Farnesoid X receptor agonist tropifexor attenuates cholestasis in a randomised trial in patients with primary biliary cholangitis.
AE, adverse event
ALP, alkaline phosphatase
ALT, alanine aminotransferase
AUC, area under the concentration–time curve
C4, 7-alpha-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one
CL/F,ss, the apparent systemic clearance following oral administration at steady state
Cmax, maximum plasma concentration
FGF19, fibroblast growth factor 19
FXR, farnesoid X receptor
Farnesoid X receptor
GGT, γ-glutamyl transferase
HDL, high-density lipoprotein
LDL, low-density lipoprotein
NASH, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis
OCA, obeticholic acid
PBC, primary biliary cholangitis
PD, pharmacodynamic
PRO, patient-reported outcome
Primary biliary cholangitis
Proof of concept
Pruritus
QoL, quality of life
Racc, accumulation ratio
SAE, serious adverse event
Tmax, time to reach Cmax
Tropifexor
ULN, upper limit of normal
VAS, visual analogue scale
pBAD, primary bile acid diarrhoea
qd, once daily
γ-Glutamyl transferase
Journal
JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology
ISSN: 2589-5559
Titre abrégé: JHEP Rep
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101761237
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2022
Nov 2022
Historique:
received:
05
07
2022
accepted:
12
07
2022
entrez:
21
10
2022
pubmed:
22
10
2022
medline:
22
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The safety, tolerability, and efficacy of the non-bile acid farnesoid X receptor agonist tropifexor were evaluated in a phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study as potential second-line therapy for patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) with an inadequate ursodeoxycholic acid response. Patients were randomised (2:1) to receive tropifexor (30, 60, 90, or 150 μg) or matched placebo orally once daily for 28 days, with follow-up on Days 56 and 84. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability of tropifexor and reduction in levels of γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT) and other liver biomarkers. Other objectives included patient-reported outcome measures using the PBC-40 quality-of-life (QoL) and visual analogue scale scores and tropifexor pharmacokinetics. Of 61 enrolled patients, 11, 9, 12, and 8 received 30-, 60-, 90-, and 150-μg tropifexor, respectively, and 21 received placebo; 3 patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events (AEs) in the 150-μg tropifexor group. Pruritus was the most frequent AE in the study (52.5% [tropifexor] Tropifexor showed improvement in cholestatic markers relative to placebo, predictable pharmacokinetics, and an acceptable safety-tolerability profile, thereby supporting its potential further clinical development for PBC. The bile acid ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the standard-of-care therapy for primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), but approximately 40% of patients have an inadequate response to this therapy. Tropifexor is a highly potent non-bile acid agonist of the farnesoid X receptor that is under clinical development for various chronic liver diseases. In the current study, in patients with an inadequate response to UDCA, tropifexor was found to be safe and well tolerated, with improved levels of markers of bile duct injury at very low (microgram) doses. Itch of mild to moderate severity was observed in all groups including placebo but was more frequent at the highest tropifexor dose. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02516605).
Sections du résumé
Background & Aims
UNASSIGNED
The safety, tolerability, and efficacy of the non-bile acid farnesoid X receptor agonist tropifexor were evaluated in a phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study as potential second-line therapy for patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) with an inadequate ursodeoxycholic acid response.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Patients were randomised (2:1) to receive tropifexor (30, 60, 90, or 150 μg) or matched placebo orally once daily for 28 days, with follow-up on Days 56 and 84. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability of tropifexor and reduction in levels of γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT) and other liver biomarkers. Other objectives included patient-reported outcome measures using the PBC-40 quality-of-life (QoL) and visual analogue scale scores and tropifexor pharmacokinetics.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Of 61 enrolled patients, 11, 9, 12, and 8 received 30-, 60-, 90-, and 150-μg tropifexor, respectively, and 21 received placebo; 3 patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events (AEs) in the 150-μg tropifexor group. Pruritus was the most frequent AE in the study (52.5% [tropifexor]
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
Tropifexor showed improvement in cholestatic markers relative to placebo, predictable pharmacokinetics, and an acceptable safety-tolerability profile, thereby supporting its potential further clinical development for PBC.
Lay summary
UNASSIGNED
The bile acid ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the standard-of-care therapy for primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), but approximately 40% of patients have an inadequate response to this therapy. Tropifexor is a highly potent non-bile acid agonist of the farnesoid X receptor that is under clinical development for various chronic liver diseases. In the current study, in patients with an inadequate response to UDCA, tropifexor was found to be safe and well tolerated, with improved levels of markers of bile duct injury at very low (microgram) doses. Itch of mild to moderate severity was observed in all groups including placebo but was more frequent at the highest tropifexor dose.
Clinical Trials Registration
UNASSIGNED
This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02516605).
Identifiants
pubmed: 36267872
doi: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2022.100544
pii: S2589-5559(22)00116-1
pmc: PMC9576902
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02516605']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100544Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/L001489/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
CS is a consultant for Novartis and BiomX and has received honoraria from Falk Pharma and research funding from Galapagos and BiomX. HW is a consultant for or has received speaker fees from Falk Foundation, BMS, AbbVie, Norgine, Merz, Mallinckrodt, MYR GmbH, Gilead, MSD, and Intercept. AM has research grants from Merck and Intercept and has received speaker’s and teaching honoraria from Intercept. GMH has consulted for Intercept, Genfit, Cymabay, GSK, Novartis, Pliant, Falk Pharma. CL has research grants from Novartis, Gilead, Intercept, Enanta, NGM, Genfit, Cara Therapeutics, CymaBay, Target PharmaSolutions, Genkyotex, GSK, Durect, Pliant, High Tide and Zydus, and is a consultant for Genfit, GSK, CymaBay, Mirum, Cara therapeutics, Pliant, Shire, Target PharmaSolutions, Calliditas, and Escient. KVK is on the Advisory Committee or Review Panel of 89Bio, Gilead, CymaBay, Intercept, Genfit, and Madrigal; is a consultant for Calliditas, Intercept, HighTide, Mirum, and Novo Nordisk; has received grant/research support from Allergan, Gilead, Intercept, Genfit, Novartis, Enanta, HighTide, CymaBay, GSK, Pfizer, Madrigal, Viking, Metacrine, Pliant, and Hanmi; has received speaker’s and teaching honoraria from AbbVie, Gilead, and Intercept; and is a stock shareholder of Inipharm. PM has received speaker’s honoraria from Alfa Wasserman and Chiesi. EJ is an investigator in clinical trials sponsored by Allergan, BMS, Celgene, CymaBay, Dr Falk, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, and Roche; has received speaker’s honoraria from AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, and Roche. ESM has no conflicts of interest to disclose. LBK was an employee of Novartis until study completion and is a stockholder of Novartis. DJ has received grant funding from Intercept and Pfizer; is a consultant for Abbott, Genkyotex, GSK and Intercept; and has received speaker fees from Falk, Abbott, and Intercept. JS is a contractor with Novartis. PK, SC, and JC were employees of Novartis until manuscript finalisation. MKB is an employee and stockholder of Novartis. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details.
Références
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Sep;52(5):808-820
pubmed: 32702169
Lancet. 2015 Oct 17;386(10003):1565-75
pubmed: 26364546
Hepatology. 2019 Jan;69(1):394-419
pubmed: 30070375
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jun 07;378(23):2171-2181
pubmed: 29874528
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Jun;4(6):445-453
pubmed: 30922873
J Med Chem. 2002 Aug 15;45(17):3569-72
pubmed: 12166927
Hepatology. 2019 Sep;70(3):788-801
pubmed: 30661255
Gut. 2005 Nov;54(11):1622-9
pubmed: 15961522
J Hepatol. 2019 Aug;71(2):357-365
pubmed: 30980847
J Clin Invest. 2013 Apr;123(4):1513-30
pubmed: 23524965
Hepatol Commun. 2019 May 17;3(8):1085-1097
pubmed: 31388629
Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y). 2018 Nov;14(11):654-657
pubmed: 30538606
J Clin Invest. 2003 Dec;112(11):1678-87
pubmed: 14623915
J Hepatol. 2017 Jul;67(1):145-172
pubmed: 28427765
Front Pharmacol. 2018 Nov 08;9:1283
pubmed: 30467479
Gut. 2018 Sep;67(9):1568-1594
pubmed: 29593060
Hepatology. 2008 Sep;48(3):871-7
pubmed: 18752324
J Hepatol. 2012 May;56(5):1181-1188
pubmed: 22245904
Gastroenterology. 2015 Apr;148(4):751-61.e8
pubmed: 25500425
Gastroenterology. 2014 Dec;147(6):1338-49.e5; quiz e15
pubmed: 25160979
Clin Pharmacol Drug Dev. 2020 Apr;9(3):395-410
pubmed: 31823525
N Engl J Med. 1994 May 12;330(19):1342-7
pubmed: 8152446
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 Aug;19(8):1688-1697.e14
pubmed: 32777554
N Engl J Med. 1991 May 30;324(22):1548-54
pubmed: 1674105
Acta Derm Venereol. 2012 Sep;92(5):497-501
pubmed: 22102095
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 May 21;116(21):10525-10530
pubmed: 31068464
J Med Chem. 2017 Dec 28;60(24):9960-9973
pubmed: 29148806
Ann Hepatol. 2020 Jan - Feb;19(1):5-16
pubmed: 31771820
Gastroenterology. 2015 Apr;148(4):704-6
pubmed: 25724453
N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 18;375(7):631-43
pubmed: 27532829
Am J Gastroenterol. 2019 Jan;114(1):48-63
pubmed: 30429590
Hepatology. 2012 Oct;56(4):1391-400
pubmed: 22473838