Placebo response and remission rates in randomised trials of induction and maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis

Efficacy and Safety of Advanced Therapies in Moderately-to-Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of biologics and small molecules for treatment of adults with moderately-to-severely active ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials evaluating approved and emerging targeted therapies for patients with UC. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) approach was applied. Outcomes assessed included clinical response and remission, endoscopic mucosal healing, and safety.

RESULTS

Thirty studies were included in the NMA following a feasibility assessment comparing approved induction dosing regimens and 22 studies comparing approved maintenance dosing regimens. In the biologic/Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi)-naïve population, induction studies showed similar clinical response and remission rates across most interventions, with upadacitinib demonstrating significant improvements versus most other interventions. For maintenance studies, mirikizumab demonstrated significant improvements in clinical response and remission versus most other interventions. In the biologic/JAKi-experienced population, no significant differences were observed between most interventions in induction studies, except for significantly improved clinical response and remission for mirikizumab versus adalimumab, and upadacitinib demonstrated significant improvement versus all other interventions. Few differences between active treatments were observed in maintenance studies. In both populations, all active interventions had similar efficacy in terms of endoscopic mucosal healing in both induction and maintenance studies. Regardless of prior treatment exposure, similar rates of serious adverse events were seen across all active interventions in the induction period.

CONCLUSION

Among the available interventions, owing to its favourable efficacy and safety profile, mirikizumab has a relevant role in the long-term treatment of UC.

Consistent efficacy outcomes between phase 2 and phase 3 trials in Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis in adults: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The approval of novel biologic agents and small molecules for the treatment of Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) is dependent on phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, these trials sometimes fail to achieve the expected efficacy outcomes observed in phase 2 trials.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of RCTs that evaluated biologic agents and small molecules using paired regimens in both phase 2 and phase 3. We searched Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases up until February 13, 2024. The revised Cochrane tool was utilized to assess the risk of bias. A generalized linear mixed-effects model (GLMM) was employed to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) for efficacy outcomes in phase 2 trials compared to phase 3.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 23 trials with 10 paired regimens for CD and 30 trials with 11 paired regimens for UC. The GLMM analysis revealed that phase 2 CD trials had higher outcomes measured by the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) by 9-13% without statistical significance: CDAI-150: OR, 1.12 (95% CI 0.83-1.51, p = 0.41); CDAI-100: OR, 1.09 (95% CI 0.88-1.35, p = 0.40); or CDAI-70: OR, 1.13 (95% CI 0.61-2.08, p = 0.66). For UC, two efficacy outcomes were estimated to be equally reported in phase 2/phase 3 pairs: clinical remission: OR, 1.00 (95% CI 0.83-1.20, p = 0.96); endoscopic improvement: OR, 0.98 (95% CI 0.83-1.15, p = 0.79). However, the rate of clinical response was underestimated in phase 2 by 19%: OR, 0.81 (95% CI 0.70-0.95, p = 0.03). The inclusion criterion for the type of Mayo score for UC had a significant interaction with the study phase to influence the difference in clinical response (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the main efficacy outcomes for CD and UC remain consistent between phase 2 and phase 3 trials, except for UC response rates. The efficacy data obtained from phase 2 trials can be considered reliable for the design of subsequent phase 3 trials.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42023407947).

A review on the current status and definitions of activity indices in inflammatory bowel disease: how to use indices for precise evaluation

Many clinical trials have been conducted for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), so various clinical indices (CIs) and endoscopic indices (EIs) have also been evaluated. However, recently, with the progress of IBD management, review of established indices from previous studies, and establishment of new indices, the landscape of the use of indices in clinical trials have changed. We investigated the number and frequency of the indices adapted in recent clinical trials for ulcerative colitis (CI and EI) and Crohn's disease (CI, EI, index related to magnetic resonance imaging, index for evaluating patient-reported outcomes, and health-related quality of life). Based on the results, we selected representative indices and further reviewed their content and characteristics. Moreover, various definitions, including clinical and endoscopic response or remission, have been described by means of representative indices in clinical trials.

The Relieving Effects of a Polyherb-Based Dietary Supplement ColonVita on Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) in Older Adults with Chronic Gastrointestinal Symptoms Are Influenced by Age and Cardiovascular Disease: A 12-Week Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Chronic gastrointestinal symptoms (CGS) negatively affect the quality of life in about 15–30% of the population without effective drugs. Recent studies suggest that dietary supplement may improve CGS, but inconsistent results exist. The goal of this study is to evaluate the effect of a polyherbal-based supplement ColonVita on the gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI) in 100 old adults with CGS (63.1 ± 9.6 years) who were randomly assigned to daily ColonVita or placebo tablets (n = 50/group) for 12 weeks in a double-blind, randomized controlled trial design. No significant fibrdifferences were found between ColonVita and placebo in the baseline total GIQLI score (101.12 ± 16.87 vs. 101.80 ± 16.48) (P > 0.05) or postintervention total GIQLI score (114.78 ± 9.62 vs. 111.74 ± 13.01) (P > 0.05). However, ColonVita significantly improved 16 scores of the 19 core GI symptoms compared with 10 items improved by placebo. The ColonVita group significantly improved the remission rate of 5 core GI symptoms compared to placebo and significantly improved the total GIQLI scores (118.09 ± 7.88 vs. 109.50 ± 16.71) (P < 0.05) and core GI symptom scores (64.61 ± 3.99 vs. 60.00 ± 8.65) (P < 0.05) in people ≥60 years of age (n = 49) but not in those under 60 y (n = 51). ColonVita significantly improved the total GIQLI scores and core GI symptom scores in people without cardiovascular diseases (CVD) (n = 56) (116.74 ± 9.38 vs. 110.10 ± 14.28) (P < 0.05) and (63.11 ± 4.53 vs. 59.93 ± 8.03) (P=0.07), respectively, but not in those with CVD (n = 44). Thus, ColonVita was beneficial for old adults with CGS, especially those ≥60 years of age and without CVD. Because a heterogenous pathogenesis of CGS-like irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and inflammatory bowel disease (ISD) is differentially associated with CVD, different comorbidities may have influenced the outcomes of different trials that should be controlled in further studies.

Low FODMAP Diet for Functional Gastrointestinal Symptoms in Quiescent Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

A low FODMAP diet (LFD) has been hypothesized to relieve symptoms of functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGD) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of the study was to systematically review the literature for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of the LFD in patients with IBD and FGD. Four databases were searched, but a meta-analysis was not performed due to methodological and outcomes heterogeneity. Four RCTs fulfilled the criteria, with three having some concerns in their risk of bias assessment. All interventions compared the LFDs against a "typical" or sham diet, spanning in duration from 21 days to 6 weeks. Quality of life was improved in two RCTs, while revealing inconsistent findings in the third trial, based on different assessment tools. The fecal assays revealed non-significant findings for most variables (fecal weight, pH, water content, gene count, and gut transit time) and inconsistent findings concerning stool frequency and short-chain fatty acids concentration. Levels of fecal calprotectin, CRP, or T-cell phenotype did not differ between intervention and comparator arms. Two RCTs reported a reduction in abdominal pain, while results concerning pain duration and bloating were inconsistent. In one trial, energy intake was considerably reduced among LFD participants. Regarding gut microbiota, no differences were noted. A considerable degree of methodological and outcome heterogeneity was observed, paired with results inconsistency. The available data are not sufficient to justify the claim that an LFD induces relief of FGD symptoms, although it may pave the way to a placebo response.

Interrogating the Gut-Brain Axis in the Context of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Translational Approach

This review examines preclinical and clinical studies relevant to our understanding of how the bidirectional gut-brain axis influences the natural history of inflammatory bowel disease. Preclinical studies provide proof of concept that preexisting behavioral illness, such as depression, results in increased susceptibility to inflammatory stimuli and that commonly used classes of antidepressants protect against this vulnerability. However, clinical studies suggesting behavioral illness as a risk factor for IBD and a protective role for antidepressants have relied primarily on symptom-reporting rather than objective measurements of inflammation. In terms of gut-to-brain signaling, there is emerging evidence from preclinical and clinical observation that intestinal inflammation alters brain functions, including the induction of mood disorders, alteration of circadian rhythm both centrally and peripherally, and changes in appetitive behaviors. Furthermore, preclinical studies suggest that effective treatment of intestinal inflammation improves associated behavioral impairment. Taken together, the findings of this review encourage a holistic approach to the management of patients with IBD, accommodating lifestyle issues that include the avoidance of sleep deprivation, optimized nutrition, and the monitoring and appropriate management of behavioral disorders. The review also acknowledges the need for better-designed clinical studies evaluating the impact of behavioral disorders and their treatments on the natural history of IBD, utilizing hard end points to assess changes in the inflammatory process as opposed to reliance on symptom-based assessments. The findings of the review also encourage a better understanding of changes in brain function and circadian rhythm induced by intestinal inflammation.

Probiotics for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative colitis is an inflammatory condition affecting the colon, with an annual incidence of approximately 10 to 20 per 100,000 people. The majority of people with ulcerative colitis can be put into remission, leaving a group who do not respond to first- or second-line therapies. There is a significant proportion of people who experience adverse effects with current therapies. Consequently, new alternatives for the treatment of ulcerative colitis are constantly being sought. Probiotics are live microbial feed supplements that may beneficially affect the host by improving intestinal microbial balance, enhancing gut barrier function and improving local immune response.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine the efficacy of probiotics compared to placebo, no treatment, or any other intervention for the maintenance of remission in people with ulcerative colitis. The secondary objective was to assess the occurrence of adverse events associated with the use of probiotics.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two other databases on 31 October 2019. We contacted authors of relevant studies and manufacturers of probiotics regarding ongoing or unpublished trials that may be relevant to the review, and we searched ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched references of trials for any additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared probiotics against placebo or any other intervention, in both adults and children, for the maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis were eligible for inclusion. Maintenance therapy had to be for a minimum of three months when remission has been established by any clinical, endoscopic,histological or radiological relapse as defined by study authors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently conducted data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment of included studies. We analysed data using Review Manager 5. We expressed dichotomous and continuous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

In this review, we included 12 studies (1473 randomised participants) that met the inclusion criteria. Participants were mostly adults. The studies compared probiotics to placebo, probiotics to 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) and a combination of probiotics and 5-ASA to 5-ASA. The studies ranged in length from 12 to 52 weeks. The average age of participants was between 32 and 51, with a range between 18 and 88 years. Seven studies investigated a single bacterial strain, and five studies considered mixed preparations of multiple strains. The risk of bias was high in all except three studies due to selective reporting, incomplete outcome data and lack of blinding. This resulted in low- to very low-certainty of evidence. It is uncertain if there is any difference in occurrence of clinical relapse when probiotics are compared with placebo (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.18; 4 studies, 361 participants; very low-certainty evidence (downgraded for risk of bias, imbalance in baseline characteristics and imprecision)). It is also uncertain whether probiotics lead to a difference in the number of people who maintain clinical remission compared with placebo (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.37; 2 studies, 141 participants; very low-certainty evidence (downgraded for risk of bias, imbalance in baseline characteristics and imprecision)). When probiotics are compared with 5-ASA, there may be little or no difference in clinical relapse (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.22; 2 studies, 452 participants; low-certainty evidence) and maintenance of clinical remission (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.25; 1 study, 125 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if there is any difference in clinical relapse when probiotics, combined with 5-ASA are compared with 5-ASA alone (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.87; 2 studies, 242 participants; very low-certainty evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision)). There may be little or no difference in maintenance of remission when probiotics, combined with 5-ASA, are compared with 5-ASA alone (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.24; 1 study, 122 participants; low-certainty evidence). Where reported, most of the studies which compared probiotics with placebo recorded no serious adverse events or withdrawals due to adverse events. For the comparison of probiotics and 5-ASA, one trial reported 11/110 withdrawals due to adverse events with probiotics and 11/112 with 5-ASA (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.25; 222 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Discontinuation of therapy was due to gastrointestinal symptoms. One study (24 participants) comparing probiotics combined with 5-ASA with 5-ASA alone, reported no withdrawals due to adverse events; and two studies reported two withdrawals in the probiotic arm, due to avascular necrosis of bilateral femoral head and pulmonary thromboembolism (RR 5.29, 95% CI 0.26 to 107.63; 127 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Health-related quality of life and need for additional therapy were reported infrequently.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of probiotics for the maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis remains unclear. This is due to low- to very low-certainty evidence from poorly conducted studies, which contribute limited amounts of data from a small number of participants. Future trials comparing probiotics with 5-ASA rather than placebo will better reflect conventional care given to people with ulcerative colitis. Appropriately powered studies with a minimum length of 12 months are needed.

Current Endpoints of Clinical Trials in Ulcerative Colitis: Are They Valid?

Note: This statement is mandatory. Please provide.

The Future of Biosimilars: Maximizing Benefits Across Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases

Biologics have transformed the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Biosimilars-biologic medicines with no clinically meaningful differences in safety or efficacy from licensed originators-can stimulate market competition and have the potential to expand patient access to biologics within the parameters of treatment recommendations. However, maximizing the benefits of biosimilars requires cooperation between multiple stakeholders. Regulators and developers should collaborate to ensure biosimilars reach patients rapidly without compromising stringent quality, safety, or efficacy standards. Pharmacoeconomic evaluations and payer policies should be updated following biosimilar market entry, minimizing the risk of imposing nonmedical barriers to biologic treatment. In RA, disparities between treatment guidelines and national reimbursement criteria could be addressed to ensure more uniform patient access to biologics and enable rheumatologists to effectively implement treat-to-target strategies. In IBD, the cost-effectiveness of biologic treatment earlier in the disease course is likely to improve when biosimilars are incorporated into pharmacoeconomic analyses. Patient understanding of biosimilars is crucial for treatment success and avoiding nocebo effects. Full understanding of biosimilars by physicians and carefully considered communication strategies can help support patients initiating or switching to biosimilars. Developers must operate efficiently to be sustainable, without undermining product quality, the reliability of the supply chain, or pharmacovigilance. Developers should also facilitate information sharing to meet the needs of other stakeholders. Such collaboration will help to ensure a sustainable future for both the biosimilar market and healthcare systems, supporting the availability of effective treatments for patients.

Tofacitinib for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In the UK, treatments for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis who have an inadequate response to conventional therapies comprise four biological therapies-the tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) agents adalimumab, golimumab and infliximab and the anti-integrin vedolizumab-and an orally administered small molecule therapy, tofacitinib. However, there have been few head-to-head studies of these therapies. This study aimed to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib with biological therapies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all relevant randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence. Clinical response, clinical remission and serious infection rates were synthesised using network meta-analysis (NMA). The results were used to compare the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib and biologics with conventional therapy, using a Markov model, which incorporated lifetime costs and consequences of treatment from a UK National Health Service perspective. Analyses were conducted separately for TNFi-naïve and TNFi-exposed populations.

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs were used in the NMAs. There were no statistically significant differences among biological therapies and tofacitinib for either TNFi-naïve or TNFi-exposed patients. In TNFi-naïve patients, all therapies were more efficacious than placebo. In TNFi-exposed patients, only tofacitinib was significantly more efficacious than placebo as induction therapy, and only tofacitinib and vedolizumab were significantly more efficacious than placebo as maintenance therapies. There were no significant differences in serious infection rates among therapies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for tofacitinib versus conventional therapy were £21 338 and £22 816 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the TNFi-naïve and TNFi-exposed populations, respectively. TNFi therapies were dominated or extendedly dominated in both populations. Compared with vedolizumab, tofacitinib was associated with a similar number of QALYs, at a lower cost.

CONCLUSION

Tofacitinib is an efficacious treatment for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis and is likely to be a cost-effective use of NHS resources.

Vedolizumab in Japanese patients with ulcerative colitis: A Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Background

Vedolizumab safety and efficacy have been established in many populations all over the world, but have never been studied in Japan. We report results from a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of vedolizumab in Japanese patients with active ulcerative colitis (UC).

Methods

Patients with moderate-to-severe UC were enrolled into Cohort 1 (double-blinded) or Cohort 2 (open-label) in the induction phase. Cohort 1 was randomized 2:1 to receive 300 mg vedolizumab or placebo, while Cohort 2 received vedolizumab 300 mg only, at Weeks 0, 2, and 6. Patients from Cohorts 1 and 2 showing a clinical response to vedolizumab at Week 10 were randomized 1:1 to receive vedolizumab or placebo (double-blinded) at Week 14 and then every 8 weeks up to Week 54 as the maintenance phase. The primary endpoint was clinical response at Week 10, for the induction phase, and clinical remission at Week 60, for the maintenance phase.

Results

A total of 292 patients were enrolled into the induction phase (246 in Cohort 1, 46 in Cohort 2); 83 patients achieved response to vedolizumab and were subsequently enrolled into the maintenance phase. Clinical response rates at Week 10 were 39.6% (65/164) and 32.9% (27/82) in the vedolizumab and placebo groups in Cohort 1, respectively (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.37, 95% CI 0.779–2.399; p = 0.2722). In the maintenance phase, clinical remission rate at Week 60 was significantly higher in the vedolizumab group, at 56.1% (23/41), versus 31.0% (13/42) for placebo (AOR = 2.88, 95% CI 1.168–7.108; p = 0.0210). Most adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity, and no deaths occurred during the study period.

Conclusions

Vedolizumab showed numerically greater efficacy compared with placebo as induction therapy, but the difference was not statistically significant. Vedolizumab was significantly superior to placebo as maintenance therapy in Japanese patients with UC. Vedolizumab has favourable safety and tolerability in these patients.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02039505.

Placebo Rates in Randomized Controlled Trials of Pouchitis Therapy

BACKGROUND

Approximately half of the patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who undergo restorative proctocolectomy develop pouchitis within 10 years of surgery. Currently, there are no approved pouchitis treatments. It is important to quantify, and ultimately minimize, placebo rates to design and conduct efficient pouchitis trials.

AIMS

To quantify the placebo rate observed in pouchitis randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in meta-analysis.

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to November 3, 2017, for placebo-controlled RCTs enrolling adult UC patients with, or at risk for developing, pouchitis. A fixed-effect binomial-normal model was used to pool placebo rates on the log-odds (logit) scale. Proportions and 95% confidence intervals were reported. Outcomes of interest included development of pouchitis, induction of remission/response, and maintenance of remission/response. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate study quality.

RESULTS

Twelve trials (five prevention, five induction, and two maintenance) enrolling a total of 229 placebo patients were eligible for inclusion. The pooled placebo rates for development of pouchitis and induction of response were 47% (95% CI 39-56%) and 24% (95% CI 14-37%), respectively. An insufficient number of trials prevented additional data pooling and meta-regression analysis and no consistent definitions of outcome were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

No consistent methods for measuring pouchitis disease activity or defining response and remission were identified, highlighting the need for standardized definitions of outcomes for use in pouchitis trials. Additional high-quality trials are required to evaluate existing and novel therapies in this area.

Evolution of Clinical Trials in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Since the first clinical trial of cortisone in ulcerative colitis in 1955, remarkable progress has been made in the design and conduct of clinical trials in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). In this review article, we will discuss evolution of clinical trials in IBD over the last 3-5 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recognizing limitations intrinsic to clinical disease activity indices in IBD, regulatory authorities have recommended evaluating co-primary endpoints of patient-reported outcomes and endoscopic disease activity in clinical trials. Biomarker-enriched trial enrolment and central endoscopy reading have emerged as critical events in trial recruitment and outcome assessment and have driven placebo response rates down. While trials of novel biologic therapies and advanced small molecules continue at an accelerated pace, pragmatic comparative efficacy trials of treatment strategy aimed at optimizing current therapies (such as early combined immunosuppression [REACT], tight disease control [CALM], therapeutic drug monitoring [TAXIT, TAILORIX]) have directly informed clinical practice. With emphasis on value-based care and population health management, multi-pronged remote monitoring, self-management, and telemedicine approaches in the era of smartphones have re-emerged with promise. Non-conventional therapies such as fecal microbiota transplantation, though still experimental, have provided insight into disease pathogenesis and offered hope for microbial manipulation strategies for treating these complex diseases. Clinical trials have rapidly evolved over the last 5 years not only focusing on novel therapies but also optimizing existing treatment approaches and population health management. Over the next decade, these trials will continue to advance the field, and be readily translatable into clinical practice.