8 minute read
Intravitreal Pegcetacoplan for Geographic Atrophy
Longer term follow-up and post-hoc analyses support efficacy and safety of treatment. Cheryl Guttman Krader reports
Intravitreal treatment with the complement C3 inhibitor pegcetacoplan (Apellis Pharmaceuticals) administered monthly or every other month is well-tolerated and slows geographic atrophy (GA) growth secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD), new findings from phase 3 registration studies indicate.
The phase 3 study program ± includes two identically designed trials—OAKS and DERBY. Across the two studies, 1,258 patients were randomised to receive pegcetacoplan 15 mg/0.1 mL monthly or every other month (EOM) or sham monthly or EOM.
As previously reported, only the OAKS trial met the primary endpoint assessing change from baseline to month 12 in total GA lesion area (measured by fundus autofluorescence). Roger A Goldberg MD, MBA presented 18-month results that showed continued reductions in GA lesion growth from month 12 to month 18 for both pegcetacoplan regimens versus sham in both DERBY and OAKS, with widening of the differences between the pegcetacoplan and sham groups. Pegcetacoplan slowed the growth in both foveal and extrafoveal lesions.
Sunir J Garg MD presented a post-hoc subgroup analysis adjusting for baseline imbalances between treatment arms in covariates affecting GA lesion growth. This led to convergence of the treatment effect of pegcetacoplan at 12 months across OAKS, DERBY, and the 12-month phase 2 FILLY study and at 18 months between OAKS and DERBY, including in the subgroups of patients with foveal and extrafoveal GA. EFFICACY UPDATE At 18 months, the monthly and EOM pegcetacoplan groups in OAKS showed reductions in GA growth compared to sham of 16% and 22%, respectively, and 12% and 13%, respectively, in DERBY.
SE) from baselinein GA lesion (mm²) 2.0 1.0 1.5 2.5 22% (monthly) reduction p<0.0001 (nominal) vs sham 16% (every other month) reduction p=0.0018 (nominal) vs sham 16% 22% LS mean change ( Baseline 0.0 0.5 M2 M4 M6 M8 M10 M12
Sham (n=207, pooled) PEOM (n=205) PM (n=202) 9
“The 18-month percentage results are similar to the 12-month results, but visually, the GA lesion growth curves continue to separate over time, and that separation represents in absolute terms an increased amount of retinal tissue preserved with pegcetacoplan,” Dr Goldberg said.
He also presented an analysis looking at GA growth over 6-month intervals that showed the relative underperformance of pegcetacoplan in DERBY during the first 6 months with an increasing benefit between months 6 and 12 and 12 and 18.
Analyses of data from subgroups of patients with foveal and extrafoveal lesions showed both pegcetacoplan regimens were associated with a continuous and clinically meaningful reduction
OAKS
3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 M14 M16 M18 Baseline M2 M4 M6 M8 M10 M12 Sham (n=195, pooled) PEOM (n=201) PM (n=201)
Pegcetacoplanreduced GA lesion growth vs sham in OAKS and DERBY at Month 18
DERBY
3.5
13% (monthly) reduction p=0.0254 (nominal) vs sham
3.0
12% (every other month) reduction 12% p=0.0332 (nominal) vs sham 13%
M14 M16 M18 LS means estimated from a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM). The modified intention-to-treat population was used for the analysis, defined as all randomized patients who received at least 1 injection of pegcetacoplan or sham and have baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of GA lesion area in the study eye. GA=geographic atrophy;LS=least square; M=month; PEOM=pegcetacoplanevery other month; PM=pegcetacoplanmonthly; SE=standard error. Reductions in GA lesion growth in OAKS and DERBY combined over 6-month periods from baseline to Month 18 12% 13
16% 17% 13%
18%Lesion growth percent reduction vs sham pooled 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% MONTHS 0-6 MONTHS 6-12 All data represented are from OAKS and DERBY combined 21% MONTHS 12-18 PEOM PM Percent reduction vs. sham pooled for Month 0 to Month 18 was estimated from a piecewise linear slope model with 6-month segments. GA=geographic atrophy; PEOM=pegcetacoplanevery other month; PM=pegcetacoplanmonthly.
in the growth rate of lesions, regardless of location. A robust effect on extrafoveal lesions observed at 12 months was maintained, and there was an improved effect on foveal lesions with ongoing pegcetacoplan treatment, he said.
REASSURING SAFETY PROFILE The adverse event review 1 identified no new safety signals with a lengthened treatment duration.
“Importantly, no cases of retinitis or vasculitis have been reported,” Dr Goldberg said.
Pooled analyses of data from DERBY and OAKS showed rates of exudative AMD development (identified by the investigator) in the pegcetacoplan monthly, EOM, and sham groups were 9.5%, 6.2%, and 2.9%, respectively. Rates of exudative AMD per 100 patient-years were similar at months 12 and 18 for both pegcetacoplan regimens. Per injection rates of endophthalmitis and intraocular inflammation at month 18 in the pooled pegcetacoplan groups were 0.04% and 0.23%, respectively.
CONTROLLING FOR CONFOUNDERS “One of the goals of randomisation is to balance risk factors between treatment groups, but chance imbalances can occur that can lead to differing estimates of the treatment effect. A covariate analysis is one way to compensate for that effect. The reason for doing this work is that the results of OAKS mirrored those of the phase 2 FILLY study, whereas DERBY missed its primary endpoint in both treatment arms. Since the design of the studies, we have a better understanding of many variables that affect GA growth,” Dr Garg explained.
The post-hoc covariate analyses identified imbalances in the DERBY trial in proportions of study eyes with unifocal lesions and with extensive intermediate/large drusen that favour sham treatment. Identified imbalances in the OAKS trial were in the proportion of eyes with extrafoveal lesions that may have attenuated the effect of pegcetacoplan and in the FILLY trial in proportions of eyes with low-luminance deficit and extensive
Converging treatment effect of pegcetacoplan in OAKS and DERBY in covariate-adjusted post-hoc analysis continues at Month 18
OAKS DERBY
3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 0.5 0
Baseline M2 M4 M6 M8 M10 M12 Sham (n=207, pooled) PEOM (n=205) PM (n=202)
LS means estimated from a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. The mITT population was used for the analysis.
GA=geographic atrophy; LS=least squares; M=month; mITT=modified intent-to-treat; PEOM=pegcetacoplan every other month; PM=pegcetacoplan monthly; SE=standard error. 14
LS mean change ( ± SE) from baselinein GA lesion (mm²) 26% (monthly) reduction p<0.0001 (nominal) vs sham 22% primary analysis 18% (every other month) reduction p=0.0002 (nominal) vs sham 16% primary analysis BaselineBaseline Baseline M14 M16 M18 18% 26% 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Baseline M2 M4 M6 M8 M10 M12 Sham (n=195, pooled) PEOM (n=201) PM (n=201)
16% (monthly) reduction p=0.0024 (nominal) vs sham 13% primary analysis
16% 16% (every other month) reduction p=0.0023 (nominal) vs sham 16%
12% primary analysis M14 M16 M18
All eyes on the future of ophthalmology
TOMEY has been supplying ophthalmologists worldwide with instruments for high-tech ophthalmic diagnostics for more than 50 years.
apEye is revolutionising eye prostheses.
At ESCRS we will be presenting a world first: A 3D-printed artificial eye prosthesis, which owes its unique true colour and the natural appearance of the iris to high-resolution scans from the TOMEY ASOCT CASIA2.
Learn all about the ground-breaking Light Source Technology in CASIA2 and apEye – products which will revolutionize the market.
CASIA2 at tomey.de Meet us at ESCRS
Booth A26 Hall 4
intermediate/large drusen favouring pegcetacoplan.
After adjusting for the covariates, the magnitude of pegcetacoplan effect at month 12 in OAKS was the same or slightly greater than observed in the primary analysis. The covariate adjustments in DERBY and FILLY led to results that more closely mirrored the results in OAKS.
A covariate-adjusted ± analysis of lesion growth at month 18 in patients with extrafoveal lesions showed that all pegcetacoplan treatment arms in DERBY and OAKS had a nominally significant effect as was observed in the primary analysis but with somewhat better convergence between studies. Data from the subgroup with foveal lesions showed the treatment effect of pegcetacoplan was similar in the covariateadjusted and primary analysis for OAKS but improved in the covariate-adjusted analysis in DERBY, Dr Garg said.
He reiterated that the covariate analysis does not fully explain treatment group imbalances nor replace the primary analysis. Dr Goldberg and Dr Garg presented at the annual ARVO conference in Denver, Colorado, US. Roger A Goldberg MD, MBA is a partner at Bay Area Retina Associates, Walnut Creek, California, US, and a Volunteer Professor at the CPMC Ophthalmology Residency program, San Francisco, California, US. rgoldberg.eyemd@gmail.com Sunir J Garg MD is a partner with MidAtlantic Retina and a Professor of Ophthalmology on the Retina Service of Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US. sgarg@midatlanticretina.com
Covariate-adjusted lesion growth in patients with extrafoveal lesions at Month 18
OAKS Extrafoveal Subgroup
4.0 4.0
33% (monthly) reduction 18% (monthly) reduction
3.5 p<0.0001 (nominal) vs sham 3.5 p=0.0380 (nominal) vs sham 33% primary analysis 17% primary analysis
15% (every other month) reduction 24% (every other month) reduction
3.0 p=0.0673 (nominal) vs sham 3.0 p=0.0035 (nominal) vs sham 17% primary analysis 23% primary analysis 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 LS means estimated from a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. The mITT population was used for the analysis.
GA=geographic atrophy; LS=least squares; M=month; mITT=modified intent-to-treat; PEOM=pegcetacoplan every other month; PM=pegcetacoplan monthly; SE=standard error. 15
SE) from baselinein GA lesion (mm²) 15% 33% DERBY Extrafoveal Subgroup 24% 18% LS mean change ( Baseline M2 M4 M6 M8 M10 M12 M14 M16 M18 Baseline M2 M4 M6 M8 M10 M12 M14 M16 M18
Sham (n=59, pooled) PEOM (n=73) PM (n=86) Sham (n=72, pooled) PEOM (n=81) PM (n=72)
Systematic Review Award
2022 – 2023
The 2022/2023 ESCRS Systematic Review Award (“SRA”) is a new initiative sponsored by the ESCRS to produce a high quality body of research aimed to prepare, collate, analyse, synthesise and report medical research.
