Anifrolumab, an Anti–Interferon‐α Receptor Monoclonal Antibody, in Moderate‐to‐Severe Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab, a type I interferon (IFN) receptor antagonist, in a phase IIb, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study of adults with moderate‐to‐severe systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods Patients (n = 305) were randomized to receive in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inArthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) Vol. 69; no. 2; pp. 376 - 386
Main Authors Furie, Richard, Khamashta, Munther, Merrill, Joan T., Werth, Victoria P., Kalunian, Kenneth, Brohawn, Philip, Illei, Gabor G., Drappa, Jorn, Wang, Liangwei, Yoo, Stephen
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.02.2017
John Wiley and Sons Inc
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab, a type I interferon (IFN) receptor antagonist, in a phase IIb, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study of adults with moderate‐to‐severe systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods Patients (n = 305) were randomized to receive intravenous anifrolumab (300 mg or 1,000 mg) or placebo, in addition to standard therapy, every 4 weeks for 48 weeks. Randomization was stratified by SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 score (<10 or ≥10), oral corticosteroid dosage (<10 or ≥10 mg/day), and type I IFN gene signature test status (high or low) based on a 4‐gene expression assay. The primary end point was the percentage of patients achieving an SLE Responder Index (SRI[4]) response at week 24 with sustained reduction of oral corticosteroids (<10 mg/day and less than or equal to the dose at week 1 from week 12 through 24). Other end points (including SRI[4], British Isles Lupus Assessment Group [BILAG]–based Composite Lupus Assessment [BICLA], modified SRI[6], and major clinical response) were assessed at week 52. The primary end point was analyzed in the modified intent‐to‐treat (ITT) population and type I IFN–high subpopulation. The study result was considered positive if the primary end point was met in either of the 2 study populations. The Type I error rate was controlled at 0.10 (2‐sided), within each of the 2 study populations for the primary end point analysis. Results The primary end point was met by more patients treated with anifrolumab (34.3% of 99 for 300 mg and 28.8% of 104 for 1,000 mg) than placebo (17.6% of 102) (P = 0.014 for 300 mg and P = 0.063 for 1,000 mg, versus placebo), with greater effect size in patients with a high IFN signature at baseline (13.2% in placebo‐treated patients versus 36.0% [P = 0.004] and 28.2% [P = 0.029]) in patients treated with anifrolumab 300 mg and 1,000 mg, respectively. At week 52, patients treated with anifrolumab achieved greater responses in SRI(4) (40.2% versus 62.6% [P < 0.001] and 53.8% [P = 0.043] with placebo, anifrolumab 300 mg, and anifrolumab 1,000 mg, respectively), BICLA (25.7% versus 53.5% [P < 0.001] and 41.2% [P = 0.018], respectively), modified SRI(6) (28.4% versus 49.5% [P = 0.002] and 44.7% [P = 0.015], respectively), major clinical response (BILAG 2004 C or better in all organ domains from week 24 through week 52) (6.9% versus 19.2% [P = 0.012] and 17.3% [P = 0.025], respectively), and several other global and organ‐specific end points. Herpes zoster was more frequent in the anifrolumab‐treated patients (2.0% with placebo treatment versus 5.1% and 9.5% with anifrolumab 300 mg and 1,000 mg, respectively), as were cases reported as influenza (2.0% versus 6.1% and 7.6%, respectively), in the anifrolumab treatment groups. Incidence of serious adverse events was similar between groups (18.8% versus 16.2% and 17.1%, respectively). Conclusion Anifrolumab substantially reduced disease activity compared with placebo across multiple clinical end points in the patients with moderate‐to‐severe SLE.
Bibliography:identifier: NCT01438489.
Supported by MedImmune.
ClinicalTrials.gov
Dr. Furie has received consulting fees (more than $10,000) and research grants from MedImmune. Professor Khamashta has received consulting fees from MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline, and UCB and speaking fees from Inova Diagnostics (less than $10,000 each) and research grants from Bayer. Dr. Merrill has received consulting fees from MedImmune and Genentech/Roche (less than $10,000 each) and research grants from Genentech. Dr. Werth has received consulting fees from MedImmune (less than $10,000) and holds a patent for the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index (CLASI; owned by the University of Pennsylvania) used in this study. Dr. Kalunian has received consulting fees from MedImmune and AstraZeneca (less than $10,000 each) and research grants from MedImmune. Mr. Brohawn and Drs. Illei, Wang, and Yoo own stock or stock options in AstraZeneca. Dr. Drappa owns stock options in AstraZeneca and holds a patent relating to type I IFN in systemic lupus erythematosus.
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
ObjectType-News-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01438489.
ISSN:2326-5191
2326-5205
DOI:10.1002/art.39962