S13 RO7790121 as Treatment for Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: Efficacy and Health-Related Quality of Life Improvements: Results from the Phase IIb TUSCANY-2 Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Following promising results from a phase IIa study, the global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging phase IIb TUSCANY-2 trial (NCT04090411) aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the anti-tumor necrosis factor-like ligand 1A- antibody RO7790121 in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). As reported previously at UEG week 2024 and ACG 2024, adult patients with moderately to severely active UC (total Mayo Score [tMS]–12, endoscopic subscore ≥2) who had failed ≥1 prior conventional/advanced treatment were randomized to receive RO7790121 subcutaneously (SC) 50 mg, 150 mg, 450 mg, or placebo monthly during the 12-week induction period and RO7790121 SC 50 mg, 150 mg, or 450 mg monthly during the treat-through, 40-week maintenance period. The primary endpoint (clinical remission by tMS) was assessed at week 14 in the intent-to-treat population and the secondary endpoints (clinical remission by modified Mayo score [mMS], which is more aligned to updated FDA guidance; endoscopic improvement) were assessed at weeks 14 and 56 in the induction and maintenance intent-to-treat population, respectively. At week 14, clinical remission by tMS was achieved in 25.5%, 23.3% and 23.9% of participants in the RO7790121 50-mg, 150-mg, 450-mg arms, respectively vs 11.6% receiving placebo (p>0.05). The proportion of patients showing clinical remission by mMS at week 14 was 29.8%, 35.0% and 31.8% in the RO7790121 50-mg, 150-mg, 450-mg arms, respectively vs 11.6% in placebo (nominal P< 0.05). Improvements in clinical remission were sustained throughout maintenance. At week 14, 40.4%, 38.3% and 40.9% of patients in the RO7790121 50-mg, 150-mg, 450-mg arms, respectively vs 18.6% receiving placebo demonstrated endoscopic improvement, sustained through week 56. Here, we report effect of RO7790121 on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with UC. Methods: Patient-reported HRQoL during induction and maintenance was assessed using the IBD Questionnaire (IBDQ) at weeks 4, 8, 12, 14, 24 and 52. Safety was assessed throughout. Results: Overall, 245 patients were randomized and treated; 228 completed the induction; 224 entered the maintenance period. Improvements in total IBDQ score from baseline were observed across all RO7790121 arms from week 4 (mean change from baseline 33.82 [90% confidence interval (CI) 26.18–41.46], 35.76 [29.13–42.4] and 35.87 [30.38–41.35] in the RO7790121 50-mg, 150-mg, 450-mg arms, respectively vs 16.78 [9.01–24.55] with placebo), sustained up to week 52. Improvements in fatigue, abdominal pain and bloating were also observed from week 4, sustained throughout induction and maintenance. During induction, 47.8% (117/245) of patients reported ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). The most common TEAEs during induction (occurring in ≥5% patients overall) were anemia (5.3%) and headache (5.3%). In the induction period, 10 patients experienced serious TEAEs (placebo=4; 50 mg=3; 150 mg=0; 450 mg=3); 2 treatment-related (placebo=1; 450 mg=1). No patients discontinued the study due to TEAEs. A generally similar safety profile was observed during maintenance. Conclusions: Data from the phase IIb TUSCANY-2 study suggest that RO7790121 leads to meaningful improvements in clinical and endoscopic endpoints, as well as in HRQoL of patients with moderately to severely active UC, with a favorable risk/benefit profile. A confirmatory phase III study is currently underway.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".