Dose Escalation Assessment Among Targeted Immunomodulators in the Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Raising the bar in ulcerative colitis management

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease characterized by growing incidence and prevalence around the world in the last few decades. The range of available existing treatment and strategies for its management is being implemented. Given the introduction of newly developed molecules and the lack of specific guidelines, drug positioning may represent a tough clinical challenge. UC management is mostly medical, and it has been shifting toward a more personalized approach with the aim to create a tailored strategy depending on the patient's profile. A treat-to target strategy seems to be the best approach to reach disease control as it allows to carry out therapeutic choices based on objective and specific parameters: histological, ultrasonographic, and molecular targets may add to the already used clinical, endoscopic, and biochemical targets. In addition, dual-targeted therapy has emerged as an attractive therapeutic strategy for patients not achieving remission. This review aims to provide an overview of the available strategies to raise the bar in UC.

Immunogenicity of Therapeutic Antibodies Used for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Treatment and Clinical Considerations

The introduction of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors has led to a paradigm shift in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The subsequent introduction of both anti-integrins and cytokine blockers has since expanded the biologic armamentarium. However, immunogenicity, defined as the production of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) to the prescribed biopharmaceutical, means a significant fraction of patients exposed to biologic agents will experience a secondary loss of response to one or more of the drugs. In clinical settings, immunogenicity may be caused by several factors, both patient related (e.g., underlying chronic disease, systemic immune burden, including previous biologic therapy failure, and [epi]genetic background) and treatment related (e.g., dose and administration regimens, drug physical structure, photostability, temperature, and agitation). Here, we outline these elements in detail to enhance biopharmaceutical delivery and therapy for patients with IBD. Moreover, concurrent immunomodulator medication may reduce the risks of ADA generation, especially when using the chimeric drug infliximab. Summarizing the latest developments and knowledge in the field, this review aims to provide strategies to prevent ADA production and information on managing non-responsiveness or loss of response to biologics. Better understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying the formation of ADAs and the critical factors influencing the immunogenicity of biopharmaceuticals may lead to improved health outcomes in the IBD community that may benefit both the individual patient and society through lower healthcare expenses.

Dose escalation of biologics in biologic-naive patients with Crohn's disease: Outcomes from the ODESSA-CD study

BACKGROUND

Dose escalation of biologics may restore response in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) who experience inadequate response or loss of response, but the rates of dose escalation and subsequent adverse clinical outcomes have not been well characterized.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the rate of dose escalation of biologics and associated adverse clinical outcomes and economic outcomes in biologic-naive patients with CD.

METHODS

ODESSA-CD (real wOrld Dose EScalation and outcomeS with biologics in IBD pAtients with Crohn's Disease) was a retrospective cohort study conducted using claims data from IBM MarketScan databases. Adults with CD with at least 1 claim for an index drug (adalimumab, infliximab, ustekinumab, or vedolizumab) between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2018, and no claims for biologics in the 6 months prior (ie, biologic naive) were included. Follow-up ended on June 30, 2020. Cox proportional hazards models and logistic regression models were used to compare the rate of dose escalation and the likelihood of adverse clinical outcomes and costs after dose escalation, respectively.

RESULTS

Of the 2,664 eligible patients, most (71.4%) were younger than 50 years and 50.5% were male. The rate of dose escalation was higher with the anti-tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) treatments adalimumab (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.703; P < 0.0001) and infliximab (HR = 1.690; P < 0.0001) compared with vedolizumab, but there was no significant difference between ustekinumab and vedolizumab (HR = 0.842; P = 0.730). After dose escalation, the likelihood of infection, sepsis, and inflammatory bowel disease-related hospitalization did not differ among biologics (anti-TNFα vs vedolizumab: odds ratio [OR] = 1.141, P = 0.599; ustekinumab vs vedolizumab: OR = 0.891; P = 0.836); however, corticosteroid use was more likely with anti-TNFα treatment than with vedolizumab (OR = 1.740, P = 0.002). Among patients whose dose was escalated, index drug costs were likely to be higher with anti-TNFα treatment and ustekinumab than with vedolizumab (anti-TNFα vs vedolizumab: ratio of expected cost = 1.429, P = 0.002; ustekinumab vs vedolizumab: ratio of expected cost = 3.115, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who were biologic naive and received ustekinumab or vedolizumab were less likely to undergo dose escalation than those who received anti-TNFα treatment. Adverse clinical outcomes after dose escalation were similar among these biologics but with different costs. These analyses may inform providers and payers of the clinical and economic implications of dose escalation.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Healthcare Resource Use for Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn's Disease in Italy

INTRODUCTION

Real-world data are used to inform decision-makers and optimise therapeutic management for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). We analysed data on the epidemiology (by using proxies of prevalence and incidence), patient characteristics, treatment patterns and associated healthcare direct costs for the management of patients with UC and patients with CD in Italy.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study used administrative databases from eight Local Health Units geographically distributed across Italy. Adult patients with a hospitalisation and/or an exemption for UC or CD were included. Study outcomes were summarised descriptively, and limited statistical tests were performed.

RESULTS

At baseline, 9255 adults with UC and 4747 adults with CD were included. Mean (standard deviation) age at inclusion was 54.0 (18.4)/48.6 (18.1) years, for UC/CD. The estimated average incidence of UC and CD for the period 2013-2020 was 36.5 and 18.7 per 100,000, respectively. The most frequently prescribed drug category for patients with UC/CD was conventional treatment [mesalazine and topical corticosteroids (67.4%/61.1%), immunomodulators and systemic corticosteroids (43.2%/47.7%)], followed by biologic treatments (2.1%/5.1%). The mean annual total direct cost per patient was 7678 euro (€), for UC and €6925 for CD.

CONCLUSION

This analysis, carried-out in an Italian clinical setting, may help to optimise therapy for patients with UC and CD and provide relevant clinical practice data to inform decision-makers.

Therapeutic sequencing in inflammatory bowel disease: Determining the optimal position of vedolizumab for long-term Crohn's disease control using real-world evidence

BACKGROUND

Several biologics are available for the treatment of moderate to severe Crohn's disease, but data to optimize their use are scarce. Vedolizumab (VDZ) is a gut-selective anti-lymphocyte trafficking monoclonal antibody that was approved in 2014 for the treatment of moderate to severe Crohn's disease. Based on real-world evidence, a model was developed to examine the effect of VDZ's position in the treatment sequence on clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop a model using real-world data to investigate how the positioning of VDZ in a sequence of biologic therapies for CD affects clinical effectiveness outcomes of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYS), patient-reported disease activity, and surgery rates.

METHODS

A semi-Markov sequential model was developed to identify the optimal position of VDZ in a treatment sequence that included corticosteroids (CS), two biologics, and best supportive care (BSC). Using real-world data, three sequences were compared: VDZ as first (position), second, and last biologic (with anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha agents adalimumab (ADA) and infliximab (IFX) and the anti-interleukin-12 and -23 agent ustekinumab (UST) as alternative biologic treatments). Published real-world evidence informed model inputs. Vedolizumab sequences were compared and ranked based on QALYS, patient-reported outcomes from Crohn's disease activity index scores, or proportion of patients undergoing surgery by the 10-year time horizon for model simulation. Sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the impact of model input uncertainty.

RESULTS

Vedolizumab as the first biologic was the optimal position for this treatment according to all criteria, including yielding the highest QALYs (5.09) versus VDZ in second (4.97) and third (4.96) biologic sequence positions in sequences containing CS, anti-TNFα (aggregated data), UST, and BSC; 1780/2000 (89%) probabilistic simulations. In sequences containing ADA, VDZ, and UST biologics, ADA and VDZ in the first-line biologic position yielded QALYs of 5.09 versus 5.07, respectively. Adalimumab as the first biologic was best for clinical remission.

CONCLUSIONS

This simulation model using real-world evidence indicates that positioning VDZ or ADA as the first biologic is likely to lead to improved long-term patient outcomes when compared to administering these treatments later or starting with IFX monotherapy.

Clinical profiles and outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease receiving standard and escalated doses of targeted therapies: findings from a global real-world study

OBJECTIVE

Although dosing regimens of targeted therapies (TT) for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) are guided by market authorizations and clinical guidelines, little is known about clinical guideline adherence or outcomes in patients receiving escalated doses of TT due to lack of response. This real-world study explored the prevalence of dose escalation and compared outcomes between patients receiving standard and escalated TT doses.

METHODS

Data were from the 2020-2021 Adelphi Disease Specific Programme for inflammatory bowel disease, a cross-sectional survey of gastroenterologists and their UC and CD patients across five European countries and the US. Physicians provided retrospective data collection of patient demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment history, and satisfaction; patients reported quality-of-life and work productivity. Patients were grouped by TT maintenance dose; standard and escalated dose groups were compared. Outcomes were adjusted for time on current TT and severity at current TT initiation using regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of 1,241 UC and 1,477 CD patients, 19.1% and 24.1%, respectively, received escalated TT doses. Despite escalation, a substantial proportion of patients had not achieved remission, had moderate or severe disease activity, or were flaring. Most physicians were not fully satisfied with treatment in the escalated dose group and were more likely to switch patients to another treatment regimen than patients on standard dose.

CONCLUSION

Dose escalation is not always an effective approach to resolve inadequate or loss of response in UC and CD, highlighting a need for more therapeutic options or alternative treatment strategies in patients unresponsive to TT.

Intravenous ustekinumab maintenance treatment in patients with loss of response to subcutaneous dosing

Background

Ustekinumab (UST) is indicated for the treatment of Crohn's disease (CD) and Ulcerative Colitis (UC). Despite having shown clinical effectiveness in the real world, some patients may lose response over time or need a higher dose to achieve it. In this context, UST intravenous (IV) maintenance has been proposed.

Objectives

The primary endpoint of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of maintenance IV UST treatment in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) patients who present with partial response or loss of response to subcutaneous (SC) UST.

Design

We performed a monocentric observational retrospective study including patients with active IBD on maintenance treatment with IV UST.

Methods

The clinical response and remission was analyzed at week 12, defined as either Harvey-Bradshaw Index ⩽ 4 for CD or partial Mayo Score ⩽ 2 for UC. The reduction of objective markers of disease activity, fecal calprotectin, and C-reactive protein was evaluated. Moreover, UST trough levels were measured pre- and post-UST IV maintenance and any adverse events were assessed.

Results

We included 23 patients. Clinical remission at week 12 was achieved by 43.5% of the patients. The proportion of patients in clinical response after 12 weeks on UST IV maintenance was 82.6%. After a median follow-up of 9.3 months all patients remained on IV UST maintenance. No adverse events were recorded in any patient for the duration of the study.

Conclusions

IV UST maintenance treatment was able to recapture response in most of the patients who had lost response to SC maintenance.

Persistence and other treatment patterns among bio-experienced patients with Crohn's disease initiated on ustekinumab or adalimumab

BACKGROUND: Real-world data on persistence on ustekinumab and adalimumab among bio-experienced patients with Crohn's disease (CD) are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare treatment persistence and describe switching, restart, and dose titration among bio-experienced patients with CD initiated on ustekinumab or adalimumab. METHODS: IBM MarketScan Commercial Database was used to identify bio-experienced adults with CD who were assigned to either the ustekinumab or adalimumab cohort based on the agent first initiated (index date) after September 23, 2016. Cohorts were balanced using inverse probability of treatment weights-average treatment effect on treated. Persistence on index agent (absence of exposure gap > 120 days for ustekinumab or > 60 days for adalimumab), persistence while corticosteroid-free, and persistence while receiving monotherapy were assessed at 12 months after index date and compared between cohorts using weighted Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards model analyses. RESULTS: Among 903 patients in the ustekinumab cohort and 525 patients in the adalimumab cohort, baseline characteristics were balanced after weighting. At 12 months post-index, ustekinumab was associated with higher persistence (80.1% vs 64.6%; hazard ratio = 2.02 [95% CI = 1.60-2.56]; P < 0.001) and persistence while receiving monotherapy (51.6% vs 40.0%; 1.51 [1.28-1.78]; P < 0.001) vs adalimumab. Persistence while corticosteroid-free was similar in the ustekinumab vs adalimumab cohort (50.1% vs 48.2%; 1.19 [1.00-1.41]; P = 0.0516). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective real-world study demonstrated that among bio-experienced patients with CD, initiation of ustekinumab was associated with better persistence at 12 months of follow-up, including persistence while receiving monotherapy, compared with adalimumab. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Drs Zhao, Ding, and Kachroo are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and stockholders of Johnson & Johnson. Dr Manceur, Mr Lefebvre, Ms Zhdanava, and Mr Pilon are employees of Analysis Group, Inc., a consulting company that has provided paid consulting services to Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, which funded the development and conduct of this study and article. Mr Holiday was an employee of Analysis Group, Inc., at the time of study conduct.

Dose Escalation Patterns of Advanced Therapies in Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Dose escalation is one of the treatment approaches studied and suggested in advanced therapies for Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). This study aimed to identify and characterize the dosing escalation patterns of advanced therapies in CD and UC.

METHODS

Two systematic literature reviews (SLRs) were conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE®, Embase®, and Cochrane Library were searched for articles published between January 2011 and October 2021 and limited to non-interventional studies in English language. Congress and bibliographic searches were also conducted. Articles were screened by two independent researchers. Dose escalation patterns were described and summarized considering the regional regulatory label recommendation (in North America [NA] or outside of North America [ONA]).

RESULTS

Among 3190 CD and 2116 UC articles identified in the Ovid searches, 100 CD and 54 UC studies were included in the SLR, with more studies conducted ONA. Most studies reported an initial maintenance dose pattern aligned with the lower starting dose per local regulatory label; however, several ONA studies (n = 13 out of 14) reported ustekinumab every 8 weeks as starting maintenance pattern in CD. In ONA studies, the median within-guideline escalation rates in CD and UC were 43% in ustekinumab (CD only), 33% and 32% for vedolizumab; 29% and 39% for adalimumab; and 14% and 10% for infliximab. Evidence regarding dose escalation patterns for tofacitinib, certolizumab pegol, and golimumab was limited. Some dose escalation patterns outside of label recommendations were observed including ustekinumab every 8 weeks to every 4 weeks and vedolizumab every 8 weeks to every 6 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Dose escalation strategies are widely documented in the literature. The reported dose escalation patterns and escalation rates vary by region and by CD and UC. Most escalation patterns reported were aligned with regulatory recommendations while some reported more diverse or aggressive dose escalation.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42021289251.

Systematic Literature Review of Real-World Evidence on Dose Escalation and Treatment Switching in Ulcerative Colitis

Background

Currently approved biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis have well-established efficacy. However, many patients fail to respond or lose response, leading to dose escalation or treatment switching.

Objective

We sought to identify real-world evidence on dose escalation and treatment switching and associated clinical and economic outcomes among adults with ulcerative colitis treated with infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, or tofacitinib.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE (up to 26 August 2020), and conference proceedings (2017-2020) for studies in adults with ulcerative colitis to assess clinical response and remission, colectomy, adverse events, and economic outcomes related to dose escalation and treatment switching.

Results

In 56 studies, dose escalation and treatment switching involving infliximab and/or adalimumab were most frequently investigated. Rates of clinical response after dose escalation were 20-95% (1.8-36 months), clinical remission rates were 10-94% (1.8-36 months), colectomy rates were 0-33% (12-38 months), and adverse event rates were 0-18%. Treatment switching rates in 21 studies were 4-70% over 3-62 months, with switch due to loss of response rates of 4-35% over 12-62 months (7 studies). Up to 35% of patients underwent colectomy 12-120 weeks after switching, and 13-38% experienced adverse events. Data relating to economic outcomes were limited to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, but demonstrated increased direct costs associated with both dose escalation and treatment switching.

Conclusion

Dose escalation and treatment switching are common with existing therapies. However, clinical response and remission rates vary, and a proportion of patients fail to achieve optimal clinical and economic outcomes. This highlights the need for more efficacious and durable treatments for patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis.

Treatment persistence among bio-naïve patients with Crohn's disease initiated on ustekinumab or adalimumab

OBJECTIVES

To compare persistence and describe dose titration among bio-naïve patients with Crohn's disease (CD) initiated on ustekinumab or adalimumab.

METHODS

Bio-naïve adults with CD who initiated ustekinumab or adalimumab (index date) from 23 September 2016 (ustekinumab US approval for CD) to 1 August 2019 were selected from IQVIA PharMetrics Plus. Cohorts were balanced on baseline characteristics measured over 12 months pre-index using inverse probability of treatment weights. Persistence was defined as no gaps (ustekinumab: >120 days; adalimumab: >60 days) between days of supply. Dose escalation was defined as ≥2 consecutive sub-cutaneous claims 100% above the US label daily dose in the maintenance phase; de-escalation was a return to the daily dose for ≥2 consecutive claims. Outcomes were described using weighted Kaplan-Meier models; persistence outcomes were compared using Cox's proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

At 12 months post-index, patients in the ustekinumab (n = 948) versus adalimumab (n = 4143) cohort had a significantly higher rate of persistence on index biologic (hazard ratio [HR] 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.29-1.74). A total of 830 (87.6%) patients in the ustekinumab cohort and 3713 (89.6%) in the adalimumab cohort began the maintenance phase; within 12 months, 11.2% and 16.9%, underwent a dose escalation, and 26.6% and 6.3%, respectively, subsequently de-escalated to the per US label daily exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Bio-naïve patients with CD initiated on ustekinumab were more persistent than patients initiated on adalimumab; moreover, these patients had numerically lower dose escalation and higher de-escalation rates than patients initiated on adalimumab. Findings support the use of ustekinumab as a first-line treatment for bio-naïve patients with CD.

Proactive infliximab is more effective than vedolizumab in inducing fecal calprotectin remission in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Current evidence suggests vedolizumab (VDZ) may be as effective as Infliximab (IFX) in inflammatory bowel disease. It is unknown if proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (PTDM) of IFX may improve these results.

METHODS

Case-control study including consecutive patients with primary response to conventional IFX (n = 70), proactive IFX (n = 148), and VDZ (n = 95). PTDM was performed at week 14 and every other infusion, aiming at a trough level between 5 and 10 µg/ml. The primary outcome was fecal calprotectin (Fc) remission (<250 µg/g) at 1 year of treatment. Secondary outcomes included Fc remission at week 14 (proactive IFX/VDZ), clinical remission, treatment discontinuation, hospitalization, and surgery at 1-year of follow-up.

RESULTS

Proactive IFX was superior to conventional IFX and VDZ in inducing Fc remission at 1-year (69.4% vs 47.1% vs 37.9%, p = .003 and p < .001). Results remained significant in biologic naïve patients (70.8% vs 44.4% vs 51.4%, p = .001 and p = .043) but comparisons between conventional IFX and VDZ were not significant (p = .265 and p = .664). In multivariate analysis correcting for prior biologic exposure, proactive IFX was more effective than conventional IFX (OR 2.480 95%CI [1.367-4.499], p = .003) and VDZ (OR 3.467 95%CI [1.578-7.617], p = .002) in inducing Fc remission. Amongst secondary outcomes, only clinical remission was significant between proactive IFX and VDZ in the overall cohort (80.4% vs 55.8%, p < .001) and in biologic naïve patients (80.2% vs 62.9%, p = .043). Fc remission at 1-year was associated with better results in most secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Proactive IFX was superior to VDZ in inducing Fc remission at 1-year, which was associated with improved clinical outcomes.SUMMARYCurrent evidence suggests that vedolizumab may be as effective as Infliximab in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.There have been no studies comparing vedolizumab with proactively optimized Infliximab based on trough levels.We confirm that conventional IFX is as effective as vedolizumab but proactive IFX appears superior to vedolizumab in inducing fecal calprotectin remission.Fecal calprotectin remission associates with better clinical outcomes.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: loss of response and requirement of ustekinumab dose escalation in inflammatory bowel diseases

BACKGROUND

Ustekinumab is effective in treating Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the loss of response (LOR) to ustekinumab and the efficacy of dose escalation have not been systematically explored.

METHODS

Databases were searched for eligible studies from inception through July 2021. Summary estimates were pooled, and subgroup analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We included 14 studies (CD: 13; UC: 1). In CD patients, the annual risk of LOR to ustekinumab and dose escalation among primary responders was 21% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12-31%, 1530 person-years, n = 9) per person-year and 25% (95% CI 12-32%, 657 person-years, n = 5) per person-year respectively. Clinical response was regained in 58% (95% CI 49-67%, 279 patients, n = 8) of secondary non-responders after dose escalation (interval reduction or intravenous reinduction). In UC patients, no studies provided data on LOR, but only one study showed that 35% (100/284) of patients underwent dose escalation (or sham dose adjustment), leading to an annual risk of dose escalation of 18% per person-year. After dose escalation, 58% (14/24) of the patients regained symptomatic remission.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary responders with CD experienced LOR to ustekinumab at a risk of 21% per person-year and required dose escalation at a risk of 25% per person-year. Fifty-eight per cent of secondary non-responders with CD may benefit from dose escalation. LOR has not been well characterized in patients with UC.

Optimizing biologic therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus in the United Arab Emirates

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are chronic, relapsing-remitting inflammatory conditions with a substantial negative impact on health-related quality of life and work productivity. Treatment of IBD has been revolutionized by the advent of biologic therapies, initially with anti-TNF agents and more recently with multiple alternatives targets, and yet more under development.

OBJECTIVES

Approximatively one third of patients do not respond to biologic therapy and more importantly a significant proportion experiences partial response or loss of response during treatment. The latter are common clinical situations and paradoxically are not addressed in the commercial drug labels and available guidelines. There is therefore a clinical need for physicians to understand when and how eventually to optimize the biologic therapy.

DESIGN

This consensus using a Delphi methodology was promoted and supported by the Emirates Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology to close this gap.

DATA SOURCES AND METHODS

Following an extensive systematic review of over 60,000 studies, 81 studies with dose escalation and five addressing drug monitoring were selected and in addition five systematic reviews and three guidelines.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

after three rounds of voting 18 statements were selected with agreement ranging from of 80% to 100.