Higher vs Standard Adalimumab Induction Dosing Regimens and Two Maintenance Strategies: Randomized SERENE CD Trial Results

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Dose-optimization strategies for biologic therapies in Crohn's disease (CD) are not well established. The SERENE CD (Study of a Novel Approach to Induction and Maintenance Dosing With Adalimumab in Patients With Moderate to Severe Crohn's Disease) trial evaluated higher vs standard adalimumab induction dosing and clinically adjusted (CA) vs therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) maintenance strategies in patients with moderately to severely active CD.

METHODS

In this phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial, eligible adults (Crohn's Disease Activity Index score of 220-450, endoscopic evidence of mucosal inflammation, and previous failure of standard therapies) were randomized to higher induction regimen (adalimumab 160 mg at weeks 0, 1, 2, and 3; n = 308) or standard induction regimen (adalimumab 160 mg at week 0 and 80 mg at week 2; n = 206) followed by 40 mg every other week from week 4 onward. Co-primary end points included clinical remission at week 4 and endoscopic response at week 12. At week 12, patients were re-randomized to maintenance therapy optimized by Crohn's Disease Activity Index and C-reactive protein (CA; n = 92) or serum adalimumab concentrations and/or clinical criteria (TDM; n = 92); exploratory end points were evaluated at week 56.

RESULTS

Similar proportions of patients receiving higher induction regimen and standard induction regimen achieved clinical remission at week 4 (44% in both; P = .939) and endoscopic response at week 12 (43% vs 39%, respectively, P = .462). Week 56 efficacy was similar between CA and TDM. Safety profiles were comparable between dosing regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher induction regimen was not superior to standard induction regimen, and CA and TDM maintenance strategies were similarly efficacious. Adalimumab therapy was well tolerated, and no new safety concerns were identified. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02065570).

Safety and Efficacy of Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonists in Older Patients With Ulcerative Colitis: Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of Data From Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Treatment of older patients (more than 60 years) with ulcerative colitis (UC) can be a challenge, because they might be more vulnerable to adverse events (AEs). We determined the effects of age on the safety and efficacy of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in a pooled analysis of data from randomized trials.

METHODS

We obtained individual patient-level data from 4 trials of anti-TNF therapy for patients with UC from the Yale Open Data Access Project. Participants were assigned to groups of older age (60 years or older) and younger age (younger than 60 years). The primary outcome was difference in serious AEs (SAEs), defined as death, life-threatening event, hospitalization, and/or significant disability. Secondary outcomes were severe infections, non-severe infections, neoplasms, and achievement of clinical remission, defined by trial investigators as Mayo score ≤ 2 with no sub-score >1 at the end of induction or maintenance therapy. A random effects logistic regression model was fitted to estimate the effect of anti-TNF therapy on safety and efficacy by age, adjusting for confounders and trial-level effects.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 2257 patients (231 60 years or older). Higher proportions of older patients receiving anti-TNF therapy had SAEs (20%) and hospitalizations (14.4%), compared with younger patients (10.2% had SAEs and 5.2% were hospitalized); there were no significant differences between groups in proportions with severe or non-severe infections. Compared with placebo, there was no significant difference in safety risks associated with anti-TNF therapy (SAEs reduced by 5.4% in older patients vs reduction of 2.4% in younger patients; hospitalizations reduced by 6.7% in older patients vs reduction of 2.5% in younger patients; severe infections reduced by 3.1% vs increase of 0.7% in younger patients). There was no significant difference in between older vs younger patients in efficacy of anti-TNF therapy in inducing remission (odds risk ratio, 1.05, 95% CI, 0.33-3.39) or in maintaining remission (odds risk ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.18-1.33).

CONCLUSIONS

In a pooled analysis of data from randomized trials, we found that older patients with UC have an increased baseline increased risk of SAEs, but no increase in risk can be attributed to anti-TNF therapy in older vs younger patients.

Biologic agents in inflammatory eye disease

Non-infectious uveitis is a potentially sight threatening disease. Along the years, several therapeutic strategies have been proposed as a means to its treatment, including local and systemic steroids, immunosuppressives and more recently, biologic agents. The introduction of biologics can be defined as a new era: biologic therapies provide new options for patients with refractory and sight threatening inflammatory disorders. The availability of such novel treatment modalities has markedly improved the therapy of uveitis and considerably increased the possibility of long-term remissions. This article provides a review of current literature on biologic agents, such as tumor necrosis factor blockers, anti-interleukins and other related biologics, such as interferon alpha, for the treatment of uveitis. Several reports describe the efficacy of biologics in controlling a large number of refractory uveitides, suggesting a central role in managing ocular inflammatory diseases. However, there is still lack of randomized controlled trials to validate most of their applications. Biologics are promising drugs for the treatment of uveitis, showing a favorable safety and efficacy profile. On the other hand, lack of evidence from randomized controlled studies limits our understanding as to when commence treatment, which agent to choose, and how long to continue therapy. In addition, high cost and the potential for serious and unpredictable complications have very often limited their use in uveitis refractory to traditional immunosuppressive therapy.