Video

CHICAGO – When fat tissue from individuals with obesity was exposed to the artificial sweetener sucralose, there was significant upregulation of genes that promote intracellular glucose transport. Genes known to be adipogenic and those governing sweet taste receptors also were significantly upregulated with sucralose exposure.

“Effects of sucralose are particularly more detrimental in obese individuals who are prediabetic or diabetic, rather than nonobese consumers of low-calorie sweetener,” said Sabyasachi Sen, MD, during a press conference at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

These new findings, together with in vitro examination of human adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) exposed to sucralose, are helping solve the puzzle of how a sweetener that delivers no energy may contribute to metabolic derangement, said Dr. Sen, professor of endocrinology at George Washington University in Washington.

Dr. Sen and his collaborators first exposed the MSCs to concentrations of sucralose ranging from 0 mM to 0.2 mM – a physiologic level for high sucralose consumers – to the supraphysiologic concentration of 1 mM.

The adipogenic genes CEBPa and FABP4 were upregulated in the sucralose-exposed MSCs, which also showed more intracellular fat droplet accumulation. Reactive oxygen species increased in the MSCs in a dose-dependent fashion as well, said Dr. Sen in a video interview.

All of this upregulation, said Dr. Sen, was pushing the MSCs toward becoming fat cells. “At the same time, we saw that there are certain genes that were upregulating that were allowing more glucose to enter the cell.” The increase in reactive oxygen species paralleled what was seen in a similar model that used glucose rather than sucralose, he said.

The investigators then took subcutaneous fat biopsies from four normal-weight individuals (body mass index, 23.4-24.8 kg/m²), and from 14 obese individuals (BMI, 32-64 kg/m²). Each group had sucralose users and nonusers. Using mRNA gene expression profiles, they saw that glucose transporter genes, adipogenic genes, and antioxidant genes were upregulated among sucralose consumers with obesity, significantly more than for the normal-weight participants.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Sen S et al. ENDO 2018, Abstract SUN-071.

CHICAGO – When fat tissue from individuals with obesity was exposed to the artificial sweetener sucralose, there was significant upregulation of genes that promote intracellular glucose transport. Genes known to be adipogenic and those governing sweet taste receptors also were significantly upregulated with sucralose exposure.

“Effects of sucralose are particularly more detrimental in obese individuals who are prediabetic or diabetic, rather than nonobese consumers of low-calorie sweetener,” said Sabyasachi Sen, MD, during a press conference at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

These new findings, together with in vitro examination of human adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) exposed to sucralose, are helping solve the puzzle of how a sweetener that delivers no energy may contribute to metabolic derangement, said Dr. Sen, professor of endocrinology at George Washington University in Washington.

Dr. Sen and his collaborators first exposed the MSCs to concentrations of sucralose ranging from 0 mM to 0.2 mM – a physiologic level for high sucralose consumers – to the supraphysiologic concentration of 1 mM.

The adipogenic genes CEBPa and FABP4 were upregulated in the sucralose-exposed MSCs, which also showed more intracellular fat droplet accumulation. Reactive oxygen species increased in the MSCs in a dose-dependent fashion as well, said Dr. Sen in a video interview.

All of this upregulation, said Dr. Sen, was pushing the MSCs toward becoming fat cells. “At the same time, we saw that there are certain genes that were upregulating that were allowing more glucose to enter the cell.” The increase in reactive oxygen species paralleled what was seen in a similar model that used glucose rather than sucralose, he said.

The investigators then took subcutaneous fat biopsies from four normal-weight individuals (body mass index, 23.4-24.8 kg/m²), and from 14 obese individuals (BMI, 32-64 kg/m²). Each group had sucralose users and nonusers. Using mRNA gene expression profiles, they saw that glucose transporter genes, adipogenic genes, and antioxidant genes were upregulated among sucralose consumers with obesity, significantly more than for the normal-weight participants.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Sen S et al. ENDO 2018, Abstract SUN-071.

CHICAGO – When fat tissue from individuals with obesity was exposed to the artificial sweetener sucralose, there was significant upregulation of genes that promote intracellular glucose transport. Genes known to be adipogenic and those governing sweet taste receptors also were significantly upregulated with sucralose exposure.

“Effects of sucralose are particularly more detrimental in obese individuals who are prediabetic or diabetic, rather than nonobese consumers of low-calorie sweetener,” said Sabyasachi Sen, MD, during a press conference at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

These new findings, together with in vitro examination of human adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) exposed to sucralose, are helping solve the puzzle of how a sweetener that delivers no energy may contribute to metabolic derangement, said Dr. Sen, professor of endocrinology at George Washington University in Washington.

Dr. Sen and his collaborators first exposed the MSCs to concentrations of sucralose ranging from 0 mM to 0.2 mM – a physiologic level for high sucralose consumers – to the supraphysiologic concentration of 1 mM.

The adipogenic genes CEBPa and FABP4 were upregulated in the sucralose-exposed MSCs, which also showed more intracellular fat droplet accumulation. Reactive oxygen species increased in the MSCs in a dose-dependent fashion as well, said Dr. Sen in a video interview.

All of this upregulation, said Dr. Sen, was pushing the MSCs toward becoming fat cells. “At the same time, we saw that there are certain genes that were upregulating that were allowing more glucose to enter the cell.” The increase in reactive oxygen species paralleled what was seen in a similar model that used glucose rather than sucralose, he said.

The investigators then took subcutaneous fat biopsies from four normal-weight individuals (body mass index, 23.4-24.8 kg/m²), and from 14 obese individuals (BMI, 32-64 kg/m²). Each group had sucralose users and nonusers. Using mRNA gene expression profiles, they saw that glucose transporter genes, adipogenic genes, and antioxidant genes were upregulated among sucralose consumers with obesity, significantly more than for the normal-weight participants.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Sen S et al. ENDO 2018, Abstract SUN-071.

LA JOLLA, CALIF. – In patients with relapsed peripheral T-cell lymphoma, the goal before moving to transplant is achieving complete or near-complete remission, according to Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

“If you’re really trying to go to transplant, you want a complete remission or close to it. So that’s often been combination chemotherapy. But I think what we’re learning is, when some of the newer agents are combined, we’re seeing higher complete response rates. And we’re doing a better job at picking subtype specific approaches,” Dr. Horwitz said in a video interview at the annual T-cell Lymphoma Forum.

Dr. Horwitz also explored the role for reduced-intensity regimens in older patients, the use of radiation conditioning, and which new agents look most promising in peripheral T-cell lymphoma.

Dr. Horwitz had previously disclosed financial relationships with Celgene, Forty Seven, Huya Bioscience International, Infinity, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Millennium, Seattle Genetics, and Takeda. The T-Cell Lymphoma Forum is held by Jonathan Wood & Associates, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Horwitz SM. TCLF 2018.

LA JOLLA, CALIF. – In patients with relapsed peripheral T-cell lymphoma, the goal before moving to transplant is achieving complete or near-complete remission, according to Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

“If you’re really trying to go to transplant, you want a complete remission or close to it. So that’s often been combination chemotherapy. But I think what we’re learning is, when some of the newer agents are combined, we’re seeing higher complete response rates. And we’re doing a better job at picking subtype specific approaches,” Dr. Horwitz said in a video interview at the annual T-cell Lymphoma Forum.

Dr. Horwitz also explored the role for reduced-intensity regimens in older patients, the use of radiation conditioning, and which new agents look most promising in peripheral T-cell lymphoma.

Dr. Horwitz had previously disclosed financial relationships with Celgene, Forty Seven, Huya Bioscience International, Infinity, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Millennium, Seattle Genetics, and Takeda. The T-Cell Lymphoma Forum is held by Jonathan Wood & Associates, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Horwitz SM. TCLF 2018.

LA JOLLA, CALIF. – In patients with relapsed peripheral T-cell lymphoma, the goal before moving to transplant is achieving complete or near-complete remission, according to Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

“If you’re really trying to go to transplant, you want a complete remission or close to it. So that’s often been combination chemotherapy. But I think what we’re learning is, when some of the newer agents are combined, we’re seeing higher complete response rates. And we’re doing a better job at picking subtype specific approaches,” Dr. Horwitz said in a video interview at the annual T-cell Lymphoma Forum.

Dr. Horwitz also explored the role for reduced-intensity regimens in older patients, the use of radiation conditioning, and which new agents look most promising in peripheral T-cell lymphoma.

Dr. Horwitz had previously disclosed financial relationships with Celgene, Forty Seven, Huya Bioscience International, Infinity, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Millennium, Seattle Genetics, and Takeda. The T-Cell Lymphoma Forum is held by Jonathan Wood & Associates, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Horwitz SM. TCLF 2018.

NEW ORLEANS – Combined treatment for 28 days with the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus plus the aromatase inhibitor letrozole in 37 women with recurrent endometrial cancer produced an overall objective response rate of 24% and an average progression-free survival rate of 6.3 months in a randomized phase 2 study with a total of 74 patients. The treatment was also relatively well tolerated, with more serious adverse vents of anemia and hyperglycemia.

But the most attention-grabbing finding of this study was that, in the subset of 15 women who had received no prior chemotherapy, the objective response rate on this regimen was 53% and median progression-free survival was 21.6 months, Brian M. Slomovitz, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

This level of response in the chemotherapy-naive subgroup was “very high, and not what we expected,” Dr. Slomovitz, , professor of ob.gyn. and human genetics and director of gynecologic oncology at the University of Miami, said in a video interview. “This is something we need to further investigate to see if we can make this part of standard care.”

Although he conceded that the data from this study were too limited to warrant a regulatory indication, he suggested that it might be enough to gain the everolimus plus letrozole combination used in the study citation as a treatment option in clinical guidelines. The next step should be a phase 3 trial that compares the everolimus plus letrozole combination with the traditional chemotherapy regimen of carboplatin plus paclitaxel, Dr. Slomovitz added.

The Everolimus and Letrozole or Hormonal Therapy to Treat Endometrial Cancer phase 2 trial, initiated by the Gynecologic Oncology Group, ran at 26 U.S. centers, and randomized patients with stage III or IV recurrent, advanced, or persistent endometrial cancer who had either no or at most one prior course of chemotherapy. The study design also excluded patients who had previously been treated with an mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor or hormonal therapy for their endometrial cancer. The control arm placed 37 patients on a standard hormonal therapy regimen of tamoxifen plus medroxyprogesterone, with 36 of patients in this subgroup evaluable.

The overall results in the two treatment arms were roughly similar, except for the striking benefit seen with everolimus(Afinitor) plus letrozole(Femara) in the chemotherapy-naive patents; 15 patients in each arm had not received any chemotherapy before entering the study. In this subgroup, among the patients who received conventional hormonal therapy, the objective response rate was 43% and progression-free survival was 6.6 months.

The two arms also differed by their pattern of grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Among the patients on everolimus plus letrozole, the most common were anemia (24%) and hyperglycemia (14%), both expected consequences of the regimen. The hormonal therapy arm led to an 8% incidence of thromboembolic events, which did not occur in the everolimus plus letrozole arm.

Another attraction of the everolimus and letrozole regimen is that it is oral and avoids the need for drug infusions, Dr. Slomovitz noted.

The investigator-initiated study received funding from Novartis, the company that markets everolimus and letrozole. Dr. Slomovitz has been an advisor to Advaxis, AstraZeneca, Clovis, Genmab, Jannsen, and Tesaro, and he has received research funding from Novartis.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Slomovitz BM et al. SGO 2018, abstract 1.

NEW ORLEANS – Combined treatment for 28 days with the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus plus the aromatase inhibitor letrozole in 37 women with recurrent endometrial cancer produced an overall objective response rate of 24% and an average progression-free survival rate of 6.3 months in a randomized phase 2 study with a total of 74 patients. The treatment was also relatively well tolerated, with more serious adverse vents of anemia and hyperglycemia.

But the most attention-grabbing finding of this study was that, in the subset of 15 women who had received no prior chemotherapy, the objective response rate on this regimen was 53% and median progression-free survival was 21.6 months, Brian M. Slomovitz, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

This level of response in the chemotherapy-naive subgroup was “very high, and not what we expected,” Dr. Slomovitz, , professor of ob.gyn. and human genetics and director of gynecologic oncology at the University of Miami, said in a video interview. “This is something we need to further investigate to see if we can make this part of standard care.”

Although he conceded that the data from this study were too limited to warrant a regulatory indication, he suggested that it might be enough to gain the everolimus plus letrozole combination used in the study citation as a treatment option in clinical guidelines. The next step should be a phase 3 trial that compares the everolimus plus letrozole combination with the traditional chemotherapy regimen of carboplatin plus paclitaxel, Dr. Slomovitz added.

The Everolimus and Letrozole or Hormonal Therapy to Treat Endometrial Cancer phase 2 trial, initiated by the Gynecologic Oncology Group, ran at 26 U.S. centers, and randomized patients with stage III or IV recurrent, advanced, or persistent endometrial cancer who had either no or at most one prior course of chemotherapy. The study design also excluded patients who had previously been treated with an mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor or hormonal therapy for their endometrial cancer. The control arm placed 37 patients on a standard hormonal therapy regimen of tamoxifen plus medroxyprogesterone, with 36 of patients in this subgroup evaluable.

The overall results in the two treatment arms were roughly similar, except for the striking benefit seen with everolimus(Afinitor) plus letrozole(Femara) in the chemotherapy-naive patents; 15 patients in each arm had not received any chemotherapy before entering the study. In this subgroup, among the patients who received conventional hormonal therapy, the objective response rate was 43% and progression-free survival was 6.6 months.

The two arms also differed by their pattern of grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Among the patients on everolimus plus letrozole, the most common were anemia (24%) and hyperglycemia (14%), both expected consequences of the regimen. The hormonal therapy arm led to an 8% incidence of thromboembolic events, which did not occur in the everolimus plus letrozole arm.

Another attraction of the everolimus and letrozole regimen is that it is oral and avoids the need for drug infusions, Dr. Slomovitz noted.

The investigator-initiated study received funding from Novartis, the company that markets everolimus and letrozole. Dr. Slomovitz has been an advisor to Advaxis, AstraZeneca, Clovis, Genmab, Jannsen, and Tesaro, and he has received research funding from Novartis.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Slomovitz BM et al. SGO 2018, abstract 1.

NEW ORLEANS – Combined treatment for 28 days with the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus plus the aromatase inhibitor letrozole in 37 women with recurrent endometrial cancer produced an overall objective response rate of 24% and an average progression-free survival rate of 6.3 months in a randomized phase 2 study with a total of 74 patients. The treatment was also relatively well tolerated, with more serious adverse vents of anemia and hyperglycemia.

But the most attention-grabbing finding of this study was that, in the subset of 15 women who had received no prior chemotherapy, the objective response rate on this regimen was 53% and median progression-free survival was 21.6 months, Brian M. Slomovitz, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

This level of response in the chemotherapy-naive subgroup was “very high, and not what we expected,” Dr. Slomovitz, , professor of ob.gyn. and human genetics and director of gynecologic oncology at the University of Miami, said in a video interview. “This is something we need to further investigate to see if we can make this part of standard care.”

Although he conceded that the data from this study were too limited to warrant a regulatory indication, he suggested that it might be enough to gain the everolimus plus letrozole combination used in the study citation as a treatment option in clinical guidelines. The next step should be a phase 3 trial that compares the everolimus plus letrozole combination with the traditional chemotherapy regimen of carboplatin plus paclitaxel, Dr. Slomovitz added.

The Everolimus and Letrozole or Hormonal Therapy to Treat Endometrial Cancer phase 2 trial, initiated by the Gynecologic Oncology Group, ran at 26 U.S. centers, and randomized patients with stage III or IV recurrent, advanced, or persistent endometrial cancer who had either no or at most one prior course of chemotherapy. The study design also excluded patients who had previously been treated with an mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor or hormonal therapy for their endometrial cancer. The control arm placed 37 patients on a standard hormonal therapy regimen of tamoxifen plus medroxyprogesterone, with 36 of patients in this subgroup evaluable.

The overall results in the two treatment arms were roughly similar, except for the striking benefit seen with everolimus(Afinitor) plus letrozole(Femara) in the chemotherapy-naive patents; 15 patients in each arm had not received any chemotherapy before entering the study. In this subgroup, among the patients who received conventional hormonal therapy, the objective response rate was 43% and progression-free survival was 6.6 months.

The two arms also differed by their pattern of grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Among the patients on everolimus plus letrozole, the most common were anemia (24%) and hyperglycemia (14%), both expected consequences of the regimen. The hormonal therapy arm led to an 8% incidence of thromboembolic events, which did not occur in the everolimus plus letrozole arm.

Another attraction of the everolimus and letrozole regimen is that it is oral and avoids the need for drug infusions, Dr. Slomovitz noted.

The investigator-initiated study received funding from Novartis, the company that markets everolimus and letrozole. Dr. Slomovitz has been an advisor to Advaxis, AstraZeneca, Clovis, Genmab, Jannsen, and Tesaro, and he has received research funding from Novartis.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Slomovitz BM et al. SGO 2018, abstract 1.

ORLANDO – Andexanet alfa, a new agent that reverses the anticoagulant effect of direct factor Xa inhibitors, showed an acceptable level of efficacy and safety in 227 patients who received the drug in the agent’s pivotal trial.

These results, which placed andexanet in the same ballpark for efficacy and safety as idarucizumab (Praxbind), approved in 2015 for reversing the anticoagulant dabigatran (Pradaxa), suggest that andexanet is likely on track for its own Food and Drug Administration marketing approval, Stuart Connolly, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

Portola Pharmaceuticals, the company developing andexanet alfa (AndexXa) previously announced that it expected Food and Drug Administration action on its marketing application by May 2018.

Andexanet reversal “has similar efficacy and safety as seen with other reversal agents” for other types of anticoagulants, said Dr. Connolly, a professor of medicine and an electrophysiologist at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont. In the trial results he reported, andexanet treatment of patients who were bleeding while on treatment with a direct factor Xa inhibitor had an 83% rate of hemostatic efficacy and an 11% rate of thrombotic events. By comparison, idarucizumab, the FDA-approved reversal agent for the anticoagulant dabigatran, produced a 68% hemostatic efficacy and a 6% rate of thrombotic events in the idarucizumab pivotal trial, RE-VERSE AD (N Engl J Med. 2015 Aug 6;373[6]:511-20).

Clinicians administered andexanet alfa as a bolus followed by a 2-hour continuous infusion, with hemostatic efficacy assessed 12 hours after the start of treatment. The results showed that factor Xa inhibition fell by about 75%-90% within minutes of starting the bolus and remained depressed at that level during the infusion but then began recovering by 2 hours after the stop of infusion. Andexanet is a factor Xa “decoy” molecule that acts by latching onto the inhibitor molecules and thereby preventing them from interacting with actual factor Xa, but andexanet also has a short half life and hence the effect quickly reduces once treatment stops.

“There is no doubt that andexanet rapidly decreases anti–factor Xa activity,” he said.

Adjudicated efficacy results were available for 132 patients and showed good or excellent hemostasis achieved on andexanet in 109 patients (83%), Dr. Connolly reported. The effect on hemostasis was consistent regardless of patient age, sex, bleeding site, type of anticoagulant, and dosage tested.

Thrombotic events during the 30 days following treatment occurred in 24 of 227 patients (11%) who received andexanet and were evaluable for safety. Notably, no clustering of thrombotic events occurred early, even among the 129 patients who restarted on an anticoagulant during the 30 days after treatment. Among the 129 patients who restarted on an anticoagulant, 9 (7%) had a thrombotic event during the 30-day follow-up, compared with 15 events among 98 patients (15%) who did not restart on an anticoagulant.

Dr. Connolly acknowledged that a limitation of the ANNEXA-4 study is the absence of a control group, but he added that he and his associates believed randomizing patients with a serious bleed to placebo control would not have been “practical, feasible, or ethical.”

ANNEXA-4 is sponsored by Portola Pharmaceuticals, the company developing andexanet alfa (AndexXa). Dr. Connolly has been a consultant to Portola, and also to Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Sanofi-Aventis. Dr. Kirtane has received research support from several device manufacturers.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Connolly S. ACC 2018.

ORLANDO – Andexanet alfa, a new agent that reverses the anticoagulant effect of direct factor Xa inhibitors, showed an acceptable level of efficacy and safety in 227 patients who received the drug in the agent’s pivotal trial.

These results, which placed andexanet in the same ballpark for efficacy and safety as idarucizumab (Praxbind), approved in 2015 for reversing the anticoagulant dabigatran (Pradaxa), suggest that andexanet is likely on track for its own Food and Drug Administration marketing approval, Stuart Connolly, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

Portola Pharmaceuticals, the company developing andexanet alfa (AndexXa) previously announced that it expected Food and Drug Administration action on its marketing application by May 2018.

Andexanet reversal “has similar efficacy and safety as seen with other reversal agents” for other types of anticoagulants, said Dr. Connolly, a professor of medicine and an electrophysiologist at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont. In the trial results he reported, andexanet treatment of patients who were bleeding while on treatment with a direct factor Xa inhibitor had an 83% rate of hemostatic efficacy and an 11% rate of thrombotic events. By comparison, idarucizumab, the FDA-approved reversal agent for the anticoagulant dabigatran, produced a 68% hemostatic efficacy and a 6% rate of thrombotic events in the idarucizumab pivotal trial, RE-VERSE AD (N Engl J Med. 2015 Aug 6;373[6]:511-20).

Clinicians administered andexanet alfa as a bolus followed by a 2-hour continuous infusion, with hemostatic efficacy assessed 12 hours after the start of treatment. The results showed that factor Xa inhibition fell by about 75%-90% within minutes of starting the bolus and remained depressed at that level during the infusion but then began recovering by 2 hours after the stop of infusion. Andexanet is a factor Xa “decoy” molecule that acts by latching onto the inhibitor molecules and thereby preventing them from interacting with actual factor Xa, but andexanet also has a short half life and hence the effect quickly reduces once treatment stops.

“There is no doubt that andexanet rapidly decreases anti–factor Xa activity,” he said.

Adjudicated efficacy results were available for 132 patients and showed good or excellent hemostasis achieved on andexanet in 109 patients (83%), Dr. Connolly reported. The effect on hemostasis was consistent regardless of patient age, sex, bleeding site, type of anticoagulant, and dosage tested.

Thrombotic events during the 30 days following treatment occurred in 24 of 227 patients (11%) who received andexanet and were evaluable for safety. Notably, no clustering of thrombotic events occurred early, even among the 129 patients who restarted on an anticoagulant during the 30 days after treatment. Among the 129 patients who restarted on an anticoagulant, 9 (7%) had a thrombotic event during the 30-day follow-up, compared with 15 events among 98 patients (15%) who did not restart on an anticoagulant.

Dr. Connolly acknowledged that a limitation of the ANNEXA-4 study is the absence of a control group, but he added that he and his associates believed randomizing patients with a serious bleed to placebo control would not have been “practical, feasible, or ethical.”

ANNEXA-4 is sponsored by Portola Pharmaceuticals, the company developing andexanet alfa (AndexXa). Dr. Connolly has been a consultant to Portola, and also to Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Sanofi-Aventis. Dr. Kirtane has received research support from several device manufacturers.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Connolly S. ACC 2018.

ORLANDO – Andexanet alfa, a new agent that reverses the anticoagulant effect of direct factor Xa inhibitors, showed an acceptable level of efficacy and safety in 227 patients who received the drug in the agent’s pivotal trial.

These results, which placed andexanet in the same ballpark for efficacy and safety as idarucizumab (Praxbind), approved in 2015 for reversing the anticoagulant dabigatran (Pradaxa), suggest that andexanet is likely on track for its own Food and Drug Administration marketing approval, Stuart Connolly, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

Portola Pharmaceuticals, the company developing andexanet alfa (AndexXa) previously announced that it expected Food and Drug Administration action on its marketing application by May 2018.

Andexanet reversal “has similar efficacy and safety as seen with other reversal agents” for other types of anticoagulants, said Dr. Connolly, a professor of medicine and an electrophysiologist at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont. In the trial results he reported, andexanet treatment of patients who were bleeding while on treatment with a direct factor Xa inhibitor had an 83% rate of hemostatic efficacy and an 11% rate of thrombotic events. By comparison, idarucizumab, the FDA-approved reversal agent for the anticoagulant dabigatran, produced a 68% hemostatic efficacy and a 6% rate of thrombotic events in the idarucizumab pivotal trial, RE-VERSE AD (N Engl J Med. 2015 Aug 6;373[6]:511-20).

Clinicians administered andexanet alfa as a bolus followed by a 2-hour continuous infusion, with hemostatic efficacy assessed 12 hours after the start of treatment. The results showed that factor Xa inhibition fell by about 75%-90% within minutes of starting the bolus and remained depressed at that level during the infusion but then began recovering by 2 hours after the stop of infusion. Andexanet is a factor Xa “decoy” molecule that acts by latching onto the inhibitor molecules and thereby preventing them from interacting with actual factor Xa, but andexanet also has a short half life and hence the effect quickly reduces once treatment stops.

“There is no doubt that andexanet rapidly decreases anti–factor Xa activity,” he said.

Adjudicated efficacy results were available for 132 patients and showed good or excellent hemostasis achieved on andexanet in 109 patients (83%), Dr. Connolly reported. The effect on hemostasis was consistent regardless of patient age, sex, bleeding site, type of anticoagulant, and dosage tested.

Thrombotic events during the 30 days following treatment occurred in 24 of 227 patients (11%) who received andexanet and were evaluable for safety. Notably, no clustering of thrombotic events occurred early, even among the 129 patients who restarted on an anticoagulant during the 30 days after treatment. Among the 129 patients who restarted on an anticoagulant, 9 (7%) had a thrombotic event during the 30-day follow-up, compared with 15 events among 98 patients (15%) who did not restart on an anticoagulant.

Dr. Connolly acknowledged that a limitation of the ANNEXA-4 study is the absence of a control group, but he added that he and his associates believed randomizing patients with a serious bleed to placebo control would not have been “practical, feasible, or ethical.”

ANNEXA-4 is sponsored by Portola Pharmaceuticals, the company developing andexanet alfa (AndexXa). Dr. Connolly has been a consultant to Portola, and also to Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Sanofi-Aventis. Dr. Kirtane has received research support from several device manufacturers.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Connolly S. ACC 2018.