Efficacy and optimal dosing interval of the long-acting beta2 agonist, vilanterol, in persistent asthma: A randomised trial

SummaryBackgroundVilanterol (VI) is a novel once-daily long-acting beta2 agonist with inherent 24-h activity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of three once-daily doses and one twice-daily dose of VI used concurrently with ICS in adult patients (≥18 years) with persistent asthma. Safety was also assessed.MethodsMulticentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, five-period crossover study consisting of 7-day treatment periods separated by 7-day wash-out periods. Seventy-five patients, maintained on ICS, received VI 6.25, 12.5 and 25 mcg once-daily (evening), VI 6.25 mcg twice-daily (morning/evening), and placebo. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (mean of 23 h and 24 h post evening dose) on Day 7; secondary endpoint was weighted mean 24-h serial FEV1 on Day 7.ResultsAll VI groups demonstrated statistically significant increases in trough FEV1 versus placebo (p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant increase in weighted mean 24-h FEV1 for each VI group versus placebo (p < 0.001). The effects of once-daily VI on trough FEV1 and weighted mean 24-h FEV1 were dose dependent. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was low in each VI treatment group and was not dose dependent (5–9%; placebo = 18%); no drug-related AEs or serious AEs were reported.ConclusionOnce-daily treatment with VI was well tolerated and associated with improvements in lung function. The VI 6.25 mcg twice-daily dose showed the greatest change in trough FEV1, however, similar changes in weighted mean 24-h FEV1 with VI 12.5 mcg once-daily were observed. Although our study was not powered to demonstrate non-inferiority of once- versus twice-daily dosing of VI, the data suggest no advantage over a 24-h period of twice-daily over once-daily dosing for the same total daily dose.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00980200

A non-conserved amino acid variant regulates differential signalling between human and mouse CD28

CD28 superagonistic antibodies (CD28SAb) can preferentially activate and expand immunosuppressive regulatory T cells (Treg) in mice. However, pre-clinical trials assessing CD28SAbs for the therapy of autoimmune diseases reveal severe systemic inflammatory response syndrome in humans, thereby implying the existence of distinct signalling abilities between human and mouse CD28. Here, we show that a single amino acid variant within the C-terminal proline-rich motif of human and mouse CD28 (P212 in human vs. A210 in mouse) regulates CD28-induced NF-κB activation and pro-inflammatory cytokine gene expression. Moreover, this Y209APP212 sequence in humans is crucial for the association of CD28 with the Nck adaptor protein for actin cytoskeleton reorganisation events necessary for CD28 autonomous signalling. This study thus unveils different outcomes between human and mouse CD28 signalling to underscore the importance of species difference when transferring results from preclinical models to the bedside

Efficacy and safety of fluticasone furoate 100 μg and 200 μg once daily in the treatment of moderate-severe asthma in adults and adolescents: a 24-week randomised study

Background: Inhaled corticosteroids are a mainstay of therapy for persistent asthma, but suboptimal adherence with twice-daily use is widespread. Fluticasone furoate (FF) is a new inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) suitable for once-daily dosing in asthma. This study was performed to descriptively assess the efficacy and safety of two doses of FF, with no planned formal statistical hypothesis testing. Methods: This was a 24-week double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group study (NCT01431950). Patients aged ≥ 12 years with moderate-severe persistent asthma and uncontrolled on mid-high dose ICS were stratified by baseline FEV1 and randomised (1:1) to treatment with FF 100 μg or 200 μg once daily in the evening. The primary endpoint was change from baseline trough FEV1 after 24 weeks; secondary and other endpoints included peak expiratory flow (PEF) and rescue-free and symptom-free 24-hour periods over Weeks 1–24, and Asthma Control Test™ (ACT) score at Week 24. A pre-specified subgroup analysis of patients by randomisation strata was performed for the primary and selected secondary and other endpoints. Safety assessments included adverse events, laboratory and vital sign measurements, and change from baseline in 24-hour urinary cortisol at Week 24. Results: With FF 100 μg and 200 μg, least squares mean trough FEV1 improved from baseline by 208 mL and 284 mL, respectively, at Week 24; treatment difference: 77 mL (95% CI: –39, 192). Similar improvements from baseline in rescue- and symptom-free periods, and morning and evening PEF were observed in both groups. Patients were 42% more likely to be well-controlled (ACT score ≥ 20) with FF 200 μg than with FF 100 μg. Slightly more patients receiving FF 200 μg vs. FF 100 μg reported adverse events (63% vs. 59%) and events deemed treatment related (5% vs. <1%). Seven serious adverse events (FF 200 μg 4; FF 100 μg 3) were reported, none of which were deemed treatment related. No clinically relevant effects of either dose on 24-hour urinary cortisol were observed. Conclusion: Improvements from baseline in trough FEV1 were observed after 24 weeks of treatment with both doses of FF, with a numerically greater improvement in FEV1 observed in patients receiving FF 200 μg. Secondary endpoint findings were similar between groups. No safety concerns were identified during the study

Efficacy and safety of once-daily fluticasone furoate 50 mcg in adults with persistent asthma: a 12-week randomized trial

Abstract Background Fluticasone furoate (FF) is a novel, once-daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) that has been shown to improve lung function vs. placebo in asthma patients. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of FF 50 mcg compared with placebo in asthma patients uncontrolled by non-ICS therapy. Methods This 12-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase III study randomized 248 patients (aged ≥12 years) to once-daily FF 50 mcg administered via the ELLIPTA™a dry powder inhaler or placebo. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in pre-dose evening trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). Secondary endpoints were change from baseline in percentage of rescue-free 24-h periods (powered), evening and morning peak expiratory flow, symptom-free 24-h periods and withdrawals due to lack of efficacy. Other endpoints included Asthma Control Test™, Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire and ELLIPTA ease of use questions. Safety was assessed throughout the study. Results There was a significant difference in evening trough FEV1 between FF 50 mcg and placebo (treatment difference: 120 mL; p = 0.012). There was also a significant difference in rescue-free 24-h periods (11.6%; p = 0.004) vs. placebo. There were numerically greater improvements with FF vs. placebo for all remaining secondary endpoints. The incidence of adverse events was lower with FF (31%) than with placebo (38%); few were treatment-related (FF 50 mcg: n = 1, <1%; placebo: n = 4, 3%). Conclusion FF 50 mcg once daily significantly improved FEV1 and percentage of rescue-free 24-h periods experienced over 12 weeks vs. placebo, and was well tolerated. Trial registration www.clinicaltrials.gov , registration number: NCT0143607

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Effectiveness of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol on asthma control in the Salford Lung Study

Objective: The Asthma Salford Lung Study demonstrated the effectiveness of initiating once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) versus continuing usual care in asthma patients in UK primary care [1]. Here, we report a secondary analysis in a subset of patients with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/Salm) as their baseline intended maintenance therapy, to evaluate the relative effectiveness of initiating FF/VI versus continuing FP/Salm. Methods: Adults with symptomatic asthma were randomised to initiate FF/VI 100[200]/25 µg or continue FP/Salm. The Asthma Control Test (ACT), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Asthma questionnaire, severe exacerbations, salbutamol inhaler prescriptions and serious adverse events (SAEs) were recorded throughout the 12-month treatment period. Results: One thousand two hundred and sixty-four patients (FF/VI 646; FP/Salm 618) were included in this subset analysis; 978 had baseline ACT score p Conclusions: For patients in primary care, initiating FF/VI was significantly better than continuing with FP/Salm for improving asthma control and quality of life, and reducing asthma exacerbations, with no notable difference in SAEs. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01706198. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01706198.</p

Once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol <i>versus</i> twice-daily fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in patients with asthma well controlled on ICS/LABA

<p><i>Objective</i>: We aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority of once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 µg (FF/VI) to twice-daily fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 µg (FP/SAL) in adults/adolescents with asthma well controlled on inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂ agonist (ICS/LABA). <i>Methods</i>: This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, 24-week study (NCT02301975/GSK study 201378). Patients whose asthma met study-defined criteria for control were randomized 1:1:1 to receive FF/VI, FP/SAL or twice-daily FP 250 µg for 24 weeks. Primary endpoint was change from baseline in evening trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁). Secondary endpoints included rescue-/symptom-free 24-hour periods. Safety was also assessed. <i>Results</i>: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included 1504 randomized and treated patients (504 FF/VI; 501 FP/SAL; 499 FP); mean age 43.5 years, 64% female. FF/VI demonstrated non-inferiority (using a margin of −100 mL) to FP/SAL for evening trough FEV₁ at Week 24 (ITT: 19 mL [95% confidence interval (CI) −11 to 49]; per protocol population [<i>N</i> = 1336]: 6 mL [95% CI −27 to 40]). Improvement in evening trough FEV₁ at Week 24 for both FF/VI (123 mL; <i>p</i> < 0.001) and FP/SAL (104 mL; <i>p</i> < 0.001) was greater than FP. FF/VI increased rescue-/symptom-free 24-hour periods by 1.2%/1.2% compared with FP/SAL. All treatments were well tolerated. On-treatment adverse event (AE) rates were 43% to 45% across arms; there were no drug-related serious AEs. <i>Conclusions</i>: FF/VI was non-inferior to FP/SAL for evening trough FEV₁ at 24 weeks. These data suggest that patients well controlled on FP/SAL could step across to FF/VI without loss of control.</p