Guselkumab in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: QUASAR Phase 2b Induction Study
Language English Country United States Media print-electronic
Document type Clinical Trial, Phase II, Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PubMed
37659673
DOI
10.1053/j.gastro.2023.08.038
PII: S0016-5085(23)04963-6
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- Advanced Therapy, Interleukin-23p19 Subunit Antagonist, QUASAR, Ulcerative Colitis,
- MeSH
- Double-Blind Method MeSH
- Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized adverse effects MeSH
- Immunosuppressive Agents therapeutic use MeSH
- Remission Induction MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Colitis, Ulcerative * diagnosis drug therapy complications MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Clinical Trial, Phase II MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
- Names of Substances
- guselkumab MeSH Browser
- Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized MeSH
- Immunosuppressive Agents 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 Medicine 1 Agaplesion Markus Hospital Goethe University Frankfurt Germany
Hospital Clínic de Barcelona IDIBAPS CIBERehd Barcelona Spain
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
References provided by Crossref.org
ClinicalTrials.gov
NCT04033445