Introduction
To compare the efficacy of different modalities of FMT to induce clinical remission in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC).
Aims & Methods
We performed a systematic review and network analysis (random effects model) of randomized controlled trials including at least one arm of FMT in
adult patients with active UC.
Primary endpoint, i.e. clinical remission (total Mayo score ≤ 2 with Mayo endoscopic score ≤ 1), was assessed between week 6 and 12. Results are expressed as relative risk with 95% confidence intervals, adjusted for bowel cleansing and pre-FMT antibiotics therapy.
Ranking of FMT modalities for clinical remission was calculated as their surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA), which represents the percentage of efficacy achieved by an agent compared with an imaginary agent that is always the best without uncertainty. Heterogeneity among studies was evaluated by τ (global statistical heterogeneity across all comparisons).
Results
Among the 12 selected studies, patients were exclusively bio-naïve in 4 studies (4/12), while between 9 and 32% had prior biologics exposure in the other trials. Risk of bias was low across all domains in 7 studies. Global heterogeneity was negligible (τ = 0). After adjustment on bowel cleansing and pre-FMT antibiotics, oral capsule (RR=7.1[1.8-33.3]), lower GI FMT (RR=4.5[1.7-12.5] and combination of both (RR=12.5[2.1-100]) were more effective than placebo to induce clinical remission contrary to upper GI FMT (RR=1.1[0.2-7.7]) and autologous FMT (RR = 0.8 [0.2-3.8]. The combination of lower GI FMT and oral capsule was significantly more effective than upper GI FMT to induce clinical remission (RR=10.7[1.1-104.2]). Combination of lower GI FMT and oral capsule ranked highest for the induction of clinical remission (SUCRA=0.93), followed by oral capsule (SUCRA=0.82) and lower GI FMT (SUCRA=0.72). Autologous FMT ranked lower than placebo (SUCRA=0.12 vs 0.22). We performed a sensitivity analysis distinguishing single donor FMT and multi-donor FMT (pooled samples from different donors). Combination of lower GI FMT and oral capsule ranked highest for the induction of clinical remission (SUCRA=0.89), followed by single donor lower GI FMT (SUCRA = 0.70), multi-donor (pooled samples) lower GI FMT (SUCRA = 0.65), multi-donor (pooled samples) oral capsule (SUCRA = 0.61), single donor oral capsule (SUCRA = 0.60).
Conclusion
In this network meta-analysis, we confirmed the efficacy of FMT to induce clinical remission in patients with UC. The combination of lower GI and oral capsule FMT seems to be the best modality of FMT for patients with UC while upper GI FMT is not suitable. In clinical trials, autologous FMT should be avoided due to a potential detrimental effect.
Disclosure
Anthony BUISSON: Consulting fees for Abbvie, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Celltrion Healthcare, CTMA, Galapagos/Alfa Sigma, GutyCare/Resilience, Janssen, MSD, Nexbiome, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Takeda, Tillotts. And Viatris. Lecture fees for Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Celltrion Healthcare, Galapagos/Alfa Sigma, Janssen, Mayoli-Spindler, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Norgine, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Tillotts and Vifor Pharma. Research grants from: Abbvie, Celltrion Healthcare, Galapagos/Alfa Sigma, Janssen, Lessaffre, Lilly, Pfizer, Takeda.