A Novel Bispecific Fusion Protein Targeting C3b/C4b and VEGF in Patients With nAMD: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 1b Study
NCT04370379 | Not specified | Jia H et al. (2023)
Jia H, Li T, Sun J, et al. A Novel Bispecific Fusion Protein Targeting C3b/C4b and VEGF in Patients With nAMD: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 1b Study. Am J Ophthalmol, 2023; 248:8–15.
Locations

2 study centers in China
Study Period

May 26, 2020 – February 8, 2021
Study Design

Phase 1b, randomized, open-label, multiple ascending-dose study
Study Population

Experimental Group
Control Group
Follow-up Time: 20 weeks
Outcomes

Durability
Not reported
Vision
Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA)
The mean change in BCVA from baseline at Week 12:
• 2 mg: +4.48 (SE 3.58) letters
• 4 mg: +8.60 (SE 3.61) letters
• Aflibercept: +8.92 (SE 3.57) letters
The mean change in BCVA from baseline at Week 16:
• 2 mg: +3.48 (SE 3.23) letters
• 4 mg: +7.43 (SE 3.26) letters
• Aflibercept: +8.92 (SE 3.22) letters
The mean change in BCVA from baseline at Week 20:
• 2 mg: +5.64 (SE 3.56) letters
• 4 mg: +8.93 (SE 3.59) letters
• Aflibercept: +7.92 (SE 3.55) letters
Vision Maintaining
Gained ≥10 ETDRS letters at week 20:
• 4 mg group: 2 patients
• Aflibercept group: 2 patients
Other
Efficacy: Progression Outcome Macular Atrophy The patients with macular atrophy at Week 20:
• 4 mg group: 1/6, 16.7%
• Aflibercept group: 3/6, 50%
• The differences were numerical differences with no statistical significance
Immunognicity
Not reported
Pharmokinetics
Following intravitreal administration of 2 mg per eye of efdamrofusp alfa to patients with nAMD, the mean plasma Cmax of free efdamrofusp alfa was 14.7
pmol/L (range, 4.7-20.4 pmol/L), which was numerically lower than with aflibercept (173.9 pmol/L; range, 0-469.6 pmol/L) at the same dose.
The Peak Time (Tmax) of free efdamrofusp alfa was 4.08 hours (range, 3.78-167.5 hours).
Pharmacodynamic parameters, including plasma-free VEGF, C5a, and interleukin-6, did not show treatment-dependent changes.
Anatomic
Central Subfield Thickness (CST)
The mean change in CST from baseline at Week 12:
• 2 mg: -157.86 (SE 22.251) µm
• 4 mg: -144.61 (SE 21.479) µm
• Aflibercept: -168.02 (SE 22.835) µm
The mean change in CST from baseline at Week 16:
• 2 mg: -155.53 (SE 22.329) µm
• 4 mg: -147.61 (SE 21.560) µm
• Aflibercept: -149.69 (SE 22.912) µm
The mean change in CST from baseline at Week 20:
• 2 mg: -157.53 (SE 22.367) µm
• 4 mg: -148.61 (SE 21.599) µm
• Aflibercept: -176.69 (SE 22.948) µm
Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV)
A CNV area reduction was observed at week 12 and week 20 in all groups.
The mean CNV area reduction from baseline at Week 20:
• 2 mg: -1.02 mm²
• 4 mg: -2.39 mm²
• Aflibercept: -1.39 mm².
Subretinal Fluid (SRF)
The proportion of patients with SRF absorption from baseline to Week 20:
• 2 mg: Not reported
• 4 mg: 5/5 (100%)
• Aflibercept: 2/3 (66.7%).
Retinal pigment epithelial detachment (PED)
The proportion of patients with PED resolution from baseline to Week 20:
• 2 mg: Not reported
• 4 mg: 2/6 (33%)
• Aflibercept: 2/6 (33%).
Safety
Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs)
• 2 mg: 66.7%
• 4 mg: 66.7%
• Aflibercept: 100%.
Ocular TEAEs
Patients with ocular TEAEs:
• 2 mg: 33.3%
• 4 mg: 66.7%
• Aflibercept: 66.7%
• All mild or moderate in severity and related to the intravitreal injection procedure
Conjunctival hemorrhage (most common):
• 2 mg: 16.7%
• 4 mg: 66.7%
• Aflibercept: 50.0%
Serious AEs
• No ocular serious adverse event was reported.
• One patient in the efdamrofusp alfa 4 mg group reported a non-ocular serious adverse event of lumbar disc herniation, which was moderate in severity and unrelated to the treatment as judged by the investigator.

Conclusion
Efdamrofusp alfa (2 mg and 4 mg) was well tolerated with no serious AEs and demonstrated comparable BCVA and anatomical improvements to aflibercept. The 4 mg dose showed the largest CNV area reduction and complete SRF absorption in all affected patients.
Risk of Bias Assessment for Primary Outcome
Randomization Process
High risk
Note: No information on the method of randomization or allocation concealment. In addition, due to the small sample size, the two groups were not comparable at the baseline.
Missing Outcome Data
Low risk
Note: No missingness.
Selection of the Reported Results
Some concerns Note: the protocol is not publicly available.
Deviations from Intended Observations
Low risk Note: The primary outcome is safety. Although it is an open-label study, the assessment was unlikely to be influenced by the knowledge of the intervention. All participants were included in the final analysis (ITT).
Measurement of the Outcome
Low risk Note: The primary outcome is safety. The risk of biased measurement is low.
Overall
High risk
Categories: Wet AMD
