Search This Blog

Sunday, September 8, 2019

Pain Week: Teva Ajovy Effective for Tough-to-Treat Migraine

Fremanezumab (Ajovy) received FDA approval in 2018 for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine prevention. But the trials supporting approval of the agent, which functions by targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), excluded patients who had failed two or more preventive medications, and those who had common comorbidities.
Two studies presented at the 2019 PAINWeek conference explored fremanezumab effects in these subgroups.
FOCUS Trial
Fremanezumab reduced headache among patients who had failed to respond to two to four other classes of migraine preventive treatments at 12 weeks versus placebo, according to results from the FOCUS study.
Among 837 participants, fremanezumab showed significantly reduced mean monthly migraine days versus placebo when administered quarterly (95% CI −3.8 to −2.4, P<0.0001) and monthly (95% CI −4.2 to −2.8, P<0.0001), reported Ladislav Pazdera, MD, of Vestra Clinics in Rychnov nad Kněžnou, Czech Republic.
And it worked fast, achieving at least a 50% reduction in the number of monthly migraines compared with placebo by as early as 4 weeks, though less than half of patients achieved this endpoint, she reported in a poster. The findings were published in 2019 in the Lancet.
“Placebo responses were low and decreased with increasing number of classes of prior preventive treatments failed, while significant improvements in efficacy were observed with fremanezumab compared with placebo, even in patients who had previously experienced an inadequate response to 4 different classes of migraine preventive treatments,” Pazdera’s group wrote.
Elizabeth Loder, MD, MPH, of Harvard Medical School in Boston said the follow-up in this study was “relatively short” and its not known whether the “quite modest” improvements in migraine days will be sustained over time.
Loder, who was not involved in the study, also noted that, as with many trials evaluating preventive treatments for migraine, this study struggled to reach the benchmark 50% reduction in migraine days in even half of patients, which perhaps reflects the heterogeneity of the condition.
“The question of whether medications work in patients who have not benefited from other preventive medications is an important one, since those patients are difficult to treat,” Loder told MedPage Today. “It makes sense that prior treatment failures may indicate the presence of more severe disease.”
She also noted the overall number of headache days are not shown, meaning some participants might be classified as achieving the endpoint because they have a reduction in severity of headache.
The trial enrolled adult patients who had failed to respond to preventative migraine medications within the past 10 years across 104 international sites. Participants were then randomly assigned to either the quarterly fremanezumab arm — in which they got 675 mg at month 1 and placebo at months 2 and 3 — or the monthly arm, in which episodic and chronic migraine patients got 225 mg and 675 mg of fremanezumab in month 1, respectively, and then 225 mg at months 2 and 3. A third arm was administered monthly placebo for 12 weeks.
Adverse events (AEs) were similar across all arms; the most common were injection-site erythema, injection-site induration, and nasopharyngitis. Serious adverse events occurred in six patients but were not treatment-related.
HALO Trial
Fremanezumab was also effective among chronic migraine patients with acute medication overuse, according to a post-hoc analysis of the HALO trials, which were used to support the drug’s approval.
Among 477 chronic migraine patients with acute medication overuse, fremanezumab reduced the number of migraine days by at least half in 37% and 48% of patients on the quarterly and monthly regimen, respectively, reported Stephen Silberstein, MD, of Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia.
Also, roughly 60% no longer met the criteria for acute medication overuse at 6 months in both the quarterly and monthly arms, which was maintained through the 1-year mark, he reported.
The “medication overuse” diagnosis is controversial and it remains unclear whether frequent use of medication is causing headaches to be worse, or rather that individuals with more severe headache tend to require more medication, Loder said.
“Some people — not me — feel that overuse of symptom relieving medication might render preventive treatment less effective,” Loder said. “Thus, it is reasonable to do a post-hoc analysis of trial participants who had medication overuse to see how they fare.”
For this study, adult patients with confirmed chronic migraine were rolled over from the phase III HALO trials and also enrolled from the community. New enrollees were allowed to continue stable use of two concomitant migraine preventive medications and rollover participants were permitted to continue using one. Rollover patients were not enrolled if using onabotulinumtoxinA, opioids, or barbiturates in the time preceding the study, though these exclusions were not applied to new patients.
In this study, acute medication overuse was defined as acute headache medication use on ≥15 days, migraine-specific acute medication use on ≥10 days, or use of combination medications for headache on ≥10 days.
Loder emphasized that the post-hoc nature of this analysis and the lack of a placebo comparator make this study “hypothesis-generating” at most.
“It is also the case that the method of enrolling participants in these studies may have favored positive findings,” Loder said, adding that rollover patients were the ones who did not drop out of the study due to adverse events or lack of efficacy.
Participants on the quarterly schedule received 675 mg at baseline and placebo at weeks 4 and 8, while those in the monthly arm were administered 675 mg at baseline and 225 mg at weeks 4 and 8.
Those included were a mean age of about 46, who had been diagnosed with migraine 23 years prior. About a quarter were on current preventive medication at the time of the trial as well.
Fremanezumab also reduced the number of days patients required medication by about 8 days at 1 year in both the quarterly and monthly arm, Silberstein reported. It also reduced headache-related disability, measured through Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) scores at 1 year in the quarterly (-6.9 points) and monthly groups (-8.1).
The most common AEs were injection-site reactions in both groups, with <10% of patients in both the quarterly and monthly arms experiencing a serious AE. However, 12% and 11% of patients developed an upper respiratory tract infection in the quarterly and monthly arms, respectively.
FOCUS and HALO were funded by Teva Pharmaceutical. Some co-authors are company employees.
Pazdera disclosed no relevant relationships with industry.
Silberstein disclosed multiple relevant relationships with industry.

Greater support needed to improve the treatment of knee osteoarthritis

 new Curtin University-led paper has outlined that many people living with knee osteoarthritis may be needlessly suffering or receiving the wrong treatments for their symptoms, recommending a major change in how osteoarthritis is understood and treated.
The paper, published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, concluded that people with osteoarthritis are often provided potentially risky treatments with limited benefit such as opioid medication, injections, and arthroscopic surgery to manage their pain.
Lead author Dr. JP Caneiro, from Curtin’s School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science, said most people with osteoarthritis around the globe are not receiving the best practice care, including education, strengthening exercises,  and weight management, that they require. Greater support from the health system is needed.
“This editorial is a call to action by  in the field, from physiotherapy, rheumatology and orthopaedic surgery, including an outline of three key steps that are needed to change the way  understand and manage knee osteoarthritis,” Dr. Caneiro said.
“This includes changing the way clinicians understand and explain the condition to patients, how they treat the condition and by coaching patients to put them in charge of managing their own condition. Together, this helps to reduce the disability burden and suffering associated with knee osteoarthritis.”
Dr. Caneiro said the proposed steps would enable healthcare professionals to promote a new and better understanding of knee osteoarthritis that is aligned with contemporary evidence.
“Knee osteoarthritis can be painful and debilitating, and the pain is often blamed on structural damage, with people frequently given scans and told that their knees are ‘bone on bone,’ leading them to believe that a knee replacement is inevitable,” Dr. Caneiro said.
“Because of this, treatment often aims to ‘fix’ the structure, leading to many people receiving knee arthroscopic surgery or a knee replacement. In contrast, research tells us that non-surgical treatments targeting physical, lifestyle and psychological factors can reduce pain, disability, reliance on medication and need for surgery. However, effective non-surgical approaches are often not prescribed, and there is very little support within the health system to fund them.”
Co-author John Curtin Distinguished Professor Peter O’Sullivan, also from Curtin’s School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science, said it was critical to spread the message to international and national healthcare professionals and the general public to change society’s misconceptions about .
“It is important for clinicians to shift away from labeling this condition as ‘structural damage’ and instead focus on knee health, encouraging  therapy, physical activity and weight loss, as well as reassuring patients that it is safe to exercise and strengthen their ,” Professor O’Sullivan said.
“People with osteoarthritis need health professionals to coach them to develop a positive mindset, engage with exercise, and learn how to manage possible flare-ups. To facilitate a shift in the treatment of osteoarthritis, important changes need to occur at the health system level such as funding, and better reimbursement for exercise, weight loss and education programs for  care.”

Explore further

More information: JP Caneiro et al. Three steps to changing the narrative about knee osteoarthritis care: a call to action, British Journal of Sports Medicine (2019). DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2019-101328

Drugmakers file second court challenge to Canada’s new drug price rules

Canada’s main pharmaceutical industry lobby group, along with 16 of its member companies, filed a lawsuit on Friday to block new regulations meant to lower patented drug prices, the second legal challenge to a new regime that could eventually reduce prices in the United States as well.
Canada published the final regulations in August, despite heavy lobbying from drug companies, which stand to lose revenue as prices drop. The federal government estimates the new rules will save Canadian patients, employers and insurers, including governments, C$13.2 billion ($10 billion) over a decade.
Friday’s lawsuit was filed in federal court and led by Innovative Medicines Canada (IMC), which represents major drugmakers in Canada. It is separate from a lawsuit filed last month and focuses on federal patent law, arguing that Canada cannot use regulations to “fundamentally alter” the role of its federal drug price regulator.
IMC was not a plaintiff in a Quebec Superior Court challenge filed in August, which argued that price regulation falls within provincial jurisdiction.
“We would not enter into this lightly. The industry lives and breathes saving lives, but it does require a viable business model to do so,” IMC President Pamela Fralick said in an interview. “Canada is not creating a sustainable environment for innovative medicines.”

Fralick said industry had been trying to work with Health Canada to find policy alternatives to the proposal for nearly two years.
IMC has argued that new drugs may launch late or not at all in Canada if prices fall, and that the policy will discourage investment in Canada. The government says other countries with lower drug prices have investment and drug access that are as good as or better than Canada’s.

Lower prices in Canada could spill into the United States, the world’s largest pharmaceutical market, since the Trump administration said in July it would allow U.S. states and other groups to start pilot programs importing drugs from Canada. The administration is also considering linking what it pays for drugs under Medicare, which provides federal health insurance for Americans 65 or older, to prices abroad, including in Canada.
The new regulations, which go into force July 1, 2020, change the list of countries with which Canada’s federal drug price regulator, the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board, compares domestic prices, dropping the United States and Switzerland, where prices are highest. It will also let the agency consider the cost-effectiveness of new medicines for the first time.
Plaintiffs in the new case include Canadian subsidiaries of AbbVie Inc, Astellas Pharma Inc, AstraZeneca PLC, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co, Eli Lilly and Co, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and Pfizer Inc.

Amgen drug shrinks lung cancer tumors in half of patients

An experimental Amgen Inc drug that targets a specific genetic mutation reduced tumor size in around half of advanced lung cancer patients given the highest dose in a small, early-stage trial, the company said on Sunday.
Out of 13 lung cancer patients taking a 960-milligram dose of AMG510, seven had tumors shrink by at least 30%, according to data presented in Barcelona at the World Conference on Lung Cancer. Cancer was stabilized in the other six high-dose patients.
Nine of the 13, or 69%, are still taking the daily pill. Two of the partial responders have died, and another left the study due to cancer progression. One patient with stable disease also died.
Patients who responded to the drug have been treated for a median of 15 weeks, but the median duration of response has not been reached, according to Greg Friberg, head of oncology development at Amgen.
He said one patient previously reported as free of lung cancer is being counted as a partial responder since cancer in lymph nodes or other tissue cannot be ruled out.
Thirty-four lung cancer patients are enrolled in the Phase 1 dose-ranging trial, but Amgen has moved only the highest dose into a mid-stage study. The trial enrolled patients with tumors carrying the targeted mutation whose cancer had worsened despite several previous treatments – including chemotherapy and checkpoint inhibitors.
Of the 23 lung cancer patients so far evaluated – at various doses of AMG510 – 11 had tumor shrinkage of at least 30%.
About a third of trial patients reported mild side effects. More serious side effects, diarrhea and anemia, were seen in 9%of patients and no one left the study due to toxicity, the company said.

Wall Street has taken a keen interest in the Amgen drug that could become the first approved medicine targeting a mutated form of a gene known as KRAS – one of the most common mutations found in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
NSCLC accounts for up to 85% of lung cancers, by far the leading cause of cancer death among men and women, according to the American Cancer Society.
AMG510 is part of a growing trend of precision medicines that target gene mutations driving cancer regardless of the organ in which the disease originated.
The targeted mutation, KRASG12C, occurs in around 13% of NSCLC cases, as well as 3-5% of colorectal cancers and up to 2% of other solid tumor cancers, including pancreatic.
Amgen plans to present Phase 1 AMG510 trial results for patients with colorectal cancer later this month at a separate meeting to be held in Barcelona, this one by the European Society for Medical Oncology.

The company is also enrolling patients in an early-stage study of AMG510 in combination with Keytruda, Merck & Co’s checkpoint inhibitor designed to unleash the body’s immune system to attack cancer cells.
Amgen said the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has granted “fast track” status to AMG510 for previously treated NSCLC with KRASG12C mutation.
Rivals such as Mirati Therapeutics Inc are also developing drugs that target KRAS mutations, but Amgen’s could be first to market.

More deaths linked to vaping; Michigan 1st with ban

Three more deaths linked to vaping have been reported in Indiana, California and Minnesota, bringing the total number of such U.S. deaths to five.
Some type of chemical irritation is likely associated with the illnesses, but more information is needed to determine the exact cause.
“While this investigation is ongoing, people should consider not using e-cigarette products,” the CDC wrote in a news release.
U.S. health officials are now investigating more than 450 cases of possible vaping-related illnesses in 33 states, while last week, the governor of Michigan announced the state will become the first to ban flavored e-cigarettes.

ADC Therapeutics readies IPO

ADC Therapeutics SA (ADCT) has filed a prospectus for a $150M IPO.
The Swiss biotech develops antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) to treat cancer that use pyrrobenzodiazepines (PBDs), a class of natural products produced by actinomycetes bacteria, as the cytotoxic agent. The company says PBD toxins are 100 times more potent than the cytotoxic agents (called warheads) used in ADCs currently on the market.
Lead candidates are ADCT-402 (loncastuximab tesirine), in Phase 2 development for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (preliminary 41.7% response rate) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (41.4% response rate in a Phase 1 study), and ADCT-301 (camidanlumab tesirine), in Phase 2 development for relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (86.5% response rate in Phase 1).
If current studies are successful, the company expects to file a U.S. marketing application for ADCT-402 in H2 2020 followed by ADCT-301 in H1 2022.
2019 Financials (6 mo.): Contract Revenue: $2.3M (+274%); Net loss: ($49.9M) (+19%); Cash Consumption: ($55.7M) (+9%).
Related ticker: Seattle Genetics (NASDAQ:SGEN)

Saturday, September 7, 2019

CMS gets new powers to go after Medicare, Medicaid fraudsters

The Trump administration issued a new rule that aims to prevent payments to Medicare and Medicaid fraudsters by boosting revocation powers and extending the time before troublesome organizations can rejoin the programs.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services said that the final rule issued Thursday marks a major turnaround from the agency’s normal approach of attempting to recoup fraudulent payments after the fact.
“For too many years, we have played an expensive and inefficient game of ‘whack-a-mole’ with criminals⁠—going after them one at a time⁠—as they steal from our programs,” CMS Administrator Seema Verma said in a statement Thursday. “Now for the first time, we have tools to stop criminals before they can steal from taxpayers.
The rule gives CMS new powers to revoke or deny organizations from participating in Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
A new “affiliations” authority lets CMS identify individuals or organizations that have a high risk of fraud, waste or abuse based on their association with previously sanctioned people or groups, a release on the new rule said.
“For example, a currently enrolled or newly enrolling organization that has an owner/managing employee who is ‘affiliated’ with another previously revoked organization can be denied enrollment in Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP or, if already enrolled, can have its enrollment revoked because of the problematic affiliation,” the agency said.

Over the last five years, nearly $52 billion has been paid to 2,097 entities that were affiliated with an individual or company that had their enrollment revoked, the final rule said. CMS estimates it could save $20.7 billion over five years through the new affiliation authority.
The definition of an affiliation includes if a supplier or provider has a 5% or greater direct or indirect ownership stake in a revoked organization, has a general or limited partnership or if an individual has operational or managerial control over day-to-day operations of the organization, according to the rule.
CMS also now has the authority to revoke or deny Medicare enrollment if a revoked provider or supplier tries to come back in under a different name. CMS can also revoke or deny enrollment if a provider or supplier bills for services or items from a non-compliant location or if they have an outstanding debt from the Treasury Department for an overpayment.
The rule also enables CMS to prevent an application from enrolling in one of the programs for up to three years if a provider or supplier submitted false or misleading information in their enrollment application.
Under the new regulations, a revoked provider could re-enroll in Medicare, Medicaid or CHIP after 10 years. This is a major increase from the previous penalty of waiting only three years. If a provider or supplier gets revoked for a second time, then it must wait two decades before it can rejoin the program.
The new authorities go into effect on Nov. 4.
Federal health programs such as Medicare and Medicaid are a plum target for fraudsters due in part to the large number of payments the federal government doles out. The Government Accountability Office has said that improper Medicaid payments, for instance, reached $37 billion in 2017.
CMS said that it has been working to combat fraud and waste. The agency cited the improper payment rate for Medicare’s fee-for-service program was 8.12%, the lowest since 2010.