Guselkumab in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: QUASAR Phase 2b Induction Study


Peyrin-Biroulet L., Allegretti J. R., Rubin D. T., Bressler B., Germinaro M., Huang K. (., ...Daha Fazla

GASTROENTEROLOGY, cilt.165, sa.6, ss.1443-1457, 2023 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 165 Sayı: 6
  • Basım Tarihi: 2023
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.08.038
  • Dergi Adı: GASTROENTEROLOGY
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, EMBASE, Food Science & Technology Abstracts, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Veterinary Science Database
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1443-1457
  • Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The QUASAR Phase 2b Induction Study evaluated the efficacy and safety of guselkumab, an interleukin-23p19 subunit antagonist, in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior inadequate response and/or intolerance to corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, and/or advanced therapy. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, induction study, patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive intravenous guselkumab 200 or 400 mg or placebo at weeks 0/4/8. The primary endpoint was clinical response (compared with baseline, modified Mayo score decrease >= 30% and >= 2 points, rectal bleeding subscore >= 1-point decrease or subscore of 0/1) at week 12. Guselkumab and placebo week-12 clinical non-responders received subcutaneous or intravenous guselkumab 200 mg, respectively, at weeks 12/16/20 (uncontrolled study period). RESULTS: The primary analysis population included patients with baseline modified Mayo scores >= 5 and <= 9 (intravenous guselkumab 200 mg, n = 101; 400 mg, n = 107; placebo, n = 105). Week-12 clinical response percentage was greater with guselkumab 200 mg (61.4%) and 400 mg (60.7%) vs placebo (27.6%; both P < .001). Greater proportions of guselkumab-treated vs placebo-treated patients achieved all major secondary endpoints (clinical remission, symptomatic remission, endoscopic improvement, histo-endoscopic mucosal improvement, and endoscopic normalization) at week 12. Among guselkumab week-12 clinical nonresponders, 54.3% and 50.0% of patients in the 200- and 400-mg groups, respectively, achieved clinical response at week 24. Safety was similar among guselkumab and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Guselkumab intravenous induction was effective vs placebo in patients with moderately to severely active UC. Guselkumab was safe, and efficacy and safety were similar between guselkumab dose groups.