Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 20, 2025
Author Spotlight: Developing a Rat Model for Pouchitis Research and Treatment
Published on: May 31, 2024
Mucosal Healing With Vedolizumab in Patients With Chronic Pouchitis: EARNEST, a Randomized, Double-Blind,
Vipul Jairath1, Brian G Feagan2, Mark S Silverberg3
1Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada; Alimentiv, London, Ontario, Canada.
Background & Aims:
Vedolizumab is indicated for the treatment of chronic pouchitis in the European Union. We assessed whether vedolizumab induced mucosal healing (MH) and if MH was associated with clinical improvements.
Methods:
EARNEST, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, evaluated vedolizumab efficacy and safety in adults with chronic pouchitis. Centrally read endoscopic and histologic evaluation was performed at baseline, Week (W)14, and W34. Ulcer count, adapted Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease in the pouch, and Pouchitis Disease Activity Index histologic component were evaluated. Pouchitis Disease Activity Index and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire remission at W14 and W34 were compared by MH status at W14.
Results:
Following treatment, mean (standard deviation) number of ulcers in vedolizumab-treated patients reduced from 15.1 (16.4) to 5.0 (4.9) at W14 and 2.7 (3.2) at W34 versus placebo-treated patients with corresponding values of 11.8 (11.3), 13.4 (18.4), and 9.7 (13.8) (vedolizumab vs placebo difference [95% confidence interval]: W14: -8.4 [-14.3, -2.6]; W34: -7.0 [-12.0, -2.0]). More patients receiving vedolizumab versus placebo achieved reduction in ulcerated pouch surface area (W14: 52.4% vs 20.0%; difference, 32.4 percentage points [p.p] [9.7, 51.4]; W34: 52.1% vs 12.9%; difference, 40.2p.p [15.6, 60.3]), absence of ulceration (W14: 23.8% vs 7.5%; difference, 16.3p.p [1.1, 31.6]; W34: 34.4% vs 15.6%; difference, 18.8p.p [-2.0, 39.5]), Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease remission (W14: 23.8% vs 7.5%; difference, 16.3p.p [1.1, 31.6]; W34: 34.4% vs 15.6%; difference, 18.8p.p [-2.0, 39.5]), and MH (W14: 16.7% vs 2.5%; difference, 14.2p.p [1.9, 26.4]). Patients with MH at W14 had higher rates of Pouchitis Disease Activity Index and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire remission at W14 and W34 than those without.
Conclusions:
Vedolizumab induced endoscopic improvements in patients with chronic pouchitis, which was associated with improved outcomes at W34, particularly in patients achieving MH at W14. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02790138.).
More Related Videos
07:38Multimodal Quantitative Phase Imaging with Digital Holographic Microscopy Accurately Assesses Intestinal Inflammation and Epithelial Wound Healing
Published on: September 13, 2016
07:05Important Endpoints and Proliferative Markers to Assess Small Intestinal Injury and Adaptation using a Mouse Model of Chemotherapy-Induced Mucositis
Published on: May 12, 2019
Related Concept Videos
01:21Inflammatory Bowel Disease V: Surgical Management
Here are some common surgical interventions for IBD:
01:25Peptic Ulcer Disease V: Surgical Management and Nursing Care
Surgical Interventions for Peptic Ulcer Disease
01:26Peptic Ulcer Disease IV: Management
The therapeutic approach involves ensuring adequate rest, implementing drug therapy, promoting smoking cessation, making dietary modifications, and emphasizing long-term follow-up care.
Pharmacological management
The prevailing therapy for peptic ulcers involves a combination of managing the patient's current...
01:30Peptic Ulcer Disease I: Introduction
An acute ulcer, marked by superficial erosion and minimal inflammation, swiftly resolves upon identifying and addressing the underlying cause. In contrast, a chronic ulcer persists, potentially eroding through the muscular wall and forming fibrous tissue.
Peptic ulcers can also be...
01:24Pathophysiology of Peptic Ulcer Disease: Mucosal Defense Factors
01:28Peptic 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.