Hisamatsu, Tadakazu

Abstract Background Risankizumab (RZB), a high-affinity humanised IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-23 p19, has shown sustained efficacy and an acceptable safety profile for patients (pts) with ulcerative colitis (UC).1 This interim analysis reports efficacy data at week (wk) 0 and wk 96, as well as safety data of the COMMAND (NCT03398135) open-label extension (OLE). Methods The COMMAND OLE enrolled pts who completed 52-wks maintenance dosing in the COMMAND substudies or entered directly from the induction study.1 All pts received RZB180 subcutaneous (SC) starting at OLE wk 0, except pts who had prior rescue therapy (single RZB 1200 mg intravenous [IV] dose then RZB360 Q8w) who continued RZB360 in the OLE. The OLE was not designed to compare RZB180 and RZB360 groups. The data cut-off date for this interim analysis was as of June 30, 2024. Efficacy endpoints assessed were clinical remission (CR) per AMS, clinical response per AMS, endoscopic improvement, endoscopic remission, and corticosteroid-free CR per Partial AMS up to wk 96. Data are reported as observed prior to RZB rescue therapy during OLE. The safety analysis also includes pts who directly entered the OLE from induction; presented as events/100 pt years (E/100 PY). Results Of the pts who entered the OLE (RZB180, N = 701; RZB360, N = 302), approximately 40% of pts had the opportunity to reach OLE wk 96 as of the cut-off date. At OLE wk 0 and 96, a similar proportion of patients in the RZB180 group achieved clinical and endoscopic outcomes (Figure 1A). In the RZB360 group, the percent of pts achieving clinical and endoscopic endpoints increased from OLE wk 0 through OLE wk 96 (Figure 1B). Similar rates of serious AEs, severe AEs, and AEs leading to discontinuation of study drug were reported in the RZB180 group and the RZB360 group with no new safety risks identified (Table 1). Conclusion In this interim analysis of the OLE, a sustained benefit was observed with long-term RZB treatment up to 96 wks. The long-term safety profile for RZB remains consistent and supports the long-term use. References 1. Louis E et al. JAMA 2024;332(11):881-897

Abstract Background The primary objective of the VIVID-1 trial (NCT03926130) was to demonstrate efficacy and safety of mirikizumab (miri), a p19-directed anti-IL-23 antibody, compared to placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease. Miri demonstrated statistically significant improvements in co-primary and all key secondary endpoints versus (vs) PBO1. Here we present the results of secondary endpoints on the comparisons of miri to ustekinumab (uste), a p40 directed anti-IL-12/IL-23 inhibitor from the Phase 3, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active- and PBO-controlled, treat-through (TT) study, VIVID-1 (NCT03926130). Methods Adult pts (N=1065) were randomised 6:3:2 to miri (N=579) 900mg intravenously (IV) every 4 weeks (Q4W) to W12, then 300mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W to W52, uste (N=287) one ~6 mg/kg IV dose, then 90mg SC Q8W to W52 or PBO (N=199). At W12 PBO responders continued PBO to W52; PBO non-responders received the same blinded miri regimen as described above (IV then SC). Efficacy of miri vs uste was assessed by the proportion of pts achieving endoscopic response and by the proportion of pts achieving clinical remission by Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at W52 (both gated). Additional non-multiplicity-adjusted endpoints included endoscopic remission, corticosteroid-free clinical remission by CDAI, and the composite of CDAI clinical remission and endoscopic response at W52. (Figure 1 for definitions). Results Baseline characteristics were overall balanced across the three treatment groups (table 1). Pts treated with miri achieved all key major secondary endpoints (p<.000001) compared to PBO (Figure 1). Miri achieved non-inferiority to uste for clinical remission by CDAI (p=0.113117) (Figure 1C). Although superiority to uste in endoscopic response was not achieved (p=0.51) (Figure 1A), in biologic failed pts miri demonstrated a numerical trend towards greater response rates compared to uste for endoscopic response and clinical remission by CDAI (Figure 1 B & D). The overall safety profile was consistent with the known safety profile of miri. The proportion of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAE) were similar for miri (78.6%) and uste (77.3%); most common TEAEs were COVID-19, anaemia, arthralgia, headache, upper respiratory tract infection, nasopharyngitis and injection site reaction. Instances of serious adverse events were comparable for miri (10.3%) and uste (10.7%). Conclusion In this phase 3 TT design study, miri achieved non-inferiority to uste for clinical remission by CDAI. In biologic failed pts miri had a numerical trend towards greater response compared to uste in clinical and endoscopic endpoints, with an acceptable safety profile. 1Ferrante et al., submitted to ECCO 2024

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.