Long-term efficacy and safety of subcutaneous concizumab prophylaxis in hemophilia A and hemophilia A/B with inhibitors

Amy D Shapiro, Pantep Angchaisuksiri, Jan Astermark, Gary Benson, Giancarlo Castaman, Hermann Eichler, Victor Jiménez-Yuste, Kaan Kavakli, Tadashi Matsushita, Lone Hvitfeldt Poulsen, Allison P Wheeler, Guy Young, Silva Zupančić-Šalek, Johannes Oldenburg, Pratima Chowdary, Amy D Shapiro, Pantep Angchaisuksiri, Jan Astermark, Gary Benson, Giancarlo Castaman, Hermann Eichler, Victor Jiménez-Yuste, Kaan Kavakli, Tadashi Matsushita, Lone Hvitfeldt Poulsen, Allison P Wheeler, Guy Young, Silva Zupančić-Šalek, Johannes Oldenburg, Pratima Chowdary

Abstract

Despite current therapies, there remains an unmet need for treatment for patients with hemophilia. The main parts of two phase 2 trials established clinical proof-of-concept for once-daily, subcutaneous concizumab prophylaxis in patients with hemophilia A/B with inhibitors (HAwI/HBwI; explorer4) and severe hemophilia A without inhibitors (HA; explorer5). Here, we present results from extension parts of these trials, included to evaluate longer term safety and efficacy. Both trials included main (≥24 weeks) and extension (52-102 weeks) parts, with patients receiving concizumab 0.15 mg/kg with potential dose escalation to concizumab 0.20 or 0.25 mg/kg if they experienced ≥3 treated spontaneous bleeding episodes within 12 weeks. Endpoints included annualized bleeding rate (ABR), adverse events (AEs), and occurrence of antidrug antibodies. Thromboembolic events were AEs of special interest. Thirty-six patients with HA, 15 with HAwI, and 10 with HBwI were exposed to concizumab. Estimated ABRs during the main + extension parts at last dose level were 4.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.2-7.2) and 6.4 (95% CI, 4.1-9.9) in explorer4 and explorer5, respectively (spontaneous ABRs were 1.8 [95% CI, 1.2-2.6] and 2.1 [95% CI, 1.3-3.3]). Most AEs were mild, with no deaths, events leading to withdrawal, or thromboembolic events. Anti-drug antibodies developed in 25% of patients and were low titer and transient, with no observed clinical effect in most cases. Results of the main + extension parts of these trials were consistent with results of the main parts. Ongoing phase 3 trials will further evaluate concizumab as a once-daily, subcutaneous treatment across hemophilia subtypes. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03196284 and #NCT03196297.

© 2022 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.

Figures

Graphical abstract
Graphical abstract
Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Study design for the phase 2 concizumab trials. (A) explorer4 (HAwI/HBwI). (B) explorer5 (HA). As shown in panel A, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either prophylaxis with concizumab or on-demand treatment with rFVIIa for 24 weeks (main part). Patients who received rFVIIa during the main part were switched to concizumab prophylaxis during the extension part (56-94 weeks). As shown in panel B, all patients received concizumab prophylaxis during the main part (24 weeks) and extension part (52-102 weeks). Dose escalation criteria throughout both trials were ≥3 treatment-requiring spontaneous bleeding episodes within the 12 weeks before concizumab treatment during both the main and extension parts.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Patient disposition in the phase 2 concizumab trials. (A) explorer4 (HAwI, HBwI). (B) explorer5 (HA). *One patient withdrew consent after randomization. **Three patients withdrew in the extension phase (one due to lack of efficacy, one because of suspicion of no therapeutic effect due to normal TFPI level with ADA, and one withdrawal of consent). ***Four patients withdrew before the end of the main part. †Two patients discontinued due to lack of efficacy. ‡One patient withdrew consent in the extension part.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
ABRs (treated bleeding episodes on the last concizumab dose level) during the main + extension parts of the phase 2 concizumab trials explorer4 (HAwI, HBwI) and explorer5 (HA) by hemophilia subtype; full analysis set. Least-squares mean estimates of ABR (95% CI) are shown. The ABR estimate was based on a negative binomial regression with log of exposure time as offset and hemophilia type as factor (explorer4).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Plots by hemophilia subtype of (A) concizumab plasma concentration (geometric mean) vs time; (B) free TFPI plasma concentration (mean) vs time; (C) prothrombin fragments 1 + 2 vs concizumab plasma concentration; and (D) D-dimers vs concizumab plasma concentration in the main + extension parts of the phase 2 concizumab trials explorer4 (HAwI, HBwI) and explorer5 (HA). All data from visit 16 were allocated to 118 weeks (HAwI and HBwI) or 126 weeks (HA) after first concizumab dose (panels A and B). Data below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) were included as LLOQ/2 in the calculations. Horizontal dashed lines in panel A indicate a concizumab exposure level between 200 and 4000 ng/mL. Baseline values for panels C and D were assigned to Visit 9 (last treatment during main part) for the on-demand treatment arm in explorer4. BC, baseline concizumab; FEU, fibrinogen-equivalent units; LLN, lower limit of normal; ULN, upper limit of normal.

References

    1. Kloosterman F, Zwagemaker AF, Abdi A, Gouw S, Castaman G, Fijnvandraat K. Hemophilia management: huge impact of a tiny difference. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2020;4(3):377-385.
    1. Srivastava A, Santagostino E, Dougall A, et al. . WFH guidelines for the management of hemophilia, 3rd edition. Haemophilia. 2020;26(suppl 6): 1-158.
    1. Thornburg CD, Duncan NA. Treatment adherence in hemophilia. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017;11:1677-1686.
    1. Berntorp E, Dolan G, Hay C, et al. . European retrospective study of real-life haemophilia treatment. Haemophilia. 2017;23(1):105-114.
    1. van den Berg HM, Fischer K, Carcao M, et al. ; PedNet Study Group . Timing of inhibitor development in more than 1000 previously untreated patients with severe hemophilia A. Blood. 2019;134(3):317-320.
    1. Wight J, Paisley S. The epidemiology of inhibitors in haemophilia A: a systematic review. Haemophilia. 2003;9(4):418-435.
    1. Giangrande PLF, Hermans C, O’Mahony B, et al. ; European Haemophilia Consortium (EHC) and the European Association for Haemophilia and Allied Disorders (EAHAD) . European principles of inhibitor management in patients with haemophilia. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018;13(1):66.
    1. Male C, Andersson NG, Rafowicz A, et al. . Inhibitor incidence in an unselected cohort of previously untreated patients with severe haemophilia B: a PedNet study. Haematologica. 2021;106(1):123-129.
    1. Puetz J, Soucie JM, Kempton CL, Monahan PE; Hemophilia Treatment Center Network (HTCN) Investigators . Prevalent inhibitors in haemophilia B subjects enrolled in the Universal Data Collection database. Haemophilia. 2014;20(1):25-31.
    1. Chitlur M, Warrier I, Rajpurkar M, Lusher JM. Inhibitors in factor IX deficiency a report of the ISTH-SSC international FIX inhibitor registry (1997-2006). Haemophilia. 2009;15(5):1027-1031.
    1. Kempton CL, Meeks SL. Toward optimal therapy for inhibitors in hemophilia. Blood. 2014;124(23):3365-3372.
    1. Butterfield JSS, Hege KM, Herzog RW, Kaczmarek R. A molecular revolution in the treatment of hemophilia. Mol Ther. 2020;28(4):997-1015.
    1. Nogami K, Shima M. New therapies using nonfactor products for patients with hemophilia and inhibitors. Blood. 2019;133(5):399-406.
    1. . Multiple Escalating Dose Study of BAY1093884 in Adults With Hemophilia A or B With or Without Inhibitors (NCT03597022). Available at: . Accessed 15 September 2021.
    1. Hilden I, Lauritzen B, Sørensen BB, et al. . Hemostatic effect of a monoclonal antibody mAb 2021 blocking the interaction between FXa and TFPI in a rabbit hemophilia model. Blood. 2012;119(24):5871-5878.
    1. Eichler H, Angchaisuksiri P, Kavakli K, et al. . A randomized trial of safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of concizumab in people with hemophilia A. J Thromb Haemost. 2018;16(11):2184-2195.
    1. Shapiro AD, Angchaisuksiri P, Astermark J, et al. . Subcutaneous concizumab prophylaxis in hemophilia A and hemophilia A/B with inhibitors: phase 2 trial results. Blood. 2019;134(22):1973-1982.
    1. Eichler H, Angchaisuksiri P, Kavakli K, et al. . Concizumab restores thrombin generation potential in patients with haemophilia: pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling results of concizumab phase 1/1b data. Haemophilia. 2019;25(1):60-66.
    1. Seremetis SV, Cepo K, Skovgaard Rasmussen J, et al. . Risk mitigation strategy for concizumab clinical trials after pause due to non-fatal thrombotic events. Blood. 2020;136(suppl 1):40.
    1. Srivastava A, Brewer AK, Mauser-Bunschoten EP, et al. ; Treatment Guidelines Working Group on Behalf of the World Federation of Hemophilia . Guidelines for the management of hemophilia. Haemophilia. 2013;19(1):e1-e47.
    1. Shapiro AD, Cepo K, Tønder SM, Young G, Jiménez-Yuste V. Safety and efficacy of concizumab prophylaxis following a switch from rFVIIa on-demand treatment: sub-analysis results from the phase 2 explorer4 trial in patients with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2021;5(suppl 2), PB 0503.
    1. Hummelshøj Landsy L, Castaman G, Cepo K, Lenting PJ, Oldenburg J. Immunogenicity in the concizumab phase 2 clinical trials: clinical impact of anti-drug antibodies. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2021;5(suppl 2):e12591, OC32.3.
    1. Yegneswaran S, Evans V, Jiang X, et al. . BAY 1093884 binds to the Kunitz 1 and 2 domain interface of tissue factor pathway inhibitor and inhibits its function. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2017;1(suppl 1):146 (PB 892).
    1. Makris M, Iorio A, Lenting PJ. Emicizumab and thrombosis: the story so far. J Thromb Haemost. 2019;17(8):1269-1272.
    1. Oldenburg J, Mahlangu JN, Kim B, et al. . Emicizumab prophylaxis in hemophilia A with inhibitors. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(9):809-818.
    1. World Federation of Hemophilia. Alnylam suspends fitusiran dosing due to thrombotic event in phase 2 open-label extension study. Available at: . Accessed 15 September 2021.
    1. World Federation of Hemophilia. First case of an anti-drug antibody reported in Hemlibra trial. Available at: . Accessed 15 September 2021.
    1. Mahlangu J, Paz P, Hardtke M, Aswad F, Schroeder J. TRUST trial: BAY 86-6150 use in haemophilia with inhibitors and assessment for immunogenicity. Haemophilia. 2016;22(6):873-879.
    1. Stoecklein VM, Osuka A, Lederer JA. Trauma equals danger—damage control by the immune system. J Leukoc Biol. 2012;92(3):539-551.
    1. Lee XY, Cepo K, Porstmann T. Concizumab subcutaneous prophylaxis improves health-related quality-of-life measures in patients with congenital hemophilia with inhibitors: phase 2 trial results. Blood. 2019;134(suppl 1):2419.
    1. Lobet S, Hermans C, Lambert C. Optimal management of hemophilic arthropathy and hematomas. J Blood Med. 2014;5:207-218.

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi