Prevention of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) illness in all infants is a major public health priority. However, no vaccine is currently available to protect this vulnerable population. Palivizumab, the only approved agent for RSV prophylaxis, is limited to high-risk infants, and the cost associated with the requirement for dosing throughout the RSV season makes its use impractical for all infants. We describe the development of a monoclonal antibody as potential RSV prophylaxis for all infants with a single intramuscular dose. MEDI8897*, a highly potent human antibody, was optimized from antibody D25, which targets the prefusion conformation of the RSV fusion (F) protein. Crystallographic analysis of Fab in complex with RSV F from subtypes A and B reveals that MEDI8897* binds a highly conserved epitope. MEDI8897* neutralizes a diverse panel of RSV A and B strains with >50-fold higher activity than palivizumab. At similar serum concentrations, prophylactic administration of MEDI8897* was ninefold more potent than palivizumab at reducing pulmonary viral loads by >3 logs in cotton rats infected with either RSV A or B subtypes. MEDI8897 was generated by the introduction of triple amino acid substitutions (YTE) into the Fc domain of MEDI8897*, which led to more than threefold increased half-life in cynomolgus monkeys compared to non-YTE antibody. Considering the pharmacokinetics of palivizumab in infants, which necessitates five monthly doses for protection during an RSV season, the high potency and extended half-life of MEDI8897 support its development as a cost-effective option to protect all infants from RSV disease with once-per-RSV-season dosing in the clinic.

ObjectivesDespite the therapeutic value of current rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatments, agents with alternative modes of action are required. Mavrilimumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor-α, was evaluated in patients with moderate-to-severe RA.MethodsIn a phase IIb study (NCT01706926), patients with inadequate response to ≥1 synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug(s), Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)−C reactive protein (CRP)/erythrocyte sedimentation rate ≥3.2, ≥4 swollen joints despite methotrexate (MTX) were randomised 1:1:1:1 to subcutaneous mavrilimumab (150, 100, 30 mg), or placebo every other week (eow), plus MTX for 24 weeks. Coprimary outcomes were DAS28−CRP change from baseline to week 12 and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response rate (week 24).Results326 patients were randomised (150 mg, n=79; 100 mg, n=85; 30 mg, n=81; placebo, n=81); 305 completed the study (September 2012–June 2013). Mavrilimumab treatment significantly reduced DAS28−CRP scores from baseline compared with placebo (change from baseline (SE); 150 mg: −1.90 (0.14), 100 mg: −1.64 (0.13), 30 mg: −1.37 (0.14), placebo: −0.68 (0.14); p<0.001; all dosages compared with placebo).Significantly more mavrilimumab-treated patients achieved ACR20 compared with placebo (week 24: 73.4%, 61.2%, 50.6% vs 24.7%, respectively (p<0.001)). Adverse events were reported in 43 (54.4%), 36 (42.4%), 41 (50.6%) and 38 (46.9%) patients in the mavrilimumab 150, 100, 30 mg eow and placebo groups, respectively. No treatment-related safety signals were identified.ConclusionsMavrilimumab significantly decreased RA disease activity, with clinically meaningful responses observed 1 week after treatment initiation, representing a novel mechanism of action with persuasive therapeutic potential.Trial registration numberNCT01706926; results.

Background: We and others have reported the prophylactic efficacy of oral consumption of probiotic lactobacilli in the interleukin 10 knockout (IL-10 KO) model of colitis. It has not been demonstrated that the oral route is essential for probiotic efficacy. Aims: (i) To determine the effect of parenteral administration (subcutaneous) of Lactobacillus salivarius 118 on colitis of IL-10 KO mice; and (ii) to determine if observed responses are disease specific. Methods: (i) IL-10 KO mice were injected subcutaneously with L salivarius 118 or saline over 19 weeks. At sacrifice, the bowels were histologically scored. Isolated splenocytes were cultured in vitro and cytokine levels measured. (ii) In the collagen induced arthritis model, DBA/1 mice were injected subcutaneously with the probiotic or saline. At sacrifice, paw thickness was measured and joints were histologically scored. Results: (i) Colonic inflammatory scores were significantly decreased in IL-10 KO mice injected with L salivarius 118 compared with controls (p,0.05). Proinflammatory cytokine production from stimulated splenocytes was significantly lower for the probiotic group whereas stimulated transforming growth factor b (TGF-b) levels were significantly increased (p,0.05). (ii) Scoring of arthritis and paw thickness were significantly improved in the group of mice injected with L salivarius 118 compared with controls. Conclusions: (1) Subcutaneous administration of L salivarius 118 significantly attenuated colitis in the IL-10 KO model and suppressed collagen induced arthritis, suggesting that the oral route may not be essential for probiotic anti-inflammatory effects and that responses are not disease specific. (2) The probiotic effect was associated with reduced production of proinflammatory (T helper 1) cytokines and maintained production of anti-TGF-b.

ObjectiveThis 24‐week, phase IIb, double‐blind study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mavrilimumab (a monoclonal antibody to granulocyte–macrophage colony‐stimulating factor receptor α) and golimumab (a monoclonal antibody to tumor necrosis factor [anti‐TNF]) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have had an inadequate response to disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (referred to as DMARD‐IR) and/or inadequate response to other anti‐TNF agents (referred to as anti‐TNF–IR).MethodsPatients with active RA and a history of DMARD‐IR (≥1 failed regimen) or DMARD‐IR (≥1 failed regimen) and anti‐TNF–IR (1–2 failed regimens) were randomized 1:1 to receive either mavrilimumab 100 mg subcutaneously every other week or golimumab 50 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks alternating with placebo every 4 weeks, administered concomitantly with methotrexate. The primary end points were the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20), 50% improvement, and 70% improvement response rates at week 24, percentage of patients achieving a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C‐reactive protein level (DAS28‐CRP) of <2.6 at week 24, percentage of patients with a score improvement of >0.22 on the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI) at week 24, and safety/tolerability measures. This study was not powered to formally compare the 2 treatments.ResultsAt week 24, differences in the ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates between the mavrilimumab treatment group (n = 70) and golimumab treatment group (n = 68) were as follows: in all patients, −3.5% (90% confidence interval [90% CI] −16.8, 9.8), −8.6% (90% CI −22.0, 4.8), and −9.8% (90% CI −21.1, 1.4), respectively; in the anti‐TNF–IR group, 11.1% (90% CI −7.8, 29.9), −8.7% (90% CI −28.1, 10.7), and −0.7% (90% CI −18.0, 16.7), respectively. Differences in the percentage of patients achieving a DAS28‐CRP of <2.6 at week 24 between the mavrilimumab and golimumab groups were −11.6% (90% CI −23.2, 0.0) in all patients, and −4.0% (90% CI −20.9, 12.9) in the anti‐TNF–IR group. The percentage of patients achieving a >0.22 improvement in the HAQ DI score at week 24 was similar between the treatment groups. Treatment‐emergent adverse events were reported in 51.4% of mavrilimumab‐treated patients and 42.6% of golimumab‐treated patients. No deaths were reported, and no specific safety signals were identified.ConclusionThe findings of this study demonstrate the clinical efficacy of both treatments, mavrilimumab at a dosage of 100 mg every other week and golimumab at a dosage of 50 mg every 4 weeks, in patients with RA. Both regimens were well‐tolerated in patients who had shown an inadequate response to DMARDs and/or other anti‐TNF agents.

No abstract