Olson, Allan

LINKED CONTENTThis article is linked to Danese et al papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16753 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16761

SummaryBackgroundEpithelial barrier dysfunction contributes to a dysregulated intestinal immune response in ulcerative colitis (UC). GB004 is an orally administered, small molecule, gut‐targeted stabiliser of hypoxia‐inducible factor‐1α, a transcription factor with protective roles at the epithelial layer of the inflamed gut.AimsTo evaluate safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and efficacy of GB004 in patients with active UC.MethodsThis double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study randomised patients 2:1 to receive an oral solution of GB004 120 mg or placebo once daily for 28 days. Eligible patients had a Robarts Histopathology Index score ≥4 with neutrophils in the epithelium, total Mayo Clinic score 3‐12, Mayo Clinic endoscopic subscore ≥1, and blood in the stool, despite treatment with 5‐aminosalicylates, corticosteroids or immunosuppressants.ResultsThirty‐four patients were randomised. GB004 120 mg for 28 days was generally well‐tolerated. Adverse events occurred in 27.3% (3/11) and 39.1% (9/23) of patients in the placebo and GB004 groups respectively. Nausea and dysgeusia were most commonly reported in the GB004 group (0% for placebo and 21.7% [5/23] and 13.0% [3/23] respectively for GB004). There were no treatment‐related serious adverse events or deaths. GB004 exhibited minimal accumulation, with higher colonic concentrations relative to plasma. Exploratory pharmacodynamic and efficacy analyses demonstrated GB004 target engagement and numerically higher proportions of patients achieving improvement in multiple measures of disease activity, respectively, at day 28 for GB004 compared to placebo.ConclusionResults from this phase 1b trial support evaluation of the full therapeutic potential of GB004 for the treatment of UC. A phase 2 study (NCT04556383) is ongoing. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03860896.

Objective We evaluated the reliability and responsiveness of available but incompletely validated UC histological disease activity indices using standardised rules for centralised assessment. Design Disease activity was assessed in biopsies collected in a phase II placebo-controlled ozanimod trial by four blinded pathologists using the Geboes (GS) and modified Riley (MRS) scores, the Robarts Histopathology (RHI) and Nancy Histological (NHI) indices and a Visual Analogue Scale. Reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Index responsiveness was evaluated by assessing longitudinal validity (Pearson correlations of changes in index scores and other disease measures), and effect size estimates (standardised effect size (SES)) using two criteria for change (treatment assignment and >2 point decrease in total Mayo Clinic score). Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve estimates evaluated the probability of the indices to discriminate between treatment and placebo. Results Inter-rater reliability of the histological indices was substantial to almost perfect (ICC>0.61), and responsiveness was moderate to large (SES estimates>0.5); 0.81 (0.52, 1.10), 0.87 (0.58, 1.17), 0.57 (0.30, 0.84) and 0.81 (0.52, 1.09) when treatment assignment was the criterion for change and 1.05 (0.80, 1.31), 1.13 (0.87, 1.39), 0.88 (0.64, 1.12) and 1.06 (0.80, 1.31) for the change in Mayo score criterion for the GS, MRS, RHI and NHI, respectively. The indices had similar drisciminative ability based on AUROC estimates (range 0.608–0.649). Conclusion All four existing histological indices were similarly reliable and responsive based on this dataset.