-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Guselkumab in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: QUASAR Phase 2b Induction Study
L. Peyrin-Biroulet, JR. Allegretti, DT. Rubin, B. Bressler, M. Germinaro, KG. Huang, N. Shipitofsky, H. Zhang, R. Wilson, C. Han, BG. Feagan, WJ. Sandborn, J. Panés, T. Hisamatsu, GR. Lichtenstein, BE. Sands, A. Dignass, QUASAR Study Group
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu klinické zkoušky, fáze II, časopisecké články, randomizované kontrolované studie
- MeSH
- dvojitá slepá metoda MeSH
- humanizované monoklonální protilátky škodlivé účinky MeSH
- imunosupresiva terapeutické užití MeSH
- indukce remise MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- ulcerózní kolitida * diagnóza farmakoterapie komplikace MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- klinické zkoušky, fáze II MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
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 nonresponders 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. CLINICALTRIALS: gov number: NCT04033445.
Department of Gastroenterology Nancy University Hospital F 54500 Vandœuvre lès Nancy France
Department of Medicine 1 Agaplesion Markus Hospital Goethe University Frankfurt Germany
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec Canada
FHU CURE Nancy University Hospital F 54500 Vandœuvre lès Nancy France
Groupe Hospitalier privé Ambroise Paré Hartmann Paris IBD Center 92200 Neuilly sur Seine France
Hospital Clínic de Barcelona IDIBAPS CIBERehd Barcelona Spain
INFINY Institute Nancy University Hospital F 54500 Vandœuvre lès Nancy France
INSERM NGERE University of Lorraine F 54000 Nancy France
Janssen Research and Development LLC Spring House Pennsylvania
University of British Columbia Vancouver British Columbia Canada
University of California San Diego La Jolla California
University of Chicago Medicine Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center Chicago Illinois
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24000505
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20240213093224.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 240109s2023 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.08.038 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)37659673
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Peyrin-Biroulet, Laurent $u Department of Gastroenterology, Nancy University Hospital, F-54500 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France; INSERM, NGERE, University of Lorraine, F-54000 Nancy, France; INFINY Institute, Nancy University Hospital, F-54500 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France; FHU-CURE, Nancy University Hospital, F-54500 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France; Groupe Hospitalier privé Ambroise Paré-Hartmann, Paris IBD Center, 92200 Neuilly sur Seine, France; Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
- 245 10
- $a Guselkumab in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: QUASAR Phase 2b Induction Study / $c L. Peyrin-Biroulet, JR. Allegretti, DT. Rubin, B. Bressler, M. Germinaro, KG. Huang, N. Shipitofsky, H. Zhang, R. Wilson, C. Han, BG. Feagan, WJ. Sandborn, J. Panés, T. Hisamatsu, GR. Lichtenstein, BE. Sands, A. Dignass, QUASAR Study Group
- 520 9_
- $a 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 nonresponders 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. CLINICALTRIALS: gov number: NCT04033445.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a humanizované monoklonální protilátky $x škodlivé účinky $7 D061067
- 650 12
- $a ulcerózní kolitida $x diagnóza $x farmakoterapie $x komplikace $7 D003093
- 650 _2
- $a dvojitá slepá metoda $7 D004311
- 650 _2
- $a imunosupresiva $x terapeutické užití $7 D007166
- 650 _2
- $a indukce remise $7 D012074
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 655 _2
- $a klinické zkoušky, fáze II $7 D017427
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a randomizované kontrolované studie $7 D016449
- 700 1_
- $a Allegretti, Jessica R $u Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endoscopy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- 700 1_
- $a Rubin, David T $u University of Chicago Medicine Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, Chicago, Illinois
- 700 1_
- $a Bressler, Brian $u University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- 700 1_
- $a Germinaro, Matthew $u Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Spring House, Pennsylvania
- 700 1_
- $a Huang, Kuan-Hsiang Gary $u Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Spring House, Pennsylvania
- 700 1_
- $a Shipitofsky, Nicole $u Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Spring House, Pennsylvania
- 700 1_
- $a Zhang, Hongyan $u Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Spring House, Pennsylvania
- 700 1_
- $a Wilson, Rebbecca $u Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Spring House, Pennsylvania
- 700 1_
- $a Han, Chenglong $u Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Spring House, Pennsylvania
- 700 1_
- $a Feagan, Brian G $u Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
- 700 1_
- $a Sandborn, William J $u University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
- 700 1_
- $a Panés, Julian $u Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBERehd, Barcelona, Spain
- 700 1_
- $a Hisamatsu, Tadakazu $u Kyorin University, Tokyo, Japan
- 700 1_
- $a Lichtenstein, Gary R $u University of Pennsylvania Health System, The Raymond and Ruth Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Gastroenterology Division, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- 700 1_
- $a Sands, Bruce E $u Dr. Henry D. Janowitz Division of Gastroenterology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
- 700 1_
- $a Dignass, Axel $u Department of Medicine I, Agaplesion Markus Hospital, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. Electronic address: Axel.Dignass@agaplesion.de
- 710 2_
- $a QUASAR Study Group
- 773 0_
- $w MED00001877 $t Gastroenterology $x 1528-0012 $g Roč. 165, č. 6 (2023), s. 1443-1457
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37659673 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20240109 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20240213093222 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2049266 $s 1210199
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2023 $b 165 $c 6 $d 1443-1457 $e 20230901 $i 1528-0012 $m Gastroenterology $n Gastroenterology $x MED00001877
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20240109