Cargando…

Indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous C1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks

INTRODUCTION: For prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks, replacement therapy with human C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) treatment is approved and available as intravenous [C1-INH(IV)] (Cinryze(®)) and subcutaneous [C1-INH(SC)] HAEGARDA(®) preparations. In the absence of a head-to-head comparative...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bernstein, Jonathan A., Li, Huamin Henry, Craig, Timothy J., Manning, Michael E., Lawo, John-Philip, Machnig, Thomas, Krishnarajah, Girishanthy, Fridman, Moshe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6407188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30899278
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13223-019-0328-3
_version_ 1783401490958778368
author Bernstein, Jonathan A.
Li, Huamin Henry
Craig, Timothy J.
Manning, Michael E.
Lawo, John-Philip
Machnig, Thomas
Krishnarajah, Girishanthy
Fridman, Moshe
author_facet Bernstein, Jonathan A.
Li, Huamin Henry
Craig, Timothy J.
Manning, Michael E.
Lawo, John-Philip
Machnig, Thomas
Krishnarajah, Girishanthy
Fridman, Moshe
author_sort Bernstein, Jonathan A.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: For prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks, replacement therapy with human C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) treatment is approved and available as intravenous [C1-INH(IV)] (Cinryze(®)) and subcutaneous [C1-INH(SC)] HAEGARDA(®) preparations. In the absence of a head-to-head comparative study of the two treatment modalities, an indirect comparison of data from 2 independent but similar clinical trials was undertaken. METHODS: Two similar randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies were identified which evaluated either C1-INH(SC) (COMPACT; NCT01912456; 16 weeks) or C1-INH(IV) (CHANGE; NCT01005888; 14 weeks) vs. placebo (on-demand treatment only) for routine prevention of HAE attacks. Individual patient data from each trial were used to conduct an indirect comparison of treatment effects. Attack reductions (absolute and percent of mean/median number of monthly HAE attacks reduction over placebo) were compared between the two C1-INH formulations at approved/recommended doses: C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg twice weekly (n = 45) and 1000 U of C1-INH(IV) twice weekly (n = 22). Point estimates were adjusted using mixed and quantile regression models that controlled for study design. RESULTS: The absolute mean monthly numbers of HAE attack reductions were 3.6 (95% CI 2.9, 4.2) for C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg vs. placebo and 2.3 (1.4, 3.3) for C1-INH(IV) vs. placebo; between-product difference, 1.3 (0.1, 2.4; P = 0.034). The mean percent reduction in monthly attack rate was significantly greater with C1-INH(SC) as compared with C1-INH(IV) (84% vs. 51%; P < 0.001). The percentages of subjects experiencing ≥ 50%, ≥ 70%, and ≥ 90% reductions in monthly HAE attack rates versus placebo were significantly higher with C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg as compared to C1-INH(IV) 1000 U (≥ 50% reduction: 91% vs. 50%, odds ratio [OR] = 10.33, P = 0.003; ≥ 70% reduction: 84% vs. 46%, OR = 6.19, P = 0.005; ≥ 90% reduction: 57% vs. 18%, OR = 6.04, P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of an indirect study comparison, this analysis suggests greater attack reduction with twice-weekly C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg as compared to twice-weekly C1-INH(IV) 1000 U for the routine prevention of HAE attacks.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6407188
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64071882019-03-21 Indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous C1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks Bernstein, Jonathan A. Li, Huamin Henry Craig, Timothy J. Manning, Michael E. Lawo, John-Philip Machnig, Thomas Krishnarajah, Girishanthy Fridman, Moshe Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol Research INTRODUCTION: For prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks, replacement therapy with human C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) treatment is approved and available as intravenous [C1-INH(IV)] (Cinryze(®)) and subcutaneous [C1-INH(SC)] HAEGARDA(®) preparations. In the absence of a head-to-head comparative study of the two treatment modalities, an indirect comparison of data from 2 independent but similar clinical trials was undertaken. METHODS: Two similar randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies were identified which evaluated either C1-INH(SC) (COMPACT; NCT01912456; 16 weeks) or C1-INH(IV) (CHANGE; NCT01005888; 14 weeks) vs. placebo (on-demand treatment only) for routine prevention of HAE attacks. Individual patient data from each trial were used to conduct an indirect comparison of treatment effects. Attack reductions (absolute and percent of mean/median number of monthly HAE attacks reduction over placebo) were compared between the two C1-INH formulations at approved/recommended doses: C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg twice weekly (n = 45) and 1000 U of C1-INH(IV) twice weekly (n = 22). Point estimates were adjusted using mixed and quantile regression models that controlled for study design. RESULTS: The absolute mean monthly numbers of HAE attack reductions were 3.6 (95% CI 2.9, 4.2) for C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg vs. placebo and 2.3 (1.4, 3.3) for C1-INH(IV) vs. placebo; between-product difference, 1.3 (0.1, 2.4; P = 0.034). The mean percent reduction in monthly attack rate was significantly greater with C1-INH(SC) as compared with C1-INH(IV) (84% vs. 51%; P < 0.001). The percentages of subjects experiencing ≥ 50%, ≥ 70%, and ≥ 90% reductions in monthly HAE attack rates versus placebo were significantly higher with C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg as compared to C1-INH(IV) 1000 U (≥ 50% reduction: 91% vs. 50%, odds ratio [OR] = 10.33, P = 0.003; ≥ 70% reduction: 84% vs. 46%, OR = 6.19, P = 0.005; ≥ 90% reduction: 57% vs. 18%, OR = 6.04, P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of an indirect study comparison, this analysis suggests greater attack reduction with twice-weekly C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg as compared to twice-weekly C1-INH(IV) 1000 U for the routine prevention of HAE attacks. BioMed Central 2019-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6407188/ /pubmed/30899278 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13223-019-0328-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Bernstein, Jonathan A.
Li, Huamin Henry
Craig, Timothy J.
Manning, Michael E.
Lawo, John-Philip
Machnig, Thomas
Krishnarajah, Girishanthy
Fridman, Moshe
Indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous C1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks
title Indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous C1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks
title_full Indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous C1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks
title_fullStr Indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous C1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks
title_full_unstemmed Indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous C1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks
title_short Indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous C1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks
title_sort indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous c1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6407188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30899278
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13223-019-0328-3
work_keys_str_mv AT bernsteinjonathana indirectcomparisonofintravenousvssubcutaneousc1inhibitorplacebocontrolledtrialsforroutinepreventionofhereditaryangioedemaattacks
AT lihuaminhenry indirectcomparisonofintravenousvssubcutaneousc1inhibitorplacebocontrolledtrialsforroutinepreventionofhereditaryangioedemaattacks
AT craigtimothyj indirectcomparisonofintravenousvssubcutaneousc1inhibitorplacebocontrolledtrialsforroutinepreventionofhereditaryangioedemaattacks
AT manningmichaele indirectcomparisonofintravenousvssubcutaneousc1inhibitorplacebocontrolledtrialsforroutinepreventionofhereditaryangioedemaattacks
AT lawojohnphilip indirectcomparisonofintravenousvssubcutaneousc1inhibitorplacebocontrolledtrialsforroutinepreventionofhereditaryangioedemaattacks
AT machnigthomas indirectcomparisonofintravenousvssubcutaneousc1inhibitorplacebocontrolledtrialsforroutinepreventionofhereditaryangioedemaattacks
AT krishnarajahgirishanthy indirectcomparisonofintravenousvssubcutaneousc1inhibitorplacebocontrolledtrialsforroutinepreventionofhereditaryangioedemaattacks
AT fridmanmoshe indirectcomparisonofintravenousvssubcutaneousc1inhibitorplacebocontrolledtrialsforroutinepreventionofhereditaryangioedemaattacks