Fragility index analysis for randomized controlled trials of approved biologicals and small molecule drugs in inflammatory bowel diseases

INTRODUCTION

Biologics and small molecules have been increasingly applied in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). But the robustness of their trials has not been evaluated.

METHODS

We initially collected all the approved biologics or small molecules for CD or UC up to December 1, 2022. Databases were then queried by keywords in chemical name and CD or UC. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the two-arm, 1:1 design were included. Fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ) were subsequently calculated.

RESULTS

We included twenty-eight RCTs, including nine pivotal trials listed in approval labels, nineteen non-pivotal trials not included in the labels. The median sample size was 99 [IQR, 60-262] and the median number of loss-of-follow-up (LFU) was 14 [IQR, 8-43]. Pivotal trials in the labels had the median FI of 8 [IQR, 4-14, n = 6] that was marginally higher than non-pivotal trials (3 [IQR, 2-4], p = 0.08). The median FQ was 0.0330 [IQR, 0.1220-0.0466] and 0.0310 [IQR, 0.0129-0.0540] for pivotal and non-pivotal trials, respectively (p = 1.0). The sample size and FI were significantly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient [r] = 0.56, 95 %CI 0.21-0.78, p = 0.003). The number of total events was also significantly correlated with FI (r = 0.53, 95 %CI 0.17-0.77, p = 0.006). Study p-values were significantly associated with FI (p = 0.01): trials with p-values < 0.001 had the highest median FI of 10 [IQR, 6-17]. No factor was found strongly correlated with FQ.

CONCLUSION

Results from trials assessing administration-approved biologics or small molecules for treating CD or UC were vulnerable to small changes by measuring FI or FQ. Pivotal studies contributing to regulatory approvals exhibited a relatively higher degree of resilience compared to non-pivotal trials.

Real-world experience with subcutaneous infliximab: broadening treatment strategies for inflammatory bowel disease

INTRODUCTION

The first subcutaneous (SC) formulation of infliximab (IFX), CT‑P13 SC, has been approved in Europe and Australia, including for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

AREAS COVERED

We provide a comprehensive overview of available clinical trial and real-world data for IFX SC treatment of IBD, focusing on the potential benefits of switching from IFX intravenous (IV) to IFX SC. We evaluate emerging evidence for IFX SC treatment for difficult-to-treat IBD, use as monotherapy, and suitability for patients receiving escalated IFX IV doses. Therapeutic drug monitoring approaches and patient and healthcare system perspectives on IFX SC are also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

IFX SC represents a significant treatment innovation in the tumor necrosis factor inhibitor class after approximately 20 years of IFX IV availability. Evidence suggests that IFX SC is well tolerated and is associated with high patient acceptance and satisfaction. In addition, effectiveness is maintained in patients with stable disease following switch from IFX IV. Switching may be advisable, given the clinical benefits of IFX SC and its potential to improve healthcare service capacity. There are several areas requiring further research, including the role of IFX SC in difficult-to-treat and refractory disease, and the feasibility of IFX SC monotherapy.

Infliximab, adalimumab and golimumab for treating moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis after the failure of conventional therapy (including a review of TA140 and TA262): clinical effectiveness systematic review and economic model

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is the most common form of inflammatory bowel disease in the UK. UC can have a considerable impact on patients' quality of life. The burden for the NHS is substantial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of interventions, to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of all interventions and comparators (including medical and surgical options), to estimate the expected net budget impact of each intervention, and to identify key research priorities.

DATA SOURCES

Peer-reviewed publications, European Public Assessment Reports and manufacturers' submissions. The following databases were searched from inception to December 2013 for clinical effectiveness searches and from inception to January 2014 for cost-effectiveness searches for published and unpublished research evidence: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, The Cochrane Library including the Cochrane Systematic Reviews Database, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the Health Technology Assessment database and NHS Economic Evaluation Database; ISI Web of Science, including Science Citation Index, and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science and Bioscience Information Service Previews. The US Food and Drug Administration website and the European Medicines Agency website were also searched, as were research registers, conference proceedings and key journals.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review [including network meta-analysis (NMA)] was conducted to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of named interventions. The health economic analysis included a review of published economic evaluations and the development of a de novo model.

RESULTS

Ten randomised controlled trials were included in the systematic review. The trials suggest that adult patients receiving infliximab (IFX) [Remicade(®), Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd (MSD)], adalimumab (ADA) (Humira(®), AbbVie) or golimumab (GOL) (Simponi(®), MSD) were more likely to achieve clinical response and remission than those receiving placebo (PBO). Hospitalisation data were limited, but suggested more favourable outcomes for ADA- and IFX-treated patients. Data on the use of surgical intervention were sparse, with a potential benefit for intervention-treated patients. Data were available from one trial to support the use of IFX in paediatric patients. Safety issues identified included serious infections, malignancies and administration site reactions. Based on the NMA, in the induction phase, all biological treatments were associated with statistically significant beneficial effects relative to PBO, with the greatest effect associated with IFX. For patients in response following induction, all treatments except ADA and GOL 100 mg at 32-52 weeks were associated with beneficial effects when compared with PBO, although these were not significant. The greatest effects at 8-32 and 32-52 weeks were associated with 100 mg of GOL and 5 mg/kg of IFX, respectively. For patients in remission following induction, all treatments except ADA at 8-32 weeks and GOL 50 mg at 32-52 weeks were associated with beneficial effects when compared with PBO, although only the effect of ADA at 32-52 weeks was significant. The greatest effects were associated with GOL (at 8-32 weeks) and ADA (at 32-52 weeks). The economic analysis suggests that colectomy is expected to dominate drug therapies, but for some patients, colectomy may not be considered acceptable. In circumstances in which only drug options are considered, IFX and GOL are expected to be ruled out because of dominance, while the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for ADA versus conventional treatment is approximately £50,300 per QALY gained.

LIMITATIONS

The health economic model is subject to several limitations: uncertainty associated with extrapolating trial data over a lifetime horizon, the model does not consider explicit sequential pathways of non-biological treatments, and evidence relating to complications of colectomy was identified through consideration of approaches used within previous models rather than a full systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

Adult patients receiving IFX, ADA or GOL were more likely to achieve clinical response and remission than those receiving PBO. Further data are required to conclusively demonstrate the effect of interventions on hospitalisation and surgical outcomes. The economic analysis indicates that colectomy is expected to dominate medical treatments for moderate to severe UC.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013006883.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Outcomes of a National Cohort of Children with Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis

AIM

All Irish children with ulcerative colitis (UC) attend the National Centre for Paediatric Gastroenterology at Our Lady's Children's Hospital, Crumlin. The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of children with acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASC) and the impact of infliximab on these outcomes following its introduction for this indication in 2011.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of all patients admitted with ASC between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2015 was undertaken. Patients were identified from the departmental database cross-referenced with the hospital inpatient enquiry system. Inpatients with a paediatric ulcerative colitis activity index (PUCAI) of ≥65 were included. Data collected included baseline demographic and laboratory data, concomitant treatments, PUCAI scores on days 3 and 5, second-line treatments, surgery, and discharge outcomes. Infliximab dose, frequency, and available therapeutic drug monitoring results were recorded, along with clinical response outcomes (remission, primary, and secondary loss of response). The cohort was sub-analysed to determine if there was any era effect pre- and post-introduction of infliximab (2009-2010 and 2011-2015, respectively).

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients (M:F = 1.4:1) were treated for acute severe colitis over the study period (8 in the pre-infliximab and 47 in the post-infliximab era) and 46/55 (86%) had steroid-refractory disease. Of these, 7/8 (88%) required colectomy in the pre-infliximab era, compared with 15/47 (36%) in the post-infliximab era. The remission rate with second-line infliximab was 61% at maximal follow-up. There were no identifiable factors that predicted likely success or failure of infliximab, including gender, CRP, day-3 and day-5 PUCAI scores. Of the 33 patients treated with infliximab, dose increase was required in 23/33 (70%); 21/33 (64%) received an accelerated dose schedule, and 9/33 (27%) eventually needed colectomy. Primary and secondary loss of response to infliximab was seen in one and nine patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This is the first population-based study of the outcomes of severe UC in Irish children, and suggests a higher burden of steroid-refractory disease compared with previous international studies. While infliximab treatment has led to reduction in colectomy rates, a significant proportion of patients lose therapeutic effect.

Review article: dose optimisation of infliximab for acute severe ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Although optimal medical management of acute severe ulcerative colitis (UC) is ill-defined, infliximab has become a standard of care. Accumulating evidence suggests an increased rate of infliximab clearance in patients with acute severe UC and a reduced colectomy rate with an intensified infliximab induction regimen.

AIM

To assess the strength of the current evidence for the relationship between infliximab pharmacokinetics, dosing strategies and disease behaviour in patients with acute severe UC.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE and conference proceedings from 2000 to 2016 for relevant articles describing the pharmacokinetics of infliximab in acute severe UC and/or infliximab dose intensification strategies in acute severe UC. Eligible articles described randomised controlled trials, and cohort, cross-sectional, and case-controlled studies.

RESULTS

Of 400 citations identified, 76 studies were eligible. Increased infliximab clearance occurs in patients with acute severe UC, and is driven by the total inflammatory burden and leakage of drug into the colonic lumen. Several cohort studies suggest that infliximab dose intensification is beneficial to at least 50% of acute severe UC patients and the results of case-controlled studies indicate that an intensified infliximab dosing regimen with 1-2 additional infusions in the first 3 weeks of treatment could reduce the early (3-month) colectomy rate by up to 80%, although these data require prospective validation.

CONCLUSIONS

Uncontrolled studies suggest a benefit for infliximab dose optimisation in patients with acute severe UC. A randomised controlled trial in acute severe UC patients comparing a personalised infliximab dose-optimisation strategy with conventional dosing is a research priority.