MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S1165 Efficacy and Safety of Etrasimod in Patients With Moderate to Severe Isolated Proctitis Relative to Those With More Extensive Colitis: Results From the Phase 3 ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 Trials

2023· article· en· W4387750879 on OpenAlexaff
Laurent Peyrin‐Biroulet, Marla C. Dubinsky, Bruce E. Sands, Julián Panés, Stefan Schreiber, Walter Reinisch, Brian G. Feagan, Silvio Danese, Andrés Yarur, Geert D’Haens, Martina Goetsch, Karolina Wosik, Joseph Wu, Irene Modesto, Aoibhinn McDonnell, Lauren Bartolome, Christopher J. Rabbat, Séverine Vermeire

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProctitisInternal medicineUlcerative colitisPancolitisColitisGastroenterologyPlaceboPopulationClinical trialClinical endpointColonoscopyColorectal cancerPathologyDiseaseCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Most clinical trials of systemic ulcerative colitis (UC) therapies exclude patients (pts) with isolated proctitis, who are considered a more treatment-refractory population, creating a need for clinical evidence. Etrasimod is an investigational, oral, once-daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P)1,4,5 receptor modulator in development for the treatment of moderately to severely active UC. The phase 3 etrasimod ELEVATE UC trials included pts with isolated proctitis (< 10 cm rectal involvement), provided they met all other eligibility criteria.1 Methods: This post hoc analysis assessed predefined efficacy and safety outcomes in subgroups of pts with isolated proctitis and more extensive colitis (proctosigmoiditis/left-sided colitis/pancolitis). In ELEVATE UC 52 (NCT03945188) and ELEVATE UC 12 (NCT03996369), pts (aged 16–80 years) with moderately to severely active UC were randomized 2:1 to etrasimod 2 mg once daily or placebo. ELEVATE UC 52 comprised a 12-week (wk) induction period followed by a 40-wk maintenance period with a treat-through design. ELEVATE UC 12 comprised a 12-wk induction period. Clinical endpoints were assessed in pts with isolated proctitis (data pooled from both trials) and in pts with more extensive colitis (individual trial data). Sustained and corticosteroid-free clinical remission were assessed at Wk 52 (ELEVATE UC 52 only). Bowel urgency Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) was assessed at Wks 12 and 52. Safety was assessed up to Wk 52. Results: This analysis included 64 (pooled; Wk 12) and 36 (ELEVATE UC 52; Wk 52) pts with isolated proctitis, and 397 (ELEVATE UC 52; Wks 12 and 52) and 326 (ELEVATE UC 12; Wk 12) pts with more extensive colitis. Similar proportions of pts with isolated proctitis achieved the predefined efficacy endpoints vs those with more extensive colitis (Table 1). Pts with isolated proctitis receiving etrasimod had similar improvements in urgency NRS scores vs those with more extensive colitis (mean change from baseline: Wk 12, -2.8 vs -2.9 [both trials]; Wk 52, -5.0 vs -4.1). Safety in pts with isolated proctitis was generally similar to that in the overall trial population.1 Conclusion: Etrasimod treatment had similar efficacy in pts with isolated proctitis and in those with more extensive colitis. Prospective confirmation in larger pt cohorts with isolated proctitis is necessary. Safety was consistent with the overall population. Reference: 1. Sandborn WJ et al. Lancet 2023; 401: 1159-11711 Table 1. - Achievement of Prespecified Efficacy Endpoints Among Pts with Isolated Proctitis [a] and Those with More Extensive Colitis in the Etrasimod ELEVATE UC Trials (Full Analysis Set) Endpoint Pts with isolated proctitis Pts with more extensive colitis ELEVATE UC 12 + ELEVATE UC 52 ELEVATE UC 52 ELEVATE UC 12 Wk 12 PBO, n (%) [N=22] Etrasimod 2 mg QD, n (%) [N=42] Percentage difference from PBO [b] PBO, n (%) [N=135] Etrasimod 2 mg QD, n (%) [N=262] Percentage difference from PBO [b] PBO, n (%) [N=103] Etrasimod 2 mg QD, n (%) [N=223] Percentage difference from PBO [b] Clinical remission [c] 3 (13.6) 18 (42.9) 45.5*** 10 (7.4) 68 (26.0) 18.5*** 16 (15.5) 57 (25.6) 9.9* Clinical response [d] 9 (40.9) 30 (71.4) 35.2* 48 (35.6) 162 (61.8) 26.0*** 43 (41.7) 141 (63.2) 21.0*** Symptomatic remission [e] 5 (22.7) 22 (52.4) 44.2*** 30 (22.2) 118 (45.0) 22.7*** 31 (30.1) 108 (48.4) 18.0** Endoscopic improvement [f] 5 (22.7) 22 (52.4) 41.3** 20 (14.8) 93 (35.5) 20.6*** 21 (20.4) 71 (31.8) 11.4* Endoscopic improvement-histological remission [g] 3 (13.6) 16 (38.1) 40.7** 7 (5.2) 55 (21.0) 16.0*** 9 (8.7) 36 (16.1) 7.4* Wk 52, ELEVATE UC 52 PBO, n (%) [N=9] Etrasimod 2 mg QD, n (%) [N=27] Percentage difference from PBO [b] PBO, n (%) [N=135] Etrasimod 2 mg QD, n (%) [N=262] Percentage difference from PBO [b] N/A Clinical remission [c] 1 (11.1) 12 (44.4) 44.4*** 10 (7.4) 82 (31.3) 24.0*** Clinical response [d] 3 (33.3) 15 (55.6) 32.3 32 (23.7) 128 (48.9) 25.2*** Symptomatic remission [e] 1 (11.1) 15 (55.6) 53.6*** 27 (20.0) 112 (42.7) 22.8*** Endoscopic improvement [f] 3 (33.3) 14 (51.9) 29.5 16 (11.9) 99 (37.8) 26.0*** Endoscopic improvement-histological remission [g] 3 (33.3) 8 (29.6) -2.3 12 (8.9) 71 (27.1) 18.4*** Sustained clinical remission [h] 1 (11.1) 8 (29.6) 35.7*** 3 (2.2) 46 (17.6) 15.5*** Corticosteroid-free clinical remission [i] 1 (11.1) 12 (44.4) 44.4*** 9 (6.7) 82 (31.3) 24.8*** [a] Pts with isolated proctitis at baseline (defined as < 10 cm of rectal involvement) met all other eligibility criteria for inclusion (MMS 4–9, ES ≥ 2 [centrally read] and RBS ≥ 1).[b] Treatment comparisons and 2-sided p values were obtained using the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel method within each subgroup, adjusting to study stratification (for pooled data only), naïvety to prior biologic/Janus kinase inhibitor therapy, baseline corticosteroid use and baseline disease activity (MMS 4–6 or 7–9). Difference (%) is for etrasimod minus PBO and is based on estimated common risk difference using Mantel–Haenszel weights.[c] Clinical remission was defined as an SFS=0 (or =1 with a ≥ 1-point decrease from baseline), RBS=0 and ES ≤ 1 (excluding friability).[d] Clinical response was defined as a ≥ 2-point and ≥ 30% decrease from baseline in MMS, and a ≥ 1-point decrease from baseline in RBS or an absolute RBS ≤ 1.[e] Symptomatic remission was defined as an SFS=0 (or =1 with a ≥ 1-point decrease from baseline) and an RBS=0.[f] Endoscopic improvement was defined as a score of ≤ 1 (excluding friability).[g] Endoscopic improvement-histologic remission was defined as an ES ≤ 1 (excluding friability) with histologic remission as measured by a Geboes Index score < 2.0.[h] Sustained clinical remission was defined as clinical remission at both Wks 12 and 52.[i]Corticosteroid-free remission was defined as remission at Wk 52 with no use of corticosteroids for at least the last 12 study wks immediately before Wk 52.*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001 (nominal p values are reported without adjustment for multiple comparisons).ES, endoscopic subscore; MMS, modified Mayo score; N, total number of patients; n, number of patients with evaluable data within each category; N/A, not applicable; PBO, placebo; pt, patient; QD, once daily; RBS, rectal bleeding subscore; SFS, stool frequency subscore; UC, ulcerative colitis; wk, week.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→