Minimal Symptom Expression' in Patients With Acetylcholine Receptor Antibody-Positive Refractory Generalized Myasthenia Gravis Treated With Eculizumab

The efficacy and tolerability of eculizumab were assessed in REGAIN, a 26-week, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive (AChR+) refractory generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG), and its open-label extension

Post-intervention Status in Patients With Refractory Myasthenia Gravis Treated With Eculizumab During REGAIN and Its Open-Label Extension

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether eculizumab helps patients with anti-acetylcholine receptor-positive (AChR+) refractory generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG) achieve the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) post-intervention status of minimal manifestations (MM), we assessed patients' status throughout REGAIN (Safety and Efficacy of Eculizumab in AChR+ Refractory Generalized Myasthenia Gravis) and its open-label extension. METHODS: Patients who completed the REGAIN randomized controlled trial and continued into the open-label extension were included in this tertiary endpoint analysis. Patients were assessed for the MGFA post-intervention status of improved, unchanged, worse, MM, and pharmacologic remission at defined time points during REGAIN and through week 130 of the open-label study. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients completed REGAIN and continued into the open-label study (eculizumab/eculizumab: 56; placebo/eculizumab: 61). At week 26 of REGAIN, more eculizumab-treated patients than placebo-treated patients achieved a status of improved (60.7% vs 41.7%) or MM (25.0% vs 13.3%; common OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.1-4.5). After 130 weeks of eculizumab treatment, 88.0% of patients achieved improved status and 57.3% of patients achieved MM status. The safety profile of eculizumab was consistent with its known profile and no new safety signals were detected. CONCLUSION: Eculizumab led to rapid and sustained achievement of MM in patients with AChR+ refractory gMG. These findings support the use of eculizumab in this previously difficult-to-treat patient population. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: REGAIN, NCT01997229; REGAIN open-label extension, NCT02301624. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that, after 26 weeks of eculizumab treatment, 25.0% of adults with AChR+ refractory gMG achieved MM, compared with 13.3% who received placebo

The evolving SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in Africa: Insights from rapidly expanding genomic surveillance

INTRODUCTION Investment in Africa over the past year with regard to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) sequencing has led to a massive increase in the number of sequences, which, to date, exceeds 100,000 sequences generated to track the pandemic on the continent. These sequences have profoundly affected how public health officials in Africa have navigated the COVID-19 pandemic. RATIONALE We demonstrate how the first 100,000 SARS-CoV-2 sequences from Africa have helped monitor the epidemic on the continent, how genomic surveillance expanded over the course of the pandemic, and how we adapted our sequencing methods to deal with an evolving virus. Finally, we also examine how viral lineages have spread across the continent in a phylogeographic framework to gain insights into the underlying temporal and spatial transmission dynamics for several variants of concern (VOCs). RESULTS Our results indicate that the number of countries in Africa that can sequence the virus within their own borders is growing and that this is coupled with a shorter turnaround time from the time of sampling to sequence submission. Ongoing evolution necessitated the continual updating of primer sets, and, as a result, eight primer sets were designed in tandem with viral evolution and used to ensure effective sequencing of the virus. The pandemic unfolded through multiple waves of infection that were each driven by distinct genetic lineages, with B.1-like ancestral strains associated with the first pandemic wave of infections in 2020. Successive waves on the continent were fueled by different VOCs, with Alpha and Beta cocirculating in distinct spatial patterns during the second wave and Delta and Omicron affecting the whole continent during the third and fourth waves, respectively. Phylogeographic reconstruction points toward distinct differences in viral importation and exportation patterns associated with the Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants and subvariants, when considering both Africa versus the rest of the world and viral dissemination within the continent. Our epidemiological and phylogenetic inferences therefore underscore the heterogeneous nature of the pandemic on the continent and highlight key insights and challenges, for instance, recognizing the limitations of low testing proportions. We also highlight the early warning capacity that genomic surveillance in Africa has had for the rest of the world with the detection of new lineages and variants, the most recent being the characterization of various Omicron subvariants. CONCLUSION Sustained investment for diagnostics and genomic surveillance in Africa is needed as the virus continues to evolve. This is important not only to help combat SARS-CoV-2 on the continent but also because it can be used as a platform to help address the many emerging and reemerging infectious disease threats in Africa. In particular, capacity building for local sequencing within countries or within the continent should be prioritized because this is generally associated with shorter turnaround times, providing the most benefit to local public health authorities tasked with pandemic response and mitigation and allowing for the fastest reaction to localized outbreaks. These investments are crucial for pandemic preparedness and response and will serve the health of the continent well into the 21st century

Quantifying burn severity in forests of the interior Pacific Northwest: From field measurements to satellite spectral indices

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2019Accurate quantification of burn severity, or the magnitude of fire-caused ecological change, is important, especially as the climate warms and associated changes to fire regimes unfold. The purpose of this thesis is to explore relationships between different methods of burn severity quantification in the Interior Pacific Northwest (IPNW) (Chapter 2), and to see if these relationships differ in short interval reburns (Chapter 3). Burn severity is commonly assessed in the field by forest managers and scientists using semi-quantitative ordinal ocular estimates such as the Composite Burn Index (CBI). Yet, because CBI and direct quantitative measures of burn severity are rarely collected together, how CBI relates to individual measures of burn severity has not been widely tested. Further, how CBI relates to different satellite indices of burn severity varies and has not been tested across many regions. I address these knowledge gaps by comparing CBI to eight individual quantitative field measures of burn severity 1-year post burn from 315 plots across 14 fires in the IPNW. Using zero and one inflated beta regression models and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) for model comparison, I tested the relationship between CBI and individual field measures, and between CBI and three satellite indices. Canopy measures were best captured by CBI while surface measures were not well captured by CBI. Furthermore, the three remotely sensed indices were nearly equal in their relationship with burn severity in the region. The strong correspondence between CBI and most individual measures of burn severity suggests that CBI, as a relatively simple field assessment, could be used to infer individual components of burn severity in burned landscapes. However, some variables were not captured by CBI (e.g., deep char, or charred bole surface that is scaly in appearance) and could be collected in the field to augment CBI. In Chapter 3, I tested to see if the relationships between individual field metrics and 1) CBI and 2) RdNBR differed if the fire was a short interval reburn, and when so, if the first fire was stand replacing or not. This research question addresses the gap in understanding of if burn severity indices in reburns provide the same information as they do in single burns. While reburns are a normal part of fire regimes, in some areas they represent a return to historical fire frequency, while in others they raise significant ecological questions about their effects on forest structure and function. I found the relationship between canopy measures (e.g. change in live canopy cover, tree mortality, char heights) and CBI were mostly similar between single burns and reburns. However, the relationships between CBI and floor measures of burn severity differ in short interval reburns when the first fire was non-stand replacing. CBI’s inability to capture surface measures may be because surface measures are often related to pre-fire vegetation and general cover in the understory, and CBI is a post-fire measurement. Relationships between canopy measures and RdNBR were also mostly similar between single burns and reburns, and RdNBR over-predicted surface char in reburns where the first fire was non-stand replacing. RdNBR may be unable to capture surface char in reburns where the first fire was non-stand replacing because these areas may experience frequent light surface fire, where satellite sensors only capture the spectral signatures from unchanged tree canopies. In a non-stand replacing fire, the understory may be frequently opening up and re-sprouting post fire, and it may be difficult for satellite sensors to capture the spectral indices in the understory. Deep char could not be modeled by either CBI or RdNBR, suggesting that neither metric can capture deep char. My study suggests that current canopy measures of burn severity are accurate in reburns, but that interpretation of reburn burn severity on the forest floor should be made with caution

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

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

Eculizumab in refractory generalized myasthenia gravis previously treated with rituximab: subgroup analysis of REGAIN and its extension study

Introduction/Aims: Individuals with refractory generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG) who have a history of rituximab use and experience persistent symptoms represent a population with unmet treatment needs. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of eculizumab in patients with refractory anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive (AChR+) gMG previously treated with rituximab. Methods: This post hoc subgroup analysis of the phase 3 REGAIN study (NCT01997229) and its open-label extension (OLE; NCT02301624) compared baseline characteristics, safety, and response to eculizumab in participants who had previously received rituximab with those who had not. Rituximab use was not permitted within the 6 months before screening or during REGAIN/OLE. Results: Of 125 REGAIN participants, 14 had received rituximab previously (7 received placebo and 7 received eculizumab). In the previous-rituximab group, 57% had used at least four other immunosuppressants compared with 16% in the no-previous-rituximab group. Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living total scores from eculizumab baseline to week 130 of eculizumab treatment improved in both the previous-rituximab and no-previous-rituximab groups (least-squares mean −4.4, standard error of the mean [SEM] 1.0 [n = 9] and least-squares mean −4.6, SEM 0.3 [n = 67], respectively; difference = 0.2, 95% confidence interval −1.88 to 2.22). In addition, in both groups, most patients who were treated with eculizumab for 130 weeks achieved a Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America post-intervention status of minimal manifestations (66.7% and 65.0%, respectively). The eculizumab safety profile was similar between groups and consistent with its established profile. Discussion: Eculizumab is an effective therapy for patients with refractory AChR+ gMG, irrespective of whether they had received rituximab treatment previously

‘Minimal symptom expression’ in patients with acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive refractory generalized myasthenia gravis treated with eculizumab

Background: The efficacy and tolerability of eculizumab were assessed in REGAIN, a 26-week, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive (AChR+) refractory generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG), and its open-label extension. Methods: Attainment of ‘minimal symptom expression’ was evaluated using patient-reported outcome measures of gMG symptoms [MG activities of daily living scale (MG-ADL), 15-item MG quality of life questionnaire (MG-QOL15)] at the completion of REGAIN and during the open-label extension. ‘Minimal symptom expression’ was defined as MG-ADL total score of 0–1 or MG-QOL15 total score of 0–3. Results: At REGAIN week 26, more eculizumab-treated patients achieved ‘minimal symptom expression’ versus placebo [MG-ADL: 21.4% vs 1.7%; difference 19.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 8.5, 31.0; p = 0.0007; MG-QOL15: 16.1% vs 1.7%; difference 14.4%; 95% CI 4.3, 24.6; p = 0.0069]. During the open-label extension, the proportion of patients in the placebo/eculizumab group who achieved ‘minimal symptom expression’ increased after initiating eculizumab treatment and was sustained through 130 weeks of open-label eculizumab (MG-ADL: 1.7 to 27.8%; MG-QOL15: 1.7 to 19.4%). At extension study week 130, similar proportions of patients in the eculizumab/eculizumab and placebo/eculizumab groups achieved ‘minimal symptom expression’ (MG-ADL: 22.9% and 27.8%, respectively, p = 0.7861; MG-QOL15: 14.3% and 19.4%, respectively, p = 0.7531). The long-term tolerability of eculizumab was consistent with previous reports. Conclusions: Patients with AChR+ refractory gMG who receive eculizumab can achieve sustained ‘minimal symptom expression’ based on patient-reported outcomes. ‘Minimal symptom expression’ may be a useful tool in measuring therapy effectiveness in gMG. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01997229, NCT02301624