Alirocumab, a Fully Human Monoclonal Antibody to Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/kexin Type 9: Therapeutic Dosing in Phase 3 Studies

PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of effective drug therapies that reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (LDL-C), cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains an important cause of mortality and morbidity. Therefore, additional LDL-C reduction may be warranted, especially for people who are unresponsive to, or unable to take, existing LDL-C-reducing therapies. By inhibiting the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) enzyme, monoclonal antibodies (PCSK9 inhibitors) reduce LDL-C and CVD risk.

OBJECTIVES

Primary To quantify the effects of PCSK9 inhibitors on CVD, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke, compared to placebo or active treatment(s) for primary and secondary prevention. Secondary To quantify the safety of PCSK9 inhibitors, with specific focus on the incidence of influenza, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and cancer, compared to placebo or active treatment(s) for primary and secondary prevention.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies by systematically searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science in December 2019. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in August 2020 and screened the reference lists of included studies. This is an update of the review first published in 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All parallel-group and factorial randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a follow-up of at least 24 weeks were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed and extracted data. Where data were available, we calculated pooled effect estimates. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence and in 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 studies with data on 60,997 participants. Eighteen trials randomised participants to alirocumab and six to evolocumab. All participants received background lipid-lowering treatment or lifestyle counselling. Six alirocumab studies used  an active treatment comparison group (the remaining used placebo), compared to three evolocumab active comparison trials. Alirocumab compared with placebo decreased the risk of CVD events, with an absolute risk difference (RD) of -2% (odds ratio (OR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 0.94; 10 studies, 23,868 participants; high-certainty evidence), decreased the risk of mortality (RD -1%; OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96; 12 studies, 24,797 participants; high-certainty evidence), and MI (RD -2%; OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94; 9 studies, 23,352 participants; high-certainty evidence) and for any stroke (RD 0%; OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.91; 8 studies, 22,835 participants; high-certainty evidence). Compared to active treatment the alirocumab effects, for CVD, the RD was 1% (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.87; 3 studies, 1379 participants; low-certainty evidence); for mortality, RD was -1% (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.40; 5 studies, 1333 participants; low-certainty evidence); for MI, RD was 1% (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.64 to 3.28, 5 studies, 1734 participants; low-certainty evidence); and for any stroke, RD was less than 1% (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.13 to 5.61; 5 studies, 1734 participants; low-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo the evolocumab, for CVD, the RD was -2% (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.91; 3 studies, 29,432 participants; high-certainty evidence); for mortality, RD was less than 1% (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.19; 3 studies, 29,432 participants; high-certainty evidence); for MI, RD was -1% (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.82; 3 studies, 29,432 participants; high-certainty evidence); and for any stroke RD was less than -1% (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.94; 2 studies, 28,531 participants; high-certainty evidence).  Compared to active treatment, the evolocumab effects, for any CVD event RD was less than -1% (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.14 to 3.04; 1 study, 218 participants; very low-certainty evidence); for all-cause mortality, the RD was less than 1% (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.30; 3 studies, 5223 participants; very low-certainty evidence); and for MI, RD was less than 1% (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.85; 3 studies, 5003 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were insufficient data on any stroke.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for the clinical endpoint effects of  evolocumab and alirocumab were graded as high. There is a strong evidence base to prescribe PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies to people who might not be eligible for other lipid-lowering drugs, or to people who cannot meet their lipid goals on more traditional therapies, which was the main patient population of the available trials.  The evidence base of PCSK9 inhibitors compared with active treatment is much weaker (low very- to low-certainty evidence) and it is unclear whether evolocumab or alirocumab might be effectively used as replacement therapies. Related, most of the available studies preferentially enrolled people with either established CVD or at a high risk already, and evidence in low- to medium-risk settings is minimal. Finally, there is very limited evidence on any potential safety issues of both evolocumab and alirocumab. While the current evidence synthesis does not reveal any adverse signals, neither does it provide evidence against such signals. This suggests careful consideration of alternative lipid lowering treatments before prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors.

PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of effective drug therapies that reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (LDL-C), cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains an important cause of mortality and morbidity. Therefore, additional LDL-C reduction may be warranted, especially for patients who are unresponsive to, or unable to take, existing LDL-C-reducing therapies. By inhibiting the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) enzyme, monoclonal antibodies (PCSK9 inhibitors) may further reduce LDL-C, potentially reducing CVD risk as well.

OBJECTIVES

Primary To quantify short-term (24 weeks), medium-term (one year), and long-term (five years) effects of PCSK9 inhibitors on lipid parameters and on the incidence of CVD. Secondary To quantify the safety of PCSK9 inhibitors, with specific focus on the incidence of type 2 diabetes, cognitive function, and cancer. Additionally, to determine if specific patient subgroups were more or less likely to benefit from the use of PCSK9 inhibitors.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies by systematically searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. We also searched Clinicaltrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and screened the reference lists of included studies. We identified the studies included in this review through electronic literature searches conducted up to May 2016, and added three large trials published in March 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All parallel-group and factorial randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a follow-up time of at least 24 weeks were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed and extracted data. When data were available, we calculated pooled effect estimates.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 studies with data on 67,237 participants (median age 61 years; range 52 to 64 years). Twelve trials randomised participants to alirocumab, three trials to bococizumab, one to RG7652, and four to evolocumab. Owing to the small number of trials using agents other than alirocumab, we did not differentiate between types of PCSK9 inhibitors used. We compared PCSK9 inhibitors with placebo (thirteen RCTs), ezetimibe (two RCTs) or ezetimibe and statins (five RCTs).Compared with placebo, PCSK9 inhibitors decreased LDL-C by 53.86% (95% confidence interval (CI) 58.64 to 49.08; eight studies; 4782 participants; GRADE: moderate) at 24 weeks; compared with ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors decreased LDL-C by 30.20% (95% CI 34.18 to 26.23; two studies; 823 participants; GRADE: moderate), and compared with ezetimibe and statins, PCSK9 inhibitors decreased LDL-C by 39.20% (95% CI 56.15 to 22.26; five studies; 5376 participants; GRADE: moderate).Compared with placebo, PCSK9 inhibitors decreased the risk of CVD events, with a risk difference (RD) of 0.91% (odds ratio (OR) of 0.86, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.92; eight studies; 59,294 participants; GRADE: moderate). Compared with ezetimibe and statins, PCSK9 inhibitors appeared to have a stronger protective effect on CVD risk, although with considerable uncertainty (RD 1.06%, OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.75; three studies; 4770 participants; GRADE: very low). No data were available for the ezetimibe only comparison. Compared with placebo, PCSK9 probably had little or no effect on mortality (RD 0.03%, OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.14; 12 studies; 60,684 participants; GRADE: moderate). Compared with placebo, PCSK9 inhibitors increased the risk of any adverse events (RD 1.54%, OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.12; 13 studies; 54,204 participants; GRADE: low). Similar effects were observed for the comparison of ezetimibe and statins: RD 3.70%, OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.34; four studies; 5376 participants; GRADE: low. Clinical event data were unavailable for the ezetimibe only comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Over short-term to medium-term follow-up, PCSK9 inhibitors reduced LDL-C. Studies with medium-term follow-up time (longest median follow-up recorded was 26 months) reported that PCSK9 inhibitors (compared with placebo) decreased CVD risk but may have increased the risk of any adverse events (driven by SPIRE-1 and -2 trials). Available evidence suggests that PCSK9 inhibitor use probably leads to little or no difference in mortality. Evidence on relative efficacy and safety when PCSK9 inhibitors were compared with active treatments was of low to very low quality (GRADE); follow-up times were short and events were few. Large trials with longer follow-up are needed to evaluate PCSK9 inhibitors versus active treatments as well as placebo. Owing to the predominant inclusion of high-risk patients in these studies, applicability of results to primary prevention is limited. Finally, estimated risk differences indicate that PCSK9 inhibitors only modestly change absolute risks (often to less than 1%).

ODYSSEY MONO: effect of alirocumab 75 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks as monotherapy versus ezetimibe over 24 weeks

ABSTRACT 

Alirocumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody to PCSK9. The ODYSSEY MONO study was the first alirocumab Phase III study to test a previously unused dose of 75 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks in a population on no lipid-lowering therapy. A total of 103 patients were randomly assigned to alirocumab starting at 75 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks or ezetimibe 10 mg per os every day with alirocumab dose uptitration at 12 weeks based on achieved LDL-cholesterol level at week 8 and followed to week 24. At the week-24 primary end point, the alirocumab intent-to-treat group showed a 47.2% (least square [LS] mean) reduction in LDL-cholesterol compared with a 15.6% (LS mean) reduction with ezetimibe (LS mean difference of 31.6%; p < 0.0001). Safety parameters and adverse events were similar between the two groups.

Efficacy and safety of alirocumab, a fully human PCSK9 monoclonal antibody, in high cardiovascular risk patients with poorly controlled hypercholesterolemia on maximally tolerated doses of statins: rationale and design of the ODYSSEY COMBO I and II trials

BACKGROUND

Alirocumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody to proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin type 9 (PCSK9) under investigation for treatment of hypercholesterolemia and reduction of cardiovascular events.

METHODS/DESIGN

The COMBO studies, part of the Phase 3 ODYSSEY clinical trial program, are designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of alirocumab as add-on therapy to stable, maximally tolerated daily statin, with or without other lipid-lowering therapy (LLT), in a planned 966 patients with hypercholesterolemia at high cardiovascular risk. COMBO I ( http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01644175) is placebo-controlled, with a double-blind treatment period of 52 weeks, and 306 planned patients who may receive other LLTs in addition to statin therapy. COMBO II ( http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01644188) has a double-blind treatment period of 104 weeks, comparing alirocumab with ezetimibe in 660 planned patients receiving statin therapy (but no other LLTs). The primary efficacy endpoint is the difference between treatment arms in percent change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) from baseline to week 24. Both studies utilized a starting dose of alirocumab 75 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W; administered as 1 mL solution via auto-injector). Patients with LDL-C levels ≥70 mg/dL after 8 weeks of treatment were up-titrated in a blinded manner at week 12 to alirocumab 150 mg Q2W (also 1 mL auto-injector).

DISCUSSION

In conclusion, the COMBO studies will provide information on the long-term efficacy and safety of alirocumab in high-risk patients when administered in addition to maximally tolerated statin therapy, with a flexible dosing strategy which allows for individualized therapy based on the degree of LDL-C lowering needed to achieve the desired treatment response.

TRIAL REGISTRATIONS COMBO I

NCT01644175 ( NCT01644175).

COMBO II

NCT01644188 ( NCT01644188).

Monotherapy with the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab versus ezetimibe in patients with hypercholesterolemia: results of a 24 week, double-blind, randomized Phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Efficacy and safety of alirocumab were compared with ezetimibe in hypercholesterolemic patients at moderate cardiovascular risk not receiving statins or other lipid-lowering therapy.

METHODS

In a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study (NCT01644474), patients (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] 100-190 mg/dL, 10-year risk of fatal cardiovascular events ≥ 1%-<5% [systemic coronary risk estimation]) were randomized to ezetimibe 10mg/day (n=51) or alirocumab 75 mg subcutaneously (via 1-mL autoinjector) every 2 weeks (Q2W) (n=52), with dose up-titrated to 150 mg Q2W (also 1 mL) at week 12 if week 8 LDL-C was ≥ 70 mg/dL. Primary endpoint was mean LDL-C % change from baseline to 24 weeks, analyzed using all available data (intent-to-treat approach, ITT). Analyses using on-treatment LDL-C values were also conducted.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) baseline LDL-C levels were 141.1 (27.1) mg/dL (alirocumab) and 138.3 (24.5) mg/dL (ezetimibe). The 24-week treatment period was completed by 85% of alirocumab and 86% of ezetimibe patients. Least squares mean (SE) LDL-C reductions were 47 (3)% with alirocumab versus 16 (3)% with ezetimibe (ITT; p<0.0001) and 54 (2)% versus 17 (2)% (on-treatment; p<0.0001). At week 12, before up-titration, alirocumab 75 mg Q2W reduced LDL-C by 53 (2)% (on-treatment). Injection site reactions were infrequent (<2% and <4% of alirocumab and ezetimibe patients, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Alirocumab demonstrated significantly greater LDL-C lowering versus ezetimibe after 24 weeks with the lower 75 mg Q2W dose sufficient to provide ≥ 50% LDL-C reduction in the majority of the patients. Adverse events were comparable between groups.