Preclinical data from a murine model of acute colitis has suggested that the combination therapy of guselkumab, an IL-23 inhibitor, and golimumab, a TNF inhibitor, may lead to improved outcomes in patients with UC [1]. A phase 2, proof-of-concept study (NCT03662542) was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of guselkumab plus golimumab compared with guselkumab or golimumab monotherapy in participants with moderately to severely active UC [2]. Participants (n=214) were randomised 1:1:1 to golimumab monotherapy (subcutaneous 200 mg at week 0, 100 mg at weeks 2, 6, and 10), guselkumab monotherapy (intravenous 200 mg at weeks 0, 4, and 8), or a combination of these 2 regimens (200 mg guselkumab intravenous plus 200 mg golimumab subcutaneous at week 0, 100 mg golimumab subcutaneous at weeks 2, 6, and 10, 200 mg guselkumab intravenous at week 4 and 8). The primary outcome was the clinical responsea at week 12. Prof. Bruce Sands (Mount Sinai School of Medicine, NY, USA) presented the results.
At week 12, the combination therapy significantly outperformed golimumab monotherapy (83.1% vs 61.1%; P=0.003) but not guselkumab monotherapy (83.1% vs 74.6%; P=0.215) regarding clinical response rates (see Figure). Clinical remissionb was significantly higher in the combination therapy arm (36.6%) compared with guselkumab alone (21.1%; P=0.041), and borderline significant compared with golimumab alone (22.2%; P=0.058). Furthermore, endoscopic improvementc significantly favoured the combination therapy over the monotherapy arms (P=0.003 for combination vs golimumab; P=0.016 for combination vs guselkumab) whereas for histologic remissiond the combination therapy was only significantly higher than golimumab monotherapy (P=0.003).
Figure: Clinical response of guselkumab, golimumab, or the combination at week 12 [2]
The safety profiles of the 3 treatment regimens were similar. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 52.8%, 43.7%, and 40.8% of the participants in the golimumab, guselkumab, and combination therapy arm, respectively. Corresponding proportions of serious AEs were 1.4%, 2.8%, and 1.4%. The proportion of infections did not differ between the treatment conditions, with 14.1% of the participants in the golimumab or combination therapy arm and 22.2% of the participants in the golimumab arm displaying an infection. No deaths, malignancies, or opportunistic infections were observed at week 12.
“Combination induction treatment with guselkumab plus golimumab resulted in greater proportions of patients achieving a clinical response, clinical remission, endoscopic improvement and normalisation, and the composite endpoint of histologic remission and endoscopic improvement at week 1,” concluded Prof. Sands. “Further study of this combination therapy is warranted.”
a. Clinical response is defined as a decrease in the Mayo score ≥30% and ≥3 points, with either a decrease in rectal bleeding subscore ≥1 or rectal bleeding subscore of 0 or 1.
b. Clinical remission is defined as a stool frequency subscore of 0 or 1, a rectal bleeding subscore of 0, and an endoscopy subscore of 0 or 1 with no friability present on endoscopy, where the stool frequency subscore has not increased from baseline.
c. Endoscopic improvement is defined as an endoscopy subscore of 0 or 1 with no friability present on the endoscopy.
d. Histologic remission is defined as absence of neutrophils of the mucosa, no crypts destruction, and no erosion, ulcerations, or granulation tissues according to the Geboes grading system.
- Perrigoue J, et al. In silico evaluation and pre-clinical efficacy of anti-TNF and anti-IL-23 combination therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. P328, ECCO 2022, 16–19 February.
- Sands BE, et al. Efficacy and safety of combination induction therapy with guselkumab and golimumab in participants with moderately-to-severely active Ulcerative Colitis: Results through week 12 of a phase 2a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, proof-of-concept study. OP36, ECCO 2022, 16–19 February.
Copyright ©2022 Medicom Medical Publishers
Posted on
Previous Article
« Combined endpoint may support personalised medicine in ulcerative colitis Next Article
Risankizumab more efficacious in colonic than in ileal Crohn’s disease »
« Combined endpoint may support personalised medicine in ulcerative colitis Next Article
Risankizumab more efficacious in colonic than in ileal Crohn’s disease »
Table of Contents: ECCO 2022
Featured articles
Upadacitinib maintenance therapy delivers sustained improvements in active ulcerative colitis
Novel Treatment Modalities
Guselkumab shows encouraging safety and efficacy in ulcerative colitis
Guselkumab maintenance therapy achieved high efficacy rates in Crohn’s disease
Mirikizumab efficacious for active ulcerative colitis
Risankizumab more efficacious in colonic than in ileal Crohn’s disease
Guselkumab plus golimumab promising combination for ulcerative colitis
Combined endpoint may support personalised medicine in ulcerative colitis
Filgotinib seems promising for perianal fistulising Crohn’s disease
Upadacitinib maintenance therapy delivers sustained improvements in active ulcerative colitis
Upadacitinib counters extraintestinal manifestations in ulcerative colitis
Deucravacitinib does not meet primary endpoint for ulcerative colitis
Head-to-Head Comparisons
Anti-TNFs versus vedolizumab and ustekinumab in Crohn’s disease
Upadacitinib appears to be an efficacious therapy for moderately-to-severely ulcerative colitis
Subcutaneous infliximab versus subcutaneous vedolizumab in IBD
Vedolizumab outperforms anti-TNF in biologic-naïve ulcerative colitis
Short-Term and Long-Term Treatment Results
Ozanimod treatment shows maintained response in ulcerative colitis
Stopping infliximab but not antimetabolites leads to more relapses in Crohn’s disease
Vedolizumab first approved therapy for chronic pouchitis
VEDOKIDS: Vedolizumab seems effective in paediatric IBD
Primary endpoint of 5-hydroxytryptophan for fatigue in IBD not met
Specific Therapeutic Strategies
Positive outcomes with therapeutic drug monitoring during infliximab maintenance therapy
Segmental colectomy beneficial over total colectomy in Chrohn’s disease
Modified 2-stage ileal pouch-anal anastomosis versus 3-stage alternative
Similar results for different corticosteroid tapering protocols in UC
Miscellaneous Topics
Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic for IBD management
AI model distinguishes between histologic activity and remission in ulcerative colitis
Multi-Omic and dietary analysis of Crohn’s disease identifies pathogenetic factors
Novel classification system for perianal fistulising Crohn’s disease
Vaccination tool associated with improved vaccination coverage in IBD
Comparable safety profiles of biological therapies in elderly patients with IBD
Early biologic therapy induces larger effect than delayed treatment in Crohn’s disease
RESTORE-UC: No better outcomes with FMT superdonors than with autologous stools
Related Articles
© 2024 Medicom Medical Publishers. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy
HEAD OFFICE
Laarderhoogtweg 25
1101 EB Amsterdam
The Netherlands
T: +31 85 4012 560
E: publishers@medicom-publishers.com