Introduction

The safety and efficacy of mirikizumab (miri), an anti-IL-23p19 antibody, for moderately-to-severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) have been shown in Phase 3 trials (LUCENT-1 and -2; NCT03518086, NCT03524092). Extended induction with 3 additional intravenous (IV) doses of miri induced clinical response at Week (W)24 in more than 50% of patients who did not initially achieve clinical response to induction with miri at W12. Among the clinical non-responders, some had achieved partial response at W12 (Table 1). We assessed response over time in clinical non-responders at the end of induction who received extended induction with miri for an additional 12W.

Aims & Methods

In LUCENT-1, patients (N=1281) were randomly assigned 3:1 to receive miri 300mg or placebo IV at W0, W4, and W8. Patients not achieving clinical response with miri 300mg IV at W12 of LUCENT-1 (n=272) received extended induction treatment with open-label miri 300mg IV at W12, W16, and W20 (LUCENT-2). Symptomatic remission, symptomatic response, bowel urgency (BU) remission, and BU change from baseline at W16 and W20 are reported (definitions in Table 1) in addition to the previously disclosed outcomes at W24. For categorical variables, number and percentage of patients who are responders/remitters were presented. For continuous variables, mean change from baseline with standard deviation (SD) was used. Missing data were imputed as non-response.

Results

Among patients who were clinical non-responders to 12W of initial induction treatment (n=272), 53 (19.5%); 73 (26.8%); 101 (37.1%) achieved symptomatic remission and 144 (52.9%); 169 (62.1%); 197 (72.4%) patients achieved symptomatic response at W16, W20, and W24, respectively. Among miri induction non-responders with Urgency Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score ≥3 at induction baseline (n=256), 10.9% achieved BU remission at W16, 14.8% at W20, and 19.9% at W24. There was a 1.8±2.4 (mean±SD) point reduction in Urgency NRS scores at W16, 2.1±2.5 reduction at W20, and 2.5±2.7 reduction at W24 (Table 1).

Conclusion

Among patients who were clinical non-responders to induction at W12, more than 50% achieved clinical response after 3 additional induction doses with miri. A proportion of patients benefited earlier from extended induction at W16 and W20, respectively, regarding symptomatic response and remission, and BU outcomes. The results demonstrate continued symptomatic improvement and further support the potential benefit of extended induction treatment.

Disclosure

DR receives grants or contracts from Takeda, and discloses consultancy fees with Abbvie, Altrubio, Allergan, Inc., American College of Gastroenterology, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Athos Therapeutics, Bellatrix Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ltd., Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corp/Syneos, Cornerstones Health, Inc. (non-profit), GalenPharma/Atlantica, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, GoDuRn, LLC, InDex Pharmaceuticals, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Iterative Scopes, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly and Company, Materia Prima, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Reistone, Takeda and Techlab, Inc.
AC is on the advisory board of and/or a consultant for and/or receives educational grants from Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda.
VJ has received consulting/advisory board fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv Inc. (formerly Robarts Clinical Trials), Arena Pharmaceuticals, Asieris, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Sandoz, Takeda and TopiVert, and speaker’s fees from AbbVie, Ferring, Galapagos, Janssen, Pfizer, Shire and Takeda.
JW has received consultancy or advisory board fees from Medtronic and Eli Lilly and Company.
KM, RM,SM, RE, SB are employees and minor shareholders of Eli Lilly and Company
LZ-P is an employee of HaaPACS GmbH and contractor for Eli Lilly and Company
TK has received lecture fees from Abbie GK, Activaid, Alfresa Pharma, Janssen Pharmaceutical, JIMRO, Kyorin Pharmaceutical, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Nippon Kayaku, Pfizer Japan, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Thermo Fisher Diagnostics and Zeria Pharmaceutical; research grants from Abbvie GK, Activaid, Alfresa Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly Japan, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceutical, JMDC, Mochida Pharmaceutical, Nippon Kayaku, Pfizer Japan and Takeda Pharmaceutical; scholarship contributions from Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Nippon Kayaku and Zeria Pharmaceutical; study group sponsorship by Abbvie GK, EA Pharma, JIMRO, Kyorin Pharmaceutical, Mochida Pharmaceutical, Otsuka Holdings and Zeria Pharmaceutical; and advisory or consultancy fees from Abbie GK, Activaid, Alfresa Pharma, EA Pharma, Janssen Pharmaceutical, KISSEI Pharmaceutical, Kyorin Pharmaceutical, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Mochida Pharmaceutical, Nippon Kayaku, Pfizer Japan and Takeda Pharmaceutical.

Introduction

A dysfunctional intestinal mucosal barrier is a key pathophysiological hallmark and driver of a broad range of gastrointestinal diseases including celiac disease and inflammatory bowel disease. To date, there are no adequate treatment strategies to ameliorate impaired barrier function.
IMU-856 is an orally available and systemically acting small molecule modulator of sirtuin 6 (SIRT6), a histone/non-histone protein deacetylase which serves as a transcriptional regulator of intestinal barrier function and regeneration of bowel epithelium. IMU-856 may represent a new approach to treat gastrointestinal diseases with compromised barrier function.

Aims & Methods

This was a first-in-human, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of IMU-856 in healthy volunteers and patients with celiac disease. In the multiple ascending dose part, healthy human subjects were dosed once-daily for 14 consecutive days with IMU-856 at three different dose levels or placebo. Additionally, the Phase 1/1b study was designed to assess safety and tolerability of IMU-856 at two different dose levels in patients with celiac disease during periods of gluten-free diet and a 15-day gluten challenge. Further objectives included pharmacokinetics and the assessment of histological changes. Biomarkers reflecting intestinal enterocyte mass and function, nutrient absorption, and enteroendocrine hormones like GLP-1 were analyzed to assess potential effects on gut health.

Results

IMU-856 was safe and well-tolerated with a benign adverse event profile and pharmacokinetics that allow once-daily dosing. Treatment with IMU-856 protected against gluten-induced histologic deterioration, improved the health and metabolic function of intestinal enterocytes as measured by nutrient uptake and citrulline [1], and had positive effects on enteroendocrine cells increasing endogenous GLP-1 levels in a dose-dependent manner.

Conclusion

IMU-856 is a safe, highly selective and potent epigenetic modulator, improving the intestinal barrier function in patients with celiac disease undergoing a gluten challenge.
Positive effects of IMU-856 on gut hormones and various biomarkers for overall gut health including intestinal function and integrity were observed. Therefore, IMU-856 may offer extensive potential for treatment of gastrointestinal diseases with compromised intestinal barrier function and metabolic diseases.

References

1. Daveson AJM, Stubbs R, Polasek TM, Isola J, Anderson R, Tye-Din JA, et al. Safety, clinical activity, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics of IMU-856, a SIRT6 modulator, in coeliac disease: a first-in-human, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 trial.

Disclosure

AS, MW, EP: employees of Immunic AG, option and shareholders of Immunic, Inc.
IPO, JF, IK, SE: employees of Immunic AG, option and/or shareholders of Immunic, Inc.
HK: employee of Immunic AG, shareholder of Immunic, Inc., co-inventor of patents for the drug in investigation
DP: option holder of Immunic, Inc.
DV, AM: employees of Immunic AG and Immunic, Inc., shareholders of Immunic, Inc., co-inventors of patents for the drug in investigation

Introduction

Side effects, patient preference, and high costs may prompt cessation of anti-TNF therapy in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients in sustained remission. Given the risk of relapse, careful patient selection is essential. This study aimed to assess relapse rates and identify predictors of relapse following anti-TNF cessation in UC patients in remission.

Aims & Methods

A systematic search on cohort studies reporting relapse rates after cessation of anti-TNF therapy in ≥30 UC patients in clinical remission was performed 6 September 2024. Individual patient data was requested. We excluded patients with steroid use, ≤6 months anti-TNF therapy, ≤16 years, previous colectomy (n=4), golimumab as anti-TNF therapy (n=3) or without follow-up. Continuation of treatment with immunomodulators or mesalamine at cessation of anti-TNF was allowed. Relapse was defined as the need to (re)start treatment with steroids, anti-TNF or other advanced therapies, or the need for surgical treatment, as applied by the original author. Pooled relapse rates were computed using a random-effects model. A prediction model was built with a Cox proportional hazards model, performance assessed by iteratively leaving one study out (internal-external cross-validation, IECV). Missing covariate data were multiply imputed 100 times using the MICE algorithm. Variable selection was guided by three criteria: ≤20% missing data, a univariate p-value ≤ 0.2, and input from clinical experts.

Results

In total, 654 patients from 8 studies were included in the individual participant data meta-analysis. At anti-TNF cessation, median age was 40 years (IQR 31-51) with a median anti-TNF treatment of 18 months (IQR 18-36). The majority of patients were treated with infliximab (n = 610, 93%). Only 42 patients (9%) received a second-line anti-TNF therapy. The pooled relapse rate were 24% [95% CI 19-29%, I² = 44%] and 34% [95% CI 29-40%, I² = 39] at 1 and 2 years after cessation, respectively. Upon cessation, 211 patients (33%) continued mesalamine, 239 (39%) thiopurines, and 136 (22%) a combination of both. In our model, thiopurine therapy and older age at cessation were associated with a reduced risk of relapse, whereas immunomodulator refractoriness as an indication for starting anti-TNF therapy was associated with an increased risk. Other factors included in the prediction model were disease extent, type of anti-TNF therapy, history of anti-TNF therapy, fecal calprotectin level and endoscopic activity, leading to a c statistic of 0.55 [95% CI 0.51-0.59] (Table 1).

Table 1: Predictors of relapse in a pooled Cox regression analysis

Conclusion

Approximately 1 in 4 patients experience a relapse of UC within 1 year after anti-TNF cessation, increasing to 1 in 3 within 2 years. Continuation of thiopurines is associated with a reduced risk. A prediction model for relapse was developed in this large IPD meta-analysis cohort and may aid in shared decision-making on anti-TNF cessation. However, its limited discriminative ability underscores the need for further refinement, incorporating data on microscopic remission and molecular and immunological markers to better capture deeper disease control.

Introduction

Guselkumab (GUS) is a dual-acting IL-23p19 subunit inhibitor that potently neutralizes IL-23 and binds to CD64, a receptor on cells that produce IL-23. In the QUASAR studies, GUS intravenous (IV) induction and subcutaneous (SC) maintenance demonstrated symptomatic, endoscopic, and histologic efficacy through 2 years.^1,2 Here, we describe maintenance of endoscopic and histologic efficacy in the long-term extension (LTE).

Aims & Methods

At maintenance week (W) 0, GUS IV induction responders were randomized 1:1:1 to GUS 100 mg SC every 8 weeks (q8w), GUS 200 mg SC q4w or placebo (GUS withdrawal). Participants (pts) completing the W44 visit could enter the LTE and continue the treatment regimen they were receiving at W44. Placebo pts discontinued after study unblinding. Efficacy data for randomized pts who continued to receive their GUS regimen assigned at W0 in the LTE were analyzed using 2 methods: 1) nonresponder imputation (NRI) accounting for pts with treatment failure or missing data, and 2) “as observed.”

Results

Overall, 303 randomized pts (155 for 100 mg q8w and 148 for 200 mg q4w) continued their GUS treatment assigned at W0 in the LTE. Of pts who achieved endoscopic improvement at W44, 87.2% of GUS 100 mg q8w pts and 80.2% GUS 200 mg q4w pts maintained endoscopic improvement through W92 (NRI analysis; Table). Of pts who achieved histologic improvement at W44, 77.9% and 75.2%, respectively, maintained histologic improvement at W92. Of pts who achieved histo-endoscopic mucosal improvement (HEMI) at W44, 73.5% and 75.5%, respectively, maintained HEMI through W92. Of pts who were in histologic remission at W44, 71.2% maintained histologic remission at W92 in both GUS groups. Results of the as-observed analysis were consistent with the NRI analysis; the dropout rate was low among GUS-treated pts in the LTE. Proportions of pts who maintained endoscopic and histologic outcomes from W0 to W92 are presented in the Table.

Conclusion

High rates of long-term sustained endoscopic and histologic endpoints were observed at W92 of the LTE with both GUS dose regimens.

References

1. Rubin DT, et al. Guselkumab in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (QUASAR): phase 3 double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled induction and maintenance studies. Lancet. 2025;405(10472):33-49.
2. Lichtenstein GR, et al. Efficacy and safety of guselkumab for ulcerative colitis through week 92 of the QUASAR long-term extension study. Presented at: Digestive Disease Week (DDW); May 4–6, 2025; San Diego, CA.

Disclosure

Study support: Johnson & Johnson.
TH: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, EA Pharma Co, Ltd., JIMRO, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Johnson & Johnson, Kissei Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd., Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Nippon Kayaku Co., Ltd., Pfizer Inc, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
JP: AbbVie, Alimentiv, Athos, Atomwise, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celsius, Ferring, Galapagos, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Mirum, Nimbus, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus, Protagonist, Revolo, Sanofi, Sorriso, Surrozen, Takeda, Wasserman.
FM: AbbVie, Arena, Celltrion, Eli Lilly and Company, Ferring, Fresenius, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Roche, Sandoz, Tillots, Takeda, Teva.
GRL: AbbVie, American College of Gastroenterology, CellCeutrix, Celgene, Clinical Advances in Gastroenterology, Ferring, Gastroenterology and Hepatology [Gastro-Hep Communications], Gilead, Johnson & Johnson, Orthobiotech, Eli Lilly, Luitpold / American Regent, Merck, McMahon Publishing, Pfizer, Prometheus, Romark, Salix/ Valeant, Shire, SLACK, Springer, Takeda, UCB, Up-To-Date, Vindico, Virgo.
JRA: Abbvie, Bristol Myer Squibb, Ferring, Finch, Iterative Scopes, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Pfizer, Roivant, Seres Therapeutics, Roivant Adiso.
BB: AbbVie, Alimentiv, Allergan, Amgen, AMT, Bausch Health, Bristol Myers Squibb, Business Intelligence, Celgene, Celltrion, Eupraxia Fresenius Kabi, Ferring, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, Iterative Scopes, GlaxoSmithKline, Jamp, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Microbiome Insights, Mylan, Novartis, Organon, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist, Qu Biologic, Sandoz, Takeda, Viatris.
WA: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Dynacare, Eli-Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus, Sandoz, Sanofi, Takeda, Theradiag.
MAS: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Falk, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Sanofi, STADA, Takeda, Tillotts.
BDY: AbbVie Korea, BMS Pharmaceutical Korea Ltd., Celltrion, Chong Kun Dang Pharm, CJ Red BIO, Cornerstones Health, Curacle, Daewoong Pharm, Dong-A ST, Eisai Korea, Eli Lilly and Company Korea, Ferring Korea, Imscout, IQVIA, Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson Korea, JEIL PHARMACEUTICAL CO., Kangstem Biotech, Korea Otsuka Pharm, Korea United Pharm, Medtronic Korea, NanoEntek, ORGANOIDSCIENCES LTD, Pfizer Korea, Samsung Bioepis, Takeda, Takeda Korea, Yuhan.
SY, MG, NS, DP, YM, HZ: Johnson & Johnson.
AD: Abivax, AbbVie, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CED Service GmbH, Celltrion, Dr Falk Foundation, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilead, High5MD, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Materia Prima, MedToday, MSD, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Roche, Sandoz, Stada, Takeda, Thieme, Tillotts, UniMed Verlag, Vifor Pharma.
DTR: Abbvie, Altrubio, Apex, Avalo Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Buhlmann Diagnostics Corp, Celgene, Connect BioPharma, Intouch Group, Iterative Health, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Pfizer, Samsung Neurologica, Takeda.
BES: AbbVie, Abivax, Adiso Therapeutics, Agomab, Alimentiv, Amgen, AnaptysBio, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Biolojic Design, Biora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Equillium, Enthera, Enveda Biosciences, Evommune, Ferring, Galapagos, Genentech (Roche), Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Gossamer Bio, Imhotex, Index Pharmaceuticals, Innovation Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Johnson & Johnson, Kaleido, Kallyope, Lilly, Merck, Microba, Mirador Therapeutics, Mobius Care, Morphic Therapeutics, MRM Health, Nexus Therapeutics, Nimbus Discovery, Odyssey Therapeutics, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus Biosciences, Prometheus Laboratories, Protagonist Therapeutics, Q32 Bio, Rasayana Therapeutics, Recludix Therapeutics, Reistone Biopharma, Sanofi, Sorriso Pharmaceuticals, Spyre Therapeutics, Sun Pharma, Surrozen, Takeda, Target RWE, Teva, TLL Pharmaceutical, Tr1X, Union Therapeutics, Ventyx Biosciences, and Vividion Therapeutics.