Peter A Merkel, Michael D George, Huibin Yue, Tamara Popov, Andreas Kronbichler, Mark A Little, David R W Jayne
{"title":"Safety of Avacopan for the Treatment of Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis: Combined Data From Three Clinical Trials.","authors":"Peter A Merkel, Michael D George, Huibin Yue, Tamara Popov, Andreas Kronbichler, Mark A Little, David R W Jayne","doi":"10.1002/acr2.70001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to report the safety of avacopan, an oral selective complement C5a receptor antagonist, using pooled data from clinical trials in patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (granulomatosis with polyangiitis [GPA] or microscopic polyangiitis [MPA]).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were included from two phase 2 (CLEAR [NCT01363388] and CLASSIC [NCT02222155]) and one phase 3 (ADVOCATE [NCT02994927]) double-blind randomized controlled trials comparing the safety and efficacy of avacopan with active non-avacopan control regimens to induce remission in patients with GPA or MPA. In CLEAR and ADVOCATE, avacopan-treated patients received either no or lower doses of study-supplied prednisone than the control groups; in CLASSIC, all groups received the same dose of study-supplied prednisone. Assessments included rates of exposure-adjusted adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and AEs of special interest.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 439 patients with GPA or MPA (avacopan: n = 239; non-avacopan: n = 200) were included. The exposure-adjusted rates of AEs, SAEs, white blood cell (WBC) count reductions, and infections were lower with avacopan versus control (between-group differences in rate per 100 patient-years -151.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) -218.6 to -85.3], -20.8 [95% CI -38.3 to -3.3], -11.6 [95% CI -22.2 to -1.2], and -24.3 [95% CI -48.5 to -0.1], respectively). SAEs associated with hepatic function abnormalities occurred in 4.4% of the avacopan group and 2.8% of the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In clinical trials of GPA or MPA, use of avacopan was associated with fewer AEs, SAEs, and WBC count reductions and fewer infections than non-avacopan treatment. Safety data support the use of avacopan in patients with GPA or MPA.</p>","PeriodicalId":93845,"journal":{"name":"ACR open rheumatology","volume":"7 4","pages":"e70001"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11973930/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACR open rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr2.70001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to report the safety of avacopan, an oral selective complement C5a receptor antagonist, using pooled data from clinical trials in patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (granulomatosis with polyangiitis [GPA] or microscopic polyangiitis [MPA]).
Methods: Data were included from two phase 2 (CLEAR [NCT01363388] and CLASSIC [NCT02222155]) and one phase 3 (ADVOCATE [NCT02994927]) double-blind randomized controlled trials comparing the safety and efficacy of avacopan with active non-avacopan control regimens to induce remission in patients with GPA or MPA. In CLEAR and ADVOCATE, avacopan-treated patients received either no or lower doses of study-supplied prednisone than the control groups; in CLASSIC, all groups received the same dose of study-supplied prednisone. Assessments included rates of exposure-adjusted adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and AEs of special interest.
Results: Overall, 439 patients with GPA or MPA (avacopan: n = 239; non-avacopan: n = 200) were included. The exposure-adjusted rates of AEs, SAEs, white blood cell (WBC) count reductions, and infections were lower with avacopan versus control (between-group differences in rate per 100 patient-years -151.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) -218.6 to -85.3], -20.8 [95% CI -38.3 to -3.3], -11.6 [95% CI -22.2 to -1.2], and -24.3 [95% CI -48.5 to -0.1], respectively). SAEs associated with hepatic function abnormalities occurred in 4.4% of the avacopan group and 2.8% of the control group.
Conclusion: In clinical trials of GPA or MPA, use of avacopan was associated with fewer AEs, SAEs, and WBC count reductions and fewer infections than non-avacopan treatment. Safety data support the use of avacopan in patients with GPA or MPA.
目的:本研究旨在通过汇总抗中性粒细胞胞浆抗体(ANCA)相关血管炎(肉芽肿伴多血管炎[GPA]或显微多血管炎[MPA])患者的临床试验数据,报道口服补体C5a受体拮抗剂avacopan的安全性。方法:数据来自两项2期(CLEAR [NCT01363388]和CLASSIC [NCT02222155])和一项3期(ADVOCATE [NCT02994927])双盲随机对照试验,比较avacopan与非avacopan有效对照方案诱导GPA或MPA患者缓解的安全性和有效性。在CLEAR和ADVOCATE试验中,与对照组相比,阿瓦库泮治疗的患者要么不接受强的松治疗,要么接受更低剂量的强的松治疗;在CLASSIC中,所有组接受相同剂量的研究提供的强的松。评估包括暴露调整不良事件(ae)、严重不良事件(sae)和特别关注的不良事件发生率。结果:总体而言,439例GPA或MPA患者(avacopan: n = 239;非空腔:n = 200)。与对照组相比,avacopan组的ae、SAEs、白细胞(WBC)计数减少和感染的暴露调整率更低(每100患者年发生率组间差异分别为-151.9[95%可信区间(CI) -218.6至-85.3]、-20.8 [95% CI -38.3至-3.3]、-11.6 [95% CI -22.2至-1.2]和-24.3 [95% CI -48.5至-0.1])。与肝功能异常相关的SAEs发生率为阿伐科泮组的4.4%,对照组的2.8%。结论:在GPA或MPA的临床试验中,与不使用avacopan治疗相比,使用avacopan与更少的ae、sae、WBC计数减少和感染相关。安全性数据支持在GPA或MPA患者中使用avacopan。