Zouboulis, Christos C

Abstract Background The results of a previous phase IIa trial suggested efficacy of the anti-C5a compound vilobelimab in a small number of patients with severe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) refractory to adalimumab treatment. Objectives To study the efficacy of vilobelimab in a larger-scale randomized phase IIb trial (SHINE) of patients with moderate-to-severe HS. Methods In total, 177 patients with moderate-to-severe HS were treated either with placebo or one of four doses of vilobelimab, a monoclonal antibody that targets the complement split product C5a. Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR) at 16 weeks was the primary endpoint. Those who achieved HiSCR switched to open-label low-dose vilobelimab; those who did not were switched to medium-dose vilobelimab. The trial was registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT number 2017-004501-40) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03487276). Results The study did not meet the primary endpoint, perhaps due, in part, to an unexpectedly high HiSCR placebo response rate of 47.1%. HS flares decreased and post hoc analysis showed that high-dose vilobelimab significantly decreased the median draining tunnel counts and IHS4 score by 63%. Following the switch to medium-dose vilobelimab at week 16, 45.5% of those who did not respond to treatment achieved HiSCR at week 40. Conclusions Compared with placebo, vilobelimab treatment did not result in significant HiSCR improvements in patients with moderate-to-severe HS. Post hoc analysis revealed significant effects for the highest tested dose on draining tunnel reduction and IHS4 score, which captures reductions in draining tunnels. These findings warrant further investigation.

AbstractIntroductionThe International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System (IHS4) is a validated tool that measures inflammatory lesions, including draining tunnels, in hidradenitis suppurativa (HS).ObjectiveTo evaluate secukinumab efficacy using IHS4 in patients with moderate to severe HS.MethodsData from the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE trials, which assessed subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg every 2 (SECQ2W) and 4 (SECQ4W) weeks in adults with moderate to severe HS, were analyzed. Assessments included changes from baseline in IHS4 and severity classification up to Week 52; IHS4‐55, IHS4‐75, IHS4‐90 responses (55%, 75% and 90% reduction in IHS4) and concordance between IHS4‐55 and HS clinical response (HiSCR), at Weeks 16 and 52.ResultsIn total, 1084 patients (SECQ2W = 361; SECQ4W = 360; placebo = 363) were analyzed. At Week 16, SECQ2W and SECQ4W demonstrated a numerically higher reduction in IHS4 from baseline versus placebo (adjusted mean [95% CI]: −10.80 [−12.30 to −9.30] and −9.46 [−10.96 to −7.96] vs. −4.92 [−6.43 to −3.41]); the reduction was maintained until Week 52 in both dose regimens. A greater proportion of patients achieved IHS4‐55 with SECQ2W (43.4%) and SECQ4W (39.5%) versus placebo (31.5%) at Week 16, with further improvement at Week 52. Similar trends were observed for IHS4‐75 and IHS4‐90 responses. While no patients had mild disease based on IHS4 (80.7% had severe and 19.3% had moderate HS) at baseline, a greater proportion of patients were categorized as having mild disease at Week 16 in the SECQ2W (25.9%) and SECQ4W (24.0%) groups versus placebo (16.4%); this trend continued up to Week 52 in both dose regimens. Strong concordance (>85%) was observed between IHS4‐55 and HiSCR.ConclusionsBoth SECQ2W and SECQ4W demonstrated efficacy in improving treatment response as measured by IHS4 and reducing disease severity versus placebo at Week 16 and these improvements were sustained through Week 52. These findings support that the dynamic and dichotomous IHS4 can efficiently detect treatment response changes in clinical trial settings.Clinical Trials RegistrationSUNSHINE (NCT03713619); SUNRISE (NCT03713632).

AbstractBackgroundThe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) clinical response (HiSCR) has come under scrutiny as several HS clinical trials failed to meet primary endpoints with high placebo responses. This may be due to limitations of the tool and raters' ability to accurately characterize and count lesions, rather than lack of efficacy of the studied drug. Due to HS lesion complexity and potential differences in rater training, it was hypothesized that there would be discrepancies in how providers characterize and count lesions for HS clinical trials.ObjectiveTo evaluate how HS providers and patients name and count HS lesions and to identify discrepancies among providers to initiate the development of consensus‐driven guidance for HS rater training.MethodsAn online survey was distributed to the members of HIdradenitis SuppuraTiva cORe outcomes set International Collaboration (HISTORIC). Respondents were asked to classify lesion images composed of multiple and different morphology types and answer questions regarding inclusion of associated dermatological conditions.ResultsForty‐seven HISTORIC members responded (29 providers; 18 patients). There was variability in how respondents classified HS lesions. Of 12 questions containing images, four had ≥50% of respondents choosing the same answer. With an image of a lesion composed of different morphologies, 45% of providers counted it as a single lesion and 45% counted it as multiple distinct lesions. With an image of multiple interconnected draining tunnels, 7% of providers classified it as a single draining tunnel while 79% categorized it as multiple draining tunnels with the number estimated by visual inspection. There was also variability in deciding whether lesions occurring in associated conditions should be considered separately or included in HS lesion counts. Patient responses were also variable.ConclusionsThe result of the current study reaffirms the gap in how providers characterize and count HS lesions for clinical trials and the need to develop consensus‐driven rater training related to HS outcome measures.

Abstract Background Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with a considerable disease burden. Existing treatment options are limited and often suboptimal; a high unmet need exists for effective targeted therapies. Objectives To explore the effects of spesolimab treatment in patients with HS. Methods This randomized double-blind placebo-controlled proof-of-clinical-concept (PoCC) study was conducted at 25 centres across 12 countries from 3 May 2021 to 21 April 2022. Patients had moderate-to-severe HS for ≥ 1 year before enrolment. Patients were randomized (2 : 1) to receive a loading dose of 3600-mg intravenous spesolimab (1200 mg at weeks 0, 1 and 2) or matching placebo, followed by maintenance with either 1200-mg subcutaneous spesolimab every 2 weeks from weeks 4 to 10 or matching placebo. The primary endpoint was the percentage change from baseline in total abscess and inflammatory nodule (AN) count at week 12. Secondary endpoints were the absolute change from baseline in the International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System (IHS4), percentage change from baseline in draining tunnel (dT) count, the proportion of patients achieving a dT count of 0, absolute change from baseline in the revised Hidradenitis Suppurativa Area and Severity Index (HASI-R), the proportion of patients achieving Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR50), the proportion of patients with ≥ 1 flare (all at week 12) and patient-reported outcomes. Results In this completed trial, randomized patients (n = 52) received spesolimab (n = 35) or placebo (n = 17). The difference vs. placebo in least squares mean is reported. At week 12, the percentage change in total AN count was similar between treatment arms: –4.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) –31.7 to 23.4]. There was greater numerical improvement in the spesolimab arm, as measured by IHS4 (13.9, 95% CI –25.6 to –2.3); percentage change from baseline in dT count (–96.6%, 95% CI –154.5 to –38.8); and the proportion of patients achieving a dT count of 0 (18.3%, 95% CI –7.9 to 37.5). Spesolimab treatment also improved HASI-R and HiSCR50 vs. placebo. Spesolimab demonstrated a favourable safety profile, similar to that observed in trials in other diseases. Conclusions This exploratory PoCC study supports the development of spesolimab as a new therapeutic option in HS.

Abstract Background Validated, inclusive and easy‐to‐use outcomes for hidradenitis suppurativa are essential both in the clinical trial setting and clinical practice. The continuous IHS4 is a validated tool that dynamically assesses nodules/abscesses/draining tunnels and classifies disease severity as mild/moderate/severe. However, dichotomous outcomes are often required for clinical trials reporting. Objective To develop and validate a dichotomous outcome based on IHS4 that can be used in clinical trial settings and day‐to‐day clinical practice. Methods De‐identified data from the PIONEER‐I and ‐II studies were accessed through Vivli. Potential IHS4 thresholds were analysed using baseline to Week 12 data from adalimumab‐ and placebo‐treated hidradenitis suppurativa patients in the PIONEER‐I trial. The final threshold was chosen based on its ability to discriminate between patients treated with adalimumab or placebo and its association with reduction in inflammatory lesions. The final threshold was validated using data from baseline to Week 12 from adalimumab‐ and placebo‐treated hidradenitis suppurativa patients in both the PIONEER‐II and the combined PIONEER‐I and ‐II studies. Results The best performing cut‐off for the IHS4 was a 55% reduction of the IHS4 score (IHS4‐55). Patients who achieved the IHS4‐55 had an odd's ratio of 2.00 [95%‐CI 1.26–3.18, p = 0.003], 2.79 (95%‐CI 1.76–4.43, p < 0.001) and 2.16 (95%‐CI 1.43–3.29, p < 0.001) for being treated with adalimumab rather than placebo in PIONEER‐I, PIONEER‐II and the combined dataset, respectively. Additionally, the achievement of the IHS4‐55 was associated with a significant reduction in inflammatory nodules, abscesses and draining tunnels in all analysed datasets. Conclusions IHS4‐55, a novel dichotomous IHS4 version, based on a 55% reduction of the total score was developed. The IHS4‐55 performs similarly to the HiSCR in discriminating between adalimumab‐ and placebo‐treated hidradenitis suppurativa patients and shows significant associations with reductions in lesion counts. Moreover, the IHS4‐55 addresses some of the HiSCR drawbacks by dynamically including draining tunnels in a validated manner. By allowing the analysis of hidradenitis suppurativa patients with an abscess and nodule count below 3 but many draining tunnels, this outcome measure will improve inclusivity in clinical trials.

Abstract Objective Behçet's disease ( BD ) is a chronic, relapsing, inflammatory vascular disease with no pathognomonic test. Low sensitivity of the currently applied International Study Group ( ISG ) clinical diagnostic criteria led to their reassessment. Methods An International Team for the Revision of the International Criteria for BD (from 27 countries) submitted data from 2556 clinically diagnosed BD patients and 1163 controls with BD ‐mimicking diseases or presenting at least one major BD sign. These were randomly divided into training and validation sets. Logistic regression, ‘leave‐one‐country‐out’ cross‐validation and clinical judgement were employed to develop new International Criteria for BD ( ICBD ) with the training data. Existing and new criteria were tested for their performance in the validation set. Results For the ICBD , ocular lesions, oral aphthosis and genital aphthosis are each assigned 2 points, while skin lesions, central nervous system involvement and vascular manifestations 1 point each. The pathergy test, when used, was assigned 1 point. A patient scoring ≥4 points is classified as having BD . In the training set, 93.9% sensitivity and 92.1% specificity were assessed compared with 81.2% sensitivity and 95.9% specificity for the ISG criteria. In the validation set, ICBD demonstrated an unbiased estimate of sensitivity of 94.8% (95% CI : 93.4–95.9%), considerably higher than that of the ISG criteria (85.0%). Specificity (90.5%, 95% CI : 87.9–92.8%) was lower than that of the ISG ‐criteria (96.0%), yet still reasonably high. For countries with at least 90%‐of‐cases and controls having a pathergy test, adding 1 point for pathergy test increased the estimate of sensitivity from 95.5% to 98.5%, while barely reducing specificity from 92.1% to 91.6%. Conclusion The new proposed criteria derived from multinational data exhibits much improved sensitivity over the ISG criteria while maintaining reasonable specificity. It is proposed that the ICBD criteria to be adopted both as a guide for diagnosis and classification of BD .