritic cell-based therapeutics. In this review, we will discuss the therapeutic potential of these novel approaches

Stratification of biological therapies by pathobiology in biologic-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis (STRAP and STRAP-EU): two parallel, open-label, biopsy-driven, randomised trials

BACKGROUND: Despite highly effective targeted therapies for rheumatoid arthritis, about 40% of patients respond poorly, and predictive biomarkers for treatment choices are lacking. We did a biopsy-driven trial to compare the response to rituximab, etanercept, and tocilizumab in biologic-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis stratified for synovial B cell status. METHODS: STRAP and STRAP-EU were two parallel, open-label, biopsy-driven, stratified, randomised, phase 3 trials done across 26 university centres in the UK and Europe. Biologic-naive patients aged 18 years or older with rheumatoid arthritis based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR)–European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were included. Following ultrasound-guided synovial biopsy, patients were classified as B cell poor or B cell rich according to synovial B cell signatures and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to intravenous rituximab (1000 mg at week 0 and week 2), subcutaneous tocilizumab (162 mg per week), or subcutaneous etanercept (50 mg per week). The primary outcome was the 16-week ACR20 response in the B cell-poor, intention-to-treat population (defined as all randomly assigned patients), with data pooled from the two trials, comparing etanercept and tocilizumab (grouped) versus rituximab. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. These trials are registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register, 2014-003529-16 (STRAP) and 2017-004079-30 (STRAP-EU). FINDINGS: Between June 8, 2015, and July 4, 2019, 226 patients were randomly assigned to etanercept (n=73), tocilizumab (n=74), and rituximab (n=79). Three patients (one in each group) were excluded after randomisation because they received parenteral steroids in the 4 weeks before recruitment. 168 (75%) of 223 patients in the intention-to-treat population were women and 170 (76%) were White. In the B cell-poor population, ACR20 response at 16 weeks (primary endpoint) showed no significant differences between etanercept and tocilizumab grouped together and rituximab (46 [60%] of 77 patients vs 26 [59%] of 44; odds ratio 1·02 [95% CI 0·47–2·17], p=0·97). No differences were observed for adverse events, including serious adverse events, which occurred in six (6%) of 102 patients in the rituximab group, nine (6%) of 108 patients in the etanercept group, and three (4%) of 73 patients in the tocilizumab group (p=0·53). INTERPRETATION: In this biologic-naive population of patients with rheumatoid arthrtitis, the dichotomic classification into synovial B cell poor versus rich did not predict treatment response to B cell depletion with rituximab compared with alternative treatment strategies. However, the lack of response to rituximab in patients with a pauci-immune pathotype and the higher risk of structural damage progression in B cell-rich patients treated with rituximab warrant further investigations into the ability of synovial tissue analyses to inform disease pathogenesis and treatment response. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council and Versus Arthritis

Abatacept in individuals at high risk of rheumatoid arthritis (APIPPRA): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel, placebo-controlled, phase 2b clinical trial

\ua9 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Background: Individuals with serum antibodies to citrullinated protein antigens (ACPA), rheumatoid factor, and symptoms, such as inflammatory joint pain, are at high risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis. In the arthritis prevention in the pre-clinical phase of rheumatoid arthritis with abatacept (APIPPRA) trial, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and acceptability of treating high risk individuals with the T-cell co-stimulation modulator abatacept. Methods: The APIPPRA study was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel, placebo-controlled, phase 2b clinical trial done in 28 hospital-based early arthritis clinics in the UK and three in the Netherlands. Participants (aged ≥18 years) at risk of rheumatoid arthritis positive for ACPA and rheumatoid factor with inflammatory joint pain were recruited. Exclusion criteria included previous episodes of clinical synovitis and previous use of corticosteroids or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated permuted block randomisation (block sizes of 2 and 4) stratified by sex, smoking, and country, to 125 mg abatacept subcutaneous injections weekly or placebo for 12 months, and then followed up for 12 months. Masking was achieved by providing four kits (identical in appearance and packaging) with pre-filled syringes with coded labels of abatacept or placebo every 3 months. The primary endpoint was the time to development of clinical synovitis in three or more joints or rheumatoid arthritis according to American College of Rheumatology and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology 2010 criteria, whichever was met first. Synovitis was confirmed by ultrasonography. Follow-up was completed on Jan 13, 2021. All participants meeting the intention-to-treat principle were included in the analysis. This trial was registered with EudraCT (2013–003413–18). Findings: Between Dec 22, 2014, and Jan 14, 2019, 280 individuals were evaluated for eligibility and, of 213 participants, 110 were randomly assigned to abatacept and 103 to placebo. During the treatment period, seven (6%) of 110 participants in the abatacept group and 30 (29%) of 103 participants in the placebo group met the primary endpoint. At 24 months, 27 (25%) of 110 participants in the abatacept group had progressed to rheumatoid arthritis, compared with 38 (37%) of 103 in the placebo group. The estimated proportion of participants remaining arthritis-free at 12 months was 92\ub78% (SE 2\ub76) in the abatacept group and 69\ub72% (4\ub77) in the placebo group. Kaplan–Meier arthritis-free survival plots over 24 months favoured abatacept (log-rank test p=0\ub7044). The difference in restricted mean survival time between groups was 53 days (95% CI 28–78; p<0\ub70001) at 12 months and 99 days (95% CI 38–161; p=0\ub70016) at 24 months in favour of abatacept. During treatment, abatacept was associated with improvements in pain scores, functional wellbeing, and quality-of-life measurements, as well as low scores of subclinical synovitis by ultrasonography, compared with placebo. However, the effects were not sustained at 24 months. Seven serious adverse events occurred in the abatacept group and 11 in the placebo group, including one death in each group deemed unrelated to treatment. Interpretation: Therapeutic intervention during the at-risk phase of rheumatoid arthritis is feasible, with acceptable safety profiles. T-cell co-stimulation modulation with abatacept for 12 months reduces progression to rheumatoid arthritis, with evidence of sustained efficacy beyond the treatment period, and with no new safety signals. Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb

The Adjuvanticity of an O. volvulus-Derived rOv-ASP-1 Protein in Mice Using Sequential Vaccinations and in Non-Human Primates

Adjuvants potentiate antigen-specific protective immune responses and can be key elements promoting vaccine effectiveness. We previously reported that the Onchocerca volvulus recombinant protein rOv-ASP-1 can induce activation and maturation of naïve human DCs and therefore could be used as an innate adjuvant to promote balanced Th1 and Th2 responses to bystander vaccine antigens in mice. With a few vaccine antigens, it also promoted a Th1-biased response based on pronounced induction of Th1-associated IgG2a and IgG2b antibody responses and the upregulated production of Th1 cytokines, including IL-2, IFN-γ, TNF-α and IL-6. However, because it is a protein, the rOv-ASP-1 adjuvant may also induce anti-self-antibodies. Therefore, it was important to verify that the host responses to self will not affect the adjuvanticity of rOv-ASP-1 when it is used in subsequent vaccinations with the same or different vaccine antigens. In this study, we have established rOv-ASP-1's adjuvanticity in mice during the course of two sequential vaccinations using two vaccine model systems: the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV spike protein and a commercial influenza virus hemagglutinin (HA) vaccine comprised of three virus strains. Moreover, the adjuvanticity of rOv-ASP-1 was retained with an efficacy similar to that obtained when it was used for a first vaccination, even though a high level of anti-rOv-ASP-1 antibodies was present in the sera of mice before the administration of the second vaccine. To further demonstrate its utility as an adjuvant for human use, we also immunized non-human primates (NHPs) with RBD plus rOv-ASP-1 and showed that rOv-ASP-1 could induce high titres of functional and protective anti-RBD antibody responses in NHPs. Notably, the rOv-ASP-1 adjuvant did not induce high titer antibodies against self in NHPs. Thus, the present study provided a sound scientific foundation for future strategies in the development of this novel protein adjuvant