P1010 Guselkumab improves abdominal pain and bowel urgency symptoms in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: Results from the phase 3 QUASAR induction study
D Rubin,J Panés,B Feagan,S Yarandi,K H Huang,M Germinaro,C Han,Y Miao,H Zhang,Y Qiu,M Klopocka,G Duvall,G Lichtenstein,T Hisamatsu,B Bressler,L Peyrin-Biroulet
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.1140
2024-01-01
Journal of Crohn's and Colitis
Abstract:Abstract Background Abdominal pain and bowel urgency are prevalent, burdensome symptoms experienced by patients (pts) with ulcerative colitis (UC) that impact daily life, including social activities. In this study, we use data from the Phase 3 QUASAR Induction Study to assess efficacy of guselkumab (GUS) on abdominal pain, bowel urgency, and the impact of bowel urgency on pts’ lives. Methods Pts were randomized 3:2 to receive IV GUS 200mg or placebo (PBO) at Weeks (Wks) 0, 4, and 8. Abdominal pain and bowel urgency were evaluated at baseline and Wk12 using items from the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire, where pts rated trouble with abdominal pain, symptoms of bowel urgency, and the impact of bowel urgency over the past 2 wks using 7-point scales (1=all of the time to 7=none of the time). A ≥2 point increase from baseline was clinically meaningful improvement. All analyses were prespecified but not multiplicity controlled; all p-values are nominal. Results At baseline, percentages of pts with abdominal pain (GUS 77.7% and PBO 77.9%), symptoms of bowel urgency (GUS 86.0% and PBO 83.2%), and impact of bowel urgency (GUS 70.8% and PBO 70.4%) at least a little of the time (score ≤5) were similar between groups. GUS-treated pts showed greater improvements at Wk12 in these outcomes compared with PBO (Table 1). For abdominal pain, 52.0% of GUS-treated pts had clinically meaningful improvements from baseline at Wk12 vs 33.0% in the PBO group (p<0.001), and 21.1% vs 12.3%, respectively, of those with abdominal pain at baseline had resolution at Wk12 (p=0.004; Fig. 1A). For symptoms of bowel urgency, 58.6% vs 33.0%, respectively, had clinically meaningful improvements (p<0.001; Fig. 1B), and 24.0% vs 9.8%, respectively, of those with symptoms of bowel urgency at baseline had resolution at Wk12 (p<0.001). Similarly, 57.7% vs 33.0%, respectively, had clinically meaningful improvements in the impact of bowel urgency (p<0.001; Fig. 1B), and 32.4% vs 13.1%, respectively, of those impacted at baseline had resolution at Wk12 (p<0.001). Symptoms and impact of bowel urgency were combined into a bowel urgency score; of pts with symptoms or impact scores ≤6 at baseline, 19.7% versus 8.2%, respectively, had resolution of both at Wk12 (p<0.001; Fig. 1B). Conclusion Pts receiving GUS showed clinically meaningful improvements in health-related quality of life measures related to abdominal pain and bowel urgency, including both the symptoms of bowel urgency and impact on pts’ lives.
gastroenterology & hepatology