Dataset Information

Potential benefits of immunomodulator use with vedolizumab for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aim

This study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of vedolizumab treatment with or without concomitant immunomodulator use in Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis.

Methods

Among enrolled patients in a phase 3 study conducted in Japan (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02039505), data from patients allocated to 300-mg intravenous vedolizumab for induction and maintenance phases were used for this exploratory analysis. Efficacy endpoints were clinical response, clinical remission, and mucosal healing at week 10 and clinical remission and mucosal healing at week 60, and disease worsening and treatment failure during the maintenance phase.

Results

At week 10, the differences in clinical response, clinical remission, and mucosal healing rates between the subgroups (those with concomitant immunomodulator use minus those without) were 0.7 (95% confidence interval: -14.3, 15.7), 3.3 (95% confidence interval: -8.5, 15.2), and 1.8 (95% confidence interval: -13.0, 16.5), respectively. At week 60, the differences in clinical remission and mucosal healing between the subgroups with and without concomitant immunomodulator use were 26.1 (95% confidence interval: -3.5, 55.6) and 29.9 (95% confidence interval: 1.4, 58.4), respectively. The proportions of patients without treatment failure at day 330 of the maintenance phase were 90.7% with concomitant immunomodulator use and 73.7% without. No marked differences in incidence of infections were observed between subgroups.

Conclusions

This study suggested the possibility that concomitant immunomodulator use may be beneficial to maintain the clinical efficacy of vedolizumab.

SUBMITTER: Naganuma M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9293068 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUlcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory condition of the colon characterized by episodes of disease activity and symptom-free remission.There is paucity of evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of complementary or alternative medicines for the management of UC. Curcumin, an anti-inflammatory agent, has been used in many chronic inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, esophagitis and post-surgical inflammation. The efficacy of this agent for maintenance of remission in patients with UC has not been systematically evaluated.ObjectivesThe primary objective was to systematically review the efficacy and safety of curcumin for maintenance of remission in UC.Search methodsA computer-assisted literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Inflammatory Bowel Disease Specialized Trial Register was performed on July 11, 2012 to identify relevant publications. Proceedings from major gastroenterology meetings and references from published articles were also searched to identify additional studies.Selection criteriaRandomized placebo-controlled trials (RCT) of curcumin for maintenance of remission in UC were included. Studies included patients (of any age) who were in remission at the time of recruitment. Co-interventions were allowed.Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data were analyzed using Review Manager (RevMan 5.1). We calculated the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for each dichotomous outcome. For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI.Main resultsOnly one trial (89 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. This trial randomized 45 patients to curcumin and 44 patients to placebo. All patients received treatment with sulfasalazine or mesalamine. The study was rated as low risk of bias. Curcumin was administered orally in a dose of 2 g/day for six months. Fewer patients relapsed in the curcumin group than the placebo group at six months. Four per cent of patients in the curcumin group relapsed at six months compared to 18% of patients in the placebo group (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.09; P = 0.06). There was no statistically significant difference in relapse rates at 12 months. Twenty-two per cent of curcumin patients relapsed at 12 months compared to 32% of placebo patients (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.40; P = 0.31). A total of nine adverse events were reported in seven patients. These adverse events included sensation of abdominal bulging, nausea, transient hypertension, and transient increase in the number of stools. The authors did not report which treatment group the patients who experienced adverse events belonged to. The clinical activity index (CAI) at six months was significantly lower in the curcumin group compared to the placebo group (1.0 + 2.0 versus 2.2 + 2.3; MD -1.20, 95% CI -2.14 to -0.26). The endoscopic index (EI) at six months was significantly lower in the curcumin group than in the placebo group (0.8 + 0.6 versus 1.6 + 1.6; MD -0.80, 95% CI -1.33 to -0.27).Authors' conclusionsCurcumin may be a safe and effective therapy for maintenance of remission in quiescent UC when given as adjunctive therapy along with mesalamine or sulfasalazine. However, further research in the form of a large scale methodologically rigorous randomized controlled trial is needed to confirm any possible benefit of curcumin in quiescent UC.

Project description:Background and objectivesUlcerative colitis is highly prevalent in Canada and cost-effective ulcerative colitis therapies are warranted. Vedolizumab subcutaneous (SC) formulation was recently approved for ulcerative colitis maintenance therapy. We assessed vedolizumab SC cost effectiveness vs conventional and advanced therapeutics in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis from a Canadian public healthcare payer perspective.MethodsA hybrid decision tree/Markov model was developed to evaluate vedolizumab SC costs, quality-adjusted life-years, and cost effectiveness vs conventional therapy, adalimumab SC, infliximab intravenous, golimumab SC, tofacitinib, ustekinumab SC, and vedolizumab intravenous. This model predicts the number of patients achieving clinical response and remission after treatment induction, and sustained benefit during maintenance treatment. To account for statistical uncertainties, the base-case analysis was conducted in a probabilistic manner. Scenario analyses examined the impact of previous treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor agents, dose escalation, loss of efficacy, and treatment adherence.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, conventional therapy was the most cost-effective therapeutic option in the overall population. Vedolizumab SC was cost effective and dominant compared with other advanced therapies (adalimumab, golimumab, infliximab, tofacitinib 5 mg, ustekinumab, and vedolizumab intravenous). The annual vedolizumab SC cost per patient was reduced vs ustekinumab SC, tofacitinib 5 mg, vedolizumab intravenous, and golimumab SC by $47,024, $3251, $2120, and $2004 (Canadian dollars), respectively, and exceeded that of infliximab, adalimumab, and conventional therapy by $582, $3293, and $41,024, respectively. Among the treatments, vedolizumab SC generated the highest quality-adjusted life-years overall (14.21), which translated into the best incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-years gained over conventional therapy in the overall population ($109,374) and in anti-tumor necrosis factor-naïve and anti-tumor necrosis factor-experienced patients ($41,658/$114,287).ConclusionsConventional therapy offered the most cost-effective therapeutic option followed by vedolizumab SC. Based on a $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year threshold, vedolizumab was cost effective in anti-tumor necrosis factor-naïve patients but not the overall population also when compared to conventional therapy.