MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2992673177 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-128929

Breakthrough Hemolysis in Adult Patients with Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria Treated with Ravulizumab: Results of a 52-Week Extension from Two Phase 3 Studies

2019· article· en· W2992673177 sur OpenAlexaff
Anita Hill, Caroline Piatek, Régis Peffault de Latour, Lily Wong, Richard A. Wells, Robert A. Brodsky, Jin Seok Kim, Jun‐ichi Nishimura, Philip Kuriakose, Rodrigo Pavani, Peng Liu, Stephan Ortiz, Hubert Schrezenmeier, Jong‐Wook Lee, Austin Kulasekararaj

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiqueComplement system in diseases
Établissements canadiensHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésParoxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuriaMedicineEculizumabHemoglobinuriaInternal medicineAdverse effectAnemiaSurrogate endpointGastroenterologySurgeryImmunologyComplement systemAntibody

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION In patients (pts) with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) receiving eculizumab, approximately 11%-27% may experience breakthrough hemolysis (BTH)-the return of hemolytic disease activity. BTH may be associated with inadequate C5 inhibition or complement-activating conditions (CACs; eg, infection). Although there is no broad consensus regarding the definition of BTH, this study defined BTH based on literature review and expert consensus: ≥1 new or worsening sign or symptom of intravascular hemolysis (fatigue, hemoglobinuria, abdominal pain, dyspnea, anemia [hemoglobin <10 g/dL], major adverse vascular event [including thrombosis], dysphagia, or erectile dysfunction) in the presence of elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (≥2 × ULN) after prior LDH reduction to <1.5 × ULN on therapy. Ravulizumab, an innovative long-acting C5 complement inhibitor, was recently approved in the United States, Japan, and Europe for the treatment of PNH. In two phase 3 trials, ALXN1210-PNH-301 (301; NCT02946463) and ALXN1210-PNH-302 (302; NCT03056040), ravulizumab (q8w) was shown to be noninferior to eculizumab 900 mg (q2w) for all primary and key secondary endpoints (including BTH). Each study had a 26-wk randomized primary evaluation period, followed by an extension period during which pts could receive ravulizumab for up to 2 y. In the current analysis, pt-level data were evaluated to assess causes and clinical parameters associated with BTH incidences reported up to 1 y in the two phase 3 trials. METHODS The trials were phase 3, randomized, open-label, noninferiority, multicenter studies. Eligible pts were ≥18 y with confirmed PNH diagnosis. Pts in study 301 were naive to C5 inhibitor therapy, with LDH of ≥1.5 × ULN and ≥1 sign/symptom of PNH at screening. Pts in study 302 were stable receiving eculizumab treatment for ≥6 mo, with LDH of ≤1.5 × ULN at screening. Pts received weight-based dosing of ravulizumab q8w or the approved eculizumab dose (900 mg q2w) for 183 d; in the extension, eligible pts continued (R-R arm) or switched to ravulizumab (E-R arm). The outcome of interest was the proportion of pts with BTH during the extensions of 301 and 302 (wks 27-52), causes, and clinical parameters associated with BTH incidents. BTH causation was determined by clinical review and categorized as related to inadequate C5 inhibition (free C5 ≥0.5 μg/mL), CAC due to an inciting event (eg, infection, trauma, surgery), or unrelated to either event. RESULTS Study 301: 243 pts entered the extension period (R-R arm: n=124; E-R arm: n=119). In both groups, 99% of pts who had no BTH during wks 0-26 experienced no BTH incidents during wks 27-52. Four pts in the R-R arm experienced BTH during wks 27-52, of which 3 pts had experienced BTH during wks 0-26. In the E-R arm, there were fewer BTH events during wks 27-52 compared with wks 0-26 (Table A). Two pts experienced BTH after switching to ravulizumab in the E-R arm, of which 1 had experienced BTH during wks 0-26. During wks 27-52, 2 BTH events (1 in each arm) were associated with infection and 4 BTH events in the R-R arm and 1 in the E-R arm were unrelated to free C5 elevation or reported infection. Study 302: 191 pts entered the extension period (R-R arm: n=96; E-R arm: n=95). Of these pts, 97% in the R-R arm and 100% in the E-R arm who had no BTH during wks 0-26 had no BTH incidents during wks 27-52. Three pts in the R-R arm experienced BTH during wks 27-52. In the E-R arm, there were fewer BTH events during wks 27-52 compared with wks 0-26 (Table B). One pt experienced BTH after switching to ravulizumab; this pt previously experienced BTH during wks 0-26. During wks 27-52, 2 BTH events in the R-R arm and 1 event in the E-R arm were associated with infection, and 1 BTH event in the R-R arm was unrelated to free C5 elevation or reported infection. In both studies, no BTH incidents were associated with free C5 of >0.5 μg/mL (the threshold associated with complete inhibition of C5) during wks 27-52 while on ravulizumab treatment. CONCLUSIONS During wks 27-52, in both studies, the number of pts who experienced BTH events was similar to that in wks 0-26 in the R-R group, and fewer pts experienced BTH events after switching from eculizumab to ravulizumab. No BTH events were associated with elevations in free C5 to >0.5 μg/mL in pts taking ravulizumab. Similar numbers of pts initially receiving ravulizumab or eculizumab experienced infection-related BTH events, possibly due to proximal complement activation. Disclosures Hill: Bioverativ: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria; Regeneron: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Apellis: Honoraria; Akari: Honoraria; Ra Pharma: Honoraria. Piatek:Alexion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Dova: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Rigel: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Research Funding. Peffault de Latour:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Wells:Alexion: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Brodsky:Achillion: Research Funding; Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grant funding. Nishimura:Alexion: Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kuriakose:Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy. Pavani:Alexion: Employment. Liu:Alexion: Employment. Ortiz:Alexion: Employment. Schrezenmeier:Alexion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lee:Achillion: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kulasekararaj:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Akari Therapeutics: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Achilleon: Consultancy; Ra Pharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,409
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,866

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,258
Écart entre enseignants0,245 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetComplement system in diseasesTravaux en français237 207