• Comparable CV effect expected across PCSK9
inhibitor class
• Post-hoc MACE results in previous trials
viewed with some restraint
• 50% MACE reduction unlikely, 35% realistic
and meaningful for both
Amgen’s (NASDAQ:AMGN) Repatha (evolocumab) and
Sanofi (EPA: SAN)/Regeneron Pharmaceuticals’ (NASDAQ:REGN) Praluent
(alirocumab) are expected to produce positive cardiovascular (CV) event
outcomes in their respective CV outcomes trials (CVOTs), experts agreed.
Previous post-hoc major cardiovascular event (MACE) analysis data and
low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering outcomes inspires
continued positive signal optimism for the PCSK9 inhibitors. However, experts
stressed previous small study sizes and trial design disparities makes signal
translation to larger trials difficult to predict and any small differentiator
could determine a market winner.
These CVOT results on MACE reduction extent
will determine each PCSK9 inhibitor’s cost benefit profile and subsequent
competitive value. Repatha and Praluent are approved as an adjunct to maximally
tolerated statin therapy in heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH)
and atherosclerotic CV disease, with Repatha also being approved for homozygous
FH (HoFH). CVOT results aim to expand drug labels into primary prevention of CV
events in statin intolerant patients.
Assuming label expansion, analysts predict
Repatha and Praluent could achieve respective peak sales of USD 7bn and USD
6.1bn peak sales.
Repatha’s Phase III FOURIER 27,564-patient
dyslipidemia CVOT (NCT01764633) has primary completion expected in October
2017. Amgen expects topline results in 1Q17.
Praluent’s Phase III ODYSSEY Outcomes
18,600-patient acute coronary syndrome (ACS) CVOT (NCT01663402) is due to
complete in December 2017. Analysts expect interim efficacy analyses around
2H16-1Q17.
Both trials have similar primary endpoints of
time to MACE, with Repatha being 60 months long and Praluent 64 months.
Amgen declined to comment. Regeneron did not
respond to a comment request.
Previous MACE
reduction signals create CVOT hope
Praluent’s previous MACE reduction data in its
78-week ODYSSEY trial (NCT01507831) -- in 2,341 high risk CV patients receiving
Praluent or placebo every fortnight -- somewhat encourages CVOT read out
optimism, said Dr Robert Rosenson, professor, cardiology, Mount Sinai Hospital,
New York. Although the primary endpoint was LDL-C change from baseline to week
24, a post-hoc analysis demonstrated a lower MACE rate with Praluent over
placebo at 1.7% versus 3.3% respectively (p=0.02), (Robinson et al. NEJM 2015;
372(16):1489-99).
Further to Praluent’s positive MACE signal,
Rosenson and Dr Steven Nissen, chairman, department of cardiovascular medicine,
Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Ohio added there is no foreseeable reason why CV
outcomes should substantially differ between Praluent and Repatha. Dr Christie
Mitchell Ballantyne, director, Atherosclerosis Clinical Research Laboratory,
Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas agreed similar PCSK9 inhibitor class
effects are expected, however, disparities between the CVOT’s duration,
inclusion criteria and dosing regimens may drive some drug class
differentiation, which is currently unpredictable.
Neither Praluent nor Repatha will likely
demonstrate a 50% MACE reduction rate as their CVOTs include heart disease
patients with background therapy and therefore PCSK9 inhibitor treatment will
unlikely induce such a large incremental benefit, said Rosenson. A 35% MACE
reduction is realistic and potentially clinically meaningful, he added.
Rosenson also noted patient inclusion disparity
between ODYSSEY and ODYSSEY Outcomes creates some uncertainty over MACE results
being replicated across trials.
ODYSSEY enrolled patients with either HeFH,
with or without coronary heart disease (CHD) or CHD risk; or
hypercholesterolemia patients with established CHD or CHD risk. Contrastingly,
ODYSSEY Outcomes is simply recruiting hospitalized ACS patients in the past
year.
Overall, post-hoc MACE results encourage a
positive CV signal in ODYSSEY Outcomes, however, post-hoc studies are
insufficiently powered to definitively demonstrate a therapy’s CV effect, added
Ballantyne and Nissen. Although Rosenson maintained CVOT optimism from prior
signals, he acknowledged the post-hoc analysis’ limitations, namely its shorter
duration (by around 178 weeks), doesn’t guarantee result comparability in a
longer, larger study.
Further to past MACE data, PCSK9 inhibitor’s
LDL-C lowering mechanism also supports favorable CVOT outcomes for both drugs,
experts agreed on the sidelines of the British Cardiovascular Society congress
in Manchester this week.
A two stage 511-patient trial (NCT01984424) in
uncontrolled LDL-C individuals with a history of statin intolerance evaluated
Repatha’s lipid lowering effects in patients receiving subcutaneous evolocumab
(Repatha) versus oral ezetimibe (Nissen et al. JAMA 2016;315(15):1580- 90).
Mean week 22 and 24 results demonstrated a between group LDL-C difference of
-37.8%, favoring evolocumab.
Despite being a surrogate endpoint, a -37.8%
LDL-C lowering outcome over commonly prescribed ezetimibe indicates a
potentially protective CV effect, however, this is unclear ahead of long-term
CVOT read outs, said Ballantyne, Nissen and Rosenson.
CVOT results
critical to uptake prospects
Although positive CVOT results are expected,
the extent of the potential benefit will drive physician prescription habits,
said Ballantyne, Nissen and Rosenson. CVOT results will resolve PCSK9
inhibitors’ currently unknown cost/benefit profile, said Dr Saul Myerson,
associate professor, cardiovascular medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford,
UK. Praluent and Repatha cost around USD 14,000 annually. This news service
previously reported PCSK9 inhibitors’ high price makes them reserved for severe
patients.
Furthermore, positive CVOT data may sway payer
willingness towards permitting the expensive treatments, added Nissen. Payer
reluctance is PCSK9 inhibitors’ main uptake barrier as prescriptions require
extensive cost justification, whilst patients reluctantly initiate treatment
due to potentially large out-of-pocket payments and anticipated prescription
hassle, said Ballantyne. Positive CVOT read outs could overcome these issues
for both drugs, said Ballantyne.
The realistic expectation of a 35% MACE
reduction may boost uptake, however, if a lower rate is demonstrated, treatment
benefit may not outweigh its cost, said Rosenson.
Contrastingly, efficacious statins are
affordable and have been used clinically for around 50 years in millions of
patients, said Dr Pasquale Maffia, honorary senior lecturer, institute of
cardiovascular and medical sciences, University of Glasgow, UK. This could
dampen PCSK9 inhibitor uptake at its current price -- despite an improved
cost-benefit profile -- until longer term data speaks to improved quality of
life, said Maffia.
Aside from determining the agents’ CV effects,
Amgen and Regeneron’s CVOTs may uncover potential long-term toxicities,
potentially influencing uptake, added Ballantyne. Allergic reactions are the
most common Praluent/ Repatha-associated adverse events. Praluent and Repatha’s
past studies included around 500- 2,000 patients for around six months, whereas
CVOTs include many thousands of patients on several years of therapy, he
explained. CVOTs therefore include a much longer treatment exposure period and
should therefore better determine the therapy’s risk/benefit profile, said Ballantyne.
Amgen has a market cap of USD 117.7bn.
Regeneron has a market cap of USD 39.9bn
Alexandra Thompson
Journalist, London
Alexandra is an award-winning
healthcare professional journalist. Prior to joining BioPharm Insight, Alex was
Editorial Assistant at CIG Healthcare, covering pharmaceutical news for
pharmacists and pharmaceutical support staff. She was awarded the annual
Johnson & Johnson ‘Best Healthcare Professional Trade Journalist of the
Year’ award in 2014 for an article on eczema. Alex graduated from the
University of Leeds with a 2.1 Hons in Biology in 2012.