Siegmund, Britta

Abstract Background Risankizumab (RZB), a monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-23 p19, was evaluated for maintenance therapy in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) and clinical response to RZB intravenous (IV) induction treatment in a phase 3 double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled withdrawal (WD) maintenance study, COMMAND (NCT03398135). Methods Patients with moderately to severely active UC who achieved a clinical response per Adapted Mayo score after 12 or 24 weeks (wks) of RZB IV treatment in the phase 2b and phase 3 INSPIRE induction studies (NCT03398148)1 were randomized 1:1:1 in COMMAND to RZB 180 mg (RZB180), 360 mg (RZB360), or PBO (RZB withdrawal) subcutaneous (SC) treatment every 8 wks for 52 wks. The efficacy analysis included responders to 12 wk of RZB IV, while the safety analysis included responders to 12 or 24 wk of RZB IV. The primary endpoint was clinical remission per Adapted Mayo score at wk 52. Key secondary endpoints included endoscopic improvement, HEMI, endoscopic remission, steroid-free clinical remission, maintenance of clinical remission, no bowel urgency, and no abdominal pain at wk 52. Results At baseline of induction, demographics and disease characteristics were similar between treatment groups; 75% of 548 patients had history of inadequate response or intolerance to ≥ 1 advanced therapy (AT). Patients receiving RZB180 (40.2%) and RZB360 (37.6%) achieved significantly higher rates of clinical remission vs WD (25.1%) (adjusted treatment difference vs WD: 16.3% and 14.2%, respectively; P ≤ .01) (Fig. 1A). Greater proportions of patients achieved endoscopic improvement, HEMI, endoscopic remission, steroid-free clinical remission, maintenance of clinical remission, no bowel urgency, and no abdominal pain with RZB180 and RZB360 vs WD (Fig. 1B). The overall rates of adverse events (AEs), and serious infections were similar among treatment groups (Table 1). Serious (presented as events/100 patient-years [E/100 PY]) (RZB180: 5.9; RZB360: 6.3; WD: 11.4) and severe AEs (RZB180: 1.6; RZB360: 4.0; WD: 8.0) were lower in the RZB arms vs WD. No active tuberculosis, adjudicated anaphylaxis, serious hypersensitivity, or adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events were reported in any treatment group. Conclusion In patients with moderately to severely active UC responding to 12-week RZB induction therapy, RZB maintenance dosing with 180 mg and 360 mg SC was superior to placebo in achieving clinical remission as well as other key clinical, endoscopic, and histological-endoscopic endpoints. RZB was well-tolerated, with no new safety concerns observed.

Abstract Background Vedolizumab (VDZ) is a gut-selective humanised monoclonal anti-α4β7 integrin antibody for treatment of UC and CD. This post-authorization safety study (PASS) compared long-term safety in patients (pts) treated with VDZ or other biologics for UC or CD. Methods This was a prospective, observational, multicentre, cohort study in pts with UC or CD starting treatment with VDZ or other biologics (NCT02674308, EUPAS6469). Pts were biologic naïve (VDZ=35%, Other biologic=65%) or had prior exposure to biologics other than VDZ and were followed for up to 7 yrs. Pts were treated under usual standard of care as directed by their physician with no discontinuation from the study due to physician-directed treatment changes. The primary safety outcome was serious infections and was compared between cohorts using a Cox proportional hazards model adjusted by propensity score (with other biologics as reference). Secondary safety outcomes were adverse events (AE) of special interest (AESI) as listed in Tables 2 and 3. Results In total, 5208 patients were enrolled across 21 countries between Mar 2015 and Jul 2019. The full analysis set comprised 5008 pts (VDZ=2502; other biologic=2506) and mean (SD) study duration was 37.4 (14.1) months. Consistent with the observational nature of the study and the current standard of care, the baseline characteristics in the two cohorts were imbalanced (Table 1). The overall treatment-emergent Adverse Event (AE) rate was 61.3% (VDZ) and 59.5% (other biologic), with serious AEs in 27.5% (VDZ) and 25.7% (other biologic), respectively. In UC pts, the incidence rate (IR) of serious infections were: 0.014 (95% CI: 0.010, 0.019) [VDZ] and 0.015 (0.010, 0.023) [other biologic], with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.018 (0.931, 1.114), p=0.70 (Table 2). In CD pts, corresponding findings were 0.012 (95% CI: 0.008, 0.017) [VDZ] and 0.006 (95% CI: 0.004, 0.009) [other biologic] with HR of 1.035 (0.959, 1.117), p=0.38 (Table 3). The incidence of primary and secondary safety outcomes is reported in Table 2 for UC and Table 3 for CD. There were no safety issues relating to pregnancy and no cases of PML observed. There were 19 deaths in the VDZ cohort (1 case of pneumonia deemed as treatment-related); and 13 deaths in the other biologic cohort, 2 cases deemed treatment-related (one case septic shock and pneumonia; one case non-small cell lung cancer). Clinical outcomes and quality of life (QoL) measures were comparable between cohorts. Conclusion In this long-term, prospective, real-world observational study of a large multinational population under routine standard of care there was no new safety signal identified in relation to VDZ. Results are consistent with the known safety profile of VDZ.

Abstract Background Small bowel fibrostenotic strictures are common in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD). No global consensus recommendations on definitions, diagnosis and clinical management are available. Methods Several systematic reviews followed by a RAND/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness study on the definitions, diagnosis and clinical management of fibrostenosing CD in clinical practice were performed. A panel of 28 global experts and a patient representative were convened. They assessed a total of 152 candidate items. The items were subsequently evaluated for appropriateness. Results No accurate predictive biomarkers are available for naïve or anastomotic fibrostenosing strictures. Accurate diagnosis of fibrostenosing CD requires cross-sectional imaging which should evaluate bowel wall thickness, luminal narrowing and prestenotic dilatation. A potential inflammatory component should be assessed. Abdominal cross-sectional imaging was considered necessary prior to any treatment decision. The panel proposed an approach to medical, endoscopic, and surgical therapies (Figure 1 and Table 1). Technical characteristics for endoscopic balloon dilation and follow up strategies after successful dilation therapy were identified. Appropriateness, types and performance of different surgical approaches in various settings were evaluated. Conclusion This global consensus provides clinical guidance for the diagnostic and therapeutic management of patients with fibrostenotic CD.