Spencer-Segal, Joanna L.

Abstract Introduction Endogenous Cushing's syndrome (CS) is a rare endocrine disorder that chronically exposes patients to supraphysiological cortisol levels. Primary therapy for CS consists of surgery. Medical therapies are also considered for many patients with CS, including those who are not surgical candidates or have persistent or recurrent hypercortisolism after surgery. Osilodrostat, an adrenal steroidogenesis inhibitor, demonstrated sustained efficacy and safety in phase 3 clinical trials and is currently approved to treat endogenous CS in Europe and the United States. Because of limited clinical experience, questions remain about how to individualize osilodrostat treatment for different clinical scenarios and special populations. Additional guidance from experts based on clinical study and real-world experiences with osilodrostat is needed. Methods A modified Delphi consensus panel study was conducted consisting of 13 specialists from high-volume endocrinology centers with experience prescribing osilodrostat. Advisors participated in 3 consensus rounds (2 anonymous surveys, 1 virtual workshop) over approximately 10 months to provide guidance and recommendations on optimal osilodrostat use. Results Over 2 surveys and a 2-hour virtual workshop, 26 statements related to osilodrostat achieved consensus among Delphi panelists and 5 were excluded. Topics included patient preparation before osilodrostat initiation, baseline testing, dosing at onset and during treatment, managing dose adjustments, monitoring during dose titration, and treatment alterations for planned and unexpected clinical events. Conclusion Treatment guidance and recommendations for osilodrostat use were obtained using the Delphi method. These statements are intended to provide physicians with education and guidance on using osilodrostat to optimally treat patients with CS.

Abstract Disclosure: D. Ferone: Consulting Fee; Self; Camurus AB, Ipsen, Novartis-AAA, Recordati. Grant Recipient; Self; Camurus AB, Ipsen, Novartis-AAA, Recordati. Research Investigator; Self; Camurus AB. J.L. Spencer-Segal: Advisory Board Member; Self; Camurus AB. Research Investigator; Self; Camurus AB. G. Fidan Yaylali: None. M. Doknic: Speaker; Self; Pfizer, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Merck, Sandoz. E. Isaeva: None. A. Dreval: None. A. Gilis-Januszewska: None. E. Gezer: None. I. Bancos: Advisory Board Member; Self; Diurnal, Spruce, Neurocrine, Adrenas, Sparrow, Corcept, HRA Pharmaceuticals, Recordati, Xeris, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk. Grant Recipient; Self; Recordati, HRA Pharmaceuticals. L. Katznelson: Advisory Board Member; Self; Camurus AB, Recordati. M. Harrie: Employee; Self; Camurus AB. Stock Owner; Self; Camurus AB. A. Svedberg: Employee; Self; Camurus AB. Stock Owner; Self; Camurus AB. A.M. Pedroncelli: Employee; Self; Camurus AB. Stock Owner; Self; Camurus AB. F. Tiberg: Employee; Self; Camurus AB. Stock Owner; Self; Camurus AB. Background: Acromegaly is a rare, serious disorder characterized by overproduction of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1). There is a need for new, convenient therapies that provide effective disease control. CAM2029 is a novel subcutaneous octreotide depot designed for convenient once-monthly self-administration (ready-to-use syringe or injection pen). In a 24-week, Phase 3 trial (ACROINNOVA 1), CAM2029 was superior to placebo at attaining IGF-1 response (≤upper limit of normal [ULN] at week 22/24: 72.2% vs 37.5%; P=0.0018) in patients with acromegaly previously controlled under standard of care (SoC; octreotide long-acting repeatable [LAR]/lanreotide Autogel). Here, we report interim data from another Phase 3 trial of CAM2029 (ACROINNOVA 2; NCT04125836), focusing on the “New to CAM2029” subgroup of patients whose acromegaly was either controlled or uncontrolled under SoC. Methods: This 52-week, Phase 3, open-label trial (with a 52-week extension) enrolled patients who had received CAM2029 or placebo in ACROINNOVA 1 (reported separately) and “New to CAM2029” patients who were adequately or inadequately controlled (IGF-1 ≤2x ULN) on a stable dose of octreotide LAR/lanreotide Autogel for ≥3 months (data reported here). In the main part of the trial, new patients received once-monthly CAM2029 20 mg for up to 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was adverse events (AEs). Secondary endpoints included (i) the proportion of patients with IGF-1 ≤1x ULN (weeks 50/52 mean), (ii) the change from baseline in IGF-1, and (iii) the combined IGF-1 and GH response. Baseline values reflected SoC treatment. Data cutoff: May 23, 2023. Results: Eighty-one new patients were enrolled (mean age 51.8 years; 59.3% female). No new or unexpected safety signals were observed. The most common treatment-emergent AEs were injection site erythema (n=22) or swelling (n=13), and headache (n=12). AEs were mostly mild (grade 1/2); there were no serious or Grade 3 treatment-related AEs attributed to CAM2029. IGF-I response increased from 14.8% at baseline SoC (12/81) to 33.3% (20/60 patients with available data) at weeks 50/52. The estimated increase in IGF-1 response (linear probability model) from baseline at week 52 was 21.9% (95% CI: 9.6, 34.1). Biochemical control for both IGF-1 and GH improved over time: 30.0% of patients (18/60) had a combined IGF-1 and GH response at the end of the main part of trial, vs 11.7% (7/60) at baseline. Conclusion: CAM2029 was well tolerated with a safety profile consistent with that of SoC. Biochemical control rates improved from SoC baseline over 52 weeks of CAM2029 treatment in the “New to CAM2029” patients. These findings reinforce the efficacy and safety of CAM2029 in patients with acromegaly, including patients with uncontrolled disease with current SoC treatment (octreotide LAR/lanreotide Autogel). Presentation: 6/1/2024

OBJECTIVES: We postulate that corticosteroid-related side effects in critically ill patients are similar across sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). By pooling data across all trials that have examined corticosteroids in these three acute conditions, we aim to examine the side effects of corticosteroid use in critical illness. DATA SOURCES: We performed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention library of COVID research, CINAHL, and Cochrane center for trials. STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared corticosteroids to no corticosteroids or placebo in patients with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. DATA EXTRACTION: We summarized data addressing the most described side effects of corticosteroid use in critical care: gastrointestinal bleeding, hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, superinfections/secondary infections, neuropsychiatric effects, and neuromuscular weakness. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 47 RCTs ( n = 13,893 patients). Corticosteroids probably have no effect on gastrointestinal bleeding (relative risk [RR], 1.08; 95% CI, 0.87–1.34; absolute risk increase [ARI], 0.3%; moderate certainty) or secondary infections (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.89–1.05; absolute risk reduction, 0.5%; moderate certainty) and may have no effect on neuromuscular weakness (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03–1.45; ARI, 1.4%; low certainty) or neuropsychiatric events (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.82–1.74; ARI, 0.5%; low certainty). Conversely, they increase the risk of hyperglycemia (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11–1.31; ARI, 5.4%; high certainty) and probably increase the risk of hypernatremia (RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.29–1.96; ARI, 2.3%; moderate certainty). CONCLUSIONS: In ARDS, sepsis, and CAP, corticosteroids are associated with hyperglycemia and probably with hypernatremia but likely have no effect on gastrointestinal bleeding or secondary infections. More data examining effects of corticosteroids, particularly on neuropsychiatric outcomes and neuromuscular weakness, would clarify the safety of this class of drugs in critical illness.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, up to January 10, 2023. STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing corticosteroids with placebo or standard care with sepsis. DATA EXTRACTION: The critical outcomes of interest included mortality, shock reversal, length of stay in the ICU, and adverse events. DATA ANALYSIS: We performed both a pairwise and dose-response meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of different corticosteroid doses on outcomes. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to assess certainty in pooled estimates. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 45 RCTs involving 9563 patients. Corticosteroids probably reduce short-term mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88–0.99; moderate certainty) and increase shock reversal at 7 days (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.11–1.38; high certainty). Corticosteroids may have no important effect on duration of ICU stay (mean difference, –0.6 fewer days; 95% CI, 1.48 fewer to 0.27 more; low certainty); however, probably increase the risk of hyperglycemia (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08–1.18; moderate certainty) and hypernatremia (RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.32–2.03; moderate certainty) and may increase the risk of neuromuscular weakness (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01–1.45; low certainty). The dose-response analysis showed a reduction in mortality with corticosteroids with optimal dosing of approximately 260 mg/d of hydrocortisone (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83–0.98) or equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: We found that corticosteroids may reduce mortality and increase shock reversal but they may also increase the risk of hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, and neuromuscular weakness. The dose-response analysis indicates optimal dosing is around 260 mg/d of hydrocortisone or equivalent.

RATIONALE: New evidence is available examining the use of corticosteroids in sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), warranting a focused update of the 2017 guideline on critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency. OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for use of corticosteroids in hospitalized adults and children with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. PANEL DESIGN: The 22-member panel included diverse representation from medicine, including adult and pediatric intensivists, pulmonologists, endocrinologists, nurses, pharmacists, and clinician-methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines. We followed Society of Critical Care Medicine conflict of interest policies in all phases of the guideline development, including task force selection and voting. METHODS: After development of five focused Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) questions, we conducted systematic reviews to identify the best available evidence addressing each question. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach and formulated recommendations using the evidence-to-decision framework. RESULTS: In response to the five PICOs, the panel issued four recommendations addressing the use of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. These included a conditional recommendation to administer corticosteroids for patients with septic shock and critically ill patients with ARDS and a strong recommendation for use in hospitalized patients with severe CAP. The panel also recommended against high dose/short duration administration of corticosteroids for septic shock. In response to the final PICO regarding type of corticosteroid molecule in ARDS, the panel was unable to provide specific recommendations addressing corticosteroid molecule, dose, and duration of therapy, based on currently available evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The panel provided updated recommendations based on current evidence to inform clinicians, patients, and other stakeholders on the use of corticosteroids for sepsis, ARDS, and CAP.