Explore the vast range of titles available.

Treatments with survival benefit are greatly needed for women with heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Eribulin mesilate is a non-taxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor with a novel mode of action. We aimed to compare overall survival of heavily pretreated patients receiving eribulin versus currently available treatments. In this phase 3 open-label study, women with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer were randomly allocated (2:1) to eribulin mesilate (1·4 mg/m 2 administered intravenously during 2–5 min on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) or treatment of physician's choice (TPC). Patients had received between two and five previous chemotherapy regimens (two or more for advanced disease), including an anthracycline and a taxane, unless contraindicated. Randomisation was stratified by geographical region, previous capecitabine treatment, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00388726. 762 women were randomly allocated to treatment groups (508 eribulin, 254 TPC). Overall survival was significantly improved in women assigned to eribulin (median 13·1 months, 95% CI 11·8–14·3) compared with TPC (10·6 months, 9·3–12·5; hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·66–0·99; p=0·041). The most common adverse events in both groups were asthenia or fatigue (270 [54%] of 503 patients on eribulin and 98 [40%] of 247 patients on TPC at all grades) and neutropenia (260 [52%] patients receiving eribulin and 73 [30%] of those on TPC at all grades). Peripheral neuropathy was the most common adverse event leading to discontinuation from eribulin, occurring in 24 (5%) of 503 patients. Eribulin showed a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival compared with TPC in women with heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer. This finding challenges the notion that improved overall survival is an unrealistic expectation during evaluation of new anticancer therapies in the refractory setting. Eisai.

Frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) is a recently described inflammatory and scarring type of hair loss affecting almost exclusively women. Despite a dramatic recent increase in incidence the aetiopathogenesis of FFA remains unknown. We undertake genome-wide association studies in females from a UK cohort, comprising 844 cases and 3,760 controls, a Spanish cohort of 172 cases and 385 controls, and perform statistical meta-analysis. We observe genome-wide significant association with FFA at four genomic loci: 2p22.2, 6p21.1, 8q24.22 and 15q2.1. Within the 6p21.1 locus, fine-mapping indicates that the association is driven by the HLA-B*07: 02 allele. At 2p22.1, we implicate a putative causal missense variant in CYP1B1 , encoding the homonymous xenobiotic- and hormone-processing enzyme. Transcriptomic analysis of affected scalp tissue highlights overrepresentation of transcripts encoding components of innate and adaptive immune response pathways. These findings provide insight into disease pathogenesis and characterise FFA as a genetically predisposed immuno-inflammatory disorder driven by HLA-B*07: 02. Frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) features lichenoid cutaneous inflammation and scarring hair loss. Here, Tziotzios et al. identify four genetic loci associated with FFA by GWAS followed by Bayesian fine-mapping, co-localisation and HLA imputation which highlights HLA-B*07:02 as a risk factor.

The improved characterisation of risk factors for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) suggests they could be combined to identify individuals at increased disease risks in whom preventive strategies may be evaluated. We aimed to develop an RA prediction model capable of generating clinically relevant predictive data and to determine if it better predicted younger onset RA (YORA). Our novel modelling approach combined odds ratios for 15 four-digit/10 two-digit HLA-DRB1 alleles, 31 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and ever-smoking status in males to determine risk using computer simulation and confidence interval based risk categorisation. Only males were evaluated in our models incorporating smoking as ever-smoking is a significant risk factor for RA in men but not women. We developed multiple models to evaluate each risk factor's impact on prediction. Each model's ability to discriminate anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive RA from controls was evaluated in two cohorts: Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium (WTCCC: 1,516 cases; 1,647 controls); UK RA Genetics Group Consortium (UKRAGG: 2,623 cases; 1,500 controls). HLA and smoking provided strongest prediction with good discrimination evidenced by an HLA-smoking model area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.813 in both WTCCC and UKRAGG. SNPs provided minimal prediction (AUC 0.660 WTCCC/0.617 UKRAGG). Whilst high individual risks were identified, with some cases having estimated lifetime risks of 86%, only a minority overall had substantially increased odds for RA. High risks from the HLA model were associated with YORA (P<0.0001); ever-smoking associated with older onset disease. This latter finding suggests smoking's impact on RA risk manifests later in life. Our modelling demonstrates that combining risk factors provides clinically informative RA prediction; additionally HLA and smoking status can be used to predict the risk of younger and older onset RA, respectively.

Clinical development of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is challenging due to rapid changes in the variant landscape. This study identified a threshold model for neutralising antibody (nAb) titres associated with clinically relevant protection against symptomatic COVID-19 for vulnerable populations. Using efficacy data from the phase 3 PROVENT pre-exposure prophylaxis trial of tixagevimab–cilgavimab (NCT04625725), individual nAb ID 50 titres were predicted by dividing serum mAb concentration by prevalence-adjusted tixagevimab–cilgavimab potency (from in vitro IC 50 values combined with viral surveillance data) and related to efficacy with a Cox model. The Threshold of Protection (ToP) Cox model was externally validated using data from the phase 3 SUPERNOVA trial (NCT05648110), which assessed sipavibart efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 in immunocompromised participants. The PROVENT ToP model estimated the variant-specific observed efficacies from SUPERNOVA for 3 and 6 months post any dose with Lin’s concordance of 0.86 and 0.75, respectively. This approach integrates predicted nAb ID 50 titres against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants into a ToP model that can be applied across different variants and could serve as a surrogate endpoint in immunobridging studies to expedite clinical evaluation and regulatory approval for mAbs targeting SARS-CoV-2. Neutralising antibody levels are an important correlate of protection for pre-exposure prophylaxis against COVID-19, but it can be difficult to account for immune evasion of emerging virus variants. Here the authors present a variant-adjusted threshold of protection model, developed and validated with data from two clinical trials, which can be used to infer efficacy against any SARS-CoV-2 variant.

Introduction The phase 3 PROVENT and STORM CHASER studies evaluated AZD7442 (tixagevimab/cilgavimab) for pre-exposure and post-exposure prophylaxis of symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We report the final 15-month results of both studies. Methods In PROVENT, participants were randomized 2:1 to receive 300 mg AZD7442 ( n  = 3460) or placebo ( n  = 1737). In STORM CHASER, participants were enrolled within 8 days of exposure to a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-infected individual and randomized 2:1 to receive 300 mg AZD7442 ( n  = 749) or placebo ( n  = 372). Results In PROVENT, the relative risk reduction (RRR) in symptomatic COVID-19 for AZD7442 versus placebo was 76.7% at primary analysis [95% confidence interval (CI) 46.1, 90.0; p  < 0.001], 83.0% at day 183 (95% CI 67.3, 91.2; nominal p  < 0.001), and 46.3% at day 366 (95% CI 23.1, 62.4; nominal p  < 0.001). Severe/critical COVID-19 was reduced by 91.4% with AZD7442 versus placebo by day 366 (95% CI 61.3, 98.1; nominal p  < 0.0001). Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 58.2% and 58.0% of participants administered AZD7442 or placebo, respectively; serious AEs (SAEs) occurred in 6.2% and 5.6%, respectively. In STORM CHASER, the RRR in symptomatic COVID-19 for AZD7442 versus placebo was 33.3% at primary analysis (95% CI − 25.9, 64.7; p  = 0.212), 43.3% at day 183 (95% CI 1.4, 67.4; nominal p  = 0.044) and 3.4% at day 366 (95% CI − 35.6, 31.2; nominal p  = 0.842). Severe/critical COVID-19 did not occur in participants receiving AZD7442 versus 0.5% of participants receiving placebo by day 366. AEs occurred in 46.5% and 51.9% of participants administered AZD7442 or placebo, respectively; SAEs occurred in 2.7% and 4.3%, respectively. In both studies, serum concentration–time profiles over 457 days were similar for tixagevimab and cilgavimab and consistent with the extended half-life reported for AZD7442 (approximately 90 days). Conclusion This analysis provides proof of concept supporting long-term safety of intramuscularly administered AZD7442 for prevention of symptomatic/severe COVID-19. A graphical abstract is available with this article. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers PROVENT (NCT04625725) and STORM CHASER (NCT04625972). Graphical abstract Plain Language Summary Antibodies are proteins produced by the body’s immune system to specifically target foreign substances, such as viruses. AZD7442 is made up of an antibody pair (tixagevimab and cilgavimab) that specifically bind and neutralize severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). AZD7442 was designed to give several months of protection against the virus. These antibodies were tested in two clinical trials to see if they could either protect people from getting COVID-19 (PROVENT trial) or prevent people already exposed to SARS-CoV-2 from getting COVID-19 (STORM CHASER trial). In the two trials, approximately 6000 adults received AZD7442 or placebo (injections that look exactly like AZD7442 but contain no medicine). Protection against COVID-19 was monitored for up to 1 year, and safety for up to 15 months. The percentage of trial participants who reported side effects was similar in the AZD7442 and placebo groups, in both trials. The PROVENT trial showed that AZD7442 reduced the risk of getting COVID-19 up to 6 months and protected against severe COVID-19 for up to 1 year. In STORM CHASER, participants were treated after SARS-CoV-2 exposure but before a positive COVID-19 test. Some participants were already infected with SARS-CoV-2 at the start of the trial, others were not. STORM CHASER showed that AZD7442 protected people against COVID-19 for up to 6 months if they were not already infected at the start. The results of these trials provide proof of concept to support the long-term safety of AZD7442 for the prevention of COVID-19.

Introduction In the phase 3 TACKLE study, outpatient treatment with AZD7442 (tixagevimab/cilgavimab) was well tolerated and significantly reduced progression to severe disease or death through day 29 in adults with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at the primary analysis. Here, we report data from the final analysis of the TACKLE study, performed after approximately 15 months’ follow-up. Methods Eligible participants were randomized 1:1 and dosed within 7 days of symptom onset with 600 mg intramuscular AZD7442 ( n  = 456; 300 mg tixagevimab/300 mg cilgavimab) or placebo ( n  = 454). Results Severe COVID-19 or death through day 29 occurred in 4.4% and 8.8% of participants who received AZD7442 or placebo, a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 50.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 14.4, 71.3; p  = 0.0096]; among participants dosed within 5 days of symptom onset, the RRR was 66.9% (95% CI 31.1, 84.1; p  = 0.002). Death from any cause or hospitalization for COVID-19 complications or sequelae through day 169 occurred in 5.0% of participants receiving AZD7442 versus 9.7% receiving placebo, an RRR of 49.2% (95% CI 14.7, 69.8; p  = 0.009). Adverse events occurred in 55.5% and 55.9% of participants who received AZD7442 or placebo, respectively, and were mostly mild or moderate in severity. Serious adverse events occurred in 10.2% and 14.4% of participants who received AZD7442 or placebo, respectively, and deaths occurred in 1.8% of participants in both groups. Serum concentration–time profiles recorded over 457 days were similar for AZD7442, tixagevimab, and cilgavimab, and were consistent with the extended half-life reported for AZD7442 (approx. 90 days). Conclusions AZD7442 reduced the risk of progression to severe COVID-19, hospitalization, and death, was well tolerated through 15 months, and exhibited predictable pharmacokinetics in outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. These data support the long-term safety of using long-acting monoclonal antibodies to treat COVID-19. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04723394. ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04723394 . Plain Language Summary The body’s immune system produces proteins called antibodies that specifically target foreign substances such as viruses. AZD7442 is a combination of two antibodies (called tixagevimab and cilgavimab) that bind to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus spike protein, preventing it from causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). AZD7442 was designed to be “long-acting” and therefore provide prolonged protection against COVID-19 lasting several months from a single dose. It was tested in a clinical trial (TACKLE) to see if it could prevent people who had recently developed symptoms of COVID-19 from getting sicker, being hospitalized, or dying. Around 900 adults took part in this clinical trial. Half of this group were treated with a dose of AZD7442, given as two injections. The other half received a placebo (injections that look like the AZD7442 injections but contain no medicine). The effect of AZD7442 treatment against COVID-19 was monitored over 6 months, and safety was monitored over 15 months. Around the same percentage of participants in the trial reported side effects with AZD7442 and placebo, suggesting there were no safety issues with AZD7442. AZD7442 treatment reduced the risk of participants getting severe COVID-19 or dying from COVID-19 by approximately half, compared with the placebo group. Participants receiving AZD7442 also had fewer hospitalizations due to COVID-19 complications, compared with the placebo group. These results showed the long-term safety of using long-acting antibodies such as AZD7442 as a treatment for COVID-19. Graphical Abstract

Introduction We assessed effects of AZD7442 (tixagevimab/cilgavimab) on deaths from any cause or hospitalizations due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and symptom severity and longer-term safety in the TACKLE adult outpatient treatment study. Methods Participants received 600 mg AZD7442 ( n  = 452) or placebo ( n  = 451) ≤ 7 days of COVID-19 symptom onset. Results Death from any cause or hospitalization for COVID-19 complications or sequelae through day 169 (key secondary endpoint) occurred in 20/399 (5.0%) participants receiving AZD7442 versus 40/407 (9.8%) receiving placebo [relative risk reduction (RRR) 49.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 14.5, 69.7; p  = 0.009] or 50.7% (95% CI 17.5, 70.5; p  = 0.006) after excluding participants unblinded before day 169 for consideration of vaccination). AZD7442 reduced progression of COVID-19 symptoms versus placebo through to day 29 (RRR 12.5%; 95% CI 0.5, 23.0) and improved most symptoms within 1–2 weeks. Over median safety follow-up of 170 days, adverse events occurred in 174 (38.5%) and 196 (43.5%) participants receiving AZD7442 or placebo, respectively. Cardiac serious adverse events occurred in two (0.4%) and three (0.7%) participants receiving AZD7442 or placebo, respectively. Conclusions AZD7442 was well tolerated and reduced hospitalization and mortality through 6 months, and symptom burden through 29 days, in outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Clinical Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04723394. ( https://beta.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04723394 ). Graphical Abstract Plain Language Summary Antibodies are proteins produced by the body’s immune system to specifically combat foreign substances, such as viruses. Tixagevimab and cilgavimab are a pair of antibodies that bind to a specific part of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). When they bind to the virus, they reduce its ability to cause disease. These antibodies were tested in a clinical trial to see if they could prevent people with COVID-19 from being hospitalized or dying. Around 900 adults took part in this clinical trial. These people all had COVID-19 but were not sick enough to be in hospital. Half of this group were treated with a dose of tixagevimab and cilgavimab, given as two injections. The other half received a placebo (injections that look exactly like the tixagevimab and cilgavimab injections but contain no medicine). The study found that, over 6 months, people with COVID-19 who received tixagevimab and cilgavimab were less likely to need to go to hospital than people who received the placebo. They were also less likely to die of COVID-19. Tixagevimab and cilgavimab also helped to improve COVID-19 symptoms. People who received the antibodies saw their symptoms improve faster than people who received the placebo. They were also less likely to have symptoms that got worse. Most people felt better within 1–2 weeks of getting treatment. No safety issues were found with tixagevimab and cilgavimab compared with placebo.

Objectives The evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) necessitates rapid methods for assessing monoclonal antibody (mAb) potency against emerging variants. Authentic virus neutralisation assays are considered the gold standard for measuring virus‐neutralising antibody (nAb) titres in serum. However, authentic virus‐based assays pose inherent practical challenges for measuring nAb titres against emerging SARS‐CoV‐2 variants (e.g. storing infectious viruses and testing at biosafety level‐3 facilities). Here, we demonstrate the utility of pseudovirus neutralisation assay data in conjunction with serum mAb concentrations to robustly predict nAb titres in serum. Methods SARS‐CoV‐2 nAb titres were determined via authentic‐ and lentiviral pseudovirus‐based neutralisation assays using serological data from three AZD7442 (tixagevimab–cilgavimab) studies: PROVENT (NCT04625725), TACKLE (NCT04723394) and a phase 1 dose‐ranging study (NCT04507256). AZD7442 serum concentrations were assessed using immunocapture. Serum‐based half‐maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) values were derived from pseudovirus nAb titres and serum mAb concentrations, and compared with in vitro IC50 measurements. Results nAb titres measured via authentic‐ and lentiviral pseudovirus‐based neutralisation assays were strongly correlated for the ancestral SARS‐CoV‐2 virus and SARS‐CoV‐2 Alpha. Serum AZD7442 concentrations and pseudovirus nAb titres were strongly correlated for multiple SARS‐CoV‐2 variants with all Spearman correlation coefficients ≥ 0.78. Serum‐based IC50 values were similar to in vitro IC50 values for AZD7442, for ancestral SARS‐CoV‐2 and Alpha, Delta, Omicron BA.2 and Omicron BA.4/5 variants. Conclusions These data highlight that serum mAb concentrations and pseudovirus in vitro IC50 values can be used to rapidly predict nAb titres in serum for emerging and historical SARS‐CoV‐2 variants. In the analyses reported herein, we use data from clinical studies of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) monoclonal antibody (mAb) combination AZD7442 (tixagevimab–cilgavimab) to demonstrate the utility of pseudovirus neutralisation assay data in conjunction with mAb serum concentrations to predict neutralising antibody titres against emergent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) variants. Our findings offer a strategy to streamline the clinical evaluation of mAbs targeting SARS‐CoV‐2 and have the potential to significantly decrease the time from discovery to clinical deployment of the next generation of COVID‐19 mAbs.