Experience of switching from a daily to a less frequent administration of injection treatments

Efficacy of Somapacitan in Treatment-Fatigue Adult Patients With Growth Hormone Deficiency Previously Treated With Once-Daily Growth Hormone Injections: A 24-Week Randomized Active-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the efficacy of somapacitan in a 24-week, randomized, active-controlled study in patients with growth hormone deficiency (GHD) who experienced fatigue from daily growth hormone (GH) injections.

METHODS

Twenty-nine adult patients with GHD, pretreated with daily GH for ≥5 years, who had reported treatment-related fatigue, were randomized to somapacitan or daily GH. Outcome measures were changes in treatment satisfaction assessed by Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication-9, insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) standard deviation score, glucose and lipid parameters, body composition, bone mineral density (BMD), carotid intima media thickness, and reactive hyperaemia index, from baseline to week 24.

RESULTS

The difference in change in Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication-9 score for convenience was significant, in favor of somapacitan (estimated difference, somapacitan-daily GH [95% CI]:23.2 [7.9; 38.4] points, P = .004). No differences between treatment arms in estimated changes from baseline to study-end were observed for IGF-1 levels, glucose and lipid profile, visceral adipose tissue, fat mass (%), lean body mass, and vascular parameters. There was significant difference in BMD of the lumbar spine (estimated difference, somapacitan-daily GH [95% CI] -0.036 (-0.064, -0.009) gr/cm2, P = .011).

CONCLUSION

In AGHD patients who were fatigued from the long-term daily GH injections, somapacitan was reported to be more convenient than daily GH. It was effective in maintaining IGF-1 levels and body composition, glucose, lipids, and vascular parameters, comparable to daily GH. Nonsignificant decrease in BMD with somapacitan could reflect a favorable increase in bone metabolic units, as previously observed in naïve patients with GHD during the initial 6-month period of GH therapy.

Long-Acting Growth Hormone Therapy in Pediatric Growth Hormone Deficiency: A Consensus Statement

CONTEXT

Several long-acting growth hormone (LAGH) therapies have recently become available, but guidance on their usage in children with growth hormone (GH) deficiency is limited.

METHODS

International experts in pediatric endocrinology were invited to join a consensus group based on their expertise in treating children with daily GH and LAGH. The group comprised 11 experts from 10 countries across the world. Online group meetings were held in February to March 2024 followed by a 1-day in-person meeting in May 2024 to finalize the consensus recommendations. A targeted literature search approach was used to identify and share evidence ahead of the meetings. Formulations considered were limited to those with international populations in phase III pivotal trials and regulatory approvals in multiple countries.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Topics covered include patient selection and preference, dose adjustment, initiating and switching therapies, administration, adherence and missed doses, practical considerations, and knowledge gaps. LAGH formulations offer a potential advantage over daily GH injections for children with GH deficiency in terms of reduced injection frequency and treatment burden; this may also be associated with improved adherence and treatment outcomes over time. However, data on LAGH in pediatric GH deficiency are mostly limited to clinical trials, and long-term, real-world data are currently lacking.

CONCLUSION

This article provides an international consensus on the use of LAGH therapy in children with GH deficiency to guide practitioners when considering these new treatment options for their patients. Long-term data are needed to fill current data gaps and allow the creation of comprehensive evidence-based recommendations.

Efficacy and safety of twice per year depemokimab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (ANCHOR-1 and ANCHOR-2): phase 3, randomised, double-blind, parallel trials

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) symptoms are frequently driven by type 2 inflammation. Depemokimab is the first ultra-long-acting biological drug engineered with enhanced interleukin-5 binding affinity, high potency, and an extended half-life, enabling twice per year dosing and sustained type 2 inflammation inhibition. The ANCHOR-1 and ANCHOR-2 trials investigated the efficacy and safety of depemokimab in people with CRSwNP.

METHODS

ANCHOR-1 and ANCHOR-2 were randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, replicate phase 3 trials conducted concurrently at 190 centres (hospitals, specialised clinics, and clinical trial sites) in 16 countries (Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Türkiye, the UK, and the USA). Individuals aged 18 years or older at the time of consent, with inadequately controlled CRSwNP, an endoscopic bilateral nasal polyps score of 5 or more, previous surgery for CRSwNP or previous treatment with or intolerance to systemic corticosteroids, and severe symptoms were stratified by previous CRSwNP surgery and randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either depemokimab (100 mg subcutaneously) or placebo every 26 weeks (with standard of care). Allocation was computer generated. The trial sponsor, site staff, and participants were masked. The coprimary endpoints were change from baseline in total endoscopic nasal polyps score (0-8) at week 52 and mean nasal obstruction score (verbal response scale [0-3]) over weeks 49-52, assessed in the full analysis set. Integrated analyses were conducted. Adverse events on treatment and after treatment were monitored. The trials are complete and are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05274750 and NCT05281523).

FINDINGS

Between April 18, 2022, and Aug 7, 2023, 540 individuals were randomly assigned across ANCHOR-1 and ANCHOR-2; 528 participants comprised the full analysis set (depemokimab, n=272; placebo, n=256). Depemokimab had statistically significant improvements from baseline versus placebo in the coprimary endpoints of total nasal polyps score (treatment difference: ANCHOR-1, -0·7, 95% CI -1·1 to -0·3; p<0·001; ANCHOR-2, -0·6, -1·0 to -0·2; p=0·004; integrated, -0·7, -0·9 to -0·4) and mean nasal obstruction verbal response scale score (ANCHOR-1, -0·23, -0·46 to 0·00; p=0·047; ANCHOR-2, -0·25, -0·46 to -0·03; p=0·025; integrated, -0·24, -0·39 to -0·08). Adverse events were similar between depemokimab and placebo in ANCHOR-1 (74% [n=106] vs 79% [n=101]) and ANCHOR-2 (76% [n=98] vs 80% [n=102]).

INTERPRETATION

Depemokimab significantly improved clinically relevant coprimary endpoints versus placebo and was well tolerated, supporting its use as a twice per year treatment option, with the potential to reduce treatment burden for people with CRSwNP.

FUNDING

GSK.

Efficacy, safety, and patient satisfaction of norditropin and sogroya in patients with growth hormone deficiency: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Growth hormone deficiency occurs when the pituitary gland does not produce enough growth hormone. Norditropin®, a recombinant human growth hormone, and Sogroya®, an albumin-binding growth hormone derivative, are prescribed for patients with growth hormone deficiency. This systematic review assesses the efficacy, safety, and patient satisfaction associated with Norditropin and Sogroya.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases to identify eligible comparative studies. All studies published until June 2023 were included in our analysis. Our outcomes for children included height velocity and height velocity standard deviation score. In contrast, adult outcomes included adverse events, insulin-like growth factor 1-standard deviation score (IGF-1 SDS), and the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication-9 (TSQM-9). Results are reported as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 1058 participants (665 children and 393 adults) were included in the meta-analysis. In children, Norditropin at doses of 0.034 and 0.067 mg/kg/day was compared to Sogroya at doses of 0.04, 0.08, 0.16, and 0.24 mg/kg/week. The results showed that 0.034 mg/kg/day Norditropin had a favorable impact on height velocity (MD -2.01, 95% CI -3.7 to -2.12, p < 0.00001) and height velocity standard deviation score (Mean Difference -3.61, 95% CI -5.06 to -2.16, p < 0.00001) when compared to Sogroya 0.04 mg/kg/day. Other doses showed comparable results. In adults, the only significant side effect noted was rash, which favored Sogroya (OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.04-0.27, p < 0.00001). Additionally, IGF-1 SDS was significantly higher in the Sogroya group than in the Norditropin group (MD 0.25, 95% CI 0.02-0.48, p = 0.03). Furthermore, the overall score of the TSQM-9 questionnaire, which includes three domains: convenience, effectiveness, and satisfaction, was significantly higher in the Sogroya group compared to the Norditropin group (OR 6.36, 95% CI 3.92-8.8, p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Norditropin and Sogroya showed comparable efficacy and safety profiles, except for the prevalence of rash in the Norditropin group, and Sogroya has higher satisfaction among adults. More high-quality studies with more patients are required to confirm these results.

Health-related quality of life in pre-pubertal children with pediatric growth hormone deficiency: 12-month results from a phase 3 clinical trial of once-weekly somatrogon versus once-daily somatropin

OBJECTIVE

Treatment of pediatric growth hormone deficiency (pGHD) with daily injection of recombinant human growth hormone (somatropin) aims to increase height velocity and improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The Quality of Life in Short Stature Youth (QoLISSY) questionnaire was administered in a phase 3 clinical trial that evaluated efficacy and safety of once-weekly somatrogon versus once-daily somatropin in children with pGHD (ClinicalTrials.gov no NCT02968004).

METHODS

Treatment-naïve prepubertal children with pGHD received once-weekly somatrogon or once-daily somatropin for 12 months. The QoLISSY core module (physical/social/emotional subscales) was administered at baseline and 12 months after treatment initiation. QoLISSY-Parent was completed by parents/caregivers of children <7 years old and some parents/caregivers of children ≥7 years old; children ≥7 years old self-completed QoLISSY-Child.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups (N = 117). Among children <7 years old, QoLISSY-Parent total and subscale scores showed similarly improved HRQoL at 12 months relative to baseline in both treatment groups. Self-reported QoLISSY-Child total and subscale scores in children ≥7 years old indicated HRQoL improvements at 12 months that were numerically better with somatrogon than somatropin (similar results with QoLISSY-Parent in this age group). At both time points, children reported better HRQoL than perceived by their parents/caregivers.

CONCLUSION

Treatment for 12 months with once-weekly somatrogon or once-daily somatropin resulted in comparable improvements in HRQoL among children with pGHD. Lower HRQoL perceived by parents/caregivers possibly reflect children's tendency to emphasize adaptation. These results suggest that evaluation of HRQoL could help support treatment decisions in children with pGHD treated with growth hormone.

Comparing treatment with daily and long-acting growth hormone formulations in adults with growth hormone deficiency: Challenging issues, benefits, and risks

Daily administration of growth hormone (GH) treatment has been in clinical use for treatment for GH deficiency (GHD) in adults for more than 30 years. Numerous studies have demonstrated evidence that GH treatment improves body composition, cardiovascular risk factors and quality of life with few side effects. Less frequent GH injections are hypothesized to improve adherence and several long-acting GH (LAGH) formulations have been developed and a few have been approved and marketed. Different pharmacological modifications have been applied and the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of LAGH are different to each other and to those of daily injections and require different dosing and monitoring specific for each LAGH. Studies have shown improved adherence with LAGH, and short-term efficacy and side effects are comparable between daily GH injections and LAGHs. Long-term treatment with daily GH injections is effective and safe, while long-term studies for LAGHs are awaited. In this review challenges, benefits, and risks of treatment with daily and long-acting GH preparations will be compared.

Treatment burden, adherence, and quality of life in children with daily GH treatment in France

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe in a real-life setting the treatment burden and adherence and quality of life (QOL) of children treated with daily injections of growth hormone and their relationship with treatment duration.

DESIGN

This non-interventional, multicenter, cross-sectional French study involved children aged 3-17 years treated with daily growth hormone injections.

METHODS

Based on a recent validated dyad questionnaire, the mean overall life interference total score (100 = most interference) was described, with treatment adherence and QOL, using the Quality of Life of Short Stature Youth questionnaire (100 = best). All analyses were performed according to treatment duration prior to inclusion.

RESULTS

Among the 275/277 analyzed children, 166 (60.4%) had only growth hormone deficiency (GHD). In the GHD group, the mean age was 11.7 ± 3.2 years; median treatment duration was 3.3 years (interquartile range 1.8-6.4). The mean overall life interference total score was 27.7 ± 20.7 (95% CI (24.2; 31.2)), with non-significant correlation with treatment duration (P = 0.1925). Treatment adherence was good (95.0% of children reported receiving >80% of planned injections over the last month); it slightly decreased with treatment duration (P = 0.0364). Children's overall QOL was good (81.5 ± 16.6 and 77.6 ± 18.7 according to children and parents, respectively), but subscores of the coping and treatment impact domains were <50. Similar results were observed in all patients independently of the condition requiring treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-life French cohort confirms the treatment burden of daily growth hormone injections, as previously reported in an interventional study.