Tag Archives: ustekinumab

Comparative Efficacy: Infliximab vs. Ustekinumab

Posted on by

ECL Wong et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2023; 29: 1015-1023. Open Access! Comparative Efficacy of Infliximab vs Ustekinumab for Maintenance of Clinical Response in Biologic Naïve Crohn’s Disease

This post hoc analysis included data from separate trials examined the response of 220 biologic-naïve CD participants to either inflximab biosimilar or ustekinumab.

Key findings:

  • Clinical remission: One-year clinical remission (CR) and corticosteroid-free CR rates were similar between infliximab-treated and ustekinumab-treated patients (CR, 66 of 110 [60.0%] vs 63 of 110 [57.3%]; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.15), corticosteroid-free CR, 11 of 28 (39.3%) vs 27 of 51 [52.9%]; aOR, 0.58)
  • Endoscopic response/remission:  infliximab-treated participants were more likely to achieve 1-year endoscopic response (43 of 92 [46.7%] vs 6 of 30 [20.0%], aOR, 3.59) and endoscopic remission (31 of 92 [33.7%] vs 4 of 30 [13.3%]; aOR, 3.35)

In the discussion, the authors note only 1 head-to-head study in CD with ustekinumab. “The SEAVUE trial (NCT03464136) compared adalimumab and ustekinumab among biologic-naïve CD patients. Ustekinumab demonstrated similar efficacy for the achievement of clinical and endoscopic outcomes compared with adalimumab.23 Similar rates of CR at 1 year were reported in SEAVUE (64.9% ustekinumab vs 61% adalimumab) as in our analysis (57.3% ustekinumab vs 60% infliximab)…ustekinumab demonstrated longer retention and lower immunogenicity and has practical advantages over adalimumab, including less frequent dosing intervals (every 8 weeks for ustekinumab vs every 2 weeks for adalimumab) while providing similar efficacy.”

My take: This study suggests that infliximab may be a little better than ustekimumab in biologic-naive patients due to the higher endoscopic response; however, the study was unpowered to provide a definitive answer. A prior study suggested similar endoscopic healing rates (P Riviere et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2023; 29: 923-931).

Related blog posts:

Waters off the Cap d’Ail Trail (near Eze, France)

Which is a More Effective First-Line for Crohn’s Disease: Ustekinumab or anti-TNF agents?

Posted on by

P Riviere et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2023; 29: 923-931. Comparative Effectiveness of Ustekinumab and Anti-TNF Agent as First-Line Biological Therapy in Luminal Crohn’s Disease: A Retrospective Study From 2 Referral Centers

A previous study (SEAVUE) has suggested similar efficacy of ustekinumab and adalimumab in biologic-naive patients (post: SEAVUE: Head-to-Head Ustekimumab vs. Adalimumab) with ~60-65% clinical response at 52 weeks and ~30% endoscopic remission.

This current retrospective study sought to obtain ‘real-world’ data comparing anti-TNF agents (95 adalimumab, 61 infliximab) to ustekinumab (n=50). In the anti-TNF group, 44% (n=68) received concomitant immunomodulator therapy. Key findings:

  •  At 3 months, clinical response rates were 86% in anti-TNF groups and 64% in the ustekinumab.
  • At 12 months, in adjusted multivariate analysis, clinical remission (based on Harvey-Bradshaw Index) was independently associated with the biological therapy received (odds ratio, 2.6 for anti-TNF agent vs ustekinumab; P = .02).
  • “In our sensitivity analysis, a significant difference in terms of efficacy was only found between infliximab and ustekinumab.”
  • In those with ileocolonoscopy, endoscopic healing was similar (between 6-18 months): 58% of anti-TNF group and 61% of ustekinumab group.
  • 2% of patients in the anti-TNF group had severe adverse events compared to none in the ustekinumab group; among patients receiving adalimumab, 1 patient had cerebral aspergillosis, 1 had a postinfectious macrophage activation syndrome, and 1 had severe folliculitis needing abscess drainage.
  • Drug persistence at 12 months was 87% in anti-TNF group and 88% in ustekinumab group.

The discussion notes that ‘real-world’ data is important as only ~30% of patients in a regular practice would fulfill the criteria to be included in clinical trials. However, in this retrospective (non-randomized) study, there were differences in the patient population that could affect response to treatment, including a higher rate of smokers in the anti-TNF group (29% compared to 12% in the ustekinumab group).

My take: While anti-TNF therapy, particularly infliximab, may be a little better based on clinical remission, the most objective marker of efficacy, endoscopic healing, was similar. Thus, it is not clear if anti-TNF therapy is more effective than ustekinumab. To achieve optimal results, many in the anti-TNF group received immunomodulator cotherapy and dose escalation.

Related blog posts:

Joel Andres, Chef & Philanthropist, World Central Kitchen

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

Treatments for “Bad” Inflammatory Bowel Disease (Part 1)

Posted on by

Generally, in my view, “bad” inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) occurs when treatments are not working; though, many would argue that any IBD is bad IBD. Over the next few days, reviewed articles will focus on the problem of IBD that is not responding well to treatment.

A Yerushalmy-Feler et al. JPGN 2022; 75: 717-723. Safety and Potential Efficacy of Escalating Dose of Ustekinumab in Pediatric Crohn Disease (the Speed-up Study): A Multicenter Study from the Pediatric IBD Porto Group of ESPGHAN

In this retrospective study with 69 children with Crohn’s disease (CD) from 25 centers, the authors looked at the effectiveness of ustekinumab (UST) dose escalation which entailed reducing frequency to less than every 8 weeks. Most children were biologic (98.6%)- and immunomodulator (86.8%)- experienced.

Key findings:

  • Clinical response and remission were observed at 3 months after UST escalation in 46 (67%) and 29 (42%) children, respectively.
  • Fecal calprotectin level from 1100 (500–2300) to 515 (250–1469) µg/g (P = 0.012) 3 months post-escalation
  • Endoscopic and transmural healing were achieved in 3 of 19 (16%) and 2 of 15 (13%) patients, respectively

In their discussion, the authors note that UST has not received FDA approval despite the fact that it has become a common second- and third-line biologic therapy for pediatric CD.

My take: This study supports the common practice of escalation of UST for children with active CD despite treatment at every 8 weeks.

Related Ustekinumab Studies:

Related blog posts:

Deepdene Park, Atlanta. Part of Olmstead Linear Park

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

Improving MRE Utility in Pediatric Crohn’s

Posted on by

G Focht et al. Gastroenterol 2022; 163: 1306-1320. Open Access! Development, Validation, and Evaluation of the Pediatric Inflammatory Crohn’s Magnetic Resonance Enterography Index From the ImageKids Study

In this prospective study of children (n-240) with Crohn’s disease, the authors utilized ileocolonoscopy and MREs (n=159) and followed for 18 months.

Key findings:

  • 5 MRE findings were identified to generate a PICMI (Pediatric Inflammatory Crohn’s Magnetic Resonance Enterography Index): wall thickness, wall diffusion weighted imaging, ulcerations, mesenteric edema, and comb sign
  • In the validation cohort of 81 MREs, the weighted global PICMI correlated well with the radiologist global assessment (r = 0.85; P < .001) and with the simple endoscopic score in a subsample with ileocolonic disease (r = 0.63; P < .001).
  •  Interobserver and test-retest reliability were high (interclass correlation coefficients, 0.84 and 0.81, respectively; both P < .001)
  • Transmural healing was defined as PICMI ≤10 and response as a change of >20 points with excellent discriminative validity (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.96

My take: This study identifies a specific MRI index (PICMI) that is reliable for assessing the entire bowel in pediatric CD and does not require intravenous gadolinium or rectal enema. By using a standardized tool, similar to SEMA-CD for ileocolonoscopy, this will improve the usefulness of MREs.

Also noted: Link: Clinical support tool (sponsored by AGA) that provides individualized information on 2nd line therapy effectiveness (ustekinumab and vedolizumab) with regard to probability of achieving clinical remission, how quick to expect a response, and whether therapeutic drug monitoring is needed.

Related blog posts:

IBD Updates: Dietary Patterns and Disease Activity, Ustekinumab in SUSTAIN study, INSPECT Study for Perianal Fistulas

Posted on by

BN Limketkai et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2022; 28: 1627-1636. Open Access! Dietary Patterns and Their Association With Symptoms Activity in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. This retrospective study with dietary surveys of 691 participants found the following:

  • Compared with WD1 (typical Western Diet), PB2 (Plant-based diet 2) was associated with lower odds of active symptoms for CD (odds ratio [OR], 0.32
  • PB1 (Plant-based diet 1) was associated with lower odds of active symptoms for participants with UC (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.23-0.90) but not for participants with CD (OR, 0.95

Diet PB1 (“Plant-based Diet 1”) was characterized by much higher intake of fruits, vegetables, plant-based proteins, and cooked grains than most other dietary clusters. There was low water intake in favor of juices and other beverages. There was otherwise average intake of added fats and oils, sugars, seafood, and dairy products, and modest intake of meats, eggs, mixed grains, and breads.

Diet PB2 (“Plant-based Diet 2”) was characterized by high intake of fruits, vegetables, plant proteins, and cooked grains and low intake of animal proteins (especially red and cured meats), added fats, sweetened beverages, sweet bakery products, other desserts, eggs, and breads. There was also a reduction of other beverages in favor of water. There was otherwise an average intake of seafood and dairy products.

M Chaparro et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2022; 28: 1725-1736. Open Access! Long-Term Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Ustekinumab in Crohn’s Disease Patients: The SUSTAIN Study In this retrospective study, 97% of the 463 patients had received prior biological therapy.

  • At week 16, 56% had remission, 70% had response
  • 26.1% required dose escalation or intensification
  • After a median follow-up of 15 months, 356 (77%) patients continued treatment.
  • Previous intestinal surgery and concomitant steroid treatment were associated with higher risk of ustekinumab discontinuation.
  • Neither concomitant immunosuppressants nor the number of previous biologics were associated with ustekinumab discontinuation risk

J Panes et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2022; 28: 1737-1745. Open Access! INSPECT: A Retrospective Study to Evaluate Long-term Effectiveness and Safety of Darvadstrocel in Patients With Perianal Fistulizing Crohn’s Disease Treated in the ADMIRE-CD Trial

Background: The current chart review study evaluated the longer-term effectiveness and safety of darvadstrocel (expanded allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells).; n=43 treated patient and n=46 controls.

Key findings:

  • At 52, 104, and 156 weeks posttreatment, clinical remission was observed in 29 (67.4%) of 43, 23 (53.5%) of 43, and 23 (53.5%) of 43 darvadstrocel-treated patients, compared with 24 (52.2%) of 46, 20 (43.5%) of 46, and 21 (45.7%) of 46 control subjects, respectively.

SEAVUE: Head-to-Head Ustekimumab vs. Adalimumab

Posted on by

BE Sands et al.Lancet 2022; 399: 2200-2211. Ustekinumab versus adalimumab for induction and maintenance therapy in biologic-naive patients with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3b trial

Methods: This was  “a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, active-comparator, phase 3b trial (SEAVUE) at 121 hospitals or private practices in 18 countries. We included biologic-naive patients aged 18 years or older with moderately to severely active Crohn’s…Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1; via an interactive web response system) to receive ustekinumab (approximately 6 mg/kg intravenously on day 0, then 90 mg subcutaneously once every 8 weeks) or adalimumab (160 mg on day 0, 80 mg at 2 weeks, then 40 mg once every 2 weeks, subcutaneously) through week 56. Study treatments were administered as monotherapy and without dose modifications.”

386 patients were enrolled.

Key findings:

  • 29 (15%) of 191 patients in the ustekinumab group and 46 (24%) of 195 in the adalimumab group discontinued study treatment before week 52
  • At week 52, 124 (65%) of 191 patients in the ustekinumab group versus 119 (61%) of 195 in the adalimumab group were in clinical remission (CDAI <150)
  • Endoscopic remission at week 52: ustekinumab 29% and for adalimumab 29%
  • Endoscopic response at week 52: ustekinumab 42%and for adalimumab 37%
  • Rapid onset of clinical response was seen with both therapies with improvement noted as early as week 2 assessment
  • Antidrug antibodies were less frequent with ustekinumab compared to adalimumab: 2% vs 74%.
  • Infections were reported in 65 (34%) of ustekinumab group compared to 79 (41%) of adalimumab group. Serious infections were reported in four (2%) of 191 patients in the ustekinumab group and five (3%) of 195 in the adalimumab group.
  • No deaths occurred through week 52 of the study.

My take:

  1. Both medications had a high similar response rate. Ustekinumab had fewer patients discontinue medication and lower immunogenicity which could improve efficacy/duration of response in an extended study.
  2. It is good to see a well-designed head-to-head study rather than a placebo-control arm. Placebo-based studies are hard to justify given the availability of multiple effective agents.

Near Denali, AK

Head-to-Head (Sort of): Infliximab vs Ustekinumab for Crohn’s Disease

Posted on by

N Narula et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20: 1579-1587. Comparative Efficacy and Rapidity of Action for Infliximab vs Ustekinumab in Biologic Naïve Crohn’s Disease

Using a post hoc analysis of 2 large Crohn’s disease (CD) trial with 420 biologic-naive adult patients, the authors found the following Key Findings:

  • At week 6, a comparable number of patients achieved clinical remission with infliximab compared with patients treated with ustekinumab (44.9% vs 37.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.22)
  • At week 6 the clinical response rates were not significantly different (58.4% infliximab vs 54.9% ustekinumab; aOR, 1.25)
  • At week 6, 42.3% infliximab vs 34.7% ustekinumab had fecal calprotectin level less than 250 mcg/L in those with increased values at baseline

My take: A true head-to-head trial, rather than a post-hoc analysis, would more definitively determine relative efficacy and relative time to response. This study indicates that both agents have similar efficacy by week 6.

Related blog posts:

Fountain at Forsyth Park in Savannah

Can You Give Ustekinumab Subcutaneously After IV Reaction?

Posted on by

J Sunny et al. JPGN Reports: May 2022 – Volume 3 – Issue 2 – p e205 Open Access: Hypersensitivity Reaction to Ustekinumab in Pediatric and Young Adult Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: A Case Series

This is a case series of six pediatric patients and young adults who developed hypersensitivity reactions during intravenous infusion with ustekinumab (UST).

Key findings:

  • Hypersensitivity reactions during intravenous (IV) induction dose of UST, ranging from mild allergic reactions to anaphylaxis, with no antibodies detected in the two who had testing
  • Reactions occurred 0-30 minutes after start of infusion
  • Management was with methylprednisolone in 5 of 6 patients, diphendyramine in 3 of 6, and epinephrine in 1. One patient was managed with IV diphenhydramine alone.
  • Four of six continued with UST subcutaneously without reactions. ***Change of formulation of UST from IV to subcutaneous was done in a controlled hospital-based setting. The other two 33% were switched to another biologic due to physician preference and were never exposed to the subcutaneous formulation
  • Although the exact pathogenesis of this infusion reaction remains unknown, it has been attributed to EDTA

My take: It appears that patients with UST hypersensitivity reactions can be changed to SC formulation. The authors recommend to trial a subcutaneous dose of UST in a controlled setting; in addition, they suggest testing with skin prick testing or specific IgE levels to EDTA done by allergy and immunology.

Related blog posts:

Sandia Mountain, near Albuquerque

IBD Shorts: Ustekinumab in Kids, Subcutaenous Infliximab, Nutrition Highlights

Posted on by

MT Dolinger et al. J Crohns Colitis 2022.  doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac055. Online ahead of print. Outcomes of Children With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Who Develop Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Induced Skin Reactions

In this retrospective study, among those who developed skin reactions to anti-TNF agents, 71 (64%) continued anti-TNF and 40 (36%) switched to ustekinumab (UST). Key findings:

  • Switching to UST had a higher rate and odds of resolution of skin findings (29/40 (73%) vs. 24/71 (34%); p <0.0001) and combined remission (21 (52%) vs. 22 (31%); p=0.03) vs. continuing anti-TNF at 6 months

PJ Smith et al. J Crohns Colitis, jjac053, https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac053 Open Access: Efficacy and Safety of Elective Switching From Intravenous to Subcutaneous Infliximab (Ct-P13): A Multi-Centre Cohort Study

Patients (n=181) on established maintenance IV infliximab who switched to SC CT-P13 were included in this retrospective multi-centre cohort study. Key findings:

  • Treatment persistence rate was high (N=167, 92.3%) and only 14 patients (7.7%) stopped treatment during the follow-up period. There were low rates of immunogenicity with no change in clinical disease activity indices or biomarkers

Link: Crohn’s and Colitis Congress 2022 Nutritional Highlights (Nutritional Therapy for IBD Website). This website has a summaries, and links to extensive information (videos/posters) from recent IBD meeting.

Sunrise in Sandy Springs (4/9/22) -no filter

Ustekinumab vs Adalimumab: Head-to-Head Study

Posted on by

From Gastroenterology & Endoscopy News: Head-to-Head Trial Shows Similar Efficacy and Safety With Ustekinumab and Adalimumab

An excerpt:

The first head-to-head trial comparing ustekinumab and adalimumab has found the two drugs are similarly safe and effective in patients with moderate to severe Crohn’s disease…

Dr. Scherl and her co-investigators in the SEAVUE trial randomly assigned 386 biologic-naive patients with Crohn’s disease to receive one year of treatment with either ustekinumab or adalimumab at standard on-label doses, with no dose escalation throughout the study period and no concomitant immunomodulators...

The findings, which were presented at the 2021 annual meeting of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation (oral presentation OP02), showed that after one year of treatment, 65% of patients who received ustekinumab and 61% of those who received adalimumab achieved clinical remission, defined as a CDAI below 150...[And] similar additional outcomes, including clinical response at one year (72.3% for ustekinumab vs. 66.2% for adalimumab), corticosteroid-free remission at one year (60.7% vs. 57.4%, respectively), endoscopic remission at one year (28.5% vs. 30.7%) 

My take: This study indicates that ustekinumab likely has similar safety and efficacy as adalimumab (though the study did not allow dose escalation or immunomodulators); thus, it could be positioned as a first-line treatment. It is administered less frequently as well.

Related blog posts: