Efficacy and safety of filgotinib as induction and maintenance therapy for Crohn's disease (DIVERSITY): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.
There is a need for efficacious therapies for patients with Crohn's disease that are better tolerated and more durable than available treatments. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of filgotinib, an oral Janus kinase 1 preferential inhibitor, for treating Crohn's disease.
This phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in 371 centres in 39 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease for at least 3 months before enrolment. Patients were enrolled into one of two induction studies on the basis of their experience with biological agents (induction study A included biologic-naive and later biologic-experienced patients and induction study B included biologic-experienced patients). In both induction studies, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using an interactive web response system, to receive oral filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, or placebo once daily for 11 weeks. Patients who received filgotinib and had two-item patient-reported outcome (PRO2) clinical remission or an endoscopic response at week 10 were re-randomised (2:1) to receive their induction dose or placebo orally, once daily to the end of week 58 in the maintenance study. Co-primary endpoints were PRO2 clinical remission and an endoscopic response at week 10 (induction studies) and week 58 (maintenance study). PRO2 clinical remission was defined as an abdominal pain subscore of not more than 1 and a liquid or very soft stool frequency subscore of not more than 3 (from eDiary data) and endoscopic response was defined as a reduction of at least 50% in Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease from induction baseline (from central reading of endoscopy). For the induction studies, efficacy was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. For the maintenance study, efficacy was assessed in all patients from either filgotinib treatment group in the induction studies who reached PRO2 clinical remission or an endoscopic response at week 10, and who were re-randomised and received at least one dose of study drug in the maintenance study. Patients who received placebo throughout the induction and maintenance studies were not included in the full analysis set for the maintenance study. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02914561.
Between Oct 31, 2016, and Nov 11, 2022, 2634 patients were screened, of whom 1372 were enrolled (induction study A: n=707, induction study B: n=665, and maintenance study: n=481). There were 346 (49%) women and 358 (51%) men in induction study A, 356 (54%) women and 303 (46%) men in induction study B, and 242 women (51%) and 236 men (49%) in the maintenance study. Significantly more patients had PRO2 clinical remission at week 10 with filgotinib 200 mg than with placebo in induction study B (29·7% vs 17·9%, difference 11·9%; 95% CI 3·7 to 20·2, p=0·0039) but not induction study A (32·9% vs 25·7%, 6·9%; -1·4 to 15·2, p=0·0963); there was no significant difference for endoscopic response (induction study A: 23·9% vs 18·1%, difference 5·5%; 95% CI -2·0 to 12·9, p=0·1365; induction study B: 11·9% vs 11·4%, 0·1%; -6·5 to 6·6, p=0·9797). At week 58, both co-primary endpoints were reported in greater proportions of patients who received filgotinib 200 mg than in those who received placebo (PRO2 clinical remission: 43·8% vs 26·4%, difference 16·8%; 95% CI 2·0 to 31·6, p=0·0382; endoscopic response: 30·4% vs 9·4%, difference 20·6%; 95% CI 8·2 to 33·1, p=0·0038). Co-primary endpoints were not met for filgotinib 100 mg in any study. In the induction studies, the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; ≥5% of patients in any group) were abdominal pain; arthralgia; an exacerbation, flare, or worsening of Crohn's disease; headache; nasopharyngitis; nausea; and pyrexia. In the maintenance study, the most frequently reported TEAEs (≥5% of patients in any filgotinib or associated placebo group) were those reported in the induction studies (except for headache) and abdominal distension, upper abdominal pain, anaemia, and flatulence. Serious TEAEs were reported in 49 patients in induction study A (18 [8%]) of 222 patients in the filgotinib 200 mg group, 16 [7%] of 245 patients in the filgotinib 100 mg group, and 15 [6%] of 237 patients in the placebo group), 81 patients in induction study B (19 [9%] of 202 patients in the filgotinib 200 mg group, 36 [16%] of 228 patients in the filgotinib 100 mg group, and 26 [11%] of 229 patients in the placebo group), and 49 patients in the maintenance study (13 [11%] of 118 patients in the filgotinib 200 mg-filgotinib 200 mg group, five [9%] of 56 patients in the filgotinib 200 mg-placebo group, 14 [13%] of 104 patients in the filgotinib 100 mg-filgotinib 100 mg group, three [5%] of 55 patients in the filgotinib 100 mg-placebo group, and 14 [10%] of 145 patients in the placebo-placebo group). No deaths were reported during the induction and maintenance studies.
Filgotinib 200 mg did not meet the co-primary endpoints of clinical remission and an endoscopic response at week 10, but did meet the co-primary endpoints at week 58. Filgotinib treatment was well tolerated, and no new safety signals were reported.
Galapagos.
Vermeire S
，Schreiber S
，Rubin DT
，D'Haens G
，Reinisch W
，Watanabe M
，Mehta R
，Roblin X
，Beales I
，Gietka P
，Hibi T
，Hospodarskyy I
，Ritter T
，Genovese MC
，Kwon P
，Santermans E
，Le Brun FO
，Barron R
，Masior T
，Danese S
... -
《The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology》
Antioxidants for female subfertility.
M.G. Showell, R. Mackenzie‐Proctor, V. Jordan, and R.J. Hart, “Antioxidants for Female Subfertility,” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, no. 8 (2020): CD007807, https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007807.pub4 This Editorial Note is for the above article, published online on August 27, 2020, in Cochrane Library (cochranelibrary.com), and has been issued by the Publisher, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, in agreement with Cochrane. The Editorial note has been agreed due to concerns discovered by the Cochrane managing editor regarding the retraction of six studies in the Review (Badawy et al. 2006, 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.02.097; El Refaeey et al. 2014, 10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.03.011; El Sharkwy & Abd El Aziz 2019a, https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12902; Gerli et al. 2007, https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202309_33752, full text: https://europepmc.org/article/MED/18074942; Ismail et al. 2014, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.06.008; Hashemi et al. 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2017.1372413). In addition, expressions of concern have been published for two studies (Jamilian et al. 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-017-1236-3; Zadeh Modarres 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-017-1148-2). The retracted studies will be moved to the Excluded Studies table, and their impact on the review findings will be investigated and acted on accordingly in a future update. Initial checks indicate that removal of the six retracted studies did not make an appreciable difference to the results. Likewise, the studies for which Expressions of Concern were issued will be moved to the Awaiting classification table; they did not report any review outcomes, so removal will have no impact on the review findings.
A couple may be considered to have fertility problems if they have been trying to conceive for over a year with no success. This may affect up to a quarter of all couples planning a child. It is estimated that for 40% to 50% of couples, subfertility may result from factors affecting women. Antioxidants are thought to reduce the oxidative stress brought on by these conditions. Currently, limited evidence suggests that antioxidants improve fertility, and trials have explored this area with varied results. This review assesses the evidence for the effectiveness of different antioxidants in female subfertility.
To determine whether supplementary oral antioxidants compared with placebo, no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant improve fertility outcomes for subfertile women.
We searched the following databases (from their inception to September 2019), with no language or date restriction: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AMED. We checked reference lists of relevant studies and searched the trial registers.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any type, dose or combination of oral antioxidant supplement with placebo, no treatment or treatment with another antioxidant, among women attending a reproductive clinic. We excluded trials comparing antioxidants with fertility drugs alone and trials that only included fertile women attending a fertility clinic because of male partner infertility.
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary review outcome was live birth; secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy rates and adverse events.
We included 63 trials involving 7760 women. Investigators compared oral antioxidants, including: combinations of antioxidants, N-acetylcysteine, melatonin, L-arginine, myo-inositol, carnitine, selenium, vitamin E, vitamin B complex, vitamin C, vitamin D+calcium, CoQ10, and omega-3-polyunsaturated fatty acids versus placebo, no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant. Only 27 of the 63 included trials reported funding sources. Due to the very low-quality of the evidence we are uncertain whether antioxidants improve live birth rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (odds ratio (OR) 1.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 2.43; P < 0.001, I2 = 29%; 13 RCTs, 1227 women). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected live birth rate of 19%, the rate among women using antioxidants would be between 24% and 36%. Low-quality evidence suggests that antioxidants may improve clinical pregnancy rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.43 to 1.89; P < 0.001, I2 = 63%; 35 RCTs, 5165 women). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected clinical pregnancy rate of 19%, the rate among women using antioxidants would be between 25% and 30%. Heterogeneity was moderately high. Overall 28 trials reported on various adverse events in the meta-analysis. The evidence suggests that the use of antioxidants makes no difference between the groups in rates of miscarriage (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.55; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%; 24 RCTs, 3229 women; low-quality evidence). There was also no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of multiple pregnancy (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.56; P = 0.99, I2 = 0%; 9 RCTs, 1886 women; low-quality evidence). There was also no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of gastrointestinal disturbances (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.47 to 5.10; P = 0.47, I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, 343 women; low-quality evidence). Low-quality evidence showed that there was also no difference between the groups in rates of ectopic pregnancy (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.27 to 7.20; P = 0.69, I2 = 0%; 4 RCTs, 404 women). In the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison, low-quality evidence shows no difference in a lower dose of melatonin being associated with an increased live-birth rate compared with higher-dose melatonin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.15; P = 0.89, I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 140 women). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected live-birth rate of 24%, the rate among women using a lower dose of melatonin compared to a higher dose would be between 12% and 40%. Similarly with clinical pregnancy, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates between a lower and a higher dose of melatonin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.15; P = 0.89, I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 140 women). Three trials reported on miscarriage in the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison (two used doses of melatonin and one compared N-acetylcysteine versus L-carnitine). There were no miscarriages in either melatonin trial. Multiple pregnancy and gastrointestinal disturbances were not reported, and ectopic pregnancy was reported by only one trial, with no events. The study comparing N-acetylcysteine with L-carnitine did not report live birth rate. Very low-quality evidence shows no evidence of a difference in clinical pregnancy (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.00; 1 RCT, 164 women; low-quality evidence). Low quality evidence shows no difference in miscarriage (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.42 to 5.67; 1 RCT, 164 women; low-quality evidence). The study did not report multiple pregnancy, gastrointestinal disturbances or ectopic pregnancy. The overall quality of evidence was limited by serious risk of bias associated with poor reporting of methods, imprecision and inconsistency.
In this review, there was low- to very low-quality evidence to show that taking an antioxidant may benefit subfertile women. Overall, there is no evidence of increased risk of miscarriage, multiple births, gastrointestinal effects or ectopic pregnancies, but evidence was of very low quality. At this time, there is limited evidence in support of supplemental oral antioxidants for subfertile women.
Showell MG
，Mackenzie-Proctor R
，Jordan V
，Hart RJ
... -
《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
