Guselkumab in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: QUASAR Phase 2b Induction Study
Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet1, Jessica R Allegretti2, David T Rubin3
1Department of Gastroenterology, Nancy University Hospital, F-54500 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France; INSERM, NGERE, University of Lorraine, F-54000 Nancy, France; INFINY Institute, Nancy University Hospital, F-54500 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France; FHU-CURE, Nancy University Hospital, F-54500 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France; Groupe Hospitalier privé Ambroise Paré-Hartmann, Paris IBD Center, 92200 Neuilly sur Seine, France; Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Background & Aims:
The QUASAR Phase 2b Induction Study evaluated the efficacy and safety of guselkumab, an interleukin-23p19 subunit antagonist, in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior inadequate response and/or intolerance to corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, and/or advanced therapy.
Methods:
In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, induction study, patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive intravenous guselkumab 200 or 400 mg or placebo at weeks 0/4/8. The primary endpoint was clinical response (compared with baseline, modified Mayo score decrease ≥30% and ≥2 points, rectal bleeding subscore ≥1-point decrease or subscore of 0/1) at week 12. Guselkumab and placebo week-12 clinical nonresponders received subcutaneous or intravenous guselkumab 200 mg, respectively, at weeks 12/16/20 (uncontrolled study period).
Results:
The primary analysis population included patients with baseline modified Mayo scores ≥5 and ≤9 (intravenous guselkumab 200 mg, n = 101; 400 mg, n = 107; placebo, n = 105). Week-12 clinical response percentage was greater with guselkumab 200 mg (61.4%) and 400 mg (60.7%) vs placebo (27.6%; both P < .001). Greater proportions of guselkumab-treated vs placebo-treated patients achieved all major secondary endpoints (clinical remission, symptomatic remission, endoscopic improvement, histo-endoscopic mucosal improvement, and endoscopic normalization) at week 12. Among guselkumab week-12 clinical nonresponders, 54.3% and 50.0% of patients in the 200- and 400-mg groups, respectively, achieved clinical response at week 24. Safety was similar among guselkumab and placebo groups.
Conclusions:
Guselkumab intravenous induction was effective vs placebo in patients with moderately to severely active UC. Guselkumab was safe, and efficacy and safety were similar between guselkumab dose groups.
Clinicaltrials:
gov number: NCT04033445.
Related Concept Videos
Drugs for Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis in IBD
Drugs for Peptic Ulcer Disease: Sucralfate as Mucosal Protective Agents
In this scenario, mucosal protective agents like sucralfate play an essential role. Sucralfate, a complex of sulfated sucrose and aluminum hydroxide, demonstrates its usefulness in acidic conditions,...
Inflammatory Bowel Disease IV: Pharmacological Management
Pharmacologic...
Inflammatory Bowel Disease I: Ulcerative Colitis
Inflammatory bowel disease, or IBD, encompasses a group of disorders characterized by chronic inflammation or ulceration of the gastrointestinal tract.
Risk Factors
The exact cause of IBD remains unclear, although it is believed to be due to a mix of genetic, environmental, microbial, and immune factors. Genetic factors are significant in determining susceptibility to IBD, with family history being a critical risk factor. Individuals with a first-degree relative who has IBD are at...
Peptic Ulcer Disease III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Few clinical manifestations differentiate gastric ulcers from duodenal ulcers. Distinctions in the location, timing, and pain relief are crucial for healthcare providers in differentiating between gastric and duodenal ulcers during clinical assessments.
Drugs for Treatment of Crohn's Disease in IBD Using Immunomodulatory Agents


