Adalimumab for induction of remission in Crohn's disease

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).

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Adalimumab and Vedolizumab in Treating Moderate to Severe Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis

Background

Numerous patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) do not respond to conventional or biological therapy. Adalimumab (ADA) and vedolizumab (VDZ), according to certain research, may be a useful alternative treatment for these people. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of using ADA and VDZ to treat moderate to severe IBD: Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC).

Methods

We searched PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, CINAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, and WHO trials registry (ICTRP). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ADA or VDZ with placebo in participants with active CD or UC were included. The primary outcomes were the clinical response and remission at induction and maintenance phases and mucosal healing. The secondary outcome was the incidence of profound negative events. The research used Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3 (Biostat Inc., USA).

Results

Eighteen RCTs were incorporated, in which 11 studies described the usefulness and safeness of ADA or VDZ in CD patients, and seven studies investigated the efficacy and safety of ADA or VDZ in UC patients. The meta-analysis revealed that both ADA and VDZ treatments were superior to placebo for producing clinical remission and eliciting clinical response at induction and maintenance phases in individuals with moderately to severely active CD or UC. Interestingly, we found that ADA was superior to VDZ as first-line treatment for patients with CD, but not UC.

Conclusion

ADA and VDZ are effective and safe in CD and UC patients. However, RCTs of a larger number of patients are still required for better assessing the safety profile of ADA and VDZ.

Current evidence and clinical relevance of drug-microbiota interactions in inflammatory bowel disease

Background

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic relapsing-remitting disease. An adverse immune reaction toward the intestinal microbiota is involved in the pathophysiology and microbial perturbations are associated with IBD in general and with flares specifically. Although medical drugs are the cornerstone of current treatment, responses vary widely between patients and drugs. The intestinal microbiota can metabolize medical drugs, which may influence IBD drug (non-)response and side effects. Conversely, several drugs can impact the intestinal microbiota and thereby host effects. This review provides a comprehensive overview of current evidence on bidirectional interactions between the microbiota and relevant IBD drugs (pharmacomicrobiomics).

Methods

Electronic literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane databases to identify relevant publications. Studies reporting on microbiota composition and/or drug metabolism were included.

Results

The intestinal microbiota can both enzymatically activate IBD pro-drugs (e.g., in case of thiopurines), but also inactivate certain drugs (e.g., mesalazine by acetylation via N-acetyltransferase 1 and infliximab via IgG-degrading enzymes). Aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, thiopurines, calcineurin inhibitors, anti-tumor necrosis factor biologicals and tofacitinib were all reported to alter the intestinal microbiota composition, including changes in microbial diversity and/or relative abundances of various microbial taxa.

Conclusion

Various lines of evidence have shown the ability of the intestinal microbiota to interfere with IBD drugs and vice versa. These interactions can influence treatment response, but well-designed clinical studies and combined in vivo and ex vivo models are needed to achieve consistent findings and evaluate clinical relevance.

Adalimumab for induction of remission in patients with Crohn's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

A large number of people with Crohn's disease (CD) fail to recover from conventional therapy or biological therapy. Some studies showed that adalimumab (ADA) may be an effective alternative therapy for these patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ADA in inducing CD remission.

Methods

We performed search of Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Register, and several other databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any dose of ADA with controls (placebo or active) in participants with active CD were included. The primary outcome was the failure to achieve clinical response/remission at 4 weeks. Several subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. Review Manager Software v5.3 was used.

Results

Four RCTs were included (n = 919), in which 553 participants received ADA and 366 participants received placebo. A meta-analysis of four studies showed that at 4 weeks, there were more people in the ADA group with clinical response/remission or symptom improvement compared with the placebo group. The rates of side effects, serious side effects, and study withdrawals due to side effects were lower in ADA participants than placebo ones.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis shows that ADA is superior to placebo in induction of clinical response/remission of CD patients, but no firm conclusions can be drawn on the safety of ADA in CD due to the low number of events.

Graphical Abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40001-022-00817-6.

Quality of Life and Work Productivity Improvements with Upadacitinib: Phase 2b Evidence from Patients with Moderate to Severe Crohn's Disease

Introduction

In the phase 2 CELEST study, positive efficacy results were obtained with the Janus kinase 1 inhibitor upadacitinib for adult patients with moderate to severe Crohn’s disease. We present the health-related quality of life and work productivity improvement results with upadacitinib from CELEST.

Methods

CELEST (NCT02365649) was a double-blind study where patients were randomized 1:1:1:1:1:1 in the 16-week induction period to placebo or upadacitinib 3 mg twice daily (BID), 6 mg BID, 12 mg BID, 24 mg BID, or 24 mg once daily (QD). Patients completing the induction period were re-randomized 1:1:1 to receive upadacitinib 3 mg BID, 12 mg BID, or 24 mg QD for 36 weeks or 3 mg BID, 6 mg BID, or 12 mg BID (after amendment). Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions visual analog scale (EQ-5D VAS), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire outcomes were assessed at baseline and Weeks 8, 16, and 52.

Results

At Week 16, a significant percentage (P ≤ 0.05) of patients receiving upadacitinib 6-mg BID dose or higher achieved IBDQ response (IBDQ score change ≥ 16 points; 49%–57% for upadacitinib vs. 24% for placebo) and IBDQ remission, except 24 mg QD (IBDQ score ≥ 170; 26%–39% for upadacitinib vs. 11% for placebo). Greater improvements in IBDQ total score, EQ-5D VAS, and activity impairment from baseline (P ≤ 0.1) versus placebo were also observed. Larger improvements (P ≤ 0.1) in IBDQ response and total score and EQ-5D VAS were observed at Week 8 with 6 and 24 mg BID versus placebo, with improvements for all dosages maintained or greater at Week 52 for IBDQ, EQ-5D VAS, and WPAI endpoints, in particular for the 12-mg BID group.

Conclusion

Improvements in health-related quality of life and work productivity were achieved and sustained with upadacitinib in patients with moderate to severe Crohn’s disease.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02365649.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01660-7.

Progress in research of vedolizumab in treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease is a kind of chronic inflammatory disease of the gastrointestinal tract with unclear etiology. At present, its main therapeutic drugs include aminosalicylates, glucocorticoids, immunosuppressive agents, and biological agents. With the deepening study of the disease and the progress of science and technology, there have been more and more studies on the targets for biological agents, including tumor necrosis factor-α, Janus kinase, interleukin, intestinal integrin, etc. As a humanized integrin antagonist, vedolizumab can selectively inhibit the interaction between integrin α4β7 and mucosal addressin cell adhesion molecule-1, and block the migration of lymphocytes to the intestinal tract to alleviate the intestinal inflammation, so as to achieve the therapeutic effect. This article reviews the mechanism, clinical efficacy, and application of vedolizumab in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease.

SAveRUNNER: A network-based algorithm for drug repurposing and its application to COVID-19

The novelty of new human coronavirus COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 and the lack of effective drugs and vaccines gave rise to a wide variety of strategies employed to fight this worldwide pandemic. Many of these strategies rely on the repositioning of existing drugs that could shorten the time and reduce the cost compared to de novo drug discovery. In this study, we presented a new network-based algorithm for drug repositioning, called SAveRUNNER (Searching off-lAbel dRUg aNd NEtwoRk), which predicts drug-disease associations by quantifying the interplay between the drug targets and the disease-specific proteins in the human interactome via a novel network-based similarity measure that prioritizes associations between drugs and diseases locating in the same network neighborhoods. Specifically, we applied SAveRUNNER on a panel of 14 selected diseases with a consolidated knowledge about their disease-causing genes and that have been found to be related to COVID-19 for genetic similarity (i.e., SARS), comorbidity (e.g., cardiovascular diseases), or for their association to drugs tentatively repurposed to treat COVID-19 (e.g., malaria, HIV, rheumatoid arthritis). Focusing specifically on SARS subnetwork, we identified 282 repurposable drugs, including some the most rumored off-label drugs for COVID-19 treatments (e.g., chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, heparin), as well as a new combination therapy of 5 drugs (hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, lopinavir, ritonavir, remdesivir), actually used in clinical practice. Furthermore, to maximize the efficiency of putative downstream validation experiments, we prioritized 24 potential anti-SARS-CoV repurposable drugs based on their network-based similarity values. These top-ranked drugs include ACE-inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies (e.g., anti-IFNγ, anti-TNFα, anti-IL12, anti-IL1β, anti-IL6), and thrombin inhibitors. Finally, our findings were in-silico validated by performing a gene set enrichment analysis, which confirmed that most of the network-predicted repurposable drugs may have a potential treatment effect against human coronavirus infections.

Adalimumab for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Conventional medications for Crohn's disease (CD) include anti-inflammatory drugs, immunosuppressants and corticosteroids. If an individual does not respond, or loses response to first-line treatments, then biologic therapies such as tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) antagonists such as adalimumab are considered for treating CD. Maintenance of remission of CD is a clinically important goal, as disease relapse can negatively affect quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab for maintenance of remission in people with quiescent CD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to April 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered for inclusion randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing adalimumab to placebo or to an active comparator.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We analyzed data on an intention-to-treat basis. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes. The primary outcome was failure to maintain clinical remission. We define clinical remission as a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of < 150. Secondary outcomes were failure to maintain clinical response, endoscopic remission, endoscopic response, histological remission and adverse events (AEs). We assessed biases using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We used GRADE to assess the overall certainty of evidence supporting the primary outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs (1158 participants). We rated four trials at low risk of bias and two trials at unclear risk of bias. All participants had moderate-to-severe CD that was in clinical remission. Four studies were placebo-controlled (1012 participants). Two studies (70 participants) compared adalimumab to active medication (azathioprine, mesalamine or 6-mercaptopurine) in participants who had an ileocolic resection prior to study enrolment. Adalimumab versus placebo Fifty-nine per cent (252/430) of participants treated with adalimumab failed to maintain clinical remission at 52 to 56 weeks, compared with 86% (217/253) of participants receiving placebo (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.77; 3 studies, 683 participants; high-certainty evidence). Among those who received prior TNF-α antagonist therapy, 69% (129/186) of adalimumab participants failed to maintain clinical or endoscopic response at 52 to 56 weeks, compared with 93% (108/116) of participants who received placebo (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.85; 2 studies, 302 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Fifty-one per cent (192/374) of participants who received adalimumab failed to maintain clinical remission at 24 to 26 weeks, compared with 79% (149/188) of those who received placebo (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.83; 2 studies, 554 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Eighty-seven per cent (561/643) of participants who received adalimumab reported an AE compared with 85% (315/369) of participants who received placebo (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09; 4 studies, 1012 participants; high-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events were seen in 8% (52/643) of participants who received adalimumab and 14% (53/369) of participants who received placebo (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.80; 4 studies, 1012 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and withdrawal due to AEs was reported in 7% (45/643) of adalimumab participants compared to 13% (48/369) of placebo participants (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.91; 4 studies, 1012 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Commonly-reported AEs included CD aggravation, arthralgia, nasopharyngitis, urinary tract infections, headache, nausea, fatigue and abdominal pain. Adalimumab versus active comparators No studies reported failure to maintain clinical remission. One study reported on failure to maintain clinical response and endoscopic remission at 104 weeks in ileocolic resection participants who received either adalimumab, azathioprine or mesalamine as post-surgical maintenance therapy. Thirteen per cent (2/16) of adalimumab participants failed to maintain clinical response compared with 54% (19/35) of azathioprine or mesalamine participants (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.87; 51 participants). Six per cent (1/16) of participants who received adalimumab failed to maintain endoscopic remission, compared with 57% (20/35) of participants who received azathioprine or mesalamine (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.75; 51 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One study reported on failure to maintain endoscopic response at 24 weeks in ileocolic resection participants who received either adalimumab or 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) as post-surgical maintenance therapy. Nine per cent (1/11) of adalimumab participants failed to maintain endoscopic remission compared with 50% (4/8) of 6-MP participants (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.33; 19 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Adalimumab is an effective therapy for maintenance of clinical remission in people with quiescent CD. Adalimumab is also effective in those who have previously been treated with TNF-α antagonists. The effect of adalimumab in the post-surgical setting is uncertain. More research is needed in people with recent bowel surgery for CD to better determine treatment plans following surgery. Future research should continue to explore factors that influence initial and subsequent biologic selection for people with moderate-to-severe CD. Studies comparing adalimumab to other active medications are needed, to help determine the optimal maintenance therapy for CD.