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

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

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) mediated enterocolitis (IMC) may lead to treatment discontinuation. Corticosteroids for IMC is associated with serious side effects and might affect cancer progression in addition to preclude continued ICI treatment. We hypothesized that vedolizumab, a gut selective α4β7 integrin inhibitor, is effective as a first-line treatment and investigated whether vedolizumab reduces corticosteroid exposure and facilitate ICI resumption.

Aims & Methods

We conducted a single center, open-label, explorative phase 2 trial including patients treated with ICI who developed IMC. Patients were randomized 1:1 ratio to receive vedolizumab (300 mg) or standard treatment with corticosteroids, with infliximab used as recue therapy for corticosteroid failure. The primary outcome was cumulative corticosteroid dose at week 30. Key secondary outcomes included cumulative corticosteroid dose at week 10, corticosteroid free remission at week 10 and ICI resumption rates.

Results

Twenty-two patients received vedolizumab, and 19 patients received standard treatment. At week 10, the mean cumulative corticosteroid use was significantly lower in the vedolizumab arm (1157 mg vs. 2207 mg). By week 30, the mean corticosteroid use remained lower but not statistically significant (1378 mg vs. 2390 mg, estimated difference 1012 mg, 95% CI -229 to 2253, p=0.107), Among patients with less severe IMC, who did not need corticosteroids during screening, vedolizumab-treated patients used in average 1729 mg less corticosteroid (95% CI 631 to 2827). Corticosteroid-free remission at weeks 2 and 10 was more common with vedolizumab. Seven patients (33.3%) in the vedolizumab group resumed with ICI compared to three (16.7%) in the standard arm. In patients with severe colitis, who required upfront corticosteroid treatment, a trend towards longer hospitalization in the vedolizumab arm was observed.

Conclusion

For patients with less severe colitis, not needing corticosteroids during screening, vedolizumab may be a viable corticosteroid-sparing option, enabling faster remission and ICI resumption.

Disclosure

The study was funded by Aage og Johanne Louis-Hansens Fond, National Research grants. Takeda Pharma provided the study drug vedolizumab.

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

Variable	Hazard Rate	95% Confidence interval
Age at discontinuation, per 10 years	0.80	0.72 – 0.88
Ulcerative colitis disease extent, Proctitis vs. extensive Left-sided vs. extensive	1.4 1.1	0.92 – 2.1 0.87 – 1.5
Type of anti-TNF therapy, adalimumab vs. infliximab	0.91	0.55 – 1.5
≥1 previous anti-TNF, yes vs. no	1.5	0.95 – 2.3
Indication anti-TNF therapy Immunomodulator refractoriness, yes vs no/unknown	1.5	1.1 – 2.2
Concomitant treatment after anti-TNF therapy, None vs thiopurine Mesalamine vs. thiopurine Combination of mesalamine and thiopurines vs thiopurine	1.8 1.2 1.2	1.1 – 3.0 0.86 – 1.6 0.81 – 1.7
Fecal Calprotectin (µg/g), per 100	1.1	0.95 – 1.3
Endoscopic activity, yes (mild, moderate or severe) vs. no	1.3	0.91 – 2.0

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.

Table. Maintenance of endoscopic and histologic efficacy with GUS in the QUASAR LTE study
aPercentages represent proportions of pts achieving the endpoint at W92 among those who achieved the corresponding endpoint at W44. CIs in each treatment group are based on the normal approximation confidence limits. bPercentages represent proportions of pts achieving the endpoint at W92 among those who achieved the corresponding endpoint at W0 (baseline of the maintenance study). CIs in each treatment group are based on the normal approximation confidence limits. Includes pts with modified Mayo score of 5-9 at induction baseline who achieved clinical response to GUS IV induction and were randomized to receive GUS maintenance treatment and did not experience a dose adjustment from W8 through W32. Endoscopic improvement is defined as an endoscopic subscore of 0 or 1. Histologic improvement is defined as neutrophil infiltration in <5% of crypts, no crypt destruction, and no erosions, ulcerations or granulation tissue according to the Geboes grading system. HEMI is defined as achieving a combination of histologic improvement and endoscopic improvement. Histologic remission is defined as the absence of neutrophils from the mucosa (both lamina propria and epithelium), no crypt destruction, and no erosions, ulcerations or granulation tissue according to the Geboes grading system (equivalent to a Robarts Histopathology Index ≤2b, with subscores of 0 for lamina propria neutrophils and neutrophils in the epithelium and without ulcers or erosion). CI=Confidence interval; GUS=Guselkumab; HEMI=histologic-endoscopic mucosal improvement; IV=Intravenous; LTE=Long-term extension; m=Number of pts achieving endpoint at W0 or W44; n=Number of pts achieving endpoint at week 92; NRI=Nonresponder imputation; pts=Participants; q4w=Every 4 weeks; q8w=Every 8 weeks; SC=Subcutaneous; W=Week.
	Endpoint maintenance: W44 to W92a				Endpoint maintenance: W0 to W92b
	NRI analysis		As-observed analysis		NRI analysis		As-observed analysis
% [95% CI] (n/m)	GUS 100mg SC q8w	GUS 200mg SC q4w	GUS 100mg SC q8w	GUS 200mg SC q4w	GUS 100mg SC q8w	GUS 200mg SC q4w	GUS 100mg SC q8w	GUS 200mg SC q4w
Endoscopic improvement	87.2% [80.5, 94.0] (82/94)	80.2% [72.4, 88.0] (81/101)	92.1% [86.5, 97.7] (82/89)	90.0% [83.8, 96.2] (81/90)	80.3% [70.7, 89.9] (53/66)	85.9% [77.4, 94.5] (55/64)	85.5% [76.7, 94.3] (53/62)	94.8% [89.1, 100] (55/58)
Histologic improvement	77.9% [70.5, 85.2] (95/122)	75.2% [67.6, 82.8] (94/125)	83.3% [76.5, 90.2] (95/114)	83.2% [76.3, 90.1] (94/113)	74.3% [65.7, 82.8] (75/101)	72.0% [62.9, 81.2] (67/93)	80.6% [72.6, 88.7] (75/93)	80.7% [72.2, 89.2] (67/83)
HEMI	73.5% [64.0, 83.0] (61/83)	75.5% [66.8, 84.2] (71/94)	80.3% [71.3, 89.2] (61/76)	85.5% [78.0, 93.1] (71/83)	70.2% [58.3, 82.1] (40/57)	79.6% [68.9, 90.4] (43/54)	78.4% [67.1, 89.7] (40/51)	91.5% [83.5, 99.5] (43/47)
Histologic remission	71.2% [62.7, 79.6] (79/111)	71.2% [63.0, 79.4] (84/118)	76.7% [68.5, 84.9] (79/103)	77.8 % [69.9, 85.6] (84/108)	67.0% [57.4, 76.7] (61/91)	67.1% [56.9, 77.2] (55/82)	73.5% [64.0, 83.0] (61/83)	76.4% [66.6, 86.2] (55/72)

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.

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.