Atrasentan and renal events in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease (SONAR): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Short-term treatment for people with type 2 diabetes using a low dose of the selective endothelin A receptor antagonist atrasentan reduces albuminuria without causing significant sodium retention. We report the long-term effects of treatment with atrasentan on major renal outcomes. Methods: We did this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial at 689 sites in 41 countries. We enrolled adults aged 18–85 years with type 2 diabetes, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)25–75 mL/min per 1·73 m 2 of body surface area, and a urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR)of 300–5000 mg/g who had received maximum labelled or tolerated renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 4 weeks. Participants were given atrasentan 0·75 mg orally daily during an enrichment period before random group assignment. Those with a UACR decrease of at least 30% with no substantial fluid retention during the enrichment period (responders)were included in the double-blind treatment period. Responders were randomly assigned to receive either atrasentan 0·75 mg orally daily or placebo. All patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was a composite of doubling of serum creatinine (sustained for ≥30 days)or end-stage kidney disease (eGFR <15 mL/min per 1·73 m 2 sustained for ≥90 days, chronic dialysis for ≥90 days, kidney transplantation, or death from kidney failure)in the intention-to-treat population of all responders. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned study treatment. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01858532. Findings: Between May 17, 2013, and July 13, 2017, 11 087 patients were screened; 5117 entered the enrichment period, and 4711 completed the enrichment period. Of these, 2648 patients were responders and were randomly assigned to the atrasentan group (n=1325)or placebo group (n=1323). Median follow-up was 2·2 years (IQR 1·4–2·9). 79 (6·0%)of 1325 patients in the atrasentan group and 105 (7·9%)of 1323 in the placebo group had a primary composite renal endpoint event (hazard ratio [HR]0·65 [95% CI 0·49–0·88]; p=0·0047). Fluid retention and anaemia adverse events, which have been previously attributed to endothelin receptor antagonists, were more frequent in the atrasentan group than in the placebo group. Hospital admission for heart failure occurred in 47 (3·5%)of 1325 patients in the atrasentan group and 34 (2·6%)of 1323 patients in the placebo group (HR 1·33 [95% CI 0·85–2·07]; p=0·208). 58 (4·4%)patients in the atrasentan group and 52 (3·9%)in the placebo group died (HR 1·09 [95% CI 0·75–1·59]; p=0·65). Interpretation: Atrasentan reduced the risk of renal events in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease who were selected to optimise efficacy and safety. These data support a potential role for selective endothelin receptor antagonists in protecting renal function in patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk of developing end-stage kidney disease. Funding: AbbVie

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of cedirogant from phase I studies in healthy participants and patients with chronic plaque psoriasis.

Cedirogant is an inverse agonist of retinoic acid-related orphan receptor gamma thymus (RORγt) developed for the treatment of moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis. Here, we report the results from two phase I studies in which the pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and efficacy of cedirogant in healthy participants and patients with moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis were evaluated. The studies consisted of single (20-750 mg) and multiple (75-375 mg once-daily [q.d.]) ascending dose designs, with effect of food and itraconazole on cedirogant exposure also evaluated. Safety and PK were evaluated for both healthy participants and psoriasis patients, and efficacy was assessed in psoriasis patients. Following single and multiple doses, cedirogant mean terminal half-life ranged from 16 to 28 h and median time to reach maximum plasma concentration ranged from 2 to 5 h across both populations. Cedirogant plasma exposures were dose-proportional after single doses and less than dose-proportional from 75 to 375 mg q.d. doses. Steady-state concentrations were achieved within 12 days. Accumulation ratios ranged from approximately 1.2 to 1.8 across tested doses. Food had minimal effect and itraconazole had limited impact on cedirogant exposure. No discontinuations or serious adverse events due to cedirogant were recorded. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and Self-Assessment of Psoriasis Symptoms (SAPS) assessments demonstrated numerical improvement with treatment of cedirogant 375 mg q.d. compared with placebo. The PK, safety, and efficacy profiles of cedirogant supported advancing it to phase II clinical trial in psoriasis patients

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of cedirogant from phase I studies in healthy participants and patients with chronic plaque psoriasis

Abstract Cedirogant is an inverse agonist of retinoic acid‐related orphan receptor gamma thymus (RORγt) developed for the treatment of moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis. Here, we report the results from two phase I studies in which the pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and efficacy of cedirogant in healthy participants and patients with moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis were evaluated. The studies consisted of single (20–750 mg) and multiple (75–375 mg once‐daily [q.d.]) ascending dose designs, with effect of food and itraconazole on cedirogant exposure also evaluated. Safety and PK were evaluated for both healthy participants and psoriasis patients, and efficacy was assessed in psoriasis patients. Following single and multiple doses, cedirogant mean terminal half‐life ranged from 16 to 28 h and median time to reach maximum plasma concentration ranged from 2 to 5 h across both populations. Cedirogant plasma exposures were dose‐proportional after single doses and less than dose‐proportional from 75 to 375 mg q.d. doses. Steady‐state concentrations were achieved within 12 days. Accumulation ratios ranged from approximately 1.2 to 1.8 across tested doses. Food had minimal effect and itraconazole had limited impact on cedirogant exposure. No discontinuations or serious adverse events due to cedirogant were recorded. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and Self‐Assessment of Psoriasis Symptoms (SAPS) assessments demonstrated numerical improvement with treatment of cedirogant 375 mg q.d. compared with placebo. The PK, safety, and efficacy profiles of cedirogant supported advancing it to phase II clinical trial in psoriasis patients

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health