Mim8, a novel factor VIIIa mimetic bispecific antibody, shows favorable safety and pharmacokinetics in healthy adults

Background

Mim8 (denecimig) is a novel activated coagulation factor VIII-mimetic bispecific antibody that assembles with activated coagulation FIX and FX on the platelet membrane surface.

Objectives

The FRONTIER1 (NCT04204408, NN7769-4513) single ascending dose and the 4882 pharmacokinetic (PK) studies (NCT05127473, NN7769-4882) examined the safety, tolerability, PK, and pharmacodynamics (PD) of Mim8 in healthy adult males.

Methods

The FRONTIER1 single ascending dose study consisted of 6 cohorts, each with 6 participants who received a single subcutaneous (s.c.) dose of Mim8 and 2 participants who received a placebo. The 4882 PK study had 11 arms, each with 6 participants who received a single s.c. dose of Mim8. The primary endpoint for both studies was treatment-emergent adverse events. Other safety assessments included relative changes in D-dimer, prothrombin fragments 1 and 2, fibrinogen, and platelets. The PK and PD were assessed using Mim8 plasma concentration and activated partial thromboplastin clotting time and thrombin generation, respectively.

Results

Mim8 was well tolerated, and there were no severe treatment-emergent adverse events. The PK properties of Mim8 in both studies were consistent with dose-proportionality. The terminal half-life of Mim8 after a single dose was approximately 1 month, and maximum plasma concentration was reached after 10 days.

Conclusion

The PK and PD profiles suggest that Mim8 is suitable as a long-acting FVIIIa-mimetic bispecific antibody for hemophilia A prophylaxis.

Endothelial-protective effects of a G-protein-biased sphingosine-1 phosphate receptor-1 agonist, SAR247799, in type-2 diabetes rats and a randomized placebo-controlled patient trial

Aims

SAR247799 is a G‐protein‐biased sphingosine‐1 phosphate receptor‐1 (S1P₁) agonist designed to activate endothelial S1P₁ and provide endothelial‐protective properties, while limiting S1P₁ desensitization and consequent lymphocyte‐count reduction associated with higher doses. The aim was to show whether S1P₁ activation can promote endothelial effects in patients and, if so, select SAR247799 doses for further clinical investigation.

Methods

Type‐2 diabetes patients, enriched for endothelial dysfunction (flow‐mediated dilation, FMD <7%; n = 54), were randomized, in 2 sequential cohorts, to 28‐day once‐daily treatment with SAR247799 (1 or 5 mg in ascending cohorts), placebo or 50 mg sildenafil (positive control) in a 5:2:2 ratio per cohort. Endothelial function was assessed by brachial artery FMD. Renal function, biomarkers and lymphocytes were measured following 5‐week SAR247799 treatment (3 doses) to Zucker diabetic fatty rats and the data used to select the doses for human testing.

Results

The maximum FMD change from baseline vs placebo for all treatments was reached on day 35; mean differences vs placebo were 0.60% (95% confidence interval [CI] −0.34 to 1.53%; P = .203) for 1 mg SAR247799, 1.07% (95% CI 0.13 to 2.01%; P = .026) for 5 mg SAR247799 and 0.88% (95% CI −0.15 to 1.91%; P = .093) for 50 mg sildenafil. Both doses of SAR247799 were well tolerated, did not affect blood pressure, and were associated with minimal‐to‐no lymphocyte reduction and small‐to‐moderate heart rate decrease.

Conclusion

These data provide the first human evidence suggesting endothelial‐protective properties of S1P₁ activation, with SAR247799 being as effective as the clinical benchmark, sildenafil. Further clinical testing of SAR247799, at sub‐lymphocyte‐reducing doses (≤5 mg), is warranted in vascular diseases associated with endothelial dysfunction.

P2429More precise assessment of flow-mediated dilation by measuring individually determined maximum dilatory peak time in healthy middle-aged subjects and patients with diabetes mellitus type 2

The assessment of flow-mediated dilation (FMD) is widely used in clinical research to quantify endothelial function. FMD is calculated by subtracting the artery's baseline diameter from the peak diameter during hyperemia. However, there is no consensus on how to determine peak diameter. Many authors report FMD results based on values assessed at predefined time points. This may limit the accuracy and reproducibility of FMD. We hypothesised that FMD values using maximum dilatory peak time (MDP) would differ from those using predefined time points. Using individually determined MDP may lead to a lower number of subjects needed to show significance for a given difference in FMD.

FMD was measured in middle-aged subjects with and without diabetes mellitus type 2 (T2DM) by ultrasound (12-MHz transducer). In a subset of subjects, FMD was measured again 30 days later. All measurements were performed by certified research physicians and evaluated using appropriate software. FMD values were compared at 60 s and 90 s after start of hyperaemia and at MDP during hyperaemia.

FMD was measured in 100 healthy subjects and 72 subjects with T2DM (mean ± SD age 57±6 years, healthy: body mass index 26.2±3 kg/m2, blood pressure 127±10 /80±7 mmHg, DMT2: body mass index 29±3 kg/m2, blood pressure 135±11 / 86±5 mmHg, HbA1c 7.1±0.7%). FMD in healthy subjects was lower at predefined time points compared to MDP (least square mean difference (95% CI)) 60 s vs. MDP −1.14% (−1.72 to −0.56; p<0.0001) and 90 s vs. MDP −1.87% (−2.48 to −1.26; p<0.0001). Also in subjects with DMT2, FMD at predefined time points was lower compared to MDP (least square mean difference (95% CI)) 60 s vs. MDP −1.08% (−1.71 to −0.44; p<0.001) and 90 s vs. MDP −1.73% (−2.38 to −1.06; p<0.001). The intra-subject variability was lowest for MDP compared to 60 s and 90 s (15% vs. 36% and 51%, respectively). Assuming 80% power and alpha at 0.05, the individually determined peak requires 15 people to detect a 1% difference in FMD versus 26 subjects if determined at 60 s and 31 subjects if determined at 90 s.

This study demonstrated significantly higher FMD values and superior reproducibility of the individually determined maximum dilatory peak compared to peaks at predefined time points in healthy middle-aged people and patients with type 2 diabetes. This roughly halves the number of study participants needed to detect a 1% difference in FMD.

Steady state is reached within 2-3 days of once-daily administration of degludec, a basal insulin with an ultralong duration of action

BACKGROUND

Various factors influence the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of insulin analogs. The aim of the present study was to determine time to steady state of insulin degludec (IDeg), a basal insulin analog with an ultralong duration of action, after once-daily subcutaneous administration in subjects of varying age, diabetes type, and ethnicity.

METHODS

Time to steady state was analyzed in 195 subjects across five Phase I randomized single-center double-blind studies: three in subjects with type 1 diabetes (T1DM), including one in elderly subjects, and two in subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), including one with African American and Hispanic/Latino subpopulations. Subjects received once-daily IDeg (100 U/mL, s.c.) at doses of 0.4-0.8 U/kg for 6-12 days. Time to clinical steady state was measured from first dose until the serum IDeg trough concentration exceeded 90% of the final plateau level. The IDeg concentrations were log-transformed and analyzed using a mixed-effects model with time from first dose and dose level (where applicable) as fixed effects, and subject as a random effect.

RESULTS

Steady state serum IDeg concentrations were reached after 2-3 days in all subjects. In trials with multiple dose levels, time to steady state was independent of dose level in T1DM (P = 0.51) and T2DM (P = 0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

Serum IDeg concentrations reached steady state within 2-3 days of once-daily subcutaneous administration in all subjects with T1DM or T2DM, including elderly and African American and Hispanic/Latino subjects. At steady state, serum IDeg concentrations were unchanged from day to day.