Macitentan for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: the randomised controlled MUSIC trial.

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis is a progressive, fatal disease. This prospective, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group, placebo-controlled phase II trial (NCT00903331) investigated the efficacy and safety of the endothelin receptor antagonist macitentan in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Eligible subjects were adults with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis of <3 years duration and a histological pattern of usual interstitial pneumonia on surgical lung biopsy. The primary objective was to demonstrate that macitentan (10 mg once daily) positively affected forced vital capacity versus placebo. Using a centralised system, 178 subjects were randomised (2:1) to macitentan (n=119) or placebo (n=59). The median change from baseline up to month 12 in forced vital capacity was -0.20 L in the macitentan arm and -0.20 L in the placebo arm. Overall, no differences between treatments were observed in pulmonary function tests or time to disease worsening or death. Median exposures to macitentan and placebo were 14.5 months and 15.0 months, respectively. Alanine and/or aspartate aminotransferase elevations over three times upper limit of normal arose in 3.4% of macitentan-treated subjects and 5.1% of placebo recipients. In conclusion, the primary objective was not met. Long-term exposure to macitentan was well tolerated with a similar, low incidence of elevated hepatic aminotransferases in each treatment group

Macitentan for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: The randomised controlled MUSIC trial

PubMed ID: 23682110Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis is a progressive, fatal disease. This prospective, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group, placebo-controlled phase II trial (NCT00903331) investigated the efficacy and safety of the endothelin receptor antagonist macitentan in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Eligible subjects were adults with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis of <3 years duration and a histological pattern of usual interstitial pneumonia on surgical lung biopsy. The primary objective was to demonstrate that macitentan (10 mg once daily) positively affected forced vital capacity versus placebo. Using a centralised system, 178 subjects were randomised (2:1) to macitentan (n=119) or placebo (n=59). The median change from baseline up to month 12 in forced vital capacity was -0.20 L in the macitentan arm and -0.20 L in the placebo arm. Overall, no differences between treatments were observed in pulmonary function tests or time to disease worsening or death. Median exposures to macitentan and placebo were 14.5 months and 15.0 months, respectively. Alanine and/or aspartate aminotransferase elevations over three times upper limit of normal arose in 3.4% of macitentan-treated subjects and 5.1% of placebo recipients. In conclusion, the primary objective was not met. Long-term exposure to macitentan was well tolerated with a similar, low incidence of elevated hepatic aminotransferases in each treatment group. Copyright © ERS 2013.Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd

Hot of the breath: mortality as a primary end-point in IPF treatment trials: the best is the enemy of the good.

The problem of the selection of accurate primary end-points for treatment studies in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) has recently been aired in a controversial paper from the USA.1 The limitations of current end-points are discussed and the authors conclude that all-cause mortality and all-cause nonelective hospitalisation best meet clinically meaningful end-point criteria. Much of the article is well argued and there is no quarrel with the view that current primary end-points are flawed. We also agree that all-cause mortality would, indeed, be the most clinically meaningful primary end-point and, therefore, the preferred primary end-point, were it not impractical, as discussed below. However, readers of the statement should reflect on the wise maxim that ‘the best may be the enemy of the good’. The purpose of our document is to provide a perspective on all-cause mortality as a primary end-point, endorsed by 52 European clinicians Including the authors (with one abstention), exploring the implications of the statement by Raghu and colleagues. We believe strongly that the adoption of the views of these authors by licensing bodies—with, by implication, a statistically significant mortality benefit a pre-requisite for drug registration—would set back progress in the treatment of IPF by a decade or more. It should be acknowledged at the outset that the statement of Raghu and colleagues does not make explicit recommendations with regard to drug licensing. Indeed, the authors declare that it is not their aim to make such recommendations and their intentions in this regard should not be questioned. However, if the statement has, indeed, been widely ‘misread’, the reasons for this are clear enough. Representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were active participants in a forum in Bethesda, Maryland (July 2011) which gave rise to the document as a proceedings statement.1 It is widely known

Efficacy and safety of nintedanib in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Nintedanib (formerly known as BIBF 1120) is an intracellular inhibitor that targets multiple tyrosine kinases. A phase 2 trial suggested that treatment with 150 mg of nintedanib twice daily reduced lung-function decline and acute exacerbations in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. METHODS: We conducted two replicate 52-week, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trials (INPULSIS-1 and INPULSIS-2) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 150 mg of nintedanib twice daily as compared with placebo in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. The primary end point was the annual rate of decline in forced vital capacity (FVC). Key secondary end points were the time to the first acute exacerbation and the change from baseline in the total score on the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire, both assessed over a 52-week period. RESULTS: A total of 1066 patients were randomly assigned in a 3:2 ratio to receive nintedanib or placebo. The adjusted annual rate of change in FVC was -114.7 ml with nintedanib versus -239.9 ml with placebo (difference, 125.3 ml; 95% confidence interval [CI], 77.7 to 172.8; P<0.001) in INPULSIS-1 and -113.6 ml with nintedanib versus -207.3 ml with placebo (difference, 93.7 ml; 95% CI, 44.8 to 142.7; P<0.001) in INPULSIS-2. In INPULSIS-1, there was no significant difference between the nintedanib and placebo groups in the time to the first acute exacerbation (hazard ratio with nintedanib, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.54 to 2.42; P=0.67); in INPULSIS-2, there was a significant benefit with nintedanib versus placebo (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.77; P=0.005). The most frequent adverse event in the nintedanib groups was diarrhea, with rates of 61.5% and 18.6% in the nintedanib and placebo groups, respectively, in INPULSIS-1 and 63.2% and 18.3% in the two groups, respectively, in INPULSIS-2. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, nintedanib reduced the decline in FVC, which is consistent with a slowing of disease progression; nintedanib was frequently associated with diarrhea, which led to discontinuation of the study medication in less than 5% of patients. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; INPULSIS-1 and INPULSIS-2 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01335464 and NCT01335477.)