IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0212989.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vedolizumab in Japanese patients with ulcerative colitis: A Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Author

Listed:
  • Satoshi Motoya
  • Kenji Watanabe
  • Haruhiko Ogata
  • Takanori Kanai
  • Toshiyuki Matsui
  • Yasuo Suzuki
  • Mitsuhiro Shikamura
  • Kenkichi Sugiura
  • Kazunori Oda
  • Tetsuharu Hori
  • Takahiro Araki
  • Mamoru Watanabe
  • Toshifumi Hibi

Abstract

Background: Vedolizumab safety and efficacy have been established in many populations all over the world, but have never been studied in Japan. We report results from a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of vedolizumab in Japanese patients with active ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods: Patients with moderate-to-severe UC were enrolled into Cohort 1 (double-blinded) or Cohort 2 (open-label) in the induction phase. Cohort 1 was randomized 2:1 to receive 300 mg vedolizumab or placebo, while Cohort 2 received vedolizumab 300 mg only, at Weeks 0, 2, and 6. Patients from Cohorts 1 and 2 showing a clinical response to vedolizumab at Week 10 were randomized 1:1 to receive vedolizumab or placebo (double-blinded) at Week 14 and then every 8 weeks up to Week 54 as the maintenance phase. The primary endpoint was clinical response at Week 10, for the induction phase, and clinical remission at Week 60, for the maintenance phase. Results: A total of 292 patients were enrolled into the induction phase (246 in Cohort 1, 46 in Cohort 2); 83 patients achieved response to vedolizumab and were subsequently enrolled into the maintenance phase. Clinical response rates at Week 10 were 39.6% (65/164) and 32.9% (27/82) in the vedolizumab and placebo groups in Cohort 1, respectively (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.37, 95% CI 0.779–2.399; p = 0.2722). In the maintenance phase, clinical remission rate at Week 60 was significantly higher in the vedolizumab group, at 56.1% (23/41), versus 31.0% (13/42) for placebo (AOR = 2.88, 95% CI 1.168–7.108; p = 0.0210). Most adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity, and no deaths occurred during the study period. Conclusions: Vedolizumab showed numerically greater efficacy compared with placebo as induction therapy, but the difference was not statistically significant. Vedolizumab was significantly superior to placebo as maintenance therapy in Japanese patients with UC. Vedolizumab has favourable safety and tolerability in these patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02039505.

Suggested Citation

  • Satoshi Motoya & Kenji Watanabe & Haruhiko Ogata & Takanori Kanai & Toshiyuki Matsui & Yasuo Suzuki & Mitsuhiro Shikamura & Kenkichi Sugiura & Kazunori Oda & Tetsuharu Hori & Takahiro Araki & Mamoru W, 2019. "Vedolizumab in Japanese patients with ulcerative colitis: A Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-17, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0212989
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212989
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0212989
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0212989&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0212989?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0212989. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.