Endoscopic, Histologic, and Composite Endpoints in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis Treated with Etrasimod [106/120 characters, including spaces].

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Histologic remission, a potentially important treatment target in ulcerative colitis (UC), is associated with favorable long-term outcomes. Etrasimod is an oral, once-daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P)1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active UC. This post-hoc analysis of the ELEVATE UC program evaluated the efficacy of etrasimod according to histologic and composite (histologic/endoscopic/symptomatic) endpoints and examined their prognostic value. METHODS: Patients with moderately to severely active UC were randomized 2:1 to once-daily oral etrasimod 2 mg or placebo. Histologic and composite endpoints, including disease clearance (endoscopic/histologic/symptomatic remission), were assessed at Weeks 12 (ELEVATE UC 52; ELEVATE UC 12) and 52 (ELEVATE UC 52). Logistic regressions examined associations between baseline and Week 12 histologic/composite endpoints and Week 52 outcomes. RESULTS: At Weeks 12 and 52, significant improvements with etrasimod vs placebo were observed in histologic/composite outcomes, including endoscopic improvement-histologic remission (EIHR) and disease clearance. The proportion of patients treated with etrasimod achieving clinical remission (CR) at Week 52 was higher among those with disease clearance at Week 12 vs those without disease clearance (73.9% [17/23] vs 28.3% [71/251]). Histologic improvement and endoscopic improvement (EI) at Week 12 were moderately and strongly associated with CR at Week 52, odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval [CI]): 2.37 (1.27, 4.41) and 6.36 (3.47, 11.64), respectively. Histologic remission and EI at Week 12 were strongly associated with EIHR at Week 52, OR (95% CI): 3.21 (1.70, 6.06) and 5.47 (2.89, 10.36), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Etrasimod was superior to placebo for achievement of stringent histologic and composite endpoints; NCT03945188, NCT03996369.

Long-term safety and efficacy of filgotinib for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: Interim analysis from up to 4 years of follow-up in the SELECTION open-label long-term extension study.

BACKGROUND: Filgotinib, an oral, once-daily, Janus kinase 1 preferential inhibitor, is an approved treatment for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. AIMS: The aim of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of continued filgotinib therapy over ~4 years in the long-term extension of the phase 2b/3 SELECTION trial (SELECTIONLTE; NCT02914535). METHODS: In this interim analysis of SELECTIONLTE, SELECTION completers (week 10 responders to filgotinib who completed the maintenance study) continued their assigned treatment (double-blind filgotinib 200 mg [FIL200] or filgotinib 100 mg) and SELECTION week 10 non-responders received open-label FIL200. We assessed safety by adverse events (AEs), and efficacy by partial Mayo Clinic Score (pMCS), inflammatory biomarkers and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We compared safety and efficacy between achievers and non-achievers of a multi-component endpoint, comprehensive disease control (CDC), comprising symptomatic, endoscopic, inflammatory biomarker and HRQoL improvements. RESULTS: Data for completers (n = 250) and non-responders (n = 372) were reported for ≤202 weeks. AE occurrences were low and consistent with previous analyses. The as-observed proportion of FIL200-treated patients in pMCS, biomarker and HRQoL remission during SELECTIONLTE remained high among completers (week 144: 80.0%, 86.4% and 86.0%, respectively) and increased among non-responders (week 192: 62.1%, 76.7% and 59.3%, respectively). Significantly higher proportions of CDC achievers at SELECTION week 58 achieved pMCS, IBDQ and corticosteroid-free pMCS remission than non-achievers, up to LTE week 96. CONCLUSIONS: Filgotinib induced and maintained symptomatic remission and improved HRQoL over 4 years. Safety results showed a proven long-term benefit-risk profile. FIL200-treated CDC achievers had better long-term outcomes than non-achievers.

Development and investigation of a non-invasive disease severity index for inflammatory bowel disease.

INTRODUCTION: The disease severity index (DSI) encapsulates the inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) burden but requires endoscopic investigations. This study developed a non-invasive DSI using faecal calprotectin (DSI-fCal) and faecal myeloperoxidase (DSI-fMPO) instead of colonoscopy. METHODS: Adults with IBD were recruited prospectively. Baseline biomarker concentrations were used to develop DSI-fCal and DSI-fMPO, and these were correlated with the original DSI, IBD-symptoms, endoscopic activity, and quality-of-life (QoL). Area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curves (AUROC) assessed DSI-fCal/DSI-fMPO as predictors of clinical and biochemical remission at six months (symptom remission and fCal <150 µg/g, respectively), and a complicated IBD-course at 24 months (disease relapse needing escalation of biologicals/immunomodulators/recurrent corticosteroids, IBD-hospitalisations/surgeries). Multivariable logistic regression assessed the utility of DSI-fCal/DSI-fMPO in predicting a complicated IBD-course at 24 months. RESULTS: In total, 171 patients were included (Crohn's disease=99, female=90, median age=46y (IQR 36-59)). DSI-fCal and DSI-fMPO correlated with the original DSI (r>0.9, p<0.001), endoscopic indices (r=0.45-0.49, p<0.001), IBD-symptoms (r=0.53-0.58, p<0.001) and QoL (r=-0.57-0.58, p<0.001). Baseline DSI-fCal (AUROC=0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.92) and DSI-fMPO (AUROC=0.80, 95% CI 0.67-0.93) were associated with 6-month clinical and biochemical remission. DSI-fCal (AUROC=0.83, 95% CI 0.77-0.89) and DSI-fMPO (AUROC=0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.87) performed similarly in predicting a complicated IBD-course to the original DSI (pdifference>0.05). The non-invasive DSI was independently associated with a complicated IBD-course on multivariable analyses (DSI-fCal28, aOR=6.04, 95% CI 2.42-15.08; DSI-fMPO25, aOR=7.84, 95% CI 2.96-20.73). CONCLUSIONS: The DSI-fCal and DSI-fMPO perform similarly in prognosticating the longitudinal disease course as the original DSI, whilst avoiding a need for an endoscopic assessment.

Differences Between the 2016 and 2022 Food and Drug Administration Guidance-Implications for Design and Interpretation of Clinical Trials in Ulcerative Colitis.

Background: In 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) updated its draft guidance for drug development in ulcerative colitis, replacing the version from 2016. Several changes from the 2016 version merit further discussion as they impact clinical trial design and the interpretation of trial results. Methods: We compared both documents and critically appraised the changes and implications for future clinical trials. Results: The 2022 guidance recommends full colonoscopy, rather than flexible sigmoidoscopy, to document disease activity in all involved segments of the colon. The concordance between the findings of the 2 procedures is very high and there is little evidence to support colonoscopy over sigmoidoscopy. The use of colonoscopy, rather than sigmoidoscopy, is also associated with a higher burden to trial participants who must undergo full bowel preparation, cost, and a potential for more adverse events. The definition of the Mayo endoscopic score of 0 was changed from the original publication to "normal appearance of mucosa," which suggests that endoscopic signs of prior disease, such as pseudopolyps and scarring, are incompatible with a score 0, even though they are not associated with active disease. The term "mucosal healing" has been abolished and histologic outcomes defined as exploratory. A welcome change is that shorter washout periods than 5 half-lives will be considered to reduce patient exposure to corticosteroids as bridging therapy. Conclusions: The 2022 FDA draft guidance includes changes which for the most part are not informed by empirical evidence, which may ultimately complicate interpretation of future trials and preclude comparisons with past trials.

Implications of von Willebrand Factor in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Beyond Bleeding and Thrombosis.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) displays an increased venous and arterial thrombotic risk despite the common occurrence of intestinal bleeding. While some of the mechanisms leading to these thrombotic complications have been studied, other specific changes in the hemostasis profile of IBD patients have been less explored. One such example relates to von Willebrand factor (VWF) whose plasma levels have been reported to be modulated in IBD. Von Willebrand factor is a plasma glycoprotein crucial for hemostatic functions via roles both in platelet function and coagulation. High plasma VWF is a known risk factor for venous thromboembolism. In addition to its canonical roles in hemostasis, VWF is known to be directly or indirectly involved in other vascular processes such as maintenance of endothelial barrier integrity or proliferation of vascular smooth muscle cells. The purpose of this review is to recapitulate and update the existing data about VWF biology in IBD and to highlight its role both in the existing procoagulant phenotype and in vascular alterations that may occur in IBD.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) displays an increased thrombotic risk. Von Willebrand factor (VWF) is increased in IBD and is a risk factor for venous thromboembolism. This review purposes to recapitulate and update the existing data about VWF biology in IBD.

Risankizumab for Ulcerative Colitis: Two Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: The clinical effects of risankizumab (a monoclonal antibody that selectively targets the p19 subunit of IL-23) for the treatment of ulcerative colitis are unknown. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of risankizumab when administered as an induction and a maintenance therapy for patients with ulcerative colitis. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two phase 3 randomized clinical trials were conducted. The induction trial was conducted at 261 clinical centers (in 41 countries) and enrolled 977 patients from November 5, 2020, to August 4, 2022 (final follow-up on May 16, 2023). The maintenance trial was conducted at 238 clinical centers (in 37 countries) and enrolled 754 patients from August 28, 2018, to March 30, 2022 (final follow-up on April 11, 2023). Eligible patients had moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis; a history of intolerance or inadequate response to 1 or more conventional therapies, advanced therapies, or both types of therapies; and no prior exposure to risankizumab. Interventions: For the induction trial, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive 1200 mg of risankizumab or placebo administered intravenously at weeks 0, 4, and 8. For the maintenance trial, patients with a clinical response (determined using the adapted Mayo score) after intravenous treatment with risankizumab were randomized 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous treatment with 180 mg or 360 mg of risankizumab or placebo (no longer receiving risankizumab) every 8 weeks for 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was clinical remission (stool frequency score ≤1 and not greater than baseline, rectal bleeding score of 0, and endoscopic subscore ≤1 without friability) at week 12 for the induction trial and at week 52 for the maintenance trial. Results: Among the 975 patients analyzed in the induction trial (aged 42.1 [SD, 13.8] years; 586/973 [60.1%] were male; and 677 [69.6%] were White), the clinical remission rates at week 12 were 132/650 (20.3%) for 1200 mg of risankizumab and 20/325 (6.2%) for placebo (adjusted between-group difference, 14.0% [95% CI, 10.0%-18.0%], P < .001). Among the 548 patients analyzed in the maintenance trial (aged 40.9 [SD, 14.0] years; 313 [57.1%] were male; and 407 [74.3%] were White), the clinical remission rates at week 52 were 72/179 (40.2%) for 180 mg of risankizumab, 70/186 (37.6%) for 360 mg of risankizumab, and 46/183 (25.1%) for placebo (adjusted between-group difference for 180 mg of risankizumab vs placebo, 16.3% [97.5% CI, 6.1%-26.6%], P < .001; adjusted between-group difference for 360 mg of risankizumab vs placebo, 14.2% [97.5% CI, 4.0%-24.5%], P = .002). No adverse event signals were detected in the treatment groups. Conclusion and Relevance: Compared with placebo, risankizumab improved clinical remission rates in an induction trial and in a maintenance trial for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. Further study is needed to identify benefits beyond the 52-week follow-up. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03398148 and NCT03398135.

Systematic review: Methotrexate-A poorly understood and underused medication in inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: Methotrexate, an immunosuppressant used for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) for over 30 years, remains underused compared to thiopurines. AIMS: To review the efficacy, safety, optimal dosing and delivery regimens of methotrexate in adults with IBD. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies involving patients with IBD treated with methotrexate from inception to August 2023. All studies were included from the MEDLINE database via PubMed. RESULTS: For Crohn's disease, we included eight randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 17 observational studies. Parenteral methotrexate effectively increased remission rates in steroid-dependent patients at 25 mg/week for 16 weeks and at 15 mg/week for maintenance. Methotrexate can be used in combination with anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents to reduce immunogenicity. Data comparing thiopurines and methotrexate remain scarce. For ulcerative colitis (UC), we included five RCTs and 10 observational studies were included; there was no evidence to support the use of methotrexate in (UC). We extracted safety data from 17 studies; mild-to-moderate adverse effects were common. The incidence of liver fibrosis or cirrhosis was low. CONCLUSION: Methotrexate is effective at inducing and maintaining remission in steroid-refractory Crohn's disease and can reduce anti-TNF-induced immunogenicity when used in combination therapy. Data regarding tolerance and safety are reassuring. These findings challenge preconceived ideas on methotrexate and suggest that it is a valid first-line conventional option for the treatment of mild-to-moderate Crohn's disease.

An international multicentre study of SwiTching from Intravenous to subcutaneous inflixiMab and vEdolizumab in inflammatory bowel diseases: The TIME study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subcutaneous (SC) formulations of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) are approved for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of switching from intravenous (IV) to SC formulations of IFX and VDZ in IBDs. METHODS: This multicentre, retrospective study collected data of adult patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) switched to SC IFX or VDZ. The primary endpoint was clinical remission at 12 months stratified based on timing of switch. A composite endpoint consisting of therapy discontinuation, reverse-switch, need for steroids, and drug optimization was evaluated. A multivariate analysis investigated the association between patients' characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-one patients (59% UC, 53% male, mean age 44 ± 15 years, 68% IFX) from 13 centres were included. The switch occurred at Week 6 in a third of cases (36%). Median time to switch was 13 months. Most patients switched to SC IFX and VDZ were in clinical remission at 3 (87% and 77%), 6 (86% and 83%) and 12 (63% and 60%) months. In the multivariate analysis, there was no difference in clinical remission rate at 12 months; however, patients switched at Week 6 had a higher rate of experiencing any therapeutic changes at 3 (false discovery rate (FDR) = .002), 6 (FDR <1 × 10-10) or 12 months (FDR = .08). Clinical disease activity at baseline (only in UC) (FDR = .07) and previous exposure to biologics (FDR = .001) were risk factors for composite endpoint at 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSION: SC IFX and VDZ are effective in daily clinical practice in IBD patients. Switching patients in remission reduces the risk of negative outcomes.

Risankizumab versus Ustekinumab for Moderate-to-Severe Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of risankizumab as compared with ustekinumab in patients with Crohn's disease are unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3b, multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial with blinded assessment of end points, patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease who had had an inadequate response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy or unacceptable side effects with such therapy were randomly assigned to receive risankizumab or ustekinumab at standard doses for 48 weeks. The two primary end points, which were tested sequentially, were clinical remission at week 24 (defined as a Crohn's Disease Activity Index score of <150 [range, 0 to 600, with higher scores indicating more severe disease activity]), which was analyzed in the first 50% of patients to complete the week 24 visit, with a noninferiority margin of 10 percentage points; and endoscopic remission at week 48 (defined as a score of ≤4, a decrease of ≥2 points from baseline, and no subscore >1 in any individual variable on the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease [range, 0 to 56, with higher scores indicating more severe disease]), which was analyzed for superiority in 100% of the patients. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of risankizumab or ustekinumab. RESULTS: In the full intention-to-treat population for the efficacy analysis, 230 of 255 patients (90.2%) who received risankizumab and 193 of 265 patients (72.8%) who received ustekinumab completed all the assigned treatments. Both primary end points were met; risankizumab was noninferior to ustekinumab with respect to clinical remission at week 24 (58.6% vs. 39.5%; adjusted difference, 18.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.6 to 30.3) and superior to ustekinumab with respect to endoscopic remission at week 48 (31.8% vs. 16.2%; adjusted difference, 15.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 8.4 to 22.9; P<0.001). The incidence of adverse events appeared to be similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this head-to-head clinical trial of risankizumab and ustekinumab involving patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease who had had unacceptable side effects with anti-TNF therapy or an inadequate response to such therapy, risankizumab was noninferior to ustekinumab with respect to clinical remission at week 24 and superior with respect to endoscopic remission at week 48. (Funded by AbbVie; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04524611.).

ARE WE READY FOR MULTIPLE SWITCHES BETWEEN REFERENCE PRODUCTS AND BIOSIMILARS?

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) currently impose an immense social and economic burden on society in terms of both direct and indirect healthcare costs. Their incurable and progressive nature results in an unavoidable lifetime expense. The introduction of infliximab more than two decades ago had revolutionized IBD treatment. Nowadays, while biologic drugs comprise various vital therapeutic options for patients, they can be associated to significant costs to healthcare systems. The most crucial benefit of biosimilars is that they bring more significant cost reduction and increase access to advanced therapies. They also allow the treatment of newly diagnosed patients and dose optimization for those who need it. There is an inverse relationship between price and demand for treatment with biologics. For a more significant reduction in cost to be possible, greater use of biosimilars is necessary. For this to occur, it is imperative not only to use biosimilars in naïve patients but also to switch to biosimilars in those patients who have started therapy with reference biologics. At present, randomized and observational studies have demonstrated effectiveness and safety results in recommending a single switch between a reference product and a biosimilar, and vice versa. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the literature and discuss whether scientific evidence is enough to support multiple switches of biologics and biosimilars in IBD patients.

Benefits of Biosimilars in the Management of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An International Survey.

Background/Objectives: The development of biosimilar drugs has revolutionized the management of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), significantly reducing healthcare costs. However, the impact of biosimilar availability on patient care is unknown. We conducted a survey to investigate the benefits of using biosimilars in patients with IBD. Methods: Physicians involved in the IBD care were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. The questionnaire consisted of 42 questions addressing availability, cost, recommendations, and positioning regarding the use of biosimilars. Results: A total of 233 physicians (88.4% gastroenterologists) from 63 countries worldwide participated in the survey. Most respondents had >10 years of practice (202/233, 85.9%). Biosimilars were available in almost all cases (221, 94.8%), and over two-thirds of respondents had more than one biosimilar of adalimumab or infliximab on hospital formulary. In most cases, adalimumab and infliximab biosimilars had a reduced cost of at least 30% compared to the originators. The savings resulting from the use of biosimilars allowed physicians to improve patient care (3/233, 1.3%) or to improve research (2/233, 0.8%) in only a few cases. Interestingly, for about 50% of respondents, the cost of biologics was a limitation for patient access to therapy. For the majority of participants, the availability of biosimilars did not influence treatment decisions in Crohn's disease (70/165, 42.4%) and ulcerative colitis (83/165, 50.3%). Conclusions: The reduced cost of biosimilars compared to reference products is the main driver of choice in IBD. The impact of biosimilars of ustekinumab and vedolizumab in improving access to therapies and changing the treatment algorithm remains to be defined.

Target Trial Emulation: Improving the Quality of Observational Studies in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Using the Principles of Randomized Trials.

The past decade has seen a substantial increase in the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard method for generating robust evidence of drug safety and efficacy but are expensive, time-consuming, and may have ethical implications. Observational studies in IBD are often used to fill the gaps in evidence but are typically hindered by significant bias. There are several approaches for making statistical inferences from observational data with some that focus on study design and others on statistical techniques. Target trial emulation is an emerging methodological process that aims to bridge this gap and improve the quality of observational studies by applying the principles of an ideal, or "target," randomized trial to routinely collected clinical data. There has been a rapid expansion of observational studies that have emulated trials over the past 5 years in other medical fields, but this has yet to be adopted in gastroenterology and IBD. The wealth of nonrandomized clinical data available through electronic health records, patient registries, and administrative health databases afford innumerable hypothesis-generating opportunities for IBD research. This review outlines the principles of target trial emulation, discusses the merits to IBD observational studies in reducing the most common biases and improving confidence in causality, and details the caveats of using this approach.

Target trial emulation uses observational data to mimic the principles of an ideal or "target" randomized trial. This framework offers several opportunities to strengthen the quality of observational research in inflammatory bowel disease by reducing common sources of bias.

Acute severe ulcerative colitis trials: the past, the present and the future.

Acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC), characterised by bloody diarrhoea and systemic inflammation, is associated with a significant risk of colectomy and a small risk of mortality. The landmark trial of cortisone in 1955 was pivotal for two reasons: first, for establishing the efficacy of a drug that remains a first-line therapy today and, second, for producing the first set of disease severity criteria and clinical trial endpoints that shaped the subsequent ASUC trial landscape. Trials in the 1990s and at the turn of the millennium established the efficacy of infliximab and ciclosporin, but since then, there has been little progress in drug development for this high-risk population. This systematic review evaluates all interventional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in patients hospitalised with severe UC. It provides an overview of the efficacy of treatments from past to present and assesses the evolution of trial characteristics with respect to study populations, eligibility criteria and study designs over time. This review details ongoing RCTs in this field and provides a perspective on the challenges for future clinical trial programmes and how these can be overcome to help deliver novel ASUC therapies.

Impact of Prior Biologic or Janus Kinase Inhibitor Therapy on Efficacy and Safety of Etrasimod in the ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 Trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Etrasimod is an oral, once daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate [S1P]1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis [UC]. This subgroup analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of etrasimod 2 mg once daily vs placebo by prior biologic/Janus kinase inhibitor [bio/JAKi] exposure in ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12. METHODS: Pre-defined efficacy endpoints were assessed at Weeks 12 and 52 in ELEVATE UC 52 and Week 12 in ELEVATE UC 12 in bio/JAKi-naïve and -experienced patients, and at Week 12 [pooled] based on prior advanced therapy exposure mechanism. RESULTS: In the ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 analysis populations, 80/274 [29.2%] and 74/222 [33.3%] patients receiving etrasimod and 42/135 [31.1%] and 38/112 [33.9%] patients receiving placebo, respectively, were bio/JAKi-experienced. In both bio/JAKi-naïve and -experienced patients, a significantly greater proportion receiving etrasimod vs placebo achieved clinical remission (p<0.05) in ELEVATE UC 52 at Weeks 12 [naïve: 30.9% vs 9.7%; experienced: 17.5% vs 2.4%] and 52 [naïve: 36.6% vs 7.5%; experienced: 21.3% vs 4.8%]; in ELEVATE UC 12, this was observed only for bio/JAKi-naïve patients [naïve: 27.7% vs 16.2%, p=0.033; experienced: 18.9% vs 13.2%, p=0.349]. Similar patterns were observed for most efficacy endpoints. Among patients with prior anti-integrin exposure [N=90], a significantly greater proportion achieved clinical response [54.1% vs 27.6%, p=0.030], but not clinical remission [9.8% vs 3.4%, p=0.248], with etrasimod vs placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Bio/JAKi-naïve and -experienced patients had clinically meaningful induction and maintenance treatment benefits with etrasimod vs placebo.

Differential efficacy of medical therapies for ulcerative colitis according to disease extent: patient-level analysis from multiple randomized controlled trials.

Background: Disease extent in Ulcerative Colitis (UC) has prognostic implications for disease course. It is unclear whether the efficacy of medical therapies for moderate to severely active UC vary according to disease extent at enrollment. Methods: We analyzed patient level data from 11 Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials of advanced therapies in patients with moderate-to-severe UC to assess modifications of advanced therapy effects by disease extent. Primary outcome was clinical response and secondary outcomes were clinical remission, endoscopic response/remission and endoscopic improvement, and Mayo clinic subscore for both induction and maintenance studies. Binary and continuous outcomes were analyzed using the modified Poisson regression model and the mixed-effects model, respectively, adjusting for age, sex, disease duration, concomitant steroid use and prior anti-TNF use. Effect modifications with binary outcomes were quantified by ratios of risk ratio for left-sided to that for extensive colitis while effect modifications with the Mayo subscores were quantified by differences of the differences between mean scores of the left-sided and extensive colitis. Results were presented with point estimates and 95% confidence intervals as well as p-values. Findings: Eleven clinical trials enrolling 5450 UC patients (infliximab = 2, adalimumab = 2, golimumab = 2, vedolizumab = 2, tofacitinib = 3) were included. In induction trials, there was evidence to suggest effect modification by disease extent for clinical response with tofacitinib (the ratio of RRs 0.67, 95% CI [0.45, 0.99], p = 0.049) and clinical remission with infliximab (ratio of RRs 0.33, 95% CI [0.13, 0.85], p = 0.020) favoring patients with extensive colitis. There was no evidence to suggest effect modification for endoscopic improvement and clinical outcomes. There was evidence to suggest effect modification by disease extent for clinical remission with tofacitinib (ratio of RRs 0.44, 95% CI [0.22, 0.89], p = 0.020) favoring patients with extensive colitis. For symptom subscores from the Mayo Clinic score, tofacitinib was associated with a greater reduction in both stool frequency (difference of differences 0.37, 95% CI [0.08, 0.65], p = 0.012) and rectal bleeding scores (difference of differences 0.25, 95% CI [0.03, 0.47], p = 0.026) in patients with extensive colitis compared to left sided. Interpretation: These findings underscore the possibility of differential efficacy of medical therapies according to disease distribution. These results warrant further exploration in forthcoming trials to better inform treatment strategies and consideration of disease distribution as a baseline stratification factor in clinical trials. Funding: This study did not receive any financial support.

Drug Optimization in Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Ulcerative Colitis: A Global Survey.

Background/Objectives: The treatment of patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC) is challenging. Although there are commonly used guidelines, therapy optimization is not standardized. We conducted a survey to investigate the management and treatment of patients with mild-to-moderate UC. Methods: Physicians with experience in treating inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) were invited to participate in an anonymous, multiple-choice survey between June and July 2023. The survey addressed various issues of patient care such as patient monitoring, treatment optimization, follow-up, treatment decision making, and therapy de-escalation. Results: The survey included 222 physicians (59.9% men; mean age = 50.4 years) from 66 countries worldwide. Gastroenterologists were the most represented specialists (89.6%), followed by surgeons (3.2%), and internal medicine doctors (2.7%). Two-thirds of the participants (66.7%) had >10 years of experience in the field of IBD. The combination of oral (≥4 g/day) and rectal 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) was the preferred choice when optimizing therapy. Budesonide MMX (41.8%) and systemic steroids (39.9%) were preferred in patients who failed 5-ASA. Treatment decisions were predominantly based on endoscopic (99.0%) or clinical (59.8%) activity. A significant percentage of clinicians did not optimize therapy in the case of increased fecal calprotectin alone (45.1%) or radiological/ultrasound activity (39.8%) alone. Conclusions: The guidelines for the management of mild-to-moderate UC are well accepted in clinical practice. Endoscopic remission remains the main therapeutic target, followed by clinical remission. Fecal calprotectin and intestinal ultrasound still elicit complaints from physicians.

Evaluating the pharmacokinetics of upadacitinib for the treatment of moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Janus kinases (JAK) are enzymes involved in signaling pathways that activate the immune system. Upadacitinib, an oral small molecule, is the first JAK inhibitor approved by FDA and EMA for the treatment of moderately to severely active Crohn's disease (CD), following successful phase II and III trials. Compared to other JAK inhibitors, upadacitinib has a high selectivity toward JAK1. This characteristic could improve its efficacy and safety. AREAS COVERED: This review provides an overview of the available knowledge on the pharmacokinetics of upadacitinib as induction and maintenance therapy for CD. EXPERT OPINION: The approval of newer targeted small molecules drug, including JAK inhibitors, marked a significant advancement in terms of effectiveness. In fact, the oral administration, the rapid absorption, the excellent bioavailability and the short serum time of maximum concentration are some of the advantages compared to biologics. The selective inhibition of JAK1 by upadacitinib allows for high efficacy while maintaining a reliable safety profile.

Long-term Outcome of Risankizumab in Crohn's Disease: a Real-world GETAID Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the long-term effectiveness and safety of risankizumab maintenance treatment in a large real-world cohort of patients with Crohn's Disease (CD). METHODS: From May 2021 to August 2023, all consecutive patients with CD treated with risankizumab in 25 GETAID centers have been retrospectively included. The primary endpoint was steroid-free clinical remission (Harvey Bradshaw Index [HBI] <5) at 52 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 174 patients included, 99%, 93%, and 96% had been previously exposed to anti-TNF, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab, respectively. All patients had received ≥3 biologics, and 108 (62%) had previous intestinal resection. Median follow-up was 13.7 months (interquartile range, 10.0-18.1 months). The rates of steroid-free clinical remission and clinical remission at week 26 were 47% (72/152) and 52% (79/152), and 46% (58/125), and 48% (60/125) at week 52, respectively. Risankizumab persistence rates were 94%, 89%, and 79% at weeks 12, 26, and 52, respectively. At the end of follow-up, 45 (45/174; 26%) patients had discontinued risankizumab (loss of response, 42%; primary failure, 37%; intolerance, 13%). Thirty-six patients (36/174; 20.9%) were hospitalized, and 22 (22/174; 12.6%) required intestinal resection. Fifty-one patients (29%) had an adverse event, including 26 (15%) serious adverse events (CD flare, n = 17). One death (myocardial infarction) and one cancer (papillary thyroid carcinoma) were observed. CONCLUSION: This is the first real-life study to report long-term outcomes in patients with refractory CD treated with risankizumab. One-half of the patients achieved steroid-free clinical remission after 1 year, and the safety profile was consistent with the literature.

Navigating the complexities of drug development for inflammatory bowel disease.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) - consisting of ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease - is a complex, heterogeneous, immune-mediated inflammatory condition with a multifactorial aetiopathogenesis. Despite therapeutic advances in this arena, a ceiling effect has been reached with both single-agent monoclonal antibodies and advanced small molecules. Therefore, there is a need to identify novel targets, and the development of companion biomarkers to select responders is vital. In this Perspective, we examine how advances in machine learning and tissue engineering could be used at the preclinical stage where attrition rates are high. For novel agents reaching clinical trials, we explore factors decelerating progression, particularly the decline in IBD trial recruitment, and assess how innovative approaches such as reconfiguring trial designs, harmonizing end points and incorporating digital technologies into clinical trials can address this. Harnessing opportunities at each stage of the drug development process may allow for incremental gains towards more effective therapies.

MMX mesalamine in ulcerative colitis: Major advantages towards classical mesalamine formulations.

Medical therapy is the cornerstone of ulcerative colitis (UC) management and aims to induce and maintain remission. In case of mild-to-moderate UC, mesalamine (5-ASA) is the first-line option. 5-ASA requires local release at the level of the inflamed mucosa to exert its therapeutic action. While rectal preparations are useful in distal colitis, in cases of UC of at least rectosigmoid extent, guidelines suggest the association of oral and rectal 5-ASA. Mesalamine with Multi Matrix System® technology (MMX mesalamine) is an oral, high-strength (1.2 g/tablet), once-daily formulation of 5-ASA, designed to provide delayed and prolonged release throughout the entire colon. Clinical trials demonstrated a strong efficacy in inducing and maintaining clinical and endoscopic remission in active mild-to-moderate UC. The efficacy is related to specific colonic drug-delivery, to its high-dosage and once-daily administration, thus improving patients' adherence and outcomes. The specific colonic-delivery is also associated with very low rates of systemic absorption and adverse events (AEs). With this comprehensive review we aimed to summarize current knowledge on MMX mesalamine in mild-to-moderate UC, in terms of clinical pharmacology, efficacy and safety, also compared to other 5-ASA products. In addition we provided an expert opinion on the topic, examining the implications on clinical practice.