Citations

Abstract Background In VARSITY, the first head-to-head randomized controlled trial of biologics, vedolizumab (VDZ) was superior vs adalimumab (ADA) in achieving clinical remission (CR) at Week 52 in patients (pts) with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC).1 Current treatment goals in UC are based on clinical symptoms and endoscopy, with histologic improvement considered an aspirational goal.2-4 In pts with CR in VARSITY, greater treatment differences between VDZ and ADA at Week 52 were seen in endoscopic improvement and histologic response. Here, data from VARSITY were used to define disease clearance: a novel composite outcome in UC comprising clinical and endoscopic remission plus minimal histologic disease activity. Methods VARSITY was a phase 3b, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-control trial of treatment with VDZ (300mg IV Q8W) vs ADA (40mg SC Q2W) maintenance after induction. Pts were randomized in a treat through design, and no dose escalation was allowed. For these analyses, based on pts who completed the study until Week 52, disease clearance was defined as a composite outcome based on 1) CR: partial Mayo score ≤2 and no individual subscore >1 (excluding sigmoidoscopy subscore); 2) endoscopic improvement: endoscopic subscore ≤1; and 3) absence of active histologic disease (minimum histological disease activity [MHDA]): Robarts Histology Index (RHI) <5. Treatment failure was defined as discontinuation from treatment or completion of treatment but failure to achieve any of CR, endoscopic improvement, or MHDA. The rates of disease clearance and failures were compared between treatment groups and stratified by presence of inflammatory burden at baseline: C-reactive protein ≥5 mg/L and fecal calprotectin >100 µg/g. Results More pts in the VDZ treatment group than the ADA group achieved disease clearance at Week 52 (VDZ: 112/383, 29.2%, 95% CI 24.7-34.1 vs ADA: 63/386, 16.3%, 95% CI 12.8-20.4). Compared with treatment failures (VDZ: 92/383, 24.0% vs ADA: 134/386, 34.7%, Table 1), disease clearers had lower C-reactive protein (CRP) baseline mean values (7.4mg/L and 6.4mg/L vs 13.6mg/L and 9.4mg/L for disease clearers vs treatment failures, for VDZ and ADA, respectively). Fewer pts with inflammatory burden at baseline (CRP ≥5 mg/L and fecal calprotectin >100 µg/g) achieved disease clearance (Fig 1). Baseline corticosteroid use was more frequent in ADA disease clearers (42.9%) compared with VDZ disease clearers (32.1%). Conclusion Disease clearance is a novel and achievable composite outcome that is achieved by almost one third of pts in the VDZ treatment group in VARSITY. Analyses are ongoing to further characterize the trajectory leading to disease clearance as well as the role of baseline characteristics.

Abstract Background Filgotinib (FIL) is an oral preferential Janus kinase (JAK) 1 inhibitor in development for the treatment of inflammatory diseases. FIL for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) was evaluated in the phase 2b/3, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled SELECTION study (NCT02914522) and its long-term extension (LTE) study (NCT02914535). Here we report safety results from the FIL UC program. Methods Patients received FIL 100 mg, FIL 200 mg or PBO (2:2:1) once daily orally for up to 11 weeks for induction (cohort 1). At week 11, FIL induction responders were rerandomized 2:1 to continue FIL or receive PBO maintenance for 47 weeks (cohort 2). Week 10 non-responders and patients with worsening disease during the maintenance study were eligible for open-label FIL in the LTE. Patients completing the maintenance study could continue blinded dosing in the LTE. Cohort 3 comprised cohorts 1 and 2 and the LTE. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) and exposure-adjusted event rates (EAERs) per 100 patient-years (PYs) were calculated for treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) by treatment group in cohorts 1 and 2 (EAIR) and cohort 3 (EAER). Results In cohort 1, 1069 patients received FIL and 279 patients received PBO; baseline characteristics were generally similar across treatment groups (overall mean age, 43 years; mean UC duration, 8.4 years; mean Mayo Clinic Score, 9.0). EAIRs for AEs of interest were similar across treatment groups in cohorts 1 and 2 (Table 1). Treatment exposure for PBO, FIL 100 mg or FIL 200 mg in cohort 3 (i.e. cohorts 1 + 2 + the LTE) was 318, 360 and 1207 PYs, and median treatment duration was 12, 11 and 67 weeks, respectively. One case of pulmonary embolism occurred with FIL 200 mg induction and three venous thrombosis cases occurred with PBO maintenance/LTE (cohort 3) (Table 2). EAERs for all infections were similar across treatment groups, the most common being nasopharyngitis (Table 2). Opportunistic infections were rare. EAERs for serious infections were low across treatment groups (2.2 [PBO], 3.5 [FIL 100 mg], 2.2 [FIL 200 mg]), the most common being appendicitis (Table 2). EAERs for herpes zoster (HZ) were low in all treatment groups (0.3 [PBO], 0.3 [FIL 100 mg], 1.8 [FIL 200 mg]) (Table 2). HZ infections were cutaneous only and only one was serious. EAIRs for all infections in cohorts 1 and 2 were generally numerically higher for both PBO and FIL in patients over (vs under) 65 years old and in those with (vs without) biologic treatment failure (Figure 1). Conclusion FIL was well tolerated in patients with UC. Aggregation of AEs typical for pan-JAK inhibition was not observed, consistent with preferential JAK-1 inhibition with FIL.

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 Background Adalimumab (ADA) is efficacious and well tolerated in adult patients with ulcerative colitis (UC).1,2 SERENE-UC (NCT02065622) is a study evaluating higher ADA dosing regimens from which induction study results have previously been reported3; here, we report data from the maintenance study. Methods This Phase 3, double-blind, randomised, multicentre study evaluated higher vs. standard ADA dosing regimens for induction and maintenance therapy in adult patients with moderately to severely active UC. Following completion of the induction study at Week 8, all patients were re-randomised 2:2:1 to ADA 40 mg every week (40 EW), ADA 40 mg every other week (40 EOW), or exploratory ADA 40 mg with therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) regimens, stratified by induction treatment regimen, clinical response status at Week 8, and clinical remission (CRem) status at Week 8 among Week 8 responders. Efficacy endpoints were evaluated in Week 8 responders (ITT-RP) unless indicated differently. The primary efficacy endpoint was proportion of patients achieving CRem (full Mayo Score ≤2 with no subscore >1) at Week 52. The endoscopic component of the Mayo Score was scored via central reading. Non-responder imputation was used for missing values. Comparisons between 40 EW and 40 EOW dosing regimens used the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test adjusted for stratification. Safety assessment included a collection of adverse events (AEs), vital signs, and laboratory data. Results Of 852 patients in the Global (ex-Japan) induction study, 757 were re-randomised at Week 8 and 371 were included in the ITT-RP. In the ITT-RP, induction baseline demographics and disease characteristics were generally balanced across the 3 treatment arms; range across arms for mean UC disease duration was 6.2–7.8 years, 6.8–11.7% had prior infliximab use, and 62.5–63.5% were receiving corticosteroids. The overall mean ADA exposure was 252.2 days. The table displays results for efficacy endpoints. The observed safety profile was similar between maintenance treatment arms, including AEs of special interest (generally <1% across arms). Conclusion In the Global (ex-Japan) study of SERENE-UC, CRem at Week 52 was numerically higher among Week 8 responders in patients receiving ADA 40 EW compared with 40 EOW maintenance regimens (∆ = 10.5%), but not statistically significant. Higher maintenance treatment with 40 EW was generally safe and well tolerated with a similar safety profile to 40 EOW. No new long-term safety concerns were observed. References

Abstract Background Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) experience substantial impairment in quality of life (QOL). Patient QOL endpoints are important measures of treatment outcome. We evaluated the effects of intravenous vedolizumab vs. adalimumab on QOL in VARSITY, the first head-to-head trial comparing the efficacy and safety of biologics in patients with moderately to severely active UC. Methods VARSITY was a phase 3b, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised trial (NCT02497469; EudraCT 2015-000939-33). QOL was assessed using the inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire (IBDQ) at baseline, Week (Week) 30, and Week 52. Endpoints included clinically meaningful IBDQ improvement (defined as an increase in total score of ≥16 points from baseline to Week 52), IBDQ remission (defined as a total score of >170 points at Week 52) and change from baseline in IBDQ-specific domain scores (bowel symptoms, systemic symptoms, emotional function, and social function) at Week 30 and Week 52. Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and faecal calprotectin (FCP) were also assessed as indicators of disease activity. Results Among randomised patients, 383 (vedolizumab) and 386 (adalimumab) patients received ≥1 dose of study drug (N=769). At Week 52, clinically meaningful IBDQ improvement was observed in 52.0% (vedolizumab) vs. 42.2% (adalimumab) of patients (treatment difference 9.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.7% to 16.7%), while IBDQ remission was achieved by 50.1% (vedolizumab) vs. 40.4% (adalimumab) of patients (treatment difference 9.6%; 95% CI, 2.8% to 16.5%). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) changes in IBDQ total score from baseline for observed cases favoured vedolizumab over adalimumab (Week 30: 61.3 [39.8] vs. 52.6 [42.8]; Week 52: 66.1 [41.8] vs. 60.4 [42.2]; Figure 1). IBDQ subscores showed similar favourable trends for vedolizumab (Figure 2). At Week 52, mean (SD) changes from baseline in CRP for patients treated with vedolizumab vs. adalimumab were –50.9 (174.8) nmol/l vs. –37.2 (169.2) nmol/l and for FCP were –2187.3 (7440.4) µg/g vs. –1846.6 (4560.6) µg/g (Figure 3). Among patients with FCP >250 µg/g at baseline, the proportion of patients achieving FCP ≤250 µg/g was 33.9% vs. 24.5% at Week 30 and 35.2% vs. 28.9% at Week 52 for patients treated with vedolizumab vs. adalimumab, respectively. Conclusion Based on IBDQ total score and subscores, more patients with UC treated with vedolizumab than with adalimumab achieved clinically meaningful improvement and clinical remission. Reduced inflammation, as indicated by improvements in CRP and FCP, was consistent with improvements in QOL.

INTRODUCTION: Histologic remission is associated with superior long-term clinical outcomes in ulcerative colitis (UC). VARSITY, the first head-to-head comparison of biologic agents in UC (NCT02497469; EudraCT 2015-000939-33), showed superior clinical remission and endoscopic improvement at Week 52 with vedolizumab (VDZ), a gut-selective, humanized, α 4 β 7 integrin monoclonal antibody, vs adalimumab (ADA), a systemic, human, anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) monoclonal antibody. 1 Both VDZ and ADA were generally safe and well-tolerated. 1 This analysis compared histologic improvements with VDZ vs ADA in VARSITY. METHODS: Patients with moderately to severely active UC were randomized 1:1 to active VDZ intravenous (IV) infusions (300 mg)/placebo subcutaneous (SC) injections or placebo IV/active ADA SC (160/80/40 mg). Prespecified histologic exploratory endpoints included histologic remission (Geboes score < 2 or Robarts Histopathology Index [RHI] score < 3) and minimal histologic disease activity (Geboes score < 3.2 or RHI score < 5) at Week 14 and Week 52. Histologic remission was also assessed based on previous anti-TNF use. RESULTS: A total of 769 patients received ≥1 dose of VDZ (n = 383) or ADA (n = 386). Median (range) duration of exposure was 477 (127, 630) days for VDZ and 420 (71, 454) days for ADA. Mean (standard deviation) baseline histologic disease activity was similar between groups (Geboes: VDZ, 15.0 [4.92]; ADA, 15.1 [5.03]; RHI: VDZ, 19.5 [8.74]; ADA, 19.6 [8.89]). Histologic remission induced by VDZ at Week 52 was greater than with ADA in the overall (Geboes or RHI), anti-TNF naïve (Geboes or RHI), and anti-TNF failure (RHI only) groups (Table 1). Histologic remission at Week 14 favored VDZ over ADA, with larger differentiation when using RHI (Table 1). VDZ also outperformed ADA in achieving minimal histologic disease activity at Weeks 14 and 52 (Table 1). CONCLUSION: VARSITY showed that use of VDZ, compared with ADA, achieved higher rates of histologic remission and minimal histologic disease activity at Weeks 14 and 52 in patients with moderately to severely active UC. These data support the use of VDZ over ADA in UC.