Introduction

Histological assessment in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is often required with endoscopic diagnoses to establish disease activity. This is evident in patients where histological healing is a major therapeutic goal and when endoscopic healing can also exhibit microscopic disease. IBD can manifest in numerous landmark features which are structural and inflammatory related. Histological activity is determined through erosion/ulceration, architectural changes in tissue morphology, mucin depletion and presence of varied inflammatory cells the colonic crypts, Muscularis Mucosae (MM) and Lamina Propria (LP). Histological scoring systems vary in complexity and methodology and subject to discrepancies in inter-rater consensus. Our model aims to provide accurate measurements of key histological features in Ulcerative Colitis (UC) used in scoring systems as both a decision support tool for improving pathologist scoring alignment and sensitive quantitative metrics of inflammatory cells to evaluate disease activity.

Aims & Methods

We developed an ensemble of convolutional neural networks to identify cell types, tissue foreground, crypts, MM, and haemorrhage in H&E images of IBD biopsy data. Models were trained with expert-labelled annotations comprising 34,289 image-annotation pairs (80% training, 20% validation) from in-house and publicly available data. Model accuracy was assessed with 6,464 held-out image-annotation pairs from 26 Whole Slide Images (WSIs) from all sites of the large intestine commonly sampled during endoscopic investigation, while ground truth annotations were reviewed by GI-trained pathologists to certify accuracy. We used geospatial methods to derive boundaries of the LP from other predicted domains, associate cells to delineated regions, measure architectural changes and derive spatially differentiated metrics of inflammatory burden in 66 patients with confirmed UC.

Results

The AI model spatially differentiates and segments cell types and tissue compartments. This produces metrics for inflammatory cell counts in regions of interest such as crypts, LP, and MM. Goblet cell segmentation within crypts allows for measurement of mucin depletion. This can be visualized for pathologists where each inflammatory cell type across the WSI is represented as density metrics. Automated quantification of inflammatory cells across AI-identified tissue domains throughout the bowels of UC patients revealed large intra- and inter-patient variability.

Conclusion

Our AI model can measure histological healing by detecting architectural change, inflammatory cell number, goblet cell reduction and erosions and ulceration. This allows for metrics and visual overlays to assist with pathologist reading and quantifying changes in mucosal biopsies in a clinical trial setting which requires extremely sensitive tools only AI can provide.

Disclosure

DW/AM/RL/PA/PW and CL are employees at Perspectum Ltd. EF and RG are consultants for Perspectum Ltd. All other co-authors have no conflicts of interest to declare relevant to this work.

Introduction

MORF-057 is an oral α₄β₇ integrin inhibitor that prevents immune cell entry into the gut to alleviate inflammation.

Aims & Methods

EMERALD-2 is a phase 2b, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating MORF-057 efficacy and safety in adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). Participants with Modified Mayo Score (MMS) 5–9, inadequate/loss of response or intolerance to conventional or advanced therapy (AT), and who were integrin inhibitor-naïve received 1 of 3 MORF-057 doses or placebo (1:1:1:1). The primary efficacy endpoint was clinical remission at Week 12; secondary and exploratory efficacy endpoints were rates of clinical response and endoscopic improvement, respectively. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic endpoints and safety were evaluated. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05611671).

Results

The study enrolled 280 participants (mean [SD] age, 40.2 [14.6] years; 55.4% male; mean [SD] time since UC diagnosis, 6.7 [7.2] years). At baseline, mean (SD) MMS was 6.7 (1.0); 39.3% of participants were on a stable corticosteroid dose, 20.4% were on an immunomodulator, and 31.1% were AT-experienced.
Clinical remission rate with MORF-057 at Week 12 was dose dependent, ranging from 17.1% (100 mg QD) to 31.9% (200 mg BID) vs. 24.3% with placebo (Table 1), with the same trend in the AT-experienced subgroup (N=87; 100 mg QD, 4.3%; 100 mg BID, 13.6%; 200 mg BID, 21.1%; placebo, 13.0%). Compared with placebo, 200 mg BID MORF-057 had numerically higher clinical response and endoscopic and histo-endoscopic mucosal improvement (HEMI) rates, with the latter 2 endpoints showing an increasing trend with higher doses.

Table 1. Efficacy endpoints in EMERALD-2 at Week 12

Rate (proportion of patients, %)	MORF-057			Placebo (n=70)
	100 mg QD (n=70)	100 mg BID (n=71)	200 mg BID (n=69)
Clinical Remissiona	17.1	23.9	31.9	24.3
Clinical Responseb	57.1	53.5	62.3	54.3
Endoscopic Improvementc	31.4	32.4	43.5	31.4
Histo-Endoscopic Mucosal Improvementd	27.1	31.0	42.0	25.7

^aBased on MMS (stool frequency=0/1, RB=0, MES=0/1 [excluding friability]). Non-significant vs. placebo.
^b≥2-point reduction in MMS and ≥30% change from baseline, and ≥1-point reduction in RB score from baseline or RB=0/1.
^cMES≤1.
^dMES=0/1 (excluding friability) and neutrophil infiltration in <5% of crypts; no crypt destruction; and no erosions, ulcerations, or granulation tissue (Geboes scoring).
MES, Mayo Endoscopic Subscore; MMS, Modified Mayo Score; RB, rectal bleeding.

There was a dose-dependent increasing trend in α4β7 receptor occupancy. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in the MORF-057 groups were mostly of mild (42/76, 55.3%) or moderate (25/76, 32.9%) severity; TEAE frequency was similar to the placebo group (36.0% [pooled rate for 3 dose regimens] vs. 34.8%). Among all participants, there were 5 serious AEs not considered treatment-related (UC exacerbation [n=2], AST increase, pneumothorax, vertebral disc herniation). There were no cases of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy or meaningfully increased absolute lymphocyte count and no deaths.

Conclusion

Dose-dependent responses to MORF-057 were observed for clinical remission and hard-to-achieve endpoints such as HEMI at Week 12. The clinical remission rate with MORF-057 was numerically higher but did not achieve statistical significance vs. placebo, which showed higher-than-expected responses. MORF-057 had a favorable safety profile with no meaningful safety findings. The study is ongoing to evaluate maintenance safety and efficacy, with further clinical development of MORF-057 planned.

Disclosure

BES: Honoraria for consulting--AbbVie, Adiso Therapeutics, Agomab, Alimentiv, Amgen, AnaptysBio, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Artugen Therapeutics, Astra Zeneca, Biolojic Design, Biora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Calibr, Celgene, Celltrion, ClostraBio, Equillium, Enthera, Enveda Biosciences, Evommune, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Fzata, Galapagos, Genentech (Roche), Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Gossamer Bio, Imhotex, Index Pharmaceuticals, Innovation Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Kaleido, Kallyope, Merck & Co., Microbiotica, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Mobius Care, Morphic Therapeutics, MRM Health, Nexus Therapeutics, Nimbus Discovery, Odyssey Therapeutics, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Palisade Bio, Progenity, Prometheus Biosciences, Prometheus Laboratories, Protagonist Therapeutics, Q32 Bio, Rasayana Therapeutics, Recludix Therapeutics, Reistone Biopharma, Sanofi, Sorriso Therapeutics, Spyre Therapeutics, Surrozen, Target RWE, Teva, TLL Pharmaceutical, Tr1X, Union Therapeutics, Ventyx Biosciences. Consulting and speaking fees--Abivax. Consulting and speaking fees and other support--Eli Lilly and Company. Research grants, consulting and speaking fees, and other support--Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda. Research grants and consulting fees--Janssen. Stock/stock options--Ventyx Biopharma.
BGF: Senior Scientific Director at Alimentiv Inc. Consulting--AbbVie, Abivax, Adiso, AgomAB Therapeutics, Akros, Alira Health, Ally Bridge Group, AnaptysBio, Apini Therapeutics, Argenx, Attovia Tx, Avoro Capital Advisors, Belmore Law, BioFactura, BioJamp, Biora Therapeutics, Blackbird Laboratories, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Boxer Capital, Celsius Therapeutics, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Clarivate, Connect BioPharma, Disc Medicine, Duality, EcoR1, Eli Lilly and Company, Ensho Therapeutics, Equillium, Evida, Enveda, Faes Farma, First Wave, Forbion, Galapagos, Galen Atlantica, Genentech/Roche, General Atlantic, Genesis Therapeutics, Gilead, Gossamer Pharma, GSK, Imhotex, ImmiDomics, Immunic Therapeutics, Intercept, Janssen, Japan Tobacco Inc., Klick Health, LifeMine Therapeutics, Mage Biologics, Merck, Mestag, Mirador Therapeutics, Mobius Care, Monte Rosa Tx, Morphic Therapeutics, Nexys Therapeutics, Nighthawk Therapeutics, Nimbus Therapeutics, Novartis, OncoC4, OrbiMed, Orphagen, Palisade Bio, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist,32 Bio, REDX, Roche, Roivant/Televant, Sanofi, Sobi, Sorriso, Spyre Therapeutics, SRT Therapeutics, Sun Pharma, Surrozen Inc., Synedgen, Takeda, Teva, Triastek, Trex Bio, TR1X Inc. TVM Lifesciences, Ventyx Biosciences, Versant Ventures, Vida Ventures, Zagbio. Speaker's Bureau--AbbVie, Janssen, Takeda. Scientific Advisory Board (DSMB)--AbbVie, AnaptysBio, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, Genentech/Roche, Janssen, Merck, MiroBio, Origo BioPharma, Pfizer, REDX Pharma, Sanofi, Takeda, Teva, Ecor1Capital, Morphic, GSK. Stock shareholder--Connect BioPharma, EnGene. Provided expert testimony--Belmore Law.
SS: Received fees--AbbVie, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Falk, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilead, IMAB, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, MSD, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Protagonist, Provention Bio, Roche, Sandoz/Hexal, Shire, Takeda, Ventyx.
LP-B: Consulting--AbbVie, Abivax, Adacyte, Alimentiv, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, Arena, Banook, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Connect Biopharm, Cytoki Pharma, Enthera, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Gossamer Bio, GSK, IAC Image Analysis, Index Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Mopac, Morphic, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Oncodesign Precision Medicine, ONO Pharma, OSE Immunotherapeuthics, Pandion Therapeuthics, Par' Immune, Pfizer, Prometheus, Protagonist, Roche, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi, Satisfay, Takeda, Telavant, Theravance, Thermo Fischer, Tigenix, Tillots, Viatris, Vectivbio, Ventyx, Ysopia. Grants--Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Medac, MSD, Takeda. Lectures--AbbVie, Alfasigma, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Celltrion, Ferring, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Kern Pharma, Eli Lilly and Company, Medac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda, Tillots, Viatris. Travel support--AbbVie, Alfasigma, Amgen, Celltrion, Connect Biopharm, Ferring, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Gossamer Bio, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Medac, Morphic, MSD, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda, Thermo Fischer, Tillots.
SD: Consultancy fees--AbbVie, Alimentiv, Allergan, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, AstraZeneca, Athos Therapeutics, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Dr Falk Pharma, Eli Lilly and Company, Enthera, Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc., Gilead, Hospira, Inotrem, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Morphic, MSD, Mundipharma, Mylan, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda, Teladoc Health, TiGenix, UCB Inc., Vial, Vifor. Lecture fees--AbbVie, Amgen, Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc., Gilead, Janssen, Mylan, Pfizer, Takeda.
BA, MC, YW, SKL, MM, AW, XZ, NME: Employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly and Company.

Introduction

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), a new class of immunotherapeutic agents, are the first-line treatment for many advanced epithelial cancers. Gastrointestinal irAEs, particularly diarrhea and colitis, affect approximately 40% of ICI-treated patients and often lead to therapy discontinuation.¹ High-dose corticosteroids represent the first-line treatment, but about one-third of patients show inadequate response and require second-line immunosuppressants such as Infliximab or Vedolizumab.² As the body of evidence about the role of gut microbiota in the pathogenesis of GI irAE grows, fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is emerging as a potential treatment for steroid- and biologic-refractory ICI-induced colitis.³ Although data are still preliminary, FMT represents a promising therapeutic strategy in this setting.

Aims & Methods

The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of FMT in patients referred to our Microbiome clinic for steroid- and biologic-refractory ICI-induced colitis. After clinical evaluation, patients were treated with FMT via colonoscopy from healthy donors. FMT was performed as already described, following international clinical guidelines.^4,5 Following the endoscopic procedure, patients were evaluated at 1, 4, 8, and 12 weeks. We collected data on: patient characteristics, cancer type, cancer treatment and its suspension, severity of diarrhea before FMT (graded via CTCAE)⁶, time in weeks from initiation of cancer therapy to onset of diarrhea, grade of diarrhea following treatment and resumption of ICI.

Results

Our cohort included 7 patients with steroid- and biologic-refractory ICI-induced colitis (grade 1: n=0 ; grade 2: n=1 ; grade 3: 5=x; grade 4: n=1). Four patients were affected by renal cell carcinoma, 2 by melanoma, 1 by pulmonary cancer. All patients were treated with PD-1/PDL-1 inhibitors or CTLA-4 ( Nivolumab: n= 3; Nivolumab and Ipilimumab: n=2; Durvalumab: n= 1; Pembrolizumab: n= 1) and 6 patients interrupted ICI due to gastrointestinal irAEs. All patients received single FMT from healthy donors via colonoscopy. Following FMT, diarrhea improved to grade ≤ 1 in 6 patients (85%) at week 1, 4, 8, and 12 after the procedure, suggesting a sustained effect of microbiome modulation in the medium term. One patient died during follow-up for reasons other than ICI-colitis.

Conclusion

Our preliminary findings suggest that FMT may be a promising therapeutic strategy for refractory ICI-colitis. Further, larger and randomized studies are warranted to confirm our data.

References

1. Dougan M, Wang Y, Rubio-Tapia A, Lim JK. AGA Clinical Practice Update on Diagnosis and Management of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Colitis and Hepatitis: Expert Review. Gastroenterology. 2021;160(4):1384-1393. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2020.08.063
2. Haanen J, Obeid M, Spain L, et al. Management of toxicities from immunotherapy: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2022;33(12):1217-1238. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.10.001
3. Wang Y, Wiesnoski DH, Helmink BA, et al. Fecal microbiota transplantation for refractory immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated colitis. Nat Med. 2018;24(12):1804-1808. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0238-9
4. Cammarota G, Ianiro G, Kelly CR, et al. International consensus conference on stool banking for faecal microbiota transplantation in clinical practice. Gut. 2019;68(12):2111-2121. doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2019-319548
5. Ianiro G, Rossi E, Thomas AM, et al. Faecal microbiota transplantation for the treatment of diarrhoea induced by tyrosine-kinase inhibitors in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):4333. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-18127-y
6. Freites-Martinez A, Santana N, Arias-Santiago S, Viera A. Using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE - Version 5.0) to Evaluate the Severity of Adverse Events of Anticancer Therapies. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2021;112(1):90-92. doi:10.1016/j.ad.2019.05.009

Disclosure

G.I. has received personal fees for acting as speaker for Biocodex, Danone, Sofar, Malesci, Metagenics and Tillotts Pharma, and for acting as consultant and/or advisor for Ferring Therapeutics, Giuliani, Malesci and Tillotts Pharma. A.G. reports personal fees for consultancy from Eisai Srl, 3PSolutions, Real Time Meeting, Fondazione Istituto Danone, SinergieSrl, Board MRGE and Sanofi SpA personal fees for acting as a speaker for Takeda SpA, AbbVie and Sandoz SpA and personal fees for acting on advisory boards for VSL3 and Eisai. G.C. has received personal fees for acting as advisor for Ferring Therapeutics. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Introduction

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have marked a breakthrough in the management of a wide range of cancer types, leading to increased overall survival. However, this treatment is frequently associated with the onset of various immune-related adverse events (irAEs), including ICI-related diarrhea and colitis.¹ Current recommendations for patients with diarrhea or colitis grade 2 or higher (graded via CTCAE)² include the discontinuation of ICI and administration of immune suppressants (e.g. steroids or biologics), which may lead to worse outcomes in these patients.³ Therefore, alternative therapeutic strategies to manage irAEs are needed. The gut microbiota plays a pivotal role in the onset of gastrointestinal irAEs, but the role of its therapeutic modulation on these disorders is mostly unknown. ^4,5

Aims & Methods

Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of therapeutic microbiome modulation for gastrointestinal irAEs in cancer patients. We enrolled cancer patients affected by ICI-related diarrhea/colitis referred to our Microbiome Clinic from January 2023 to March 2025. After clinical evaluation, patients were stratified according to severity of diarrhea (graded via CTCAE)² and then received a microbiome-modulating therapy. Patients were followed-up for at least 8 week after the initiation of therapy. We collected data about patient demographics (age and gender), patient’s overall health status as assessed by the the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI)⁶, type of cancer, oncological therapy and its suspension, time in weeks from initiation of cancer therapy to onset of diarrhea, severity of diarrhea (graded via CTCAE)², time in weeks until resolution of diarrhea and resumption of oncological therapy

Results

We enrolled 42 patients in the study period (8 males, 34 females, mean age 58,3 years-old, mean CCI-index 5.8). All patients were treated with ICI (Pembrolizumab: n=25 , Dostarlimab: n=4, Nivolumab: n=4; Atezolizumab: n=3; Novulumab and Ipilumab: n=2, Cemiplimab: n=2; Mogamulizumab: n=1; Pertuzumab: n=1). Ten patients experienced G1 diarrhea (23,8%), 16 (38,1) G2, 15 (35,7%) G3 and one G4 (2,4%). As indicated by current European Guidelines³, 30 patients (71,4%) had to interrupt ICI due to diarrhea. Multi-strain probiotics were administered to 27 (64.3% ) patients, rifaximin to 22 (52,4%). Overall, 21 patients (50%) needed therapy with systemic steroids. Seven patients who experienced ICI-related colitis refractory to steroids and biologics were successfully treated with FMT. Twenty-eight patients (66.7% ) had a resolution of the diarrhea (G0) and 11 patients (26.2%) had diarrhea G1 at a mean time of 8 weeks. Upon resolution of diarrhea, nine of the 30 patients who had interrupted ICI (30%) were able to resume the treatment. None of the patients experienced any adverse event related to gut microbiota modulation as defined by CTCAE².

Conclusion

Therapeutic modulation of gut microbiota appears to be a promising safe and effective approach for treating ICI-related diarrhea and colitis. However, these preliminary findings need confirmation through more consolidated and well-designed studies.

References

1. Dougan M, Wang Y, Rubio-Tapia A, Lim JK. AGA Clinical Practice Update on Diagnosis and Management of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Colitis and Hepatitis: Expert Review. Gastroenterology. 2021;160(4):1384-1393. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2020.08.063
2. Freites-Martinez A, Santana N, Arias-Santiago S, Viera A. Using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE - Version 5.0) to Evaluate the Severity of Adverse Events of Anticancer Therapies. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2021;112(1):90-92. doi:10.1016/j.ad.2019.05.009
3. Haanen J, Obeid M, Spain L, et al. Management of toxicities from immunotherapy: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2022;33(12):1217-1238. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.10.001
4. Wang Y, Wiesnoski DH, Helmink BA, et al. Fecal microbiota transplantation for refractory immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated colitis. Nat Med. 2018;24(12):1804-1808. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0238-9
5. Wang T, Zheng N, Luo Q, et al. Probiotics Lactobacillus reuteri Abrogates Immune Checkpoint Blockade-Associated Colitis by Inhibiting Group 3 Innate Lymphoid Cells. Front Immunol. 2019;10. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2019.01235
6. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-383. doi:10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8

Disclosure

G.I. has received personal fees for acting as speaker for Biocodex, Danone, Sofar, Malesci, Metagenics and Tillotts Pharma, and for acting as consultant and/or advisor for Ferring Therapeutics, Giuliani, Malesci and Tillotts Pharma. A.G. reports personal fees for consultancy from Eisai Srl, 3PSolutions, Real Time Meeting, Fondazione Istituto Danone, SinergieSrl, Board MRGE and Sanofi SpA personal fees for acting as a speaker for Takeda SpA, AbbVie and Sandoz SpA and personal fees for acting on advisory boards for VSL3 and Eisai. G.C. has received personal fees for acting as advisor for Ferring Therapeutics. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

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

	Personalised treatment (n=23)	Standard treatment (n=25)
Gender = Male (%)	11 (47.8)	15 (60.0)
Age (year) (median [IQR])	37.00 [24.50, 57.50]	42.00 [30.00, 56.00]
Disease duration (years) (median [IQR])	1.75 [0.62, 5.30]	6.16 [2.61, 17.21]
Naive to advanced therapy (%)	18 (78.3)	21 (84.0)
Lichtiger score (median [IQR])	14 [13, 16]	14 [12, 15]
Total Mayo score (median [IQR])	11 [11, 11]	11 [10, 11]
UCEIS (median [IQR])	6 [5, 7]	6 [5, 7]
CRP (mg/L) (median [IQR])	49.00 [35.70, 70.30]	51.00 [17.00, 105.00]
Albumin (g/L) (median [IQR])	26.00 [23.00, 30.50]	31.00 [23.00, 34.00]

Advanced therapy was defined as treatment with any biologics, JAK inhibitor or S1P modulator. IQR = interquartile range; UCEIS = Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity, CRP = C-reactive protein.

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.