Pharmacotherapeutic group: Antivirals for systemic use, other anti-virals. ATC code: J05AX25.
Mechanism of action
Baloxavir marboxil is a prodrug that is converted by hydrolysis to baloxavir, the active form that exerts anti-influenza activity. Baloxavir acts on the cap-dependent endonuclease (CEN), an influenza virus-specific enzyme in the polymerase acidic (PA) subunit of the viral RNA polymerase complex and thereby inhibits the transcription of influenza virus genomes resulting in inhibition of influenza virus replication.
In vitro activity
The 50 % inhibition concentration (IC50) of baloxavir was 1.4 to 3.1 nmol/L for influenza A viruses and 4.5 to 8.9 nmol/L for influenza B viruses in an enzyme inhibition assay.
In a MDCK cell culture assay, the median 50 % effective concentration (EC50) values of baloxavir were 0.73 nmol/L (n=31; range: 0.20-1.85 nmol/L) for subtype A/H1N1 strains, 0.83 nmol/L (n=33; range: 0.35‑2.63 nmol/L) for subtype A/H3N2 strains, and 5.97 nmol/L (n=30; range: 2.67‑14.23 nmol/L) for type B strains.
In a MDCK cell-based virus titre reduction assay, the 90 % effective concentration (EC90) values of baloxavir were in the range of 0.46 to 0.98 nmol/L for subtype A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 viruses, 0.80 to 3.16 nmol/L for avian subtype A/H5N1 and A/H7N9 viruses, and 2.21 to 6.48 nmol/L for type B viruses.
Resistance
Viruses bearing PA/I38T/F/M/N/S mutations or the PA/T20K mutation selected in vitro or in clinical studies show reduced susceptibility to baloxavir. PA/I38T/F/M/N/S mutations led to an increase in EC50 values ranging from 11 to 57‑fold for influenza A viruses and 2 to 8‑fold for influenza B viruses. The PA/T20K mutation led to a 7‑fold increase in the EC50 value for influenza B virus.
In the four phase 3 studies of treatment of uncomplicated influenza (see below) no resistance to baloxavir was detected in baseline isolates. In the two adult and adolescent studies, treatment-emergent mutations PA/I38T/M/N were detected in 36/370 (9.7 %) and in 15/290 (5.2 %) patients treated with baloxavir marboxil but were not detected in any patients treated with placebo.
In the phase 3 study in paediatric patients aged 1 to < 12 years (Ministone‑2 (CP40563)), treatment-emergent mutations PA/I38T/M/S were found in 11 of 57 (19.3 %) influenza-infected subjects in the baloxavir marboxil treatment group.
In the phase 3 study in paediatric patients aged < 1 year (Ministone-1 (CP40559)), PA/I38T and PA/T20K were detected in 2 of 13 (15.4 %) influenza‑infected subjects treated with baloxavir marboxil.
In the phase 3 study of post-exposure prophylaxis (see below), PA/I38T/M were found in 10 of 374 (2.7 %) baloxavir marboxil‑treated subjects. PA/I38 substitutions were not detected in placebo‑treated subjects, with the exception of 2 subjects who received baloxavir marboxil as rescue medication.
Baloxavir is active in vitro against influenza viruses that are considered resistant to neuraminidase inhibitors, including strains with the following mutations: H274Y in A/H1N1, E119V and R292K in A/H3N2, R152K and D198E in type B virus, H274Y in A/H5N1, R292K in A/H7N9.
Clinical trials
Treatment of uncomplicated influenza
Adult and adolescent patients
Capstone 1 (1601T0831), was a phase 3 randomised, double‑blind, multicentre study conducted in Japan and the US to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single oral tablet dose of baloxavir marboxil compared with placebo and with oseltamivir in healthy adult and adolescent patients (aged ≥ 12 years to ≤ 64 years) with uncomplicated influenza. Patients were randomised to receive baloxavir marboxil (patients who weighed 40 to < 80 kg received 40 mg and patients who weighed ≥ 80 kg received 80 mg), oseltamivir 75 mg twice daily for 5 days (only if aged ≥ 20 years) or placebo. Dosing occurred within 48 hours of first onset of symptoms.
A total of 1436 patients (of which 118 were aged ≥ 12 years to ≤ 17 years) were enrolled in the 2016-2017 Northern Hemisphere influenza season. The predominant influenza virus strain in this study was the A/H3 subtype (84.8 % to 88.1 %) followed by the B type (8.3 % to 9.0 %) and the A/H1N1pdm subtype (0.5 % to 3.0 %). The primary efficacy endpoint was time to alleviation of symptoms (cough, sore throat, headache, nasal congestion, feverishness or chills, muscle or joint pain, and fatigue) (TTAS). Baloxavir marboxil elicited a statistically significant reduction in TTAS when compared with placebo (Table 4).
Table 4. Capstone 1: Time to alleviation of symptoms (baloxavir marboxil vs placebo), ITTI population*
| Time to alleviation of symptoms (Median [hours]) |
| Baloxavir marboxil 40/80 mg (95 % CI) N=455 | Placebo (95 % CI) N=230 | Difference between Baloxavir marboxil and placebo (95 % CI for difference) | P-value |
| 53.7 (49.5, 58.5) | 80.2 (72.6, 87.1) | ‑26.5 (−35.8, −17.8) | < 0.0001 |
| CI: Confidence interval *ITTI: The Intention-to-treat Infected population consisted of patients who received the study medicine with a confirmed diagnosis of influenza. Confirmation of influenza was based on the results of RT-PCR on Day 1. |
When the baloxavir marboxil group was compared to the oseltamivir group, there was no statistically significant difference in TTAS (53.5 h vs 53.8 h, respectively).
The median (95 % CI) TTAS was 49.3 (44.0, 53.1) and 82.1 (69.5, 92.9) hours for patients who were symptomatic for > 0 to ≤ 24 hours, and 66.2 (54.4, 74.7) and 79.4 (69.0, 91.1) hours for patients who were symptomatic for > 24 to ≤ 48 hours for baloxavir marboxil and placebo, respectively.
The median time to resolution of fever in patients treated with baloxavir marboxil was 24.5 hours (95 % CI: 22.6, 26.6) compared with 42.0 hours (95 % CI: 37.4, 44.6) in those receiving placebo. No difference was noted in duration of fever in the baloxavir marboxil group compared with the oseltamivir group.
Capstone 2 (1602T0832) was a phase 3 randomised, double‑blind, multicentre study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single oral tablet dose of baloxavir marboxil compared with placebo and with oseltamivir in adult and adolescent patients (aged ≥ 12 years) with uncomplicated influenza who had at least one host factor predisposing to the development of complications. Patients were randomised to receive a single oral dose of baloxavir marboxil (according to weight as in Capstone 1), oseltamivir 75 mg twice daily for 5 days, or placebo. Dosing occurred within 48 hours of first onset of symptoms.
Of the total 2184 patients 59 were aged ≥ 12 to ≤ 17 years, 446 were aged ≥ 65 to ≤ 74 years, 142 were aged ≥ 75 to ≤ 84 years and 14 were aged ≥ 85 years. The predominant influenza viruses in this study were the A/H3 subtype (46.9 % to 48.8 %) and influenza B (38.3 % to 43.5 %). The primary efficacy endpoint was time to improvement of influenza symptoms (cough, sore throat, headache, nasal congestion, feverishness or chills, muscle or joint pain, and fatigue) (TTIS). Baloxavir marboxil elicited a statistically significant reduction in TTIS when compared with placebo (Table 5).
Table 5 . Capstone 2: Time to improvement of influenza symptoms (baloxavir marboxil vs placebo), ITTI population
| Time to improvement of influenza symptoms (Median [hours]) |
| Baloxavir marboxil 40/80 mg (95 % CI) N=385 | Placebo (95 % CI) N=385 | Difference between Baloxavir marboxil and placebo (95 % CI for difference) | P-value |
| 73.2 (67.2, 85.1) | 102.3 (92.7, 113.1) | ‑29.1 (−42.8, −14.6) | < 0.0001 |
When the baloxavir marboxil group was compared to the oseltamivir group, there was no statistically significant difference in TTIS (73.2 h vs 81.0 h respectively).
The median (95 % CI) TTIS was 68.6 (62.4, 78.8) and 99.1 (79.1, 112.6) hours for patients who were symptomatic for > 0 to ≤ 24 hours and 79.4 (67.9, 96.3) and 106.7 (92.7, 125.4) hours for patients who were symptomatic for > 24 to ≤ 48 hours for baloxavir marboxil and placebo, respectively.
For patients infected with type A/H3 virus, the median TTIS was shorter in the baloxavir marboxil group compared with the placebo group but not compared with the oseltamivir group (see Table 6). In the subgroup of patients infected with type B virus, the median TTIS was shorter in the baloxavir marboxil group compared with both the placebo and oseltamivir group (see Table 6).
Table 6. Time to improvement of symptoms by influenza virus subtype, ITTI population
| Time to improvement of symptoms (Hours) Median [95 % CI] |
| Virus | Baloxavir marboxil | Placebo | Oseltamivir |
| A/H3 | 75.4 [62.4, 91.6] N=180 | 100.4 [88.4, 113.4] N=185 | 68.2 [53.9, 81.0] N=190 |
| B | 74.6 [67.4, 90.2) N=166 | 100.6 [82.8, 115.8] N=167 | 101.6 [90.5, 114.9] N=148 |
The median time to resolution of fever was 30.8 hours (95 % CI: 28.2, 35.4) in the baloxavir marboxil group compared with 50.7 hours (95 % CI: 44.6, 58.8) in the placebo group. No clear differences between the baloxavir marboxil group and the oseltamivir group were observed.
The overall incidence of influenza-related complications (death, hospitalisation, sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis, and/or pneumonia) was 2.8 % (11/388 patients) in the baloxavir marboxil group compared with 10.4 % (40/386 patients) in the placebo group. The lower overall incidence of influenza-related complications in the baloxavir marboxil group compared with the placebo group was mainly driven by lower incidences of bronchitis (1.8 % vs. 6.0 %, respectively) and sinusitis (0.3 % vs. 2.1 %, respectively).
Paediatric patients (aged 1 < 12 years)
Ministone-2 (CP40563) was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled study, designed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of a single oral dose of granules for oral suspension of baloxavir marboxil compared with oseltamivir in otherwise healthy paediatric patients (aged 1 to < 12 years) with influenza-like symptoms.
A total of 173 patients were randomised in a 2:1 ratio to receive a single oral dose of baloxavir marboxil based on body weight (2 mg/kg for patients weighing < 20 kg or 40 mg for patients weighing ≥ 20 kg) or oseltamivir (dose based on body weight) for 5 days. Patients could receive paracetamol as required. Patients with host factors predisposing to the development of complications (14 % (25/173)) were included in the study. The predominant influenza virus strain in this study was the A/H3 subtype. The primary objective was to compare the safety of a single dose of baloxavir marboxil with 5 days of oseltamivir administered twice daily. A secondary objective was to compare the efficacy of baloxavir marboxil with oseltamivir based on the efficacy endpoints including time to alleviation of influenza signs and symptoms (cough and nasal symptoms, time to return to normal health and activity and duration of fever).
Time to alleviation of influenza signs and symptoms were comparable between the baloxavir marboxil group (median 138.1 hours [95 % CI: 116.6, 163.2]) and the oseltamivir group (median 150 hours [95 % CI: 115.0, 165.7]) see Table 7.
Table 7. Time to alleviation of influenza signs and symptoms, ITTI population
| Time to alleviation of symptoms (Median [hours]) |
| Baloxavir marboxil (95 % CI) N=80 | Oseltamivir (95 % CI) N=43 |
| 138.1 (116.6, 163.2) | 150.0 (115.0, 165.7) |
The median duration of fever was comparable between the baloxavir marboxil group (41.2 hours [95 % CI: 24.5, 45.7]) and the oseltamivir group (46.8 hours [95 % CI: 30.0, 53.5]).
The overall incidence of influenza-related complications (death, hospitalisation, pneumonia, bronchitis, sinusitis, otitis media, encephalitis/encephalopathy, febrile seizures, myositis) was 7.4 % (6/81 patients) in the baloxavir marboxil group and 7 % (3/43 patients) in the oseltamivir group. The incidence of otitis media was 3.7 % (3/81 patients) in the baloxavir marboxil group and 4.7 % (2/43 patients) in the oseltamivir group. Sinusitis, pneumonia and bronchitis occurred in one patient each in the baloxavir marboxil group and febrile seizures occurred in one patient in the oseltamivir group.
Paediatric patients (aged < 1 year)
Ministone-1 (CP40559) was a multicenter, single‑arm, open label study to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of a single oral dose of baloxavir marboxil in paediatric patients (aged < 1 year) with influenza‑like symptoms. The youngest patient recruited was 3 weeks of age. Extrapolation of efficacy to < 1 year was based on exposure matching from adults and older children.
A total of 48 patients received a single oral dose of baloxavir marboxil based on body weight and age (2 mg/kg for patients ≥ 3 months (N=39), 1 mg/kg for patients ≥ 4 weeks to < 3 months (N=8) and 1 mg/kg for patients <4 weeks (N=1)). The predominant influenza virus strain in this study was the A/H3 subtype. The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and PK of a single oral dose of baloxavir marboxil. A secondary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of baloxavir marboxil based on the efficacy endpoints including time to alleviation of influenza signs and symptoms (cough and nasal symptoms, time to return to normal health and activity and duration of fever). No new safety concerns were identified.
Post‑exposure prophylaxis of influenza
Blockstone (1719T0834) was a phase 3, randomised, double‑blind, multicentre study conducted in 749 subjects in Japan to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single oral tablet dose or a single dose of granules of baloxavir marboxil compared with placebo for post‑exposure prophylaxis of influenza. Subjects were household contacts of influenza‑infected index patients.
There were 607 subjects ≥12 years, and 142 subjects 1 to < 12 years who received either baloxavir marboxil dosed according to weight as in the treatment studies or placebo. The majority of subjects (73.0 %) were enrolled within 24 hours of symptom onset in the index patient group. The predominant influenza virus strains in the index patients were the A/H3 subtype (48.6 %) and the A/H1N1pdm subtype (47.5 %) followed by influenza B (0.7 %).
The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of household subjects who were infected with influenza virus and presented with fever and at least one respiratory symptom in the period from Day 1 to Day 10.
There was a statistically significant reduction in the proportion of subjects with laboratory-confirmed clinical influenza from 13.6 % in the placebo group to 1.9 % in the baloxavir marboxil group (see Table 8).
Table 8. Proportion of subjects with influenza virus, fever, and at least one respiratory symptom (baloxavir vs placebo)
| Proportion of subjects with influenza virus, fever, and at least one respiratory symptom (%) mITT* population |
| Baloxavir marboxil (95 % CI) | Placebo (95 % CI) | Adjusted risk ratio (95 % CI) | P-value |
| N=374 1.9 (0.8, 3.8) | N=375 13.6 (10.3, 17.5) | 0.14 (0.06, 0.30) | < 0.0001 |
| Proportion of subjects ≥ 12 years with influenza virus, fever, and at least one respiratory symptom (%) |
| N=303 1.3 (0.4, 3.3) | N=304 13.2 (9.6, 17.5) | 0.10 (0.04, 0.28) | < 0.0001 |
| Proportion of subjects 1 to < 12 years with influenza virus, fever, and at least one respiratory symptom (%) |
| N = 71 4.2 (0.9, 11.9) | N = 71 15.5 (8, 26) | 0.27 (0.08, 0.90) | 0.0339 |
* mITT: modified intention-to-treat. The mITT population included all randomised subjects who received the study medicine and had post-baseline efficacy data available among household members of influenza-infected index patients. The mITT population was analysed as randomised.
Paediatric population
The European Medicines Agency has deferred the obligation to submit the results of studies with Xofluza in one or more subsets of the paediatric population for the treatment of influenza and prevention of influenza (see section 4.2 for information on paediatric use).