Development of antifibrotic therapy for stricturing Crohn's disease: lessons from randomized trials in other fibrotic diseases.

Intestinal fibrosis is considered an inevitable complication of Crohn's disease (CD) that results in symptoms of obstruction and stricture formation. Endoscopic or surgical treatment is required to treat the majority of patients. Progress in the management of stricturing CD is hampered by the lack of effective antifibrotic therapy; however, this situation is likely to change because of recent advances in other fibrotic diseases of the lung, liver, and skin. In this review, we summarize data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antifibrotic therapies in these conditions. Multiple compounds have been tested for antifibrotic effects in other organs. According to their mechanisms, they were categorized into growth factor modulators, inflammation modulators, 5-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors, intracellular enzymes and kinases, renin-angiotensin system (RAS) modulators, and others. From our review of the results from the clinical trials and discussion of their implications in the gastrointestinal tract, we have identified several molecular candidates that could serve as potential therapies for intestinal fibrosis in CD.

Vedolizumab for the Treatment of Chronic Pouchitis.

BACKGROUND: Approximately half the patients with ulcerative colitis who undergo restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) will subsequently have pouchitis, and among those patients, one fifth will have chronic pouchitis. METHODS: We conducted a phase 4, double-blind, randomized trial to evaluate vedolizumab in adult patients in whom chronic pouchitis had developed after undergoing IPAA for ulcerative colitis. Patients were assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive vedolizumab intravenously at a dose of 300 mg or placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, 14, 22, and 30. All the patients received concomitant ciprofloxacin from weeks 1 to 4. The primary end point was modified Pouchitis Disease Activity Index (mPDAI)-defined remission (an mPDAI score of ≤4 and a reduction from baseline of ≥2 points in the mPDAI total score; scores range from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating more severe pouchitis) at week 14. The mPDAI is based on clinical symptoms and endoscopic findings. Other efficacy end points included mPDAI-defined remission at week 34, mPDAI-defined response (a reduction from baseline of ≥2 points in the mPDAI score) at weeks 14 and 34, and PDAI-defined remission (a PDAI score of ≤6 and a reduction from baseline of ≥3 points; scores range from 0 to 18, with higher scores indicating more severe pouchitis) at weeks 14 and 34. The PDAI is based on clinical symptoms, endoscopic findings, and histologic findings. RESULTS: Among the 102 patients who underwent randomization, the incidence of mPDAI-defined remission at week 14 was 31% (16 of 51 patients) with vedolizumab and 10% (5 of 51 patients) with placebo (difference, 21 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5 to 38; P = 0.01). Differences in favor of vedolizumab over placebo were also seen with respect to mPDAI-defined remission at week 34 (difference, 17 percentage points; 95% CI, 0 to 35), mPDAI-defined response at week 14 (difference, 30 percentage points; 95% CI, 8 to 48) and at week 34 (difference, 22 percentage points; 95% CI, 2 to 40), and PDAI-defined remission at week 14 (difference, 25 percentage points; 95% CI, 8 to 41) and at week 34 (difference, 19 percentage points; 95% CI, 2 to 37). Serious adverse events occurred in 3 of 51 patients (6%) in the vedolizumab group and in 4 of 51 patients (8%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with vedolizumab was more effective than placebo in inducing remission in patients who had chronic pouchitis after undergoing IPAA for ulcerative colitis. (Funded by Takeda; EARNEST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02790138; EudraCT number, 2015-003472-78.).

Integrating Evidence to Guide Use of Biologics and Small Molecules for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

Advances in science have led to the development of multiple biologics and small molecules for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). This growth in advanced medical therapies has been accompanied by an increase in methodological innovation to study and compare therapies. Guidelines provide an evidence-based approach to integrating therapies into routine practice, but they are often unable to provide timely recommendations as new therapies come to market, and they have limited incorporation of real-world evidence when making recommendations. This limits the scope and usability of guidelines, and a gap remains in defining how best to position and integrate advanced medical therapies for IBD. In this review, we provide a framework for clinicians and researchers to understand key differences in sources of evidence, how different methodologies are applied to study the comparative effectiveness of advanced medical therapies in IBD, and considerations for how these sources of evidence can be used to better integrate current guideline recommendations. Over time, we anticipate this framework will allow for a transition to living guidelines and/or practice recommendations.

Standardizing Randomized Controlled Trials in Celiac Disease: An International Multidisciplinary Appropriateness Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is a need to develop safe and effective pharmacologic options for the treatment of celiac disease (CeD); however, consensus on the appropriate design and configuration of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in this population is lacking. METHODS: A 2-round modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method study was conducted. Eighteen gastroenterologists (adult and pediatric) and gastrointestinal pathologists voted on statements pertaining to the configuration of CeD RCTs, inclusion and exclusion criteria, gluten challenge, and trial outcomes. Two RCT designs were considered, representing the following distinct clinical scenarios for which pharmacotherapy may be used: trials incorporating a gluten challenge to simulate exposure; and trials evaluating reversal of histologic changes, despite attempted adherence to a gluten-free diet. Each statement was rated as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate, using a 9-point Likert scale. RESULTS: For trials evaluating prevention of relapse after gluten challenge, participants adherent to a gluten-free diet for 12 months or more with normal or near-normal-sized villi should be enrolled. Gluten challenge should be FODMAPS (fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols) free, and efficacy evaluated using histology with a secondary patient-reported outcome measure. For trials evaluating reversal of villus atrophy, the panel voted it appropriate to enroll participants with a baseline villus height to crypt depth ratio ≤2 and measure efficacy using a primary histologic end point. Guidance for measuring histologic, endoscopic, and patient-reported outcomes in adult and pediatric patients with CeD are provided, along with recommendations regarding the merits and limitations of different end points. CONCLUSIONS: We developed standardized recommendations for clinical trial design, eligibility criteria, outcome measures, gluten challenge, and disease evaluations for RCTs in patients with CeD.

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.

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.

Interim Analysis of a Trial Evaluating the Utility of Non-Targeted Biopsies for Colorectal Neoplasia Detection in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Persons with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) affecting the colorectum (cIBD) have a 1.5- to 2-fold higher risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC) relative to age- and sex-matched members of the general population.1 Intensive surveillance colonoscopy is recommended in this population to detect and treat early neoplastic lesions before they evolve to incurable cancers.2 Some societies advocate for widespread non-targeted ("random") biopsies throughout the colorectum to screen for "invisible" neoplastic lesions, in addition to targeted biopsies and/or resection of visible lesions.2 Despite the theoretical value of non-targeted biopsies in this setting, there are no high-quality, controlled data to support this practice. In addition to adding significant time and costs to colonoscopy screening, extensive biopsy sampling may also increase the risk of colorectal bleeding and bowel perforation, particularly in elderly patients and those receiving anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapies. With the widespread adoption of disease-modifying biologic and small molecule therapies,3 mucosal healing as a treatment end point,4 high-definition endoscopes,5 and endoscopy quality standards,6 as well as reports of very low neoplasia yield for non-targeted biopsies (0.1%-0.2% of biopsies),7 many experts have started to question the value of non-targeted biopsies as an adjunct for neoplasia surveillance in persons with cIBD.8 However, a recent large French cohort study reported that non-targeted biopsies still identify up to 20% of all neoplastic foci in persons with cIBD,9 albeit primarily in individuals with other major CRC risk factors.

Impact of Treatment Response on Risk of Serious Infections in Patients With Crohn's Disease: Secondary Analysis of the PYRAMID Registry.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Traditional risk factors for serious infections with advanced therapies in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) have been assessed at baseline before starting therapy. We evaluated the impact of treatment response on the risk of serious infections in adalimumab-treated patients with CD through secondary analysis of the PYRAMID registry (NCT00524537). METHODS: We included patients with CD who initiated adalimumab and classified them as treatment responders (achieved steroid-free clinical remission based on patient-reported outcomes) vs nonresponders (not in steroid-free clinical remission) at 6 months after treatment initiation (landmark). We compared the risk of serious infections between responders vs nonresponders between 6 and 36 months after treatment initiation through stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Of 1515 adalimumab-treated patients, 763 (50.4%) were classified as responders at 6 months (37 ± 13 y; 56% female; disease duration, 9.5 ± 8.5 y). Compared with nonresponders, responders were less likely to have moderate to severe symptoms (55.6% vs 33%), or require steroids (45.5% vs 17.3%) or opiates (6.6% vs 1.3%) at baseline, without any differences in disease location, perianal disease, and prior CD complications. During follow-up evaluation, using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting, responders were 34% less likely to experience serious infections compared with nonresponders (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.96). Risk of gastrointestinal and extraintestinal infections was lower in responders vs nonresponders. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CD who respond to adalimumab have a lower risk of developing serious infections compared with nonresponders. These findings underscore that initiation of advanced therapy for CD may lower the risk of serious infections through effective disease control and avoidance of corticosteroids.

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.

Withdrawal of Immunomodulators or TNF Antagonists in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases in Remission on Combination Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Withdrawal of immunomodulators (IMMs) or tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) in remission on combination therapy is attractive. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of (1) IMM, or (2) TNF antagonist withdrawal in patients with IBD in sustained remission on combination therapy. METHODS: Through a systematic review till March 31, 2023, we identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy and safety of IMM or TNF antagonist withdrawal vs continued combination therapy, in patients with IBD in sustained corticosteroid-free clinical remission for >6 months on combination therapy. Primary outcome was risk of relapse and serious adverse events at 12 months. We conducted meta-analysis to calculate relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) and used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to appraise certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We identified 8 RCTs with 733 patients (77% with Crohn's disease, 91% on infliximab-based combination therapy). On meta-analysis of 5 RCTs, there was no difference in the risk of relapse between patients with IMM withdrawal (continued TNF antagonist monotherapy) vs continued combination therapy (16.8% vs 14.9%; RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.75-1.76) without heterogeneity (low certainty of evidence). TNF antagonist withdrawal (continued IMM monotherapy) was associated with 2.4-times higher risk of relapse compared with continuing combination therapy (31.5% vs 11.2%; RR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.38-4.01), with minimal heterogeneity (low certainty of evidence). There was no difference in the risk of serious adverse events with IMM or TNF antagonist withdrawal vs continued combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with IBD in sustained corticosteroid-free clinical remission for >6 months on combination therapy, de-escalation with TNF antagonist withdrawal, but not IMM withdrawal, was associated with an increased risk of relapse.

Comparative Efficacy of Advanced Therapies for Achieving Endoscopic Outcomes in Crohn's Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of advanced therapies for achieving endoscopic outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severely active Crohn's disease. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from inception to August 2, 2023 to identify phase II and III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults (≥18 years) with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease treated with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists, etrolizumab, vedolizumab, anti-interleukin (IL)12/23p40, anti-IL23p19, or Janus kinase-1 (JAK1) inhibitors, compared with placebo/active comparator, for induction and/or maintenance of remission and reported endoscopic outcomes. Primary outcome was endoscopic response after induction therapy, and endoscopic remission after maintenance therapy. We performed a random-effects network meta-analysis using a frequentist approach, and estimated relative risk (RRs), 95% confidence interval (CI) values, and P score for ranking agents. We used GRADE to ascertain certainty of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 20 RCTs (19 placebo-controlled and 1 head-to-head trial; 5592 patients) were included out of which 12 RCTs reported endoscopic outcomes for the induction phase, 5 reported for the maintenance phase, and 3 reported for both induction and maintenance phases. JAK1 inhibitors (RR, 3·49 [95% CI, 1·48-8·26]) and anti-IL23p19 (RR, 2·30 [95% CI, 1·02-5·18]) agents were more efficacious than etrolizumab (moderate certainty of evidence), and JAK1 inhibitors (RR, 2·34 [95% CI, 1·14-4·80]) were more efficacious than anti-IL12/23p40 agents for inducing endoscopic response (moderate certainty of evidence). JAK1 inhibitors and anti-IL23p19 ranked highest for induction of endoscopic response. There was paucity of RCTs of TNF antagonists reporting endoscopic outcomes with induction therapy. On network meta-analysis of 6 RCTs, all agents except vedolizumab (RR, 1.89 [95% CI, 0.61-5.92]) were effective in maintaining endoscopic remission compared with placebo. TNF antagonists, IL12/23p40, and JAK1 inhibitors were ranked highest. CONCLUSIONS: On network meta-analysis, JAK1 inhibitors and anti-IL23p19 agents may be the most effective among non-TNF-targeting advanced therapies for inducing endoscopic response. Future head-to-head trials will further inform positioning of different therapies for the management of Crohn's disease.

Development of an MRI-Based Prediction Model for Anti-TNF Treatment Failure in Perianal Crohn's Disease: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Clinical and radiologic variables associated with perianal fistula (PAF) outcomes are poorly understood. We developed prediction models for anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) treatment failure in patients with Crohn's disease-related PAF. METHODS: In a multicenter retrospective study between 2005 and 2022 we included biologic-naive adults (>17 years) who initiated their first anti-TNF therapy for PAF after pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Pretreatment MRI studies were prospectively reread centrally by blinded radiologists. We developed and internally validated a prediction model based on clinical and radiologic parameters to predict the likelihood of anti-TNF treatment failure, clinically, at 6 months. We compared our model and a simplified version of MRI parameters alone with existing imaging-based PAF activity indices (MAGNIFI-CD and modified Van Assche MRI scores) by De Long statistical test. RESULTS: We included 221 patients: 32 ± 14 years, 60% males, 76% complex fistulas; 68% treated with infliximab and 32% treated with adalimumab. Treatment failure occurred in 102 (46%) patients. Our prediction model included age at PAF diagnosis, time to initiate anti-TNF treatment, and smoking and 8 MRI characteristics (supra/extrasphincteric anatomy, fistula length >4.3 cm, primary tracts >1, secondary tracts >1, external openings >1, tract hyperintensity on T1-weighted imaging, horseshoe anatomy, and collections >1.3 cm). Our full and simplified MRI models had fair discriminatory capacity for anti-TNF treatment failure (concordance statistic, 0.67 and 0.65, respectively) and outperformed MAGNIFI-CD (P = .002 and < .0005) and modified Van Assche MRI scores (P < .0001 and < .0001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our risk prediction models consisting of clinical and/or radiologic variables accurately predict treatment failure in patients with PAF.

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.

Gut virome-colonising Orthohepadnavirus genus is associated with ulcerative colitis pathogenesis and induces intestinal inflammation in vivo.

OBJECTIVES: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory disorder of unknown aetiology. Gut virome dysbiosis is fundamental in UC progression, although its role in the early phases of the disease is far from fully understood. Therefore, we sought to investigate the role of a virome-associated protein encoded by the Orthohepadnavirus genus, the hepatitis B virus X protein (HBx), in UC aetiopathogenesis. DESIGN: HBx positivity of UC patient-derived blood and gut mucosa was assessed by RT-PCR and Sanger sequencing and correlated with clinical characteristics by multivariate analysis. Transcriptomics was performed on HBx-overexpressing endoscopic biopsies from healthy donors.C57BL/6 mice underwent intramucosal injections of liposome-conjugated HBx-encoding plasmids or the control, with or without antibiotic treatment. Multidimensional flow cytometry analysis was performed on colonic samples from HBx-treated and control animals. Transepithelial electrical resistance measurement, proliferation assay, chromatin immunoprecipitation assay with sequencing and RNA-sequencing were performed on in vitro models of the gut barrier. HBx-silencing experiments were performed in vitro and in vivo. RESULTS: HBx was detected in about 45% of patients with UC and found to induce colonic inflammation in mice, while its silencing reverted the colitis phenotype in vivo. HBx acted as a transcriptional regulator in epithelial cells, provoking barrier leakage and altering both innate and adaptive mucosal immunity ex vivo and in vivo. CONCLUSION: This study described HBx as a contributor to the UC pathogenesis and provides a new perspective on the virome as a target for tailored treatments.

Ustekinumab versus adalimumab for induction and maintenance therapy in biologic-naive patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3b trial.

BACKGROUND: Active-comparator trials are important to inform patient and physician choice. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of monotherapy with either ustekinumab or adalimumab in biologic-naive patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, active-comparator, phase 3b trial (SEAVUE) at 121 hospitals or private practices in 18 countries. We included biologic-naive patients aged 18 years or older with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease and a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of 220-450, who had not responded to or were intolerant to conventional therapy (or were corticosteroid dependent) and had at least one ulcer of any size at baseline endoscopic evaluation. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1; via an interactive web response system) to receive ustekinumab (approximately 6 mg/kg intravenously on day 0, then 90 mg subcutaneously once every 8 weeks) or adalimumab (160 mg on day 0, 80 mg at 2 weeks, then 40 mg once every 2 weeks, subcutaneously) through week 56. Study treatments were administered as monotherapy and without dose modifications. Patients, investigators, and study site personnel were masked to treatment group assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who were in clinical remission (CDAI score <150) at week 52 in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03464136, and EudraCT, 2017-004209-41. FINDINGS: Between June 28, 2018, and Dec 12, 2019, 633 patients were assessed for eligibility and 386 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ustekinumab (n=191) or adalimumab (n=195). 29 (15%) of 191 patients in the ustekinumab group and 46 (24%) of 195 in the adalimumab group discontinued study treatment before week 52. There was no significant difference between the ustekinumab and adalimumab groups in the occurrence of the primary endpoint; at week 52, 124 (65%) of 191 patients in the ustekinumab group versus 119 (61%) of 195 in the adalimumab group were in clinical remission (between-group difference 4%, 95% CI -6 to 14; p=0·42). Safety for both groups was consistent with previous reports. Serious infections were reported in four (2%) of 191 patients in the ustekinumab group and five (3%) of 195 in the adalimumab group. No deaths occurred through week 52 of the study. INTERPRETATION: Both ustekinumab and adalimumab monotherapies were highly effective in this population of biologic-naive patients, with no difference in the primary outcome between the drugs. FUNDING: Janssen Scientific Affairs.

Predictors of Placebo Induction Response and Remission in Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: High placebo response rates in clinical trials of ulcerative colitis (UC) have been reported previously. However, data from patient-level analyses are lacking. We assessed factors associated with clinical and endoscopic placebo response among placebo-treated patients in clinical trials of UC. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of pooled clinical trial data from GEMINI-1, ACT-1, ACT-2, PURSUIT, ULTRA-2, OCTAVE-1, and OCTAVE-2. Predictors were assessed in placebo-treated patients for their association with end of induction (week 6 of 8) clinical response (reduction in total Mayo score of ≥3 and ≥30% from baseline with ≥1 point decrease in rectal bleeding subscore [RBS] or absolute RBS ≤1); clinical remission (total Mayo score ≤2 and no subscore >1); endoscopic healing (Mayo endoscopic subscore ≤1); partial Mayo score of 0; patient-reported outcome 2-item remission (RBS of 0 and stool frequency ≤1), resolution of rectal bleeding, and stool frequency normalization. Predictors on univariate analyses with P < .05 were included in multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Placebo-treated patients with normal serum C-reactive protein and albumin levels were more likely to attain clinical response (71 of 437 [16.3%] vs 49 of 660 [7.4%]; adjusted odds ratio, 2.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-5.41; P = .018). Compared with patients with a Mayo endoscopic score of 2, patients with a Mayo endoscopic score of 3 were less likely to attain clinical response (105 of 556 [18.8%] vs 179 of 675 [25.9%]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.68; P = .003). Similar findings were observed for clinical remission and resolution of rectal bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Biomarkers such as normal serum C-reactive protein and albumin and baseline endoscopic severity were found to affect placebo response rates in clinical trials of UC. These findings have implications for clinical trial design in UC.

Comparative Risk of Serious Infections With Biologic Agents and Oral Small Molecules in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Safety is a key consideration when choosing advanced therapies (biologic agents and oral small-molecule inhibitors/modulators) in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the risk of serious infections with advanced therapies in active comparator studies. METHODS: Through a systematic search until February 28, 2022, we included 20 head-to-head studies comparing risk of serious infections with tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) antagonists, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, tofacitinib, filgotinib, and ozanimod in patients with IBD. We performed random-effects meta-analysis comparing different advanced therapies. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in the risk of serious infections between vedolizumab vs TNFα antagonists in all patients with IBD (17 cohorts: odds ratio [OR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68-1.04), with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 37%); on subgroup analysis, vedolizumab was associated with a lower risk of serious infections in patients with ulcerative colitis (11 cohorts: OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83; I2 = 0%), but not in Crohn's disease (CD) (9 cohorts: OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.78-1.35; I2 = 42%). Age, sex, prior biologic exposure, and use of biologic monotherapy did not influence this association. In patients with CD, ustekinumab was associated with a lower risk of serious infections vs TNFα antagonists (3 cohorts: OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.93; I2 = 16%) and vs vedolizumab (3 cohorts: OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.17-0.93; I2 = 67%). Few studies compared other advanced therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Vedolizumab may offer net benefit over TNFα antagonists in patients with ulcerative colitis, but not in CD. Ustekinumab may offer net benefit over TNFα antagonists and vedolizumab in patients with CD.

Endoscopy Unit Level Interventions to Improve Adenoma Detection Rate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is inversely correlated with the risk of interval colon cancer and is a key target for quality improvement in endoscopy units. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions that can be implemented at the endoscopy unit level to improve ADRs. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between January 1990 and December 2022 to identify relevant studies. Both randomized controlled trials and observational studies were eligible. Data for the primary outcome of ADR were analyzed and reported on the log-odds scale with 95% CIs using a random-effects meta-analysis model using the empiric Bayes estimator. RESULTS: From 10,778 initial citations, 34 studies were included in the meta-analysis comprising 371,041 procedures and 1501 endoscopists. The provision of report cards (odds ratio [OR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.13-1.45; P < .001) and the presence of an additional observer to identify polyps (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09-1.43; P = .002) were associated with significant increases in ADRs whereas multimodal interventions were borderline significant (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.00-1.40; P = .05) and withdrawal time monitoring was not associated significantly with an increase in ADRs (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.93-1.96; P = .11). CONCLUSIONS: The provision of report cards and the presence of an additional observer to identify polyps are associated with improved ADRs and should be considered for implementation in endoscopy facilities.

Delayed Ustekinumab Responders in Ulcerative Colitis Have Greater Inflammatory Burden but Similar Outcomes as Early Responders.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Differences in 1-year outcomes among early compared with delayed responders to vedolizumab have been shown in ulcerative colitis. However, it is unclear whether similar differences exist with ustekinumab, and what factors differentiate delayed responders from nonresponders. METHODS: This study was a post hoc analysis of patient-level data from the UNIFI clinical trial. Ustekinumab-treated patients with clinical response, defined as a reduction in total Mayo score of 30% or more and 3 or more points from baseline with a reduction in their rectal bleeding subscore of 1 or more or a rectal bleeding subscore of 1 or less, at week 8 were deemed early responders and their outcomes were compared with delayed responders (week 8 nonresponders who subsequently responded at week 16). The primary outcome assessed was 1-year clinical remission, defined as a total Mayo score of 2 or less and no subscore greater than 1. RESULTS: We included 642 ustekinumab-treated patients, including 321 (50%) early responders, 115 (17.9%) delayed responders, and 205 (32.1%) nonresponders. No differences were observed for 1-year clinical remission among early vs delayed responders (132 of 321 [41.1%] vs 40 of 115 [34.8%]; P = .233), or for other outcomes assessed regardless of induction dose. Compared with early responders, delayed responders had more severe baseline Mayo endoscopic disease (88 of 115 [76.5%] vs 206 of 321 [64.2%]; P = .015) and abnormal baseline C-reactive protein level greater than 3 mg/L (83 of 115 [72.2%] vs 183 of 321 [57%]; P = .004). Compared with nonresponders, delayed responders had a significant decrease in C-reactive protein level (F-value [degrees of freedom, mean squares] [4, 844]; P < .0001) and fecal calprotectin level (F[4, 818]; P < .0001) through week 16. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with early ustekinumab responders, delayed responders had a greater inflammatory burden at baseline. Early and delayed responders had similar 1-year outcomes. Biomarker decline observed in delayed responders can help differentiate them from nonresponders.

ENTERPRET: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Vedolizumab Dose Optimization in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis Who Have Early Nonresponse.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) may experience nonresponse to biologics, possibly as a result of low drug exposure. This trial assessed the efficacy of dose optimization in patients with UC who have early nonresponse to vedolizumab and high drug clearance. METHODS: ENTERPRET was a phase 4, open-label, randomized, controlled trial that included patients with moderate to severe UC who had high drug clearance at week 5 (serum concentration, <50 µg/mL) and nonresponse to standard vedolizumab treatment at week 6. At week 6, eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive standard dosing (300 mg every 8 weeks) or dose-optimized vedolizumab (600 mg at week 6, then 300 mg every 4 weeks; or 600 mg at week 6, then 600 mg every 4 weeks [based on week 5 serum concentration]). The primary end point was endoscopic improvement at week 30. RESULTS: Of 278 enrolled patients, 132 (47.5%) had a clinical response at week 6. From week 6, 108 patients received standard (n = 53) or dose-optimized vedolizumab (n = 55); among patients with nonresponse at week 6, 86.5% had high drug clearance. At week 30, 10 patients (18.9%) who received standard vedolizumab had endoscopic improvement vs 8 patients (14.5%) who received dose-optimized vedolizumab. Five patients (9.4%) who received standard vedolizumab had clinical remission at week 30 vs 5 patients (9.1%) who received dose-optimized vedolizumab; clinical response was observed in 17 (32.1%) and 17 patients (30.9%), respectively. Safety event rates were similar among treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with early nonresponse and high drug clearance, vedolizumab dose optimization is probably not required. A proportion of patients benefited from continued treatment irrespective of the dose received. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT03029143.