ABSTRACT
Background Baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 and 2 inhibitor, improved outcomes in a previous randomized controlled trial of hospitalized adults with COVID-19, in combination with remdesivir.
Methods In this phase 3, global, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 1525 hospitalized adults with COVID-19 receiving standard of care (SOC) were randomly assigned (1:1) to once-daily baricitinib 4-mg (N=764) or placebo (N=761) for up to 14 days. SOC included systemic corticosteroids in ∼79% of participants (dexamethasone ∼90%). The primary endpoint was the proportion who progressed to high-flow oxygen, non-invasive ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death by day 28. A key secondary endpoint was all-cause mortality by day 28.
Results Overall, 27.8% of participants receiving baricitinib vs 30.5% receiving placebo progressed (primary endpoint, odds ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.67-1.08; p=0.18). The 28-day all-cause mortality was 8.1% for baricitinib and 13.1% for placebo, corresponding to a 38.2% reduction in mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57, 95% CI 0.41-0.78; nominal p=0.002); 1 additional death was prevented per 20 baricitinib-treated participants. Reduction in mortality was seen for all pre-specified subgroups of baseline severity (most pronounced for participants on high-flow oxygen/non-invasive ventilation at baseline [17.5%, baricitinib vs 29.4%, placebo; HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33-0.80; nominal p=0.007]). The frequency of adverse events, serious adverse events, serious infections, and venous thromboembolic events was similar between groups.
Conclusions While reduction of disease progression did not achieve statistical significance, treatment with baricitinib in addition to SOC (predominantly dexamethasone) significantly reduced mortality with a similar safety profile between groups of hospitalized COVID-19 participants.
INTRODUCTION
Hospitalized patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) often experience an intense hyperinflammatory state that may lead to multiple organ dysfunction including acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), septic shock, and death.1-4 Despite recent treatment advances with remdesivir, dexamethasone, and tocilizumab, reducing mortality among hospitalized patients remains a critical unmet need.5-8
Baricitinib is a selective Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor9-11 with a known anti-inflammatory profile in patients with autoimmune diseases.12-14 In February 2020, baricitinib was identified by an artificial intelligence platform to have a potential coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) antiviral effect.15,16 The biochemical inhibitory effects of baricitinib on human numb-associated kinases (AAK1, BIKE, and GAK) responsible for SARS-CoV-2 viral propagation were subsequently confirmed.17 Baricitinib also reduced multiple cytokines and biomarkers implicated in COVID-19 pathophysiology.18 Inspired by these findings, studies including small cohorts of COVID-19 hospitalized patients were conducted and provided first evidence of clinical improvement associated with baricitinib treatment.19,20
ACTT-2, a NIH-sponsored double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial in hospitalized adults with COVID-19, found that baricitinib plus remdesivir was superior to remdesivir in reducing recovery time (p=0.03), with 28-day mortality reported (5.1% vs 7.8%, not statistically significant) and had fewer serious adverse events (SAEs).6 The Food and Drug Administration issued an Emergency Use Authorization in November 2020 for use of baricitinib, in combination with remdesivir, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen supplementation.21
COV-BARRIER was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of baricitinib in combination with standard of care (SOC) for the treatment of hospitalized adults with COVID-19.
METHODS
Study Design and Oversight
This multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 trial included 101 centers from 12 countries in Asia, Europe, North and South America. Participants were randomized 1:1 to placebo or baricitinib 4-mg. Participants were stratified according to the following baseline factors: disease severity, age, region, and use of corticosteroids for COVID-19. Baricitinib or placebo was administered orally (or crushed for nasogastric tube) and given daily, for up to 14 days or until discharge from hospital, whichever occurred first. Participants randomized to baricitinib 4-mg with baseline eGFR ≥30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 received baricitinib 2-mg. All participants received background SOC in keeping with local clinical practice for COVID-19 management, which could include corticosteroids, and/or antivirals. Dexamethasone use was permitted as described in the RECOVERY trial;7 higher corticosteroid doses were limited unless indicated for a concurrent condition. Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolic events (VTE) was required for all participants unless there was a major contraindication.
Efficacy and safety were evaluated up to day 28. Participants had additional post-treatment follow-up visits ∼28 days after receiving their last dose of study drug and at ∼day 60; data from the 60-day follow-up will be disclosed once available. Participant disposition is detailed in Figure 1 and includes reasons for discontinuation which include adverse events (AEs) (including death).
SOC=standard of care. *Included in the intent-to-treat population. †Includes all randomized participants who received ≥1 dose of study drug and who did not discontinue the study for the reason of ‘lost to follow-up’ at the first post-baseline visit. ‡159 deaths total reported by day 28. There were an additional 3 deaths that occurred after treatment period disposition but within 28 days.
COV-BARRIER was conducted in accordance with ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. All sites received approval from the authorized institutional review board. All participants (or legally authorized representatives) provided informed consent. An independent, external data monitoring committee (DMC) oversaw the study and evaluated unblinded interim data for efficacy, futility and safety analyses. An independent, blinded, clinical event committee adjudicated potential VTEs and deaths. The trial protocol and statistical analysis plan are available from the sponsor.
Participants
Eligible participants were ≥18 years of age, hospitalized with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, had evidence of pneumonia or active, symptomatic COVID-19, and had ≥1 elevated inflammatory marker (C reactive protein, D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin). Participants were excluded if requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease Ordinal Scale [NIAID-OS] 7) at study entry, receiving immunosuppressants (high dose corticosteroids, biologics, T cell or B cell-targeted therapies, interferon, or JAK inhibitors), or received convalescent plasma or intravenous immunoglobulin for COVID-19. Following disclosure of results from ACTT-2 showing participants without baseline oxygen support were not likely to progress, a protocol amendment was implemented to limit enrollment to participants requiring baseline oxygen support (OS 5/OS 6).
Outcomes
The composite primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who progressed to high-flow oxygen or non-invasive ventilation (OS 6), invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OS 7), or death (OS 8) by day 28, in participants treated with baricitinib plus SOC compared to placebo plus SOC. The analysis of the primary endpoint does not differentiate outcomes subsequent to the progression. All deaths were assessed in a separate, key secondary endpoint of 28-day all-cause mortality. The primary objective was assessed in: Population 1 – all randomized participants, and; Population 2 – subpopulation of participants who, at baseline required oxygen supplementation and were not receiving systemic corticosteroids for COVID-19.
Key secondary outcomes were adjusted for multiplicity and included the following (evaluated at days 1-28, unless otherwise specified): all-cause mortality, proportion of participants with ≥1-point improvement on NIAID-OS or discharge from hospital at days 4, 7, 10, and 14; number of ventilator-free days; time to recovery (NIAID-OS 1-3); overall improvement on the NIAID-OS evaluated at days 4, 7, 10, and 14; duration of hospitalization; proportion of participants with a change in oxygen saturation from <94% to ≥94% from baseline to days 4, 7, 10, and 14. Pre-specified secondary outcomes and select exploratory outcomes are described in the Supplementary Appendix. Adverse events were recorded days 1-28, coded by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (version 23.1).
Statistical Analyses
Power was calculated for the primary endpoint to succeed in ≥1 of the two primary populations, and the study was designed for the possibility of the sample size to be increased using an unblinded sample size re-estimation22 of the primary endpoint, as assessed during an interim analysis evaluated by external DMC (January 2021). The primary and secondary endpoints were analyzed according to the pre-specified analysis plan. In order to control the overall family-wise Type l error rate at a 2-sided alpha level of 0.05, a graphical testing procedure was used to test the primary and key secondary endpoints. Since the primary endpoint was not met (Table 2 and Figure S2), this manuscript reports nominal p-values for key secondary endpoints. Other analyses did not control for multiple comparisons.
Efficacy data were analyzed with the intent-to-treat population, defined as all randomized participants. Logistic regression was used for dichotomous endpoints, proportional odds model was used for ordinal endpoints, analysis of variance model was used for continuous endpoints, and mixed-effects model of repeated measure was used to assess continuous endpoints over time. Log-rank test and hazard ratio (HR) from Cox proportional hazard model were used for time-to-event analyses. These statistical models were adjusted for treatment and baseline stratification factors. Safety analyses included all randomized participants who received ≥1 dose of study drug and who did not discontinue the study for the reason of ‘lost to follow-up’ at the first post-baseline visit. Adverse events were inclusive of the 28-day treatment period. Statistical tests of treatment effects were performed at a 2-sided significance level of 0.05, unless otherwise stated (ie, graphical multiple testing strategy). Statistical analyses were performed using SAS® Version 9.4 or higher or R. Further details are described in the Supplementary Methods.
RESULTS
Participants
Between June 11, 2020 and January 15, 2021, 1525 participants were randomly assigned to receive once-daily placebo plus SOC (N=761) or baricitinib 4-mg plus SOC (N=764); 83.1% of participants completed the 28-day treatment period (Figure 1). Of the 16.9% whom discontinued from the treatment period, 62.6% of discontinuations were due to death. No randomized participants were excluded from the intent-to-treat population; however, some participants were excluded from specific analyses due to the various information requirements of the different statistical methods as outlined in Table S2.
Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were balanced among treatment groups. The mean age of the participants was 57.6 years (SD 14.1), 63.1% were male, and enrollment was global (Table 1). Countries contributing >10% of enrollment included Brazil (21%), United States (21%), Mexico (18.4%), and Argentina (13.6%); participants were also enrolled in Europe, India, Japan, Korea and Russia. Overall, 61.6% of participants were white, 11.7% were Asian, and 5.0% were black or African American (with 10.3% of US participants of black or African American race). The majority (83.3%) of participants had symptoms ≥7 days prior to enrollment. Clinical status at baseline was OS 4 for 12.3%, OS 5 for 63.4% and OS 6 for 24.4% of participants. At baseline, the majority (79.3%) of participants received systemic corticosteroids, of which 91.3% received dexamethasone; 18.9% of participants received remdesivir (Table 1, Table S3). Of the participants that received remdesivir, 91.6% also received corticosteroids. The majority of participants (99.7%) had ≥1 pre-existing comorbid condition. Select baseline demographics and clinical characteristics by baseline systemic corticosteroid use are described in Table S4.
Primary Endpoint
The composite primary endpoint of the proportion who progressed by day 28 was not statistically significant for participants treated with baricitinib versus placebo in Population 1 (27.8% vs 30.5%; odds ratio [OR] vs placebo 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.08; p=0.18) or Population 2 (28.9% vs 27.1%; OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.58-2.16; p=0.73) (Table 2). The primary endpoint by the pre-specified baseline subgroups NIAID-OS and region are described in Tables S5 and S6, respectively. Approximately 3% fewer participants progressed compared to placebo; this trend was observed in the overall population and across all OS subgroups at baseline.
Key Secondary Endpoint – All-cause Mortality
Treatment with baricitinib reduced deaths, as measured by the key secondary endpoint of 28-day all cause-mortality. Mortality was 8.1% in the baricitinib group and 13.1% in the placebo group, corresponding to a 38.2% mortality reduction (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41-0.78; nominal p=0.002); overall, 1 additional death was prevented per 20 baricitinib-treated participants (Table 2, Figure 2A, Figure 3). A 64.6% reduction in mortality was observed for Population 2 (5.2% baricitinib, 14.7% placebo; HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.88; nominal p=0.030) (Figure 2B, Figure 3). A numerical reduction in mortality with baricitinib compared with placebo was observed for pre-specified baseline severity subgroups, including OS 4 (1.1% vs 4.1%; HR 0.24, 95% CI 0-2.18; nominal p=0.23) and OS 5 (5.9% vs 8.7%; HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.45-1.16; nominal p=0.11) (Figure 2C, Figure 3). A significant reduction in mortality was observed for baseline severity subgroup OS 6 with baricitinib compared with placebo (17.5% vs 29.4%; HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33-0.80; nominal p=0.007) (Figure 2D, Figure 3); in this subgroup,1 additional death was prevented per 9 baricitinib-treated participants. A significant reduction in mortality was observed with baricitinib compared with placebo for the pre-specified subgroups of participants treated at baseline with systemic corticosteroids (9.3% vs 13.9%; HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45-0.89; nominal p=0.017), without systemic corticosteroids (3.3% vs 11.0%; HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10-0.77; nominal p=0.011), or without remdesivir (8.0% vs 13.8%; HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36-0.74; nominal p=0.001); for the 18.9% of participants with concomitant remdesivir treatment at baseline (91.6% also with corticosteroids) a numerical reduction in mortality was observed (Figure 2E-F, Figure S3, Figure 3). A numerical reduction in mortality was observed regardless of region for baricitinib compared with placebo (Figure 3, Table S7). Participant NIAID-OS status in the overall population at day 28 is shown in Figure 2G. Other secondary endpoints and the exploratory objective of pharmacokinetics are further described in the Supplementary Results, Table S8, and Figures S4, and S5.
Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality in the overall population, Population 2, by baseline NIAID-OS and by baseline systemic corticosteroid use, and distribution of NIAID-OS status over time.
For time-to-event endpoints, the p-value was calculated using an unstratified log-rank test. The HR with 95% CI was calculated using a Cox proportional hazards model. p-values are for comparisons of baricitinib 4-mg with placebo. For panels A-F, the number at risk at day 27 represent the number of participants with available data at day 28. Distribution of NIAID-OS status over time was analyzed in the intent-to-treat population with baseline OS and at least one post-baseline OS using last observation carried forward. CI=confidence interval. HR=hazard ratio. NIAID-OS=National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease Ordinal Scale. OS=ordinal scale. OS score of 5=hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen. OS score of 6=hospitalized, receiving high-flow oxygen devices or non-invasive ventilation.
The HR with 95% CI was calculated using a Cox proportional hazards model. CI=confidence interval. HR=hazard ratio. NIAID-OS=National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease Ordinal Scale.
Safety
The proportion of participants with ≥1 treatment-emergent AE (TEAE) was 44.5% in the baricitinib group and 44.4% in the placebo group; for SAEs, these proportions were 14.7% and 18%, respectively (Table 3). The most common SAEs are described in Table S9. The frequency of deaths reported as due to AE (1.6% vs 4.1%) and discontinuation of study treatment due to AE (7.5% vs 9.3%) were numerically lower with baricitinib versus placebo. Serious infections were reported for 8.5% of baricitinib-treated participants and 9.8% of placebo-treated participants (Table 3); among participants using corticosteroids at baseline, serious infections were similar between groups (9.6% vs 10.7%, respectively) (Table S10). There was a similar distribution of positively adjudicated VTEs (2.7% vs 2.5%) and major adverse cardiovascular events (1.1 % vs 1.2%,) with baricitinib and placebo groups, respectively. There were no reports of gastrointestinal perforations (Table 3). Safety data are described further in Tables 3, S10, and the Supplementary Results.
DISCUSSION
This international, multi-center study found no significant difference between baricitinib plus SOC and placebo plus SOC in the composite endpoint of disease progression. However, in a pre-specified key secondary endpoint, treatment with baricitinib reduced 28-day all-cause mortality by 38.2%, compared to placebo (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41-0.78; nominal p=0.002). In the overall population, the number needed to treat (NNT) with baricitinib to prevent 1 additional death was 20. Mortality reduction was also observed with baricitinib across baseline corticosteroid use and OS subgroups; in the OS 6 subgroup, the NNT with baricitinib to prevent 1 additional death was 9.
During the COV-BARRIER study, SOC changed significantly to include routine use of corticosteroids and guidelines23,24 were updated following the disclosure of results from the open-label RECOVERY trial in June, 2020, in which dexamethasone showed a 10.9% relative reduction in mortality compared to SOC (22.9% vs 25.7%; age-adjusted rate ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.75-0.93; p<.001).7 The evaluation of tocilizumab (anti-IL-6) in RECOVERY showed a 12.1% relative risk reduction in 28-day mortality (29% vs 33% SOC; HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.96; p=.007).8 In ACTT-2, the 28-day mortality for baricitinib plus remdesivir was 5.1% and 7.8% for remdesivir alone; the study was not powered to detect a mortality difference between the groups.6 In COV-BARRIER, baricitinib plus SOC showed a 38.2% relative reduction in mortality compared to SOC including dexamethasone (8.1% vs 13.1%; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41-0.78; nominal p=0.002). To our knowledge, baricitinib shows the largest effect size on mortality for any COVID-19 treatment when compared to other randomized trials in hospitalized patients.5-8
The frequency of TEAEs, SAEs, infections, and VTEs were similar across the baricitinib and placebo groups and no new safety signals were detected in the acute care setting.
COV-BARRIER is the first multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate the potential benefit and safety of baricitinib plus SOC, including systemic corticosteroids and remdesivir, for the treatment of hospitalized adults with COVID-19. This study addresses an important knowledge gap related to the optimization of the treatment strategies for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The enrollment timeline of COV-BARRIER is also relevant considering the complexity of evolving SOC, and heterogeneity of treatments across different geographies. All-cause mortality is the most relevant outcome in trials of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, and baricitinib plus SOC showed a meaningful reduction in mortality compared to placebo plus SOC, most notably for participants receiving high-flow oxygen or non-invasive ventilation.
Limitations of this study may have included the choice of disease progression, as measured by clinical status including oxygen support levels, as the primary outcome. Measuring progression based on the NIAID-OS reflects treatment decisions and may be influenced by the heterogeneity of clinical practice across different geographies. Baricitinib showed a consistent reduction in progression versus placebo in the three components of the composite primary endpoint, however, the difference did not reach statistical significance. In contrast, mortality is an objective and definitive patient outcome that does not change across geographies. Baricitinib may prevent mortality without reaching significance on the primary endpoint because mortality as an outcome integrates the multi-organ effects of COVID-19, which include but are not limited to pulmonary effects. Baricitinib’s anti-inflammatory effects impact all organ systems, not only pulmonary function.18 Longer-term efficacy and safety data will be evaluated in the ongoing COV-BARRIER study.25
The COV-BARRIER trial did not demonstrate a reduction in COVID-19 progression versus SOC using a composite endpoint. However, the secondary endpoint of 28-day all-cause mortality was significantly improved in participants randomized to baricitinib plus SOC as demonstrated by its efficacy in preventing 1 additional death for every 20 participants treated when compared to placebo plus SOC. The 38.2% reduction in all-cause mortality was observed in the entire study population and was consistent across pre-specified sub-groups of baseline disease severity and geography, with a similar safety profile observed with baricitinib compared to SOC in hospitalized COVID-19 participants. These results suggest that baricitinib further reduces mortality beyond current SOC and can be a treatment option in the context of the global burden of mortality observed during this COVID-19 pandemic.
Data Availability
Eli Lilly and Company provides access to all individual participant data collected during the trial, after anonymization, with the exception of pharmacokinetic or genetic data. Data are available to request 6 months after the indication studied has been approved in the US and EU and after the trial is completed, whichever is later. No expiration date of data requests is currently set once data are made available. Access is provided after a proposal has been approved by an independent review committee identified for this purpose and after receipt of a signed data sharing agreement. Data and documents, including the study protocol, statistical analysis plan, clinical study report, blank or annotated case report forms, will be provided in a secure data sharing environment. For details on submitting a request, see the instructions provided at www.vivli.org.
Data sharing statement
Eli Lilly and Company provides access to all individual participant data collected during the trial, after anonymization, with the exception of pharmacokinetic or genetic data. Data are available to request 6 months after the indication studied has been approved in the US and EU and after the trial is completed, whichever is later. No expiration date of data requests is currently set once data are made available. Access is provided after a proposal has been approved by an independent review committee identified for this purpose and after receipt of a signed data sharing agreement. Data and documents, including the study protocol, statistical analysis plan, clinical study report, blank or annotated case report forms, will be provided in a secure data sharing environment. For details on submitting a request, see the instructions provided at www.vivli.org.
Contributors
COV-BARRIER was designed jointly by consultant experts and representatives of the sponsor, Eli Lilly and Company. Data were collected by investigators and analyzed by the sponsor. All authors participated in data analysis and interpretation, draft and final manuscript review, and provided critical comment, including the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The authors had full access to the data and verified the veracity, accuracy, and completeness of the data and analyses as well as the fidelity of this report to the protocol.
Declaration of Interests
VCM received research grants from CDC, Gilead Sciences, NIH, VA, and ViiV, received honoraria from Eli Lilly and Company, served as an advisory board member for Eli Lilly and Company and Novartis and participated as a study section chair for the NIH. AVR received research grants from Eli Lilly and Company, served as a speaker and/or consultant for AbbVie, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sobi and UCB. SB, CEK, VK, RL AC, SC, BC, PR, XZ and DHA are employees and shareholders of Eli Lilly and Company. JDG received research support from Eli Lilly and Company, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Gilead Sciences, grants from Eurofins Viracor, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (administered by Merck), speaker fees from Gilead Sciences, Mylan Pharmaceuticals and advisory board fees from Gilead Sciences. RDP has no conflicts to disclose. JAA served as a speaker and scientific advisor for Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly and Company, Foundation Medicine, Novartis, MSD, Roche and Takeda. VE received a research grant from Eli Lilly and Company. MS received research grants from Eli Lilly and Company, NIAID, Novartis and served as a board member for NBOME, Osteopathic Founders Foundation and COGMED. EWE received research grants from CDC, NIH and VA, and served as an unpaid consultant for Eli Lilly and Company.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the participants and study investigators and staff, including the COV-BARRIER Study Group (see Supplementary Appendix) who participated in the study, and the following colleagues from Eli Lilly and Company: Douglas Schlichting, PhD (formerly with Lilly) and Maher Issa, MS, Jennifer L. Milata, PhD, Theodore Spiro, MD, and Zhongkai Wang, PhD, for scientific input, Nicole Byers, PhD for medical writing support and manuscript preparation, and Roisin McCarthy, PhD for assisting with manuscript process support.
Footnotes
↵* A complete list of members of the COV-BARRIER Study Group is provided in the Supplementary Appendix.
