BACKGROUND: This phase 3 study further characterizes the efficacy and safety of reslizumab (a humanized anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibody) in patients aged 12 to 75 years with asthma inadequately controlled by at least a medium-dose inhaled corticosteroid and with a blood eosinophil count ≥ 400 cells/μL.
METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive reslizumab 0.3 or 3.0 mg/kg or placebo administered once every 4 weeks for 16 weeks (total four doses). The primary end point was change from baseline in pre-bronchodilator FEV1 over 16 weeks. Secondary end points included FVC, forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% of FVC (FEF25%-75%), patient-reported control of asthma symptoms, short-acting β-agonist (SABA) use, blood eosinophil levels, and safety.
RESULTS: Reslizumab significantly improved FEV1 (difference vs placebo [reslizumab 0.3 and 3.0 mg/kg], 115 mL [95% CI, 16-215; P = .0237] and 160 mL [95% CI, 60-259; P = .0018]). Clinically meaningful increases in FVC (130 mL) and FEF25%-75% (233 mL/s) were observed with reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg. Reslizumab improved scores on the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) vs placebo (greater effects seen with 3.0 mg/kg; P < .05). The minimally important difference was reached for the AQLQ (reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg) but not on the ACQ. Scores on the Asthma Symptom Utility Index and SABA use were improved with reslizumab. The most common adverse events were worsening of asthma, headache, and nasopharyngitis; most events were mild to moderate in severity.
CONCLUSIONS: Reslizumab improved lung function, asthma control and symptoms, and quality of life. It was well tolerated in patients with inadequately controlled asthma (despite standard therapy) and elevated blood eosinophil levels. Overall, the 3.0-mg/kg dose of reslizumab provided greater improvements in asthma outcomes vs the 0.3-mg/kg dose, with comparable safety.
TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01270464; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
BACKGROUND: IL-5, a mediator of eosinophil activity, is an important potential treatment target in patients with uncontrolled asthma. The efficacy of reslizumab, a humanized anti-human IL-5 monoclonal antibody, has been characterized in patients with blood eosinophils ≥ 400 cells/μL. This study further characterizes the efficacy and safety of reslizumab in patients with poorly-controlled asthma, particularly those with eosinophils < 400 cells/μL.
METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to intravenous reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg or placebo once every 4 weeks for 16 weeks. The primary end point was the change in FEV1 from baseline to week 16. Secondary measures included Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 (ACQ-7) scores, use of short-acting β-agonists (SABAs), and FVC.
RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-two patients received ≥ 1 dose of placebo (n = 97) or reslizumab (n = 395). In the overall population, mean FEV1 change from baseline to week 16 was not significantly different between reslizumab and placebo, and no significant relationship was detected between treatment, baseline blood eosinophils and change in FEV1. In the subgroup of patients with baseline eosinophils < 400 cells/μL, patients treated with reslizumab showed no significant improvement in FEV1 compared with those receiving placebo. In the subgroup with eosinophils ≥ 400 cells/μL, however, treatment with reslizumab was associated with much larger improvements in FEV1, ACQ-7, rescue SABA use, and FVC compared with the placebo group. Reslizumab was well tolerated, with fewer overall adverse events compared with placebo (55% vs 73%).
CONCLUSIONS: Reslizumab was well tolerated in patients with inadequately controlled asthma. Clinically meaningful effects on lung function and symptom control were not seen in patients unselected for baseline eosinophils.
TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01508936; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
BACKGROUND: Elevated numbers of blood eosinophils are a risk factor for asthma exacerbations. Reslizumab is a humanised anti-interleukin 5 monoclonal antibody that disrupts eosinophil maturation and promotes programmed cell death. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of reslizumab in patients with inadequately controlled, moderate-to-severe asthma.
METHODS: We did two duplicate, multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials. Both trials enrolled patients with asthma aged 12-75 years (from 128 clinical research centres in study 1 and 104 centres in study 2) from Asia, Australia, North America, South America, South Africa, and Europe, whose asthma was inadequately controlled by medium-to-high doses of inhaled corticosteroid based therapy and who had blood eosinophils of 400 cells per μL or higher and one or more exacerbations in the previous year. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either intravenous reslizumab (3·0 mg/kg) or placebo every 4 weeks for 1 year by computerised central randomisation. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment during the study. Each patient received a specific volume of study drug (reslizumab or matching placebo) on the basis of the patient's body weight and randomly assigned treatment group. Additionally, the sponsor's clinical personnel involved in the study were masked to the study drug identity until the database was locked for analysis and the treatment assignment revealed. The primary outcome was the annual frequency of clinical asthma exacerbations and was analysed by intention to treat. We assessed safety outcomes in the patients who had received one or more dose of the drug. The trials have been completed and are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01287039 (study 1) and NCT01285323 (study 2).
FINDINGS: Study 1 was done between April 12, 2011, and March 3, 2014 and study 2 between March 22, 2011, and April 9, 2014. Of 2597 patients screened, 953 were randomly assigned to receive either reslizumab (n=477 [245 in study 1 and 232 in study 2]) or placebo (n=476 [244 and 232]). In both studies, patients receiving reslizumab had a significant reduction in the frequency of asthma exacerbations (study 1: rate ratio [RR] 0·50 [95% CI 0·37-0·67]; study 2: 0·41 [0·28-0·59]; both p<0·0001) compared with those receiving placebo. Common adverse events on reslizumab were similar to placebo. The most common adverse events were worsening asthma symptoms (127 [52%] for placebo and 97 [40%] for reslizumab in study 1; 119 [51%] for placebo and 67 [29%] for reslizumab for study 2), upper respiratory tract infections (32 [13%] and 39 [16%]; 16 [7%] and eight [3%]), and nasopharyngitis (33 [14%] and 28 [11%]; 56 [24%] and 45 [19%]). Two patients in the reslizumab group had anaphylactic reactions; both responded to standard treatment at the study centre and resolved, and the patients were withdrawn from the study.
INTERPRETATION: These results support the use of reslizumab in patients with asthma and elevated blood eosinophil counts who are inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroid-based therapy.
FUNDING: Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D.
<b>Rationale: </b>Eosinophilic asthma is a phenotype of asthma characterized by the persistence of eosinophils in the airways. IL-5 is involved in the activation and survival of eosinophils.<b>OBJECTIVES: </b>To evaluate the effect of the antibody to IL-5, reslizumab, in patients with eosinophilic asthma that is poorly controlled with high-dose inhaled corticosteroid.<b>METHODS: </b>Patients were randomly assigned to receive infusions of reslizumab at 3.0 mg/kg (n = 53) or placebo (n = 53) at baseline and at Weeks 4, 8, and 12, with stratification by baseline Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score less than or equal to 2 or greater than 2. The primary efficacy measure was the difference between the reslizumab and placebo groups in the change in ACQ score from baseline to end of therapy (Week 15 or early withdrawal).<b>MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: </b>Mean changes from baseline to end of therapy in ACQ score were -0.7 in the reslizumab group and -0.3 in the placebo group (P = 0.054) and in FEV(1) were 0.18 and -0.08 L, respectively (P = 0.002). In those patients with nasal polyps, the changes in ACQ score were -1.0 and -0.1, respectively (P = 0.012). Median percentage reductions from baseline in sputum eosinophils were 95.4 and 38.7%, respectively (P = 0.007). Eight percent of patients in the reslizumab group and 19% of patients in the placebo group had an asthma exacerbation (P = 0.083). The most common adverse events with reslizumab were nasopharyngitis, fatigue, and pharyngolaryngeal pain.<b>CONCLUSIONS: </b>Patients receiving reslizumab showed significantly greater reductions in sputum eosinophils, improvements in airway function, and a trend toward greater asthma control than those receiving placebo. Reslizumab was generally well tolerated.
This phase 3 study further characterizes the efficacy and safety of reslizumab (a humanized anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibody) in patients aged 12 to 75 years with asthma inadequately controlled by at least a medium-dose inhaled corticosteroid and with a blood eosinophil count ≥ 400 cells/μL.
METHODS:
Patients were randomized to receive reslizumab 0.3 or 3.0 mg/kg or placebo administered once every 4 weeks for 16 weeks (total four doses). The primary end point was change from baseline in pre-bronchodilator FEV1 over 16 weeks. Secondary end points included FVC, forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% of FVC (FEF25%-75%), patient-reported control of asthma symptoms, short-acting β-agonist (SABA) use, blood eosinophil levels, and safety.
RESULTS:
Reslizumab significantly improved FEV1 (difference vs placebo [reslizumab 0.3 and 3.0 mg/kg], 115 mL [95% CI, 16-215; P = .0237] and 160 mL [95% CI, 60-259; P = .0018]). Clinically meaningful increases in FVC (130 mL) and FEF25%-75% (233 mL/s) were observed with reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg. Reslizumab improved scores on the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) vs placebo (greater effects seen with 3.0 mg/kg; P < .05). The minimally important difference was reached for the AQLQ (reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg) but not on the ACQ. Scores on the Asthma Symptom Utility Index and SABA use were improved with reslizumab. The most common adverse events were worsening of asthma, headache, and nasopharyngitis; most events were mild to moderate in severity.
CONCLUSIONS:
Reslizumab improved lung function, asthma control and symptoms, and quality of life. It was well tolerated in patients with inadequately controlled asthma (despite standard therapy) and elevated blood eosinophil levels. Overall, the 3.0-mg/kg dose of reslizumab provided greater improvements in asthma outcomes vs the 0.3-mg/kg dose, with comparable safety.
