Treatment of hereditary angioedema with nanofiltered C1-esterase inhibitor concentrate (Cetor®): Multi-center phase II and III studies to assess pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and safety

[Hereditary angioedema due to C1-inhibitor deficiency, a national disease management programme]

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare, painful, disabling and potentially fatal disease, where early diagnosis and effective treatment are critical. These Austrian guidelines for the diagnosis and management of HAE provide instructions and advice on the state of the art management of HAE in Austria in contrast to global guidelines, where the situation of all countries worldwide must be taken into account. Our goal is to help Austrian physicians to consider HAE as a differential diagnosis with corresponding symptoms, to make rational decisions for the diagnosis and management of HAE with C1-inhibitor deficiency (type 1 or type 2). The guidelines provide information on common and important clinical symptoms, diagnostic methods, treatment modalities, available HAE-specific medications in Austria and last but not least to motivate physicians to refer patients to HAE centers for confirmation of the diagnosis and adequate treatment decisions.

Interventions for the long-term prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks

BACKGROUND

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition that causes acute attacks of swelling, pain and reduced quality of life. People with Type I HAE (approximately 80% of all HAE cases) have insufficient amounts of C1 esterase inhibitor (C1-INH) protein; people with Type II HAE (approximately 20% of all cases) may have normal C1-INH concentrations, but, due to genetic mutations, these do not function properly. A few people, predominantly females, experience HAE despite having normal C1-INH levels and C1-INH function (rare Type III HAE). Several new drugs have been developed to treat acute attacks and prevent recurrence of attacks. There is currently no systematic review and meta-analysis that included all preventive medications for HAE.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of interventions for the long-term prevention of HAE attacks in people with Type I, Type II or Type III HAE.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 3 August 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials in children or adults with HAE that used medications to prevent HAE attacks. The comparators could be placebo or active comparator, or both; approved and experimental drug trials were eligible for inclusion. There were no restrictions on dose, frequency or intensity of treatment. The minimum length of four weeks of treatment was required for inclusion; this criterion excluded the acute treatment of HAE attacks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. HAE attacks (number of attacks per person, per population) and change in number of HAE attacks; 2. mortality and 3. serious adverse events (e.g. hepatic dysfunction, hepatic toxicity and deleterious changes in blood tests). Our secondary outcomes were 4. quality of life; 5. severity of breakthrough attacks; 6. disability and 7. adverse events (e.g. weight gain, mild psychological changes and body hair). We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 15 studies (912 participants) that met the inclusion criteria. The studies included people with Type I and II HAE. The studies investigated avoralstat, berotralstat, subcutaneous C1-INH, plasma-derived C1-INH, nanofiltered C1-INH, recombinant human C1-INH, danazol, and lanadelumab for the prevention of HAE attacks. We did not find any studies on the use of tranexamic acid for prevention of HAE attacks. All drugs except avoralstat reduced the number of HAE attacks compared with placebo. For breakthrough attacks that occurred despite prophylactic treatment, intravenous and subcutaneous forms of C1-INH and lanadelumab reduced attack severity. It is not known whether other drugs have a similar effect, as the severity of breakthrough attacks in people taking drugs other than C1-INH and lanadelumab was not reported. For quality of life, avoralstat, berotralstat, C1-INH (all forms) and lanadelumab increased quality of life compared with placebo; there were no data for danazol. Four studies reported on changes in disability during treatment with C1-INH, berotralstat and lanadelumab; all three drugs decreased disability compared with placebo. Adverse events, including serious adverse events, did not occur at a rate higher than placebo. However, serious adverse event data and other adverse event data were not available for danazol, which prevented us from drawing conclusions about the absolute or relative safety of this drug. No deaths were reported in the included studies. The analysis was limited by the small number of studies, the small number of participants in each study and the lack of data on older drugs, therefore the certainty of the evidence is low. Given the rarity of HAE, it is not surprising that drugs were rarely directly compared, which does not allow conclusions on the comparative efficacy of the various drugs for people with HAE. Finally, we did not identify any studies that included people with Type III HAE. Therefore, we cannot draw any conclusions about the efficacy or safety of any drug in people with this form of HAE.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data suggest that berotralstat, C1-INH (subcutaneous, plasma-derived, nanofiltered and recombinant), danazol and lanadelumab are effective in lowering the risk or incidence (or both) of HAE attacks. In addition, C1-INH and lanadelumab decrease the severity of breakthrough attacks (data for other drugs were not available). Avoralstat, berotralstat, C1-INH (all forms) and lanadelumab increase quality of life and do not increase the risk of adverse events, including serious adverse events. It is possible that danazol, subcutaneous C1-INH and recombinant human C1-INH are more effective than berotralstat and lanadelumab in reducing the risk of breakthrough attacks, but the small number of studies and the small size of the studies means that the certainty of the evidence is low. This and the lack of head-to-head trials prevented us from drawing firm conclusions on the relative efficacy of the drugs.

The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema – The 2021 revision and update

Hereditary Angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease for which early diagnosis and effective therapy are critical. This revision and update of the global WAO/EAACI guideline on the diagnosis and management of HAE provides up-to-date guidance for the management of HAE. For this update and revision of the guideline, an international panel of experts reviewed the existing evidence, developed 28 recommendations, and established consensus by an online DELPHI process. The goal of these recommendations and guideline is to help physicians and their patients in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1-inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1-inhibitor (type 2), by providing guidance on common and important clinical issues, such as: 1) How should HAE be diagnosed? 2) When should HAE patients receive prophylactic on top of on-demand treatment and what treatments should be used? 3) What are the goals of treatment? 4) Should HAE management be different for special HAE patient groups such as children or pregnant/breast feeding women? 5) How should HAE patients monitor their disease activity, impact, and control? It is also the intention of this guideline to help establish global standards for the management of HAE and to encourage and facilitate the use of recommended diagnostics and therapies for all patients.

The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema-The 2021 revision and update

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease for which early diagnosis and effective therapy are critical. This revision and update of the global WAO/EAACI guideline on the diagnosis and management of HAE provides up-to-date guidance for the management of HAE. For this update and revision of the guideline, an international panel of experts reviewed the existing evidence, developed 28 recommendations, and established consensus by an online DELPHI process. The goal of these recommendations and guideline is to help physicians and their patients in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1 inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1 inhibitor (type 2), by providing guidance on common and important clinical issues, such as: (1) How should HAE be diagnosed? (2) When should HAE patients receive prophylactic on top of on-demand treatment and what treatments should be used? (3) What are the goals of treatment? (4) Should HAE management be different for special HAE patient groups such as children or pregnant/breast-feeding women? and (5) How should HAE patients monitor their disease activity, impact, and control? It is also the intention of this guideline to help establish global standards for the management of HAE and to encourage and facilitate the use of recommended diagnostics and therapies for all patients.

Population pharmacokinetics of subcutaneous C1-inhibitor for prevention of attacks in patients with hereditary angioedema

BACKGROUND

Long-term prophylaxis with subcutaneous (SC) administration of a highly concentrated plasma-derived C1-esterase inhibitor (C1-INH) formulation was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for hereditary angioedema (HAE) attack prevention.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the population pharmacokinetics of C1-INH (SC) (HAEGARDA^® ; CSL Behring) in healthy volunteers and HAE patients, and assess the variability and influence of covariates on pharmacokinetics.

METHODS

C1-INH functional activity data obtained after administration of various C1-INH (intravenous; IV) and C1-INH (SC) doses from 1 study in healthy volunteers (n = 16) and 2 studies in subjects with HAE (n = 108) were pooled to develop a population pharmacokinetic model (NONMEM v7.2). Pharmacokinetic parameters derived from steady-state simulations based on the final model were also evaluated.

RESULTS

C1-INH functional activity following C1-INH (SC) administration was described by a linear one-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination, with inter-individual variability in all parameters tested. The mean population bioavailability of C1-INH (SC), and pharmacokinetic parameters for clearance (CL), volume of distribution, and absorption rate were estimated to be ~43%, 1.03 mL/hour/kg, 0.05 L/kg and 0.0146 hour^-1 , respectively. The effect of bodyweight on CL of C1-INH functional activity was included in the final model, estimated to be 0.74. Steady-state simulations of C1-INH functional activity vs time profiles in 1000 virtual HAE patients revealed higher minimum functional activity (C_trough ) levels after twice-weekly dosing with 40 IU/kg (~40%) and 60 IU/kg (~48%) compared with 1000 IU IV (~30%). Based on the population pharmacokinetic model, the median time to peak concentration was ~59 hours and the median apparent plasma half-life was ~69 hours.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Twice-weekly bodyweight-adjusted dosing of C1-INH (SC) exhibits linear pharmacokinetics and dose-dependent increases in C_trough levels at each dosing interval. In this analysis, SC dosing led to maintenance of higher C_trough levels than IV dosing.

The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema-The 2017 revision and update

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?

Prevention of Hereditary Angioedema Attacks with a Subcutaneous C1 Inhibitor

BACKGROUND

Hereditary angioedema is a disabling, potentially fatal condition caused by deficiency (type I) or dysfunction (type II) of the C1 inhibitor protein. In a phase 2 trial, the use of CSL830, a nanofiltered C1 inhibitor preparation that is suitable for subcutaneous injection, resulted in functional levels of C1 inhibitor activity that would be expected to provide effective prophylaxis of attacks.

METHODS

We conducted an international, prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of self-administered subcutaneous CSL830 in patients with type I or type II hereditary angioedema who had had four or more attacks in a consecutive 2-month period within 3 months before screening. We randomly assigned the patients to one of four treatment sequences in a crossover design, each involving two 16-week treatment periods: either 40 IU or 60 IU of CSL830 per kilogram of body weight twice weekly followed by placebo, or vice versa. The primary efficacy end point was the number of attacks of angioedema. Secondary efficacy end points were the proportion of patients who had a response (≥50% reduction in the number of attacks with CSL830 as compared with placebo) and the number of times that rescue medication was used.

RESULTS

Of the 90 patients who underwent randomization, 79 completed the trial. Both doses of CSL830, as compared with placebo, reduced the rate of attacks of hereditary angioedema (mean difference with 40 IU, -2.42 attacks per month; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.38 to -1.46; and mean difference with 60 IU, -3.51 attacks per month; 95% CI, -4.21 to -2.81; P<0.001 for both comparisons). Response rates were 76% (95% CI, 62 to 87) in the 40-IU group and 90% (95% CI, 77 to 96) in the 60-IU group. The need for rescue medication was reduced from 5.55 uses per month in the placebo group to 1.13 uses per month in the 40-IU group and from 3.89 uses in the placebo group to 0.32 uses per month in the 60-IU group. Adverse events (most commonly mild and transient local site reactions) occurred in similar proportions of patients who received CSL830 and those who received placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with hereditary angioedema, the prophylactic use of a subcutaneous C1 inhibitor twice weekly significantly reduced the frequency of acute attacks. (Funded by CSL Behring; COMPACT EudraCT number, 2013-000916-10 , and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01912456 .).

Assessment of inhibitory antibodies in patients with hereditary angioedema treated with plasma-derived C1 inhibitor

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available regarding C1 inhibitor (C1-INH) administration and anti-C1-INH antibodies.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the incidence of antibody formation during treatment with pasteurized, nanofiltered plasma-derived C1-INH (pnfC1-INH) in patients with hereditary angioedema with C1-INH deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) and the comparative efficacy of pnfC1-INH in patients with and without antibodies.

METHODS

In this multicenter, open-label study, patients with C1-INH-HAE (≥12 years of age) were given 20 IU/kg of pnfC1-INH per HAE attack that required treatment and followed up for 9 months. Blood samples were taken at baseline (day of first attack) and months 3, 6, and 9 and analyzed for inhibitory anti-C1-INH antibody (iC1-INH-Ab) and noninhibitory anti-C1-INH antibodies (niC1-INH-Abs).

RESULTS

The study included 46 patients (69.6% female; mean age, 38.9 years; all white) who received 221 on-site pnfC1-INH infusions; most patients received 6 or fewer infusions. No patient tested positive (titer ≥1:50) for iC1-INH-Ab at any time during the study. Thirteen patients (28.2%) had detectable niC1-INH-Abs in 1 or more samples. Nine patients (19.6%) had detectable niC1-INH-Abs at baseline; 3 of these had no detectable antibodies after baseline. Of 10 patients (21.7%) with 1 or more detectable result for niC1-INH-Abs after baseline, 6 had detectable niC1-INH-Abs at baseline. Mean times to symptom relief onset and complete symptom resolution per patient were similar for those with or without anti-niC1-INH-Abs.

CONCLUSION

Administration of pnfC1-INH was not associated with iC1-INH-Ab formation in this population. Noninhibitory antibodies were detected in some patients but fluctuated during the study independently of pnfC1-INH administration and appeared to have no effect on pnfC1-INH efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01467947.

Applying complement therapeutics to rare diseases

Around 350 million people worldwide suffer from rare diseases. These may have a genetic, infectious, or autoimmune basis, and several include an inflammatory component. Launching of effective treatments can be very challenging when there is a low disease prevalence and limited scientific insights into the disease mechanisms. As a key trigger of inflammatory processes, complement has been associated with a variety of diseases and has become an attractive therapeutic target for conditions involving inflammation. In view of the clinical experience acquired with drugs licensed for the treatment of rare diseases such as hereditary angioedema and paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, growing evidence supports the safety and efficacy of complement therapeutics in restoring immune balance and preventing aggravation of clinical outcomes. This review provides an overview of the candidates currently in the pharmaceutical pipeline with potential to treat orphan diseases and discusses the molecular mechanisms triggered by complement involved with the disease pathogenesis.

Immunotherapy for primary immunodeficiency diseases

The 2 most commonly encountered primary immunodeficiency syndromes in adult practice are antibody deficiency disorders and hereditary angioedema.Immunologic therapy for these disorders has significantly improved patient management. Therapy with immunoglobulin leads to improvement in overall quality of life. With increasing survival rates and decreasing levels of life-threatening infections in patients with primary antibody deficiencies, disease complications are more commonly encountered. Treatment of these complications with monoclonal antibody therapy seems promising and is likely to increase in the future. More recently,several additional agents have become available, including novel drugs targeted at different elements of the disease process.