Pharmacotherapeutic group: paramagnetic contrast media, ATC code: V08CA12.
Gadopiclenol is a paramagnetic agent for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI).
Mechanism of action
The contrast-enhancing effect is mediated by gadopiclenol which is a macrocyclic non-ionic complex of gadolinium, the active moiety which enhances the relaxation rates of water protons in its vicinity in the body, leading to an increase in signal intensity (brightness) of tissues.
When placed in a magnetic field (patient in MRI machine), gadopiclenol shortens the T1 and T2 relaxation times in targeted tissues. The extent to which a contrast agent can affect the relaxation rate of tissue water (1/T1 or 1/T2) is termed relaxivity (r1 or r2).
Gadopiclenol presents a high relaxivity in water (see Table 3) due to its chemical structure, because it can exchange two water molecules, which are linked to the gadolinium to complete its coordination number in addition to the four nitrogens and the three oxygens of the carboxylate functions of the gadopiclenol chelate. This explains that, gadopiclenol given at half dose of gadolinium compared to other non-specific gadolinium-containing contrast agents, may provide the same contrast enhancement.
Table 3: Relaxivity at 37 °C for gadopiclenol
| | r1 (mmol-1.l.s-1) | r2 (mmol-1.l.s-1) |
| Magnetic field | 0.47 T | 1.5 T | 3 T | 0.47 T | 1.5 T | 3 T |
| Relaxivity in water | 12.5 | 12.2 | 11.3 | 14.6 | 15.0 | 13.5 |
| Relaxivity in biological medium | 13.2 | 12.8 | 11.6 | 15.1 | 15.1 | 14.7 |
Clinical efficacy and safety
Two pivotal studies included adult patients undergoing MRI with gadopiclenol at 0.1 mL/kg BW (equivalent to 0.05 mmol/kg BW) and MRI with gadobutrol at 0.1 mL/kg BW (equivalent to 0.1 mmol/kg BW). One study (Study GDX-44-010; PICTURE) included 256 patients presenting with known or highly suspected CNS lesions with focal areas of disrupted BBB (e.g. primary and secondary tumors). The majority of patients (72%) presented with brain tumors, 20% had brain or spine metastases and 8% presented with other pathologies.
The other study (Study GDX-44-011; PROMISE) included 304 patients with known or suspected abnormalities or lesions in other body regions (8% in head and neck, 28% in thorax, 35% in abdomen, 22% in pelvis and 7% in musculo-skeletal system) both based on results of a previous imaging procedure such as CT or MRI. The most frequent pathologies were breast tumors (23%) and liver tumors (21%).
The primary endpoint was the evaluation of lesion visualization, based on 3 co-criteria (border delineation, internal morphology and degree of contrast enhancement) by three independent blinded readers, using a 4-point scale. The mean of scores for each of the 3 lesion visualization co-criteria was calculated as the sum of scores for up to 3 most representative lesions divided by the number of lesions.
Both studies demonstrated:
- Superiority of the combined unenhanced/contrast-enhanced MRI (Paired) with gadopiclenol over unenhanced MRI (Pre) for all 3 lesion visualization criteria (p < 0.0001 for all three readers, paired t-tests on matching lesions).
- Non-inferiority of gadopiclenol at 0.1 mL/kg BW (equivalent to 0.05 mmol/kg BW) to gadobutrol at 0.1 mL/kg BW (equivalent to 0.1 mmol/kg BW) (p < 0.0001 for all three readers, paired t-tests on matching lesions).
The pooled analysis of the primary outcome over the three readers, and for each lesion visualization criterion also demonstrated the non-inferiority of gadopiclenol at 0.05 mmol/kg to gadobutrol at 0.1 mmol/kg in both studies, as shown in table 4 below.
Table 4: Lesion visualization – Off-site readings – Full analysis set
| | n patients | LS Mean (SE) | 95% CI difference | p-value |
| Gadopiclenol | Gadobutrol | Difference |
| Study GDX-44-010 (PICTURE) |
| Border delineation | 239 | 3.83 ( 0.02) | 3.82 ( 0.02) | 0.01 ( 0.02) | [ -0.02 ; 0.05] | 0.5025 |
| Internal morphology | 239 | 3.83 ( 0.02) | 3.81 ( 0.02) | 0.02 ( 0.02) | [ -0.01 ; 0.05] | 0.2006 |
| Degree of contrast enhancement | 239 | 3.73 ( 0.03) | 3.68 ( 0.03) | 0.05 ( 0.02) | [ 0.01 ; 0.09] | 0.0172 |
| Study GDX-44-011 (PROMISE) |
| Border delineation | 273 | 3.60 ( 0.03) | 3.60 ( 0.03) | -0.00 ( 0.02) | [ -0.05 ; 0.04] | 0.8987 |
| Internal morphology | 273 | 3.75 ( 0.02) | 3.76 ( 0.02) | -0.01 ( 0.02) | [ -0.05 ; 0.03] | 0.6822 |
| Degree of contrast enhancement | 273 | 3.30 ( 0.04) | 3.29 ( 0.04) | 0.01 ( 0.03) | [ -0.05 ; 0.07] | 0.8546 |
| CI: Confidence Interval ; LS: Least Squares ; SE: Standard Error. |
The secondary criteria evaluated included quantitative evaluations (Contrast to Noise Ratio, Lesion to Brain (background) Ratio and percentage of lesion enhancement), overall diagnostic preference and impact on patient management.
In Study GDX-44-010, Lesion to Brain Ratio, and percentage of lesion enhancement were statistically significantly higher with gadopiclenol at 0.1 mL/kg BW (equivalent to 0.05 mmol/kg BW) compared to gadobutrol at 0.1 mL/kg BW (equivalent to 0.1 mmol/kg BW) for all 3 readers. Contrast to Noise Ratio was statistically significantly higher for 2 readers. In Study GDX-44-011, percentage of lesion enhancement was significantly higher for with gadopiclenol at 0.1 mL/kg BW (equivalent to 0.05 mmol/kg BW) compared to gadobutrol at 0.1 mL/kg BW (equivalent to 0.1 mmol/kg BW) and no statistically significant difference was observed for Lesion to Background Ratio.
Lesion visualisation parameters (e.g., co-primary endpoints and quantitative assessments, such as, Contrast to Noise Ratio, Lesion to Brain (background) Ratio and percentage of lesion enhancement) were assessed in all the lesions identified by the blinded readers, independently of their size, in more than 86% of patients in CNS study and in more than 81% of patients in Body study, who had no more than 3 lesions. In the remaining patients with more than 3 lesions visible, a subset of 3 most representative lesions were selected for assessment of the co-primary endpoints. Therefore, in those patients, the additional lesions were not assessed. Consequently, the technical capability of lesion visualisation for both contrast agents cannot be extrapolated for those non-selected lesions.
The overall diagnostic preference was assessed in a global matched-pairs fashion (reading of images from both MRI assessed side by side) by three additional blinded readers in each study. The results are summarized in the Table 5 below. In Study GDX-44-010, in majority, the readers expressed a preference for images acquired with gadopiclenol. In Study GDX-44-011, in majority, the readers expressed no diagnostic preference between images acquired with gadopiclenol and with gadobutrol.
Table 5: Results on overall diagnostic preference for Study GDX-44-010 (CNS) and Study GDX-44-011 (Body)
| | Reader | N | gadopiclenol preferred | No preference | gadobutrol preferred | p- value* |
| Study GDX-44-010 (CNS) | 4 | 241 | 108 (44.8 %) | 98 (40.7 %) | 35 (14.5 %) | < 0.0001 |
| | 5 | 241 | 131 (54.4 %) | 52 (21.6 %) | 58 (24.1 %) | < 0.0001 |
| | 6 | 241 | 138 (57.3 %) | 56 (23.2 %) | 47 (19.5 %) | < 0.0001 |
| Study GDX-44-011 (Body) | 4 | 276 | 36 (13.0 %) | 216 (78.3 %) | 24 (8.7 %) | 0.1223 |
| | 5 | 276 | 40 (14.5 %) | 206 (74.6 %) | 30 (10.9 %) | 0.2346 |
| | 6 | 276 | 33 (12.0 %) | 228 (82.6 %) | 15 (5.4 %) | 0.0079 |
* Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
A change in patient treatment plan was reported after administration of gadopiclenol at 0.1 mL/kg BW (equivalent to 0.05 mmol/kg BW) in 23.3 % and 30.1 % of patients in Study GDX-44-010 and Study GDX-44-011, respectively. Analysis per subgroups in Study GDX-44-010 revealed that treatment plan could be changed for 64 % of the 22 patients for whom the investigator considered that diagnosis was not assessable (or grade of glial tumor could not be determined) based on unenhanced MRI, 28 % of 81 patients with malignant diagnosis and about 12 % of 111 patients with non-malignant diagnosis.
In Study GDX-44-011, treatment plan could be changed after MRI with gadopiclenol for 41 % of the 22 patients with non-assessable diagnosis based on unenhanced MRI, 32 % of 165 patients with malignant diagnosis and 14 % of 64 patients with non-malignant diagnosis.
A post-hoc reading of all images from both pivotal studies for CNS and Body indications was conducted in a fully blinded, unpaired, randomised manner. A high level of concordance in lesion detectability between gadopiclenol at 0.05 mmol/kg and gadobutrol at 0.1 mmol/kg was observed at lesion and at patient level. The results are summarized in Table 6 below.
Table 6: Concordance in lesion detectability between gadopiclenol at 0.05 mmol/kg and gadobutrol at 0.1 mmol/kg
| | Perfect match at lesion level* | Perfect match at patient level* |
| Study GDX-44-010 (CNS) | 88.0% to 89.8% | 84.3% to 86.0% |
| Study GDX-44-011 (Body) overall | 92.3% to 95.5% | 81.3% to 85.0% |
| Head & Neck | 89.5% to 100% | 70.6% to 94.1% |
| Thorax | 88.3% to 93.2% | 69.8% to 73.2% |
| Pelvis | 91.7% to 100% | 87.5% to 94.6% |
| Abdomen | 94.6% to 95.2% | 84.0% to 87.2% |
| Musculoskeletal | 100% | 100% |
*Range of values according to the reader (3 readers per region)
Paediatric population
Two studies (Study GDX-44-007 and GDX-44-015) included 80 paediatric patients aged 2 to 17 years old and 36 neonates and infants less than 2 years old, who were administered a single dose of gadopiclenol (0.1 mL/kg BW, equivalent to 0.05 mmol/kg BW). Pre- and post-contrast-enhanced images were assessed for 78 patients undergoing MRI for CNS imaging, 34 patients for body imaging and 3 for blood vessels imaging.
Diagnostic efficacy was evaluated and there was no difference among the paediatric age groups.