Back to Authors

Dalam, Alexis B

Mayo Clinic

Pfizer (United States)

Citations 4

Assessment and Impact of Age on the Safety and Efficacy of Etrasimod in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of Data From the ELEVATE UC Clinical Program
Lichtenstein, Gary R. , Allegretti, Jessica R. , Irving, Peter M., Charabaty, Aline , Kuehbacher, Tanja, Bananis, Eustratios , Woolcott, John , Dalam, Alexis B, Lazin, Krisztina , Keating, Michael J. , McDonnell, Aoibhinn , Danese, Silvio , Loftus, Edward V. , Banerjee, Rupa , Danese, Silvio

Inflammatory Bowel Diseases | April 4, 2025 | Volume: 31 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 2352-2362

10.1093/ibd/izae308 Get It

Abstract Background Patient age can impact the safety and efficacy of ulcerative colitis (UC) treatments. Etrasimod is an oral, once daily (QD), selective sphingosine 1-phosphate1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active UC. Here, we evaluate the impact of age on etrasimod safety and efficacy in patients with UC in the phase 3 ELEVATE UC clinical program. Methods Data were pooled from ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 in patients receiving etrasimod 2 mg QD or placebo. Proportions and incidence rates (IRs) per 100 patient-years of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were stratified by age (<40, 40-59, and ≥60 years). With the same age stratifications, efficacy was evaluated in patients with baseline Modified Mayo scores of 5-9 and 4-9 for the primary efficacy endpoint (clinical remission) and secondary efficacy endpoints. Results Overall, 787 patients were enrolled (<40 years, n = 420 [53.4%]; 40-59 years, n = 276 [35.1%]; and ≥60 years, n = 91 [11.6%]). Arthralgia, fatigue, and hypertension IRs were higher in older patients, irrespective of treatment. Serious AEs and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation were low and consistent across age groups. Significantly more patients receiving etrasimod 2 mg QD vs placebo achieved efficacy endpoints, regardless of age. Conclusions The safety profile of etrasimod 2 mg QD in the ELEVATE UC population was consistent across age groups, with no change in the incidence of AEs. Patients receiving etrasimod vs placebo showed significant clinical benefit, regardless of age. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03945188; NCT03996369.
Etrasimod as a Monotherapy or With Concomitant Use of Corticosteroids and/or Aminosalicylates: Results From the ELEVATE UC Clinical Program
Yarur, Andrés , Chiorean, Michael , Allegretti, Jessica R. , Cross, Raymond, Ha, Christina , Goetsch, Martina, McDonnell, Aoibhinn , Dalam, Alexis B, Wu, Joseph , Blanco, David, Abbatemarco, Arcangelo M. , Yarur, Andres J , Ha, Christina , Blanco, David A, Panés, Julián

Inflammatory Bowel Diseases | December 13, 2024 | Volume: 31 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 2144-2153

10.1093/ibd/izae288 Get It

Abstract Background Etrasimod is an oral, once daily (QD), selective sphingosine 1-phosphate1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). We assessed the benefit of etrasimod monotherapy and the impact of concomitant corticosteroids (CS) and/or 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) therapy. Methods In ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12, patients with moderately to severely active UC were randomized 2:1 to etrasimod 2 mg QD or placebo for 52 and 12 weeks, respectively. Oral CS or 5-ASA were allowed at baseline. Patients in the monotherapy subgroup received etrasimod or placebo without concomitant CS and/or 5-ASA at baseline. Predefined primary (clinical remission) and key secondary efficacy endpoints aligned with those from both trials and were assessed at Week 12 and Week 52. Safety was assessed up to Week 52. Results Clinical remission rates at Weeks 12 and 52 were significantly higher for etrasimod compared with placebo in patients receiving monotherapy (Week 12: 26.2% vs 4.8%; Week 52: 35.7% vs 4.0%). Differences vs placebo were statistically significant for all predefined endpoints at both time points in patients receiving monotherapy or etrasimod with concomitant 5-ASA only (all P < .05); numerical differences, due to small sample sizes, vs placebo were observed for all endpoints in the CS only and CS + 5-ASA subgroups. Safety was consistent with the overall population. Conclusions Etrasimod monotherapy showed consistent efficacy and safety vs placebo; no apparent benefit was observed with concomitant CS and/or 5-ASA in patients receiving etrasimod. Clinical trial registration NCT03945188; NCT03996369.
Assessment and impact of age on the efficacy and safety among patients in the etrasimod ELEVATE UC clinvical programme
Lichtenstein, Gary, Allegretti, Jessica R. , Irving, Peter M., Charabaty, Aline, Kuehbacher, Tanja, Bananis, Eustratios , Woolcott, John , Dalam, Alexis B, Lazin, K., Keating, Michael J. , McDonnell, A, Allegretti, Jessica R. , Loftus, Edward V. , Banerjee, Rupa , Charabaty, Aline , Lazin, Krisztina , Danese, Silvio

Zeitschrift für Gastroenterologie | October 2, 2024 | Volume: 62 | Issue: 09 | Pages: e605-e606

10.1055/s-0044-1789701 Get It

P705 Assessment of age on the efficacy and safety among patients in the etrasimod ELEVATE ulcerative colitis clinical programme
Lichtenstein, Gary R. , Allegretti, Jessica R. , Charabaty, A, Kuehbacher, Tanja, Bananis, Eustratios , Woolcott, John , Dalam, Alexis B, Lazin, Krisztina , Keating, Michael J. , McDonnell, A, Allegretti, Jessica R. , Loftus, Edward V. , Irving, Peter Miles , Banerjee, Rupa , Danese, Silvio

Journal of Crohn's and Colitis | January 24, 2024 | Volume: 18 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: i1320-i1322

10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.0835 Get It

Abstract Background Etrasimod is an oral, once-daily (QD), selective sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P)1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). Previous work has shown age can impact treatment safety and efficacy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.1 This post hoc analysis investigated the impact of age on the safety and efficacy of etrasimod in patients with UC in the phase 3 ELEVATE UC clinical programme. Methods Data pooled from the ELEVATE UC 52 (NCT03945188) and ELEVATE UC 12 (NCT03996369) trials were analysed in patients receiving etrasimod 2 mg QD and placebo. ELEVATE UC 52 had a treat-through design comprising a 12-week induction period followed by a 40-week maintenance period. ELEVATE UC 12 was a 12-week induction trial. Proportions and incidence rates (IRs) per 100 patient-years from pooled data of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and events of interest were stratified by age (<40 years, 40–59 years, ≥60 years) and analysed in patients who received ≥1 dose of etrasimod or placebo. Efficacy analyses were evaluated in patients with baseline Modified Mayo score (MMS) 5–9 for the primary efficacy endpoint (clinical remission) and select secondary endpoints at Week 12 (both trials) and Week 52 (ELEVATE UC 52) stratified by age. Results There were 787 patients enrolled in the ELEVATE UC programme, of whom 420 (53.4%) were aged <40 years, 276 (35.1%) were aged 40–59 years and 91 (11.6%) were aged ≥60 years. The proportions and IRs of TEAEs and events of interest were mostly similar between age groups and treatment arms (Table). IRs of arthralgia, fatigue, hypertension and pyrexia were higher in older age groups, regardless of treatment arm. Serious AEs and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation were low and consistent across all age subgroups. Serious infections and infection events of interest were balanced across age groups and treatment arms. Regardless of age subgroup, significantly more patients treated with etrasimod 2 mg QD vs placebo achieved the primary and select secondary efficacy endpoints at Week 12 and Week 52 (Figure). Conclusion The safety profile of etrasimod 2 mg QD in the UC population was consistent across age groups, and with no new risks other than the estimated risks associated with increasing age.2 Patients receiving etrasimod in the ELEVATE UC programme showed significant clinical benefit as assessed by clinical remission, symptomatic remission and endoscopic improvement compared with placebo, regardless of age. References 1. Lichtenstein GR et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2023; 29: 27–41. 2. Luo J et al. JMIR Med Inform 2016; 4: e30.