Filgotinib for Treating Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis:An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence invited the manufacturer (Galapagos) of filgotinib (Jyseleca®), as part of the Single Technology Appraisal process, to submit evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of filgotinib for treating moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis in adults who have had an inadequate response, loss of response or were intolerant to a previous biologic agent or conventional therapy. Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd, in collaboration with Maastricht University Medical Centre+, was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group. This paper summarises the company submission, presents the Evidence Review Group’s critical review on the clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence in the company submission, highlights the key methodological considerations and describes the development of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance by the Appraisal Committee. The company submission included one relevant study for the comparison of filgotinib versus placebo: the SELECTION trial. As there was no head-to-head evidence with any of the comparators, the company performed two separate network meta-analyses, one for the biologic-naïve population and one for the biologic-experienced population, and for both the induction and maintenance phases. The Evidence Review Group questioned the validity of the maintenance network meta-analysis because it assumed all active treatments to be comparators in this phase, which is not in line with clinical practice. The economic analysis used a number of assumptions that introduced substantial uncertainty, which could not be fully explored, for instance, the assumption that a risk of loss of response would be independent of health state and constant over time. Company and Evidence Review Group results indicate that at its current price, and disregarding confidential discounts for comparators and subsequent treatments, filgotinib dominates some comparators (golimumab and adalimumab in the company base case, all but intravenous and subcutaneous vedolizumab in the Evidence Review Group’s base case) in the biologic-naïve population. In the biologic-experienced population, filgotinib dominates all comparators in both the company and the Evidence Review Group’s base case. Results should be interpreted with caution as some important uncertainties were not included in the modelling. These uncertainties were mostly centred around the maintenance network meta-analysis, loss of response, health-related quality-of-life estimates and modelling of dose escalation. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommended filgotinib within its marketing authorisation, as an option for treating moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis in adults when conventional or biological treatment cannot be tolerated, or if the disease has not responded well enough or has stopped responding to these treatments, and if the company provides filgotinib according to the commercial arrangement.</p

Endoscopic and surgical treatment outcomes of colitis-associated advanced colorectal neoplasia:a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients are at increased risk of advanced neoplasia (high-grade dysplasia or colorectal cancer). The authors aimed to (1) assess synchronous and metachronous neoplasia following (sub)total or proctocolectomy, partial colectomy or endoscopic resection for advanced neoplasia in IBD, and (2) identify factors associated with treatment choice.MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, the authors used the Dutch nationwide pathology databank (PALGA) to identify patients diagnosed with IBD and colonic advanced neoplasia (AN) between 1991 and 2020 in seven hospitals in the Netherlands. Logistic and Fine &amp; Gray's subdistribution hazard models were used to assess adjusted subdistribution hazard ratios for metachronous neoplasia and associations with treatment choice.RESULTS: The authors included 189 patients (high-grade dysplasia n =81; colorectal cancer n =108). Patients were treated with proctocolectomy ( n =33), (sub)total colectomy ( n =45), partial colectomy ( n =56) and endoscopic resection ( n =38). Partial colectomy was more frequently performed in patients with limited disease and older age, with similar patient characteristics between Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Synchronous neoplasia was found in 43 patients (25.0%; (sub)total or proctocolectomy n =22, partial colectomy n =8, endoscopic resection n =13). The authors found a metachronous neoplasia rate of 6.1, 11.5 and 13.7 per 100 patient-years after (sub)total colectomy, partial colectomy and endoscopic resection, respectively. Endoscopic resection, but not partial colectomy, was associated with an increased metachronous neoplasia risk (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratios 4.16, 95% CI 1.64-10.54, P &lt;0.01) compared with (sub)total colectomy.CONCLUSION: After confounder adjustment, partial colectomy yielded a similar metachronous neoplasia risk compared to (sub)total colectomy. High metachronous neoplasia rates after endoscopic resection underline the importance of strict subsequent endoscopic surveillance.</p

Stakeholders' perspectives on a patient-reported outcome measure-based drug safety monitoring system for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases

Background: Biologics are used as effective therapeutics to treat a variety of diseases. Even though biologics are widely used, knowledge on the post-marketing experience of patients is limited. Therefore, a framework was established for a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM)-based drug safety monitoring system for ADRs attributed to biologics, known as the ‘Dutch Biologic Monitor’. Objective: Generation of a multi-stakeholder perspective on the preferred setup, potential and added value of a PROM-based national drug safety monitoring system. Methods: Nineteen stakeholders were interviewed following a structured interview guide. Transcribed data were coded and analyzed to count frequencies and to generate recurring themes. Results: Stakeholders (84.2%) support the establishment of a national drug safety monitoring system, but the feasibility depends on the implementation process. The need for integration and assessment of PROMs on ADRs in clinical practice and the preference to monitor small molecules and new drugs were emphasized. Preferably, all pharmacological options per indication should be monitored. Conclusions: Stakeholders recommend to establish a PROM-based national drug safety monitoring system focused on ADRs attributed to biologics, small molecules, and new drugs. Moreover, PROMs on ADRs ideally need to become integrated in clinical practice to provide health-care providers more insight in patients’ perspectives

Immune-mediated inflammatory disease patients' preferences in adverse drug reaction information regarding biologics

Objectives: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in studies and medical practice to obtain information on patients’ perspectives toward their treatment or disease. However, most study outcomes are primarily directed at healthcare professionals. It was aimed to obtain insight in which type of information immune-mediated inflammatory disease (IMID) patients prefer to receive after participating in the Dutch Biologic Monitor (DBM), a PRO-based prospective cohort event monitoring system focused on adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Methods: A survey was conducted among DBM participants that wanted information about the results. Patients’ preferences were identified using twelve statements and rated with five-point Likert-type scales. Subgroup analyses and differences between statements were performed using Mann-Whitney U Tests. Results: The survey was completed by 591 patients (response rate 67.6%). Most respondents had inflammatory rheumatic diseases (76.8%) and used adalimumab (37.2%) or etanercept (33.2%). Respondents preferred results per IMID over aggregated results (p = <0.001). Information on whether patients with similar IMIDs experience ADRs (average 4.5), which biologics are most likely to cause ADRs (4.4) and whether ADRs disappear (4.4) were most interesting. Conclusion: DBM participants prefer to receive disease-specific information on ADRs that is tailored to their own biologic and IMID, including the outcome of ADRs

Gastrointestinal adverse drug reaction profile of etanercept:Real world data from patients and healthcare professionals

Objective. We aimed to describe the nature and frequency of gastrointestinal adverse drug reactions (GI-ADRs) of etanercept (ETN) using patient-reported and healthcare professional (HCP)-registered data and compared this frequency with the GI-ADR frequency of the widely used tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitor adalimumab (ADA). Methods. Reported GI-ADRs of ETN for rheumatic diseases were collected from the Dutch Biologic Monitor and DREAM registries. We described the clinical course of GI-ADRs and compared the frequency with ADA in both data sources using Fisher exact test. Results. Out of 416 patients using ETN for inflammatory rheumatic diseases in the Dutch Biologic Monitor, 25 (6%) patients reported 36 GI-ADRs. In the DREAM registries 11 GI-ADRs were registered for 9 patients (2.3%), out of 399 patients using ETN, with an incidence of 7.1 per 1000 patient-years. Most GI-ADRs consisted of diarrhea, nausea, and abdominal pain. GI-ADRs led to ETN discontinuation in 1 patient (4%) and dose adjustment in 4 (16%) in the Dutch Biologic Monitor. Eight GI-ADRs (73%) led to ETN discontinuation in the DREAM registries. The frequency of GI-ADRs of ETN did not significantly differ from GI-ADRs of ADA in both data sources (Dutch Biologic Monitor: ETN 8.7% vs ADA 5.3%, P = 0.07; DREAM: ETN 2.8% vs ADA 4.7%, P = 0.16). Conclusion. Most GI-ADRs associated with ETN concerned gastrointestinal symptoms. These ADRs may lead to dose adjustment or ETN discontinuation. The frequency of ETN-associated GI-ADRs was comparable to the frequency of ADA-associated GI-ADRs. Knowledge about these previously unknown ADRs can facilitate early recognition and improve patient communication

Decreasing Trends in Intestinal Resection and Re-Resection in Crohn's Disease A Nationwide Cohort Study:A Nationwide Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE: To assess time trends in intestinal resection and re-resection in Crohn's disease (CD) patients.SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: CD treatment has changed considerably over the past decades. The effect of these advances on the necessity of intestinal resections and the risk of re-resection is unclear.METHODS: In this nationwide cohort study, adult CD patients with ileocolonic, small bowel, colon, or rectum resections between 1991 and 2015 were included. Data were retrieved from the Dutch nationwide network and registry of histopathology and cytopathology (PALGA). Time trends were analyzed with a broken stick model and Cox proportional hazard model with smoothing splines.RESULTS: The identified cohort comprised 8172 CD patients (3293/4879 male/female) in whom 10,315 intestinal resections were performed. The annual intestinal resection rate decreased nonlinearly from 22.7/100,000 CD patients (1991) to 2.5/100,000 (2015). A significantly steeper decrease was observed before 1999 (slope -1.56) as compared to subsequent years (slope -0.41) (P &lt; 0.001). Analogous trends were observed for ileocolonic, small bowel, and colon resections. Overall cumulative risk of re-resection was 10.9% at 5 years, 18.6% at 10 years, and 28.3% at 20 years after intestinal resection. The hazard for intestinal re-resection showed a nonlinear decreasing trend, with hazard ratio 0.39 (95% confidence interval 0.36-0.44) in 2000 and hazard ratio 0.25 (95% confidence interval 0.18-0.34) in 2015 as compared to 1991.CONCLUSION: Over the past 25 years, intestinal resection rate has decreased significantly for ileocolonic, small bowel, and colonic CD. In addition, current postoperative CD patients are at 75% lower risk of intestinal re-resection.This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0.</p

Outcome of Reverse Switching From CT-P13 to Originator Infliximab in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND: Patients suffering from inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and treated with originator infliximab are increasingly being switched to biosimilars. Some patients, however, are "reverse switched" to treatment with the originator. Here we assess the prevalence of reverse switching, including its indication and outcomes. METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, data on patients with IBD from 9 hospitals in the Netherlands were collected. All adult patients with IBD were included if they previously had been switched from originator infliximab to the biosimilar CT-P13 and had a follow-up time of at least 52 weeks after the initial switch. The reasons for reverse switching were categorized into worsening gastrointestinal symptoms, adverse effects, or loss of response to CT-P13. Drug persistence was analyzed through survival analyses. RESULTS: A total of 758 patients with IBD were identified. Reverse switching was observed in 75 patients (9.9%). Patients with reverse switching were predominantly female (70.7%). Gastrointestinal symptoms (25.5%) and dermatological symptoms (21.8%) were the most commonly reported reasons for reverse switching. In 9 patients (12.0%), loss of response to CT-P13 was the reason for reverse switching. Improvement of reported symptoms was seen in 73.3% of patients after reverse switching and 7 out of 9 patients (77.8%) with loss of response regained response. Infliximab persistence was equal between patients who were reverse-switched and those who were maintained on CT-P13. CONCLUSIONS: Reverse switching occurred in 9.9% of patients, predominantly for biosimilar-attributed adverse effects. Switching back to originator infliximab seems effective in patients who experience adverse effects, worsening gastrointestinal symptoms, or loss of response after switching from originator infliximab to CT-P13