Cardiovascular Safety of Testosterone-Replacement Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular safety of testosterone-replacement therapy in middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism has not been determined. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, noninferiority trial, we enrolled 5246 men 45 to 80 years of age who had preexisting or a high risk of cardiovascular disease and who reported symptoms of hypogonadism and had two fasting testosterone levels of less than 300 ng per deciliter. Patients were randomly assigned to receive daily transdermal 1.62% testosterone gel (dose adjusted to maintain testosterone levels between 350 and 750 ng per deciliter) or placebo gel. The primary cardiovascular safety end point was the first occurrence of any component of a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. A secondary cardiovascular end point was the first occurrence of any component of the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or coronary revascularization, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. Noninferiority required an upper limit of less than 1.5 for the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio among patients receiving at least one dose of testosterone or placebo. RESULTS: The mean (±SD) duration of treatment was 21.7±14.1 months, and the mean follow-up was 33.0±12.1 months. A primary cardiovascular end-point event occurred in 182 patients (7.0%) in the testosterone group and in 190 patients (7.3%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.17; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Similar findings were observed in sensitivity analyses in which data on events were censored at various times after discontinuation of testosterone or placebo. The incidence of secondary end-point events or of each of the events of the composite primary cardiovascular end point appeared to be similar in the two groups. A higher incidence of atrial fibrillation, of acute kidney injury, and of pulmonary embolism was observed in the testosterone group. CONCLUSIONS: In men with hypogonadism and preexisting or a high risk of cardiovascular disease, testosterone-replacement therapy was noninferior to placebo with respect to the incidence of major adverse cardiac events. (Funded by AbbVie and others; TRAVERSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03518034.).

Risankizumab as maintenance therapy for moderately to severely active Crohn's disease: results from the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, withdrawal phase 3 FORTIFY maintenance trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a great unmet need for new therapeutics with novel mechanisms of action for patients with Crohn's disease. The ADVANCE and MOTIVATE studies showed that intravenous risankizumab, a selective p19 anti-interleukin (IL)-23 antibody, was efficacious and well tolerated as induction therapy. Here, we report the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous risankizumab as maintenance therapy. METHODS: FORTIFY is a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, maintenance withdrawal study across 273 clinical centres in 44 countries across North and South America, Europe, Oceania, Africa, and the Asia-Pacific region that enrolled participants with clinical response to risankizumab in the ADVANCE or MOTIVATE induction studies. Patients in ADVANCE or MOTIVATE were aged 16-80 years with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. Patients in the FORTIFY substudy 1 were randomly assigned again (1:1:1) to receive either subcutaneous risankizumab 180 mg, subcutaneous risankizumab 360 mg, or withdrawal from risankizumab to receive subcutaneous placebo (herein referred to as withdrawal [subcutaneous placebo]). Treatment was given every 8 weeks. Patients were stratified by induction dose, post-induction endoscopic response, and clinical remission status. Patients, investigators, and study personnel were masked to treatment assignments. Week 52 co-primary endpoints were clinical remission (Crohn's disease activity index [CDAI] in the US protocol, or stool frequency and abdominal pain score in the non-US protocol) and endoscopic response in patients who received at least one dose of study drug during the 52-week maintenance period. Safety was assessed in patients receiving at least one dose of study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03105102. FINDINGS: 712 patients were initially assessed and, between April 9, 2018, and April 24, 2020, 542 patients were randomly assigned to either the risankizumab 180 mg group (n=179), the risankizumab 360 mg group (n=179), or the placebo group (n=184). Greater clinical remission and endoscopic response rates were reached with 360 mg risankizumab versus placebo (CDAI clinical remission was reached in 74 (52%) of 141 patients vs 67 (41%) of 164 patients, adjusted difference 15% [95% CI 5-24]; stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission was reached in 73 (52%) of 141 vs 65 (40%) of 164, adjusted difference 15% [5-25]; endoscopic response 66 (47%) of 141 patients vs 36 (22%) of 164 patients, adjusted difference 28% [19-37]). Higher rates of CDAI clinical remission and endoscopic response (but not stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission [p=0·124]) were also reached with risankizumab 180 mg versus withdrawal (subcutaneous placebo; CDAI clinical remission reached in 87 [55%] of 157 patients, adjusted difference 15% [95% CI 5-24]; endoscopic response 74 [47%] of 157, adjusted difference 26% [17-35]). Results for more stringent endoscopic and composite endpoints and inflammatory biomarkers were consistent with a dose-response relationship. Maintenance treatment was well tolerated. Adverse event rates were similar among groups, and the most frequently reported adverse events in all treatment groups were worsening Crohn's disease, arthralgia, and headache. INTERPRETATION: Subcutaneous risankizumab is a safe and efficacious treatment for maintenance of remission in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease and offers a new therapeutic option for a broad range of patients by meeting endpoints that might change the future course of disease. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Risankizumab as induction therapy for Crohn's disease: results from the phase 3 ADVANCE and MOTIVATE induction trials.

BACKGROUND: Risankizumab, an interleukin (IL)-23 p19 inhibitor, was evaluated for safety and efficacy as induction therapy in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. METHODS: ADVANCE and MOTIVATE were randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled, phase 3 induction studies. Eligible patients aged 16-80 years with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease, previously showing intolerance or inadequate response to one or more approved biologics or conventional therapy (ADVANCE) or to biologics (MOTIVATE), were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of intravenous risankizumab (600 mg or 1200 mg) or placebo (2:2:1 in ADVANCE, 1:1:1 in MOTIVATE) at weeks 0, 4, and 8. We used interactive response technology for random assignment, with stratification by number of previous failed biologics, corticosteroid use at baseline, and Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease (SES-CD). All patients and study personnel (excluding pharmacists who prepared intravenous solutions) were masked to treatment allocation throughout the study. Coprimary endpoints were clinical remission (defined by Crohn's disease activity index [CDAI] or patient-reported outcome criteria [average daily stool frequency and abdominal pain score]) and endoscopic response at week 12. The intention-to-treat population (all eligible patients who received at least one dose of study drug in the 12-week induction period) was analysed for efficacy outcomes. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Both trials were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03105128 (ADVANCE) and NCT03104413 (MOTIVATE), and are now complete. FINDINGS: Participants were enrolled between May 10, 2017, and Aug 24, 2020 (ADVANCE trial), and Dec 18, 2017 and Sept 9, 2020 (MOTIVATE trial). In ADVANCE, 931 patients were assigned to either risankizumab 600 mg (n=373), risankizumab 1200 mg (n=372), or placebo (n=186). In MOTIVATE, 618 patients were assigned to risankizumab 600 mg (n=206), risankizumab 1200 mg (n=205), or placebo (n=207). The primary analysis population comprised 850 participants in ADVANCE and 569 participants in MOTIVATE. All coprimary endpoints at week 12 were met in both trials with both doses of risankizumab (p values ≤0·0001). In ADVANCE, CDAI clinical remission rate was 45% (adjusted difference 21%, 95% CI 12-29; 152/336) with risankizumab 600 mg and 42% (17%, 8-25; 141/339) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 25% (43/175) with placebo; stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission rate was 43% (22%, 14-30; 146/336) with risankizumab 600 mg and 41% (19%, 11-27; 139/339) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 22% (38/175) with placebo; and endoscopic response rate was 40% (28%, 21-35; 135/336) with risankizumab 600 mg and 32% (20%, 14-27; 109/339) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 12% (21/175) with placebo. In MOTIVATE, CDAI clinical remission rate was 42% (22%, 13-31; 80/191) with risankizumab 600 mg and 40% (21%, 12-29; 77/191) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 20% (37/187) with placebo; stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission rate was 35% (15%, 6-24; 66/191) with risankizumab 600 mg and 40% (20%, 12-29; 76/191) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 19% (36/187) with placebo; and endoscopic response rate was 29% (18%, 10-25; 55/191) with risankizumab 600 mg and 34% (23%, 15-31; 65/191) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 11% (21/187) with placebo. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar among the treatment groups in both trials. Three deaths occurred during induction (two in the placebo group [ADVANCE] and one in the risankizumab 1200 mg group [MOTIVATE]). The death in the risankizumab-treated patient was deemed unrelated to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: Risankizumab was effective and well tolerated as induction therapy in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Upadacitinib as induction and maintenance therapy for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: results from three phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: There is a great unmet need for advanced therapies that provide rapid, robust, and sustained disease control for patients with ulcerative colitis. We assessed the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, as induction and maintenance therapy in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. METHODS: This phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical programme consisted of two replicate induction studies (U-ACHIEVE induction [UC1] and U-ACCOMPLISH [UC2]) and a single maintenance study (U-ACHIEVE maintenance [UC3]). The studies were conducted across Europe, North and South America, Australasia, Africa, and the Asia-Pacific region at 199 clinical centres in 39 countries (UC1), 204 clinical centres in 40 countries (UC2), and 195 clinical centres in 35 countries (UC3). Patients aged 16-75 years with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (Adapted Mayo score 5-9; endoscopic subscore 2 or 3) for at least 90 days were randomly assigned (2:1) to oral upadacitinib 45 mg once daily or placebo for 8 weeks (induction studies). Patients who achieved clinical response following 8-week upadacitinib induction were re-randomly assigned (1:1:1) to upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg, or placebo for 52 weeks (maintenance study). All patients were randomly assigned using web-based interactive response technology. The primary endpoints were clinical remission per Adapted Mayo score at week 8 (induction) and week 52 (maintenance). The efficacy analyses in the two induction studies were based on the intent-to-treat population, which included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of treatment. In the maintenance study, the primary efficacy analyses reported in this manuscript were based on the first 450 (planned) clinical responders to 8-week induction therapy with upadacitinib 45 mg once daily. The safety analysis population in the induction studies consisted of all randomised patients who received at least one dose of treatment; in the maintenance study, this population included all patients who received at least one dose of treatment as part of the primary analysis population. These studies are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819635 (U-ACHIEVE) and NCT03653026 (U-ACCOMPLISH). FINDINGS: Between Oct 23, 2018, and Sept 7, 2020, 474 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 45 mg once daily (n=319) or placebo (n=155) in UC1. Between Dec 6, 2018, and Jan 14, 2021, 522 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 45 mg once daily (n=345) or placebo (n=177) in UC2. In UC3, a total of 451 patients (21 from the phase 2b study, 278 from UC1, and 152 from UC2) who achieved a clinical response after 8 weeks of upadacitinib induction treatment were randomly assigned again to upadacitinib 15 mg (n=148), upadacitinib 30 mg (n=154), and placebo (n=149) in the primary analysis population. Statistically significantly more patients achieved clinical remission with upadacitinib 45 mg (83 [26%] of 319 patients in UC1 and 114 [34%] of 341 patients in UC2) than in the placebo group (seven [5%] of 154 patients in UC1 and seven [4%] of 174 patients; p<0·0001; adjusted treatment difference 21·6% [95% CI 15·8-27·4] for UC1 and 29·0% [23·2-34·7] for UC2). In the maintenance study, clinical remission was achieved by statistically significantly more patients receiving upadacitinib (15 mg 63 [42%] of 148; 30 mg 80 [52%] of 154) than those receiving placebo (18 [12%] of 149; p<0·0001; adjusted treatment difference 30·7% [21·7-39·8] for upadacitinib 15 mg vs placebo and 39·0% [29·7-48·2] for upadacitinib 30 mg vs placebo). The most commonly reported adverse events in UC1 were nasopharyngitis (15 [5%] of 319 in the upadacitinib 45 mg group vs six [4%] of 155 in the placebo group), creatine phosphokinase elevation (15 [4%] vs three [2%]), and acne (15 [5%] vs one [1%]). In UC2, the most frequently reported adverse event was acne (24 [7%] of 344 in the upadacitinib 45 mg group vs three [2%] of 177 in the placebo group). In both induction studies, serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation of treatment were less frequent in the upadacitinib 45 mg group than in the placebo group (serious adverse events eight [3%] vs nine (6%) in UC1 and 11 [3%] vs eight [5%] in UC2; adverse events leading to discontinuation six [2%] vs 14 [9%] in UC1 and six [2%] vs nine [5%] in UC2). In UC3, the most frequently reported adverse events (≥5%) were worsening of ulcerative colitis (19 [13%] of 148 in the upadacitinib 15 mg group vs 11 [7%] of 154 in the upadacitinib 30 mg group vs 45 [30%] of 149 in the placebo group), nasopharyngitis (18 [12%] vs 22 [14%] vs 15 [10%]), creatine phosphokinase elevation (nine [6%] vs 13 [8%] vs three [2%]), arthralgia (nine [6%] vs five [3%] vs 15 [10%]), and upper respiratory tract infection (seven [5%] vs nine [6%] vs six [4%]). The proportion of serious adverse events (ten [7%] vs nine [6%] vs 19 [13%]) and adverse events leading to discontinuation (six [4%] vs ten [6%] vs 17 [11%]) was lower in both upadacitinib groups than in the placebo group. Events of cancer, adjudicated major adverse cardiac events, or venous thromboembolism were reported infrequently. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Upadacitinib demonstrated a positive efficacy and safety profile and could be an effective treatment option for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Higher vs Standard Adalimumab Induction and Maintenance Dosing Regimens for Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis: SERENE UC Trial Results.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: SERENE UC (Study of a Novel Approach to Induction and Maintenance Dosing With Adalimumab in Patients With Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis) evaluated the efficacy of higher adalimumab induction and maintenance dose regimens in patients with ulcerative colitis. METHODS: This phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial included induction and maintenance studies, with a main study (ex-Japan) and Japan substudy. Eligible patients (18-75 years, full Mayo score 6-12, centrally read endoscopy subscore 2-3) were randomized 3:2 to higher induction regimen (adalimumab 160 mg at weeks 0, 1, 2, and 3) or standard induction regimen (160 mg at week 0 and 80 mg at week 2); all received 40 mg at weeks 4 and 6. At week 8, all patients were rerandomized 2:2:1 (main study) to 40 mg every week (ew), 40 mg every other week (eow), or exploratory therapeutic drug monitoring; or 1:1 (Japan substudy) to 40 mg ew or 40 mg eow maintenance regimens. RESULTS: In the main study, 13.3% vs 10.9% of patients receiving the higher induction regimen vs standard induction regimen achieved clinical remission (full Mayo score ≤2 with no subscore >1) at week 8 (induction primary end point; P = .265); among week-8 responders, 39.5% vs 29.0% receiving 40 mg ew vs 40 mg eow achieved clinical remission at week 52 (maintenance primary end point; P = .069). In the integrated (main + Japan) population, 41.1% vs 30.1% of week-8 responders receiving 40 mg ew vs 40 mg eow achieved clinical remission at week 52 (nominal P = .045). Safety profiles were comparable between dosing regimens. CONCLUSION: Although primary end points were not met, a >10% absolute difference in clinical remission was demonstrated with higher adalimumab maintenance dosing. Higher dosing regimens were generally well tolerated and consistent with the known safety profile of adalimumab in ulcerative colitis. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT002209456.

Efficacy of Upadacitinib in a Randomized Trial of Patients With Active Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, an oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase 1, as induction therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: We performed a multicenter, double-blind, phase 2b study of 250 adults with moderately to severely active UC and an inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to corticosteroids, immunosuppressive agents, and/or biologic therapies. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that received placebo or induction therapy with upadacitinib (7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg, or 45 mg, extended release), once daily for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who achieve clinical remission according to the adapted Mayo score at week 8. No multiplicity adjustments were applied. RESULTS: At week 8, 8.5%, 14.3%, 13.5%, and 19.6% of patients receiving 7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg, or 45 mg upadacitinib, respectively, achieved clinical remission compared with none of the patients receiving placebo (P = .052, P = .013, P = .011, and P = .002 compared with placebo, respectively). Endoscopic improvement at week 8, defined as endoscopic subscore of ≤ 1, was achieved in 14.9%, 30.6%, 26.9%, and 35.7% of patients receiving upadacitinib 7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg, or 45 mg, respectively, compared with 2.2% receiving placebo (P = .033, P < .001, P < .001, and P < .001 compared with placebo, respectively). One event of herpes zoster and 1 participant with pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis (diagnosed 26 days after treatment discontinuation) were reported in the group that received upadacitinib 45 mg once daily. Increases in serum lipid levels and creatine phosphokinase with upadacitinib were observed. CONCLUSION: In a phase 2b trial, 8 weeks of treatment with upadacitinib was more effective than placebo for inducing remission in patients with moderately to severely active UC. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02819635).

Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib in a Randomized Trial of Patients With Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, in a randomized trial of patients with Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: We performed a double-blind, phase 2 trial in adults with moderate to severe CD and inadequate response or intolerance to immunosuppressants or tumor necrosis factor antagonists. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1) to groups given placebo; or 3 mg, 6 mg, 12 mg, or 24 mg upadacitinib twice daily; or 24 mg upadacitinib once daily and were evaluated by ileocolonoscopy at weeks 12 or 16 of the induction period. Patients who completed week 16 were re-randomized to a 36-week period of maintenance therapy with upadacitinib. The primary endpoints were clinical remission at week 16 and endoscopic remission at week 12 or 16 using the multiple comparison procedure and modeling and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, with a 2-sided level of 10%. RESULTS: Among the 220 patients in the study, clinical remission was achieved by 13% of patients receiving 3 mg upadacitinib, 27% of patients receiving 6 mg upadacitinib (P < .1 vs placebo), 11% of patients receiving 12 mg upadacitinib, and 22% of patients receiving 24 mg upadacitinib twice daily, and by 14% of patients receiving 24 mg upadacitinib once daily, vs 11% of patients receiving placebo. Endoscopic remission was achieved by 10% (P < .1 vs placebo), 8%, 8% (P < .1 vs placebo), 22% (P < .01 vs placebo), and 14% (P < .05 vs placebo) of patients receiving upadacitinib, respectively, vs none of the patients receiving placebo. Endoscopic but not clinical remission increased with dose during the induction period. Efficacy was maintained for most endpoints through week 52. During the induction period, patients in the upadacitinib groups had higher incidences of infections and serious infections vs placebo. Patients in the twice-daily 12 mg and 24 mg upadacitinib groups had significant increases in total, high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels compared with patients in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 trial of patients with CD, upadacitinib induced endoscopic remission in a significant proportion of patients compared with placebo. Upadacitinib's benefit/risk profile supports further development for treatment of CD. (Clinicaltrials.gov, Number: NCT02365649).

Effect of tight control management on Crohn's disease (CALM): a multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers of intestinal inflammation, such as faecal calprotectin and C-reactive protein, have been recommended for monitoring patients with Crohn's disease, but whether their use in treatment decisions improves outcomes is unknown. We aimed to compare endoscopic and clinical outcomes in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease who were managed with a tight control algorithm, using clinical symptoms and biomarkers, versus patients managed with a clinical management algorithm. METHODS: CALM was an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 study, done in 22 countries at 74 hospitals and outpatient centres, which evaluated adult patients (aged 18-75 years) with active endoscopic Crohn's disease (Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity [CDEIS] >6; sum of CDEIS subscores of >6 in one or more segments with ulcers), a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) of 150-450 depending on dose of prednisone at baseline, and no previous use of immunomodulators or biologics. Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to tight control or clinical management groups, stratified by smoking status (yes or no), weight (<70 kg or ≥70 kg), and disease duration (≤2 years or >2 years) after 8 weeks of prednisone induction therapy, or earlier if they had active disease. In both groups, treatment was escalated in a stepwise manner, from no treatment, to adalimumab induction followed by adalimumab every other week, adalimumab every week, and lastly to both weekly adalimumab and daily azathioprine. This escalation was based on meeting treatment failure criteria, which differed between groups (tight control group before and after random assignment: faecal calprotectin ≥250 µg/g, C-reactive protein ≥5mg/L, CDAI ≥150, or prednisone use in the previous week; clinical management group before random assignment: CDAI decrease of <70 points compared with baseline or CDAI >200; clinical management group after random assignment: CDAI decrease of <100 points compared with baseline or CDAI ≥200, or prednisone use in the previous week). De-escalation was possible for patients receiving weekly adalimumab and azathioprine or weekly adalimumab alone if failure criteria were not met. The primary endpoint was mucosal healing (CDEIS <4) with absence of deep ulcers 48 weeks after randomisation. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial has been completed, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01235689. FINDINGS: Between Feb 11, 2011, and Nov 3, 2016, 244 patients (mean disease duration: clinical management group, 0·9 years [SD 1·7]; tight control group, 1·0 year [2·3]) were randomly assigned to monitoring groups (n=122 per group). 29 (24%) patients in the clinical management group and 32 (26%) patients in the tight control group discontinued the study, mostly because of adverse events. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the tight control group achieved the primary endpoint at week 48 (56 [46%] of 122 patients) than in the clinical management group (37 [30%] of 122 patients), with a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test-adjusted risk difference of 16·1% (95% CI 3·9-28·3; p=0·010). 105 (86%) of 122 patients in the tight control group and 100 (82%) of 122 patients in the clinical management group reported treatment-emergent adverse events; no treatment-related deaths occurred. The most common adverse events were nausea (21 [17%] of 122 patients), nasopharyngitis (18 [15%]), and headache (18 [15%]) in the tight control group, and worsening Crohn's disease (35 [29%] of 122 patients), arthralgia (19 [16%]), and nasopharyngitis (18 [15%]) in the clinical management group. INTERPRETATION: CALM is the first study to show that timely escalation with an anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy on the basis of clinical symptoms combined with biomarkers in patients with early Crohn's disease results in better clinical and endoscopic outcomes than symptom-driven decisions alone. Future studies should assess the effects of such a strategy on long-term outcomes such as bowel damage, surgeries, hospital admissions, and disability. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Responsiveness of Endoscopic Indices of Disease Activity for Crohn's Disease.

OBJECTIVES: The Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) and the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) are commonly used to assess Crohn's disease (CD) activity; however neither instrument is fully validated. We evaluated the responsiveness to change of the SES-CD and CDEIS using data from a trial of adalimumab, a drug therapy of known efficacy. METHODS: Paired video recordings (N=112) of colonoscopies (baseline and week 8-12) obtained from patients with CD who participated in a trial of adalimumab therapy were reviewed in random order, in duplicate, by four central readers (56 pairs of videos by 2 groups of readers). Responsiveness of the SES-CD and the CDEIS was evaluated by comparing correlations between the observed and pre-specified predictions of change scores for these endoscopic indices with a global endoscopic evaluation of severity (GELS), a patient reported outcome (PRO2), and the Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI), and by calculation of the standardized effect size, and Guyatt's Responsiveness statistic (GRS) using 2 definitions of change; (1) treatment assignment and (2) an absolute change in total PRO2 of 50. The potential application of effect size estimates was demonstrated by calculating hypothetical sample sizes for comparing two independent groups. The impact of removing stenosis as an index item and adjusting for the number of segments observed was also assessed. RESULTS: Changes in both endoscopic instruments and the GELS were highly correlated. The SES-CD displayed numerically higher effect sizes for both definitions of change. The standardized effect size and GRS estimates (95% confidence interval) for the SES-CD based on treatment assignment were 0.84 (0.53, 1.15) and 0.79 (0.48, 1.09). Corresponding values for the CDEIS were 0.72 (0.42, 1.02) and 0.75 (0.45, 1.06). The standardized effect size and GRS estimates for the SES-CD based on an absolute change in total PRO2 of 50 points or greater were 0.76 (0.49, 1.02) and 0.93 (0.64, 1.21). Corresponding values for CDEIS were 0.70 (0.44, 0.97), 0.83 (0.55, 1.10). Removal of stenosis as an index item and adjusting for observed segments did not improve responsiveness estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Although both the SES-CD and CDEIS are valid measures of endoscopic disease activity that are moderately responsive to changes in endoscopic disease activity, the SES-CD displayed numerically greater responsiveness in this data set.

Adalimumab therapy is associated with reduced risk of hospitalization in patients with ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adalimumab is effective for induction and maintenance of remission in patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC). We assessed whether adalimumab, in addition to standard UC therapy, reduced the risk for hospitalization (from all causes, from complications of UC, or from complications of UC or the drugs used to treat it) and colectomy in patients with moderate to severe UC compared with placebo. METHODS: Data were combined from patients that received induction therapy (a 160-mg dose followed by an 80-mg dose of adalimumab) or placebo in 2 trials (ULTRA 1 and ULTRA 2; n = 963). The risks of hospitalization and colectomy were compared between groups using unadjusted rates during the 8-week induction period, and patient-year-adjusted rates during 52 weeks. Statistical differences between groups were determined using the χ(2) method and Z score normal approximations. Numbers of hospitalizations were compared using Poisson regression with time offset. RESULTS: Significant reductions in risk of all-cause, UC-related, and UC- or drug-related hospitalizations (by 40%, 50%, and 47%, respectively; P < .05 for all comparisons) were observed within the first 8 weeks of adalimumab therapy compared with placebo. Significantly lower incidence rates for all-cause (0.18 vs 0.26; P = .03), UC-related (0.12 vs 0.22; P = .002), and UC- or drug-related (0.14 vs 0.24; P = .005) hospitalizations were observed during 52 weeks of adalimumab therapy compared with placebo. Rates of colectomy did not differ significantly between patients given adalimumab vs placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate to severe UC, the addition of adalimumab to standard of care treatment reduced the number of hospitalizations for any cause, as well as for UC-related and UC- or drug-related complications, compared with placebo. ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00385736 and NCT00408629.

Increased risk of malignancy with adalimumab combination therapy, compared with monotherapy, for Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Few studies have assessed the risk of malignancy from anti-tumor necrosis factor monotherapy or combination therapy for Crohn's disease (CD). We determined the relative risk of malignancy in patients with CD who received adalimumab monotherapy, compared with the general population. We also compared the risk of malignancy associated with combination adalimumab and immunomodulator therapy with that of adalimumab monotherapy. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of data from 1594 patients with CD who participated in clinical trials of adalimumab (CLASSIC I and II, CHARM, GAIN, EXTEND, and ADHERE studies; 3050 patient-years of exposure). We calculated rates of malignancy among patients; the expected rates of malignancy, based on the general population, were derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry and National Cancer Institute survey. RESULTS: Compared with the general population, patients receiving adalimumab monotherapy did not have a greater than expected incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) or other cancers, whereas those receiving combination therapy had a greater than expected incidence of malignancies other than NMSC (standardized incidence ratio, 3.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.66-5.10) and of NMSC (standardized incidence ratio, 4.59; 95% CI, 2.51-7.70). Compared with patients receiving adalimumab monotherapy, those patients receiving combination therapy had an increased risk of malignancy other than NMSC (relative risk, 2.82; 95% CI, 1.07-7.44) and of NMSC (relative risk, 3.46; 95% CI, 1.08-11.06). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CD, the incidence of malignancy with adalimumab monotherapy was not greater than that of the general population. Co-administration of immunomodulator therapy and adalimumab was associated with an increased risk of NMSC and other cancers.

Four-year maintenance treatment with adalimumab in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: Data from ULTRA 1, 2, and 3.

OBJECTIVES: The safety and efficacy of adalimumab for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) has been reported up to week 52 from the placebo-controlled trials ULTRA (Ulcerative Colitis Long-Term Remission and Maintenance with Adalimumab) 1 and 2. Up to 4 years of data for adalimumab-treated patients from ULTRA 1, 2, and the open-label extension ULTRA 3 are presented. METHODS: Remission per partial Mayo score, remission per Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) score, and mucosal healing rates were assessed in adalimumab-randomized patients from ULTRA 1 and 2 up to week 208. Corticosteroid-free remission was assessed in adalimumab-randomized patients who used corticosteroids at lead-in study baseline. Maintenance of remission per partial Mayo score and mucosal healing was assessed in patients who entered ULTRA 3 in remission per full Mayo score and with mucosal healing, respectively. As observed, last observation carried forward (LOCF) and nonresponder imputation (NRI) were used to report efficacy. Adverse events were reported for any adalimumab-treated patient. RESULTS: A total of 600/1,094 patients enrolled in ULTRA 1 or 2 were randomized to receive adalimumab and included in the intent-to-treat analyses of the studies. Of these, 199 patients remained on adalimumab after 4 years of follow-up. Rates of remission per partial Mayo score, remission per IBDQ score, mucosal healing, and corticosteroid discontinuation at week 208 were 24.7%, 26.3%, 27.7% (NRI), and 59.2% (observed), respectively. Of the patients who were followed up in ULTRA 3 (588/1,094), a total of 360 patients remained on adalimumab 3 years later. Remission per partial Mayo score and mucosal healing after ULTRA 1 or 2 to year 3 of ULTRA 3 were maintained by 63.6% and 59.9% of patients, respectively (NRI). Adverse event rates were stable over time. CONCLUSIONS: Remission, mucosal healing, and improved quality of life were maintained in patients with moderately to severely active UC with long-term adalimumab therapy, for up to 4 years. No new safety signals were reported.

Safety and efficacy of adalimumab for moderate to severe Crohn's disease in children.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The IMAgINE 1 study (NCT00409682) evaluated the safety and efficacy of adalimumab double-blind maintenance dosing regimens following open-label induction for pediatric patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: We studied 192 patients with Pediatric Crohn's Disease Activity Index (PCDAI) scores >30 for whom conventional treatment was unsuccessful. Patients received open-label induction therapy with subcutaneous adalimumab at weeks 0 and 2 (160 mg and 80 mg, or 80 mg and 40 mg, for body weight ≥40 kg or <40 kg). At week 4, 188 patients were assigned to groups based on achievement of clinical response (defined as decrease in PCDAI ≥15 points from baseline; 155/188 [82.4%]) and prior exposure to infliximab (82/188 [43.6%]). Groups were given double-blind maintenance therapy with adalimumab at high (40 mg or 20 mg for body weight ≥40 kg or <40 kg; n = 93) or low doses (20 mg or 10 mg for body weight ≥40 kg or <40 kg; n = 95) every other week for 48 weeks. Clinical remission (PCDAI ≤10) at week 26 (the primary end point) was compared between groups using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, adjusting for strata, with nonresponder imputation. Adverse events were monitored to evaluate safety. RESULTS: A total of 152 of 188 patients (80.9%) completed all 26 weeks of the study. At week 26, 63 patients (33.5%) were in clinical remission, with no significant difference between high- and low-dose groups (36/93 [38.7%] vs 27/95 [28.4%]; P = .075). No new safety signals were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab induced and maintained clinical remission of children with CD, with a safety profile comparable to that of adult patients with CD. More children who received high compared with low dose were in remission at week 26, but the difference between dose groups was not statistically significant.

Adalimumab for induction of clinical remission in moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: results of a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab (ADA), a recombinant human monoclonal antibody against tumour necrosis factor α (TNF), for the induction of clinical remission in anti-TNF naïve patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. METHODS: This 8-week, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (NCT00385736), conducted at 94 centres in North America and Europe, enrolled ambulatory adult patients with Mayo score of ≥ 6 points and endoscopic subscore of ≥ 2 points despite treatment with corticosteroids and/or immunosuppressants. Under the original study protocol, 186 patients were randomised (1:1) to subcutaneous treatment with ADA160/80 (160 mg at week 0, 80 mg at week 2, 40 mg at weeks 4 and 6) or placebo. Subsequently, at the request of European regulatory authorities, the protocol was amended to include a second induction group (ADA80/40: 80 mg at week 0, 40 mg at weeks 2, 4 and 6). The primary efficacy endpoint was clinical remission (Mayo score ≤ 2 with no individual subscore >1) at week 8, assessed in 390 patients randomised (1:1:1) to ADA160/80, ADA80/40, or placebo. Safety was assessed in all enrolled patients. Patients, study site personnel, investigators, and the sponsor were blinded to treatment assignment. RESULTS: At week 8, 18.5% of patients in the ADA160/80 group (p = 0.031 vs placebo) and 10.0% in the ADA80/40 group (p = 0.833 vs placebo) were in remission, compared with 9.2% in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in 7.6%, 3.8% and 4.0% of patients in the placebo, ADA80/40, and ADA160/80 groups, respectively. There were two malignancies in the placebo group, none in the ADA groups. There were no cases of tuberculosis and no deaths. CONCLUSIONS: ADA160/80 was safe and effective for induction of clinical remission in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis failing treatment with corticosteroids and/or immunosuppressants. Clinical trial NCT00385736.

Handling death as an intercurrent event in time to recovery analysis in COVID-19 treatment clinical trials.

In clinical trials with the objective to evaluate the treatment effect on time to recovery, such as investigational trials on therapies for COVID-19 hospitalized patients, the patients may face a mortality risk that competes with the opportunity to recover (e.g., be discharged from the hospital). Therefore, an appropriate analytical strategy to account for death is particularly important due to its potential impact on the estimation of the treatment effect. To address this challenge, we conducted a thorough evaluation and comparison of nine survival analysis methods with different strategies to account for death, including standard survival analysis methods with different censoring strategies and competing risk analysis methods. We report results of a comprehensive simulation study that employed design parameters commonly seen in COVID-19 trials and case studies using reconstructed data from a published COVID-19 clinical trial. Our research results demonstrate that, when there is a moderate to large proportion of patients who died before observing their recovery, competing risk analyses and survival analyses with the strategy to censor death at the maximum follow-up timepoint would be able to better detect a treatment effect on recovery than the standard survival analysis that treat death as a non-informative censoring event. The aim of this research is to raise awareness of the importance of handling death appropriately in the time-to-recovery analysis when planning current and future COVID-19 treatment trials.

Association Between Proposed Definitions of Clinical Remission/Response and Well-Being in Patients With Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patient-reported outcomes are recommended endpoints in Crohn's disease [CD] trials. The association between patient-reported general well-being relative to symptoms of diarrhoea and abdominal pain [AP] in patients with moderate to severe CD was explored. METHODS: Patients from three randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind adalimumab or upadacitinib studies with average daily very soft/liquid stool frequency [SF] ≥4 and/or AP score ≥2 at baseline were included. Using electronic diaries, patients reported general well-being [seven-point Likert scale; 1 = worst; 7 = best] in item 10 of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire [IBDQ]. Changes in well-being and clinical outcomes of SF and AP from baseline to week 12 or 16, and the relationship between well-being and clinical outcomes were evaluated using cumulative distribution function and probability density function curves. RESULTS: In total, 858 patients with CD were included [adalimumab, n = 695; upadacitinib, n = 163]. Patients who achieved clinical remission [SF ≤2.8, AP score ≤1.0, neither worse than baseline] were more likely than those not in clinical remission to report IBDQ item 10 response in the 6-7 group category but not IBDQ categories ≤5. Higher IBDQ score for item 10 [6-7] was associated with lower SF and AP score. Greater point increases in IBDQ item 10 were associated with a greater percentage decrease in clinical parameters; a ≥25-30% decrease in SF or AP was associated with a ≥1-point improvement in IBDQ. CONCLUSIONS: An association between improvements in patient-reported general well-being and clinical remission/response was observed using outcomes of SF and AP, supporting the clinical remission/response endpoint definitions used in clinical studies of CD. Clinical Trial Registrations [ClinicalTrials.gov]: NCT00077779 [CHARM]; NCT00348283 [EXTEND]; NCT02365649 [CELEST].

Beneficial association of ß-blocker therapy on recovery from severe acute heart failure treatment: data from the Survival of Patients With Acute Heart Failure in Need of Intravenous Inotropic Support trial.

OBJECTIVES: Beta-blocker therapy is recommended for most patients with chronic heart failure, although such therapy may be discontinued or reduced during hospitalizations. The aim is to determine whether ß-blocker use at study entry and/or at discharge has an impact on 31- and 180-day survival. DESIGN: Survival of Patients With Acute Heart Failure in Need of Intravenous Inotropic Support study was designed as a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multi-center study. SETTING: Multinational. PATIENTS: A total of 1,327 critically ill patients hospitalized with low-output heart failure in need of inotropic therapy. INTERVENTION: Levosimendan versus dobutamine. MEASUREMENTS: All-cause mortality at 31 and 180 days in patients who survived initial hospitalization with/without ß-blocker use at entry and/or at discharge. RESULTS: Patients on ß-blockers at entry and at discharge had significantly lower 31-day (p < .0001) and 180-day (p < .0001) mortality compared to patients without ß-blockers use at both time points. The association was robust when adjusted for age and co-morbidities (p = .006 at 31 days; p = .003 at 180 days). CONCLUSIONS: Those results strongly suggest, in severe acutely decompensated heart failure patients, admitted on ß-blockers, to continue on them at discharge.

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in Chinese patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease: results from a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Efficacy of adalimumab in Crohn's disease (CD) has not been shown in China. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in Chinese patients with CD. METHODS: This 26-week, multicenter, phase III study evaluated patients with moderately to severely active CD and elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (⩾3 mg/l) who were naïve to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. Patients were randomized to double-blind adalimumab 160/80 mg at weeks 0/2 and 40 mg at weeks 4/6 or placebo at weeks 0/2 followed by blinded adalimumab 160/80 mg at weeks 4/6. At week 8, all patients received open-label 40 mg adalimumab every other week through week 26. The primary endpoint was clinical remission [CD activity index (CDAI) <150] at week 4. Clinical remission at week 26 was assessed in week-8 responders (decrease in CDAI ⩾70 points at week 8 from baseline) and compared with a clinically meaningful threshold of 30%. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded throughout the study. RESULTS: At baseline, 205 patients were enrolled, with mean [standard deviation (SD)] age of 32.9 (9.9) years and CD duration of 2.7 (3.0) years. At week 4, 38/102 patients (37%) receiving adalimumab and 7/103 (7%) receiving placebo (p < 0.001) achieved clinical remission. Among week-8 responders, 93/144 (65%) achieved clinical remission at week 26 (p < 0.001). No unexpected AEs and no malignancies, active tuberculosis, or deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab induced and maintained remission in Chinese patients with CD. Safety results were consistent with the known safety profile of adalimumab. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02499783.

Levosimendan vs. dobutamine: outcomes for acute heart failure patients on beta-blockers in SURVIVE.

AIMS: Many chronic heart failure (CHF) patients take beta-blockers. When such patients are hospitalized for decompensation, it remains unclear how ongoing beta-blocker treatment will affect outcomes of acute inotrope therapy. We aimed to assess outcomes of SURVIVE patients who were on beta-blocker therapy before receiving a single intravenous infusion of levosimendan or dobutamine. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cox proportional hazard regression revealed all-cause mortality benefits of levosimendan treatment over dobutamine when the SURVIVE population was stratified according to baseline presence/absence of CHF history and use/non-use of beta-blocker treatment at baseline. All-cause mortality was lower in the CHF/levosimendan group than in the CHF/dobutamine group, showing treatment differences by hazard ratio (HR) at days 5 (3.4 vs. 5.8%; HR, 0.58, CI 0.33-1.01, P = 0.05) and 14 (7.0 vs. 10.3%; HR, 0.67, CI 0.45-0.99, P = 0.045). For patients who used beta-blockers (n = 669), mortality was significantly lower for levosimendan than dobutamine at day 5 (1.5 vs. 5.1% deaths; HR, 0.29; CI 0.11-0.78, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Levosimendan may be better than dobutamine for treating patients with a history of CHF or those on beta-blocker therapy when they are hospitalized with acute decompensations. These findings are preliminary but important for planning future studies.