5 research outputs found

    Long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of efgartigimod (ADAPT+): interim results from a phase 3 open-label extension study in participants with generalized myasthenia gravis

    Get PDF
    ObjectiveADAPT+ assessed the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of efgartigimod in adult participants with generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG).MethodsADAPT+ was an open-label, single-arm, multicenter, up to 3-year extension of the pivotal phase 3 ADAPT study. Efgartigimod was administered in treatment cycles of 4 intravenous infusions (one 10 mg/kg infusion per week). Initiation of subsequent treatment cycles was individualized based on clinical evaluation. Safety endpoints included incidence and severity of adverse events. Efficacy endpoints assessed disease severity using Myasthenia Gravis-Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) and Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) scores.ResultsAs of January 2022, 151 participants had rolled over to ADAPT+ and 145 had received ≄1 dose of efgartigimod, of whom, 111 (76.6%) were AChR-Ab+ and 34 (23.4%) were AChR-Ab−. Mean study duration (treatment plus follow-up) was 548 days, and participants received up to 17 treatment cycles, corresponding to 217.6 participant-years of exposure. In the overall population, 123 (84.8%) participants reported ≄1 treatment-emergent adverse event; most frequent were headache (36 [24.8%]), COVID-19 (22 [15.2%]), and nasopharyngitis (20 [13.8%]). Clinically meaningful improvement (CMI) in mean MG-ADL and QMG scores was seen as early as 1 week following the first infusion across multiple cycles in AChR-Ab+ and AChR-Ab− participants. Maximal MG-ADL and QMG improvements aligned with onset and magnitude of total IgG and AChR-Ab reductions. For AChR-Ab+ participants at any time point in each of the first 10 treatment cycles, more than 90% had a maximum reduction of ≄2 points (CMI) in MG-ADL total score; across the 7 cycles in which QMG was measured, 69.4% to 91.3% of participants demonstrated a maximum reduction of ≄3 points (CMI) in QMG total score. Many participants demonstrated improvements well beyond CMI thresholds. In AChR-Ab+ participants with ≄1 year of combined follow-up between ADAPT and ADAPT+, mean number of annualized cycles was 4.7 per year (median [range] 5.0 [0.5–7.6]).ConclusionResults of ADAPT+ corroborate the substantial clinical improvements seen with efgartigimod in ADAPT and support its long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy, as well as an individualized dosing regimen for treatment of gMG.Clinical trial registrationhttps://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03770403, NCT03770403

    Long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of efgartigimod (ADAPT+): interim results from a phase 3 open-label extension study in participants with generalized myasthenia gravis

    Get PDF
    Objective ADAPT+ assessed the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of efgartigimod in adult participants with generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG). Methods ADAPT+ was an open-label, single-arm, multicenter, up to 3-year extension of the pivotal phase 3 ADAPT study. Efgartigimod was administered in treatment cycles of 4 intravenous infusions (one 10 mg/kg infusion per week). Initiation of subsequent treatment cycles was individualized based on clinical evaluation. Safety endpoints included incidence and severity of adverse events. Efficacy endpoints assessed disease severity using Myasthenia Gravis-Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) and Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) scores. Results As of January 2022, 151 participants had rolled over to ADAPT+ and 145 had received ≄1 dose of efgartigimod, of whom, 111 (76.6%) were AChR-Ab+ and 34 (23.4%) were AChR-Ab−. Mean study duration (treatment plus follow-up) was 548 days, and participants received up to 17 treatment cycles, corresponding to 217.6 participant-years of exposure. In the overall population, 123 (84.8%) participants reported ≄1 treatment-emergent adverse event; most frequent were headache (36 [24.8%]), COVID-19 (22 [15.2%]), and nasopharyngitis (20 [13.8%]). Clinically meaningful improvement (CMI) in mean MG-ADL and QMG scores was seen as early as 1 week following the first infusion across multiple cycles in AChR-Ab+ and AChR-Ab− participants. Maximal MG-ADL and QMG improvements aligned with onset and magnitude of total IgG and AChR-Ab reductions. For AChR-Ab+ participants at any time point in each of the first 10 treatment cycles, more than 90% had a maximum reduction of ≄2 points (CMI) in MG-ADL total score; across the 7 cycles in which QMG was measured, 69.4% to 91.3% of participants demonstrated a maximum reduction of ≄3 points (CMI) in QMG total score. Many participants demonstrated improvements well beyond CMI thresholds. In AChR-Ab+ participants with ≄1 year of combined follow-up between ADAPT and ADAPT+, mean number of annualized cycles was 4.7 per year (median [range] 5.0 [0.5–7.6]). Conclusion Results of ADAPT+ corroborate the substantial clinical improvements seen with efgartigimod in ADAPT and support its long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy, as well as an individualized dosing regimen for treatment of gMG. Clinical trial registrationhttps://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03770403, NCT03770403

    Ethical issues with the disclosure of surgical trial short-term data

    No full text
    Background: This paper describes the distinctions between major surgical and pharmaceutical trials and questions the application of a common ethical paradigm to guide their conduct and reporting. Methods: Surgical trials differ from other trials in cumulative therapeutic effects, operator dependence, the clinical setting, interdependence of short- and long-term outcomes, and equipoise. A principal tenant of randomized controlled trial management is the maintenance of interim data confidentiality. Its application to complete surgical short-term data is examined across a variety of common clinical trial circumstances that influence data integrity and the reliability of conclusions regarding the benefit-to-risk profile of experimental interventions. Results: Complete perioperative results describe important treatment ends that cannot influence primary outcomes. These short-term results may inform patient consent, teaching and provide valuable procedural insights to surgeons outside trial precincts. Conclusion: Structured experimentation standards are necessary. But, the common paradigm applied across all clinical trials and the prohibition on short term data reporting may not serve the achievement of safe and effective advancements in surgery.Randall A. Allardyce, Philip F. Bagshaw, Christopher M. Frampton, Francis A. Frizelle, Peter J. Hewett, Nicholas A Rieger, J. Shona Smith, Michael J. Solomon and Andrew R. L. Stevenso
    corecore