• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Safety and efficacy of evobrutinib in relapsing multiple sclerosis (evolutionRMS1 and evolutionRMS2): two multicentre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trials

X. Montalban, P. Vermersch, DL. Arnold, A. Bar-Or, BAC. Cree, AH. Cross, E. Kubala Havrdova, L. Kappos, O. Stuve, H. Wiendl, JS. Wolinsky, F. Dahlke, C. Le Bolay, L. Shen Loo, S. Gopalakrishnan, Y. Hyvert, A. Javor, H. Guehring, N. Tenenbaum, D....

. 2024 ; 23 (11) : 1119-1132. [pub] 20240919

Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, randomizované kontrolované studie, multicentrická studie, klinické zkoušky, fáze III

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc25003636
E-zdroje Online Plný text

NLK ProQuest Central od 2002-05-01 do Před 2 měsíci
Nursing & Allied Health Database (ProQuest) od 2002-05-01 do Před 2 měsíci
Health & Medicine (ProQuest) od 2002-05-01 do Před 2 měsíci
Psychology Database (ProQuest) od 2002-05-01 do Před 2 měsíci

Odkazy

PubMed 39307151
DOI 10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00328-4
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje

BACKGROUND: Evobrutinib, a Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has shown preliminary efficacy in people with relapsing multiple sclerosis in a phase 2 trial. Here, we aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of evobrutinib with the active comparator teriflunomide in people with relapsing multiple sclerosis. METHODS: EvolutionRMS1 and evolutionRMS2 were two multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, phase 3 trials conducted at 701 multiple sclerosis centres and neurology clinics in 52 countries. Adults aged 18-55 years with relapsing multiple sclerosis (Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] score of 0·0-5·5) were included. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a central interactive web response system to receive either evobrutinib (45 mg twice per day with placebo once per day) or teriflunomide (14 mg once per day with placebo twice per day), all taken orally and in an unfasted state, with randomisation stratified by geographical region and baseline EDSS. All study staff and participants were masked to the study interventions. The primary endpoint for each study was annualised relapse rate based on adjudicated qualified relapses up to 156 weeks, assessed in the full analysis set (defined as all randomly assigned participants) with a negative binomial model. These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04338022 for evolutionRMS1 and NCT04338061 for evolutionRMS2, both are terminated). FINDINGS: The primary analysis was done using data for 2290 randomly assigned participants collected from June 12, 2020, to Oct 2, 2023. 1124 participants were included in the full analysis set in evolutionRMS1 (560 in the evobrutinib group and 564 in the teriflunomide group) and 1166 in evolutionRMS2 (583 in each group). 751 (66·8%) participants were female and 373 (33·1%) were male in evolutionRMS1, whereas 783 (67·2%) were female and 383 (32·8%) were male in evolutionRMS2. Annualised relapse rate was 0·15 (95% CI 0·12-0·18 with evobrutinib vs 0·14 [0·11-0·18] with teriflunomide (adjusted RR 1·02 [0·75-1·39]; p=0·55) in evolutionRMS1 and 0·11 (0·09-0·13 vs 0·11 [0·09-0·13]; adjusted RR 1·00 [0·74-1·35]; p=0·51) in evolutionRMS2. The pooled proportion of participants with any treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was similar between treatment groups (976 [85·6%] of 1140 with evobrutinib vs 999 [87·2%] of 1146 with teriflunomide). The most frequently reported TEAEs were COVID-19 (223 [19·6%] with evobrutinib vs 223 [19·5%] with teriflunomide), alanine aminotransferase increased (173 [15·2%] vs 204 [17·8%]), aspartate aminotransferase increased (110 [9·6%] vs 131 [11·4%]), and headache (175 [15·4%] vs 176 [15·4%]). Serious TEAE incidence rates were higher with evobrutinib than teriflunomide (86 [7·5%] vs 64 [5·6%]). Liver enzyme elevations at least 5 × upper limit of normal were more common with evobrutinib than with teriflunomide, particularly in the first 12 weeks (55 [5·0%] vs nine [<1%]). Three people who received evobrutinib and one who received teriflunomide met the biochemical definition of Hy's law; all cases resolved after discontinuation of treatment. There were two deaths (one in each group), neither related to study treatment. INTERPRETATION: The efficacy of evobrutinib was not superior to that of teriflunomide. Together, efficacy and liver-related safety findings do not support the use of evobrutinib in people with relapsing multiple sclerosis. FUNDING: Merck.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc25003636
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250206104455.0
007      
ta
008      
250121s2024 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/S1474-4422(24)00328-4 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)39307151
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Montalban, Xavier $u Department of Neurology, Centre d'Esclerosi Múltiple de Catalunya, Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: xavier.montalban@cem-cat.org
245    10
$a Safety and efficacy of evobrutinib in relapsing multiple sclerosis (evolutionRMS1 and evolutionRMS2): two multicentre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trials / $c X. Montalban, P. Vermersch, DL. Arnold, A. Bar-Or, BAC. Cree, AH. Cross, E. Kubala Havrdova, L. Kappos, O. Stuve, H. Wiendl, JS. Wolinsky, F. Dahlke, C. Le Bolay, L. Shen Loo, S. Gopalakrishnan, Y. Hyvert, A. Javor, H. Guehring, N. Tenenbaum, D. Tomic, evolutionRMS investigators
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Evobrutinib, a Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has shown preliminary efficacy in people with relapsing multiple sclerosis in a phase 2 trial. Here, we aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of evobrutinib with the active comparator teriflunomide in people with relapsing multiple sclerosis. METHODS: EvolutionRMS1 and evolutionRMS2 were two multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, phase 3 trials conducted at 701 multiple sclerosis centres and neurology clinics in 52 countries. Adults aged 18-55 years with relapsing multiple sclerosis (Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] score of 0·0-5·5) were included. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a central interactive web response system to receive either evobrutinib (45 mg twice per day with placebo once per day) or teriflunomide (14 mg once per day with placebo twice per day), all taken orally and in an unfasted state, with randomisation stratified by geographical region and baseline EDSS. All study staff and participants were masked to the study interventions. The primary endpoint for each study was annualised relapse rate based on adjudicated qualified relapses up to 156 weeks, assessed in the full analysis set (defined as all randomly assigned participants) with a negative binomial model. These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04338022 for evolutionRMS1 and NCT04338061 for evolutionRMS2, both are terminated). FINDINGS: The primary analysis was done using data for 2290 randomly assigned participants collected from June 12, 2020, to Oct 2, 2023. 1124 participants were included in the full analysis set in evolutionRMS1 (560 in the evobrutinib group and 564 in the teriflunomide group) and 1166 in evolutionRMS2 (583 in each group). 751 (66·8%) participants were female and 373 (33·1%) were male in evolutionRMS1, whereas 783 (67·2%) were female and 383 (32·8%) were male in evolutionRMS2. Annualised relapse rate was 0·15 (95% CI 0·12-0·18 with evobrutinib vs 0·14 [0·11-0·18] with teriflunomide (adjusted RR 1·02 [0·75-1·39]; p=0·55) in evolutionRMS1 and 0·11 (0·09-0·13 vs 0·11 [0·09-0·13]; adjusted RR 1·00 [0·74-1·35]; p=0·51) in evolutionRMS2. The pooled proportion of participants with any treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was similar between treatment groups (976 [85·6%] of 1140 with evobrutinib vs 999 [87·2%] of 1146 with teriflunomide). The most frequently reported TEAEs were COVID-19 (223 [19·6%] with evobrutinib vs 223 [19·5%] with teriflunomide), alanine aminotransferase increased (173 [15·2%] vs 204 [17·8%]), aspartate aminotransferase increased (110 [9·6%] vs 131 [11·4%]), and headache (175 [15·4%] vs 176 [15·4%]). Serious TEAE incidence rates were higher with evobrutinib than teriflunomide (86 [7·5%] vs 64 [5·6%]). Liver enzyme elevations at least 5 × upper limit of normal were more common with evobrutinib than with teriflunomide, particularly in the first 12 weeks (55 [5·0%] vs nine [<1%]). Three people who received evobrutinib and one who received teriflunomide met the biochemical definition of Hy's law; all cases resolved after discontinuation of treatment. There were two deaths (one in each group), neither related to study treatment. INTERPRETATION: The efficacy of evobrutinib was not superior to that of teriflunomide. Together, efficacy and liver-related safety findings do not support the use of evobrutinib in people with relapsing multiple sclerosis. FUNDING: Merck.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    _2
$a dvojitá slepá metoda $7 D004311
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    12
$a hydroxybutyráty $7 D006885
650    12
$a nitrily $x terapeutické užití $7 D009570
650    12
$a krotonáty $x terapeutické užití $7 D003437
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    12
$a relabující-remitující roztroušená skleróza $x farmakoterapie $7 D020529
650    12
$a toluidiny $x terapeutické užití $7 D014052
650    12
$a pyrimidiny $x terapeutické užití $7 D011743
650    _2
$a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a mladiství $7 D000293
650    _2
$a inhibitory proteinkinas $x terapeutické užití $x škodlivé účinky $7 D047428
650    _2
$a proteinkinasa BTK $x antagonisté a inhibitory $7 D000077329
650    _2
$a piperidiny $7 D010880
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a randomizované kontrolované studie $7 D016449
655    _2
$a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
655    _2
$a klinické zkoušky, fáze III $7 D017428
700    1_
$a Vermersch, Patrick $u University Lille, Inserm U1172 LilNCog, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille, Lille, France
700    1_
$a Arnold, Douglas L $u NeuroRx Research, Montreal, QC, Canada; Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada
700    1_
$a Bar-Or, Amit $u Department of Neurology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
700    1_
$a Cree, Bruce A C $u Department of Neurology, UCSF Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
700    1_
$a Cross, Anne H $u Section of Multiple Sclerosis and Neuroimmunology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA
700    1_
$a Kubala Havrdova, Eva $u General University Hospital, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Kappos, Ludwig $u Departments of Headorgans, Spine and Neuromedicine, Clinical Research, and Biomedical Engineering, Research Center for Clinical Neuroimmunology and Neuroscience, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
700    1_
$a Stuve, Olaf $u Department of Neurology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
700    1_
$a Wiendl, Heinz $u Department of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, University Hospital, Münster, Germany
700    1_
$a Wolinsky, Jerry S $u Department of Neurology, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, TX, USA
700    1_
$a Dahlke, Frank $u Impulze, Zürich, Switzerland
700    1_
$a Le Bolay, Claire $u Merck Santé, an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Lyon, France
700    1_
$a Shen Loo, Li $u EMD Serono, an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Billerica, MA, USA
700    1_
$a Gopalakrishnan, Sathej $u Merck KGaA Healthcare, Darmstadt, Germany
700    1_
$a Hyvert, Yann $u Merck KGaA Healthcare, Darmstadt, Germany
700    1_
$a Javor, Andrija $u Ares Trading, an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Eysins, Switzerland
700    1_
$a Guehring, Hans $u Merck KGaA Healthcare, Darmstadt, Germany
700    1_
$a Tenenbaum, Nadia $u EMD Serono, an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Billerica, MA, USA
700    1_
$a Tomic, Davorka $u Ares Trading, an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Eysins, Switzerland
710    2_
$a evolutionRMS investigators
773    0_
$w MED00006921 $t Lancet neurology $x 1474-4465 $g Roč. 23, č. 11 (2024), s. 1119-1132
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39307151 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20250121 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250206104451 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2263408 $s 1239643
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 23 $c 11 $d 1119-1132 $e 20240919 $i 1474-4465 $m Lancet neurology $n Lancet Neurol $x MED00006921
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20250121

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace