Research Spotlight

Packer, M., C. O’Connor, J. J. McMurray, J. Wittes, W. T. Abraham, S. D. Anker, K. Dickstein, G. Filippatos, R. Holcomb, H. Krum, A. P. Maggioni, A. Mebazaa, W. F. Peacock, M. C. Petrie, P. Ponikowski, F. Ruschitzka, D. J. van Veldhuisen, L. S. Kowarski, M. Schactman and J. Holzmeister (2017). “Effect of ularitide on cardiovascular mortality in acute heart failure.” N Engl J Med: Apr [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

Background In patients with acute heart failure, early intervention with an intravenous vasodilator has been proposed as a therapeutic goal to reduce cardiac-wall stress and, potentially, myocardial injury, thereby favorably affecting patients’ long-term prognosis. Methods In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 2157 patients with acute heart failure to receive a continuous intravenous infusion of either ularitide at a dose of 15 ng per kilogram of body weight per minute or matching placebo for 48 hours, in addition to accepted therapy. Treatment was initiated a median of 6 hours after the initial clinical evaluation. The coprimary outcomes were death from cardiovascular causes during a median follow-up of 15 months and a hierarchical composite end point that evaluated the initial 48-hour clinical course. Results Death from cardiovascular causes occurred in 236 patients in the ularitide group and 225 patients in the placebo group (21.7% vs. 21.0%; hazard ratio, 1.03; 96% confidence interval, 0.85 to 1.25; P=0.75). In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant between-group difference with respect to the hierarchical composite outcome. The ularitide group had greater reductions in systolic blood pressure and in levels of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide than the placebo group. However, changes in cardiac troponin T levels during the infusion did not differ between the two groups in the 55% of patients with paired data. Conclusions In patients with acute heart failure, ularitide exerted favorable physiological effects (without affecting cardiac troponin levels), but short-term treatment did not affect a clinical composite end point or reduce long-term cardiovascular mortality.

Papp, K. A., A. Blauvelt, M. Bukhalo, M. Gooderham, J. G. Krueger, J. P. Lacour, A. Menter, S. Philipp, H. Sofen, S. Tyring, B. R. Berner, S. Visvanathan, C. Pamulapati, N. Bennett, M. Flack, P. Scholl and S. J. Padula (2017). “Risankizumab versus ustekinumab for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.” N Engl J Med 376(16): 1551-1560.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-23 is thought to be critical to the pathogenesis of psoriasis. We compared risankizumab (BI 655066), a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that inhibits interleukin-23 by specifically targeting the p19 subunit and thus prevents interleukin-23 signaling, and ustekinumab, an interleukin-12 and interleukin-23 inhibitor, in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: We randomly assigned a total of 166 patients to receive subcutaneous injections of risankizumab (a single 18-mg dose at week 0 or 90-mg or 180-mg doses at weeks 0, 4, and 16) or ustekinumab (45 or 90 mg, according to body weight, at weeks 0, 4, and 16). The primary end point was a 90% or greater reduction from baseline in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score at week 12. RESULTS: At week 12, the percentage of patients with a 90% or greater reduction in the PASI score was 77% (64 of 83 patients) for risankizumab (90-mg and 180-mg groups, pooled), as compared with 40% (16 of 40 patients) for ustekinumab (P<0.001); the percentage of patients with a 100% reduction in the PASI score was 45% in the pooled 90-mg and 180-mg risankizumab groups, as compared with 18% in the ustekinumab group. Efficacy was generally maintained up to 20 weeks after the final dose of 90 or 180 mg of risankizumab. In the 18-mg and 90-mg risankizumab groups and the ustekinumab group, 5 patients (12%), 6 patients (15%), and 3 patients (8%), respectively, had serious adverse events, including two basal-cell carcinomas and one major cardiovascular adverse event; there were no serious adverse events in the 180-mg risankizumab group. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 trial, selective blockade of interleukin-23 with risankizumab was associated with clinical responses superior to those associated with ustekinumab. This trial was not large enough or of long enough duration to draw conclusions about safety.

Seferovic, J. P., B. Claggett, S. B. Seidelmann, E. W. Seely, M. Packer, M. R. Zile, J. L. Rouleau, K. Swedberg, M. Lefkowitz, V. C. Shi, A. S. Desai, J. J. V. McMurray and S. D. Solomon (2017). “Effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril on glycaemic control in patients with heart failure and diabetes: A post-hoc analysis from the paradigm-hf trial.” Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 5(5): 333-340.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is an independent risk factor for heart failure progression. Sacubitril/valsartan, a combination angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, improves morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), compared with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril, and improves peripheral insulin sensitivity in obese hypertensive patients. We aimed to investigate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril on HbA1c and time to first-time initiation of insulin or oral antihyperglycaemic drugs in patients with diabetes and HFrEF. METHODS: In a post-hoc analysis of the PARADIGM-HF trial, we included 3778 patients with known diabetes or an HbA1c >/=6.5% at screening out of 8399 patients with HFrEF who were randomly assigned to treatment with sacubitril/valsartan or enalapril. Of these patients, most (98%) had type 2 diabetes. We assessed changes in HbA1c, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol and BMI in a mixed effects longitudinal analysis model. Time to initiation of oral antihyperglycaemic drugs or insulin in subjects previously not treated with these agents were compared between treatment groups. FINDINGS: There were no significant differences in HbA1c concentrations between randomised groups at screening. During the first year of follow-up, HbA1c concentrations decreased by 0.16% (SD 1.40) in the enalapril group and 0.26% (SD 1.25) in the sacubitril/valsartan group (between-group reduction 0.13%, 95% CI 0.05-0.22, p=0.0023). HbA1c concentrations were persistently lower in the sacubitril/valsartan group than in the enalapril group over the 3-year follow-up (between-group reduction 0.14%, 95% CI 0.06-0.23, p=0.0055). New use of insulin was 29% lower in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan (114 [7%] patients) compared with patients receiving enalapril (153 [10%]; hazard ratio 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90, p=0.0052). Similarly, fewer patients were started on oral antihyperglycaemic therapy (0.77, 0.58-1.02, p=0.073) in the sacubitril/valsartan group. INTERPRETATION: Patients with diabetes and HFrEF enrolled in PARADIGM-HF who received sacubitril/valsartan had a greater long-term reduction in HbA1c than those receiving enalapril. These data suggest that sacubitril/valsartan might enhance glycaemic control in patients with diabetes and HFrEF.

Ahmed, N., V. Brawley, M. Hegde, K. Bielamowicz, M. Kalra, D. Landi, C. Robertson, T. L. Gray, O. Diouf, A. Wakefield, A. Ghazi, C. Gerken, Z. Yi, A. Ashoori, M. F. Wu, H. Liu, C. Rooney, G. Dotti, A. Gee, J. Su, Y. Kew, D. Baskin, Y. J. Zhang, P. New, B. Grilley, M. Stojakovic, J. Hicks, S. Z. Powell, M. K. Brenner, H. E. Heslop, R. Grossman, W. S. Wels and S. Gottschalk (2017). “Her2-specific chimeric antigen receptor-modified virus-specific t cells for progressive glioblastoma: A phase 1 dose-escalation trial.” JAMA Oncol: Apr [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

Importance: Glioblastoma is an incurable tumor, and the therapeutic options for patients are limited. Objective: To determine whether the systemic administration of HER2-specific chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-modified virus-specific T cells (VSTs) is safe and whether these cells have antiglioblastoma activity. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this open-label phase 1 dose-escalation study conducted at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston Methodist Hospital, and Texas Children’s Hospital, patients with progressive HER2-positive glioblastoma were enrolled between July 25, 2011, and April 21, 2014. The duration of follow-up was 10 weeks to 29 months (median, 8 months). Interventions: Monotherapy with autologous VSTs specific for cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, or adenovirus and genetically modified to express HER2-CARs with a CD28.zeta-signaling endodomain (HER2-CAR VSTs). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points were feasibility and safety. The key secondary end points were T-cell persistence and their antiglioblastoma activity. Results: A total of 17 patients (8 females and 9 males; 10 patients >/=18 years [median age, 60 years; range, 30-69 years] and 7 patients <18 years [median age, 14 years; range, 10-17 years]) with progressive HER2-positive glioblastoma received 1 or more infusions of autologous HER2-CAR VSTs (1 x 106/m2 to 1 x 108/m2) without prior lymphodepletion. Infusions were well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxic effects. HER2-CAR VSTs were detected in the peripheral blood for up to 12 months after the infusion by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Of 16 evaluable patients (9 adults and 7 children), 1 had a partial response for more than 9 months, 7 had stable disease for 8 weeks to 29 months, and 8 progressed after T-cell infusion. Three patients with stable disease are alive without any evidence of progression during 24 to 29 months of follow-up. For the entire study cohort, median overall survival was 11.1 months (95% CI, 4.1-27.2 months) from the first T-cell infusion and 24.5 months (95% CI, 17.2-34.6 months) from diagnosis. Conclusions and Relevance: Infusion of autologous HER2-CAR VSTs is safe and can be associated with clinical benefit for patients with progressive glioblastoma. Further evaluation of HER2-CAR VSTs in a phase 2b study is warranted as a single agent or in combination with other immunomodulatory approaches for glioblastoma.

Dess, R. T., W. C. Jackson, S. Suy, P. D. Soni, J. Y. Lee, A. E. Abugharib, Z. S. Zumsteg, F. Y. Feng, D. A. Hamstra, S. P. Collins and D. E. Spratt (2017). “Predictors of multidomain decline in health-related quality of life after stereotactic body radiation therapy (sbrt) for prostate cancer.” Cancer 123(9): 1635-1642.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for localized prostate cancer involves high-dose-per-fraction radiation treatments. Its use is increasing, but concerns remain about treatment-related toxicity. The authors assessed the incidence and predictors of a global decline in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after prostate SBRT. METHODS: From 2008 to 2014, 713 consecutive men with localized prostate cancer received treatment with SBRT according to a prospective institutional protocol. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) HRQOL data were collected at baseline and longitudinally for 5 years. EPIC-26 is comprised of 5 domains. The primary endpoint was defined as a decline exceeding the clinically detectable threshold in >/=4 EPIC-26 domains, termed multidomain decline. RESULTS: The median age was 69 years, 46% of patients had unfavorable intermediate-risk or high-risk disease, and 20% received androgen-deprivation therapy. During 1 to 3 months and 6 to 60 months after SBRT, 8% to 15% and 10% to 11% of patients had multidomain declines, respectively. On multivariable analysis, lower baseline bowel HRQOL (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.7; P < .01) and baseline depression (odds ratio, 5.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-24.3; P = .02) independently predicted for multidomain decline. Only 3% to 4% of patients had long-term multidomain declines exceeding twice the clinical threshold, and 30% of such declines appeared to be related to prostate cancer treatment or progression of disease. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate SBRT has minimal long-term impact on multidomain decline, and the majority of more significant multidomain declines appear to be unrelated to treatment. This emphasizes the importance of focusing not only on the side effects of prostate cancer treatment but also on other comorbid illnesses that contribute to overall HRQOL.