Irving, Peter Miles

Abstract Background We studied the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab (UST) vs adalimumab (ADA) through 1 year in biologic-naïve patients (pts) with moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease. Methods SEAVUE was a multicenter, randomized, blinded, parallel-group, active-controlled study in adults with CD Activity Index (CDAI) scores ≥220/≤450. Biologic-naïve pts failing/intolerant to conventional therapy with any size ulcer on baseline (BL) ileocolonoscopy were eligible. Pts were randomized 1:1 to UST (⁓6mg/kg IV at BL then 90mg SC every 8 weeks [Ws]) or ADA (160/80mg SC at BL/W2, then 40mg SC every 2 Ws) per US-approved regimens (no dose modifications). Primary endpoint was clinical remission at W52 (CDAI <150). Major secondary endpoints were corticosteroid-free remission, clinical response (≥100-point CDAI decrease from BL), remission in pt-reported CDAI components (PRO-2 symptom remission: abdominal pain mean daily score ≤1 and stool frequency mean daily score ≤3), and endoscopic remission (SES-CD score ≤3/0 for pts with BL score=3) at W52 and clinical remission at W16. Results 386 pts were randomized to UST or ADA. BL demographics and disease characteristics were balanced between groups and indicative of pts with early, moderate-to-severe CD (median CD duration, 2.58 years; CDAI, 289.5; SES-CD, 8.0). At W52, 65% of UST-treated and 61% of ADA-treated pts achieved clinical remission (Δ=4.0%; 95% CI, -5.5%, 13.5%; p=0.417). Major secondary endpoints, including endoscopic remission, were similar between groups (Table 1), as were remission rates at assessment points through W52. Some other secondary endpoints showed numerical (not statistical) differences between UST and ADA (Table 1). Key safety events are summarized in Table 2. Among UST-treated and ADA-treated pts, 34.0% and 40.5% had infections, 2.6% and 7.2% had serious adverse events (AEs) of worsening CD, and 6.3% and 11.3% had AEs that led to discontinuation (DC) of study drug, respectively. One ADA-treated pt had active pulmonary TB. Injection-site reactions associated with active treatment occurred in 1.0% of UST-treated and 10.3% of ADA-treated pts. Overall, 15.2% of UST-treated and 23.6% of ADA-treated pts DC before W52. Reasons for DC were primarily lack of efficacy (UST, 2.1% vs ADA, 5.1%), AEs (UST, 5.7% vs ADA, 10.7%), and withdrawal of consent (UST, 5.8% vs ADA, 5.1%). Time to treatment DC was longer with UST vs ADA (post hoc analysis). Conclusion Both UST and ADA were highly effective in this population of biologic-naïve pts. Rates of clinical remission at W52 were not statistically significantly different between treatment groups. DC rates were numerically lower for UST. Safety results were consistent with prior experience for both treatments.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment options for patients with moderate-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) are increasing. The appropriateness of their use in mild-moderate UC is less clear, as is the role of surgical intervention. Our aim was to define the appropriateness of therapeutic options in a range of clinical scenarios in mild-moderate UC METHODS: We applied the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to rate appropriateness of treatment choices in patients with mild-moderate UC; severe disease (likely to need hospitalization or surgery within 2 weeks) was excluded. A literature review was presented to the BRIDGe group, a panel of 13 IBD specialists, as well as 1 external IBD expert and 2 IBD surgical experts. 12 chapters were constructed including failed 5-ASA, steroid or thiopurine therapy, and primary/secondary non-response to biologics or tofacitinib. Scenarios were also divided by disease extent (proctitis vs more extensive) and activity (mild vs moderate) creating 260 scenarios in all. Panellists used a modified Delphi method to anonymously rate the appropriateness of a therapy on a 1-9 scale (1-3 not appropriate, 4-6 uncertain, 7-9 appropriate). Disagreement was assessed using a validated index (DI) and was defined as a DI > 1. The panellists then convened in person to discuss areas of disagreement, followed by a second round of rating. Scenarios rated a median of 7 or higher were deemed appropriate and those rated 3 or lower were deemed inappropriate. Scenarios rated 4-6 were considered uncertain, as were any with a DI > 1 RESULTS: Appropriateness was agreed in 131 and inappropriateness in 47 scenarios. Greatest disagreement was around the use of thiopurines, but no scenario had a DI > 1. There were 82 scenarios were rated uncertain. Biologics and tofacitinib were more likely to be rated appropriate for treatment resistance and greater disease activity; disease extent less likely to influence decision making. Surgery was felt to be appropriate in 8 scenarios, generally in more extensive and active disease that had failed to respond to medical therapy. Surgery was felt to be inappropriate in 16 scenarios and was uncertain in 24 CONCLUSION: Although there was little disagreement amongst an expert panel of IBD physicians and surgeons, there remained uncertainty about the use of medical and surgical therapy in nearly one third of situations in patients with mild-moderate UC. These results could be used to guide the design of clinical trials for these patient groups in order to guide best practice.