Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2024 Sep 1;142(9):789-797.
doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2024.2439.

Filgotinib in Active Noninfectious Uveitis: The HUMBOLDT Randomized Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Filgotinib in Active Noninfectious Uveitis: The HUMBOLDT Randomized Clinical Trial

Sunil K Srivastava et al. JAMA Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Importance: Noninfectious uveitis is a leading cause of visual impairment with an unmet need for additional treatment options.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of filgotinib, a Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) preferential inhibitor, for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis.

Design, setting, and participants: The HUMBOLDT trial was a double-masked, placebo-controlled, phase 2, randomized clinical trial conducted from July 2017 to April 2021 at 26 centers in 7 countries. Eligible participants (aged ≥18 years) had active noninfectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis despite at least 2 weeks of treatment with oral prednisone (10-60 mg per day).

Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive filgotinib, 200 mg, or placebo orally once daily for up to 52 weeks.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary end point was the proportion of participants experiencing treatment failure by week 24. Treatment failure was a composite end point represented by assessment of the presence of chorioretinal and/or retinal vascular lesions, best-corrected visual acuity, and anterior chamber cell and vitreous haze grades. Safety was assessed in participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug or placebo.

Results: Between July 26, 2017, and April 22, 2021, 116 participants were screened, and 74 (mean [SD] age, 46 [16] years; 43 female [59.7%] of 72 participants, as 2 participants did not receive treatment doses) were randomly assigned to receive filgotinib (n = 38) or placebo (n = 36). Despite early termination of the trial for business reasons ahead of meeting enrollment targets, a significantly reduced proportion of participants who received filgotinib experienced treatment failure by week 24 vs placebo (12 of 32 participants [37.5%] vs 23 of 34 participants [67.6%]; difference vs placebo -30.1%; 95% CI, -56.2% to -4.1%; P = .006). Business reasons were unrelated to efficacy or safety. Adverse events were reported in 30 of 37 participants (81.1%) who received filgotinib and in 24 of 35 participants (68.6%) who received placebo. Serious adverse events were reported in 5 of 37 participants (13.5%) in the filgotinib group and in 2 of 35 participants (5.7%) in the placebo group. No deaths were reported during the trial.

Conclusions and relevance: Results of this randomized clinical trial show that filgotinib lowered the risk of treatment failure in participants with active noninfectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis vs placebo. Although the HUMBOLDT trial provided evidence supporting the efficacy of filgotinib in patients with active noninfectious uveitis, the premature termination of the trial prevented collection of additional safety or efficacy information of this JAK1 preferential inhibitor.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03207815.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Srivastava reported receiving research grants from Regeneron, Eyepoint, Allergan, and Gilead and receiving consultancy fees from Adverum, Aura, Bausch, Gilead, jCyte, Novartis, Optos, Regeneron, and Zeiss. Dr Watkins reported being an employee and shareholder of Gilead Sciences Inc. Dr Nguyen reported serving on the scientific advisory board for Genentech, Kriya, Novartis, Regeneron, and Santen, among others, and serving on the data safety and monitoring board for Alvotech and Bellus Health. Dr Sharma reported being a consultant for AbbVie, Bausch & Lomb, Clearside, EyePoint, Regeneron, REGENXBIO, and Roche/Genentech and providing research support to institutions from Genentech/Roche, Gilead, Ionis, and Santen. Dr Dacey reported being a consultant, being a member of the speaker’s bureau, and participating in advisory boards for Allergan, AbbVie, Bausch & Lomb, and EyePoint. Dr Shah reported being a speaker for Allergan, Bausch & Lomb, Horizon Mallinckrodt, and Regeneron; receiving consultancy fees from Kriya; and receiving research grants from Bayer, Genentech, Gilead, Immunovant, Opthea, Priovant, Sling Therapeutics, and Tarsier. Dr Chu reported being a consultant to Aldeyra, Bausch & Lomb, Kriya, and Santen and receiving research and writing grants from Mallinckrodt. Dr Grewal reported being a consultant for Alimera, Allergan, EyePoint, Iveric Bio, Priovant, and Regeneron and providing research support to institutions from EyePoint, Genentech/Roche, and Priovant. Dr Faia reported being a member of the speaker’s bureau and participating in advisory boards for AbbVie/Allergan, EyePoint Pharmaceuticals, and Genentech/Roche. Dr Suhler reported receiving consulting fees and research support from AbbVie, Gilead, and Roche/Genentech; being a consultant to Kriya; and being supported by an institutional grant to the Casey Eye Institute from Research to Prevent Blindness and by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Dr Genovese reported being an employee and shareholder of Gilead Sciences Inc at the time of trial conduct read-out. Drs Guo and Barchuk reported being employees and shareholders of Gilead Sciences Inc. Dr Besuyen reported being an employee and shareholder of Galapagos and a partner of Gilead in the development of filgotinib at the time of trial conduct and read-out. Dr Dick reported being a consultant for ActiveBio, Affibody, Alimera, Hubble Therapeutics, Novartis, Revolo, UCB, and 4DMT and being a cofounder of Cirrus Therapeutics. Dr Rosenbaum reported being employed by Corvus Pharmaceuticals; receiving consulting fees from AbbVie, Affibody, Gilead, Horizon, Novartis, Revolo, Roivant, Santen, and UCB; receiving research funding from Horizon and Pfizer; serving on a data monitoring committee for Celgene-Bristol Myers Squibb and on an Outcome Resolution Committee for Lilly; and receiving royalties from UpToDate. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Flow Diagram
Two participants (one from each treatment group) were randomized but discontinued the trial before administration of the study drug owing to protocol violations. aSafety analysis set included participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. bEvaluable analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and did not permanently discontinue the trial before week 6. cTrial completion was defined as the participant completing the week 52 visit or having met the criteria for treatment failure.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Probability of Treatment Failure on or After Week 6
Treatment failures on or after week 6 were counted as events (marked by vertical lines in the Kaplan-Meier curves); participants who were not observed to have treatment failure by the time of trial completion or by the time of discontinuation from the trial were censored at the date of their last available assessment.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Probability of Treatment Failure Due to Presence of a New Active Lesion, Increased Anterior Chamber Cell (ACC) Grade or Vitreous Haze (VH) Grade, or Worsening Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA)
A, Presence of a new active lesion. B, Increased ACC grade. C, Increased VH Grade. D, Worsening BCVA. Treatment failures on or after week 6 were counted as events (marked by vertical lines in the Kaplan-Meier curves); participants who were not observed to have treatment failure by the time of trial completion or by the time of discontinuation from the trial were censored at the date of their last available assessment.

Comment in

References

    1. Rosenbaum JT, Bodaghi B, Couto C, et al. New observations and emerging ideas in diagnosis and management of noninfectious uveitis: a review. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2019;49(3):438-445. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2019.06.004 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Durrani OM, Tehrani NN, Marr JE, Moradi P, Stavrou P, Murray PI. Degree, duration, and causes of visual loss in uveitis. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88(9):1159-1162. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2003.037226 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Siddique SS, Shah R, Suelves AM, Foster CS. Road to remission: a comprehensive review of therapy in uveitis. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2011;20(11):1497-1515. doi: 10.1517/13543784.2011.617741 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rao NA. Uveitis in developing countries. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2013;61(6):253-254. doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.114090 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Guly CM, Forrester JV. Investigation and management of uveitis. BMJ. 2010;341:c4976. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c4976 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data