Introduction

Up to 40% of patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) do not respond to infliximab (IFX)(1) presumably due to insufficient drug exposure (1, 2). We investigated whether personalised IFX induction using predefined serum concentrations was superior to standard dosing.

Aims & Methods

In this prospective, multi-centre trial, adult IFX-naive steroid-refractory ASUC patients were randomised 1:1 to standard (SD) or personalised IFX dosing (PD). After an initial 5 mg/kg IFX infusion, SD was 5 mg/kg IFX at week 2 and 6. In PD, additional 5 mg/kg IFX infusions were administered guided by a Bayesian pharmacokinetic algorithm (iDose™) aiming at IFX serum concentrations >28 ug/mL day 0-28 and >15 ug/mL day 29-42 (3). The primary composite endpoint was clinical and endoscopic response at day 42 (Lichtiger score <10 and ≥3 points drop and UCEIS ≥2 points drop from baseline). Video-endoscopies were performed at baseline, day 42 and 182 and scored by 2 expert readers (XR) with adjudication by a third XR and post hoc also by the DovaVision UC AI tool (AI-R)(4). Key secondary endpoints were day 42 clinical response, day 42 endoscopic response, day 182 clinical remission (Lichtiger ≤3), day 182 endoscopic remission (UCEIS ≤1 on all components), and safety.

Results

48 patients were randomised (23 PD/25 SD) and 31 completed the 26-week study (19 PD/12 SD). Patient characteristics were comparable. Median cumulative IFX dose until day 42 was 18.41 mg/kg [1.77, 20.27] for PD vs 13.79 mg/kg [10.38, 14.82] for SD. The primary composite endpoint at day 42 was not met with XR (57% in PD vs 44% in SD; p=0.564). However, AI-R showed a significantly higher composite response rate in PD (74% in PD vs 32% in SD; p=0.0047). PD showed higher day 42 clinical response vs SD (91% vs 64%; p=0.039). Day 42 endoscopic response was observed in 57% in PD vs 44% in SD (p=0.564) with XR and 74% in PD vs 32% in SD with AI-R (p=0.0047). The proportion of patients in clinical and endoscopic remission at day 182 was higher in PD than in SD (65% vs 36%; p=0.082). Day 182 endoscopic remission with AI-R was higher in PD (52% in PD and 20% in SD; p=0.0337). SAEs occurred in 9% of patients on PD vs 20% of patients on SD. Following an interim analysis, the trial was discontinued based on futility.

Table 1. Baseline characteristics

Conclusion

Personalised IFX dosing was superior to standard dosing in ASUC when endoscopies were read by AI. This is the first IBD study where the primary endpoint, missed by expert assessment, was overturned and met by AI assessment instead. This demonstrates the potential of AI to fundamentally improve clinical trial methodology.

References

1. Seow CH, Newman A, Irwin SP, Steinhart AH, Silverberg MS, Greenberg GR. Trough serum infliximab: a predictive factor of clinical outcome for infliximab treatment in acute ulcerative colitis. Gut. 2010;59(1):49-54.
2. Papamichael K, Van Stappen T, Vande Casteele N, Gils A, Billiet T, Tops S, et al. Infliximab Concentration Thresholds During Induction Therapy Are Associated With Short-term Mucosal Healing in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14(4):543-9.
3. Ungar B, Mazor Y, Weisshof R, Yanai H, Ron Y, Goren I, et al. Induction infliximab levels among patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis compared with patients with moderately severe ulcerative colitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2016;43(12):1293-9.
4. Byrne M, Requa J, Panaccione R, Panes J, Bressler B, East JE, et al. Development and Validation of a novel AI-based computer vision solution for Ulcerative Colitis severity scoring on video for real world using high-volume expert-annotated video frames. United European Gastroenterol J. 2025 Oct.

Disclosure

This project received grant support from Pfizer Inc. and research support from Baysient LLC, Buhlmann Laboratories and Dova Health Intelligence.

Introduction

The BIOSTOP Trial is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label study conducted in Norway to evaluate the two-year outcomes of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF) antibody withdrawal in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) in sustained clinical and endoscopic remission. Prior non-randomized studies have suggested that approximately half of such patients maintain remission after anti-TNF discontinuation and that reintroduction of anti-TNF therapy is generally effective and safe in the event of relapse.

Aims & Methods

A total of 174 UC patients in confirmed clinical and endoscopic remission were enrolled across 19 gastroenterology centers between June 2017 and December 2020 and randomized 1:1 to either continue or discontinue anti-TNF therapy. Eligibility criteria included at least 12 months of first-line anti-TNF maintenance treatment, clinical remission, fecal calprotectin <200 µg/g, and endoscopic remission (Mayo endoscopic score 0 or 1). Two-year follow-up data were available for 172 patients (86 in each group). In 156 of the patients endoscopies were available for central reading (77 in the withdrawal group and 79 in the maintenance group). The primary endpoint was sustained endoscopic remission at two years.

Results

At two years, central reading of follow-up colonoscopies confirmed endoscopic remission in 64 of 77 patients (83%, 95% CI 71.8 – 93.1) in the anti-TNF withdrawal group, compared to 77 of 79 patients (96 %, 95 % CI 92.1 – 100.8) in the anti-TNF maintenance group. The non-inferiority primary endpoint of the study was thus not met. During the study period, 48% of patients in the withdrawal group and 88% in the maintenance group remained in sustained clinical and endoscopic remission without relapse. Among the 45 patients in the withdrawal group who experienced endoscopic confirmed relapse, 28 (62%) resumed anti-TNF therapy, with 26 achieving both clinical and endoscopic remission. Additionally, 10 of 13 patients with mild relapses achieved endoscopic remission with optimized non-biologic therapy. There were no difference in serious adverse events between the groups.

Conclusion

After two years, 83% of patients in the anti-TNF withdrawal group and 96% in the maintenance group were in clinical and endoscopic remission, including those who experienced flares and achieved new remission after reintroduction of anti-TNF or optimized non-biologic therapy. Nearly half of the patients maintained remission without anti-TNF, and the majority of relapses were effectively managed. These findings suggest that anti-TNF withdrawal is a safe option for selected UC patients in confirmed remission, provided they are monitored closely.
Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03011268; EudraCT Number: 2016-001409-18. Trial completion date: 31 January 2025.

Disclosure

No disclosures