Danese, Silvio

Abstract Background Endoscopic healing has become a critical treatment target in Crohn’s disease (CD). Risankizumab (RZB), a humanized immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody against the p19 subunit of interleukin 23, is being investigated as a treatment for moderate-to-severe CD. This analysis assessed different endoscopic endpoints in patients treated with RZB induction therapy in two double-blind, randomised, placebo (PBO)-controlled studies (ADVANCE [NCT03104413] and MOTIVATE [NCT03105128]). Methods Patients with moderate-to-severe CD (CD Activity Index [CDAI] of 220–450, Simple Endoscopic Score for CD [SES-CD] ≥ 6 [≥ 4 for isolated ileal disease] excluding the narrowing component, and average daily [liquid/very soft] stool frequency [SF] ≥ 4 and/or average daily abdominal pain [AP] score ≥ 2) who had demonstrated prior inadequate response or intolerance to conventional and/or biologic treatment (ADVANCE) or to biologic treatment (MOTIVATE) were randomised 2:2:1 (ADVANCE) or 1:1:1 (MOTIVATE) to receive intravenous (IV) RZB 600 mg, RZB 1200 mg, or PBO at weeks 0, 4, and 8. This analysis evaluated the proportion of patients who achieved endoscopic remission ulcer-free endoscopy (ie, absence of ulcers), and composite endpoints of CDAI clinical response and endoscopic response, and enhanced clinical response and endoscopic response at week 12 (endpoints defined in Figure 1 footnotes). All endoscopies were centrally read by a blinded reviewer. Safety was assessed throughout the studies. Results In ADVANCE and MOTIVATE, 850 and 569 patients, respectively, were randomised and included in the intent-to-treat population for this analysis. At week 12 greater proportions of RZB- vs PBO-treated patients in both studies achieved endoscopic remission (P ≤ .001), ulcer-free endoscopy (P ≤ .01), CDAI clinical response and endoscopic response (P ≤ .001), and enhanced clinical response and endoscopic response (P ≤ .001; Figure 1). Treatment with RZB 600 mg or 1200 mg was well tolerated, and no new safety risks were identified.1,2 Conclusion Induction therapy with IV RZB 600 mg or 1200 mg resulted in improved outcomes at week 12 compared with PBO as assessed by endoscopy and by composite endoscopic-clinical endpoints in patients with moderate-to-severe CD. References

Abstract Background Filgotinib (FIL) is a preferential Janus kinase 1 inhibitor in development for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. SELECTION was a phase 2b/3 randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trial to evaluate FIL for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) (NCT02914522). The aim of this post hoc analysis was to assess the speed of improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during FIL treatment. Methods Eligible patients who were biologic-naïve or -experienced were enrolled in induction study A or induction study B, respectively. In each study, patients were randomized 2:2:1 to receive FIL 100 mg, FIL 200 mg or PBO once daily orally for 10 weeks. In this post hoc analysis, data from daily patient diaries up to day 15 of induction, including Mayo stool frequency subscores (SF; range, 0 [normal] to 3 [≥5 stools/day more than normal]) and rectal bleeding subscores (RB; range, 0 [no blood] to 3 [passing blood alone]), were used to evaluate the proportion of patients achieving predefined subscores or subscore reductions. Results Induction studies A and B comprised 659 and 689 patients, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar across treatment groups within induction study A and within induction study B. In induction study A, more patients treated with FIL 200 mg vs PBO reported a reduction in SF of ≥1 from baseline as early as day 6 (FIL 200 mg, 35.8%; PBO, 20.6%, p<0.01) and every day from day 10 (Figure 1), and a reduction in RB of ≥1 from baseline as early as day 4 (FIL 200 mg, 36.9%; PBO, 23.7%; p<0.01) and every day from day 7 (Figure 2). In induction study B, more patients treated with FIL 200 mg vs PBO reported a reduction in SF of ≥1 from baseline as early as day 2 (FIL 200 mg, 21.6%; PBO, 12.1%; p<0.05) (Figure 3) and a reduction in RB of ≥1 from baseline as early as day 3 (FIL 200 mg, 29.5%; PBO, 17.6%; p<0.01) (Figure 4). More patients receiving FIL 200 mg vs PBO achieved the composite score of RB=0 and SF≤1 as early as day 9 in induction study A (FIL 200 mg, 18.8%; PBO, 9.5%, p<0.05). More patients receiving FIL 200 mg vs PBO achieved the composite score of RB=0 and SF≤1 as early as day 7 in induction study B (FIL 200 mg, 10.7%; PBO, 4.2%, p<0.05). Conclusion In this post hoc analysis of induction study data from SELECTION, improvements in SF and RB were observed within the first week of therapy with FIL 200 mg, compared with PBO, in patients with moderately to severely active UC. These data demonstrate that FIL 200 mg has rapid onset of action, as assessed by PROs, in both biologic-naïve and biologic-experienced patients.

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.

Abstract Aims SELECTION (NCT02914522) Maintenance evaluated filgotinib (FIL), a preferential JAK1 inhibitor, as maintenance therapy for patients (pts) with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) who achieved clinical remission or Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) response after 10 weeks of FIL 200mg QD, FIL 100mg QD or placebo (PBO) induction. Methods Pts randomized to FIL induction were rerandomized 2:1 to their induction FIL dose or PBO; pts randomized to PBO induction continued PBO maintenance. Steroid tapering was mandatory. The primary endpoint was clinical remission at Week 58. Key secondary endpoints and exploratory endpoints were assessed at Week 58. Results 664 pts were treated in the Maintenance Study (n=93, 270, and 301 from induction with PBO, FIL 100mg and FIL 200mg); efficacy analyses included only FIL induction pts. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were generally balanced across treatment arms; 40% were biologic experienced. Significantly higher proportion of pts on FIL 200mg or FIL 100mg were in clinical remission vs PBO. Significantly higher proportions of pts achieved key secondary endpoints with FIL 200mg vs PBO. More pts on FIL 200 mg or FIL 100mg achieved an MCS response and endoscopic improvement vs PBO. Incidences of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs and discontinuations due to AEs were similar across arms. Serious infection (<2%) and herpes zoster (<1%) were infrequent among FIL-treated patients. There were no venous thromboses, including pulmonary embolism, among FIL-treated pts. Two pts on FIL 200mg died, both AEs leading to death were considered unrelated to FIL. Conclusions FIL 200mg and FIL 100mg were effective as maintenance treatment for pts with moderately to severely active UC who had achieved clinical response to FIL induction treatment. FIL 200 mg met all key secondary endpoints including endoscopic, histologic and 6-month corticosteroid-free remission. FIL was well tolerated in pts with moderate to severely active UC. Funding Agencies None

Abstract Aims The SELECTION (NCT02914522) Induction Studies evaluated the efficacy/safety of filgotinib (FIL), a preferential JAK1 inhibitor, as induction therapy for patients (pts) with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) who were biologic-naïve but failed conventional therapy (Induction Study A) or failed prior biologics (Induction Study B). Methods Pts were randomized 2:2:1 to once–daily FIL 200mg, FIL 100mg or placebo (PBO). The primary (clinical remission), key secondary (Mayo Clinic Score [MCS] remission, endoscopic remission, and histologic remission), and exploratory endpoints (MCS response and endoscopic improvement) were assessed at Week 10. Results In both studies, baseline demographics and disease characteristics were similar across treatment groups. In Study A, 659 pts were randomized and treated. Baseline mean MCS was 8.6 and 56% had a Mayo endoscopic subscore (ES)=3. A significantly higher proportion of biologic-naïve pts on FIL 200mg achieved clinical remission vs PBO and all key secondary endpoints (Table). In Study B, 689 pts were randomized and treated. Baseline mean MCS was 9.3 and 78% had ES=3. Prior treatment failures were: anti-TNF (86%), vedolizumab (52%) and both (dual-refractory; 43%). A significantly higher proportion of biologic-experienced pts on FIL 200mg achieved clinical remission vs PBO. In Studies A and B, a greater proportion of pts on FIL 200 mg achieved an MCS response and endoscopic improvement vs PBO. The rates of AEs, serious AEs and discontinuations due to AEs were similar across FIL and PBO groups during induction. In the PBO, FIL 100mg and FIL 200mg groups, serious infections occurred in 0.7%, 0.7% and 0.4% pts in Study A and 1.4%, 1.4% and 0.8% pts in Study B; H Zoster occurred in <1% in both groups for both cohorts. Conclusions SELECTION included a high proportion of dual-refractory pts, and pts with severe endoscopic disease. Both doses of FIL were well tolerated. Filgotinib 200mg was effective induction therapy for both biologic-naïve/-experienced pts with moderately to severely active UC. Funding Agencies None

Abstract The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]-causing coronavirus disease [COVID]-19 pandemic poses major challenges for patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] to be recruited and maintained in clinical trials. However, clinical trials offer patients who have failed multiple drugs access to study medications with alternative modes of action and the potential for relief from inflammation-mediated symptoms. Therefore, the continuation of clinical trials in IBD during the COVID-19 pandemic is important both for participants and for the community of IBD patients, due to the dire need for an expanded therapeutic armamentarium. As the safety of patients in clinical trials is the leading principle, we are providing ten specific rules to guide patients and principal investigators safely through the challenging time.