4.6 Article

A randomised, placebo-controlled study of the CXCR2 antagonist AZD5069 in bronchiectasis

Journal

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
Volume 46, Issue 4, Pages 1021-1032

Publisher

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00148-2015

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. AstraZeneca
  2. Newcastle University National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre in Ageing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This randomised double-blind placebo-controlled parallel-group multicentre phase ha study evaluated the effect of the CXCR2 antagonist AZD5069 on sputum neutrophil counts in adults with bronchiectasis. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive AZD5069 80 mg or placebo orally twice daily for 28 days. Assessments included blood cell counts, inflammatory markers in blood, morning spontaneous sputum, lung function, safety and tolerability and patients completed daily BronkoTest diary cards. The primary outcome measure was the change in absolute sputum neutrophil count. Of 52 randomised patients, 45 completed treatment, 20 (76.9%) out of 26 receiving AZD5069 and 25 (96.2%) out of 26 receiving placebo. AZD5069 reduced the absolute neutrophil cell count in morning sputum by 69% versus placebo (p=0.004); percentage sputum neutrophil count was reduced by 36% (p=0.008). The number of infections/exacerbations was similar with AZD5069 and placebo (nine versus eight), but these led to more study discontinuations with AZD5069 (four versus zero). Sputum interleukin (IL)-6 and growth-regulated oncogene (GRO)-alpha and serum GRO-alpha, IL-1ss and IL-8 levels increased with AZD5069 versus placebo (all p<0.001), while serum high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels did not change. AZD5069 was well tolerated. AZD5069 markedly reduced absolute sputum neutrophil counts in bronchiectasis patients, although this was not associated with improvements in clinical outcomes in this exploratory study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available