Exposure-Response Analysis of Vamorolone (VBP15) in Boys With Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

Corticosteroids for the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a safety review

INTRODUCTION

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is an X-linked genetic disorder characterized by progressive muscle degeneration and weakness, caused by mutations in the dystrophin gene. DMD has effects in early age with significantly shortened lifespan and deteriorated quality of life in the second decade, creating an urgent need to develop better therapeutic options. Corticosteroid medication therapy is an integral tool for the management of DMD and several therapeutic options have been recently approved for use.

AREAS COVERED

A comprehensive literature search was completed to examine efficacy and safety profiles of the three corticosteroid medications available for use in DMD patients. The review presents information about the three agents through clinical trials, significant preclinical trials, and comparative studies.

EXPERT OPINION

Managing DMD takes a multidisciplinary approach, although long-term corticosteroid therapy remains a significant therapeutic tool. Based on the available published studies, unequivocal comparison between the benefits of the three medications cannot yet be made. When selecting a medication for a patient, the decision-making process will most likely rely on the minor differences in the adverse effect profiles. Whichever medication is utilized will surely be a part of a larger regimen that includes other novel therapeutic agents.

Assessing Pharmacogenomic loci Associated with the Pharmacokinetics of Vamorolone in Boys with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

Human genetic variation (polymorphisms) in genes coding proteins involved in the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination (ADME) of drugs can have a strong effect on drug exposure and downstream efficacy and safety outcomes. Vamorolone, a dissociative steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for treating Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), primarily undergoes oxidation by CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 and glucuronidation by UDP-glucuronosyltransferases. This work assesses the pharmacokinetics (PKs) of vamorolone and sources of interindividual variability (IIV) in 81 steroid-naïve boys with DMD aged 4 to <7 years old considering the genetic polymorphisms of CYPS3A4 (CYP3A4*22, CYP3A4*1B), CYP3A5 (CYP3A5*3), and UGT1A1 (UGT1A1*60) utilizing population PK modeling. A one-compartment model with zero-order absorption (Tk0, duration of absorption), linear clearance (CL/F), and volume (V/F) describes the plasma PK data for boys with DMD receiving a wide range of vamorolone doses (0.25-6 mg/kg/day). The typical CL/F and V/F values of vamorolone were 35.8 L/h and 119 L, with modest IIV. The population Tk0 was 3.14 h yielding an average zero-order absorption rate (k0) of 1.16 mg/kg/h with similar absorption kinetics across subjects at the same vamorolone dose (i.e., no IIV on Tk0). The covariate analysis showed that none of the genetic covariates had any significant impact on the PKs of vamorolone in boys with DMD. Thus, the PKs of vamorolone is very consistent in these young boys with DMD.

Efficacy and safety of different doses of vamorolone in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background and objectives

Several recent clinical studies have indicated that vamorolone is comparable in effectiveness to glucocorticosteroids for treating Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). However, there is a lack of extensive data regarding the efficacy and safety of various doses of vamorolone. We conducted a study to evaluate the efficacy of different doses of vamorolone in boys with DMD, and compare the safety of vamorolone vs. glucocorticosteroids, prednisone or deflazacort in boys with DMD.

Methods

We performed systematic searches of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for vamorolone, glucocorticosteroids, prednisone or deflazacort in boys with DMD. We assessed statistical heterogeneity across trials based on the Newcastle Ottawa scale (NOS) tool test and I2 values, and mean differences were pooled using the random-effects model. We used traditional meta-analysis to evaluate efficacy and safety of vamorolone 6.0 mg/kg/d vs. vamorolone 2.0 mg/kg/d and vamorolone vs. prednisone. A network meta-analysis was applied to estimated the safety of vamorolone in comparison to glucocorticosteroids, prednisone and deflazacort. Our meta-analysis were performed using Revman 5.4 software, and our network meta-analysis were performed using Stata/MP 18.0.

Results

In the meta-analysis, a total of 193 patients were analyzed across four clinical trials (97 patients receiving vamorolone 2 mg/kg per day; 96 patients receiving vamorolone 2 mg/kg per day). We observed that there were statistically significant differences in boys with DMD between vamorolone 6.0 mg/kg/d and vamorolone 2.0 mg/kg/d in TTSTANDV (MD = 0.03, 95%CI = 0.00-0.06, p = 0.04), TTRWV (MD = 0.13, 95%CI = 0.08-0.19, p < 0.01), 6MWT (MD = 24.54, 95%CI = 4.46-44.82, p = 0.02), TTCLIMBV (MD = 0.04, 95%CI = 0.01-0.06, p = 0.009), no significant difference in BMI z score (MD = 0.09, 95%CI = -0.03-0.20, p = 0.13). Indirect comparisons derived from network meta-analysis did not show significant differences among vamorolone, glucocorticosteroids, prednisone and deflazacort in BMI z score.

Conclusion

Our findings implied that boys with DMD who took vamorolone 6 mg/kg daily instead of 2 mg/kg daily may be safer and have superior motor function. However, more large sample randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our results.

Systematic Review Registration

This systematic review and meta-analysis has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Ongoing Systematic Reviews PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42024562916).

Pharmacotherapeutic Approaches to Treatment of Muscular Dystrophies

Muscular dystrophies are a heterogeneous group of genetic muscle-wasting disorders that are subdivided based on the region of the body impacted by muscle weakness as well as the functional activity of the underlying genetic mutations. A common feature of the pathophysiology of muscular dystrophies is chronic inflammation associated with the replacement of muscle mass with fibrotic scarring. With the progression of these disorders, many patients suffer cardiomyopathies with fibrosis of the cardiac tissue. Anti-inflammatory glucocorticoids represent the standard of care for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, the most common muscular dystrophy worldwide; however, long-term exposure to glucocorticoids results in highly adverse side effects, limiting their use. Thus, it is important to develop new pharmacotherapeutic approaches to limit inflammation and fibrosis to reduce muscle damage and promote repair. Here, we examine the pathophysiology, genetic background, and emerging therapeutic strategies for muscular dystrophies.

Cardiac therapies for Duchenne muscular dystrophy

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a devastating disease that results in life-limiting complications such as loss of skeletal muscle function as well as respiratory and cardiac complications. Advanced therapeutics in pulmonary care have significantly reduced respiratory complication-related mortality, making cardiomyopathy the main determinant factor of survival. While there are multiple therapies such as the use of anti-inflammatory drugs, physical therapy, and ventilatory assistance targeted toward delaying the disease progression in DMD, a cure remains elusive. In the last decade, several therapeutic approaches have been developed to improve patient survival. These include small molecule-based therapy, micro-dystrophin gene delivery, CRISPR-mediated gene editing, nonsense readthrough, exon skipping, and cardiosphere-derived cell therapy. Associated with the specific benefits of each of these approaches are their individual risks and limitations. The variability in the genetic aberrations leading to DMD also limits the widespread use of these therapies. While numerous approaches have been explored to treat DMD pathophysiology, only a handful have successfully advanced through the preclinical stages. In this review, we summarize the currently approved as well as the most promising therapeutics undergoing clinical trials aimed toward treating DMD with a focus on its cardiac manifestations.

Considering the Promise of Vamorolone for Treating Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

This commentary provides an independent consideration of data related to the drug vamorolone (VBP15) as an alternative steroid proposed for treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). Glucocorticoids such as prednisone and deflazacort have powerful anti-inflammatory benefits and are the standard of care for DMD, but their long-term use can result in severe adverse side effects; thus, vamorolone was designed as a unique dissociative steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, to retain efficacy and minimise these adverse effects. Extensive clinical trials (ongoing) have investigated the use of vamorolone for DMD, with two trials also for limb-girdle muscular dystrophies including dysferlinopathy (current), plus a variety of pre-clinical trials published. Vamorolone looks very promising, with similar efficacy and some reduced adverse effects (e.g., related to height) compared with other glucocorticoids, specifically prednisone/prednisolone, although it has not yet been directly compared with deflazacort. Of particular interest to clarify is the optimal clinical dose and other aspects of vamorolone that are proposed to provide additional benefits for membranes of dystrophic muscle: to stabilise and protect the sarcolemma from damage and enhance repair. The use of vamorolone (and other glucocorticoids) needs to be evaluated in terms of overall long-term efficacy and cost, and also in comparison with many candidate non-steroidal drugs with anti-inflammatory and other benefits for DMD.

Innovations in Pediatric Therapeutics Development: Principles for the Use of Bridging Biomarkers in Pediatric Extrapolation

Even with recent substantive improvements in health care in pediatric populations, considerable need remains for additional safe and effective interventions for the prevention and treatment of diseases in children. The approval of prescription drugs and biological products for use in pediatric settings, as in adults, requires demonstration of substantial evidence of effectiveness and favorable benefit-to-risk. For diseases primarily affecting children, such evidence predominantly would be obtained in the pediatric setting. However, for conditions affecting both adults and children, pediatric extrapolation uses scientific evidence in adults to enable more efficiently obtaining a reliable evaluation of an intervention's effects in pediatric populations. Bridging biomarkers potentially have an integral role in pediatric extrapolation. In a setting where an intervention reliably has been established to be safe and effective in adults, and where there is substantive evidence that disease processes in pediatric and adult settings are biologically similar, a 'bridging biomarker' should satisfy three additional criteria: effects on the bridging biomarker should capture effects on the principal causal pathway through which the disease process meaningfully influences 'feels, functions, survives' measures; secondly, the experimental intervention should not have important unintended effects on 'feels, functions, survives' measures not captured by the bridging biomarker; and thirdly, in statistical analyses in adults, the intervention's net effect on 'feels, functions, survives' measures should be consistent with what would be predicted by its level of effect on the bridging biomarker. A validated bridging biomarker has considerable potential utility, since an intervention's efficacy could be extrapolated from adult to pediatric populations if evidence in children establishes the intervention not only to be safe but also to have substantive effects on that bridging biomarker. Proper use of bridging biomarkers could increase availability of reliably evaluated therapies approved for use in pediatric settings, enabling children and their caregivers to make informed choices about health care.

Hydrogen sulfide as a therapeutic option for the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy and other muscle-related diseases

Hydrogen sulfide (H₂S) has been known for years as a poisoning gas and until recently evoked mostly negative associations. However, the discovery of its gasotransmitter functions suggested its contribution to various physiological and pathological processes. Although H₂S has been found to exert cytoprotective effects through modulation of antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-apoptotic, and pro-angiogenic responses in a variety of conditions, its role in the pathophysiology of skeletal muscles has not been broadly elucidated so far. The classical example of muscle-related disorders is Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), the most common and severe type of muscular dystrophy. Mutations in the DMD gene that encodes dystrophin, a cytoskeletal protein that protects muscle fibers from contraction-induced damage, lead to prominent dysfunctions in the structure and functions of the skeletal muscle. However, the main cause of death is associated with cardiorespiratory failure, and DMD remains an incurable disease. Taking into account a wide range of physiological functions of H₂S and recent literature data on its possible protective role in DMD, we focused on the description of the 'old' and 'new' functions of H₂S, especially in muscle pathophysiology. Although the number of studies showing its essential regulatory action in dystrophic muscles is still limited, we propose that H₂S-based therapy has the potential to attenuate the progression of DMD and other muscle-related disorders.

Standard of care versus new-wave corticosteroids in the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy: Can we do better?

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological corticosteroid therapy is the standard of care in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) that aims to control symptoms and slow disease progression through potent anti-inflammatory action. However, a major concern is the significant adverse effects associated with long term-use. MAIN: This review discusses the pros and cons of standard of care treatment for DMD and compares it to novel data generated with the new-wave dissociative corticosteroid, vamorolone. The current status of experimental anti-inflammatory pharmaceuticals is also reviewed, with insights regarding alternative drugs that could provide therapeutic advantage.

CONCLUSIONS

Although novel dissociative steroids may be superior substitutes to corticosteroids, other potential therapeutics should be explored. Repurposing or developing novel pharmacological therapies capable of addressing the many pathogenic features of DMD in addition to anti-inflammation could elicit greater therapeutic advantages.

Efficacy and safety of vamorolone in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: An 18-month interim analysis of a non-randomized open-label extension study

BACKGROUND

Treatment with corticosteroids is recommended for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) patients to slow the progression of weakness. However, chronic corticosteroid treatment causes significant morbidities. Vamorolone is a first-in-class anti-inflammatory investigational drug that has shown evidence of efficacy in DMD after 24 weeks of treatment at 2.0 or 6.0 mg/kg/day. Here, open-label efficacy and safety experience of vamorolone was evaluated over a period of 18 months in trial participants with DMD.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A multicenter, open-label, 24-week trial (VBP15-003) with a 24-month long-term extension (VBP15-LTE) was conducted by the Cooperative International Neuromuscular Research Group (CINRG) and evaluated drug-related effects of vamorolone on motor outcomes and corticosteroid-associated safety concerns. The study was carried out in Canada, US, UK, Australia, Sweden, and Israel, from 2016 to 2019. This report covers the initial 24-week trial and the first 12 months of the VBP15-LTE trial (total treatment period 18 months). DMD trial participants (males, 4 to <7 years at entry) treated with 2.0 or 6.0 mg/kg/day vamorolone for the full 18-month period (n = 23) showed clinical improvement of all motor outcomes from baseline to month 18 (time to stand velocity, p = 0.012 [95% CI 0.010, 0.068 event/second]; run/walk 10 meters velocity, p < 0.001 [95% CI 0.220, 0.491 meters/second]; climb 4 stairs velocity, p = 0.001 [95% CI 0.034, 0.105 event/second]; 6-minute walk test, p = 0.001 [95% CI 31.14, 93.38 meters]; North Star Ambulatory Assessment, p < 0.001 [95% CI 2.702, 6.662 points]). Outcomes in vamorolone-treated DMD patients (n = 46) were compared to group-matched participants in the CINRG Duchenne Natural History Study (corticosteroid-naïve, n = 19; corticosteroid-treated, n = 68) over a similar 18-month period. Time to stand was not significantly different between vamorolone-treated and corticosteroid-naïve participants (p = 0.088; least squares [LS] mean 0.042 [95% CI -0.007, 0.091]), but vamorolone-treated participants showed significant improvement compared to group-matched corticosteroid-naïve participants for run/walk 10 meters velocity (p = 0.003; LS mean 0.286 [95% CI 0.104, 0.469]) and climb 4 stairs velocity (p = 0.027; LS mean 0.059 [95% CI 0.007, 0.111]). The vamorolone-related improvements were similar in magnitude to corticosteroid-related improvements. Corticosteroid-treated participants showed stunting of growth, whereas vamorolone-treated trial participants did not (p < 0.001; LS mean 15.86 [95% CI 8.51, 23.22]). Physician-reported incidences of adverse events (AEs) for Cushingoid appearance, hirsutism, weight gain, and behavior change were less for vamorolone than published incidences for prednisone and deflazacort. Key limitations to the study were the open-label design, and use of external comparators.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed that vamorolone treatment was associated with improvements in some motor outcomes as compared with corticosteroid-naïve individuals over an 18-month treatment period. We found that fewer physician-reported AEs occurred with vamorolone than have been reported for treatment with prednisone and deflazacort, and that vamorolone treatment did not cause the stunting of growth seen with these corticosteroids. This Phase IIa study provides Class III evidence to support benefit of motor function in young boys with DMD treated with vamorolone 2.0 to 6.0 mg/kg/day, with a favorable safety profile. A Phase III RCT is underway to further investigate safety and efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov, and the links to each trial are as follows (as provided in manuscript text): VBP15-002 [NCT02760264] VBP15-003 [NCT02760277] VBP15-LTE [NCT03038399].