Cardiovascular Safety of Testosterone-Replacement Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular safety of testosterone-replacement therapy in middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism has not been determined. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, noninferiority trial, we enrolled 5246 men 45 to 80 years of age who had preexisting or a high risk of cardiovascular disease and who reported symptoms of hypogonadism and had two fasting testosterone levels of less than 300 ng per deciliter. Patients were randomly assigned to receive daily transdermal 1.62% testosterone gel (dose adjusted to maintain testosterone levels between 350 and 750 ng per deciliter) or placebo gel. The primary cardiovascular safety end point was the first occurrence of any component of a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. A secondary cardiovascular end point was the first occurrence of any component of the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or coronary revascularization, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. Noninferiority required an upper limit of less than 1.5 for the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio among patients receiving at least one dose of testosterone or placebo. RESULTS: The mean (±SD) duration of treatment was 21.7±14.1 months, and the mean follow-up was 33.0±12.1 months. A primary cardiovascular end-point event occurred in 182 patients (7.0%) in the testosterone group and in 190 patients (7.3%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.17; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Similar findings were observed in sensitivity analyses in which data on events were censored at various times after discontinuation of testosterone or placebo. The incidence of secondary end-point events or of each of the events of the composite primary cardiovascular end point appeared to be similar in the two groups. A higher incidence of atrial fibrillation, of acute kidney injury, and of pulmonary embolism was observed in the testosterone group. CONCLUSIONS: In men with hypogonadism and preexisting or a high risk of cardiovascular disease, testosterone-replacement therapy was noninferior to placebo with respect to the incidence of major adverse cardiac events. (Funded by AbbVie and others; TRAVERSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03518034.).

Risankizumab as maintenance therapy for moderately to severely active Crohn's disease: results from the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, withdrawal phase 3 FORTIFY maintenance trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a great unmet need for new therapeutics with novel mechanisms of action for patients with Crohn's disease. The ADVANCE and MOTIVATE studies showed that intravenous risankizumab, a selective p19 anti-interleukin (IL)-23 antibody, was efficacious and well tolerated as induction therapy. Here, we report the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous risankizumab as maintenance therapy. METHODS: FORTIFY is a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, maintenance withdrawal study across 273 clinical centres in 44 countries across North and South America, Europe, Oceania, Africa, and the Asia-Pacific region that enrolled participants with clinical response to risankizumab in the ADVANCE or MOTIVATE induction studies. Patients in ADVANCE or MOTIVATE were aged 16-80 years with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. Patients in the FORTIFY substudy 1 were randomly assigned again (1:1:1) to receive either subcutaneous risankizumab 180 mg, subcutaneous risankizumab 360 mg, or withdrawal from risankizumab to receive subcutaneous placebo (herein referred to as withdrawal [subcutaneous placebo]). Treatment was given every 8 weeks. Patients were stratified by induction dose, post-induction endoscopic response, and clinical remission status. Patients, investigators, and study personnel were masked to treatment assignments. Week 52 co-primary endpoints were clinical remission (Crohn's disease activity index [CDAI] in the US protocol, or stool frequency and abdominal pain score in the non-US protocol) and endoscopic response in patients who received at least one dose of study drug during the 52-week maintenance period. Safety was assessed in patients receiving at least one dose of study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03105102. FINDINGS: 712 patients were initially assessed and, between April 9, 2018, and April 24, 2020, 542 patients were randomly assigned to either the risankizumab 180 mg group (n=179), the risankizumab 360 mg group (n=179), or the placebo group (n=184). Greater clinical remission and endoscopic response rates were reached with 360 mg risankizumab versus placebo (CDAI clinical remission was reached in 74 (52%) of 141 patients vs 67 (41%) of 164 patients, adjusted difference 15% [95% CI 5-24]; stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission was reached in 73 (52%) of 141 vs 65 (40%) of 164, adjusted difference 15% [5-25]; endoscopic response 66 (47%) of 141 patients vs 36 (22%) of 164 patients, adjusted difference 28% [19-37]). Higher rates of CDAI clinical remission and endoscopic response (but not stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission [p=0·124]) were also reached with risankizumab 180 mg versus withdrawal (subcutaneous placebo; CDAI clinical remission reached in 87 [55%] of 157 patients, adjusted difference 15% [95% CI 5-24]; endoscopic response 74 [47%] of 157, adjusted difference 26% [17-35]). Results for more stringent endoscopic and composite endpoints and inflammatory biomarkers were consistent with a dose-response relationship. Maintenance treatment was well tolerated. Adverse event rates were similar among groups, and the most frequently reported adverse events in all treatment groups were worsening Crohn's disease, arthralgia, and headache. INTERPRETATION: Subcutaneous risankizumab is a safe and efficacious treatment for maintenance of remission in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease and offers a new therapeutic option for a broad range of patients by meeting endpoints that might change the future course of disease. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Risankizumab as induction therapy for Crohn's disease: results from the phase 3 ADVANCE and MOTIVATE induction trials.

BACKGROUND: Risankizumab, an interleukin (IL)-23 p19 inhibitor, was evaluated for safety and efficacy as induction therapy in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. METHODS: ADVANCE and MOTIVATE were randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled, phase 3 induction studies. Eligible patients aged 16-80 years with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease, previously showing intolerance or inadequate response to one or more approved biologics or conventional therapy (ADVANCE) or to biologics (MOTIVATE), were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of intravenous risankizumab (600 mg or 1200 mg) or placebo (2:2:1 in ADVANCE, 1:1:1 in MOTIVATE) at weeks 0, 4, and 8. We used interactive response technology for random assignment, with stratification by number of previous failed biologics, corticosteroid use at baseline, and Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease (SES-CD). All patients and study personnel (excluding pharmacists who prepared intravenous solutions) were masked to treatment allocation throughout the study. Coprimary endpoints were clinical remission (defined by Crohn's disease activity index [CDAI] or patient-reported outcome criteria [average daily stool frequency and abdominal pain score]) and endoscopic response at week 12. The intention-to-treat population (all eligible patients who received at least one dose of study drug in the 12-week induction period) was analysed for efficacy outcomes. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Both trials were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03105128 (ADVANCE) and NCT03104413 (MOTIVATE), and are now complete. FINDINGS: Participants were enrolled between May 10, 2017, and Aug 24, 2020 (ADVANCE trial), and Dec 18, 2017 and Sept 9, 2020 (MOTIVATE trial). In ADVANCE, 931 patients were assigned to either risankizumab 600 mg (n=373), risankizumab 1200 mg (n=372), or placebo (n=186). In MOTIVATE, 618 patients were assigned to risankizumab 600 mg (n=206), risankizumab 1200 mg (n=205), or placebo (n=207). The primary analysis population comprised 850 participants in ADVANCE and 569 participants in MOTIVATE. All coprimary endpoints at week 12 were met in both trials with both doses of risankizumab (p values ≤0·0001). In ADVANCE, CDAI clinical remission rate was 45% (adjusted difference 21%, 95% CI 12-29; 152/336) with risankizumab 600 mg and 42% (17%, 8-25; 141/339) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 25% (43/175) with placebo; stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission rate was 43% (22%, 14-30; 146/336) with risankizumab 600 mg and 41% (19%, 11-27; 139/339) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 22% (38/175) with placebo; and endoscopic response rate was 40% (28%, 21-35; 135/336) with risankizumab 600 mg and 32% (20%, 14-27; 109/339) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 12% (21/175) with placebo. In MOTIVATE, CDAI clinical remission rate was 42% (22%, 13-31; 80/191) with risankizumab 600 mg and 40% (21%, 12-29; 77/191) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 20% (37/187) with placebo; stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission rate was 35% (15%, 6-24; 66/191) with risankizumab 600 mg and 40% (20%, 12-29; 76/191) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 19% (36/187) with placebo; and endoscopic response rate was 29% (18%, 10-25; 55/191) with risankizumab 600 mg and 34% (23%, 15-31; 65/191) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 11% (21/187) with placebo. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar among the treatment groups in both trials. Three deaths occurred during induction (two in the placebo group [ADVANCE] and one in the risankizumab 1200 mg group [MOTIVATE]). The death in the risankizumab-treated patient was deemed unrelated to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: Risankizumab was effective and well tolerated as induction therapy in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Upadacitinib as induction and maintenance therapy for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: results from three phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: There is a great unmet need for advanced therapies that provide rapid, robust, and sustained disease control for patients with ulcerative colitis. We assessed the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, as induction and maintenance therapy in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. METHODS: This phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical programme consisted of two replicate induction studies (U-ACHIEVE induction [UC1] and U-ACCOMPLISH [UC2]) and a single maintenance study (U-ACHIEVE maintenance [UC3]). The studies were conducted across Europe, North and South America, Australasia, Africa, and the Asia-Pacific region at 199 clinical centres in 39 countries (UC1), 204 clinical centres in 40 countries (UC2), and 195 clinical centres in 35 countries (UC3). Patients aged 16-75 years with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (Adapted Mayo score 5-9; endoscopic subscore 2 or 3) for at least 90 days were randomly assigned (2:1) to oral upadacitinib 45 mg once daily or placebo for 8 weeks (induction studies). Patients who achieved clinical response following 8-week upadacitinib induction were re-randomly assigned (1:1:1) to upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg, or placebo for 52 weeks (maintenance study). All patients were randomly assigned using web-based interactive response technology. The primary endpoints were clinical remission per Adapted Mayo score at week 8 (induction) and week 52 (maintenance). The efficacy analyses in the two induction studies were based on the intent-to-treat population, which included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of treatment. In the maintenance study, the primary efficacy analyses reported in this manuscript were based on the first 450 (planned) clinical responders to 8-week induction therapy with upadacitinib 45 mg once daily. The safety analysis population in the induction studies consisted of all randomised patients who received at least one dose of treatment; in the maintenance study, this population included all patients who received at least one dose of treatment as part of the primary analysis population. These studies are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819635 (U-ACHIEVE) and NCT03653026 (U-ACCOMPLISH). FINDINGS: Between Oct 23, 2018, and Sept 7, 2020, 474 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 45 mg once daily (n=319) or placebo (n=155) in UC1. Between Dec 6, 2018, and Jan 14, 2021, 522 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 45 mg once daily (n=345) or placebo (n=177) in UC2. In UC3, a total of 451 patients (21 from the phase 2b study, 278 from UC1, and 152 from UC2) who achieved a clinical response after 8 weeks of upadacitinib induction treatment were randomly assigned again to upadacitinib 15 mg (n=148), upadacitinib 30 mg (n=154), and placebo (n=149) in the primary analysis population. Statistically significantly more patients achieved clinical remission with upadacitinib 45 mg (83 [26%] of 319 patients in UC1 and 114 [34%] of 341 patients in UC2) than in the placebo group (seven [5%] of 154 patients in UC1 and seven [4%] of 174 patients; p<0·0001; adjusted treatment difference 21·6% [95% CI 15·8-27·4] for UC1 and 29·0% [23·2-34·7] for UC2). In the maintenance study, clinical remission was achieved by statistically significantly more patients receiving upadacitinib (15 mg 63 [42%] of 148; 30 mg 80 [52%] of 154) than those receiving placebo (18 [12%] of 149; p<0·0001; adjusted treatment difference 30·7% [21·7-39·8] for upadacitinib 15 mg vs placebo and 39·0% [29·7-48·2] for upadacitinib 30 mg vs placebo). The most commonly reported adverse events in UC1 were nasopharyngitis (15 [5%] of 319 in the upadacitinib 45 mg group vs six [4%] of 155 in the placebo group), creatine phosphokinase elevation (15 [4%] vs three [2%]), and acne (15 [5%] vs one [1%]). In UC2, the most frequently reported adverse event was acne (24 [7%] of 344 in the upadacitinib 45 mg group vs three [2%] of 177 in the placebo group). In both induction studies, serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation of treatment were less frequent in the upadacitinib 45 mg group than in the placebo group (serious adverse events eight [3%] vs nine (6%) in UC1 and 11 [3%] vs eight [5%] in UC2; adverse events leading to discontinuation six [2%] vs 14 [9%] in UC1 and six [2%] vs nine [5%] in UC2). In UC3, the most frequently reported adverse events (≥5%) were worsening of ulcerative colitis (19 [13%] of 148 in the upadacitinib 15 mg group vs 11 [7%] of 154 in the upadacitinib 30 mg group vs 45 [30%] of 149 in the placebo group), nasopharyngitis (18 [12%] vs 22 [14%] vs 15 [10%]), creatine phosphokinase elevation (nine [6%] vs 13 [8%] vs three [2%]), arthralgia (nine [6%] vs five [3%] vs 15 [10%]), and upper respiratory tract infection (seven [5%] vs nine [6%] vs six [4%]). The proportion of serious adverse events (ten [7%] vs nine [6%] vs 19 [13%]) and adverse events leading to discontinuation (six [4%] vs ten [6%] vs 17 [11%]) was lower in both upadacitinib groups than in the placebo group. Events of cancer, adjudicated major adverse cardiac events, or venous thromboembolism were reported infrequently. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Upadacitinib demonstrated a positive efficacy and safety profile and could be an effective treatment option for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Handling death as an intercurrent event in time to recovery analysis in COVID-19 treatment clinical trials.

In clinical trials with the objective to evaluate the treatment effect on time to recovery, such as investigational trials on therapies for COVID-19 hospitalized patients, the patients may face a mortality risk that competes with the opportunity to recover (e.g., be discharged from the hospital). Therefore, an appropriate analytical strategy to account for death is particularly important due to its potential impact on the estimation of the treatment effect. To address this challenge, we conducted a thorough evaluation and comparison of nine survival analysis methods with different strategies to account for death, including standard survival analysis methods with different censoring strategies and competing risk analysis methods. We report results of a comprehensive simulation study that employed design parameters commonly seen in COVID-19 trials and case studies using reconstructed data from a published COVID-19 clinical trial. Our research results demonstrate that, when there is a moderate to large proportion of patients who died before observing their recovery, competing risk analyses and survival analyses with the strategy to censor death at the maximum follow-up timepoint would be able to better detect a treatment effect on recovery than the standard survival analysis that treat death as a non-informative censoring event. The aim of this research is to raise awareness of the importance of handling death appropriately in the time-to-recovery analysis when planning current and future COVID-19 treatment trials.

Higher vs Standard Adalimumab Induction and Maintenance Dosing Regimens for Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis: SERENE UC Trial Results.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: SERENE UC (Study of a Novel Approach to Induction and Maintenance Dosing With Adalimumab in Patients With Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis) evaluated the efficacy of higher adalimumab induction and maintenance dose regimens in patients with ulcerative colitis. METHODS: This phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial included induction and maintenance studies, with a main study (ex-Japan) and Japan substudy. Eligible patients (18-75 years, full Mayo score 6-12, centrally read endoscopy subscore 2-3) were randomized 3:2 to higher induction regimen (adalimumab 160 mg at weeks 0, 1, 2, and 3) or standard induction regimen (160 mg at week 0 and 80 mg at week 2); all received 40 mg at weeks 4 and 6. At week 8, all patients were rerandomized 2:2:1 (main study) to 40 mg every week (ew), 40 mg every other week (eow), or exploratory therapeutic drug monitoring; or 1:1 (Japan substudy) to 40 mg ew or 40 mg eow maintenance regimens. RESULTS: In the main study, 13.3% vs 10.9% of patients receiving the higher induction regimen vs standard induction regimen achieved clinical remission (full Mayo score ≤2 with no subscore >1) at week 8 (induction primary end point; P = .265); among week-8 responders, 39.5% vs 29.0% receiving 40 mg ew vs 40 mg eow achieved clinical remission at week 52 (maintenance primary end point; P = .069). In the integrated (main + Japan) population, 41.1% vs 30.1% of week-8 responders receiving 40 mg ew vs 40 mg eow achieved clinical remission at week 52 (nominal P = .045). Safety profiles were comparable between dosing regimens. CONCLUSION: Although primary end points were not met, a >10% absolute difference in clinical remission was demonstrated with higher adalimumab maintenance dosing. Higher dosing regimens were generally well tolerated and consistent with the known safety profile of adalimumab in ulcerative colitis. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT002209456.

Association Between Proposed Definitions of Clinical Remission/Response and Well-Being in Patients With Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patient-reported outcomes are recommended endpoints in Crohn's disease [CD] trials. The association between patient-reported general well-being relative to symptoms of diarrhoea and abdominal pain [AP] in patients with moderate to severe CD was explored. METHODS: Patients from three randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind adalimumab or upadacitinib studies with average daily very soft/liquid stool frequency [SF] ≥4 and/or AP score ≥2 at baseline were included. Using electronic diaries, patients reported general well-being [seven-point Likert scale; 1 = worst; 7 = best] in item 10 of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire [IBDQ]. Changes in well-being and clinical outcomes of SF and AP from baseline to week 12 or 16, and the relationship between well-being and clinical outcomes were evaluated using cumulative distribution function and probability density function curves. RESULTS: In total, 858 patients with CD were included [adalimumab, n = 695; upadacitinib, n = 163]. Patients who achieved clinical remission [SF ≤2.8, AP score ≤1.0, neither worse than baseline] were more likely than those not in clinical remission to report IBDQ item 10 response in the 6-7 group category but not IBDQ categories ≤5. Higher IBDQ score for item 10 [6-7] was associated with lower SF and AP score. Greater point increases in IBDQ item 10 were associated with a greater percentage decrease in clinical parameters; a ≥25-30% decrease in SF or AP was associated with a ≥1-point improvement in IBDQ. CONCLUSIONS: An association between improvements in patient-reported general well-being and clinical remission/response was observed using outcomes of SF and AP, supporting the clinical remission/response endpoint definitions used in clinical studies of CD. Clinical Trial Registrations [ClinicalTrials.gov]: NCT00077779 [CHARM]; NCT00348283 [EXTEND]; NCT02365649 [CELEST].

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in Chinese patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease: results from a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Efficacy of adalimumab in Crohn's disease (CD) has not been shown in China. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in Chinese patients with CD. METHODS: This 26-week, multicenter, phase III study evaluated patients with moderately to severely active CD and elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (⩾3 mg/l) who were naïve to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. Patients were randomized to double-blind adalimumab 160/80 mg at weeks 0/2 and 40 mg at weeks 4/6 or placebo at weeks 0/2 followed by blinded adalimumab 160/80 mg at weeks 4/6. At week 8, all patients received open-label 40 mg adalimumab every other week through week 26. The primary endpoint was clinical remission [CD activity index (CDAI) <150] at week 4. Clinical remission at week 26 was assessed in week-8 responders (decrease in CDAI ⩾70 points at week 8 from baseline) and compared with a clinically meaningful threshold of 30%. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded throughout the study. RESULTS: At baseline, 205 patients were enrolled, with mean [standard deviation (SD)] age of 32.9 (9.9) years and CD duration of 2.7 (3.0) years. At week 4, 38/102 patients (37%) receiving adalimumab and 7/103 (7%) receiving placebo (p < 0.001) achieved clinical remission. Among week-8 responders, 93/144 (65%) achieved clinical remission at week 26 (p < 0.001). No unexpected AEs and no malignancies, active tuberculosis, or deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab induced and maintained remission in Chinese patients with CD. Safety results were consistent with the known safety profile of adalimumab. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02499783.

Efficacy of Upadacitinib in a Randomized Trial of Patients With Active Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, an oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase 1, as induction therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: We performed a multicenter, double-blind, phase 2b study of 250 adults with moderately to severely active UC and an inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to corticosteroids, immunosuppressive agents, and/or biologic therapies. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that received placebo or induction therapy with upadacitinib (7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg, or 45 mg, extended release), once daily for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who achieve clinical remission according to the adapted Mayo score at week 8. No multiplicity adjustments were applied. RESULTS: At week 8, 8.5%, 14.3%, 13.5%, and 19.6% of patients receiving 7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg, or 45 mg upadacitinib, respectively, achieved clinical remission compared with none of the patients receiving placebo (P = .052, P = .013, P = .011, and P = .002 compared with placebo, respectively). Endoscopic improvement at week 8, defined as endoscopic subscore of ≤ 1, was achieved in 14.9%, 30.6%, 26.9%, and 35.7% of patients receiving upadacitinib 7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg, or 45 mg, respectively, compared with 2.2% receiving placebo (P = .033, P < .001, P < .001, and P < .001 compared with placebo, respectively). One event of herpes zoster and 1 participant with pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis (diagnosed 26 days after treatment discontinuation) were reported in the group that received upadacitinib 45 mg once daily. Increases in serum lipid levels and creatine phosphokinase with upadacitinib were observed. CONCLUSION: In a phase 2b trial, 8 weeks of treatment with upadacitinib was more effective than placebo for inducing remission in patients with moderately to severely active UC. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02819635).

Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib in a Randomized Trial of Patients With Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, in a randomized trial of patients with Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: We performed a double-blind, phase 2 trial in adults with moderate to severe CD and inadequate response or intolerance to immunosuppressants or tumor necrosis factor antagonists. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1) to groups given placebo; or 3 mg, 6 mg, 12 mg, or 24 mg upadacitinib twice daily; or 24 mg upadacitinib once daily and were evaluated by ileocolonoscopy at weeks 12 or 16 of the induction period. Patients who completed week 16 were re-randomized to a 36-week period of maintenance therapy with upadacitinib. The primary endpoints were clinical remission at week 16 and endoscopic remission at week 12 or 16 using the multiple comparison procedure and modeling and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, with a 2-sided level of 10%. RESULTS: Among the 220 patients in the study, clinical remission was achieved by 13% of patients receiving 3 mg upadacitinib, 27% of patients receiving 6 mg upadacitinib (P < .1 vs placebo), 11% of patients receiving 12 mg upadacitinib, and 22% of patients receiving 24 mg upadacitinib twice daily, and by 14% of patients receiving 24 mg upadacitinib once daily, vs 11% of patients receiving placebo. Endoscopic remission was achieved by 10% (P < .1 vs placebo), 8%, 8% (P < .1 vs placebo), 22% (P < .01 vs placebo), and 14% (P < .05 vs placebo) of patients receiving upadacitinib, respectively, vs none of the patients receiving placebo. Endoscopic but not clinical remission increased with dose during the induction period. Efficacy was maintained for most endpoints through week 52. During the induction period, patients in the upadacitinib groups had higher incidences of infections and serious infections vs placebo. Patients in the twice-daily 12 mg and 24 mg upadacitinib groups had significant increases in total, high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels compared with patients in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 trial of patients with CD, upadacitinib induced endoscopic remission in a significant proportion of patients compared with placebo. Upadacitinib's benefit/risk profile supports further development for treatment of CD. (Clinicaltrials.gov, Number: NCT02365649).

Performance of Crohn's disease Clinical Trial Endpoints based upon Different Cutoffs for Patient Reported Outcomes or Endoscopic Activity: Analysis of EXTEND Data.

Background: Clinical trial endpoints for Crohn's disease (CD) activity correlate poorly with mucosal inflammation; to assess treatment efficacy, patient-reported outcomes and endoscopic assessments are preferred. This study assessed the impact on treatment efficacy estimations of using different definitions of clinical and endoscopic remission and endoscopic response, and of using site- or central-based endoscopy evaluation. Methods: This post hoc analysis of data fromEXTEND (extend the safety and efficacy of adalimumab through endoscopic healing), a placebo (PBO)-controlled, randomized trial of adalimumab (ADA) for mucosal healing, included adults with moderate-to-severe CD. Subsets of patients meeting specified Simplified Endoscopic Score for CD (SES-CD) inclusion criteria, according to site or central reading, and baseline stool frequency (SF) and/or abdominal pain score (AP) thresholds were evaluated. Various endpoint definitions based on the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI), its SF and AP components, SES-CD, and composite endpoints were compared between treatment groups. Results: Increased stringency of Week 12 clinical endpoints compared to CDAI<150 to SF≤3.0/1.5&AP≤1.0 reduced PBO response rates by ≥12% and increased treatment effects by ≤10%. Amending the SES-CD endpoint from ≤4 to ≤2 reduced the treatment effect from 24% to 8%. Composite endpoints further diminished response rates and effect sizes. Site-based evaluation was associated with lower remission rates versus central reading in the PBO group and, thus, greater ADA-related treatment effects. Conclusions: This analysis is the first to demonstrate that increasing the stringency of clinical and endoscopic endpoint definitions in CD trials, especially lowering SF or SES-CD definitions, reduces the ability to detect treatment-related change in CD activity; focus on endpoints that reflect clinical change is warranted.

Adalimumab Reduces Extraintestinal Manifestations in Patients with Crohn's Disease: A Pooled Analysis of 11 Clinical Studies.

INTRODUCTION: Extraintestinal manifestations (EIMs) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) are common and associated with additional morbidity. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of adalimumab therapy on EIM resolution and identify potential predictors of EIM resolution in adult and pediatric patients with moderate to severe CD. METHODS: EIM data were pooled from 11 induction, maintenance, and open-label extension studies of adalimumab. Resolution of EIMs was evaluated at approximately 6 months and 1 year. Median time to initial EIM resolution and first EIM recurrence (reflecting durable resolution) of any EIM and specific categories of EIMs (arthritis/arthralgia, ocular, cutaneous) were calculated. A Cox model was used to determine predictors of initial and durable EIM resolution. RESULTS: At baseline, 54% (1137/2094) of patients receiving adalimumab and 51% (297/586) receiving placebo had EIMs. EIM resolution occurred in a significantly greater proportion of adalimumab versus placebo patients at 6 months (54% vs 31%; P < .001) and 1 year (60% vs 42%; P = .008). Median time to initial resolution of any EIM, arthritis/arthralgia, and cutaneous EIMs was significantly shorter in patients receiving adalimumab versus placebo. Durable resolution of any EIM and arthritis/arthralgia was significantly longer for patients receiving adalimumab versus placebo. Clinically meaningful predictors of EIM resolution included adalimumab treatment, male sex, and moderate (versus severe) disease activity at baseline. CONCLUSION: Adalimumab is effective for achieving initial and durable resolution of any EIM and, in particular, arthritis/arthralgia in patients with moderate to severe CD. Predictors of EIM resolution included adalimumab treatment and moderate disease severity. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Effect of tight control management on Crohn's disease (CALM): a multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers of intestinal inflammation, such as faecal calprotectin and C-reactive protein, have been recommended for monitoring patients with Crohn's disease, but whether their use in treatment decisions improves outcomes is unknown. We aimed to compare endoscopic and clinical outcomes in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease who were managed with a tight control algorithm, using clinical symptoms and biomarkers, versus patients managed with a clinical management algorithm. METHODS: CALM was an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 study, done in 22 countries at 74 hospitals and outpatient centres, which evaluated adult patients (aged 18-75 years) with active endoscopic Crohn's disease (Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity [CDEIS] >6; sum of CDEIS subscores of >6 in one or more segments with ulcers), a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) of 150-450 depending on dose of prednisone at baseline, and no previous use of immunomodulators or biologics. Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to tight control or clinical management groups, stratified by smoking status (yes or no), weight (<70 kg or ≥70 kg), and disease duration (≤2 years or >2 years) after 8 weeks of prednisone induction therapy, or earlier if they had active disease. In both groups, treatment was escalated in a stepwise manner, from no treatment, to adalimumab induction followed by adalimumab every other week, adalimumab every week, and lastly to both weekly adalimumab and daily azathioprine. This escalation was based on meeting treatment failure criteria, which differed between groups (tight control group before and after random assignment: faecal calprotectin ≥250 µg/g, C-reactive protein ≥5mg/L, CDAI ≥150, or prednisone use in the previous week; clinical management group before random assignment: CDAI decrease of <70 points compared with baseline or CDAI >200; clinical management group after random assignment: CDAI decrease of <100 points compared with baseline or CDAI ≥200, or prednisone use in the previous week). De-escalation was possible for patients receiving weekly adalimumab and azathioprine or weekly adalimumab alone if failure criteria were not met. The primary endpoint was mucosal healing (CDEIS <4) with absence of deep ulcers 48 weeks after randomisation. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial has been completed, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01235689. FINDINGS: Between Feb 11, 2011, and Nov 3, 2016, 244 patients (mean disease duration: clinical management group, 0·9 years [SD 1·7]; tight control group, 1·0 year [2·3]) were randomly assigned to monitoring groups (n=122 per group). 29 (24%) patients in the clinical management group and 32 (26%) patients in the tight control group discontinued the study, mostly because of adverse events. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the tight control group achieved the primary endpoint at week 48 (56 [46%] of 122 patients) than in the clinical management group (37 [30%] of 122 patients), with a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test-adjusted risk difference of 16·1% (95% CI 3·9-28·3; p=0·010). 105 (86%) of 122 patients in the tight control group and 100 (82%) of 122 patients in the clinical management group reported treatment-emergent adverse events; no treatment-related deaths occurred. The most common adverse events were nausea (21 [17%] of 122 patients), nasopharyngitis (18 [15%]), and headache (18 [15%]) in the tight control group, and worsening Crohn's disease (35 [29%] of 122 patients), arthralgia (19 [16%]), and nasopharyngitis (18 [15%]) in the clinical management group. INTERPRETATION: CALM is the first study to show that timely escalation with an anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy on the basis of clinical symptoms combined with biomarkers in patients with early Crohn's disease results in better clinical and endoscopic outcomes than symptom-driven decisions alone. Future studies should assess the effects of such a strategy on long-term outcomes such as bowel damage, surgeries, hospital admissions, and disability. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Long-term safety and efficacy of adalimumab for intestinal Behçet's disease in the open label study following a phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Intestinal Behçet's disease (BD) is an immune-mediated inflammatory disorder. We followed up the patients and evaluated safety profile and effectiveness of adalimumab for the treatment of intestinal BD through 100 weeks rolled over from the 52 week clinical trial (NCT01243671). METHODS: Patients initiated adalimumab therapy at 160 mg at week 0, followed by 80 mg at week 2, followed by 40 mg every other week until the end of the study. Long-term safety and all adverse events (AEs) were examined. The efficacy was assessed on the basis of marked improvement (MI) and complete remission (CR) using a composite efficacy index, which combined global gastrointestinal symptoms and endoscopic assessments. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled in this study; 15 patients received adalimumab treatment until study completion. The incidence of AEs through week 100 was 544.4 events/100 person-years, which was comparable to the incidence through week 52 (560.4 events/100 person-years). No unexpected trend was observed and adalimumab was well tolerated. At weeks 52 and 100, 60.0% and 40.0% of patients showed MI, respectively, and 20.0% and 15.0% of patients showed CR, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This report demonstrates 2 years safety and effectiveness of adalimumab in intestinal BD patients. Patients with intestinal BD refractory to conventional treatment receiving up to 2 years of adalimumab treatment demonstrated safety outcomes consistent with the known profile of adalimumab, and the treatment led to sustained reduction of clinical and endoscopic disease activity.

Four-year maintenance treatment with adalimumab in Japanese patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: The 52-week safety and efficacy of adalimumab in Japanese patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis were demonstrated in a placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial. Data from patients who enrolled in the open-label extension study are presented. METHODS: Remission and response per the full Mayo score (FMS) and the partial Mayo score (PMS), remission per the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) score, corticosteroid-free remission, and mucosal healing were assessed up to week 196 (week 208 for remission/response per PMS) of adalimumab treatment in patients who received one or more doses of adalimumab with use of a hybrid nonresponder imputation (hNRI) method. Nonresponder imputation was used for missing data up to the latest possible follow-up date for each patient, followed by observed case. Adalimumab trough concentrations were reported from week 52 to week 196 of treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported for all adalimumab-treated patients. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-six patients received adalimumab. At week 196 of treatment, remission and response rates per FMS, remission and response rates per PMS, remission rate per IBDQ score, mucosal healing rate, and corticosteroid-free remission rate were 19.2%, 32.2%, 22.5%, 32.5%, 33.1%, 30.5% (hNRI), and 40.5% (17/42; as observed), respectively. Serum adalimumab concentrations remained constant in patients receiving 40 mg every other week but increased in patients who underwent dose escalation. The safety profile was consistent with that in the 52-week study. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of adalimumab in Japanese patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis was maintained for up to 4 years of treatment. No new safety signals were observed.

Growth Improvement with Adalimumab Treatment in Children with Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Growth failure is common in children with Crohn's disease. The effect of adalimumab (ADA), a fully human antitumor necrosis factor antagonist, on height velocity in pediatric patients with baseline (BL) linear growth impairment in the IMAgINE 1 trial is presented. METHODS: This analysis included female and male patients with growth potential (bone age ≤13 and ≤14 yr, respectively), with BL Pediatric Crohn's disease Activity Index >30, and who failed or were intolerant to conventional therapy. Patients received open-label induction ADA at weeks 0 and 2 by body weight (≥40 kg, 160 and 80 mg and <40 kg, 80 and 40 mg). At week 4, patients were randomized to double-blind high (40 or 20 mg for ≥40 kg or <40 kg) or low dose (20 or 10 mg for ≥40 kg or <40 kg) every other week ADA to week 52. Height velocity z-score was summarized at BL, week 26, and week 52 by patients with BL growth impairment (z-score ≤-1.0) or normal growth (z-score >-1.0). RESULTS: ADA therapy significantly improved and normalized growth rate at weeks 26 and 52 in patients with BL growth impairment (median z-score, BL, -3.25; week 26, -0.34; and week 52, 0.21; P < 0.001 versus BL for both), but not in patients with normal growth. Growth improvement was significantly greater at week 26 in week 4 responders to induction therapy compared with nonresponders (median z-score 0.09 versus -2.92; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: ADA treatment resulted in growth rate normalization as early as week 26 in children with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease and growth impairment.

Responsiveness of Endoscopic Indices of Disease Activity for Crohn's Disease.

OBJECTIVES: The Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) and the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) are commonly used to assess Crohn's disease (CD) activity; however neither instrument is fully validated. We evaluated the responsiveness to change of the SES-CD and CDEIS using data from a trial of adalimumab, a drug therapy of known efficacy. METHODS: Paired video recordings (N=112) of colonoscopies (baseline and week 8-12) obtained from patients with CD who participated in a trial of adalimumab therapy were reviewed in random order, in duplicate, by four central readers (56 pairs of videos by 2 groups of readers). Responsiveness of the SES-CD and the CDEIS was evaluated by comparing correlations between the observed and pre-specified predictions of change scores for these endoscopic indices with a global endoscopic evaluation of severity (GELS), a patient reported outcome (PRO2), and the Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI), and by calculation of the standardized effect size, and Guyatt's Responsiveness statistic (GRS) using 2 definitions of change; (1) treatment assignment and (2) an absolute change in total PRO2 of 50. The potential application of effect size estimates was demonstrated by calculating hypothetical sample sizes for comparing two independent groups. The impact of removing stenosis as an index item and adjusting for the number of segments observed was also assessed. RESULTS: Changes in both endoscopic instruments and the GELS were highly correlated. The SES-CD displayed numerically higher effect sizes for both definitions of change. The standardized effect size and GRS estimates (95% confidence interval) for the SES-CD based on treatment assignment were 0.84 (0.53, 1.15) and 0.79 (0.48, 1.09). Corresponding values for the CDEIS were 0.72 (0.42, 1.02) and 0.75 (0.45, 1.06). The standardized effect size and GRS estimates for the SES-CD based on an absolute change in total PRO2 of 50 points or greater were 0.76 (0.49, 1.02) and 0.93 (0.64, 1.21). Corresponding values for CDEIS were 0.70 (0.44, 0.97), 0.83 (0.55, 1.10). Removal of stenosis as an index item and adjusting for observed segments did not improve responsiveness estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Although both the SES-CD and CDEIS are valid measures of endoscopic disease activity that are moderately responsive to changes in endoscopic disease activity, the SES-CD displayed numerically greater responsiveness in this data set.

Interpreting Registrational Clinical Trials of Biological Therapies in Adults with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

BACKGROUND: The use of biologics to treat inflammatory bowel disease is supported by robust randomized controlled trials in both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Nonetheless, an understanding of the principles of clinical trial design is necessary to extrapolate study findings to clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a review of inflammatory bowel disease registrational clinical trials of biologics to determine how differences in trial design potentially influence results and interpretation. RESULTS: Registrational trials of biological agents have used diverse patient populations, outcome measures, and designs, which makes comparisons of results among studies difficult. Key differences among trials include patient populations, choice of symptom-based measures or objective outcomes as endpoints, and overall trial design. Additional factors, including analytical methods, can also influence the interpretation of outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The most robust evidence is derived from comparative effectiveness trials. In the absence of these, clinicians should be aware of the various methodological issues which could impact interpretation of efficacy and safety outcomes, including differences in patient population, study design, and analytic methodology.