Management of acute attacks of hereditary angioedema: potential role of icatibant

Icatibant (Firazyr®) is a novel subcutaneous treatment recently licensed in the European Union for acute hereditary angioedema. Hereditary angioedema, resulting from inherited partial C1 inhibitor deficiency, is a disabling condition characterized by intermittent episodes of bradykinin-mediated angioedema. Icatibant blocks bradykinin B2 receptors, attenutating the episode. Randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of icatibant, showed significant superiority over oral tranexamic acid in 74 European patients and a trend to improvement in a similar US trial comparing icatibant with placebo in 55 patients. Outcomes for several endpoints did not reach significance in the US trial, perhaps because of low participant numbers and confounding factors: a further trial is planned. Open label studies have shown benefit in multiple treatments for attacks at all sites. Approximately 10% of patients require a second dose for re-emergent symptoms, usually 10 to 27 hours after the initial treatment. Its subcutaneous route of administration, good tolerability and novel mode of action make icatibant a promising addition to the limited repertoire of treatments for hereditary angioedema

findings from the Icatibant Outcome Survey

Background Patients with hereditary angioedema (HAE) due to C1-inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) experience recurrent attacks of cutaneous or submucosal edema that may be frequent and severe; prophylactic treatments can be prescribed to prevent attacks. However, despite the use of long-term prophylaxis (LTP), breakthrough attacks are known to occur. We used data from the Icatibant Outcome Survey (IOS) to evaluate the characteristics of breakthrough attacks and the effectiveness of icatibant as a treatment option. Methods Data on LTP use, attacks, and treatments were recorded. Attack characteristics, treatment characteristics, and outcomes (time to treatment, time to resolution, and duration of attack) were compared for attacks that occurred with versus without LTP. Results Data on 3228 icatibant-treated attacks from 448 patients with C1-INH-HAE were analyzed; 30.1% of attacks occurred while patients were using LTP. Attack rate, attack severity, and the distribution of attack sites were similar across all types of LTP used, and were comparable to the results found in patients who did not receive LTP. Attacks were successfully treated with icatibant; 82.5% of all breakthrough attacks were treated with a single icatibant injection without C1-INH rescue medication. Treatment outcomes were comparable for breakthrough attacks across all LTP types, and for attacks without LTP. Conclusions Patients who use LTP should be aware that breakthrough attacks can occur, and such attacks can be severe. Thus, patients with C1-INH-HAE using LTP should have emergency treatment readily available. Data from IOS show that icatibant is effective for the treatment of breakthrough attacks. Trial Registration NCT0103496

Elderly versus younger patients with hereditary angioedema type I/II: patient characteristics and safety analysis from the Icatibant Outcome Survey.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema with C1 inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) is characterized by recurrent swelling in subcutaneous or submucosal tissues. Symptoms often begin by age 5-11 years and worsen during puberty, but attacks can occur at any age and recur throughout life. Disease course in elderly patients is rarely reported. METHODS: The Icatibant Outcome Survey (IOS) is an observational study evaluating the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of icatibant. We conducted descriptive analyses in younger (age < 65 years) versus elderly patients (age ≥ 65 years). Here, we report patient characteristics and safety-related findings. RESULTS: As of February 2018, 872 patients with C1-INH-HAE type I/II were enrolled, of whom 100 (11.5%) were ≥ 65 years old. Significant differences between elderly versus younger patients, respectively, were noted for median age at symptom onset (17.0 vs 12.0 years), age at diagnosis (41.0 vs 19.4 years), and delay between symptom onset and diagnosis (23.9 vs 4.8 years) (P ≤ 0.0001 for all). Median age at diagnosis was significantly higher in elderly patients regardless of family history (P < 0.0001). Throughout the study, icatibant was used to treat 6798 attacks in 574 patients, with 63 elderly patients reporting 715 (10.5%) of the icatibant-treated attacks. No serious adverse events (SAEs) in elderly patients were judged to be possibly related to icatibant, whereas two younger patients reported three possibly related SAEs. Excluding off-label use and pregnancy (evaluated for regulatory purposes), the percentage of patients with at least one possibly/probably related AE was similar for elderly (2.0%) versus younger patients (2.7%). No deaths linked to icatibant treatment were identified. All related events in elderly patients were attributed to general disorders/administration site conditions, whereas related events in younger patients occurred across various system organ class designations. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients with C1-INH-HAE were significantly older at diagnosis and had greater delay in diagnosis than younger patients. Elderly patients contributed to approximately 10% of the icatibant-treated attacks. Our analysis found similar AE rates (overall and possibly/probably related) in icatibant-treated elderly versus younger patients, despite the fact that elderly patients had significantly more comorbidities and were receiving a greater number of concomitant medications. Our analysis did not identify any new or unexpected safety concerns

design of the HELP study extension

Background Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is characterized by recurrent attacks of subcutaneous or submucosal edema. Attacks are unpredictable, debilitating, and have a significant impact on quality of life. Patients may be prescribed prophylactic therapy to prevent angioedema attacks. Current prophylactic treatments may be difficult to administer (i.e., intravenously), require frequent administrations or are not well tolerated, and breakthrough attacks may still occur frequently. Lanadelumab is a subcutaneously-administered monoclonal antibody inhibitor of plasma kallikrein in clinical development for prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema attacks. A Phase 1b study supported its efficacy in preventing attacks. A Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo- controlled, parallel-arm study has been completed and an open-label extension is currently ongoing. Methods/design The primary objective of the open-label extension is to evaluate the long-term safety of repeated subcutaneous administrations of lanadelumab in patients with type I/II HAE. Secondary objectives include evaluation of efficacy and time to first angioedema attack to determine outer bounds of the dosing interval. The study will also evaluate immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, quality of life, characteristics of breakthrough attacks, ease of self-administration, and safety/efficacy in patients who switch to lanadelumab from another prophylactic therapy. The open-label extension will enroll patients who completed the double-blind study (“rollover patients”) and those who did not participate in the double-blind study (“non-rollover patients”), which includes patients who may or may not be currently using another prophylactic therapy. Rollover patients will receive a single 300 mg dose of lanadelumab on Day 0 and the second dose after the patient’s first confirmed angioedema attack. Thereafter, lanadelumab will be administered every 2 weeks. Non- rollover patients will receive 300 mg lanadelumab every 2 weeks regardless of the first attack. All patients will receive their last dose on Day 350 (maximum of 26 doses), and will then undergo a 4-week follow-up. Discussion Prevention of attacks can reduce the burden of illness associated with HAE. Prophylactic therapy requires extended, repeated dosing and the results of this study will provide important data on the long-term safety and efficacy of lanadelumab, a monoclonal antibody inhibitor of plasma kallikrein for subcutaneous administration for the treatment of HAE. Trial registration NCT0274159

Treatment effect of switching from intravenous to subcutaneous C1-inhibitor for prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks: COMPACT subgroup findings

n/

An open-label study to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of lanadelumab for prevention of attacks in hereditary angioedema: design of the HELP study extension

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is characterized by recurrent attacks of subcutaneous or submucosal edema. Attacks are unpredictable, debilitating, and have a significant impact on quality of life. Patients may be prescribed prophylactic therapy to prevent angioedema attacks. Current prophylactic treatments may be difficult to administer (i.e., intravenously), require frequent administrations or are not well tolerated, and breakthrough attacks may still occur frequently. Lanadelumab is a subcutaneously-administered monoclonal antibody inhibitor of plasma kallikrein in clinical development for prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema attacks. A Phase 1b study supported its efficacy in preventing attacks. A Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm study has been completed and an open-label extension is currently ongoing. Methods/design The primary objective of the open-label extension is to evaluate the long-term safety of repeated subcutaneous administrations of lanadelumab in patients with type I/II HAE. Secondary objectives include evaluation of efficacy and time to first angioedema attack to determine outer bounds of the dosing interval. The study will also evaluate immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, quality of life, characteristics of breakthrough attacks, ease of self-administration, and safety/efficacy in patients who switch to lanadelumab from another prophylactic therapy. The open-label extension will enroll patients who completed the double-blind study (“rollover patients”) and those who did not participate in the double-blind study (“non-rollover patients”), which includes patients who may or may not be currently using another prophylactic therapy. Rollover patients will receive a single 300 mg dose of lanadelumab on Day 0 and the second dose after the patient’s first confirmed angioedema attack. Thereafter, lanadelumab will be administered every 2 weeks. Non-rollover patients will receive 300 mg lanadelumab every 2 weeks regardless of the first attack. All patients will receive their last dose on Day 350 (maximum of 26 doses), and will then undergo a 4-week follow-up. Discussion Prevention of attacks can reduce the burden of illness associated with HAE. Prophylactic therapy requires extended, repeated dosing and the results of this study will provide important data on the long-term safety and efficacy of lanadelumab, a monoclonal antibody inhibitor of plasma kallikrein for subcutaneous administration for the treatment of HAE. Trial registration NCT02741596 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13601-017-0172-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

British Lung Foundation/United Kingdom primary immunodeficiency network consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis, and management of granulomatous-lymphocytic interstitial lung disease in common variable immunodeficiency disorders

A proportion of people living with common variable immunodeficiency disorders develop granulomatous-lymphocytic interstitial lung disease (GLILD). We aimed to develop a consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis, and management of GLILD. All UK specialist centers were contacted and relevant physicians were invited to take part in a 3-round online Delphi process. Responses were graded as Strongly Agree, Tend to Agree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Tend to Disagree, and Strongly Disagree, scored +1, +0.5, 0, −0.5, and −1, respectively. Agreement was defined as greater than or equal to 80% consensus. Scores are reported as mean ± SD. There was 100% agreement (score, 0.92 ± 0.19) for the following definition: “GLILD is a distinct clinico-radio-pathological ILD occurring in patients with [common variable immunodeficiency disorders], associated with a lymphocytic infiltrate and/or granuloma in the lung, and in whom other conditions have been considered and where possible excluded.” There was consensus that the workup of suspected GLILD requires chest computed tomography (CT) (0.98 ± 0.01), lung function tests (eg, gas transfer, 0.94 ± 0.17), bronchoscopy to exclude infection (0.63 ± 0.50), and lung biopsy (0.58 ± 0.40). There was no consensus on whether expectant management following optimization of immunoglobulin therapy was acceptable: 67% agreed, 25% disagreed, score 0.38 ± 0.59; 90% agreed that when treatment was required, first-line treatment should be with corticosteroids alone (score, 0.55 ± 0.51)

Primary vs. Secondary Antibody Deficiency: Clinical Features and Infection Outcomes of Immunoglobulin Replacement

<div><p>Secondary antibody deficiency can occur as a result of haematological malignancies or certain medications, but not much is known about the clinical and immunological features of this group of patients as a whole. Here we describe a cohort of 167 patients with primary or secondary antibody deficiencies on immunoglobulin (Ig)-replacement treatment. The demographics, causes of immunodeficiency, diagnostic delay, clinical and laboratory features, and infection frequency were analysed retrospectively. Chemotherapy for B cell lymphoma and the use of Rituximab, corticosteroids or immunosuppressive medications were the most common causes of secondary antibody deficiency in this cohort. There was no difference in diagnostic delay or bronchiectasis between primary and secondary antibody deficiency patients, and both groups experienced disorders associated with immune dysregulation. Secondary antibody deficiency patients had similar baseline levels of serum IgG, but higher IgM and IgA, and a higher frequency of switched memory B cells than primary antibody deficiency patients. Serious and non-serious infections before and after Ig-replacement were also compared in both groups. Although secondary antibody deficiency patients had more serious infections before initiation of Ig-replacement, treatment resulted in a significant reduction of serious and non-serious infections in both primary and secondary antibody deficiency patients. Patients with secondary antibody deficiency experience similar delays in diagnosis as primary antibody deficiency patients and can also benefit from immunoglobulin-replacement treatment.</p></div

Consensus on treatment goals in hereditary angioedema : a global Delphi initiative

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare, life-threatening genetic disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of subcutaneous or submucosal angioedema. The ultimate goals of treatment for HAE remain ill-defined. Objectives: The aim of this Delphi process was to define the goals of HAE treatment and to examine which factors should be considered when assessing disease control and normalization of the patient's life. Methods: The Delphi panel comprised 23 participants who were selected based on involvement with scientific research on HAE or coauthorship of the most recent update and revision of the World Allergy Organization/European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guideline on HAE. The process comprised 3 rounds of voting. The final round aimed to aggregate the opinions of the expert panel and to achieve consensus. Results: Two direct consensus questions were posed in round 2, based on the responses received in round 1, and the panel agreed that the goals of treatment are to achieve total control of the disease and to normalize the patient's life. For the third round of voting, 21 statements were considered, with the participants reaching consensus on 18. It is clear from the wide-ranging consensus statements that the burdens of disease and treatment should be considered when assessing disease control and normalization of patients’ lives. Conclusions: The ultimate goal for HAE treatment is to achieve no angioedema attacks. The availability of improved treatments and disease management over the last decade now makes complete control of HAE a realistic possibility for most patients

HAE international home therapy consensus document

Hereditary angioedema (C1 inhibitor deficiency, HAE) is associated with intermittent swellings which are disabling and may be fatal. Effective treatments are available and these are most useful when given early in the course of the swelling. The requirement to attend a medical facility for parenteral treatment results in delays. Home therapy offers the possibility of earlier treatment and better symptom control, enabling patients to live more healthy, productive lives. This paper examines the evidence for patient-controlled home treatment of acute attacks ('self or assisted administration') and suggests a framework for patients and physicians interested in participating in home or self-administration programmes. It represents the opinion of the authors who have a wide range of expert experience in the management of HAE