Z Gastroenterol 2025; 63(08): e421-e422
DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1810729
Abstracts | DGVS/DGAV
Kurzvorträge
Molekulare Therapie bei CED Donnerstag, 18. September 2025, 11:15 – 12:51, MZF 1

Mirikizumab effect on bowel urgency resolution in a randomised controlled phase 3 trial of participants with crohn’s disease

Authors

  • V J Vipul

    1   Western University, Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Ontario, Kanada
  • B E Sands

    2   Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, Vereinigte Staaten
  • M Chaparro

    3   Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Madrid, Spanien
  • M Chen

    4   First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • G D’Haens

    5   Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Niederlande
  • M Dubinsky

    6   Icahn School of Medicine Mount Sinai, New York, Vereinigte Staaten
  • M Ferrante

    7   University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgien
  • L Peyrin-Biroulet

    8   Nancy University Hospital, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, Frankreich
  • S Schreiber

    9   Kiel University, Kiel, Deutschland
  • S Travis

    10   University of Oxford, Oxford, Vereinigtes Königreich
  • H Carlier

    11   Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Vereinigte Staaten
  • Z Lin

    11   Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Vereinigte Staaten
  • R Moses

    11   Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Vereinigte Staaten
  • M Protic

    11   Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Vereinigte Staaten
  • A Vadhariya

    11   Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Vereinigte Staaten
  • K Tsilkos

    11   Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Vereinigte Staaten
  • S Ghosh

    12   University College Cork, Cork, Irland
 

Introduction: Bowel urgency (BU), the sudden or immediate need to have a bowel movement, is an impactful symptom of Crohn’s disease (CD) that varies in intensity. We report the efficacy of the IL-23 p19 inhibitor, mirikizumab (miri) in improving BU among patients with moderately-to-severely active CD from the phase 3 VIVID-1 trial (NCT03926130). VIVID-1 co-primary and gated endpoints, including comparison with ustekinumab, are already reported.

Methods: Adult patients (N=1065) were randomised to placebo (PBO) or miri 900mg intravenously at weeks (W) 0, 4, and 8, then 300mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks (Q4W) from W12 to W52. At W12, PBO responders continued PBO to W52, non-responders received the blinded miri regimen per protocol. BU was assessed at W12 and W52 using the Urgency Numeric Rating Scale (UNRS). We evaluated the proportion of patients with baseline (BL) UNRS≥3 and≥6 who achieved BU Clinically Meaningful Improvement (CMI;>3 change in UNRS) and BU remission (UNRS≤2). Treatment comparisons used Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests with non-responder imputation for missing values.

Results: Study population: 55.1% male. Mean (SD) age 36.2 (13.0) years. Disease duration 7.4 (7.9) years. At BL, median (Q1, Q3) UNRS 6.9 (5.2, 8.1), 94.5% patients achieved UNRS≥3 and 66.0% patients achieved≥6. In patients with BL UNRS≥3, nominally significantly higher proportions of miri versus PBO patients achieved BU CMI and BU remission at both W12 and W52 ([Table 1]). A nominally significantly greater proportion of miri-treated patients achieved W52 BU CMI-composite and BU remission-composite ([Table 1]). Similar results were seen with BL UNRS≥6.

Table 1

W12 PBO

W12 Miri

W12 p-value

W12 95% CI

W52 PBO

W52 Miri

W52 p-value

W52 95% CI

UNRSa CFB (LSM±SE)

-1.58 (0.168)

-2.44 (0.099)

0.00011

-1.24, -0.48

-1.23 (0.180)

-3.24 (0.106)

<0.0001

-2.42, -1.60

Patients with BL UNRS≥3

BU CMI-TT

50/186 (26.9)

227/547 (41.5)

0.0004

6.7, 22.0

38/186 (20.4)

301/547 (55.0)

<0.0001

28.0, 42.1

BU CMI-compositeb

38/186 (20.4)

251/547 (45.9)

<0.0001

18.5, 32.8

BU Remissionc-TT

29/186 (15.6)

134/547 (24.5)

0.01

2.3, 15.0

21/186 (11.3)

209/547 (38.2)

<0.0001

21.0, 33.2

BU Remission-composite

21/186 (11.3)

180/547 (32.9)

<0.0001

15.7, 27.8

Patients with BL UNRS≥6

BU CMI-TT

38/137 (27.7)

180/376 (47.9)

0.0001

9.8, 28.2

31/137 (22.6)

229/376 (60.9)

<0.0001

30.1, 47.3

BU CMI-composite

31/137 (22.6)

188/376 (50.0)

<0.0001

18.4, 36.0

BU Remission-TT

11/137 (8.0)

70/376 (18.6)

0.007

3.8, 15.8

13/137 (9.5)

126/376 (33.5)

<0.0001

17.1, 31.1

BU Remission-composite

13/137 (9.5)

111/376 (29.5)

0.0002

13.2, 27.0

PBO, N=199; Miri, N=579. Data are N (%) unless otherwise stated. aUNRS scale: 0 (no urgency)-10 (worst possible urgency)3. bComposite=Clinical response by PRO (2 of the patient-reported items of the CDAI, AP and SF) at W12 and W52 parameter (CMI or Remission). cBU remission=no to minimal BU (UNRS≤2). Treatment comparison: CFB used a mixed model for repeated measures model containing treatment, BL value, visit, stratification factors and interaction of BL value by visit and treatment by visit. Response rates used Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests with non-responder imputation. AP=abdominal pain; BL=baseline; CFB=change from BL; CI=confidence interval; CMI=clinically meaningful improvement; LSM=least squares mean; PBO=placebo; PRO=Patient Reported Outcome; SD=standard deviation; SE=standard error; SF=stool frequency; TT=treat-through; UNRS=Urgency Numeric Rating Scale; W=week.

Conclusion: BU is one of the most unrecognised symptoms in patients with CD. Patients enrolled in VIVID-1 had high BU scores at BL. Compared to PBO-treated pts, miri-treated pts achieved nominally significantly higher rates of BU CMI and remission at W12 and W52.



Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
04. September 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany