Eldelumab [anti-interferon-γ-inducible protein-10 antibody] Induction Therapy for Active Crohn's Disease: a Randomised, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Phase IIa Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This 11-week Phase IIa induction study evaluated the efficacy and safety of eldelumab in patients with active Crohn's disease. METHODS: Adults with Crohn's Disease Activity Index 220-450 were randomised 1:1:1 to placebo or eldelumab 10 or 20 mg/kg intravenously on Days 1 and 8, and alternate weeks thereafter. All patients underwent ileocolonoscopy at baseline. Patients with active inflammation according to the Simplified Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease criteria [the originally planned endoscopy cohort] underwent another ileocolonoscopy at Week 11 at the investigator's discretion. All ileocolonoscopies were centrally read. The primary objective was identification of the eldelumab target exposure for induction of remission [absolute Crohn's Disease Activity Index score < 150]. Rates of clinical response [reduction of ≥ 100 from baseline or absolute score < 150 Crohn's Disease Activity Index], remission, and endoscopic improvements were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients were randomised. The eldelumab exposure-remission relationship was not significant at Week 11. Numerically higher remission and response rates were reported with eldelumab 20 mg/kg [29.3% and 41.5%, respectively] and 10 mg/kg [22.5% and 47.5%] versus placebo [20.0% and 35.0%]. A higher proportion of patients with a baseline Simplified Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease > 2 who received eldelumab achieved a 50% improvement in score and greater reductions from baseline endoscopy scores overall versus placebo. Adverse events were comparable across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: No exposure-remission relationship was seen with eldelumab. Eldelumab induction treatment demonstrated trends towards clinical and endoscopic efficacy. Safety was consistent with that reported previously. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01466374.

Eldelumab [Anti-IP-10] Induction Therapy for Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomised, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 2b Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Interferon-γ-inducible protein-10 [IP-10] mediates immune cell trafficking from the circulation to the inflamed colon and decreases gut epithelial cell survival. IP-10 expression is increased in patients with ulcerative colitis [UC]. We report efficacy and safety results from a dose-ranging induction study of eldelumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody to IP-10, in moderately to severely active UC. METHODS: A total of 252 adults with UC [Mayo score ≥ 6 and endoscopic subscore ≥ 2] were randomised 1:1:1 to placebo or eldelumab 15 or 25 mg/kg administered intravenously on Days 1 and 8 and every other week thereafter. The primary endpoint was clinical remission [Mayo score ≤ 2; no individual subscale score > 1] at Week 11. Key secondary endpoints included Mayo score clinical response and mucosal healing at Week 11. RESULTS: Neither eldelumab 15 or 25 mg/kg resulted in significant increases vs placebo in the proportion of patients achieving Week 11 clinical remission. Remission and response rates were 17.6% and 47.1% with eldelumab 25mg/kg, 13.1% and 44.0% with eldelumab 15mg/kg, and 9.6% and 31.3% with placebo. Clinical remission and response rates were higher in anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF]-naïve patients treated with eldelumab compared with placebo. Eldelumab treatment was well tolerated and no immunogenicity was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The primary endpoint was not achieved with induction treatment with eldelumab 15 or 25 mg/kg in patients with UC. Trends towards clinical remission and response were observed in the overall population and were more pronounced in anti-TNF naïve patients. Eldelumab safety signals were consistent with those reported previously [ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01294410].

Reliability among central readers in the evaluation of endoscopic findings from patients with Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVE: The Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) and Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) are commonly used to assess Crohn's disease (CD) activity; however, neither instrument has been fully validated. We assessed intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of these indices. DESIGN: Video recordings of colonoscopies obtained from 50 patients with CD who participated in an induction trial of a biological therapy were triplicated and reviewed in random order by four central readers. Data were used to assess intra-rater and inter-rater reliability for CDEIS, SES-CD and a global evaluation of lesion severity (GELS). Subsequently, readers participated in a consensus process that identified common sources of disagreement. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for intra-rater reliability for CDEIS, SES-CD and GELS (95% CIs) were 0.89 (0.86 to 0.93), 0.91 (0.89 to 0.95) and 0.81 (0.77 to 0.89), respectively, with standard error of measurement (SEM) of 2.10, 2.42 and 1.15. The corresponding ICCs for inter-rater reliability were 0.71 (0.63 to 0.76), 0.83 (0.75 to 0.88) and 0.62 (0.52 to 0.70), with SEM of 3.42, 3.07 and 1.63, respectively. Correlation between CDEIS and GELS was 0.75, between SES-CD and GELS was 0.74 and between CDEIS and SES-CD was 0.92. The most common sources of disagreement were interpretation of superficial ulceration, definition of disease site at the ileocolonic anastomosis, assessment of anorectal lesions and grading severity of stenosis. CONCLUSIONS: Central reading of CDEIS and SES-CD had 'substantial' to 'almost perfect' intra-rater and inter-rater reliability; however, the responsiveness of these instruments is yet to be determined. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01466374.

Treatment patterns, complications, and disease relapse in a real-world population of patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis initiating immunomodulator therapy.

BACKGROUND: Immunomodulator (IM) treatments in ulcerative colitis (UC) are not curative and carry increased risk of complications, sometimes leading to therapy changes, reduced treatment benefits, and eventual relapse. We assessed patterns of IM utilization and therapy changes, complications, and disease relapse in a real-world population of patients with moderate-to-severe UC. METHODS: Claims data from a large commercially insured U.S. population were retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria were (1) ≥2 UC diagnosis claims (ICD-9-CM 556.xx) between January 2005 and July 2010, (2) ≥1 IM claim, where first IM claim defined the index date, (3) ≥12 months preindex health plan enrollment (baseline), and (4) ≥24 months postindex plan enrollment (follow-up). Characteristics of and changes to the index IM therapy during follow-up were descriptively assessed, as were complications and disease relapses. RESULTS: A total of 2136 patients were identified for inclusion (age, mean [SD], 46 [16] years, 54% female). Azathioprine was the most common index IM (46% of patients), followed by 6-mercaptopurine (28%). Switching from the index IM to another therapy class was common (21% of patients), with 5-ASAs (48% of switchers), oral corticosteroids (21%), and biologics (17%) being the most frequent next agents used. Augmentation was also common (25% of patients), with 5-ASA being, by far, the most frequent agent added to the index IM (72% of augmenters). Thirty percent of patients experienced a complication, and 73% of patients relapsed, with the majority of relapses occurring during index IM exposure. CONCLUSIONS: This assessment of IM treatments for UC demonstrated frequent changes to therapy and high downstream complication and relapse rates.

Anti-IP-10 antibody (BMS-936557) for ulcerative colitis: a phase II randomised study.

OBJECTIVE: Interferon-γ-inducible protein-10 (IP-10 or CXCL10) plays a role in inflammatory cell migration and epithelial cell survival and migration. It is expressed in higher levels in the colonic tissue and plasma of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). This phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of BMS-936557, a fully human, monoclonal antibody to IP-10, in the treatment of moderately-to-severely active UC. DESIGN: In this 8-week, phase II, double-blind, multicentre, randomised study, patients with active UC received placebo or BMS-936557 (10 mg/kg) intravenously every other week. The primary endpoint was the rate of clinical response at Day 57; clinical remission and mucosal healing rates were secondary endpoints. Post hoc analyses evaluated the drug exposure-response relationship and histological improvement. RESULTS: 109 patients were included (BMS-936557: n=55; placebo: n=54). Prespecified primary and secondary endpoints were not met; clinical response rate at Day 57 was 52.7% versus 35.2% for BMS-936557 versus placebo (p=0.083), and clinical remission and mucosal healing rates were 18.2% versus 16.7% (p=1.00) and 41.8% versus 35.2% (p=0.556), respectively. However, higher BMS-936557 steady-state trough concentration (Cminss) was associated with increased clinical response (87.5% vs 37.0% (p<0.001) for patients with Cminss 108-235 µg/ml vs placebo) and histological improvements (73.0% vs 41.0%; p=0.004). Infections occurred in 7 (12.7%) BMS-936557-treated patients and 3 (5.8%) placebo-treated patients. 2 (3.6%) BMS-936557 patients discontinued due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-IP-10 antibody, BMS-936557, is a potentially effective therapy for moderately-to-severely active UC. Higher drug exposure correlated with increasing clinical response and histological improvement. Further dose-response studies are warranted. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00656890.

Safety of abatacept administered intravenously in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: integrated analyses of up to 8 years of treatment from the abatacept clinical trial program.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the overall safety, including rare events, of intravenous (IV) abatacept treatment in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Data from 8 clinical trials of IV abatacept in RA were pooled. Safety events were assessed during the short-term (duration ≤ 12 months) and cumulative (short-term plus longterm extensions) abatacept treatment periods. Incidence rates per 100 patient-years were calculated. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) for hospitalized infections and malignancies were compared with external RA cohorts and, for malignancies, with the US general population. RESULTS: There were 3173 IV abatacept-treated patients with 2331 patient-years of exposure in the short-term periods, and 4149 IV abatacept-treated patients with 12,132 patient-years of exposure in the cumulative period. Incidence rates for serious infections were low and consistent over time (3.68 for abatacept vs 2.60 for placebo during the short-term, and 2.87 for abatacept during the cumulative period). Hospitalized infections were generally similar to external RA patient cohorts and were consistent over time. Incidence rates of malignancies were similar for abatacept- and placebo-treated patients during the short-term period (0.73 vs 0.59) and remained low during the abatacept cumulative period (0.73). SIR of some tissue-specific malignancies (e.g., colorectal and breast) in the cumulative period tended to be lower, while others (lymphoma and lung) tended to be higher, compared with the general population; however, incidence rates were comparable with RA cohorts. Autoimmune events were rare and infusion reactions uncommon. CONCLUSION: Longterm safety of IV abatacept was consistent with the short-term, with no unexpected events and low incidence rates of serious infections, malignancies, and autoimmune events.

Abatacept for Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The efficacy of abatacept, a selective costimulation modulator, in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) is unknown. METHODS: Four placebo-controlled trials evaluated the efficacy and safety of abatacept as induction (IP) and maintenance (MP) therapy in adults with active, moderate-to-severe CD (CD-IP; CD-MP) and UC (UC-IP1; UC-MP). In CD-IP and UC-IP1, 451 patients with CD and 490 patients with UC were randomized to abatacept 30, 10, or 3 mg/kg (according to body weight) or placebo, and dosed at weeks 0, 2, 4, and 8. In MP, 90 patients with CD and 131 patients with UC who responded to abatacept at week 12 in the induction trials were randomized to abatacept 10 mg/kg or placebo every 4 weeks through week 52. RESULTS: In CD-IP, 17.2%, 10.2%, and 15.5% of patients receiving abatacept 30, 10, and 3 mg/kg achieved a clinical response at weeks 8 and 12, vs 14.4% receiving placebo (P = .611, P = .311, and P = .812, respectively). In UC-IP1, 21.4%, 19.0%, and 20.3% of patients receiving abatacept 30, 10, and 3 mg/kg achieved a clinical response at week 12, vs 29.5% receiving placebo (P = .124, P = .043, and P = .158, respectively). In CD-MP, 23.8% vs 11.1% of abatacept vs placebo patients were in remission at week 52. In UC-MP, 12.5% vs 14.1% of patients receiving abatacept vs placebo were in remission at week 52. Safety generally was comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The studies showed that abatacept is not efficacious for the treatment of moderate-to-severe CD or UC.

Abatacept in subjects who switch from intravenous to subcutaneous therapy: results from the phase IIIb ATTUNE study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess safety, immunogenicity and efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients switched from long-term intravenous to subcutaneous (SC) abatacept. METHODS: In this phase IIIb, open-label, single-arm trial, patients who completed ≥4 years of intravenous abatacept (in long-term extensions of two phase III studies) were enrolled to receive SC abatacept (125 mg/week). The primary objective was safety during the first 3 months after switching from intravenous therapy. RESULTS: 123 patients entered the study (mean Disease Activity Score 28 (based on C reactive protein) and HAQ-DI of 3.4 and 0.94, respectively). At month 3, 120 (97.6%) patients were continuing to receive SC abatacept; no patients discontinued due to lack of efficacy. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 49 (39.8%) patients through month 3. One patient (0.8%) discontinued due to an AE and one patient (0.8%) experienced a serious AE. Two (1.6%) patients had SC injection site reactions (erythema, pain), both with mild intensity. Clinical efficacy was maintained throughout. Limited impact on immunogenicity was observed when switching routes of administration. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that patients can switch from long-term monthly intravenous abatacept to a weekly fixed dose of 125 mg SC abatacept with no increased safety concerns. This study further supports SC abatacept as an alternative treatment option for patients with RA.

A phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy and safety of MDX-1100, a fully human anti-CXCL10 monoclonal antibody, in combination with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: CXCL10 (also known as interferon-γ-inducible 10-kd protein [IP-10]) is a chemokine that potentially plays a role in the immunopathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We undertook this phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MDX-1100, a fully human, anti-CXCL10 (anti-IP-10) monoclonal antibody, in RA patients whose disease responded inadequately to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: Patients with active RA receiving stable doses of MTX (10-25 mg weekly) were randomized to receive intravenous doses of 10 mg/kg MDX-1100 (n = 35) or placebo (n = 35) every other week. The primary end point was the proportion of patients meeting the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (achieving an ACR20 response) on day 85, and patients were followed up for safety to day 141. RESULTS: The ACR20 response rate was significantly higher among MDX-1100-treated patients than among placebo-treated patients (54% versus 17%; P = 0.0024). Statistically significant differences in the ACR20 response rate between treatments were observed starting on day 43 (P < 0.05). The ACR50 and ACR70 response rates on day 85 did not differ between the groups. Overall, 51.4% of MDX-1100-treated patients and 30.3% of placebo-treated patients experienced at least 1 adverse event (AE). No study drug-related serious AEs were reported. CONCLUSION: MDX-1100 was well tolerated and demonstrated clinical efficacy in RA patients whose disease responded inadequately to MTX. This is the first study to demonstrate clinical efficacy of a chemokine inhibitor in RA and supports the notion of a potential role of IP-10 in the immunopathogenesis of RA.

Immune responses following administration of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines to patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving adalimumab.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the immunogenicity of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving adalimumab or placebo. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, multicenter study, patients received adalimumab or placebo on Days 1, 15, and 29. Pneumococcal and influenza vaccines were administered on Day 8 (vaccine baseline). Vaccine response (> or = 2-fold titer increase from baseline in > or = 3 of 5 pneumococcal antigens and > or = 4-fold titer increase from baseline in > or = 2 of 3 influenza antigens) and protective antibody titers (> or = 1.6 microg/ml pneumococcal antibody concentration to > or = 3 of 5 antigens and > or = 1:40 influenza antibody titer to > or = 2 of 3 antigens) were analyzed 4 weeks' postvaccination. RESULTS: Following pneumococcal vaccination, percentages of patients achieving a vaccine response were similar in the adalimumab and placebo groups [37.4% and 40.4%, respectively; 95% CI (confidence interval) -16.2%, 10.3%]. Percentages of patients with protective antibody titers were similar in both treatment groups (adalimumab: 85.9%, placebo: 81.7%). Following influenza vaccination, percentages of patients achieving a vaccine response were lower with adalimumab than placebo (51.5% and 63.3%, respectively; 95% CI -25.2%, 1.6%)--a result explained by the subgroup of patients with preexisting protective antibody titers at baseline. For patients without protective antibody titers at baseline, response rates were similar in the 2 groups (adalimumab: 73.3%, placebo: 73.9%). Percentages of patients with protective antibody titers were similar in both treatment groups (adalimumab: 98%, placebo: 94.5%). CONCLUSION: Patients with RA treated with adalimumab can be effectively and safely immunized with pneumococcal and influenza vaccines.