No abstract

Recombinant adeno-associated virus (rAAV) vectors offer promise for the gene therapy of α(1)-antitrypsin (AAT) deficiency. In our prior trial, an rAAV vector expressing human AAT (rAAV1-CB-hAAT) provided sustained, vector-derived AAT expression for >1 year. In the current phase 2 clinical trial, this same vector, produced by a herpes simplex virus complementation method, was administered to nine AAT-deficient individuals by intramuscular injection at doses of 6.0×10(11), 1.9×10(12), and 6.0×10(12) vector genomes/kg (n=3 subjects/dose). Vector-derived expression of normal (M-type) AAT in serum was dose dependent, peaked on day 30, and persisted for at least 90 days. Vector administration was well tolerated, with only mild injection site reactions and no serious adverse events. Serum creatine kinase was transiently elevated on day 30 in five of six subjects in the two higher dose groups and normalized by day 45. As expected, all subjects developed anti-AAV antibodies and interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunospot responses to AAV peptides, and no subjects developed antibodies to AAT. One subject in the mid-dose group developed T cell responses to a single AAT peptide unassociated with any clinical effects. Muscle biopsies obtained on day 90 showed strong immunostaining for AAT and moderate to marked inflammatory cell infiltrates composed primarily of CD3-reactive T lymphocytes that were primarily of the CD8(+) subtype. These results support the feasibility and safety of AAV gene therapy for AAT deficiency, and indicate that serum levels of vector-derived normal human AAT >20 μg/ml can be achieved. However, further improvements in the design or delivery of rAAV-AAT vectors will be required to achieve therapeutic target serum AAT concentrations.

Fig. 2.Transformants releasing E␤C suffered less damage than control lines when EPNs were present. (A) Root damage measured on plants that had received neither WCR eggs nor nematodes was minimal, and there was no difference between transformed and nontransformed plants (n ϭ 5, P ϭ 0.87). (B) Root damage on plants that received only WCR eggs, but no nematodes, was substantial. Again, no significant difference was found between the transformed and nontransformed plants (n ϭ 5, P ϭ 0.18). (C) In plots that received WCR eggs and H. megidis, roots from transformed plants (pooled) had significantly less damage than roots from control lines (n ϭ 30, P ϭ 0.007). Approximately one-quarter of the transformed plants were found not to emit E␤C. Removing these plants from the statistical analysis did not significantly affect the results. The letters above the bars indicate significant differences within a graph. Error bars indicate standard errors.

Concerns about the tolerability of mefloquine highlight the need for new drugs to prevent malaria. Atovaquone-proguanil (Malarone; GlaxoSmithKline) was safe and effective for prevention of falciparum malaria in lifelong residents of malaria-endemic countries, but experience in nonimmune people is limited. In a randomized, double-blind study, nonimmune travelers received malaria prophylaxis with atovaquone-proguanil (493 subjects) or mefloquine (483 subjects). Information about adverse events (AEs) and potential episodes of malaria was obtained 7, 28, and 60 days after travel. AEs were reported by an equivalent proportion of subjects who had received atovaquone-proguanil or mefloquine (71.4% versus 67.3%; difference, 4.1%; 95% confidence interval, -1.71 to 9.9). Subjects who received atovaquone-proguanil had fewer treatment-related neuropsychiatric AEs (14% versus 29%; P=.001), fewer AEs of moderate or severe intensity (10% versus 19%; P=.001), and fewer AEs that caused prophylaxis to be discontinued (1.2% versus 5.0%; P=.001), compared with subjects who received melfoquine. No confirmed diagnoses of malaria occurred in either group. Atovaquone-proguanil was better tolerated than was mefloquine, and it was similarly effective for malaria prophylaxis in nonimmune travelers.