Background

Arhalofenate acid, the active acid form of arhalofenate, is a non-agonist peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ) ligand, with uricosuric activity via URAT1 inhibition. Phase II studies revealed decreased acute arthritis flares in arhalofenate-treated gout compared with allopurinol alone. Hence, we investigated the anti-inflammatory effects and mechanisms of arhalofenate and its active acid form for responses to monosodium urate (MSU) crystals.

Methods

We assessed in-vivo responses to MSU crystals in murine subcutaneous air pouches and in-vitro responses in murine bone marrow-derived macrophages (BMDMs) by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), SDS-PAGE/Western blot, immunostaining, and transmission electron microscopy analyses.

Results

Oral administration of arhalofenate (250 mg/kg) blunted total leukocyte ingress, neutrophil influx, and air pouch fluid interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, and CXCL1 in response to MSU crystal injection (p < 0.05 for each). Arhalofenate acid (100 μM) attenuated MSU crystal-induced IL-1β production in BMDMs via inhibition of NLRP3 inflammasome activation. In addition, arhalofenate acid dose-dependently increased activation (as assessed by phosphorylation) of AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK). Studying AMPKα1 knockout mice, we elucidated that AMPK mediated the anti-inflammatory effects of arhalofenate acid. Moreover, arhalofenate acid attenuated the capacity of MSU crystals to suppress AMPK activity, regulated expression of multiple downstream AMPK targets that modulate mitochondrial function and oxidative stress, preserved intact mitochondrial cristae and volume density, and promoted anti-inflammatory autophagy flux in BMDMs.

Conclusions

Arhalofenate acid is anti-inflammatory and acts via AMPK activation and its downstream signaling in macrophages. These effects likely contribute to a reduction of gout flares.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pruritus is a debilitating symptom for many people living with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). In studies with seladelpar, a selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-delta agonist, patients with PBC experienced significant improvement in pruritus and reduction of serum bile acids. Interleukin-31 (IL-31) is a cytokine known to mediate pruritus, and blocking IL-31 signaling provides relief in pruritic skin diseases. This study examined the connection between seladelpars antipruritic effects and IL-31 and bile acid levels in patients with PBC. APPROACH AND RESULTS: IL-31 levels were quantified in serum samples from the ENHANCE study of patients with PBC receiving daily oral doses of placebo (n = 55), seladelpar 5 mg (n = 53) or 10 mg (n = 53) for 3 months, and for healthy volunteers (n = 55). IL-31 levels were compared with pruritus using a numerical rating scale (NRS, 0-10) and with bile acid levels. Baseline IL-31 levels closely correlated with pruritus NRS ( r = 0.54, p < 0.0001), and total ( r = 0.54, p < 0.0001) and conjugated bile acids (up to 0.64, p < 0.0001). Decreases in IL-31 were observed with seladelpar 5 mg (-30%, p = 0.0003) and 10 mg (-52%, p < 0.0001) versus placebo (+31%). Patients with clinically meaningful improvement in pruritus (NRS ≥ 2 decrease) demonstrated greater dose-dependent reductions in IL-31 compared to those without pruritus improvement (NRS < 2 decrease). Strong correlations were observed for the changes between levels of IL-31 and total bile acids ( r = 0.63, p < 0.0001) in the seladelpar 10 mg group. CONCLUSIONS: Seladelpar decreased serum IL-31 and bile acids in patients with PBC. The reductions of IL-31 and bile acids correlated closely with each other and pruritus improvement, suggesting a mechanism to explain seladelpars antipruritic effects.

Background and aims

ENHANCE was a phase 3 study that evaluated efficacy and safety of seladelpar, a selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-δ (PPAR) agonist, versus placebo in patients with primary biliary cholangitis with inadequate response or intolerance to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA).

Approach and results

Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to oral seladelpar 5 mg (n=89), 10 mg (n=89), placebo (n=87) daily (with UDCA, as appropriate). Primary end point was a composite biochemical response [alkaline phosphatase (ALP) < 1.67×upper limit of normal (ULN), ≥15% ALP decrease from baseline, and total bilirubin ≤ ULN] at month 12. Key secondary end points were ALP normalization at month 12 and change in pruritus numerical rating scale (NRS) at month 6 in patients with baseline score ≥4. Aminotransferases were assessed. ENHANCE was terminated early following an erroneous safety signal in a concurrent, NASH trial. While blinded, primary and secondary efficacy end points were amended to month 3. Significantly more patients receiving seladelpar met the primary end point (seladelpar 5 mg: 57.1%, 10 mg: 78.2%) versus placebo (12.5%) ( p < 0.0001). ALP normalization occurred in 5.4% ( p =0.08) and 27.3% ( p < 0.0001) of patients receiving 5 and 10 mg seladelpar, respectively, versus 0% receiving placebo. Seladelpar 10 mg significantly reduced mean pruritus NRS versus placebo [10 mg: -3.14 ( p =0.02); placebo: -1.55]. Alanine aminotransferase decreased significantly with seladelpar versus placebo [5 mg: 23.4% ( p =0.0008); 10 mg: 16.7% ( p =0.03); placebo: 4%]. There were no serious treatment-related adverse events.

Conclusions

Patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) with inadequate response or intolerance to UDCA who were treated with seladelpar 10 mg had significant improvements in liver biochemistry and pruritus. Seladelpar appeared safe and well tolerated.