Introduction

The small intestine (SI) microbiome plays a crucial role in nutrient absorption and emerging evidence indicates that fecal microbiome is insufficient to represent SI microbiome. Ingestible sampling capsule technologies are emerging. However, potential contamination becomes a major limitation of these devices [1].

Aims & Methods

We previously reported the Small Intestinal MicroBiome Aspiration (SIMBA) capsules as effective means for sampling, sealing and preserving SI luminal contents for 16s rRNA sequencing analysis [2,3]. A subset of the DNA samples, including SI samples collected by SIMBA capsules (CAP) and the matched saliva (SAL), fecal (FEC) and duodenal endoscopic aspirate (ASP) and brush (BRU) samples, from 16 participants recruited for an observational clinical validation study [3] were sent for shotgun metagenomic sequencing. The aims are: 1) to compare the sampling performance of the capsule (CAP) compared to endoscopic aspirates (ASP) and 850 small intestine, large intestine and fecal samples from the Clinical Microbiomics data warehouse (PRJEB28097), and 2) to characterize samples from the 4 different sampling sites in terms of species composition and functional potential.

Results

4/80 samples (1/16 SAL, 2/16 ASP, 0/16 BRU, 1/16 CAP and 0/16 FEC) failed library preparation and 76 samples were shotgun sequenced (average of 38.5 M read pairs / sample). Quality assessment showed that despite the low raw DNA yield of CAP samples, they retained a minimal level of host contamination, in comparison to ASP and BRU (mean 5.27 % vs. 93.09 - 96.44% of average total reads per sample). 3/14 ASP and all BRU samples have too few reads per sample mapping to genes, failed the rarefaction procedure and were excluded from analysis.

Site	Total (read pairs)	Host %	High Quality Non-Human (HQNH, %)	HQNH	Mapped to Gene Catalog
SAL	37.59 M	70.30	26.07	9.58 M	7.22 M
BRU	34.80 M	96.44	0.13	0.04 M	0.03 M
ASP	39.81 M	93.09	5.43	1.98 M	1.48 M
CAP	36.53 M	5.27	88.01	32.06 M	24.98 M
FEC	43.74 M	2.71	85.26	37.35 M	29.54 M

CAP samples shared majority of the species with ASP samples and a big fraction of CAP species detected in the terminal ileum samples. ASP and CAP sample composition was more similar to duodenum, jejunum and saliva and very different from large intestine and stool samples. Functional genomics further revealed GI regional-specific differences: In both ASP and CAP samples we detect a number of Gut Metabolic Modules for carbohydrate digestion and short-chain fatty acids. However, probiotic species, and species and genes involved in the bile acid metabolism were mainly prevalent in CAP and FEC samples and could not be detected in ASP samples.

Conclusion

CAP and ASP microbiome are compositionally similar despite of the high level of host contamination of ASP samples. CAP appears to be of better quality to reveal GI regional-specific functional potentials than ASP. This analysis demonstrates the great potential for the SIMBA capsule for unveiling the SI microbiome.

References

[1] Yersin S and Vonaesch P. Small intestinal microbiota: from taxonomic composition to metabolism. Trends in Microbiology, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2024.02.013
[2] Wang G, Menon S, Wilsack L, Rehak R, Lou L, Turbide C, et al. Spatially and Temporally Precise Microbiome Profiling in the Small Intestine using the SIMBA Capsule with X-ray tracking. MedRxiv 2024:2024.04.02.24305212. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.02.24305212.
[3] Wang G, Bundalovic-Torma C, Menon S, Bruehlmann S, et al. Clinical Sampling of Small Intestine Luminal Content for Microbiome Multi-Omics Analysis: A Performance Analysis of The Small Intestine Microbiome Aspiration (SIMBA) Capsule and Benchmarking Against Endoscopy. MedRxiv 2024:04.07.24305299. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.04.24305299.

Disclosure

G.W, C.BT and S.B are employees of Nimble Science. G.W, C.BT, S.B. and C.N.A. are shareholders and hold stock options of Nimble Science.

Introduction

Complex perianal fistulas represent one of the most challenging manifestations of Crohn’s disease. Combined surgical and medical therapy with biologic drugs represents today the first-line treatment option, but its efficacy does not exceed 60% in terms of healing. Recently, new therapeutic approaches, such as autologous microfragmented adipose tissue (M-Fat) injection, have shown promising results. Indeed, a recent non-profit prospective pilot study on 15 patients has demonstrated that the local injection of M-Fat is a safe and promising “rescue therapy” for patients with multiresistant complex fistulizing Crohn’s disease (PCD), with a 66.7% rate of combined remission in such difficult patients. It has to be highlighted that the M-Fat injection is minimally invasive, with less risk of sphincteric damage and can be carried out in day-surgery setting.

Aims & Methods

The primary aim of this multicentre double-blind randomized controlled trial (ATTIC) is to evaluate the efficacy of the infiltration of M-Fat in the healing of perianal complex fistulas not-responding to treatment with biologics. Consecutive patients referring to the 6 investigation Centers for surgical treatment of persistent complex fistulizing PCD refractory to biosurgical approach were assessed for eligibility. After baseline pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, those included were submitted to surgical drainage with “cone-like” fistulectomy, and then randomized to receive a 15 to 20 cc local injection, at the internal orifice level and along fistula tracts, of M-Fat obtained by a lipoaspiration and processed with an enzyme-free technology (treatment group), or a suture placement and injection of 15 cc of saline solution at the internal orifice (control group). Clinical follow-up were conducted at 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks; at 24 weeks after surgery, pelvic magnetic resonance was obtained. Success was defined as “combined remission”, combination of clinical (absence of drainage upon gentle finger compression) and radiological healing (absence of residual collections > 3 mm). Clinical remission was defined as clinical healing of all external openings not confirmed at radiological assessment.

Results

An overall 92 patients were screened, and 66 (33 per group) completed the 24-week follow-up. A statistically significant difference in favour of the treatment group in terms of combined remission emerged at the primary endpoint at 24-week follow-up (control group, 18.18%; treatment group: 57.58%; p = 0.0020). No significant differences in clinical outcome measures were encountered at any of the other follow-up points. No significant differences emerged between the groups in terms of recurrence rate, complication rate, and number of adverse events. Clinical remission was 63.64% in the treatment group compared to 51.52% in the control group with no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

This multicentre double-blind randomized controlled trial demonstrates that the intraoperative injection of M-Fat, associated with surgical complete drainage of perianal sepsis, is safe, effective, and reproducible in healing complex multirefractory perianal Crohn's disease, while improving the quality of life and significantly reducing the risk of definitive oostomy.

Introduction

The phase 2b GALAXI 1 and phase 3 GALAXI 2&3 studies evaluated guselkumab (GUS), a dual-acting IL-23p19 subunit inhibitor, in participants (pts) with moderately to severely active CD.¹ Pts treated with ustekinumab (UST) who met inadequate response criteria during the long-term extension (LTE) could cross over to GUS 200 mg SC q4w. Here, we present efficacy and safety results in pts who received GUS after experiencing an inadequate response to UST in the pooled GALAXI LTE.

Aims & Methods

Individuals with prior inadequate response or intolerance to UST were excluded from GALAXI; however, during the LTE, pts treated with UST 90 mg SC q8w who met inadequate treatment response criteria (not in clinical response [≥100-point reduction in CDAI score from baseline or CDAI<150] and CDAI ≥220) between Wks 52-80 of LTE were eligible for a treatment switch to GUS 200 mg SC q4w, without IV induction. Clinical response and clinical remission (CDAI<150) were both assessed 16 weeks after treatment switch. Endoscopic response (≥50% improvement from baseline SES-CD or SES-CD≤2) and endoscopic remission (SES-CD≤4 and ≥2-point reduction from baseline and no subscore >1 in any individual component) were assessed at Wk 96. Safety was assessed through Wk 96.

Results

In total, 80 pts treated with UST underwent treatment switch to GUS 200 mg SC q4w maintenance therapy due to meeting inadequate treatment response criteria between Wks 52-80 of the LTE. Of these 80 pts, 75 were included in the efficacy analyses (baseline mean age, 35.2yrs; male, 64.0%; mean CD disease duration, 8.21yrs; mean CDAI, 291.5; mean SES-CD, 12.8; history of inadequate response/intolerance to biologics [BIO-IR], 60.0%).
The proportions of pts achieving clinical response and clinical remission 16 weeks after treatment switch from UST to GUS 200 mg SC q4w were 61.3% and 52.0%, respectively. These results were comparable to the proportions of pts treated with GUS 200 mg IV q4w induction in the BIO-IR subgroup of the total LTE population who achieved clinical response and clinical remission at Wk 12 (61.7% and 46.7%, respectively).
The proportions of pts achieving endoscopic response and endoscopic remission at Wk 96 (ie, ~1 year after treatment switch from UST to GUS 200 mg SC q4w) were 49.3% and 30.7%, respectively. These results were similar to the proportions of pts in the BIO-IR subgroup receiving GUS 200 mg SC q4w maintenance who achieved endoscopic response and endoscopic remission at Wk 48 (57.2% and 35.5%, respectively).
Safety results are summarized in the Table.

Table. Safety Summary From Treatment Switch Through Week 96

	Ustekinumab 90 mg SC q8w → Guselkumab 200 mg SC q4wa
N	80
Average duration of follow-up, weeks	34.8
Average exposure, number of administrations	8.4
Participants with 1 or more: AEs, n (%) SAEs, n (%) AEs leading to DC of study agent, n (%) Serious infections,b n (%) Malignancies, n (%) Injection site reaction, n (%)	50 (62.5%) 6 (7.5%) 2 (2.5%) 0 1 (1.3%) 5 (6.3%)
AE= adverse event; DC= discontinuation; SAE= serious adverse event; SC= subcutaneous. a Participants who were randomized to ustekinumab at Week 0 or who switched from placebo to ustekinumab at Week 12 and continued SC maintenance dosing of ustekinumab in the maintenance period and switched to guselkumab 200 mg SC q4w dosing during the long-term extension. b Infections are based on MedDRA system organ class “Infections and Infestations”. Note: Participants are counted only once for any given event, regardless of the number of times they actually experienced the event.

Conclusion

Among pts who experienced inadequate response to UST in the LTE, more than half achieved clinical remission 16 weeks after treatment switch to GUS 200 mg SC q4w, and approximately 50% were in endoscopic response ~1 year after treatment switch. These data suggest pts with an inadequate treatment response to UST may benefit from GUS treatment. Results should be interpreted considering that pts received GUS SC maintenance therapy directly without IV induction. Key safety event rates were consistent with the known safety profile of GUS in approved indications.

References

1) Sachen K, Hammaker D, Sarabia I, et al. Frontiers in Immunology. 2025; doi:10.3389/fimmu.2025.1532852.

Disclosure

AA reports potential conflicts of interest with AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, DiaSorin, Eli Lilly, Gilead, IBD Horizons, Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda, and TLL Pharmaceuticals
DW reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Takeda
RL reports having received advisory board fees from AbbVie, Aspen, BMS, Celgene, Celltrion, Chiesi, Ferring, Glutagen, Hospira, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, and Takeda; received research grants from Celltrion, Shire, Janssen, Takeda, Joanna Tiddy grant from University of Sydney, McCusker Charitable Trust, Gastroenterological Society of Australia, NHMRC, Gutsy Group, and Pfizer
RVR, WvD, and CB are employees of Johnson & Johnson and own company stock/stock options.
TH received grant support from Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, EA pharma Co. Ltd., AbbVie GK, JIMRO Co. Ltd., Zeria Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Nippon Kayaku Co. Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Pfizer Inc., Mochida Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Boston Scientific Corporation, Kissei Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., consulting fees from Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, EA pharma Co. Ltd., AbbVie GK, Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K., Pfizer Inc., Nichi-Iko Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Bristol Myers Squibb, and lecture fee from Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, AbbVie GK, EA pharma Co. Ltd., Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., JIMRO Co., Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K., Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Pfizer Inc. Kissei Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.
JP reports consultancy fees/honorarium from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Athos, Atomwise, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celsius, Ferring, Galapagos, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Mirum, Nimbus, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus, Protagonist, Revolo, Sanofi, Sorriso, Surrozen, Takeda, and Wasserman, and has served on a data safety monitoring board for Alimentiv, Mirum, Sorriso, Sanofi, and Surrozen.

Introduction

Tumor necrosis factor–like cytokine 1A (TL1A) promotes inflammation and fibrosis. PRA023 is an anti-TL1A monoclonal antibody in development for multiple inflammatory/fibrotic diseases. ARTEMIS-UC was a phase 2 multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of PRA023 in adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). The primary endpoint of clinical remission was statistically significantly higher in the PRA023 arm compared with the placebo arm. Here, we report the impact of PRA023 on endoscopic and histologic outcomes.

Aims & Methods

Adults with a modified Mayo score of 4 to 9, centrally read endoscopy subscore of ≥2, rectal bleeding subscore of ≥1, and history of insufficient response, loss of response, and/or intolerance to conventional and/or advanced therapies (≤4 advanced agents from ≤3 classes allowed) were randomized 1:1 to receive placebo or intravenous PRA023 (1000 mg on day 1, and 500 mg at weeks 2, 6, and 10). Endoscopic improvement (defined as a Mayo endoscopic subscore ≤1 with no friability), endoscopic remission (defined as a Mayo endoscopic subscore of 0), histologic improvement (defined as Geboes score ≤3.1), and mucosal healing (defined as Geboes score ≤2B.1 and endoscopy subscore ≤1) were measured after 12 weeks of induction therapy. Improvements in other histologic parameters were assessed by changes in Geboes scores.

Results

Of 135 randomized patients, 60/67 (89.6%) in the placebo arm and 68/68 (100%) in the PRA023 arm completed the 12-week induction period. Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups. Among alpha-controlled secondary endpoints, endoscopic improvement was observed in 36.8% of PRA023-treated vs 6.0% of placebo-treated patients (Δ30.8%, p<0.0001) at week 12. Histologic improvement occurred in 46.2% of patients receiving PRA023 vs 17.5% receiving placebo (Δ28.6%, p=0.0009) and mucosal healing in 30.8% vs 3.5% (Δ27.3%, p<0.0001), respectively. The mean change (SD) from baseline in the Mayo endoscopic subscore was −0.8 (0.93) for PRA023 vs −0.2 (0.54) for placebo. Furthermore, in a post hoc analysis, a significantly greater proportion of patients who received PRA023 achieved endoscopic remission (11.8% PRA023 vs 0% placebo, Δ11.8%, p=0.004). Of the patients with eosinophils in the lamina propria (LP) at baseline, 21.8% receiving PRA023 and 5.8% receiving placebo experienced complete resolution. Similarly, the resolution rates in those with neutrophils in the LP at baseline were 41.2% and 15.4% in PRA023-treated and placebo-treated patients, respectively; and of those with neutrophils in the epithelium at baseline, values were 40.4% vs 11.3%, respectively.

Conclusion

In patients with moderately to severely active UC, PRA023 resulted in a significantly greater proportion of patients achieving endoscopic remission, endoscopic improvement, histologic improvement, and mucosal healing, endpoints associated with an improved prognosis. Resolution of eosinophil and neutrophil infiltration suggests a reduction in the inflammation associated with UC.

Disclosure

SD has received consultancy fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Allergan, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, AstraZeneca, Athos Therapeutics, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion Healthcare, Dr. Falk Pharma, Eli Lilly and Company, Enthera, Ferring, Gilead, Hospira, Inotrem, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Morphic, MSD, Mundipharma, Mylan, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda, Teladoc Health, TiGenix, UCB Inc., Vial, and Vifor and lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Ferring, Gilead, Janssen, Mylan, Pfizer, and Takeda.
BES has served as a consultant for or received speaker’s fees from AbbVie, Abivax, Adiso Therapeutics, Alimentiv, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Artizan Biosciences, Artugen Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bacainn Therapeutics, Biora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Calibr, Celltrion Healthcare, ClostraBio, Connect Biopharma, Cytoki Pharma, Eli Lilly and Company, Entera, Evommune, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilead, Genentech, GSK, Gossamer Bio, HMP Acquisition, Imhotex, Immunic, InDex Pharmaceuticals, Innovation Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Kaleido, Kallyope, Merck, MiroBio, Morphic Therapeutic, MRM Health, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus Biosciences, Prometheus Laboratories, Protagonist Therapeutics, Q32 Bio, RedHill Biopharma, Sun Pharma Global, Surrozen, Synlogic, Takeda, Target RWE, Theravance Biopharma R&D, TLL Pharmaceutical, USWM Enterprises, Ventyx Biosciences, and Viela Bio and has received stock options from Ventyx Biosciences.
LPB has served as a consultant for or has received fees from AbbVie, Allergan, Alma, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, Arena, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion Healthcare, Eli Lilly and Company, Enterome, Enthera, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Gossamer Bio, Hikma, Index Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Janssen, MSD, Mylan, Oppilan Pharma, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Nestlé, Norgine, Roche, Pandion Therapeutics, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, sterna biologicals, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda, Theravance Biopharma, Tillotts Pharma, and Vifor; has received grants from AbbVie, Fresenius Kabi, MSD, and Takeda; and has stock options from CTMA.
DTR has served as a consultant for AbbVie, AltruBio, Aslan Pharmaceuticals, Athos Therapeutics, Bellatrix Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene Chronicles, Corp/Syneos, ClostraBio, Connect Biopharma, Eco R1, Eli Lilly and Company, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Iterative Health, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Kaleido, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Reistone Biopharma, Seres Therapeutics, Takeda, Target RWE, and Trellus Health and has received grant support from Takeda, Helmsley Charitable Trust, and the Gastro-Intestinal Research Foundation.
DDN, QD, AM, JL and BD are employees and shareholders of Prometheus Biosciences.
RK has received grants from Janssen and Takeda.
TER has been a speaker for Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Abbvie; has served on advisory boards for AbbVie, Ardelyx, Arena, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Ferring, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, Intercept, Iterative Scopes, Janssen, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Sanofi, and Takeda; and has been a shareholder for Iterative Scopes.
RP has been a consultant for Abbott, AbbVie, Abivax, Alimentiv (formerly Robarts), Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion Healthcare, Cosmos Pharmaceuticals, Eisai, Elan, Eli Lilly and Company, Ferring, Galapagos, Fresenius Kabi, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GSK, BIOJAMP, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Novartis, Oppilan Pharma, Organon, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus Biosciences, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Sandoz, Satisfai Health, Shire, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda, Theravance Biopharma, Trellus, Viatris, Ventyx, and UCB; has received speakers fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Arena, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Merck, Organon, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Shire, and Takeda; and has served on advisory boards for AbbVie, Alimentiv (formerly Robarts), Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GSK, BIOJAMP, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Novartis, Oppilan Pharma, Organon, Pandion Pharma, Pfizer, Progenity, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Sandoz, Shire, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda, and Ventyx.