Request a Rep
Request a Rep

For SRT-eligible patients with NYHA class II–III obstructive HCM,

In VALOR-HCM LTE, CAMZYOS® Consistently Reduced Obstruction and Reduced Symptoms (NYHA Class) Through Week 561-3

Study Design > See Select Safety Profile >

VALOR-HCM Primary Endpoint

PRIMARY ENDPOINT3,6 The primary endpoint was a composite of the proportion of patients who decided to proceed with SRT or who remained SRT-eligible at week 16. At Week 16, 18% (n=10/56) of patients taking CAMZYOS vs 77% (n=43/56) taking placebo remained guideline-eligible or chose to undergo SRT. Two patients in each group decided to proceed with SRT. The treatment difference was 59% (95% CI: 44, 74; P<0.0001). After Week 16, patients were offered the opportunity to continue in the LTE, with crossover for the patients in the placebo group to receive CAMZYOS 5 mg daily

VALOR-HCM LTE: Primary Objective – Impact on SRT

In the pivotal VALOR-HCM trial, 18% (n=10/56) of patients taking CAMZYOS and 77% (n=43/56) taking placebo met the primary composite endpoint (remained guideline eligible for SRT at Week 16 or chose to undergo SRT at or before Week 16). Two patients in each group decided to proceed with SRT.4

Interim Week 56 results

~91% of Patients Were No Longer Guideline Eligible for and Chose Not to Undergo Septal Reduction Therapy (SRT) in the Original CAMZYOS Group1

At Week 56, ~9% (n=5/56) in the original CAMZYOS group* and ~19% in the placebo-to-CAMZYOS crossover group† remained guideline eligible for or chose to proceed with SRT.1

This prespecified exploratory endpoint was not powered for significance, and statistic comparisons have not been made.

  • These patients were imputed as meeting SRT criteria.2

VALOR-HCM LTE: LVOT Obstruction

In the pivotal VALOR-HCM trial, -45.2 (28.5) mean change (SD) in Valsalva LVOT gradient with CAMZYOS vs 0.4 (29.7) mmHg with placebo from baseline to Week 16.5

Interim Week 56 results

CAMZYOS Demonstrated Consistent Reductions in Valsalva LVOT Gradient Through Week 56 in the Original CAMZYOS Group1

Exploratory endpoint: Mean change in Valsalva LVOT gradient from baseline to Week 561,3

Mean Change in Valsalva LVOT gradient from Baseline to Week 56 Chart Mean Change in Valsalva LVOT gradient from Baseline to Week 56 Chart

These prespecified exploratory endpoints were not powered for significance, and statistical comparisons have not been made.

Important LVOT gradient thresholds6:

  • An LVOT peak gradient of ≥30 mmHg is indicative of obstruction
  • A resting or provoked LVOT gradient of ≥50 mmHg is the obstructive criteria for SRT in patients with drug-refractory symptoms

VALOR-HCM LTE: NYHA class

In the pivotal VALOR-HCM trial, 63% of patients (n=35/56) taking CAMZYOS improved by ≥1 NYHA class vs 21% (n=12/56) taking placebo group from baseline to Week 16. Approximately 7% of the randomized patients were NYHA class II and 93% were NYHA class III+ at baseline.4

Interim Week 56 results

CAMZYOS Demonstrated Symptom Improvement in ~93% of Patients in the Original CAMZYOS Group From Baseline to Week 561

NYHA class improvement at Week 56

At study baseline, approximately 6% of randomized patients were NYHA class II and 94% were NYHA class III+.1

This prespecified exploratory endpoint was not powered for significance, and statistical comparisons have not been made.

VALOR-HCM LTE: Patient-Reported Outcomes

In the pivotal VALOR-HCM trial, patients taking CAMZYOS (n=56) had a mean change (SD) of 10 (16) in KCCQ-23-CSS (patient-reported total symptom score and physical limitations) vs. 2 (12) for Placebo (n=56); treatment difference (95% CI): 9 (5, 14), from Baseline to Week 16.4

Interim Week 56 results

CAMZYOS Demonstrated Consistent Improvements in KCCQ-23–CSS Scores in the Original CAMZYOS Group

Exploratory endpoint: Mean change in KCCQ-23–CSS from baseline to Week 561,3

Mean Change in KCCQ-23 CSS from Baseline to Week 56 Chart Mean Change in KCCQ-23 CSS from Baseline to Week 56 Chart

This prespecified exploratory endpoint wasn’t powered for significance and statistical comparisons have not been made.

  • §The KCCQ-23–CSS is derived from the TSS and PL score of the KCCQ-23. The Clinical Summary Score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores representing less severe symptoms and/or physical limitations.4

KCCQ-23–CSS=Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (23-item version)–Clinical Summary Score; PL=physical limitations; TSS=total symptom score.

VALOR-HCM LTE: Cardiac Biomarker

In the pivotal VALOR-HCM trial, the proportion of geometric mean ratio of NT-proBNP between the CAMZYOS group and placebo group was 0.33 (95% CI: 0.27, 0.42) from baseline to Week 16.4

Interim Week 56 results

Change in NT-proBNP from Baseline to Week 561

Exploratory endpoint: Median change in NT-proBNP from baseline to Week 561,3

Median Change in NT-proBNP from Baseline to Week 56 Chart Median Change in NT-proBNP from Baseline to Week 56 Chart

These prespecified exploratory endpoints were not powered for significance and statistical comparisons have not been made. The clinical significance of the NT-proBNP findings is unknown.4

VALOR-HCM LTE: Cardiac Structure

Interim Week 56 results

Changes in LAVI and LVMI for Both the Original CAMZYOS Group and Crossover Group With CAMZYOS1,3

Mean Change in LAVI from Baseline to Week 56 Chart, Mean Change in LVMI from Baseline to Week 56 Chart Mean Change in LAVI from Baseline to Week 56 Chart Mean Change in LVMI from Baseline to Week 56 Chart

These prespecified exploratory endpoints were not powered for significance and statistical comparisons have not been made.

LAVI=left atrial volume index; LVMI=left ventricular mass index.

The VALOR-HCM LTE trial was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of CAMZYOS in patients who remained guideline-eligible for SRT or decided to proceed with SRT, through Week 56. Patients included those who were initially randomized to CAMZYOS (56 weeks of exposure, n=56) as well as those who were initially randomized to placebo who then crossed over to CAMZYOS starting at 5 mg at Week 16 (40 weeks of exposure, n=52).1,2*

Dose adjustments of CAMZYOS were guided by site-read echos with clinical visits occurring every 4 weeks from Weeks 16 to 32, and every 12 weeks from Weeks 32 to 56, and through the end of the study.† Treatment with CAMZYOS was temporarily interrupted if LVEF was <50%, and an LVEF <30% resulted in permanent discontinuation.1,2

  • *Two patients in the placebo group withdrew (1 each due to ineligibility and withdrawn consent) and 2 patients proceeded to SRT and did not continue into the LTE.2
  • CAMZYOS could be down-titrated at Week 20 and up-titrated at Weeks 24 and 28 and re-evaluated every 12 weeks after Week 32.1,2

This website is best viewed
using the horizontal display
on your tablet device.

This website is best viewed
using the vertical display
on your mobile device.

References:

  1. Desai MY, Owens A, Wolski K, et al. Mavacamten in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy referred for septal reduction: Week 56 results from the VALOR-HCM randomized clinical trial. JAMA Cardiol. 2023;8(10):968-977.
  2. Desai MY, Owens A, Wolski K, et al. Mavacamten in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy referred for septal reduction: Week 56 results from the VALOR-HCM randomized clinical trial. JAMA Cardiol. 2023;8(10):968-977. [supplementary appendix protocol]
  3. Desai MY, Owens A, Wolski K, et al. Myosin inhibition in patients with obstructive HCM referred for septal reduction therapy: Week 56 results of the VALOR-HCM trial. Presented at ESC 2023. Oral presentation.
  4. CAMZYOS [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; 2023.
  5. Desai MY, Owens A, Geske JB, et al. Myosin inhibition in patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy referred for septal reduction therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;80(2):95-108. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2022.04.048
  6. Ommen SR, Mital S, Burke MA, et al. 2020 AHA/ACC guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2020;142(25):e533-e631. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000938