Search

Emel Aygören-Pürsün,1 Anette Bygum,2 Kathleen Beusterien,3 Emily Hautamaki,4 Zlatko Sisic,5 Henrik B Boysen,6 Teresa Caballero7 1Angioedema Centre, Department for Children and Adolescents, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany; 2Hereditary Angioedema Centre Denmark, Department of Dermatology and Allergy Centre, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark; 3Outcomes Research Strategies in Health, Washington, DC, 4Patient Reported Outcomes, Oxford Outcomes Inc., an ICON plc company, Bethesda, MD, USA; 5ViroPharma Incorporated, Chatsworth House, Maidenhead, UK; 6HAEi – Hereditary Angioedema International Patient Organization for C1 Inhibitor Deficiencies, Skanderborg, Denmark; 7Allergy Department, Hospital La Paz Institute for Health Research (IdiPaz), Biomedical Research Network on Rare Diseases U754 (CIBERER), University Hospital La Paz, Madrid, Spain Objective: To estimate health status utility (preference) weights for hereditary angioedema (HAE) during an attack and between attacks using data from the Hereditary Angioedema Burden of Illness Study in Europe (HAE-BOIS-Europe) survey. Utility measures quantitatively describe the net impact of a condition on a patient’s life; a score of 0.0 reflects death and 1.0 reflects full health.Study design and methods: The HAE-BOIS-Europe was a cross-sectional survey conducted in Spain, Germany, and Denmark to assess the real-world experience of HAE from the patient perspective. Survey items that overlapped conceptually with the EuroQol 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D) domains (pain/discomfort, mobility, self-care, usual activities, and anxiety/depression) were manually crosswalked to the corresponding UK population-based EQ-5D utility weights. EQ-5D utilities were computed for each respondent in the HAE-BOIS-Europe survey for acute attacks and between attacks.Results: Overall, a total of 111 HAE-BOIS-Europe participants completed all selected survey items and thus allowed for computation of EQ-5D-based utilities. The mean utilities for an HAE attack and between attacks were 0.44 and 0.72, respectively. Utilities for an acute attack were dependent on the severity of pain of the last attack (0.61 for no pain or mild pain, 0.47 for moderate pain, and 0.08 for severe pain). There were no significant differences across countries. Mean utilities derived from the study approach compare sensibly with other disease states for both acute attacks and between attacks.Conclusion: The impacts of HAE translate into substantial health status disutilities associated with acute attacks as well as between attacks, documenting that the detrimental effects of HAE are meaningful from the patient perspective. Results were consistent across countries with regard to pain severity and in comparison to similar disease states. The results can be used to raise awareness of HAE as a serious disease with wide-ranging personal and social impacts. Keywords: hereditary angioedema, health-related quality of life, burden of illness, EQ-5D

Background: The aim was to evaluate long‐term effectiveness and safety of lanadelumab in patients ≥12 y old with hereditary angioedema (HAE) 1/2 (NCT02741596). Methods: Rollover patients completing the HELP Study and continuing into HELP OLE received one lanadelumab 300 mg dose until first attack (dose‐and‐wait period), then 300 mg q2wks (regular dosing stage). Nonrollovers (newly enrolled) received lanadelumab 300 mg q2wks from day 0. Baseline attack rate for rollovers: ≥1 attack/4 weeks (based on run‐in period attack rate during HELP Study); for nonrollovers: historical attack rate ≥1 attack/12 weeks. The planned treatment period was 33 months. Results: 212 patients participated (109 rollovers, 103 nonrollovers); 81.6% completed ≥30 months on study (mean [SD], 29.6 [8.2] months). Lanadelumab markedly reduced mean HAE attack rate (reduction vs baseline: 87.4% overall). Patients were attack free for a mean of 97.7% of days during treatment; 81.8% and 68.9% of patients were attack free for ≥6 and ≥12 months, respectively. Angioedema Quality‐of‐Life total and domain scores improved from day 0 to end of study. Treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (excluding HAE attacks) were reported by 97.2% of patients; most commonly injection site pain (47.2%) and viral upper respiratory tract infection (42.0%). Treatment‐related TEAEs were reported by 54.7% of patients. Most injection site reactions resolved within 1 hour (70.2%) or 1 day (92.6%). Six (2.8%) patients discontinued due to TEAEs. No treatment‐related serious TEAEs or deaths were reported. Eleven treatment‐related TEAEs of special interest were reported by seven (3.3%) patients. Conclusion: Lanadelumab demonstrated sustained efficacy and acceptable tolerability with long‐term use in HAE patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Effective inhibition of plasma kallikrein may have significant benefits for patients with hereditary angioedema due to deficiency of C1 inhibitor (C1‐INH‐HAE) by reducing the frequency of angioedema attacks. Avoralstat is a small molecule inhibitor of plasma kallikrein. This study (OPuS‐2) evaluated the efficacy and safety of prophylactic avoralstat 300 or 500 mg compared with placebo. Methods: OPuS‐2 was a Phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group study. Subjects were administered avoralstat 300 mg, avoralstat 500 mg, or placebo orally 3 times per day for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the angioedema attack rate based on adjudicator‐confirmed attacks. Results: A total of 110 subjects were randomized and dosed. The least squares (LS) mean attack rates per week were 0.589, 0.675, and 0.593 for subjects receiving avoralstat 500 mg, avoralstat 300 mg, and placebo, respectively. Overall, 1 subject in each of the avoralstat groups and no subjects in the placebo group were attack‐free during the 84‐day treatment period. The LS mean duration of all confirmed attacks was 25.4, 29.4, and 31.4 hours for the avoralstat 500 mg, avoralstat 300 mg, and placebo groups, respectively. Using the Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire (AE‐QoL), improved QoL was observed for the avoralstat 500 mg group compared with placebo. Avoralstat was generally safe and well tolerated. Conclusions: Although this study did not demonstrate efficacy of avoralstat in preventing angioedema attacks in C1‐INH‐HAE, it provided evidence of shortened angioedema episodes and improved QoL in the avoralstat 500 mg treatment group compared with placebo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Hereditary Angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease. Early diagnosis and appropriate therapy are essential. This update and revision of the global guideline for HAE provides up‐to‐date consensus recommendations for the management of HAE. In the development of this update and revision of the guideline, an international expert panel reviewed the existing evidence and developed 20 recommendations that were discussed, finalized and consented during the guideline consensus conference in June 2016 in Vienna. The final version of this update and revision of the guideline incorporates the contributions of a board of expert reviewers and the endorsing societies. The goal of this guideline update and revision is to provide clinicians and their patients with guidance that will assist them in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1‐inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1‐inhibitor (type 2). The key clinical questions covered by these recommendations are: (1) How should HAE‐1/2 be defined and classified?, (2) How should HAE‐1/2 be diagnosed?, (3) Should HAE‐1/2 patients receive prophylactic and/or on‐demand treatment and what treatment options should be used?, (4) Should HAE‐1/2 management be different for special HAE‐1/2 patient groups such as pregnant/lactating women or children?, and (5) Should HAE‐1/2 management incorporate self‐administration of therapies and patient support measures? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Hereditary angioedema ( HAE), caused by deficiency in C1-inhibitor (C1- INH), leads to unpredictable edema of subcutaneous tissues with potentially fatal complications. As surgery can be a trigger for edema episodes, current guidelines recommend preoperative prophylaxis with C1- INH or attenuated androgens in patients with HAE undergoing surgery. However, the risk of an HAE attack in patients without prophylaxis has not been quantified. Objectives This analysis examined rates of perioperative edema in patients with HAE not receiving prophylaxis. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of records of randomly selected patients with HAE type I or II treated at the Frankfurt Comprehensive Care Centre. These were examined for information about surgical procedures and the presence of perioperative angioedema. Results A total of 331 patients were included; 247 underwent 700 invasive procedures. Of these procedures, 335 were conducted in 144 patients who had not received prophylaxis at the time of surgery. Categories representing significant numbers of procedures were abdominal ( n = 113), ENT ( n = 71), and gynecological ( n = 58) procedures. The rate of documented angioedema without prophylaxis across all procedures was 5.7%; in 24.8% of procedures, the presence of perioperative angioedema could not be excluded, leading to a maximum potential risk of 30.5%. Predictors of perioperative angioedema could not be identified. Conclusion The risk of perioperative angioedema in patients with HAE type I or II without prophylaxis undergoing surgical procedures ranged from 5.7% to 30.5% ( CI 3.5-35.7%). The unpredictability of HAE episodes supports current international treatment recommendations to consider short-term prophylaxis for all HAE patients undergoing surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self-administration of therapy can help hereditary angioedema (HAE) patients regain control of their disease or reduce its impact and improve the quality of their lives. However, data from a self-administration survey, and subsequent discussion at an international HAE expert meeting, identified several barriers to self-administration therapy. These barriers include difficulty in administration technique, availability of nursing resources and the mental capacity of the patient. Encouragingly, international HAE experts identified that once a patient has acquired self-administration skills, they generally retain them in the long-term. As patient uptake increases, it was recommended that follow-up management plans should be established to address any issues from the patient's perspective. Copyright © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]