Search

Objectives: The type I interferon pathway is a promising target for treatment of patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). Here, we describe the design of a multinational, randomised phase 3 study to Determine the effectiveness of the type I interferon receptor antibody, Anifrolumab, In SYstemic sclerosis (DAISY)., Methods: DAISY includes a 52-week double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment period, a 52-week open-label active treatment period, and a 12-week safety follow-up period. The patient population includes a planned 306 adults with limited or diffuse cutaneous active SSc who satisfied American College of Rheumatology/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology 2013 SSc criteria. Use of standard immunosuppressants, including mycophenolate mofetil, at a stable dose prior to randomisation is permitted in addition to weekly subcutaneous anifrolumab or placebo. Efficacy will be assessed at Week 52 via Revised-Composite Response Index in SSc (CRISS)-25 response (primary endpoint). Lung function and skin thickness will be assessed via change from baseline in forced vital capacity in patients with SSc-associated interstitial lung disease and modified Rodnan Skin Score, respectively (key secondary endpoints)., Conclusions: The DAISY trial will evaluate the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab as a first-in-class treatment option for patients with both limited and diffuse cutaneous SSc and will provide insight into the contributions of type I interferon to SSc pathogenesis. Revised-CRISS-25 can account for improvement and worsening in a broad set of validated clinical measures beyond lung function and skin thickness, including clinician- and patient-reported outcomes, capturing the heterogeneity of SSc.

Introduction: Anifrolumab is a type I interferon (IFN) receptor 1 (IFNAR1) blocking antibody approved for treating patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Here, we investigated the immunomodulatory mechanisms of anifrolumab using longitudinal transcriptomic and proteomic analyses of the 52-week, randomised, phase 3 TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials., Methods: Patients with moderate to severe SLE were enrolled in TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 and received intravenous anifrolumab or placebo alongside standard therapy. Whole-blood expression of 18 017 genes using genome-wide RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) (pooled TULIP; anifrolumab, n=244; placebo, n=258) and 184 plasma proteins using Olink and Simoa panels (TULIP-1; anifrolumab, n=124; placebo, n=132) were analysed. We compared treatment groups via gene set enrichment analysis using MetaBase pathway analysis, blood transcriptome modules, in silico deconvolution of RNA-seq and longitudinal linear mixed effect models for gene counts and protein levels., Results: Compared with placebo, anifrolumab modulated >2000 genes by week 24, with overlapping results at week 52, and 41 proteins by week 52. IFNAR1 blockade with anifrolumab downregulated multiple type I and II IFN-induced gene modules/pathways and type III IFN-λ protein levels, and impacted apoptosis-associated and neutrophil extracellular traps-(NET)osis-associated transcriptional pathways, innate cell activating chemokines and receptors, proinflammatory cytokines and B-cell activating cytokines. In silico deconvolution of RNA-seq data indicated an increase from baseline of mucosal-associated invariant and γδT cells and a decrease of monocytes following anifrolumab treatment., Discussion: Type I IFN blockade with anifrolumab modulated multiple inflammatory pathways downstream of type I IFN signalling, including apoptotic, innate and adaptive mechanisms that play key roles in SLE immunopathogenesis., Competing Interests: Competing interests: TB is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca; HS is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca; PJN was an employee of AstraZeneca at the time the study was being conducted and is an employee and stock holder of GSK; PGG is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca; MNL was an employee of AstraZeneca at the time the study was being conducted; MR was an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca at the time the study was being conducted and is an employee and stock holder of GSK; WIW is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca; is applying for two patents (No. 17/999257; No. 18/556733); NF is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca; DM is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca; RT is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca; EFM received grants/contracts from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, BMS, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Takeda and UCB; received consulting feed from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Capella, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Galapagos, IGM, Novartis, Servier, Wolf, and Zenas; received payment/honoraria from AstraZeneca, BMS, GSK, and Roche; received support for meetings/travel from AstraZeneca and Roche; participated on Data Safety Monitoring/Advisory Boards of AstraZeneca, EMD Serono, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, and Takeda; is the Board Director of Rare Voices Australia and Exosome Biosciences Pty; RAF received grants/contracts, consulting fees, payment/honoraria, and support for attending meetings/travel from AstraZeneca and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring/Advisory Board of AstraZeneca; EMV received grants/contracts from AstraZeneca and Sandoz; consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, CESAS, Elli Lilly, Novartis, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, UCB; payment/honoraria from AstraZeneca, Novastis and Otsuka; support for attending meetings/travel from Otsuka; participated on Data Safety Monitoring/Advisory Boards of Aurinia; is the General Secretary in SLEuro; CC is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca; AP is an employee and stockholder of AstraZeneca; HA-M was an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca at the time the study was being conducted; PZB is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca; EC is an employee and stock holder of AstraZeneca., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ on behalf of EULAR.)

Objective: The longitudinal Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Prospective Observational Cohort Study (SPOCS) aims to assess SLE disease course overall and according to type I interferon 4 gene signature (IFNGS). Here, we describe SPOCS patient characteristics by IFNGS and baseline disease activity., Methods: SPOCS (NCT03189875) is an international study of patients with SLE according to Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria. Enrolled patients from 135 centres in 8 countries were followed biannually for ≤3 years from June 2017 to November 2022. Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, organ system involvement/damage and flares were analysed descriptively according to SLE Disease Activity Index-2000 score (SLEDAI-2K <10/≥10) and IFNGS status (high/low)., Results: The study population (n=823) was 93.2% female, with mean (SD) age 45.3 (13.9) years and 11.1 (9.2) years since diagnosis; 52.4% had baseline SLICC/ACR Damage Index score ≥1. Patients with SLEDAI-2K scores ≥10 (241 of 584, 41.3%) vs <10 were younger (mean 42.8 (13.7) vs 46.6 (14.2) years; nominal p=0.001), had shorter SLE duration (10.4 (8.6) vs 12.4 (9.6) years; nominal p=0.012) and more severe flares (12.9% vs 5.3%; nominal p=0.001). IFNGS-high patients (522 of 739, 70.6%) were younger than IFNGS-low patients at first SLE manifestation (30.0 (12.7) vs 36.8 (14.6) years; nominal p<0.001). Proportions of IFNGS-high patients differed according to race (nominal p<0.001), with higher proportions among Asian (83.3%) and black (86.5%) versus white patients (63.5%). Greater proportions of IFNGS-high versus IFNGS-low patients had haematological (12.6% vs 4.1%), immunological (74.4% vs 45.6%) or dermal (69.7% vs 62.2%) involvement., Conclusions: We identified key characteristics of patients with high disease activity and/or elevated type I IFN signalling, populations with SLE with high unmet needs. Baseline SLEDAI-2K ≥10 was associated with shorter disease duration and more severe flares. IFNGS-high patients were younger at diagnosis and had distinct patterns of organ involvement, compared with IFNGS-low patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LA received consulting fees, speaking fees or grant/research support from AstraZeneca. RF received speaking fees or grant/research support from AstraZeneca and Genentech. EFM received consulting, speaking fees, honoraria and/or research support from AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Sandoz and Servier. MA received consulting or speaking fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Galapagos, GSK, HEXAL, Lilly, MSD, Mylan, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi and UCB. CP received consulting or grant/research support from AstraZeneca and GSK. CS, JH, JK, TGE, RT, BDe and BDi are employees of and own shares of AstraZeneca. ER is an employee of AstraZeneca. AS is a shareholder of Galapagos, Abbott Laboratories, Gilead Sciences and Moderna; and is an employee of AstraZeneca. HAS-F is an employee of AstraZeneca and holds shares of AstraZeneca and GSK., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Remission is the established therapeutic goal for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and is currently defined by the widely adopted Definition Of Remission In SLE (DORIS) criteria. Attainment of remission is rare in the clinical setting, thus an alternative, pragmatic treatment target of low disease activity, as defined by the Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS), provides a less stringent and more attainable treatment goal for a wider proportion of patients compared with DORIS remission. Randomized controlled trials and real-world analyses have confirmed the positive clinical benefits of achieving either DORIS remission or LLDAS. The treat-to-target (T2T) approach utilizes practical clinical targets to proactively tailor individual treatment regimens. Studies in other chronic inflammatory diseases using the T2T approach demonstrated significantly improved clinical outcomes and quality-of-life measures compared with established standard of care. However, such trials have not yet been performed in patients with SLE. Here we review the evolution of DORIS remission and LLDAS definitions and the evidence supporting the positive clinical outcomes following DORIS remission or LLDAS attainment, before discussing considerations for implementation of these outcome measures as potential T2T objectives. Adoption of DORIS remission and LLDAS treatment goals may result in favorable patient outcomes compared with established standard of care for patients with SLE., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: Determine the prevaccination healthcare impact of COVID-19 in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in England., Design: Retrospective cohort study of adult patients with SLE from 1 May to 31 October 2020., Setting: Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum and Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) databases from general practitioners across England combining primary care and other health-related data., Participants: Overall, 6145 adults with confirmed SLE diagnosis ≥1 year prior to 1 May 2020 were included. Most patients were women (91.0%), white (67.1%), and diagnosed with SLE at age <50 (70.8%). Patients were excluded if they had a COVID-19 diagnosis before 1 May 2020., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Demographics and clinical characteristics were compared. COVID-19 severity was determined by patient care required and procedure/diagnosis codes. COVID-19 cumulative incidence, hospitalisation rates, lengths of stay and mortality rates were determined and stratified by SLE and COVID-19 severity., Results: Of 6145 patients, 3927 had mild, 1288 moderate and 930 severe SLE at baseline. The majority of patients with moderate to severe SLE were on oral corticosteroids and antimalarial treatments. Overall, 54/6145 (0.88%) patients with SLE acquired and were diagnosed with COVID-19, with 45 classified as mild, 6 moderate and 3 severe COVID-19. Cumulative incidence was higher in patients with severe SLE (1.4%) compared with patients classified as mild (0.8%) or moderate (0.8%). Ten COVID-19-specific hospital admissions occurred (n=6 moderate; n=4 severe). Regardless of COVID-19 status, hospital admission rates and length of stay increased with SLE severity. Of 54 patients with SLE diagnosed with COVID-19, 1 (1.9%) COVID-19-related death was recorded in a patient with both severe SLE and severe COVID-19., Conclusions: SLE severity did not appear to impact COVID-19 outcomes in this study. The COVID-19 pandemic is evolving and follow-up studies are needed to understand the relationship between COVID-19 and SLE., Competing Interests: Competing interests: APJR, RNK, RT and HAS-F are employees of and stockholders in AstraZeneca. HAS-F is a stockholder of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). KW has served as a consultant to AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly & Company, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Union Chimique Belge (UCB); and has received grant/research support from BMS and Pfizer., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To characterise the safety and efficacy of anifrolumab in active lupus nephritis (LN) through year 2 of the phase II randomised, double-blind Treatment of Uncontrolled Lupus via the Interferon Pathway (TULIP)-LN trial (NCT02547922) of 2 anifrolumab dosing regimens versus placebo., Methods: Patients received intravenous anifrolumab 900 mg for the first 3 doses followed by 300 mg anifrolumab (intensified regimen (IR)), 300 mg anifrolumab (basic regimen (BR)) or placebo every 4 weeks throughout. To continue into Year 2, patients must have achieved at least partial renal response and a glucocorticoid tapering target., Results: Of 147 randomised patients, 101 completed Year 1 study treatment; of these, 75 (74%) continued into Year 2 (anifrolumab IR: n=29, BR: n=23 and placebo: n=23). During Year 2, 72% of patients reported ≥1 adverse event (AE); serious AEs were reported in 6.9%, 8.7% and 8.7% of patients (anifrolumab IR, BR and placebo, respectively); 3 patients discontinued treatment due to an AE (anifrolumab IR: n=2 and placebo: n=1) and herpes zoster was reported in 2 patients (anifrolumab IR: n=1 and BR: n=1). The study was ongoing at the start of the pandemic, but no COVID-19 cases were reported. Of the 145 patients receiving treatment, more patients on the IR attained complete renal response at Week 104 compared with those on BR or placebo (27.3% vs 18.6% and 17.8%) and simultaneously achieved sustained glucocorticoid tapering (IR: 25.0%; BR: 18.6% and placebo: 17.8%). The improvements in estimated glomerular filtration rate were numerically larger in both anifrolumab groups versus placebo., Conclusions: The safety and tolerability profile through Year 2 of TULIP-LN was generally consistent with Year 1, with promising efficacy results for the anifrolumab IR regimen. Collectively, the results support further investigation of an anifrolumab intensified dosing regimen in larger populations of patients with active proliferative LN., Trial Registration Number: NCT02547922., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DJ has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Chemocentryx, CSL Vifor, Novartis, Roche and Takeda; has received honoraria from CSL Vifor and GSK; has received payment for participating in Data Safety Monitoring or Advisory Boards for Chinook, GSK and Takeda and has stock or stock options in Aurinia. BR has received consulting fees from Aurinia, Alexion, AstraZeneca, Biocryst, Biogen, BMS, Calliditas, Chemocentryx, Corrona, EMD Serono, Exagen, Galapagos, Genentech-Roche, GSK, Janssen, Kezar, Lilly, MorphoSys, Novartis, Omeros, Otsuka, Pfizer, Travere and University of Minnesota; has received speaker support from the American Society of Nephrology and the International Society of Nephrology and has a leadership or fiduciary role in the Lupus Foundation of America and KDIGO Glomerulonephritis Guideline group. EM has received grants or contracts from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche; has received consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, GSK, Janssen, Lilly and Pfizer; has received honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer and Sanofi; has received payment for expert testimony from AbbVie and has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from AbbVie and Pfizer. RF has received consulting fees, payment or honoraria for speaking, support for attending meetings from and payment for participating in a Data Safety Monitoring or Advisory Board for AstraZeneca. FH has received grants or contracts from GSK and consulting fees from IDORSIA. RT is an employee of AstraZeneca. TT, JK, ES, WT and CL are employees of AstraZeneca and own stock or stock options., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The type I interferon (IFN) signaling pathway is implicated in the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Anifrolumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets the type I IFN receptor subunit 1. Anifrolumab is approved in several countries for patients with moderate to severe SLE receiving standard therapy. The approved dosing regimen of anifrolumab is a 300-mg dose administered intravenously every 4 weeks; this was initially based on the results of the Phase 2b MUSE and further confirmed in the Phase 3 TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials, in which anifrolumab 300-mg treatment was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in disease activity with an acceptable safety profile. There have been several published analyses of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of anifrolumab, including a population-pharmacokinetic analysis of 5 clinical studies of healthy volunteers and patients with SLE, in which body weight and type I IFN gene expression were significant covariates identified for anifrolumab exposure and clearance. Additionally, the pooled Phase 3 SLE population has been used to evaluate how serum exposure may be related to clinical responses, safety risks, and pharmacodynamic effects of the 21-gene type I IFN gene signature (21-IFNGS). The relevance of 21-IFNGS with regard to clinical efficacy outcomes has also been analyzed. Herein, the clinical pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and immunogenicity of anifrolumab as well as results of population-pharmacokinetics and exposure-response analyses are reviewed., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: In patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), lupus low disease activity state (LLDAS) attainment is associated with improved outcomes. We investigated LLDAS attainment in anifrolumab-treated patients., Methods: We performed post hoc analysis of pooled Treatment of Uncontrolled Lupus via the Interferon Pathway (TULIP-1) (NCT02446912) and TULIP-2 (NCT02446899) anifrolumab phase 3 trial data in patients with moderate to severe SLE receiving standard therapy. LLDAS was defined as: SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 ≤4 without major organ activity, no new disease activity, Physician's Global Assessment ≤1, prednisone ≤7.5 mg/day and no non-standard immunosuppressant dosing. Time to first LLDAS attainment was compared between groups using Cox regression modelling; responses were compared using logistic regression., Results: Agnostic to treatment, 205/819 (25.0%) patients attained LLDAS at week 52; 186/205 (90.7%) were also British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA)-responders. Among BICLA-responders at week 52, 186/318 (58.5%) attained LLDAS; 203/380 (53.4%) SLE Responder Index-4 (SRI(4)) responders attained LLDAS. Improvements from baseline in patient global assessment scores at week 52 were threefold greater in LLDAS-attainers. At week 52, 30.0% of anifrolumab-treated patients and 19.6% of placebo were in LLDAS (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.5, p=0.0011). Compared with placebo, anifrolumab treatment was associated with earlier LLDAS attainment (time to first LLDAS, HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.30, p<0.0001), increased cumulative time in LLDAS (p<0.0001) and higher likelihood of sustained LLDAS (p<0.001). Anifrolumab treatment was also associated with higher rates of Definition of Remission in SLE remission at week 52 (15.3% vs 7.6%; OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4 to 3.6, p=0.0013)., Conclusions: LLDAS attainment was highly associated with, but more stringent than, BICLA and SRI(4) responses. Compared with placebo, anifrolumab treatment was associated with earlier, more frequent, and more prolonged and sustained LLDAS., Trial Registration Numbers: NCT02446912 and NCT02446899., Competing Interests: Competing interests: EFM received grant support from AstraZeneca, Amgen, AbbVie, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Janssen and UCB; received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, GSK, Janssen, Servier, UCB and Wolf Biotherapeutics; and has received speaking fees and/or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novartis and GSK. RAF has received grant/research support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. GA and RT are employees of and may hold stock in AstraZeneca., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Glucocorticoid sparing is a key priority for SLE management. We evaluated the effects of sustained glucocorticoid tapering in patients with SLE., Material and Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of the randomized, placebo-controlled, 52-week phase 3 Treatment of Uncontrolled Lupus via the Interferon Pathway (TULIP)-1 and TULIP-2 trials of anifrolumab (300 mg i.v. once every 4 weeks for 48  weeks) plus standard therapy in patients with moderate to severe SLE. In a cohort of patients receiving glucocorticoids (prednisone or equivalent) 10 mg or more per day at baseline, we assessed changes in glucocorticoid dosage, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and safety. Outcome measures were compared between sustained glucocorticoid taper responders (7.5 mg or less per day by week 40 sustained through week 52) and non-responders, regardless of treatment group, and between patients receiving anifrolumab or placebo., Results: Among the 726 patients in the TULIP trials, 375 patients received glucocorticoids 10 mg or more per day at baseline, and of these, 155 (41%) patients were sustained glucocorticoid taper responders. Compared with non-responders (n = 220), sustained glucocorticoid taper responders reduced their mean cumulative glucocorticoid dose by 32%, improved PRO scores, reduced blood pressure and experienced fewer serious adverse events. Sustained glucocorticoid tapering was achieved by 51% (96/190) of patients receiving anifrolumab vs 32% (59/185) receiving placebo. Compared with placebo, more anifrolumab-treated patients achieved both sustained glucocorticoid taper and reduced overall disease activity [38% (72/190) vs 23% (43/185)]., Conclusions: Sustained glucocorticoid tapering is associated with clinical benefits. Anifrolumab treatment has potential to reduce disease activity and glucocorticoid exposure, a key goal of SLE management., Study Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02446912 and NCT02446899., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Objective: To explore long-term safety and tolerability of anifrolumab 300 mg compared with placebo in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) who completed a Treatment of Uncontrolled Lupus via the Interferon Pathway (TULIP) trial and enrolled in the placebo-controlled 3-year long-term extension (LTE) study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02794285)., Methods: In the blinded LTE study, patients continued anifrolumab 300 mg, switched from anifrolumab 150 mg to 300 mg, or were re-randomized from placebo to receive either anifrolumab 300 mg or to continue placebo, administered every 4 weeks. Primary comparisons in the LTE study were between patients who received anifrolumab 300 mg or placebo throughout the TULIP and LTE studies. For rare safety events, comparisons included patients who received any anifrolumab dose during TULIP or LTE. When exposure differed, exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) per 100 patient-years were calculated., Results: In the LTE study, EAIRs of serious adverse events (SAEs) were 8.5 with anifrolumab compared with 11.2 with placebo; likewise, EAIRs of AEs leading to treatment discontinuation were 2.5 versus 3.2, respectively. EAIRs of non-opportunistic serious infections were comparable between groups (3.7 with anifrolumab versus 3.6 with placebo). Exposure-adjusted event rates of COVID-related AEs, including asymptomatic infections, were 15.5 with anifrolumab compared with 9.8 with placebo. No COVID-related AEs occurred in fully vaccinated individuals. EAIRs of malignancy and major acute cardiovascular events were low and comparable between groups. Anifrolumab was associated with lower cumulative glucocorticoid use and greater mean improvement in the SLE Disease Activity Index 2000, compared with placebo., Conclusion: This LTE study represents the longest placebo-controlled clinical trial performed in SLE to date. No new safety findings were identified in the LTE study, supporting the favorable benefit-risk profile of anifrolumab for patients with moderate-to-severe SLE receiving standard therapy., (© 2022 The Authors. Arthritis & Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab in the subpopulation of Japanese patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in phase 3 TULIP-2 trial., Methods: TULIP-2 was a 52-week randomized placebo-controlled trial (N = 362) that evaluated efficacy and safety of anifrolumab 300 mg IV every 4 weeks vs. placebo in patients with moderate to severe SLE who were receiving standard therapy. We performed a post hoc analysis of the primary and key secondary endpoints, and safety, of TULIP-2 in the Japanese subpopulation., Results: In the Japanese subpopulation (anifrolumab, n = 24; placebo, n = 19), the proportion of patients who achieved a British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment response at Week 52 (primary endpoint) was greater in the anifrolumab group vs. placebo [50.0% (12/24) vs. 15.8% (3/19); treatment difference: 34.2%, 95% confidence interval 6.9, 61.5; nominal p = .014]. Improvement in skin activity and flare rates (key secondary endpoints) were favourable for anifrolumab vs. placebo. Consistent with the overall population, anifrolumab had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile., Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of anifrolumab 300 mg in Japanese patients with SLE was consistent with the demonstrated clinical profile of anifrolumab for the overall TULIP-2 population., (© Japan College of Rheumatology 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To evaluate the time course of clinical response following anifrolumab treatment in patients with SLE., Methods: A post hoc analysis was conducted using pooled data from phase III, randomised, 52-week, placebo-controlled, Treatment of Uncontrolled Lupus via the Interferon Pathway (TULIP)-1 and TULIP-2 trials of intravenous anifrolumab (every 4 weeks, 48 weeks) in patients with moderate-to-severe SLE receiving standard therapy. Anifrolumab 300 mg and placebo groups were compared for British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response over time, time to sustained BICLA response, SLE Responder Index ≥4 (SRI(4)) response over time, time to sustained Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index Activity (CLASI-A) response and change in glucocorticoid dosage over time. All p values for comparisons were nominal., Results: Of the 726 evaluated patients (anifrolumab 300 mg, n=360; placebo, n=366), a greater proportion attained a BICLA response in the anifrolumab versus the placebo group from Week 8 (p<0.001); treatment group differentiation was maintained at all subsequent visits to Week 52. Consistently, more patients achieved a BICLA response sustained to Week 52 in the anifrolumab versus placebo group (HR=1.73, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.20). More patients attained SRI(4) response with anifrolumab than placebo from Week 12 (p=0.005). As early as Week 8, more patients achieved CLASI-A skin response sustained to Week 52 with anifrolumab versus placebo (HR=1.72, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.55). Glucocorticoid dosage reductions from baseline were greater in anifrolumab-treated versus placebo-treated patients from Week 20 (p=0.010) through Week 52., Conclusions: Anifrolumab treatment was associated with sustained improvements in overall SLE disease activity and skin responses versus placebo from Week 8, which likely led to greater glucocorticoid reductions in the anifrolumab versus placebo groups from Week 20. These findings provide insights to physicians and patients on when to expect potential clinical responses following anifrolumab treatment., Competing Interests: Competing interests: INB has received grant/research support from GSK and Janssen; received consulting and speaking fees from AstraZeneca, BMS and UCB; received consulting and honoraria from GSK and received consulting fees from Aurinia, Eli Lilly and Merck Serono. RFvV has received consulting fees, speaking fees and/or honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biotest, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Medac, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, and research support from AbbVie, Arthrogen, BMS, Eli Lilly, GSK, Pfizer and UCB. KP, CL, EM and RT are all employees of AstraZeneca., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: SLE significantly impairs health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In this post hoc analysis, structural equation modelling was used to examine the 'causal cascade' of interaction between anifrolumab, disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in pooled data from the phase 3 TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials., Methods: Data were pooled from the TULIP-1 (n = 364) and TULIP-2 (n = 362) randomized, placebo-controlled, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (300 mg every 4 weeks for 48 weeks). We evaluated changes from baseline to week 24 and week 52 in four clinical (BICLA, BILAG-2004, SLEDAI-2K and changes in glucocorticoid dosage) and six PRO measures (SF-36, FACIT-F, EQ-5D, LupusQoL, PHQ-8 and pain NRS) in our hypothesized model of interactions., Results: Our hypothesized model had an acceptable fit to the pooled TULIP trial data. At week 24, significant paths revealed that when compared with placebo, anifrolumab treatment improved disease activity as measured by BICLA, BILAG-2004, SLEDAI-2K and changes to glucocorticoid dosage. In turn, these clinical measures reduced pain, which improved fatigue, physical functioning, mood/emotions and HRQoL. When the model incorporated number of glucocorticoid tapers as the measure of change in glucocorticoid dosage, treatment effects of anifrolumab on glucocorticoid tapers were not retained at week 52. However, at week 52 treatment indirectly improved HRQoL through its direct effects on BICLA., Conclusions: Anifrolumab is associated with significant patient-reported improvements in aspects of HRQoL including pain, fatigue, mood and physical function. These benefits are from the direct effect of anifrolumab treatment on disease activity and reduction in glucocorticoid dosage., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

We characterized the population pharmacokinetics of anifrolumab, a type I interferon receptor-blocking antibody. Pharmacokinetic data were analyzed from the anifrolumab (intravenous [IV], every 4 weeks) arms from 5 clinical trials in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (n = 664) and healthy volunteers (n = 6). Population pharmacokinetic modeling was performed using a 2-compartment model with parallel linear and nonlinear elimination pathways. The impact of covariates (demographics, interferon gene signature [IFNGS, high/low], disease characteristics, renal/hepatic function, SLE medications, and antidrug antibodies) on pharmacokinetics was evaluated. Time-varying clearance (CL) was characterized using an empirical sigmoidal time-dependent function. Anifrolumab exposure increased more than dose-proportionally from 100 to 1000 mg IV every 4 weeks. Based on population pharmacokinetics modeling, the baseline median linear CL was 0.193 L/day in IFNGS-high patients and 0.153 L/day in IFNGS-low/healthy volunteers. After a year, median anifrolumab linear CL decreased by 8.4% from baseline. Body weight and IFNGS were significant pharmacokinetic covariates, whereas age, sex, race, disease activity, SLE medications, and presence of antidrug antibodies had no significant effect on anifrolumab pharmacokinetics. Anifrolumab at a concentration of 300 mg IV every 4 weeks was predicted to be below the lower limit of quantitation in 95% of patients ≈10 weeks after a single dose and ≈16 weeks after stopping dosing at steady state. To conclude, anifrolumab exhibited nonlinear pharmacokinetics and time-varying linear CL; doses ≥300 mg IV every 4 weeks provided sustained anifrolumab concentrations. This study provides further evidence to support the use of anifrolumab 300 mg IV every 4 weeks in patients with moderate to severe SLE., (© 2022 The Authors. The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

This study aimed to elucidate the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic and pharmacodynamic/efficacy relationships of anifrolumab, a type I interferon receptor antibody, in patients with moderate to severe systemic lupus erythematosus. Data were pooled from the randomized, 52-week, placebo-controlled TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials of intravenous anifrolumab (150 mg/300 mg, every 4 weeks for 48 weeks). Pharmacodynamic neutralization was measured with a 21-gene type I interferon gene signature (21-IFNGS) in patients with high IFNGS. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship was analyzed graphically and modeled with a nonlinear mixed-effects model. British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response rates were compared across 21-IFNGS neutralization quartiles. Overall, 819 patients received ≥1 dose of anifrolumab or placebo, of whom 676 were IFNGS high. Over 52 weeks, higher average anifrolumab serum concentrations were associated with increased median 21-IFNGS neutralization, which was rapid and sustained with anifrolumab 300 mg (>80%, weeks 12-52), lower and delayed with anifrolumab 150 mg (>50%, week 52), and minimal with placebo. The proportion of patients with week 24 anifrolumab trough concentration exceeding the IC 80 (3.88 μg/mL) was greater with anifrolumab 300 mg vs anifrolumab 150 mg (≈83% vs ≈27%), owing to the higher estimated median trough concentration (15.6 vs 0.2 μg/mL). BICLA response rates increased with 21-IFNGS neutralization; more patients had a BICLA response in the highest vs lowest neutralization quartiles at week 52 (58.1% vs 37.6%). In conclusion, anifrolumab 300 mg every 4 weeks rapidly, substantially, and sustainably neutralized the 21-IFNGS and was associated with clinical efficacy, supporting this dosing regimen in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus., (© 2022 The Authors. The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Objectives: In the anifrolumab systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) trial programme, there was one trial (TULIP-1) in which BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) responses favoured anifrolumab over placebo, but the SLE Responder Index (SRI(4)) treatment difference was not significant. We investigated the degree of concordance between BICLA and SRI(4) across anifrolumab trials in order to better understand drivers of discrepant SLE trial results., Methods: TULIP-1, TULIP-2 (both phase 3) and MUSE (phase 2b) were randomised, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (300 mg every 4 weeks, 48 weeks; TULIP-1/TULIP-2: n=180; MUSE: n=99) or placebo (TULIP-1: n=184, TULIP-2: n=182; MUSE: n=102). Week 52 BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes were assessed for each patient., Results: Most patients (78%-85%) had concordant BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes (Cohen's Kappa 0.6-0.7, nominal p<0.001). Dual BICLA/SRI(4) response rates favoured anifrolumab over placebo in TULIP-1, TULIP-2 and MUSE (all nominal p≤0.004). A discordant TULIP-1 BICLA non-responder/SRI(4) responder subgroup was identified (40/364, 11% of TULIP-1 population), comprising more patients receiving placebo (n=28) than anifrolumab (n=12). In this subgroup, placebo-treated patients had lower baseline disease activity, joint counts and glucocorticoid tapering rates, and more placebo-treated patients had arthritis response than anifrolumab-treated patients., Conclusions: Across trials, most patients had concordant BICLA/SRI(4) outcomes and dual BICLA/SRI(4) responses favoured anifrolumab. A BICLA non-responder/SRI(4) responder subgroup was identified where imbalances of key factors driving the BICLA/SRI(4) discordance (disease activity, glucocorticoid taper) disproportionately favoured the TULIP-1 placebo group. Careful attention to baseline disease activity and monitoring glucocorticoid taper variation will be essential in future SLE trials., Trial Registration Numbers: NCT02446912 and NCT02446899., Competing Interests: Competing interests: INB has received grant/research support from Genzyme/Sanofi, GSK, Roche and UCB; received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, GSK, ILTOO, Merck Serono and UCB; and speaker/honoraria from AstraZeneca, GSK and UCB. INB is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator Emeritus and is funded by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. RAF has received grant/research support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. EFM received grant support from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Merck Serono and UCB; was a consultant for AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Janssen and Merck Serono; and was a speaker at a speaker bureau for AstraZeneca. SM has received grants and other support and has been a member of an advisory board for AstraZeneca. YT has received speaking fees and/or honoraria from AbbVie, Asahi Kasei, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and YL Biologics, and has received research grants from AbbVie, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Takeda and UCB. KCK has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Chemocentryx, Eli Lilly, Equillium, Genentech/Roche, GSK, Janssen and Nektar; and has received grant/research support from BMS, Irdosia, Kirin, Pfizer, Resolve, Takeda and UCB. JTM has received grant/research support from BMS and GSK and has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Amgen, Aurinia, BMS, EMD Serono, GSK, Remegen, Janssen, Provention and UCB. PP, EM, CK, MA, MH and RT are employees of AstraZeneca., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aim: Assess the comparative efficacy of anifrolumab 300 mg versus belimumab 10 mg/kg in adults with moderate-to-severe systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) receiving standard therapy. Patients and methods: Population-adjusted simulated treatment comparisons (primary analyses) and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (supporting analyses) were conducted using individual patient data from TULIP-1/TULIP-2 and summary-level data from BLISS-52/BLISS-76. Results: Compared with belimumab-treated patients, anifrolumab-treated patients were more than twice as likely to achieve a reduction of four or more points in SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 score (simulated treatment comparison odds ratio: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.16-5.25) and SLE Responder Index-4 response (odds ratio: 2.61; 95% CI: 1.22-5.58) at 52 weeks. Conclusion: Patients with moderate-to-severe SLE are more likely to achieve an improvement in disease activity with anifrolumab than with belimumab.

Objectives: To characterise the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) according to interferon gene signature (IFNGS), demographic and clinical subgroups., Methods: We performed post hoc analyses of pooled data from the 52-week phase III TULIP-1/TULIP-2 placebo-controlled trials of intravenous anifrolumab in moderate-to-severe SLE. Outcomes were assessed in predefined subgroups: IFNGS (high/low), age, sex, body mass index, race, geographic region, age of onset, glucocorticoid use, disease activity and serological markers., Results: In pooled data, patients received anifrolumab 300 mg (360/726) or placebo (366/726); 82.6% were IFNGS-high. IFNGS-high patients had greater baseline disease activity and were more likely to have abnormal serological markers versus IFNGS-low patients. In the total population, a greater proportion of patients treated with anifrolumab versus placebo achieved British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response at week 52 (difference 16.6%; nominal p<0.001). BICLA response treatment differences with anifrolumab versus placebo were comparable to the total population across most predefined subgroups, including subgroups for baseline glucocorticoid dosage (<10/≥10 mg/day prednisone/equivalent) and for clinical disease activity (SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 score <10/≥10). Subgroups with larger treatment differences included IFNGS-high patients (18.2%), patients with abnormal baseline serological markers (23.1%) and Asian patients (29.2%). The safety profile of anifrolumab was similar across subgroups., Conclusions: Overall, this study supports the consistent efficacy and safety of anifrolumab across a range of patients with moderate-to-severe SLE. In a few subgroups, small sample sizes limited conclusions from being drawn regarding the treatment benefit with anifrolumab., Trial Registration Number: NCT02446912, NCT02446899., Competing Interests: Competing interests: EMV has received grant support from AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech and Sandoz; received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche/Genentech, Aurinia and Sandoz; and was a speaker at a speaker bureau for Becton Dickinson and GlaxoSmithKline. JTM has received grant/research support from Bristol Myers Squibb and GlaxoSmithKline, and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Provention, Remegen and UCB. EFM has received grant support from, was a consultant for and was a speaker at a speaker bureau for AstraZeneca; received grant support and consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck Serono and UCB; received grant support from Bristol Myers Squibb and received consulting fees from Amgen, Biogen, CSL, Neovacs and Wolf Biotherapeutics. RAF has received grant/research support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. INB is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator Emeritus and is funded by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre; has received grant/research support from Genzyme/Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche and UCB; received consulting fees from Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, ILTOO, Merck Serono and UCB and was a speaker for AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline and UCB. YT has received speaking fees and/or honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Mitsubishi-Tanabe and YL Biologics, and has received research grants from AbbVie, Asahi-Kasei, Chugai, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Corrona, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Kowa, Mitsubishi-Tanabe and Takeda. SM has received grant/research support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. KCK has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca. RNK, KS, GA and RJ are employees of AstraZeneca., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To characterize the relationship of anifrolumab pharmacokinetics with efficacy and safety in patients with moderate to severe SLE despite standard therapy, using pooled data from two phase 3 trials., Methods: TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 were randomized, placebo-controlled, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (every 4 weeks for 48 weeks). For the exposure-response analysis, BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) or SLE Responder Index [SRI(4)] response rates at week 52 in each quartile/tertile of average anifrolumab serum concentration (Cave) were compared for anifrolumab and placebo in all-comers, patients who completed treatment, and IFN gene signature (IFNGS)-high patients who completed treatment, using average marginal effect logistic regression. Relationships between exposure and key safety events were assessed graphically., Results: Of patients in TULIP-1/TULIP-2 who received anifrolumab (150 mg, n = 91; 300 mg, n = 356) or placebo (n = 366), 574 completed treatment, of whom 470 were IFNGS high. In the exposure-efficacy analyses, BICLA and SRI(4) treatment differences favouring anifrolumab 300 mg vs placebo were observed across Cave subgroups and all analysis populations. Logistic regression identified Cave as a significant covariate for predicted BICLA response, as higher anifrolumab Cave predicted greater efficacy. There was no evidence of exposure-driven incidence of key safety events through week 52 in patients receiving anifrolumab 150 or 300 mg., Conclusion: While higher Cave predicted greater efficacy, consistent positive benefit favouring anifrolumab 300 mg vs placebo was observed in BICLA and SRI(4) responses across Cave subgroups in the TULIP trials. There was no evidence of exposure-driven safety events., Clinicaltrial.gov Numbers: NCT02446912, NCT02446899., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Background: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterised by multisystem involvement. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of anifrolumab on organ domain-specific SLE disease activity., Methods: In this post-hoc analysis, data were pooled from the randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 TULIP-1 (NCT02446912) and TULIP-2 (NCT02446899) trials of anifrolumab (300 mg intravenously once every 4 weeks for 48 weeks) in patients aged 18-70 years with moderate-to-severe SLE. We evaluated changes from baseline to week 52 in British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 (BILAG-2004) and SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) organ domain scores, Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index activity score (CLASI-A), swollen and tender joint counts, haematology, and serology., Findings: Among the 726 patients included, the mean age was 41·8 years (SD 11·9); 674 (93%) were female, 52 (7%) were male, and 479 (66%) were White. 360 patients received anifrolumab 300 mg (180 patients in each trial), and 366 received placebo (184 patients in TULIP-1 and 182 patients in TULIP-2). The most frequently affected organ domains at baseline were musculoskeletal (645 [89%] patients based on BILAG-2004; 684 [94%] with SLEDAI-2K) and mucocutaneous (627 [86%] with BILAG-2004; 699 [96%] based on SLEDAI-2K). At week 52, anifrolumab treatment resulted in greater improvements versus placebo in the musculoskeletal system (176 [56%] of 317 patients vs 143 [44%] of 328 with BILAG-2004; 164 [49%] of 335 vs 141 [40%] of 349 with SLEDAI-2K), the mucocutaneous system (168 [54%] of 315 vs 119 [38%] of 312 with BILAG-2004; 190 [55%] of 348 vs 138 [39%] of 351 SLEDAI-2K), and immunological system (44 [19%] of 237 vs 26 [11%] of 230 with SLEDAI-2K). Less frequently affected domains had varied responses. Among patients with a CLASI-A of 10 or more at baseline, greater proportions of patients receiving anifrolumab than placebo achieved a reduction of 50% or more in CLASI-A at week 52 (49 [46%] of 107 vs 24 [25%] of 94). Among patients with at least six swollen joints, more patients in the anifrolumab group than in the placebo group had a 50% or more reduction from baseline to week 52 in swollen joint count (99 [57%] of 174 vs 92 [46%] of 200), but the difference between groups was not significant for 50% or more reduction in tender joint count., Interpretation: Across the two pivotal phase 3 trials, anifrolumab treatment improved SLE disease activity across multiple organ domains., Funding: AstraZeneca., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests EFM has received grant support from, was a consultant for, and was a speaker at a speaker bureau for AstraZeneca; received grant support and consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Janssen, and EMD Serono; and received consulting fees from Amgen, Biogen, and Wolf Biotherapeutics. RAF has received grant and research support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. INB has received grant or research support from Genzyme/Sanofi, GSK, Roche, and UCB; received consulting fees from Aurinia, Eli Lilly, GSK, ILTOO, Merck Serono, and UCB; and was a speaker for AstraZeneca, GSK, and UCB. EMV has received grant support from AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, and Sandoz; received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, GSK, Roche/Genentech, Aurinia, and Sandoz; and was a speaker at a speaker bureau for Becton Dickinson and GSK. MD has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, GSK, Janssen, and Pfizer. EM, LP, and RT are employees of AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of the type I interferon receptor antibody, anifrolumab, in patients with active, biopsy-proven, Class III/IV lupus nephritis., Methods: This phase II double-blinded study randomised 147 patients (1:1:1) to receive monthly intravenous anifrolumab basic regimen (BR, 300 mg), intensified regimen (IR, 900 mg ×3, 300 mg thereafter) or placebo, alongside standard therapy (oral glucocorticoids, mycophenolate mofetil). The primary endpoint was change in baseline 24-hour urine protein-creatinine ratio (UPCR) at week (W) 52 for combined anifrolumab versus placebo groups. The secondary endpoint was complete renal response (CRR) at W52. Exploratory endpoints included more stringent CRR definitions and sustained glucocorticoid reductions (≤7.5 mg/day, W24-52). Safety was analysed descriptively., Results: Patients received anifrolumab BR (n=45), IR (n=51), or placebo (n=49). At W52, 24-hour UPCR improved by 69% and 70% for combined anifrolumab and placebo groups, respectively (geometric mean ratio=1.03; 95% CI 0.62 to 1.71; p=0.905). Serum concentrations were higher with anifrolumab IR versus anifrolumab BR, which provided suboptimal exposure. Numerically more patients treated with anifrolumab IR vs placebo attained CRR (45.5% vs 31.1%), CRR with UPCR ≤0.5 mg/mg (40.9% vs 26.7%), CRR with inactive urinary sediment (40.9% vs 13.3%) and sustained glucocorticoid reductions (55.6% vs 33.3%). Incidence of herpes zoster was higher with combined anifrolumab vs placebo (16.7% vs 8.2%). Incidence of serious adverse events was similar across groups., Conclusion: Although the primary endpoint was not met, anifrolumab IR was associated with numerical improvements over placebo across endpoints, including CRR, in patients with active lupus nephritis., Trial Registration Number: NCT02547922., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DJ received grants or contracts from GlaxoSmithKline, consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chemocentryx, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Roche, Takeda and Vifor, speaker fees from Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline and Vifor, and owns stocks in Aurinia. BR received consulting fees from Aurinia, AstraZeneca, Calliditas, Tavere, Novartis, Omeros, Chemocentryx, Morphosys, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Janssen. EM received consulting fees from Pfizer, AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca, speaking fees from Pfizer, Amgen, AbbVie, Eli Lilly and Roche, and honoraria from Pfizer, AbbVie and Eli Lilly. RAF received consulting fees, payment or honoraria, and support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, and has participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for AstraZeneca. FAH has received grants and consulting fees from and has participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for GlaxoSmithKline, and has received consulting fees from Idorsia. TT, JK, ES, RT and CL are employees of and own shares of AstraZeneca. YLC is a former employee of and owns shares of AstraZeneca and a current employee of Seagen., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) is a validated global measure of treatment response in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) clinical trials but does not include patient-reported outcomes. To evaluate the clinical meaningfulness of a BICLA response from the patient perspective, we aimed to analyse patient-reported outcomes by BICLA responses with anifrolumab or placebo in patients with moderate to severe SLE., Methods: We did a post-hoc analysis of pooled data from the phase 3 TULIP-1 (NCT02446912) and TULIP-2 (NCT02446899) trials of anifrolumab, which assessed health-related quality of life using the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36; version 2) and Lupus Quality of Life, fatigue using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), pain using the Numerical Rating Scale, and disease activity using Patient Global Assessment. Changes from baseline and proportions of patients reporting improvements in patient-reported outcomes greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and scores greater than or equal to the normative values were compared in BICLA responders and non-responders and by treatment group (intravenous anifrolumab 300 mg or placebo)., Findings: 726 patients were included in the TULIP trials, of whom 366 received placebo (184 patients in TULIP-1 and 182 in TULIP-2) and 360 received anifrolumab 300 mg (180 patients in each trial). The mean patient age was 41·8 years (SD 11·9). 674 (93%) patients were female, 52 (7%) were male, and 479 (66%) were White; 283 (39%) were BICLA responders and 443 (61%) were BICLA non-responders. Compared with non-responders, BICLA responders reported greater mean improvements from baseline at week 52 in Patient Global Assessment, SF-36, Lupus Quality of Life, FACIT-F, and pain Numerical Rating Scale scores (all nominal p<0·0053). Compared with non-responders, a greater proportion of BICLA responders reported improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important difference across all SF-36 domains; eg, Physical Component Summary (165 [60%] of 277 for responders vs 63 [15%] of 416 for non-responders), Mental Component Summary (140 [51%] of 276 vs 59 [15%] of 416), and role physical (184 [70%] of 264 vs 76 [19%] of 398); Lupus Quality of Life domains; eg, physical health (151 [58%] of 262 vs 60 [15%] of 396), and intimate relationships (77 [41%] of 187 vs 33 [11%] of 286), and FACIT-F (155 [56%] of 276 vs 66 [15%] of 439). Similarly, a greater proportion of BICLA responders had scores equal to or greater than the normative values across all SF-36 domains and FACIT-F compared with BICLA non-responders at week 52. Patients who received anifrolumab reported greater numerical improvements in Patient Global Assessment, SF-36, Lupus Quality of Life, FACIT-F, and pain Numerical Rating Scale scores than those who received placebo., Interpretation: BICLA responders reported significant and clinically meaningful improvements in Patient Global Assessment, health-related quality of life, fatigue, and pain compared with BICLA non-responders. More patients with moderate to severe SLE who received anifrolumab were BICLA responders and had improved health-related quality of life, fatigue, and pain than those who received placebo., Funding: AstraZeneca., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests VS reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bioventus, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Corrona, Crescendo/Myriad, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Equillium, Flexion, Genentech/Roche, Glenmark, GlaxoSmithKline, Horizon, Inmedix, Janssen, Kypha, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Samsung, Samumed, Sandoz, Sanofi, Servier, Setpoint, twoXAR, and UCB. RAF reports grants or research support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. EFM reports grants from, was a consultant for, and was a speaker at a speaker bureau for AstraZeneca; grants and consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen; and consulting fees from Amgen, Biogen, Genentech, Servier, UCB, and Wolf Biotherapeutics. KCK reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chemocentrix, Eli Lilly, Equillium, Genetech/Roche, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kezar, Kirin, Pfizer, and Viela Bio. SO’Q, EGS, GA, and RT are employees of AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The randomized, double-blind, phase 2 b MUSE study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the type I IFN receptor antibody anifrolumab (300 mg or 1000 mg every 4 weeks) compared with placebo for 52 weeks in patients with chronic, moderate to severe SLE. Characterizing the exposure-response relationship of anifrolumab in MUSE will enable selection of its optimal dosage regimen in two phase 3 studies in patients with SLE., Methods: The exposure-response relationship, pharmacokinetics (PK) and SLE Responder Index (SRI(4)) efficacy data were analysed using a population approach. A dropout hazard function was also incorporated into the SRI(4) model to describe the voluntary patient withdrawals during the 1-year treatment period., Results: The population PK model found that type I IFNGS-high patients, and patients with a higher body weight, had significantly greater clearance of anifrolumab. Stochastic clinical simulations demonstrated that doses <300 mg would lead to a greater-than-proportional reduction in drug exposure owing to type I IFN alpha receptor-mediated drug clearance (antigen-sink effect, more rapid drug clearance at lower concentrations) and suboptimal SRI(4) responses with wider confidence intervals., Conclusions: Based on PK, efficacy and safety considerations, anifrolumab 300 mg every 4 weeks was recommended as the optimal dosage for pivotal phase 3 studies in patients with SLE., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: The British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) is a validated global measure of treatment response in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) clinical trials. To understand the relevance of BICLA in clinical practice, we investigated relationships between BICLA response and routine SLE assessments, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and medical resource utilization., Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of pooled data from the phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, 52-week TULIP-1 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02446912; n = 457) and TULIP-2 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02446899; n = 362) trials of intravenous anifrolumab (150/300 mg once every 4 weeks) in patients with moderate-to-severe SLE. Changes from baseline to week 52 in clinical assessments, PROs, and medical resource use were compared in BICLA responders versus nonresponders, regardless of treatment assignment., Results: BICLA responders (n = 318) achieved significantly improved outcomes compared with nonresponders (n = 501), including lower flare rates, higher rates of attainment of sustained oral glucocorticoid taper to ≤7.5 mg/day, greater improvements in PROs (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, Short Form 36 Health Survey), and fewer SLE-related hospitalizations/emergency department visits (all nominal P < 0.001). Compared with nonresponders, BICLA responders had greater improvements in global and organ-specific disease activity (Physician's Global Assessment, SLE Disease Activity Index 2000, Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index Activity, and joint counts; all nominal P < 0.001). BICLA responders had fewer lupus-related serious adverse events than nonresponders., Conclusion: BICLA response is associated with clinical benefit in SLE assessments, PROs, and medical resource utilization, confirming its value as a clinical trial end point that is associated with measures important to patient care., (© 2021 The Authors. Arthritis & Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Therapeutic success in treating patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is limited by the multivariate disease etiology, multi-organ presentation, systemic involvement, and complex immunopathogenesis. Agents targeting B-cell differentiation and survival are not efficacious for all patients, indicating a need to target other inflammatory mediators. One such target is the type I interferon pathway. Type I interferons upregulate interferon gene signatures and mediate critical antiviral responses. Dysregulated type I interferon signaling is detectable in many patients with SLE and other autoimmune diseases, and the extent of this dysregulation is associated with disease severity, making type I interferons therapeutically tangible targets. The recent approval of the type I interferon-blocking antibody, anifrolumab, by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients with SLE demonstrates the value of targeting this pathway. Nevertheless, the interferon pathway has pleiotropic biology, with multiple cellular targets and signaling components that are incompletely understood. Deconvoluting the complexity of the type I interferon pathway and its intersection with lupus disease pathology will be valuable for further development of targeted SLE therapeutics. This review summarizes the immune mediators of the interferon pathway, its association with disease pathogenesis, and therapeutic modalities targeting the dysregulated interferon pathway.

Background: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) management objectives include preventing disease flares while minimizing glucocorticoid exposure. Pooled data from the phase 3 TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials in patients with moderate to severe SLE were analyzed to determine anifrolumab's effect on flares, including those arising with glucocorticoid taper., Methods: TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 were randomized, placebo-controlled, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (300 mg every 4 weeks for 48 weeks). For patients receiving baseline glucocorticoid ≥10 mg/day, attempted taper to ≤7.5 mg/day prednisone or equivalent from Weeks 8-40 was required and defined as sustained reduction when maintained through Week 52. Flares were defined as ≥1 new BILAG-2004 A or ≥2 new BILAG-2004 B scores versus the previous visit. Flare assessments were compared for patients receiving anifrolumab versus placebo., Results: Compared with placebo (n = 366), anifrolumab (n = 360) was associated with lower annualized flare rates (rate ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60-0.95), prolonged time to first flare (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% CI 0.55-0.89), and fewer patients with ≥1 flare (difference -9.3%, 95% CI -16.3 to -2.3), as well as flares in organ domains commonly active at baseline (musculoskeletal, mucocutaneous). Fewer BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment responders had ≥1 flare with anifrolumab (21.1%, 36/171) versus placebo (30.4%, 34/112). Of patients who achieved sustained glucocorticoid reductions from ≥10 mg/day at baseline, more remained flare free with anifrolumab (40.0%, 76/190) versus placebo (17.3%, 32/185)., Conclusions: Analyses of pooled TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 data support that anifrolumab reduces flares while permitting glucocorticoid taper in patients with SLE. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers TULIP-1 NCT02446912 (clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02446912);TULIP-2 NCT02446899 (clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02446899).

Objective: To investigate long-term safety and tolerability of anifrolumab, a human monoclonal antibody to the type I interferon (IFN) receptor subunit 1, in patients with moderate-to-severe systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: This 3-year, multinational, open-label extension study included adult patients who completed treatment (48 weeks of anifrolumab or placebo; 12-week follow-up) in the MUSE phase IIb randomized controlled trial (RCT). Patients initially received 1,000 mg of anifrolumab intravenously every 4 weeks, which was reduced to 300 mg every 4 weeks based on the benefit/risk profile established in the MUSE trial. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed monthly. Exploratory end points included the SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K), Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index (SDI), pharmacodynamics, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL)., Results: Of the 246 patients who completed the RCT, 218 (88.6%) enrolled in the open-label extension study, of which 139 (63.8%) completed 3 years of treatment. Approximately 69.7% of patients reported ≥1 AE during the first year of open-label extension treatment. Frequency and patterns of serious AEs and AEs of special interest over 3 years were consistent with those reported for 1 year of treatment in the RCT. Few patients (6.9%) discontinued treatment due to AEs. No new safety signals were identified. Improvement in the SLEDAI-2K was sustained over 3 years. SDI and Short Form 36 health survey scores remained stable. Neutralization of type I IFN gene signatures was maintained in the IFN-high population, and C3, C4, and anti-double-stranded DNA showed trends toward sustained improvement., Conclusion: Long-term anifrolumab treatment demonstrates an acceptable safety profile with sustained improvement in SLE disease activity, HRQoL, and serologic measures., (© 2020 The Authors. Arthritis & Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: In phase II and III trials, anifrolumab, a human monoclonal antibody that binds type I interferon receptor subunit 1, has shown efficacy in adults with moderate to severe SLE. We evaluated the safety and tolerability of anifrolumab using data pooled from these trials to more precisely estimate the rate and severity of adverse events (AEs)., Methods: Data were pooled from patients receiving monthly intravenous anifrolumab 300 mg or placebo in MUSE, TULIP-1 and TULIP-2. Key safety endpoints included percentages and exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) of patients who experienced AEs, serious AEs (SAEs), AEs leading to discontinuation and AEs of special interest., Results: During treatment, 86.9% of patients receiving anifrolumab 300 mg (n=459) experienced AEs (≥1) versus 79.4% receiving placebo (n=466), and 4.1% versus 5.2% experienced an AE leading to discontinuation of investigational product. SAEs (≥1) were experienced by 11.8% and 16.7% of patients receiving anifrolumab and placebo, respectively (EAIR risk difference (95% CI) -7.2 (-12.5 to -1.9)), including lupus exacerbations classified as SAEs (1.5% and 3%, respectively). Infections occurred in 69.7% and 55.4% of patients receiving anifrolumab and placebo, respectively; difference in reported rates was driven by herpes zoster (HZ) and mild and moderate respiratory (excluding pneumonia) infections. The risk of HZ was increased with anifrolumab versus placebo (6.1% vs 1.3%, respectively; EAIR risk difference (95% CI) 5.4 (2.8 to 8.4)); most HZ events were mild or moderate, cutaneous and resolved without treatment discontinuation. Serious infections occurred in 4.8% and 5.6% of patients receiving anifrolumab and placebo, respectively., Conclusions: In this pooled analysis of 925 patients with moderate to severe SLE, monthly intravenous anifrolumab 300 mg was generally well tolerated over 52 weeks with an acceptable safety profile. Anifrolumab was associated with an increased incidence of HZ and respiratory tract infections and lower reported rate of SLE worsening as SAEs., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RT, GA, LP, MAM and RNK are employees of AstraZeneca. RAF has received grant/research support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. EM has received grant support from, was a consultant for and was a speaker at a speaker bureau for AstraZeneca; received grant support and consulting fees from AbbVie, BMS, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Merck Serono and UCB; received grant support from BMS; and received consulting fees from Amgen, Biogen, CSL Inc, Neovacs and Wolf Biotherapeutics., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: 300 mg of intravenous anifrolumab every 4 weeks added to standard-of-care treatment for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) reduced disease activity and glucocorticoid requirement in a previous phase 3 trial. Because patients might find subcutaneous administration more convenient than intravenous delivery, we aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety, and efficacy of subcutaneous anifrolumab in patients with SLE, active skin disease, and a high type I interferon gene signature., Methods: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study was done at 12 hospitals and outpatient clinics in Hungary, South Korea, Poland, and the USA. Eligible patients were aged 18-70 years, and had SLE with high type I interferon gene signature and an activity score on the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index (CLASI) of at least 10. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned (3:1:3:1) by use of a voice-web response system to receive either 150 mg of subcutaneous anifrolumab or corresponding placebo, or 300 mg of subcutaneous anifrolumab or corresponding placebo in addition to stable standard-of-care treatment. The study was double-blinded with respect to intervention but not dose, until 12 weeks. Doses of oral glucocorticoids were tapered after week 12. The primary pharmacokinetic endpoint was the serum concentration of anifrolumab based on the maximum concentration after the first dose and the minimum (trough) concentration before subsequent doses and was measured in all patients who received anifrolumab and had at least one quantifiable serum pharmacokinetics observation following the first dose. The primary pharmacodynamic endpoint was neutralisation of the type I interferon pharmacodynamic signature at week 12 and was assessed in all patients with a high type I interferon pharmacodynamics signature at baseline based on a 21-gene test. Safety was evaluated in the full analysis set, which included all patients who received at least one dose of anifrolumab. This trial is completed and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02962960., Findings: Between March 14, 2017, and Oct 26, 2017, 36 patients were randomly assigned to receive 150 mg of anifrolumab (n=14), 300 mg of anifrolumab (n=13), or placebo (n=9). Two patients in the anifrolumab 150 mg group were excluded from the pharmacodynamic analysis set (n=34). Ten (71%) of 14 patients in the anifrolumab 150 mg group, ten (77%) of 13 patients in the anifrolumab 300 mg group, and nine (100%) of the nine patients in the placebo group completed 52 weeks of treatment. At week 12, pre-dose mean trough serum concentrations of anifrolumab were more than dose proportional between the anifrolumab 150 mg group (19·82 μg/mL [SD 15·01]) and the anifrolumab 300 mg group (60·28 μg/mL [43·66]), and the pharmacokinetics were non-linear. At week 12, the median percentage neutralisation of the type I interferon gene signature was higher with 150 mg (88·0% [median absolute deviation 7·4]) and 300 mg (90·7% [3·3]) of anifrolumab than with placebo (18·5% [8·1]), and more patients in the anifrolumab 150 mg group and the anifrolumab 300 mg group than in the placebo group had neutralisation of 75% or more (eight [67%] of 12 vs ten [77%] of 13 vs one [11%] of nine). At least one adverse event was reported by 23 (85%) of 27 patients in the anifrolumab groups and by seven (78%) of nine patients in the placebo group; most adverse events were of mild-to-moderate severity. Serious adverse events were reported in six (22%) of 27 patients in the anifrolumab groups (four patients in the 150 mg group and two in the 300 mg group). No serious adverse events were reported in the placebo group. Herpes zoster infection was reported by three (11%) of 27 patients in the anifrolumab groups and by one (11%) of nine patients in the placebo group. There were no treatment-related deaths., Interpretation: Anifrolumab, administered subcutaneously every 2 weeks to patients with SLE and moderate-to-severe skin manifestations, had non-linear pharmacokinetics that were more than dose proportional, and neutralised the type I interferon gene signature in a dose-dependent manner. The safety profile was consistent with previous studies of intravenous anifrolumab, supporting the continued development of anifrolumab as a subcutaneously administered therapy for patients with SLE., Funding: AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Chronic activation of the type I interferon (IFN) pathway plays a critical role in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) pathogenesis. Anifrolumab is a human monoclonal antibody to the type I IFN receptor subunit 1, which blocks the action of type I IFNs. Two phase 3 studies (TULIP-1 and TULIP-2) and a phase 2b study (MUSE) provide substantial evidence for the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab for moderately to severely active SLE. In all three studies, monthly intravenous anifrolumab 300 mg was associated with treatment differences >16% compared with placebo at Week 52 in British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment response rates. The combined data across a range of other clinically significant endpoints (e.g. oral corticosteroid reduction, improved skin disease, flare reduction) further support the efficacy of anifrolumab for SLE treatment. The safety profile of anifrolumab was generally similar across all studies; serious adverse events occurred in 8-16% and 16-19% of patients receiving anifrolumab and placebo, respectively. Herpes zoster incidence was greater with anifrolumab (≤7%) vs placebo (≤2%). Evidence from these clinical trials suggests that in patients with active SLE, anifrolumab is superior to placebo in achieving composite endpoints of disease activity response and oral corticosteroid reduction.

Introduction: The Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Prospective Observational Cohort Study (SPOCS) aims to describe the disease course of SLE and its association with type I interferon gene signature (IFNGS) status., Methods and Analysis: SPOCS is an international, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study designed to follow patients through biannual study visits during a 3-year observation period. Patients ≥18 years old with a physician diagnosis that meets the American College of Rheumatology or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics SLE classification criteria will be included. SPOCS will comprehensively analyse clinical features, disease progression and treatment, SLE outcomes, health status assessments and quality of life, and healthcare resource utilisation of patients with moderate to severe SLE. A four-gene test will be used to measure IFNGS status; scores will be compared with a pre-established cut-off. Patients will be stratified by low or high IFNGS expression levels. Enrolment began in June 2017, and study completion is expected in 2022. The total number of anticipated patients was initially planned for 1500 patients and was amended to 900 patients owing to slow accrual of eligible patients., Ethics and Dissemination: The ethics committee/institutional review board/independent ethics committee at each study site approved the SPOCS protocol prior to study initiation (protocol number: D3461R00001, version 3.0, 26 June 2019). Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at scientific meetings., Trial Registration Number: NCT03189875., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ERH, RT, AB, BD, FS and XW are AstraZeneca employees. HN was an employee at AstraZeneca at the time of the study., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Anifrolumab, a human monoclonal antibody to type I interferon receptor subunit 1 investigated for the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), did not have a significant effect on the primary end point in a previous phase 3 trial. The current phase 3 trial used a secondary end point from that trial as the primary end point., Methods: We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous anifrolumab (300 mg) or placebo every 4 weeks for 48 weeks. The primary end point of this trial was a response at week 52 defined with the use of the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA). A BICLA response requires reduction in any moderate-to-severe baseline disease activity and no worsening in any of nine organ systems in the BILAG index, no worsening on the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index, no increase of 0.3 points or more in the score on the Physician Global Assessment of disease activity (on a scale from 0 [no disease activity] to 3 [severe disease]), no discontinuation of the trial intervention, and no use of medications restricted by the protocol. Secondary end points included a BICLA response in patients with a high interferon gene signature at baseline; reductions in the glucocorticoid dose, in the severity of skin disease, and in counts of swollen and tender joints; and the annualized flare rate., Results: A total of 362 patients received the randomized intervention: 180 received anifrolumab and 182 received placebo. The percentage of patients who had a BICLA response was 47.8% in the anifrolumab group and 31.5% in the placebo group (difference, 16.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 6.3 to 26.3; P = 0.001). Among patients with a high interferon gene signature, the percentage with a response was 48.0% in the anifrolumab group and 30.7% in the placebo group; among patients with a low interferon gene signature, the percentage was 46.7% and 35.5%, respectively. Secondary end points with respect to the glucocorticoid dose and the severity of skin disease, but not counts of swollen and tender joints and the annualized flare rate, also showed a significant benefit with anifrolumab. Herpes zoster and bronchitis occurred in 7.2% and 12.2% of the patients, respectively, who received anifrolumab. There was one death from pneumonia in the anifrolumab group., Conclusions: Monthly administration of anifrolumab resulted in a higher percentage of patients with a response (as defined by a composite end point) at week 52 than did placebo, in contrast to the findings of a similar phase 3 trial involving patients with SLE that had a different primary end point. The frequency of herpes zoster was higher with anifrolumab than with placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02446899.)., (Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Objectives: This study evaluated the safety and tolerability of anifrolumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the type I interferon (IFN) receptor, in Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: In this open-label, phase 2, dose-escalation study, patients received intravenous (IV) anifrolumab 100, 300, or 1000 mg every 4 weeks from days 29 to 337 (Stage 1). Patients who completed Stage 1 continued anifrolumab 300 mg every 4 weeks for 156 weeks (Stage 2). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety of anifrolumab for 48 weeks (Stage 1) and 156 weeks (Stage 2). The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anifrolumab were also assessed. Results: Of 20 patients enrolled in Stage 1, 17 received IV anifrolumab 100 mg ( n  = 6), 300 mg ( n  = 5), or 1000 mg ( n  = 6). Adverse events (AE) and serious AE (SAE) incidences were similar between dose cohorts. SAEs occurred in 41% (Stage 1) and 33% (Stage 2) of patients; AEs leading to discontinuation occurred in 24% (Stage 1) and 22% (Stage 2) of patients. Anifrolumab had non-linear pharmacokinetics after the first and last dose and dose-dependently suppressed the IFN gene signature. Conclusion: Anifrolumab was well tolerated among Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe SLE.

Objectives: To evaluate the safety of sifalimumab in Japanese patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: This phase 2, open-label study consisted of a 52-week initial stage (Stage I) and a long-term extension (Stage II). In Stage I, sequential cohorts of patients received ascending doses of sifalimumab (intravenous [IV] 1.0, 3.0, and 10.0 mg/kg or subcutaneous 100 mg every 2 weeks; IV 600 and 1200 mg every 6 weeks). In Stage II, patients enrolled before June 2012 received the same dose of sifalimumab as during Stage I for up to 157 weeks or sifalimumab 600 mg IV every 4 weeks if they enrolled later. The safety of sifalimumab was assessed by adverse events (AEs). Results: Thirty patients enrolled in Stage I and 21 patients entered Stage II. The majority of patients experienced AEs (96.7% in Stage I and 100% in Stage II); most were mild or moderate in severity. Serious AEs occurred in 30.0% and 57.1% of patients in Stage I and II, respectively; most were instances of SLE flares. The proportion of patients in Stage I and II who had AEs leading to discontinuation was 10.0% and 28.6%, respectively. Conclusion: Sifalimumab was well tolerated in Japanese patients with SLE.

Background: Type I interferons are involved in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) pathogenesis. In a phase 2 trial, anifrolumab, a human monoclonal antibody to type I interferon receptor subunit 1, suppressed interferon gene signatures and substantially reduced SLE disease activity. Here, we sought to confirm the efficacy of anifrolumab versus placebo in a phase 3 trial of adult patients with SLE and moderate-to-severe disease activity despite standard-of-care treatment., Methods: TULIP-1 was a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial done at 123 sites in 18 countries. Included patients were aged 18-70 years, with moderate-to-severe SLE, and ongoing stable treatment with either prednisone or equivalent, an antimalarial, azathioprine, mizoribine, mycophenolate mofetil or mycophenolic acid, or methotrexate. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:2) to receive placebo, anifrolumab 150 mg, or anifrolumab 300 mg intravenously every 4 weeks for 48 weeks. Stable standard-of-care treatment continued except for mandatory attempts at oral corticosteroid tapering for patients receiving prednisone or equivalent of 10 mg/day or more at baseline. The primary outcome was the difference between the proportion of patients who achieved an SLE responder index-4 (SRI-4) response at week 52 with anifrolumab 300 mg versus with placebo. Key secondary outcomes were the difference between the anifrolumab 300 mg group and the placebo group in: proportion of patients in the interferon gene signature test-high subgroup who achieved SRI-4 at week 52; proportion of patients on 10 mg/day or more corticosteroids at baseline who achieved a sustained dose reduction to 7·5 mg/day or less from week 40 to 52; proportion of patients with a cutaneous lupus erythematosus disease area and severity index (CLASI) activity score of 10 or higher at baseline who achieved a 50% or more reduction in CLASI score by week 12; proportion of patients who achieved SRI-4 at week 24; and annualised flare rate through week 52. Other measures of disease activity were also assessed at week 52, including the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based composite lupus assessment (BICLA). Safety was also assessed. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the population of patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02446912)., Findings: Between June 9, 2015, and June 16, 2017, 457 patients were randomly assigned to the anifrolumab 300 mg group (n=180), the anifrolumab 150 mg group (n=93), or the placebo group (n=184). The proportion of patients at week 52 with an SRI-4 response was similar between anifrolumab 300 mg (65 [36%] of 180) and placebo (74 [40%] of 184; difference -4·2 [95% CI -14·2 to 5·8], p=0·41). Similarly, proportions of patients with an SRI-4 response at week 24, and at week 52 in patients in the interferon gene signature test-high subgroup, did not differ between the anifrolumab and placebo groups. In patients with baseline oral corticosteroids of at least 10 mg/day, sustained dose reduction to 7·5 mg/day or less was achieved by 42 (41%) of 103 patients in the anifrolumab 300 mg group and 33 (32%) of 102 patients in the placebo group (difference 8·9 [95% CI -4·1 to 21·9]). In patients with CLASI activity score of at least 10 at baseline, at least 50% reduction by week 12 was achieved by 24 (42%) of 58 patients in the anifrolumab 300 mg group and 14 (25%) of 54 in the placebo group (difference 17·0 [95% CI -0·3 to 34·3]). Annualised flare rates were 0·60 for anifrolumab and 0·72 for placebo (rate ratio 0·83 [95% CI 0·60 to 1·14]). BICLA response was achieved by 67 (37%) of 180 patients receiving anifrolumab 300 mg versus 49 (27%) of 184 receiving placebo (difference 10·1 [95% CI 0·6 to 19·7]). Anifrolumab's safety profile was similar to that observed in phase 2, with similar proportions of patients having a serious adverse event between groups (25 [14%] of 180 for anifrolumab 300 mg, ten [11%] of 93 for anifrolumab 150 mg, and 30 [16%] of 184 for placebo)., Interpretation: The primary endpoint was not reached. However, several secondary endpoints, including reduction in oral corticosteroid dose, CLASI responses, and BICLA responses, suggest clinical benefit of anifrolumab compared with placebo. Conclusive evidence for the efficacy of anifrolumab awaits further phase 3 trial data. Despite the inherent limitations of a 1-year phase 3 study, such as incomplete knowledge of applicability to the general population and scarce detection of rare safety signals, in addition to complications from prespecified restricted medication rules, our results suggest that anifrolumab might have the potential to provide a treatment option for patients who have active SLE while receiving standard therapy., Funding: AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This post hoc analysis compared anifrolumab 300 mg every 4 weeks with placebo on rash and arthritis measures with different stringency in patients with moderate to severe SLE (phase IIb; MUSE; NCT01438489). Subgroups were analysed by type I interferon gene signature (IFNGS test-high or test-low)., Methods: Rash was measured with the SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K), British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) Index and modified Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index (mCLASI). Arthritis was evaluated using SLEDAI-2K, BILAG and swollen and tender joint counts. Outcomes were measured at week 52., Results: More anifrolumab-treated patients demonstrated resolution of rash by SLEDAI-2K versus placebo: 39/88 (44.3%) versus 13/88 (14.8%), OR (90% CI) 4.56 (2.48 to 8.39), p<0.001; improvement of BILAG: 48/82 (58.5%) versus 24/85 (28.2%), OR (90% CI) 3.59 (2.08 to 6.19), p<0.001; and ≥50% improvement by mCLASI: 57/92 (62.0%) versus 30/89 (33.7%), OR (90% CI) 3.31 (1.97 to 5.55), p<0.001. More anifrolumab-treated patients had improved arthritis by SLEDAI-2K versus placebo: 55/97 (56.7%) versus 42/99 (42.4%), OR (90%  CI) 1.88 (1.16 to 3.04), p=0.032;  and BILAG: 65/94 (69.1%) versus 47/95 (49.5%), OR (90% CI) 2.47 (1.48 to 4.12), p=0.003; and mean (SD) swollen and tender joint reductions: -5.5 (6.3) versus -3.4 (5.9), p=0.004. Comparable results were demonstrated in IFNGS test-high patients (n=151). In IFNGS test-low patients (n=50), substantial numerical differences in partial rash and arthritis responses were observed in anifrolumab-treated patients versus placebo, with statistical significance only for rash by BILAG in this small population., Conclusions: Anifrolumab treatment was associated with improvements versus placebo in specific SLE features of arthritis and rash using measures of different stringency. Although driven by robust data in the prevalent IFNGS test-high population, further evaluation in IFNGS test-low patients is warranted., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JTM has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study. She has also received grants from GSK, BMS, Xencor and Exagen; consulting fees from GSK, BMS, EMD Serono, Calgene, UCB, RemeGen, Exagen, Lilly, Amgen, Janssen, Sanofi, Anthera and Neovacs; and fees for participating in data safety monitoring boards from Immunopharma and Takeda, outside the submitted work. RF has been a consultant and investigator for MedImmune/AstraZeneca and has participated in an advisory board for MedImmune/AstraZeneca. VPW has been a consultant for MedImmune and has received a grant from AstraZeneca. The University of Pennsylvania owns copyright over the CLASI. MK reports no conflicts of interest. JD, LW and GI are employees of Viela Bio. RT is an employee of AstraZeneca. JD, GI, LW and RT own stock with AstraZeneca.

Background: Naloxegol is a novel selective, peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist for treating opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in patients with chronic pain syndromes. We analyzed the cardiovascular (CV) safety of naloxegol based on data from its development program prior to approval by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2015., Methods: Comprehensive CV safety analyses were performed in 4 clinical studies of naloxegol (12.5 and/or 25 mg) in patients with noncancer pain and OIC: two 12-week, double-blind, randomized studies; a 12-week, double-blind, extension study; and a 52-week, randomized, open-label study versus usual care. Evaluations of baseline CV risk were obtained from medical histories and clinical findings at the time of study initiation., Results: Across the 4 studies (N = 2135), 68% of patients had ≥1 CV risk factor and 41% had a history of CV disease, diabetes, or ≥2 other CV risk factors. There were no increases in blood pressure, heart rate, or the rate-pressure product with naloxegol versus placebo. The rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) per 100 patient-years of exposure were 1.13 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-2.89) for placebo/usual care and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.24-1.75) for naloxegol. The relative risk of MACE for all doses of naloxegol versus placebo was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.14-3.36)., Conclusion: These data demonstrate that naloxegol has a CV safety profile comparable to placebo/usual care in patients with OIC. Although the observed number of events was low, the data show no CV signal in patients with OIC treated with naloxegol.

Objectives: In a post-hoc analysis, we aimed to validate the Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS) definition as an endpoint in an systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) Phase IIb randomised controlled trial (RCT) (MUSE [NCT01438489]) and then utilize LLDAS to discriminate between anifrolumab and placebo., Methods: Patients received intravenous placebo (n=102) or anifrolumab (300 mg, n=99; 1,000 mg, n=104) Q4W plus standard of care for 48 weeks. LLDAS attainment (SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 ≤4 without major organ activity, no new disease activity, Physician's Global Assessment ≤1, prednisolone ≤7.5 mg/d and standard immunosuppressant dosage tolerance) was assessed. Associations with endpoints and LLDAS attainment differences between treatments were explored., Results: LLDAS attainment at Week 52 was associated with SLE Responder Index 4 (SRI[4]) and British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) (74/85[87%] and 62/84[74%] were also SRI[4] and BICLA responders, respectively; both nominal p<0.001). Only 74/159 (47%) of SRI(4) and 62/121 (51%) of BICLA responders reached LLDAS.Anifrolumab-treated patients achieved earlier LLDAS, and more spent at least half their observed time in LLDAS (OR vs. placebo; 300 mg: 3.04, 95% CI 1.34 to 6.92, nominal p=0.008; 1,000 mg: 2.17, 95% CI 0.93 to 5.03, nominal p=0.072) vs placebo-treated patients. At Week 52, 17/102 (17%), 39/99 (39%) and 29/104 (28%) of patients on placebo, anifrolumab 300 and 1,000 mg, respectively, attained LLDAS (OR vs. placebo; 300 mg: 3.41, 95% CI 1.73 to 6.76, p<0.001; 1,000 mg: 2.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.07, nominal p=0.046)., Conclusions: LLDAS attainment represents a clinically meaningful SLE outcome measure, and anifrolumab is associated with more patients who met LLDAS criteria versus placebo. These data support LLDAS as an SLE RCT endpoint., Trial Registration Number: NCT1438489; Post-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: EFM received research support, consultancy or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Glaxo Smith Kline, Janssen and UCB (Union Chimique Belge). TT, AB and RT are employees of AstraZeneca. GI was an employee of Medimmune during the conduct of this analysis; he is currently an employee of Regenxbio., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Objective: To summarize results from pain and opioid use assessments with naloxegol in adults with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and chronic noncancer pain., Methods: Two phase 3 randomized, double-blind, 12-week studies evaluated the efficacy and safety of oral naloxegol (12.5 or 25 mg daily) in adults (18 to < 85 years) with confirmed OIC and chronic noncancer pain: KODIAC-04 (NCT01309841) and KODIAC-05 (NCT01323790). Pain level was assessed daily (11-point numeric rating scale [NRS]; 0 = no pain, 10 = worst imaginable pain). Changes from baseline in mean weekly pain scores and opioid dose (weeks 1 through 12) were analyzed using mixed-model repeated measures., Results: At baseline, mean daily NRS average pain scores ranged from 4.5 to 4.8 for all groups in KODIAC-04 (N = 652) and were 4.6 for each group in KODIAC-05 (N = 700). Respective mean ± SD changes from baseline average pain for placebo, naloxegol 12.5 mg, and naloxegol 25 mg were -0.2 ± 1.07, -0.3 ± 1.05 (P = 0.773 vs. placebo), and 0.2 ± 0.95 (P = 0.837 vs. placebo; KODIAC-04) and -0.1 ± 0.94, -0.1 ± 0.87 (P = 0.744), and 0.0 ± 1.18 (P = 0.572; KODIAC-05). At baseline, mean daily opioid doses ranged from 135.6 to 143.2 morphine equivalent units (MEUs)/day in KODIAC-04, and from 119.9 to 151.7 MEUs/day in KODIAC-05. Respective mean ± SD changes from baseline dose were -1.8 ± 30.19, -2.3 ± 20.52 (P = 0.724 vs. placebo), and 0.4 ± 13.01 (P = 0.188 vs. placebo; KODIAC-04) and -0.3 ± 17.14, -1.3 ± 17.11 (P = 0.669 vs. placebo), and 0.1 ± 8.54 (P = 0.863 vs. placebo; KODIAC-05). Changes in maintenance opioid dose were few; reasons for such changes were similar across treatment groups., Conclusion: Centrally mediated opioid analgesia was maintained during treatment with naloxegol in patients with noncancer pain and OIC., (© 2017 World Institute of Pain.)

Objectives: To compare the pharmacokinetics (PK), safety and tolerability of subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous anifrolumab, an anti-type I interferon receptor monoclonal antibody in development for SLE, in healthy volunteers., Methods: In this Phase I randomised, placebo-controlled study, 30 adults were assigned to three treatment cohorts (anifrolumab 300 mg SC (n=6), anifrolumab 300 mg intravenous (n=6), anifrolumab 600 mg SC (n=6)) and placebo (n=4/cohort). Serial blood samples were collected up to Day 84 to measure anifrolumab concentrations and antidrug antibodies (ADAs). PK parameters were estimated by noncompartmental analysis., Results: Maximum serum concentrations in SC cohorts occurred after 4-7 days. Anifrolumab serum concentrations were below the limit of detection in all individuals by Day 84. Exposure to SC anifrolumab increased dose proportionally from 300 mg to 600 mg based on area under the serum concentration-time curve. Anifrolumab 300 mg SC exposure reached 87% of the intravenous exposure. Anifrolumab 300 mg SC and placebo administration elicited minimal injection-site reactions. Transient injection-site induration occurred in five of six individuals after anifrolumab 600 mg SC and two of four individuals after placebo. Transient, mild to moderate injection-site induration and pruritus occurred simultaneously in two of six individuals after anifrolumab 600 mg SC. Adverse events were reported by 50% (n=9) of anifrolumab-treated individuals and 33% (n=4) of placebo-treated individuals. ADAs were detected in only one individual in the anifrolumab 300-mg intravenous group at the Day 84 assessment., Conclusion: Anifrolumab 300-mg SC exposure was 87% of intravenous administration, with single SC anifrolumab administrations well tolerated in healthy volunteers., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RT, TR and AB are employees of AstraZeneca. LS is an employee of MedImmune LLC and a shareholder of AstraZeneca.

Objective: To compare the long-term safety and tolerability of naloxegol with placebo in patients with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and noncancer pain., Design: Twelve-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group phase 3 extension study (KODIAC-07, NCT01395524)., Setting: Clinical investigation centers in the United States., Patients: Adult outpatients (N = 302) with confirmed OIC who had completed a 12-week pivotal phase 3 study (KODIAC-04, NCT01309841)., Interventions: Daily oral administration of naloxegol (12.5 and 25 mg) or placebo., Main Outcome Measures: Adverse events (AEs), including treatment-related AEs, serious AEs, and AEs of special interest; changes from baseline to week 12 in pain scores, daily opioid dose, and symptoms and quality-of-life measurements., Results: No important new AEs occurred during this extension study compared with KODIAC-04. AEs occurred more frequently with naloxegol 25 mg (41.2 percent) versus naloxegol 12.5 mg (34.0 percent) and placebo (33.0 percent). Treatment-emergent AEs occurring in >5 percent of patients in either naloxegol group during the treatment period were arthralgia (25 mg; 5.2 percent) and diarrhea (12.5 mg; 5.3 percent); two reported AEs attributable to opioid withdrawal syndrome in naloxegol groups were deemed unrelated to study medication. None of the gastrointestinal serious AEs was adjudicated as bowel perforation; one patient (naloxegol 12.5 mg) had an event adjudicated as a major cardiovascular event and was unrelated to study medication. Pain scores and daily opioid dose were unchanged, and improvements in symptoms and quality-of-life observed in KODIAC-04 were maintained throughout the extension study., Conclusion: Naloxegol was generally safe and well tolerated in this 12-week extension study in patients with noncancer pain and OIC.

Objective: Irritability is a significant component in the clinical manifestation of major depressive disorder (MDD). The Sheehan Irritability Scale (SIS) was developed to assess irritability-related symptoms in patients with psychiatric disorders. Data from a phase 2 clinical trial (June 2008-July 2009) was utilized to evaluate the psychometric properties of the SIS. The trial population included patients diagnosed with MDD, according to DSM-IV and confirmed via the MINI diagnostic scale, who had inadequate response to citalopram., Method: The secondary analyses included 586 patients from the United States and India. Data from the SIS, depression severity measures (17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HDRS-17], Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS], Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report [QIDS-SR]), and other measures (Sheehan Disability Scale [SDS], Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale [CGI-S]) were used in the psychometric evaluation. All statistical tests used a significance level of .05 unless otherwise noted., Results: Internal consistency (0.92-0.99) and test-retest reliability (0.83 to 0.98) were excellent. Concurrent validity was demonstrated through strong correlations between the SIS total score and HDRS-17, QIDS-SR, SDS, CGI-S, and MADRS scores. SIS total scores were significantly different by clinical severity level (P < .001). Minimally important difference estimates suggest that a 7- to 8-point change in the SIS total score may be clinically meaningful., Conclusions: The SIS has excellent reliability, acceptable validity, and good responsiveness, making the SIS appropriate for use in clinical research and practice., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00692445., (© Copyright 2016 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

The Sheehan Irritability Scale (SIS) measures the frequency, severity, and impairment associated with irritability in psychiatric patients. The content validity of the SIS in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) has not been evaluated. A cross-sectional, qualitative research study was conducted to assess the content validity of the SIS among patients with MDD. One-on-one interviews were conducted, starting with open-ended questions to evaluate the consistency of the SIS content with patient experiences of irritability. Participants then completed the SIS and cognitive interviews around the comprehension of the SIS content (instructions, items, response options). Participants included 24 patients diagnosed with MDD who had an inadequate response to an antidepressant treatment. The sample was: 50.4 mean years, 66.7% female, and 91.7% white racial background. All concepts on the SIS were spontaneously mentioned by at least one participant, and when probed about the symptoms, the majority of participants (66.7-100%) reported the concepts being part of their experience. The majority of participants (70.8-100%) understood the SIS instructions, items, and response scales. This study provides evidence of content validity of the SIS in patients diagnosed with MDD, supporting the use as a measure of irritability in patients with depression.

Background: Treatment options for patients with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and inadequate response to laxatives (LIR) are few., Objective: Assess the efficacy and safety of orally administered naloxegol in patients with prospectively confirmed OIC and LIR., Methods: We analyzed pooled data from two identical randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 trials of naloxegol in patients with non-cancer pain, OIC and LIR in which naloxegol (12.5 mg, n = 240; 25 mg, n = 241) or placebo (n = 239) were administered daily. We assessed the response rates, time to first post-dose laxation, spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs), OIC symptoms and patient-reported outcomes over 12 weeks., Results: OIC response rates for the naloxegol 25-mg (p < 0.001) and the 12.5-mg (p = 0.005) LIR dose groups were higher than placebo. Median times to first post-dose SBM were 7.6, 19.2 and 41.1 hours for the naloxegol 25 mg, naloxegol 12.5 mg and placebo groups, respectively. Other SBM measures, daily symptoms of OIC, and both the Patient Assessment of Constipation - Symptoms and Patient Assessment of Constipation-Quality of Life scores improved from baseline with naloxegol treatment. Changes from baseline in opioid dose, pain scores and opioid withdrawal scores were similar among treatment groups., Conclusions: Naloxegol was efficacious, generally safe and well tolerated in the patients with OIC and LIR, while preserving opioid analgesia. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01309841; NCT01323790.

Objectives: To evaluate the neuronal nicotinic channel modulator TC-5214 (dexmecamylamine) as adjunct therapy in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and inadequate response to prior antidepressant treatment., Methods: Study 004 (D4130C00004) and Study 005 (D4130C00005) comprised an 8-week open-label antidepressant (SSRI/SNRI) treatment period followed by an 8-week randomised, active treatment with twice-daily TC-5214 (0.5, 2 or 4 mg in Study 004; 0.1, 1 or 4 mg in Study 005) or placebo, adjunct to ongoing SSRI/SNRI. Primary efficacy endpoint was change in MADRS total score from randomisation (Week 8) to treatment end (Week 16). Secondary endpoints included MADRS response and remission, and changes in SDS and HAM-D-17-item scores. Safety and tolerability were monitored throughout., Results: Studies 004 and 005 randomised 640 and 696 patients, respectively, to TC-5214 or placebo. No statistically significant improvements in MADRS total score or any secondary endpoints were seen with TC-5214 versus placebo in either study at treatment end. The most commonly reported adverse events (> 10%) with TC-5214 were constipation, dizziness and dry mouth., Conclusions: TC-5214 adjunct to antidepressant was generally well tolerated. However, the studies were not supportive of an antidepressant effect for TC-5214 in patients with MDD and inadequate response to prior antidepressant therapy.

Safety and tolerability are important considerations when selecting patients' treatment for major depressive disorder. We report the long-term safety and tolerability of the nicotinic channel modulator dexmecamylamine (TC-5214), adjunct to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) in patients with major depressive disorder and who had an inadequate response to antidepressants. This 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study explored the long-term safety and tolerability of dexmecamylamine. Patients were randomized 3:1 to receive flexibly dosed dexmecamylamine 1 to 4 mg adjunct to SSRI/SNRI or placebo plus SSRI/SNRI. The patient population comprised inadequate responders from 2 Phase III acute dexmecamylamine studies (NCT01157078 [study 002], NCT01153347 [study 004]) and de novo patients who responded inadequately during a 6-week open-label antidepressant treatment period preceding randomization. Safety and tolerability were assessed by monitoring adverse events, vital signs, and physical and laboratory parameters. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed on most efficacy-related end points. Sustained efficacy was analyzed using logistic regression. Overall, 813 patients were randomized (610 received dexmecamylamine, 203 received placebo). In total, 82.4% and 84.6% of patients, respectively, experienced an adverse event. Adverse events occurring more frequently with dexmecamylamine vs placebo were constipation (19.6% vs 6.0%), dizziness (12.0% vs 7.0%), and dry mouth (9.7% vs 5.0%). Back pain (2.8% vs 8.5%), weight increase (4.4% vs 7.0%), and fatigue (5.6 % vs 7.5%) occurred more frequently in placebo-treated patients. No notable differences were observed between dexmecamylamine and placebo for any secondary end point. In this long-term study, safety and tolerability of dexmecamylamine were consistent with that reported in acute Phase III studies of dexmecamylamine.

Background and Objective: Dexmecamylamine (TC-5214) is a nicotinic channel modulator that was evaluated as a potential adjunct treatment to an antidepressant for patients with major depressive disorder. Dexmecamylamine is almost completely eliminated via the kidneys, with more than 90 % of a given dose excreted unchanged in urine. The aim of this study was to assess the single-dose pharmacokinetics of dexmecamylamine in subjects with various degrees of renal impairment and subjects undergoing hemodialysis., Methods: A single-dose, open-label, parallel-group study was conducted at two study centers in the USA. There were four treatment groups with eight subjects in each, receiving a single dose of dexmecamylamine 8 mg (subjects with normal renal function and mild renal impairment) or TC-5412 2 mg [subjects with moderate renal impairment and end-stage renal disease (ESRD)]. The pharmacokinetics of dexmecamylamine in plasma, urine, and dialysate were evaluated using non-compartmental analysis., Results: The plasma pharmacokinetics of dexmecamylamine were influenced by renal function. The increase in dose-normalized area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) was statistically significant with an approximately doubled exposure in subjects with moderate renal impairment compared with subjects with normal renal function. The maximum plasma concentration was not impacted by renal function. Plasma clearance of dexmecamylamine in ESRD subjects appeared negligible, with flat plasma concentration-time profiles. Hemodialysis had a relatively modest effect on reduction of dexmecamylamine plasma concentrations. There was no discernable relationship between renal clearance and urinary pH., Conclusion: Renal impairment increased the AUC, prolonged the elimination half-life, and decreased the clearance of dexmecamylamine following administration as a single oral dose. It is likely that renal function would need to be taken into account when setting the dose. Dexmecamylamine administration should be avoided or the dose significantly reduced in patients with severe renal impairment and ESRD.