Dataset Information

Efficacy of biologic therapies for biologic-naive Japanese patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: a network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background/aims

Several biologic therapies are approved in Japan to treat moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC), but there are no published comparative efficacy studies in a Japanese population. We compared the efficacy of biologics approved in Japan (adalimumab, infliximab, golimumab, and vedolizumab) for treating biologic-naïve patients with UC at their approved doses.

Methods

A targeted literature review identified 4 randomized controlled trials of biologics for UC in biologicnaïve Japanese patients. For each study, efficacy outcome data from induction (weeks 6-12) and maintenance (weeks 30-60) treatment were extracted for analysis. Treatment effects on clinical response, clinical remission, and mucosal healing relative to the average placebo results across all trials were estimated using network meta-analyses followed by transformation into probabilities and odds ratios (OR).

Results

At the end of induction, the likelihood of clinical response and clinical remission was highest with infliximab (OR: 2.12 and 2.35, respectively) and vedolizumab (OR: 2.10 and 2.32, respectively); the likelihood of mucosal healing was highest with infliximab (OR: 2.24) and adalimumab (OR: 1.86). During maintenance, the likelihood of clinical response and clinical remission was highest with vedolizumab (OR: 6.44 and 4.68, respectively) and golimumab (OR: 5.13 and 3.84, respectively); the likelihood of mucosal healing was significantly higher than placebo with all biologics.

Conclusions

All active treatments were efficacious compared with placebo. Infliximab and vedolizumab had the highest odds for induction of clinical response, remission, and mucosal healing. Golimumab and vedolizumab had numerically higher odds of achieving efficacy outcomes in the maintenance phase.

SUBMITTER: Hibi T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7873404 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy of biologic therapies for biologic-naïve Japanese patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: a network meta-analysis.

Hibi Toshifumi T Kamae Isao I Pinton Philippe P Ursos Lyann L Iwakiri Ryuichi R Hather Greg G Patel Haridarshan H

Intestinal research 20200422 1

<h4>Background/aims</h4>Several biologic therapies are approved in Japan to treat moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC), but there are no published comparative efficacy studies in a Japanese population. We compared the efficacy of biologics approved in Japan (adalimumab, infliximab, golimumab, and vedolizumab) for treating biologic-naïve patients with UC at their approved doses.<h4>Methods</h4>A targeted literature review identified 4 randomized controlled trials of biologics for ...[more]

PMID: 32312035

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDue to wide-ranging impacts of Ulcerative Colitis (UC), regulatory authorities emphasize the importance of including validated patient-reported symptom severity measures in clinical trials.AimTo describe the development and validation of the Ulcerative Colitis-Symptom Questionnaire (UC-SQ).MethodsThe UC-SQ was developed in a qualitative study involving a targeted literature review, semi-structured concept elicitation interviews, and combined concept elicitation/cognitive interviews. Measurement properties, including item-level analyses, factor structure, reliability, validity, responsiveness, and clinically meaningful change were evaluated using data from a phase 2b, randomized trial in adults with UC (N = 113).ResultsFourteen symptom concepts were elicited across 22 interviews, with saturation at the fifth interview. Twenty-two items were unmodified as cognitive interview participants interpreted underlying concepts correctly. Instructions were clear and items were relevant, with appropriate response options and recall periods. Reduction to 17 items was completed prior to psychometric testing. Two items (joint pain/constipation) did not contribute to reliability in initial testing and were included as non-scored items. The 15-item UC-SQ showed evidence of internal consistency (α = 0.86) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.88). The UC-SQ discriminated by disease severity as defined by Mayo and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire scores (p < 0.0001). Convergent validity was supported by strong correlations with criterion measures. The UC-SQ was responsive in patients indicating change in other measures. A 10-point decrease from baseline indicated within-patient meaningful improvement.ConclusionsThe UC-SQ is reliable, valid and responsive, with a 10-point improvement estimating within-patient clinically meaningful improvement. The tool is fit-for-purpose as a key endpoint in pivotal UC trials.

Project description:IntroductionDespite availability of advanced therapies (ATs) for ulcerative colitis (UC), many patients fail to respond to treatment. This study examined real-world clinical and humanistic outcomes associated with current treatments in patients with UC.MethodsThis cross-sectional study used US data from the Adelphi Real World Disease Specific Programme for inflammatory bowel disease from before (2017-2018) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021). Physicians (gastroenterologists) seeing > 5 patients/month reported patients' disease characteristics, current symptoms and treatments, and reasons for treatment choices for their next seven consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 years with moderately to severely active UC before current treatment. Patients were asked to complete the EQ-5D-5L health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measure. ATs included tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis), integrin receptor antagonists, interleukin-12/23 antagonists, and Janus kinase inhibitors. Patients were classified as AT-naïve or AT-experienced based on current treatment received for ≥ 8 weeks and further classified as responders or non-responders based on symptoms, disease flare status, and remission. Descriptive analyses are presented.ResultsThe 2017-2018 cohort included 92 physicians and 539 patients (208 [38.6%] AT-experienced). The 2020-2021 cohort included 73 physicians and 448 patients (349 [77.9%] AT-experienced). TNFis were the most common ATs. In 2017-2018, 195 (58.9%) AT-naïve and 113 (54.3%) AT-experienced patients were non-responders; in 2020-2021 this was 57 (57.6%) and 182 (52.1%). Efficacy and induction of remission were physicians' most common reasons for AT choice. Dislike of injections/infusions was the most common reason for eligible patients not receiving biologic therapy. Numerically, non-responders (both AT-naïve and AT-experienced) had more symptoms, overall pain and fatigue, and lower HRQoL scores than responders.ConclusionsBefore (2017-2018) and during the pandemic (2020-2021), over half of patients with UC did not respond to AT. Non-responders carried a high burden of disease. Alternative therapies are urgently needed to treat UC.

Project description:BackgroundBiological therapies are increasingly used to treat ulcerative colitis (UC).AimTo compare the efficacy of biologics in adults with moderately-to-severely active UC, stratified by prior exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy.MethodsA systematic literature review was undertaken to identify studies of biologics approved for UC. Network meta-analysis was conducted for endpoints at induction and maintenance.ResultsSeven studies were included in the meta-analysis of induction treatment for anti-TNF therapy-naïve patients. All biologics were more effective than placebo in inducing clinical response, clinical remission, and mucosal healing. Infliximab demonstrated a statistically significant improvement over adalimumab in clinical response (odds ratio [OR] [95% credible interval (CrI)]: 2.19 [1.35-3.55]), clinical remission (OR [95% CrI]: 2.81 [1.49-5.49]), and mucosal healing (OR [95% CrI]: 2.23 [1.21-4.14]); there were no other significant differences between biologics for induction efficacy. Five studies were included in the meta-analysis of maintenance treatment, two studies rerandomised responder patients at end of induction, and three followed the same patients 'straight through'. To account for design differences, the number of responders at end of induction was assumed to be equivalent to the number rerandomised. Vedolizumab showed significantly different durable clinical response from comparators (OR [95% CrI] infliximab 3.18 [1.14-9.20], golimumab 2.33 [1.04-5.41], and adalimumab 3.96 [1.67-9.84]). In anti-TNF therapy-experienced patients, only vedolizumab and adalimumab could be compared. At induction, no significant differences in efficacy were seen. During maintenance, vedolizumab showed significantly improved rates of mucosal healing versus adalimumab (OR [95% CrI]: 6.72 [1.36-41.0]).ConclusionsThis study expands the understanding of comparative efficacies of biologic treatments for UC, encompassing outcomes and populations not previously studied. All biologic treatments were effective for UC during induction. Vedolizumab demonstrated possible clinical benefits in the maintenance setting versus all comparators, irrespective of prior anti-TNF exposure and after adjusting for differences in study design.