Antiinflammatory Therapy with Canakinumab for Atherosclerotic Disease

Background: Experimental and clinical data suggest that reducing inflammation without affecting lipid levels may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Yet, the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis has remained unproved. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of canakinumab, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, involving 10,061 patients with previous myocardial infarction and a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level of 2 mg or more per liter. The trial compared three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg, administered subcutaneously every 3 months) with placebo. The primary efficacy end point was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: At 48 months, the median reduction from baseline in the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level was 26 percentage points greater in the group that received the 50-mg dose of canakinumab, 37 percentage points greater in the 150-mg group, and 41 percentage points greater in the 300-mg group than in the placebo group. Canakinumab did not reduce lipid levels from baseline. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, the incidence rate for the primary end point was 4.50 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group, 4.11 events per 100 person-years in the 50-mg group, 3.86 events per 100 person-years in the 150-mg group, and 3.90 events per 100 person-years in the 300-mg group. The hazard ratios as compared with placebo were as follows: in the 50-mg group, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07; P = 0.30); in the 150-mg group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.98; P = 0.021); and in the 300-mg group, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.031). The 150-mg dose, but not the other doses, met the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance for the primary end point and the secondary end point that additionally included hospitalization for unstable angina that led to urgent revascularization (hazard ratio vs. placebo, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95; P = 0.005). Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P = 0.31). Conclusions: Antiinflammatory therapy targeting the interleukin-1β innate immunity pathway with canakinumab at a dose of 150 mg every 3 months led to a significantly lower rate of recurrent cardiovascular events than placebo, independent of lipid-level lowering. (Funded by Novartis; CANTOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01327846.

Cohort Enrichment Strategies for Progressive Interstitial Lung Disease in Systemic Sclerosis From European Scleroderma Trials and Research

Background Enrichment strategies from clinical trials for progressive systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD) have not been tested in a real-life cohort. Research Question Do enrichment strategies for progressive ILD impact efficacy, representativeness, and feasibility in patients with SSc-ILD from the European Scleroderma Trials and Research (EUSTAR) database? Study Design and Methods We applied the inclusion criteria of major recent SSc-ILD trials (Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Tocilizumab in Participants With Systemic Sclerosis [focuSSced], Scleroderma Lung Study II [SLS II], and Safety and Efficacy of Nintedanib in Systemic Sclerosis [SENSCIS]) and assessed progressive ILD, which was defined as absolute change in FVC and as significant progression (FVC decline ≥10%). Data were compared with all patients and with patients who did not fulfill any inclusion criteria. Results In total, 2,258 patients with SSc-ILD were included: 31.2% of the patients met SENSCIS criteria; 5.8% of the patients met SLS II criteria; 1.6% of the patients met focuSSced criteria, and 67.7% (1,529) of the patients did not meet any criteria. In the first 12 ± 3 months, the absolute FVC decline in all patients and in patients who fulfilled criteria from SENSCIS was –0.1%, in patients who fulfilled criteria from focuSSced was –3.7%, and in patients who fulfilled criteria from SLS II was 2.3%, with accompanying more progressors in focuSSced. The patient populations that fulfilled the different study inclusion criteria significantly differed in various clinical parameters. In the second 12-month period, SENSCIS-enriched patients had a further absolute FVC% decline as described for the total cohort. In contrast, patients who fulfilled the focuSSced and SLS II criteria showed numeric improvement of lung function. There were no significant associations of enrichment criteria and ILD progression. Interpretation The application of enrichment criteria from previous clinical trials showed enrichment for progression with variable success, which led to selected patient populations reducing feasibility of recruitment. These findings are important for future clinical trial design and interpretation of the results of published trials