Assessment of outcomes in Crohn's disease: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials to inform a multiple outcome framework.

Longstanding disease control in Crohn's disease (CD) is challenging and requires understanding treatment efficacy and outcomes assessment. With multiple novel therapeutic options, rigorous evaluation of outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is crucial to inform clinical practice. This study systematically reviewed RCTs focusing on CD outcomes to elucidate the breadth and depth of reported outcomes and measurement instruments. A systematic search was conducted on MEDLINE and Scopus for RCTs published from 1 January 2000 to 31 January 2023. Eligible studies included full-text articles with at least 50 adult CD patients. Primary and secondary outcomes, along with their measurement instruments, were categorized according to the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Filter 2.1 framework. From 88 included studies, 393 outcomes were analyzed. Clinical outcomes, such as clinical remission and response, were the most prevalent (50.6%); biomarkers (11.5%) and patient-reported outcomes (10.2%) were also assessed. Other outcomes included disease behavior and complications (2%), endoscopy (10.4%), histology (0.5%), radiology (1.3%), healthcare utilization (3.8%), and therapy-related safety (6.9%). Composite outcomes showed an increasing trend, reflecting a shift toward comprehensive evaluations. Coprimary endpoints, including clinical symptoms and mucosal inflammation, were reported in 21 of 88 studies. This review highlights the evolving landscape of outcome assessment in CD RCTs, emphasizing the increasing complexity of outcomes. The prominence of composite outcomes underscores efforts to capture the multidimensional nature of CD. These findings will inform the second stage of a two-round e-Delphi aimed at prioritizing key domains and outcomes for developing a multiple-component outcome for RCTs in CD research.

Defining mucosal healing in randomized controlled trials of inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and future perspective.

BACKGROUND: Mucosal healing (MH) is an established treatment goal in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, various definitions of MH exist. We aimed to identify how MH is defined in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library from inception to December 2023 for phase 2 and 3 RCTs of advanced therapies in IBD. RESULTS: One hundred forty-four studies were included, 72 in UC and 72 in CD, published between 1997 and 2023. In UC, 64% (46/72) RCTs reported MH as an endpoint. 12 definitions of MH were found, from endoscopic assessment alone (35/46; 76%) to the more recent combination of histology and endoscopy (10/46; 22%). 96% (44/46) of studies used the Mayo Endoscopic Subscore. In CD, reporting of MH lagged behind UC, with only 12% (9/72) of trials specifically defining MH as an endpoint, 7 as "absence of ulceration," 2 as Simplified Endoscopic Score for CD score ≤2 or 0. Histological assessment was performed in 3 RCTs of CD. Centralized reading of endoscopy was used in 48% (35/72) of RCTs of UC and 22% (16/72) of CD. Only 1 RCT included transmural healing as an endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: A standard definition of MH in IBD is lacking. Definitions have evolved particularly in UC, which now includes the addition of histological evaluation. Transmural healing holds promise as a future target in CD. We support a greater standardization of definitions as we expect endpoints to become increasingly stringent and multimodal with computers automating the assessment.

Outcomes of patients with prior biologic intolerance are better than those with biologic failure in clinical trials of inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) trials often stratify patients by prior biologic exposure, including prior biologic failure or intolerance. This study aimed to assess clinical outcomes in IBD patients with prior biologic failure versus intolerance treated with ustekinumab or vedolizumab. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) clinical trials for ustekinumab (UNITI, UNIFI) and vedolizumab (GEMINI-1, GEMINI-2) was performed. Clinical response, clinical remission, and endoscopic improvement (for UC) were compared among biologic naïve, biologic-failure, and biologic intolerant patients. Statistical analyses, including chi-square tests and logistic regression, were performed. RESULTS: 1178 UC and 1439 CD patients received either ustekinumab or vedolizumab. In UC, biologic intolerant patients exhibited higher clinical response (54.7% vs. 38.8%, aOR 1.87 [95% CI 0.93-3.73]), clinical remission (25.0% vs. 11.0%, aOR 2.84 [95% CI 1.47-5.49]), and endoscopic improvement (40.6% vs. 24.8%, aOR 2.76 [95% CI 1.28-5.94]) compared to biologic failure, with outcomes similar to biologic naïve patients. In biologic-intolerant CD patients, clinical response was similar between prior biologic failure and intolerance (34.2% vs 32.8%), but after adjustment for potential confounders, biologic intolerance was associated with higher odds of clinical response (aOR: 1.67, 95% CI 1.09-2.55), with no significant difference observed for clinical remission (aOR: 1.48, 95% CI 0.88-2.49). CONCLUSION: Improved treatment outcomes were generally observed in patients with biologic intolerance compared to failure, especially in UC, where outcomes were similar to biologic naïve patients. Future clinical trials should meticulously differentiate prior biologic failure versus intolerance to mitigate potential bias.

Screen Failures and Causes in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Randomized Controlled Trials: A Study of 16 913 Screened Patients.

INTRODUCTION: While recruitment rates in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) trials are continuously decreasing, the underlying reasons are likely multifactorial but remain poorly defined. Screen failure (SF) proportions and causes have not been extensively explored in IBD. AIM: We assessed SF proportions and underlying SF reasons in IBD phase 2 and 3 clinical trials. METHODS: We analyzed SF-related data from 17 randomized controlled phase 2 or 3 IBD trials. Twelve trials were in ulcerative colitis (UC) and 5 trials were in Crohn's disease (CD) operated by a single contract research organization, IQVIA. Differences between patient groups were tested for significance by Mann-Whitney and Fisher's tests when appropriate. RESULTS: We analyzed a total of 11 161 patients with UC and 5752 patients with CD. The mean SF proportion was 0.43 per trial in UC. The primary reason for SFs in UC was not meeting the overall (modified) Mayo score inclusion threshold and/or the endoscopic subscore of at least 2 (33.8% of all SF). In CD clinical trials, the mean SF proportion was at 0.53. The primary cause for SFs was not meeting the CDAI eligibility criteria (23.1% of all SFs). SF proportions were significantly higher in CD versus UC trials (P = .027). Clostridium difficile or any other intestinal infection and not meeting tuberculosis screening criteria were other major reasons for SFs both in UC and CD. CONCLUSION: High SF proportion in IBD clinical trials, particularly for CD studies, pose obstacles to patient recruitment. While underlying causes are diverse, arbitrarily defined clinical and/or endoscopic eligibility criteria remain the major limiting factors.

Analyzing data from 17 IBD clinical trials with over 16 000 screened patients, we found a screen failure (SF) proportion of 44% for UC and 51% for CD. The primary cause of SF was inadequate clinical and/or endoscopic activity scores.

Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib for Perianal Fistulizing Crohn's Disease: A Post Hoc Analysis of 3 Phase 3 Trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Efficacy of upadacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, for moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease was demonstrated in phase 3 induction (U-EXCEL, U-EXCEED) and maintenance (U-ENDURE) trials; this post hoc analysis evaluated upadacitinib outcomes in patients with fistulizing disease in these studies. METHODS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to once-daily upadacitinib 45 mg (UPA45) or placebo for 12 weeks. UPA45 clinical responders were rerandomized (1:1:1) to upadacitinib 15 mg (UPA15), 30 mg (UPA30), or placebo for 52 weeks. In patients with fistulas (any and perianal), resolution of drainage, closure of external openings, clinical remission, endoscopic response, and safety were assessed. RESULTS: Of 1021 patients in U-EXCEL and U-EXCEED, 143 (14.0%) had any fistulas at baseline (66 draining); of these, most (128) had perianal fistulas (56 draining). Greater proportions of patients receiving upadacitinib vs placebo achieved resolution of drainage of perianal fistulas at the end of induction (placebo, 5.6%, n/N = 1/18; UPA45, 44.7%, n/N = 17/38; P = .003) and maintenance (placebo, 0%, n/N = 0/11; UPA15, 28.6%, n/N = 4/14; P = .105; UPA30, 23.1% n/N = 3/13; P = .223) and closure of perianal fistula external openings (induction: placebo, 4.8%, n/N = 2/42; UPA45, 22.1%, n/N = 19/86; P = .013; maintenance: placebo, 0%, n/N = 0/30; UPA15, 18.8%, n/N = 6/32; P = .024; UPA30, 16.0%, n/N = 4/25; P = .037). CONCLUSION: Patients with fistulizing disease (primarily perianal) treated with upadacitinib achieved higher rates of resolution of drainage, closure of external openings, clinical remission, and endoscopic response vs placebo. CLINICALTRIALS: gov numbers: U-EXCEL (NCT03345849), U-EXCEED (NCT03345836), U-ENDURE (NCT03345823).

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib vs. Vedolizumab, Ustekinumab, and Tofacitinib After Induction and Maintenance for Ulcerative Colitis: Three Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence on the comparative efficacy and safety of approved therapies for ulcerative colitis (UC) during induction and maintenance, including upadacitinib (UPA), vedolizumab (VEDO), ustekinumab (UST), and tofacitinib (TOFA), is limited. METHODS: Using data from phase 3 trials, three placebo (PBO)-anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparisons of the efficacy and safety of UPA versus VEDO, UST, and TOFA (U-ACHIEVE and U-ACCOMPLISH, GEMINI-1, UNIFI, and OCTAVE induction and maintenance trials) have been conducted. Baseline characteristics from UPA trials were weighted separately to match each comparator trial. Induction responders were re-randomized to oral UPA 15 or 30 mg, VEDO 300 mg intravenously every 8 weeks (Q8W), UST 90 mg SC Q8W, or oral TOFA 5 mg, or PBO in maintenance. Treat-through efficacy outcomes at weeks 44(UST)/46(VEDO)/52(UPA/TOFA) were adjusted by the likelihood of induction response and included clinical response, clinical remission, and endoscopic improvement. Safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and AEs leading to discontinuation (except UPA vs. VEDO). Benefit-risk was assessed by numbers needed to treat (NNT)/harm, calculated as the inverse of the difference in proportions of patients achieving each efficacy/safety outcome for UPA versus comparator. RESULTS: The proportions of patients who demonstrated clinical response or endoscopic improvement was greater with UPA 15 mg versus VEDO and TOFA (p < 0.05). The proportions of patients demonstrating all treat-through efficacy outcomes were significantly greater with UPA 30 mg versus VEDO, UST, or TOFA with NNTs 3.2-8.7. No significant differences in proportions of AEs, SAEs, and AEs leading to discontinuation were observed between the two doses of UPA and comparators. CONCLUSION: In patients with active UC, greater clinical efficacy, and similar safety after 1 year of maintenance were observed with UPA versus VEDO, UST, and TOFA, suggesting a favorable benefit-risk profile for UPA. Despite matched baseline characteristics, differences in trial design and endpoints may persist.

Adaptive steroid tapering impedes corticosteroid-free remissions compared to forced tapering in clinical trials of ulcerative colitis.

INTRODUCTION: It is unclear if steroid tapering protocols can impact clinical trial outcomes in ulcerative colitis (UC), particularly fixed versus adaptive steroid tapering. Fixed steroid tapering involves incremental dose decreases at prespecified intervals and adaptive steroid tapering utilizes investigator discretion as determined by the patient's response. METHODS: In this post-hoc analysis from six clinical trials of UC (VARSITY, ACT 1, PURSUIT, GEMINI1, OCTAVE and ULTRA2), responders to induction therapy with baseline corticosteroid use were considered as the primary population of interest. Adjustments were made to account for treat-through versus re-randomization designs and multivariate regression was performed to account for other potential confounding variables. The primary outcome was corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CR) at one-year and secondary outcomes were CR and endoscopic improvement. RESULTS: There was a total of 861 patients who had achieved clinical response after induction and were using corticosteroids. Within multivariate analysis, patients using adaptive steroid tapering regimens were less likely to achieve corticosteroid-free CR at one year (odds ratio [OR] 0.66 [95% CI 0.48-0.92], p=0.015) but had increased odds for achieving CR at one year (OR 1.9 [95% CI 1.43-2.52], p<0.001). The steroid tapering regimen was not associated with achievement of endoscopic improvement at one year. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with UC on corticosteroids in clinical trials, patients using adaptive steroid weaning regimens were less likely to achieve corticosteroid-free CR at one year but more likely to achieve CR at one year. Consideration should be given to implementing mandatory fixed steroid weaning protocols in future clinical trials of UC.

Efficacy and Safety of Etrasimod in Patients with Moderately to Severely Active Isolated Proctitis: Results From the Phase 3 ELEVATE UC Clinical Programme.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pivotal trials in ulcerative colitis have historically excluded patients with isolated proctitis. Etrasimod is an oral, once-daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. This post hoc analysis assessed efficacy and safety of etrasimod 2 mg once daily in patients with isolated proctitis (centrally read) from the phase 3 ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 trials. METHODS: Patients, including those with isolated proctitis (<10 cm rectal involvement) who met all other inclusion criteria in ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12, were randomised 2:1 to receive etrasimod or placebo. Primary, secondary and other identified efficacy endpoints and safety were assessed. RESULTS: We analysed data from 64 and 723 patients at Week 12 (both trials pooled), and 36 and 397 patients at Week 52 (ELEVATE UC 52 only) with isolated proctitis and more extensive colitis (≥10 cm rectal involvement), respectively. Patients with isolated proctitis receiving etrasimod demonstrated significant improvements versus placebo, including clinical remission rates at Weeks 12 (42.9% vs 13.6%) and 52 (44.4% vs 11.1%), endoscopic improvement (52.4% vs 22.7%) at Week 12 and bowel urgency numerical rating scale score at Week 12 (all p < 0.01). Generally similar trends were observed in patients with more extensive colitis. Safety was consistent across subgroups, with no new findings. CONCLUSIONS: Etrasimod demonstrated significant improvements versus placebo in patients with isolated proctitis, and those with more extensive disease, in most efficacy endpoints at Week 12 and 52. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03945188; NCT03996369.

Comparative efficacy and safety of subcutaneous infliximab and vedolizumab in patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis included in randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: While indirect comparison of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in adults with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) shows that IFX has better effectiveness during induction, and comparable efficacy during maintenance treatment, comparative data specific to subcutaneous (SC) IFX (i.e., CT-P13 SC) versus VDZ are limited. AIM: Pooled analysis of randomised studies to compare efficacy and safety with IFX SC and VDZ in moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease. METHODS: Parallel-group, randomised studies evaluating IFX SC and VDZ in patients with moderate-to-severe CD or UC were identified. Eligible studies reported ≥ 1 prespecified outcome of interest at Week 6 (reflecting treatment during the induction phase) and/or at 1 year (Weeks 50-54; reflecting treatment during the maintenance phase). Prespecified efficacy and safety outcomes considered in this pooled analysis included the proportions of patients achieving disease-specific clinical responses, clinical remission, or discontinuing due to lack of efficacy, and the proportions of patients experiencing adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, infections, serious infections, or discontinuing due to AEs. Data from multiple studies or study arms were extracted and pooled using a random-effect model; comparative analyses were performed separately for patients with CD and UC. RESULTS: We identified three eligible CD trials and four eligible UC trials that assigned over 1200 participants per disease cohort to either IFX SC or VDZ. In patients with CD, intravenous induction therapy with IFX demonstrated better efficacy (non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) compared with VDZ; during the maintenance phase, IFX SC showed numerically better efficacy (overlapping 95% CIs) than VDZ. A lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year. In patients with UC, efficacy profiles were similar with IFX SC and VDZ during the induction and maintenance phases, and a lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year. In both cohorts, safety profiles for IFX SC and VDZ were generally comparable during 1 year. CONCLUSION: IFX SC demonstrated better efficacy than VDZ in patients with CD, and similar efficacy to VDZ in patients with UC; 1-year safety was comparable with IFX SC and VDZ.

Defining Endoscopic Remission in Crohn's Disease: MM-SES-CD and SES-CD Thresholds Associated With Low Risk of Disease Progression.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We assessed Modified Multiplier Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (MM-SES-CD) and Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) thresholds that are best associated with low likelihood of long-term disease progression. METHODS: Data from 61 patients with early Crohn's disease (CD) who participated in the CALM long-term extension study were used as the derivation cohort and validated using the McMaster inflammatory bowel disease database (n = 99). The primary outcome was disease progression (new internal fistula/abscess, stricture, perianal fistula or abscess, CD-related hospitalization or surgery) since the end of the CALM trial. Optimal MM-SES-CD and SES-CD thresholds were determined using the maximum Youden index. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses compared threshold scores of remission definitions on disease progression. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, based on the maximum Youden index, the optimal thresholds associated with a low likelihood of disease progression were MM-SES-CD <22.5 and SES-CD <4. A significantly greater proportion of patients with a MM-SES-CD ≥22.5 had disease progression as compared with patients in the derivation cohort with MM-SES-CD <22.5 (10/17 [58.8%] vs 3/44 [6.8%]; P < .001). Similarly, a significantly greater number of patients with SES-CD ≥ 4 had disease progression compared with those with a SES-CD <4 (11/25 [44.0%] vs 2/36 [5.6%]; P < .001). Compared with other clinical or endoscopic remission definitions, which demonstrated poor to fair accuracy, MM-SES-CD <22.5 performed the best for predicting disease progression (area under the curve = 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.94; P < .001). These thresholds were confirmed in the validation cohort. CONCLUSION: Achievement of MM-SES-CD <22.5 or SES-CD <4 in patients with ileocolonic or colonic CD is associated with low risk of disease progression and may be suitable targets in clinical trials and practice for endoscopic healing.

Association Between Smoking Status and the Efficacy and Safety of Tofacitinib in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis.

Background: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). This analysis assessed the impact of cigarette smoking on tofacitinib efficacy and safety in the UC clinical program. Methods: Efficacy endpoints and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated by smoking status (ever smokers [current and ex-smokers] and never smokers) in the phase (P)2 induction study (baseline demographics and safety only), P3 studies (OCTAVE Induction 1&2, OCTAVE Sustain, OCTAVE Open), and P3/4b RIVETING study. Results: This post hoc analysis included 1156 patients (ever smokers, n = 416 [36.0%; current smokers, n = 59 (5.1%); ex-smokers, n = 357 (30.9%)]; never smokers, n = 740 [64.0%]; median [range] treatment duration 654 [1-2712] and 615.5 [1-2850] days, respectively). Similar proportions of ever smokers and never smokers achieved efficacy endpoints. AEs were reported in 88.7% of ever smokers and 83.8% of never smokers. Overall, 60.6% of ever smokers had an infection (serious infections, 5.5%; herpes zoster [nonserious and serious], 10.8%; Clostridioides difficile infection, 12.0%; lower respiratory tract infection, 19.5%: corresponding values among never smokers were 53.1%, 3.9%, 6.8%, 8.5%, and 11.4%). Major adverse cardiovascular events were reported in 1.0% of ever smokers and 0.7% of never smokers and thromboembolism events (venous and arterial) in 1.0% of ever smokers and 0.9% never smokers. Deaths, malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer [NMSC]), and NMSC occurred infrequently in ever smokers (0.5%, 2.5%, and 3.7%, respectively) and never smokers (0.1%, 1.5%, and 1.0%, respectively). Colorectal cancer was reported in 0.6% of never smokers; no cases occurred in ever smokers. Conclusions: Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib were generally similar in ever smokers and never smokers. Overall, serious AEs and, as expected, infections were more frequent in ever smokers versus never smokers. This may inform treatment selection and monitoring strategies. ClinicalTrialsgov: NCT00787202;NCT01465763;NCT01458951;NCT01458574;NCT01470612;NCT03281304.

Comparing the efficacy of vedolizumab between males and females: a post-hoc analysis of GEMINI-1 and VARSITY.

Vedolizumab is a first-line treatment option for ulcerative colitis. There are differences in incidence of ulcerative colitis between males and females, but whether sex affects treatment outcomes is less clear. We examined sex-based differences in patients with ulcerative colitis initiated on vedolizumab from two major randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a post-hoc analysis on participants with ulcerative colitis from the VARSITY and GEMINI-1 RCTs who received vedolizumab. Outcomes of interest were rates of clinical improvement, clinical remission, and endoscopic improvement at weeks 6, 14, and 52 in male and female participants, as were differences in concentrations of trough vedolizumab and C-reactive protein; 1009 persons in GEMINI-1 and VARSITY trials were included. Male and female patients had similar disease characteristics aside from males being more likely to have Mayo 3 grade endoscopic severity at baseline (62.8 vs. 48.9%, P  < 0.001). At week 6, females were more likely to have endoscopic improvement (47.4 vs. 35.2%, P  = 0.001) and increased vedolizumab trough levels [34.0 (23.0-44.5) vs. 28.9 (19.0-34.6), P  < 0.001]. The probability of achieving clinical remission (28.9 vs. 34.5%, P  = 0.057) or endoscopic improvement (35.5 vs. 39.3%, P  = 0.212) at week 52 was not different between males and females. Females with ulcerative colitis treated with vedolizumab appear more likely to achieve early endoscopic improvement than males, though longer-term outcomes demonstrated no difference. Further studies are required to better understand mechanisms through which sex or sex-associated factors could influence response to therapy in ulcerative colitis.

Efficacy and Safety of Filgotinib for the Treatment of Perianal Fistulising Crohn's Disease [DIVERGENCE 2]: A Phase 2, Randomised, Placebo-controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is an unmet need in the treatment of perianal fistulising Crohn's disease [PFCD]. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the Janus kinase 1 preferential inhibitor, filgotinib, for the treatment of PFCD. METHODS: This phase 2, double-blind, multicentre trial enrolled adults with PFCD and prior treatment failure. Participants were randomised [2:2:1] to receive filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, or placebo, once daily orally for up to 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was combined fistula response (reduction from baseline of at least one draining external opening determined by physical assessment, and no fluid collections >1 cm on pelvic magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) at Week 24. RESULTS: Between April 2017 and July 2020, 106 individuals were screened and 57 were randomised. Discontinuations were lowest in the filgotinib 200 mg group (3/17 [17.6%] versus 13/25 [52.0%] for filgotinib 100 mg and 9/15 [60.0%] for placebo). The proportion of participants who achieved a combined fistula response at Week 24 was 47.1% (8/17; 90% confidence interval [CI] 26.0, 68.9%) in the filgotinib 200 mg group, 29.2% [7/24; 90% CI 14.6, 47.9%] in the filgotinib 100 mg group, and 25.0% [3/12; 90% CI 7.2, 52.7%] in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred more frequently with filgotinib 200 mg (5/17 [29.4%]) than with placebo (1/15 [6.7%]). There were no treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Filgotinib 200 mg was associated with numerical reductions in the number of draining perianal fistulas based on combined clinical and MRI findings compared with placebo, and was generally well tolerated [NCT03077412].

Switching from intravenous to subcutaneous infliximab maintenance therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: Post hoc longitudinal analysis of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacokinetic non-inferiority of subcutaneous (SC) to intravenous (IV) CT-P13 maintenance therapy was demonstrated in a randomized trial (NCT02883452). This post hoc analysis evaluated longitudinal clinical outcomes with the two infliximab treatment strategies. METHODS: Patients with Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis received CT­P13 IV loading doses (5 mg/kg; Week [W] 0 and W2) before randomization (1:1) to receive CT-P13 SC (body weight-based dosing every 2 weeks [Q2W]; W6-54; 'SC maintenance group') or CT­P13 IV (5 mg/kg Q8W; W6-22) then CT-P13 SC (Q2W; W30-54; 'IV-to-SC switch group'). Paired W30/W54 patient-level data were analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty-three (IV-to-SC switch) and fifty-nine (SC maintenance) patients were analyzed. Median trough serum CT-P13 concentrations were significantly higher at W54 versus W30 in the IV-to-SC switch group (20.4 versus 2.3 µg/mL; p < 0.00001), while remaining consistent in the SC maintenance group. Statistically significant improvements in pharmacokinetics, efficacy, fecal calprotectin levels, and quality of life were seen following switch to SC administration at W30 in the IV-to-SC switch group; safety findings were similar pre- and post-switch. CONCLUSION: Formulation switching from IV to SC infliximab maintenance therapy was well tolerated and may provide additional clinical improvements. Findings require confirmation in larger prospective studies.

Delayed Ustekinumab and Adalimumab Responders Have Similar Outcomes as Early Responders in Biologic-Naïve Crohn's Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Differences in 1-year outcomes among early and delayed responders have been demonstrated with some therapies in ulcerative colitis. However, it is unclear whether similar differences exist in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) treated with biologic therapies. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of patient-level data from the SEAVUE clinical trial program. Ustekinumab-treated and adalimumab-treated patients with clinical response at week 8, defined as a reduction in Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of at least 100 points from baseline or CDAI score <150, were deemed early responders and their outcomes were compared with delayed responders (week 8 nonresponders who subsequently responded at week 16) and nonresponders (no response at week 8 or 16). The primary outcome assessed was clinical remission at week 56, defined as CDAI <150. RESULTS: A total of 373 participants (187 treated with ustekinumab and 186 treated with adalimumab) were included in this analysis. The overall rate of delayed clinical response was low in the SEAVUE clinical trial program (13.1%). No differences were observed for week 56 clinical remission among early vs delayed responders to ustekinumab or adalimumab nor were there significant differences for secondary outcomes assessed. Delayed responders to ustekinumab and adalimumab had a significant decline in C-reactive protein by week 8 when compared with nonresponders. DISCUSSION: Among patients with moderate-to-severe CD, early and delayed responders to adalimumab and ustekinumab have similar 1-year clinical outcomes. Biomarker decline can be observed through the initial 8 weeks of therapy in patients who will eventually be delayed responders, which may help differentiate from nonresponders.

Treatment persistence and switching patterns of ABP 501 in European patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Background: Approval of the adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar ABP 501 for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) indications was based on the principle of extrapolation, without indication-specific clinical trial data. Objectives: To evaluate the real-world treatment patterns of ABP 501 in patients with IBD. Design: Retrospective analysis of pharmacy claims data from Germany and France. Methods: Continuously insured adult IBD patients who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 were included. Treatment persistence, adherence, and post-ABP 501 switching patterns were evaluated for two mutually exclusive groups: ADA-naïve patients (i.e. no baseline use of ADA products) and ADA-experienced patients (i.e. previously treated with ADA products). Results: A total of 3362 German patients and 733 French patients were included, with 54.4% and 65.3% being ADA-naïve patients, respectively. Median persistence (95% CI) on ABP 501 was 10.9 months (9.8-11.6) in ADA-naïve patients and 14.2 months (12.7-15.2) in ADA-experienced patients in Germany; for the French cohort, ADA-naïve and -experienced patients had median persistence of 12.8 months (10.2-14.7) and 11.5 months (8.8-14.4), respectively. During the first 12 months of ABP 501 initiation, 53.7% of German patients and 51.0% of French patients were adherent to the therapy. About 20% of patients in both countries switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy. In the German cohort, ADA-naïve patients most frequently switched to non-tumor necrosis factor inhibitor biologics, but ADA-experienced patients most commonly switched to reference product (RP); in the French cohort, patients most often switched to RP regardless of prior exposure to ADA products. Conclusion: About 50% of patients persisted on and were adherent to ABP 501 therapy during the first 12 months after treatment initiation in two large European countries. Post-ABP 501, switching patterns varied between countries, indicating diversified treatment practices warranting further research on reason(s) for switching and potential overall treatment outcomes.

Washout Periods in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Trials: A Systematic Literature Review and Proposed Solutions.

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), encompassing ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD), impose a substantial burden. Despite many effective molecules, significant numbers of patients do not achieve clinical remission at 1 year1 and undergo surgery during their lives, revealing an important unmet need and therapeutic gap. Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are ongoing or planned to develop more effective and tolerable therapies. In parallel, a dramatic decline in recruitment rates has been observed. A multitude of factors have contributed to poor recruitment rates, including a long washout period between the investigational drug and prior advanced therapies (ie, biologic or small molecule drug).2,3 This study aims to review the different washout periods with prior advanced therapies or immunosuppressants in phase 3 RCTs for UC and CD and to propose potential solutions to ultimately improve the design of clinical studies and patient enrollment in future trials.

Modified-Release Phosphatidylcholine (LT-02) for Ulcerative Colitis: Two Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of LT-02, a novel modified-release phosphatidylcholine (PC) formulation, for induction and maintenance of remission in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis (UC) and inadequate response to mesalamine. METHODS: LT-02 was evaluated in a multicenter double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study comprising a 12-week induction trial (PCG-2), followed by a 48-week maintenance trial (PCG-4). In PCG-2, patients were randomized 1:1:1 to treatment with 0.8 g LT-02 4 times daily (QID), 1.6 g LT-02 twice daily (BID), or placebo, respectively. All patients continued to take a standard dose of oral mesalamine (≥2.4 g/day). The primary end point in PCG-2 was deep remission. Patients achieving remission at week 12 were randomly assigned 2:1:1 to 1.6 g LT-02 BID, placebo, or 500 mg mesalamine (3 times daily), respectively, in PCG-4; the primary end point was remission at 48 weeks. RESULTS: PCG-2 was terminated early for futility after a prespecified interim analysis; 466 patients (of 762 planned) were randomized. There was no statistically significant difference in deep remission at week 12 (placebo, 13.5%; LT-02 BID, 14.2%; LT-02 QID, 9.7%). In PCG-4, 150 patients (of approximately 400 planned) were randomized. There was no statistically significant difference in remission rates at week 48 (LT-02 BID, 49.3%; mesalamine, 50.0%; placebo, 43.2%). LT-02 was safe. CONCLUSIONS: Despite prior evidence of beneficial effects of PC in phase 2 trials, our induction study with LT-02 in patients with mild to moderate UC was terminated prematurely for futility. Signals of efficacy in maintenance therapy require confirmation in an adequately powered maintenance trial. LT-02 was safe and well-tolerated. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT02280629, NCT02142725.

Prediction of Response to Systemic Corticosteroids in Active UC by Microbial Composition-A Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are used for induction of remission in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. However, up to one-third of patients fail to this therapy. We investigated if fecal microbial composition or its metabolic capacity are associated with response to systemic corticosteroids. METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter study, patients with active ulcerative colitis (Lichtiger score ≥4) receiving systemic corticosteroids were eligible. Data were assessed and fecal samples collected before and after 4 weeks of treatment. Patients were divided into responders (decrease of Lichtiger Score ≥50%) and nonresponders. The fecal microbiome was assessed by the 16S rRNA gene marker and analyzed with QIIME 2. Microbial metabolic pathways were predicted using parsimonious flux balance analysis. RESULTS: Among 93 included patients, 69 (74%) patients responded to corticosteroids after 4 weeks. At baseline, responders could not be distinguished from nonresponders by microbial diversity and composition, except for a subgroup of biologic-naïve patients. Within 4 weeks of treatment, responders experienced changes in beta diversity with enrichment of ascribed beneficial taxa, including Blautia, Anaerostipes, and Bifidobacterium, as well as an increase in predicted butyrate synthesis. Nonresponders had only minor longitudinal taxonomic changes with a significant increase of Streptococcus salivarius and a microbial composition shifting away from responders. CONCLUSION: Baseline microbial diversity and composition seem to be of limited use to predict response to systemic corticosteroids in active ulcerative colitis. Response is longitudinally associated with restoration of microbial composition and its metabolic capacity.

Alternative Endoscopy Reading Paradigms Determine Score Reliability and Effect Size in Ulcerative Colitis.

OBJECTIVE: Central reading of endoscopy is advocated by regulatory agencies for clinical trials in ulcerative colitis [UC]. It is uncertain whether the local/site reader should be included in the reading paradigm. We explore whether using locally- and centrally-determined endoscopic Mayo subscores [eMS] provide a reliable final assessment and whether the paradigm used has an impact on effect size. METHODS: eMS data from the TURANDOT [NCT01620255] study were used to retrospectively examine seven different reading paradigms (using the scores of local readers [LR], first central readers [CR1], second central readers [CR2], and various consensus reads [ConCR]) by assessing inter-rater reliabilities and their impact on the key study endpoint, endoscopic improvement. RESULTS: More than 40% of eMS scores between two trained central readers were discordant. Central readers had wide variability in scorings at baseline (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] of 0.475 [0.339, 0.610] for CR1 vs CR2). Centrally-read scores had variable concordance with LR (LR vs CR1 ICC 0.682 [0.575, 0.788], and LR vs CR2 ICC 0.526 [0.399, 0.653]). Reading paradigms with LR and CR which included a consensus, enhanced ICC estimates to >0.8. At Week 12, without the consensus reads, the CR1 vs CR2 ICC estimates were 0.775 [0.710, 0.841], and with consensus reads the ICC estimates were >0.9. Consensus-based approaches were most favourable to detect a treatment difference. CONCLUSION: The ICC between the eMS of two trained and experienced central readers is unexpectedly low, which reinforces that currently used central reading processes are still associated with several weaknesses.