Difference In Clinical Remission Research Articles

Safety and Effectiveness of Ustekinumab for Crohn’s disease with Perianal manifestations: ad-hoc analysis data from 1-year post-marketing surveillance study in Japan

Abstract Background Crohn’s disease (CD) is an immune-mediated inflammatory disorder of the gastrointestinal tract with perianal disease being one of the challenging possible manifestations. Here, we report, an ad-hoc analysis of the safety and effectiveness of 1-year use of ustekinumab (UST) for CD in patients with perianal manifestations using post-marketing surveillance (PMS) data in Japan. Methods Among 341 patients enrolled in the PMS, 229 and 224 patients who had baseline Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI) data used for evaluating perianal manifestations were included in the safety and efficacy analysis sets, respectively. Incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), clinical remission, the mean or its change in CDAI scores, and CDAI items were evaluated through Week 52 in the presence or absence of perianal manifestations at baseline. The prevalence of perianal manifestations was also described. Results Comparing patients with and without baseline perianal manifestations at Week 52, there was no difference in ADR incidence (9.1% [n=66] vs 15.3% [n=163]), no difference in clinical remission (68.3% vs 59.9%; p=0.269), and decreased mean change of CDAI score (-82.9 [n=60] vs -68.8 [n=137]). The proportion of patients with perianal manifestations decreased after UST treatment in both biologics-naïve patients (23.5% [n=4/17]) and patients who had received biologics (35.0% [n=14/40]) at Week 52. Conclusion In Japanese clinical practice, UST is safe and effective in CD patients with and without perianal manifestations. The therapy might be also beneficial in those with manifestations regardless of prior use of other biologics.

Exclusive Enteral Nutrition Orchestrates Immunological Balances as Early as Week 4 in Adult Patients of Crohn's Disease: A Pilot, Open-Lable Study.

The efficacy and underlying mechanisms of exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) in adult patients with Crohn's disease (CD) remain controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the role of EEN in adult patients with CD and to explore the mechanisms from the perspective of immunoregulation. This is a prospective, open-label pilot study. Active patients with CD were enrolled and prescribed an amino-acid-rich elemental diet for 12 weeks. Dynamic changes in immune cells, including neutrophils, monocytes, T cells and B cells, were detected by flow cytometry. Plasma cytokines were evaluated by ELISA. Twenty adult patients with CD were enrolled. Among them, 1 discontinued treatment due to poor compliance, and 19 patients were included for final analysis. Clinical remission was achieved in 47.37% (9/19), 63.16% (12/19), and 73.68% (14/19) patients at weeks 4, 8, and 12, respectively. Endoscopic remission and transmural healing were achieved in 52.63% (10/19) and 15.79% (3/19) patients at week 12. Notably, there was no significant difference in clinical remission between week 4 and week 8 (p = 0.33) or week 12 (p = 0.09). Furthermore, we observed a rapid reconstitution of immunologic homeostasis as early as week 4. At week 4, both the frequency and activation of neutrophils and monocytes were decreased after EEN therapy. Significant decreases in Th17 cells and naïve B cells, increases in memory B cells, and regulatory B cells were also detected. These changes remained stable at weeks 8 and 12. EEN with an amino-acid-rich elemental diet orchestrated immunological balances and induces clinical remission in adult CD patients as early as week 4, suggesting a 4-week EEN therapy may be feasible and practicable in clinical practice.

Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety of Ustekinumab and Adalimumab As Induction or Maintenance Therapy in Patients With Moderate to Severe Crohn's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

This meta-analysis has been conducted to compare ustekinumab and adalimumab as induction or maintenance therapy in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD).The current meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).Two investigators independently searched online databases including PubMed, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Cochrane Library for relevant articles published up to April 2023. The initial search terms were "ustekinumab," "adalimumab," and "Crohn's disease". Three studies (with a total of 612 patients) were included in the present meta-analysis. Wedid not find any significant difference in clinical remission (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 0.68-2.52), clinical response (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.39-4.91),endoscopic remission (OR: 1.56, 95% CI: 0.66-3.64), and steroid-free remission(OR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.67-1.42) between patients who received ustekinumab and patients who received adalimumab.In conclusion, this meta-analysis provides valuable insights into the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab and adalimumab in the treatment of moderate to severe CD. Our findings indicate that both drugs have similar effectiveness in achieving clinical remission, clinical response, radiological remission and steroid-free remission.

Adalimumab versus ustekinumab as first-line biological in moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease: real-life cohort from a tertiary referral center.

Therapeutic options for Crohn's disease are growing, making the choice of first-line therapy relevant. Both adalimumab and ustekinumab are effective in moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease. The Safety and Efficacy of Adalimumab Versus Ustekinumab for One Year trial suggested no difference in clinical or endoscopic remission at week 52 in biological-naive Crohn's disease patients. We explored if results withstand in the real world. We included bio-naive Crohn's disease patients starting adalimumab or ustekinumab between 2017 and 2020. Patients had endoscopy-proven moderate-to-severe disease [Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease (SES-CD) ≥3]. Clinical remission was defined as Harvey Bradshaw Index (HBI) <5 or physician global assessment. Endoscopic remission (SES-CD <3) and improvement (≥50% reduction in SES-CD from baseline) were assessed at W26-52. Propensity score matching was used. A total of 68 biological-naive Crohn's disease patients were included (32 adalimumab and 32 ustekinumab) and followed for median of (IQR) 60 (33-104) weeks. Patients had significantly higher odds of achieving endoscopic remission with adalimumab than ustekinumab [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 2.73; confidence interval (CI), 1.12-7.36; P = 0.03]. Also, more adalimumab-treated patients achieved endoscopic response, clinical remission at week 26 and 52 (aOR, 2.24; CI, 0.94-5.71; P = 0.07; aOR, 1.26; CI, 0.36-4.51; P = 0.72; aOR, 1.58; CI, 0.54-4.88; P = 0.41, respectively). Treatment persistence was not different between groups (P = 0.44). The number of adverse events was similar. In a real-world cohort of biological-naive Crohn's disease patients, adalimumab was superior to ustekinumab in achieving endoscopic remission. No differences in clinical remission at W26-52 or treatment persistence were observed. Both adalimumab and ustekinumab remain good options as first-line biologicals in moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease.

Higher vs Standard Adalimumab Induction and Maintenance Dosing Regimens for Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis: SERENE UC Trial Results

SERENE UC (Study of a Novel Approach to Induction and Maintenance Dosing With Adalimumab in Patients With Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis) evaluated the efficacy of higher adalimumab induction and maintenance dose regimens in patients with ulcerative colitis. This phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial included induction and maintenance studies, with a main study (ex-Japan) and Japan substudy. Eligible patients (18-75 years, full Mayo score 6-12, centrally read endoscopy subscore 2-3) were randomized 3:2 to higher induction regimen (adalimumab 160 mg at weeks 0, 1, 2, and 3) or standard induction regimen (160 mg at week 0 and 80 mg at week 2); all received 40 mg at weeks 4 and 6. At week 8, all patients were rerandomized 2:2:1 (main study) to 40 mg every week (ew), 40 mg every other week (eow), or exploratory therapeutic drug monitoring; or 1:1 (Japan substudy) to 40 mg ew or 40 mg eow maintenance regimens. In the main study, 13.3% vs 10.9% of patients receiving the higher induction regimen vs standard induction regimen achieved clinical remission (full Mayo score ≤2 with no subscore >1) at week 8 (induction primary end point; P= .265); among week-8 responders, 39.5% vs 29.0% receiving 40 mg ew vs 40 mg eow achieved clinical remission at week 52 (maintenance primary end point; P= .069). In the integrated (main+ Japan) population, 41.1% vs 30.1% of week-8 responders receiving 40 mg ew vs 40 mg eow achievedclinical remission at week 52 (nominal P= .045). Safety profiles were comparable between dosing regimens. Although primary end points were not met, a >10% absolute difference in clinical remission was demonstrated with higher adalimumab maintenance dosing. Higher dosing regimens were generally well tolerated and consistent with the known safety profile of adalimumab in ulcerative colitis. gov, Number: NCT002209456.

Positioning Infliximab and Vedolizumab in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Positioning Infliximab and Vedolizumab in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Potential benefits of immunomodulator use with vedolizumab for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis.

Background and AimThis study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of vedolizumab treatment with or without concomitant immunomodulator use in Japanese patients with moderate‐to‐severe ulcerative colitis.MethodsAmong enrolled patients in a phase 3 study conducted in Japan (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02039505), data from patients allocated to 300‐mg intravenous vedolizumab for induction and maintenance phases were used for this exploratory analysis. Efficacy endpoints were clinical response, clinical remission, and mucosal healing at week 10 and clinical remission and mucosal healing at week 60, and disease worsening and treatment failure during the maintenance phase.ResultsAt week 10, the differences in clinical response, clinical remission, and mucosal healing rates between the subgroups (those with concomitant immunomodulator use minus those without) were 0.7 (95% confidence interval: −14.3, 15.7), 3.3 (95% confidence interval: −8.5, 15.2), and 1.8 (95% confidence interval: −13.0, 16.5), respectively. At week 60, the differences in clinical remission and mucosal healing between the subgroups with and without concomitant immunomodulator use were 26.1 (95% confidence interval: −3.5, 55.6) and 29.9 (95% confidence interval: 1.4, 58.4), respectively. The proportions of patients without treatment failure at day 330 of the maintenance phase were 90.7% with concomitant immunomodulator use and 73.7% without. No marked differences in incidence of infections were observed between subgroups.ConclusionsThis study suggested the possibility that concomitant immunomodulator use may be beneficial to maintain the clinical efficacy of vedolizumab.

Effectiveness and Safety of Adalimumab Biosimilar SB5 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Outcomes in Originator to SB5 Switch, Double Biosimilar Switch and Bio-Naïve SB5 Observational Cohorts.

Background and AimsMultiple adalimumab [ADA] biosimilars are now approved for use in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]; however, effectiveness and safety data remain scarce. We aimed to investigate long-term outcomes of the ADA biosimilar SB5 in IBD patients following a switch from the ADA originator [SB5-switch cohort] or after start of SB5 [SB5-start cohort].MethodsWe performed an observational cohort study in a tertiary IBD referral centre. All IBD patients treated with Humira underwent an elective switch to SB5. We identified all these patients in a biological prescription database that prospectively registered all ADA start and stop dates including brand names. Data on IBD phenotype, C-reactive protein [CRP], drug persistence, ADA drug and antibody levels, and faecal calprotectin were collected.ResultsIn total, 481 patients were treated with SB5, 256 in the SB5-switch cohort (median follow-up: 13.7 months [IQR 8.6–15.2]) and 225 in the SB5-start cohort [median follow-up: 8.3 months [4.2–12.8]). Of the SB5-switch cohort, 70.8% remained on SB5 beyond 1 year; 90/256 discontinued SB5, mainly due to adverse events [46/90] or secondary loss of response [37/90]. In the SB5-start cohort, 81/225 discontinued SB5, resulting in SB5-drug persistence of 60.3% beyond 1 year. No differences in clinical remission [p = 0.53], CRP [p = 0.80], faecal calprotectin [p = 0.40] and ADA trough levels [p = 0.55] were found between baseline, week 26 and week 52 following switch. Injection site pain was the most frequently reported adverse event.ConclusionSwitching from ADA originator to SB5 appeared effective and safe in this study with over 12 months of follow-up.

Higher-Calorie Refeeding in Anorexia Nervosa: 1-Year Outcomes From a Randomized Controlled Trial.

We recently reported the short-term results of this trial revealing that higher-calorie refeeding (HCR) restored medical stability earlier, with no increase in safety events and significant savings associated with shorter length of stay, in comparison with lower-calorie refeeding (LCR) in hospitalized adolescents with anorexia nervosa. Here, we report the 1-year outcomes, including rates of clinical remission and rehospitalizations. In this multicenter, randomized controlled trial, eligible patients admitted for medical instability to 2 tertiary care eating disorder programs were randomly assigned to HCR (2000 kcals per day, increasing by 200 kcals per day) or LCR (1400 kcals per day, increasing by 200 kcals every other day) within 24 hours of admission and followed-up at 10 days and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post discharge. Clinical remission at 12 months post discharge was defined as weight restoration (≥95% median BMI) plus psychological recovery. With generalized linear mixed effect models, we examined differences in clinical remission over time. Of 120 enrollees, 111 were included in modified intent-to-treat analyses, 60 received HCR, and 51 received LCR. Clinical remission rates changed over time in both groups, with no evidence of significant group differences (P = .42). Medical rehospitalization rates within 1-year post discharge (32.8% [19 of 58] vs 35.4% [17 of 48], P = .84), number of rehospitalizations (2.4 [SD: 2.2] vs 2.0 [SD: 1.6]; P = .52), and total number of days rehospitalized (6.0 [SD: 14.8] vs 5.1 [SD: 10.3] days; P = .81) did not differ by HCR versus LCR. The finding that clinical remission and medical rehospitalization did not differ over 1-year, in conjunction with the end-of-treatment outcomes, support the superior efficacy of HCR as compared with LCR.

Concomitant 5-Aminosalicylate Therapy in Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis Patients Escalated to Infliximab Is Not Beneficial

While there is recent literature to support the discontinuation of 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA) upon the initiation of biologics, continuing 5-ASA after treatment failure is relatively common. We aimed to assess the impact of concomitant 5-ASA therapy on clinical outcomes in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients escalated to infliximab. This is a retrospective chart review of patients with moderate-to-severe UC started on infliximab between January 2012 and December 2017 at the University of Alberta. The primary outcome was clinical remission (partial Mayo score < 2) at 6 and 12months. Secondary outcomes included endoscopic (endoscopic Mayo < 2) and deep remission (combined clinical and endoscopic remission) as well as the need for rescue therapy, hospitalization or colectomy. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratios and 95% CI for the outcomes. One hundred and twenty-one patients were followed over a period of 47 (SD = 34) months. Patients on 5-ASA had increased concomitant immunomodulator use (73.3% vs. 54.1%, p = 0.03). There was no difference in clinical remission at 6 (aOR 2.59, p = 0.07) or 12months (aOR 0.43, p = 0.06). At 12months, patients on concomitant 5-ASA were less likely to achieve endoscopic (aOR 0.08, p = 0.01) and deep remission (aOR 0.07, p = 0.02). Adverse outcomes such as need for rescue therapy, hospitalization, and colectomy did not differ between the groups. Our data suggest that 5-ASA may be stopped in patients with moderate-to-severe UC who have been escalated to infliximab therapy as it has no additional benefit to control inflammation.

Probiotics for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis.

Probiotics for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis.

Effects of Apremilast, an Oral Inhibitor of Phosphodiesterase 4, in a Randomized Trial of Patients With Active Ulcerative Colitis

New oral therapeutic agents are needed for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who are unresponsive or intolerant to conventional therapy. We performed a double-blind, phase 2 trial of adults with active UC for 3 months or more who were naïve to biologic therapy or had been failed by, could not tolerate, or had contraindications to conventional therapies. The study was performed at 61 sites in 14 countries (screening from January 2015 through May 2017). Patients were randomly assigned to groups given apremilast 30 mg (n= 57), apremilast 40 mg (n= 55), or placebo (n= 58) twice daily for 12 weeks; patients were then randomly assigned to groups that received apremilast, 30 or 40 mg twice daily, for an additional 40 weeks. Endoscopies were performed and biopsies were collected during the screening phase, at week 12, and at week 52. Blood and fecal samples were also collected and analyzed throughout the study. The primary endpoint was clinical remission at week 12, defined as a total Mayo score of 2 or less, with no individual subscore above1. Clinical remission was achieved at week 12 by 31.6% of patients in the 30 mg apremilast group and 12.1% of patients in the placebo group (P = .01). However, only 21.8% of patients in the 40 mg apremilast group achieved clinical remission at week 12 (P = .27 compared with placebo). Differences in clinical remission between the 30 mg and 40 mg apremilast groups were associated with differences in endoscopic improvement. Both apremilast groups had similar improvements from baseline in Mayo score components (stool frequency score, rectal bleeding score, physician's global assessment). The 30 mg and 40 mg apremilast groups had greater median percent reductions in C-reactive protein (measured by a high-sensitivity blood test) and fecal calprotectin through week 12 than the placebo group. At week 52, clinical remission was achieved by 40.4% of patients initially assigned to the apremilast 30 mg group and 32.7% of patients initially assigned to the apremilast 40 mg group. The most frequent apremilast-associated adverse events were headache and nausea. Although the primary endpoint of clinical remission was not met in this phase 2 trial, a greater proportion of patients with active UC who received apremilast (30 mg or 40 mg) had improvements in clinical and endoscopic features, and markers of inflammation, at 12 weeks. Clinical remission was maintained to week 52 in up to 40% of patients who continued apremilast until that time point. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02289417.

A clinical decision support tool may help to optimise vedolizumab therapy in Crohn’s disease

SummaryBackgroundA clinical decision support tool (CDST) has been validated for predicting treatment effectiveness of vedolizumab (VDZ) in Crohn’s disease.AimTo assess the utility of this CDST for predicting exposure‐efficacy and disease outcomes.MethodsUsing data from three independent datasets (GEMINI, GETAID and VICTORY), we assessed clinical remission rates and measured VDZ exposure, rapidity of onset of action, response to dose optimisation and progression to surgery by CDST‐defined response groups (low, intermediate and high).ResultsA linear relationship existed between CDST‐defined groups, measured VDZ exposure, rapidity of onset of action and efficacy in GEMINI through week 52 (P < 0.001 at all time points across three CDST‐defined groups). In GETAID, CDST predicted differences in clinical remission at week 14 (AUC = 0.68) and rapidity of onset of action (P = 0.04) between probability groups. The high‐probability patients did not benefit from shortening of infusion intervals, and differences in onset of action between the high‐intermediate and low‐probability groups within GETAID were no longer significant when including low‐probability patients who received a week 10 infusion. CDST predicted a twofold increase in surgery risk over 12 months of VDZ therapy among low‐ to intermediate‐probability vs high‐probability patients (adjusted HR 2.06, 95% CI 1.33‐3.21).ConclusionsWe further extended the clinical utility of a previously validated VDZ CDST, which accurately predicts at baseline exposure‐efficacy relationships and rapidity of onset of action and could be used to help identify patients who would most benefit from interval shortening and those most likely to require surgery while on active therapy.

Concomitant Use of Aminosalicylates Is Not Associated With Improved Outcomes in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis Escalated to Vedolizumab

Vedolizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting α4β7 leukocyte integrins, has demonstrated efficacy for induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis (UC).1 However, it remains unclear whether oral aminosalicylates should be continued or stopped after treatment escalation to vedolizumab. Singh etal2 have demonstrated no significant difference in clinical remission, clinical response, or mucosal healing rates between patients treated with or without concomitant aminosalicylates at entry in clinical trials of infliximab or golimumab. We evaluate the impact of concomitant oral aminosalicylates on clinical outcomes for vedolizumab-treated UC patients.

Interventions for treating lymphocytic colitis.

Lymphocytic colitis is a cause of chronic diarrhea. Therapy is based mainly on case series and uncontrolled trials, or by extrapolation of data for treating collagenous colitis, a related disorder. This review was performed to identify therapies for lymphocytic colitis that have been proven in randomized controlled trials.To determine effective treatments for patients with clinically active lymphocytic colitis.The MEDLINE, PUBMED and EMBASE databases were searched using the search criteria "microscopic colitis" or "lymphocytic colitis" and "treatment" or "therapy" or "management" to identify relevant papers published between 1970 and September 2006. Manual searches from the references of identified papers and relevant review papers were performed. Abstracts from major gastroenterological meetings were searched to identify research submitted in abstract form only. Finally, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Functional Bowel Disorders Group Specialized Trials Register was searched for other studies.A single randomized trial published in abstract form only which studied bismuth subsalicylate was identified, and included only 5 patients with lymphocytic colitis (and 9 with collagenous colitis).Data were extracted independently by each author onto 2x2 tables (treatment versus placebo and response versus no response). For therapies assessed in one trial only, P values were derived using the chi-square test.There were 5 patients with lymphocytic colitis in the trial studying bismuth subsalicylate (nine 262 mg tablets daily for 8 weeks vs. placebo). Although all three patients on active drug experienced clinical improvement compared to none of the placebo group, there were no statistically significant differences in clinical (P = 0.10) or histological (P = 0.71) improvement.A single trial studying bismuth subsalicylate as therapy for lymphocytic colitis suggests that it may be beneficial. However, it included only 5 patients and no firm conclusions can be made from such a small trial. Larger trials studying treatments for lymphocytic colitis are warranted.

Effectiveness and safety of infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 in treating ulcerative colitis: a real‑life experience in IBD primary centers

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of infliximab biosimilar (IFX) IFX CT-P13 in inducing and maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis (UC) outpatients in Italian primary gastroenterology centers. Patients were prospectively assessed at entry, after 8, 12, 24, 36, and therefore 52 weeks. Clinical activity was rated as per the Mayo Score. The primary endpoint was reaching of clinical remission (Mayo Score ≤2). Several secondary endpoints were clinical response to treatment, reaching of mucosal healing (MH), safety of the drug. Twenty-nine patients (16 males and 13 females, mean age 45 years, range 35-42 years) were enrolled. Eleven (37.9%) patients had previous exposure to other anti-TNF-α. Clinical remission was present in 78.5% at week 24, and in 100% at 12-month follow-up. Subgroup analysis did not reveal significant differences in clinical remission between IFX-naïve patients and patients switching from originator to IFX biosimilar. A clinical response was observed in 92.3% at week 8, in 50.0% at week 16, in 100% at week 36 and in 100% at 12-month follow-up. MH occurred in 85.7% at week 24, and in 100% at 12-month follow-up Reduction of steroids was achieved in 92.3% at week 8, and in 100% during follow-up. One patient underwent proctocolectomy 3 weeks after starting IFX CT-P13. The median C-reactive protein and calprotectin levels during follow-up were significantly reduced during follow-up. No adverse events were observed during follow-up. IFX CT-P13 seems to be very effective and safe in real-life experience at primary IBD centers.