QUASAR Induction Study 1 Cumulative Response to Guselkumab in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis

Introduction: Guselkumab (GUS), an IL-23p19 antagonist, had greater efficacy than placebo (PBO) in achieving clinical response and clinical remission atWeek (Wk) 12 in the randomized, controlled Phase 2b QUASAR Induction Study 1 (NCT04033445) in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC).1 Patients who were not in clinical response at Wk 12 received GUS treatment through Wk 24. Here, we report GUS cumulative efficacy and safety results for Induction Study 1. Method(s): Eligible patients had moderately to severely active UC (modified Mayo score of 5 to 9 with a Mayo endoscopy subscore >=2) at baseline. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to IV GUS 200mg, 400mg, or PBO at Wks 0, 4, and 8. Patients who were not in clinical response to IV induction at Wk 12 received GUS treatment (PBO IV->GUS 200mg IV;GUS 200mg IV->GUS 200mg SC;GUS 400mg IV->GUS 200mg SC) at Wks 12, 16, and 20 and were evaluated at Wk 24 (Figure). Matching IV or SC PBO was administered to maintain the blind. Result(s): Three hundred thirteen patients were randomized and treated at baseline. Demographic and disease characteristics at baseline were similar among the treatment groups, and approximately 50% had a prior inadequate response or intolerance to advanced UC therapy. AtWk 12, clinical response was achieved by 61.4% (62/101) and 60.7% (65/107) of patients randomized to GUS 200mg and GUS 400mg IV vs 27.6 % (29/105) of patients randomized to PBO IV (both p< 0.001). Of the patients in the GUS groups who were not in clinical response at Wk 12, 54.3% (19/35) in the GUS 200mg IV->200mg SC group and 50.0% (19/38) in the GUS 400mg IV->200mg SC group achieved clinical response at Wk 24. Clinical response atWk 12 or 24 was achieved by 80.2% of patients who were randomized to GUS 200mg IV and 78.5% of patients who were randomized to GUS 400mg IV. For patients who received PBO IV->GUS 200mg IV, clinical response at Wk 24 (65.2%) was similar toWk 12 clinical response following GUS 200mg IV induction (61.4%). The most frequent adverse events among all GUS-treated pts (n=274) were anemia (7.7%), headache (5.1%), worsening UC (4.4%), COVID-19 (3.6%), arthralgia (2.9%) and abdominal pain (2.6%) which are consistent with Wk 12 results. Conclusion(s): Overall, approximately 80% of patients randomized to receive GUS achieved clinical response at Wk 12 or 24. Continued treatment with SC GUS allowed 50-54.3% of IV GUS Wk 12 clinical nonresponders to achieve clinical response at Wk 24. No new safety concerns for GUS were identified. (Figure Presented).

Sustainability, Scalability, and Resiliency of the Town of Innisfil Mobility-on-Demand Experiment: Preliminary Results, Analyses, and Lessons Learned

In 2017, the town of Innisfil, Ontario, launched Innisfil Transit in partnership with Uber, a transportation network company, to provide a subsidized on-demand public mobility service as an alternative to investing in a new fixed-route bus service. The performance of Innisfil Transit is documented in a 2021 Ryerson University report by Sweet, Mitra, and Benaroya, which shows greater cost effectiveness of the mobility provided over the proposed bus alternative. This paper expands on those findings by assessing Innisfil Transit with respect to sustainability, scalability, and resiliency. First, we quantify the energy and emissions of this program relative to traditional transit and driving alone across varying powertrains. We then characterize a conservative firstorder estimate of the percentage of US communities that fall within a similar spatial-demographic tier as Innisfil. Replicability also hinges on service cost and performance in comparison to average values for low-density transit in the US. Lastly, most transit agencies experienced a significant drop in demand (as much as 90%) with slowly rebounding ridership since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The resiliency of the Innisfil program to the pressures induced by the pandemic is examined in comparison to other transit operations. The lessons learned across these three dimensions complement prior work to better understand the efficiency and sustainability of on-demand public mobility service for low-density communities like Innisfil.

International Conference on Transportation and Development 2022

In 2017, the town of Innisfil, Ontario, launched Innisfil Transit in partnership with Uber, a transportation network company, to provide a subsidized on-demand public mobility service as an alternative to investing in a new fixed-route bus service. The performance of Innisfil Transit is documented in a 2021 Ryerson University report by Sweet, Mitra, and Benaroya, which shows greater cost effectiveness of the mobility provided over the proposed bus alternative. This paper expands on those findings by assessing Innisfil Transit with respect to sustainability, scalability, and resiliency. First, we quantify the energy and emissions of this program relative to traditional transit and driving alone across varying powertrains. We then characterize a conservative first-order estimate of the percentage of US communities that fall within a similar spatial-demographic tier as Innisfil. Replicability also hinges on service cost and performance in comparison to average values for low-density transit in the US. Lastly, most transit agencies experienced a significant drop in demand (as much as 90%) with slowly rebounding ridership since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The resiliency of the Innisfil program to the pressures induced by the pandemic is examined in comparison to other transit operations. The lessons learned across these three dimensions complement prior work to better understand the efficiency and sustainability of on-demand public mobility service for low-density communities like Innisfil. © ASCE. All rights reserved.

Quantifying Movement Motivations, Demand, and Inflow-Outflow Dynamics in Four Cities (New York, Chicago, Austin, and San Diego) during COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted a wide range of human activities, from food delivery habits to major moving and travel decisions. Results indicate multiple pandemic-related factors have influenced millions of relocation decisions by Americans (e.g., health risk, financial pressures, more space, and employment), and there are various positive economic and social outcomes of this influence (e.g., remote work and education), enabling more affordable living and opportunity. This paper addresses COVID-19 impacts on mobility, especially involving permanent relocations. Survey design and data analysis with U-Haul targeted customers in Austin, New York, San Diego, and Chicago to understand mobility, new moving dynamics, and motivations. © ASCE. All rights reserved.