CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Mechanism Of Action
Vedolizumab is a humanized
monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to the α4β7 integrin and
blocks the interaction of α4β7 integrin with mucosal addressin cell
adhesion molecule-1 (MAdCAM-1) and inhibits the migration of memory
T-lymphocytes across the endothelium into inflamed gastrointestinal parenchymal
tissue. Vedolizumab does not bind to or inhibit function of the α4β1
and αEβ7 integrins and does not antagonize the interaction of α4
integrins with vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1).
The α4β7 integrin is
expressed on the surface of a discrete subset of memory T-lymphocytes that
preferentially migrate into the gastrointestinal tract. MAdCAM-1 is mainly
expressed on gut endothelial cells and plays a critical role in the homing of
T-lymphocytes to gut lymph tissue. The interaction of the α4β7
integrin with MAdCAM-1 has been implicated as an important contributor
to the chronic inflammation that is a hallmark of ulcerative colitis and
Crohn's disease.
Pharmacodynamics
In clinical trials with ENTYVIO at doses ranging from 0.2
to 10 mg/kg (which includes doses outside of the recommended dose), saturation
of α4β7 receptors on subsets of circulating lymphocytes involved in
gut-immune surveillance was observed.
In clinical trials with ENTYVIO at doses ranging from 0.2
to 10 mg/kg and 180 to 750 mg (which include doses outside of the recommended
dose) in healthy subjects and in patients with ulcerative colitis or Crohn's
disease, vedolizumab did not elevate neutrophils, basophils, eosinophils,
B-helper and cytotoxic T-lymphocytes, total memory helper T-lymphocytes,
monocytes or natural killer cells.
A reduction in gastrointestinal inflammation was observed
in rectal biopsy specimens from Phase 2 ulcerative colitis patients exposed to
ENTYVIO for four or six weeks compared to placebo control as assessed by
histopathology.
In a study of 14 healthy subjects, ENTYVIO did not affect
the CD4+ lymphocyte cell counts, CD8+ lymphocyte cell counts, or the CD4+:CD8+
ratios in the CSF [see Pharmacokinetics].
Pharmacokinetics
Similar pharmacokinetics were observed in ulcerative
colitis and Crohn's disease patients administered 300 mg ENTYVIO as a 30 minute
intravenous infusion on Weeks 0 and 2, followed by 300 mg ENTYVIO every eight
weeks starting from Week 6 (Table 3).
Table 3: Mean ± SD Vedolizumab Concentrations in
Patients* with Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn’s Disease
Patient Population |
Weeks 0 to 6 |
Weeks 6 to 52 ENTYVIO Every 8 Weeks |
Trough Serum Concentration at Week 6 (mcg/mL) |
Trough Serum Concentration at Week 46† (mcg/mL) |
Ulcerative Colitis |
26.3 + 12.9 |
11.2 + 7.2 |
(N=210) |
(N=77) |
Crohn’s Disease |
27.4 + 19.2 |
13.0 + 9.1 |
(N=198) |
(N=72) |
*Data from patients in UC
Trials I and II and CD Trials I and III with pharmacokinetic data available;
data from patients with anti-vedolizumab antibody were excluded.
†Steady-state trough serum concentration. |
The presence of persistent
anti-vedolizumab antibody was observed to substantially reduce serum
concentrations of vedolizumab, either to undetectable or negligible levels at
Weeks 6 and 52 (n=8).
Vedolizumab clearance depends
on both linear and nonlinear pathways; the nonlinear clearance decreases with
increasing concentrations. Population pharmacokinetic analyses indicated that
the linear clearance was approximately 0.157 L/day, the serum half-life was
approximately 25 days at 300 mg dosage, and the distribution volume was
approximately 5 L.
Vedolizumab was not detected in the cerebrospinal fluid
(CSF) of 14 healthy subjects at five weeks after a single intravenous
administration of 450 mg ENTYVIO (1.5 times the recommended dosage).
Special Populations
Population pharmacokinetic analysis showed that the
severity of disease state, body weight, prior treatment with TNF blocker
therapy, age (18 to 78 years), serum albumin, co-administered immunomodulators
(including azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, methotrexate), and co-administered
aminosalicylates did not have a clinically meaningful effect on the
pharmacokinetics of ENTYVIO.
Pharmacokinetics of vedolizumab in patients with renal or
hepatic insufficiency have not been studied.
Clinical Studies
Clinical Studies In Ulcerative Colitis
The safety and efficacy of ENTYVIO were evaluated in two
randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (UC Trials I and II) in
adult patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC)
defined as Mayo score of six to 12 with endoscopy subscore of two or three. The
Mayo score ranges from zero to 12 and has four subscales that are each scored
from zero (normal) to three (most severe): stool frequency, rectal bleeding,
findings on endoscopy, and physician global assessment. An endoscopy subscore
of two is defined by marked erythema, lack of vascular pattern, friability, and
erosions; an endoscopy subscore of three is defined by spontaneous bleeding and
ulceration.
Enrolled patients in the United States (US) had over the
previous five-year period an inadequate response or intolerance to
immunomodulator therapy (i.e., azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine) and/or an
inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to a TNF blocker. Outside
the US, prior treatment with corticosteroids was sufficient for entry if over
the previous five-year period the patients were corticosteroid dependent (i.e.,
unable to successfully taper corticosteroids without a return of the symptoms
of UC) or had an inadequate response or intolerance to corticosteroids.
Patients that had received natalizumab ever in the past,
and patients that had received a TNF blocker in the past 60 days were excluded
from enrollment. Concomitant use of natalizumab or a TNF blocker was not
allowed.
UC Trial I
In UC Trial I, 374 patients were randomized in a
double-blind fashion (3:2) to receive ENTYVIO 300 mg or placebo by intravenous
infusion at Week 0 and Week 2. Efficacy assessments were at Week 6. Concomitant
stable dosages of aminosalicylates, corticosteroids (prednisone dosage
≤30 mg/day or equivalent), and immunomodulators (azathioprine or
6-mercaptopurine) were permitted through Week 6.
At baseline, patients received corticosteroids (54%),
immunomodulators (azathioprine or 6mercaptopurine) (30%), and/or
aminosalicylates (74%). Thirty-nine percent of patients had an inadequate
response, loss of response, or intolerance to a TNF blocker therapy. Eighteen
percent of patients had an inadequate response, inability to taper or
intolerance to prior corticosteroid treatment only (i.e., had not received
prior immunomodulators or TNF blockers). The median baseline Mayo score was
nine in the ENTYVIO group and eight in the placebo group.
In UC Trial I, a greater percentage of patients treated
with ENTYVIO compared to patients treated with placebo achieved clinical
response at Week 6 (defined in Table 4). A greater percentage of patients
treated with ENTYVIO compared to patients treated with placebo also achieved
clinical remission at Week 6 (defined in Table 4). In addition, a greater
percentage of patients treated with ENTYVIO had improvement of endoscopic
appearance of the mucosa at Week 6 (defined in Table 4).
Table 4: Proportion of Patients Meeting Efficacy
Endpoints at Week 6 (UC Trial I)
Endpoint |
Placebo
N=149 |
ENTYVIO
N=225 |
p-value |
Treatment Difference and 95% CI |
Clinical response* at Week 6 |
26% |
47% |
<0.001 |
22% (12%, 32%) |
Clinical remission† at Week 6 |
5% |
17% |
0.001 |
12% (5%, 18%) |
Improvement of endoscopic appearance of the mucosa‡ at Week 6 |
25% |
41% |
0.001 |
16% (6%, 26%) |
*Clinical response: reduction
in complete Mayo score of ≥3 points and
≥30% from baseline with an accompanying decrease in rectal bleeding subscore of ≥1
point or absolute rectal bleeding subscore of ≤1 point.
†Clinical remission: complete Mayo score of ≤2 points and no individual
subscore >1 point.
‡Improvement of endoscopic appearance of the mucosa: Mayo endoscopy subscore of
0 (normal or inactive disease) or 1 (erythema, decreased vascular pattern, mild
friability). |
UC Trial II
In order to be randomized to
treatment in UC Trial II, patients had to have received ENTYVIO and be in
clinical response at Week 6. Patients could have come from either UC Trial I or
from a group who received ENTYVIO open-label.
In UC Trial II, 373 patients
were randomized in a double-blind fashion (1:1:1) to one of the following
regimens beginning at Week 6: ENTYVIO 300 mg every eight weeks, ENTYVIO 300 mg
every four weeks or placebo every four weeks. Efficacy assessments were at Week
52. Concomitant aminosalicylates and corticosteroids were permitted through
Week 52. Concomitant immunomodulators (azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine) were
permitted outside the US but were not permitted beyond Week 6 in the US.
At Week 6, patients were
receiving corticosteroids (61%), immunomodulators (azathioprine or
6-mercaptopurine) (32%) and aminosalicylates (75%). Thirty-two percent of
patients had an inadequate response, loss of response or intolerance to a TNF
blocker therapy. At Week 6, the median Mayo score was eight in the ENTYVIO
every eight week group, the ENTYVIO every four week group, and the placebo
group. Patients who had achieved clinical response at Week 6 and were
receiving corticosteroids were required to begin a corticosteroid-tapering
regimen at Week 6.
In UC Trial II, a greater percentage of patients in
groups treated with ENTYVIO as compared to placebo achieved clinical remission
at Week 52, and maintained clinical response (clinical response at both Weeks 6
and 52) (Table 5). In addition, a greater percentage of patients in groups
treated with ENTYVIO as compared to placebo were in clinical remission at both
Weeks 6 and 52, and had improvement of endoscopic appearance of the mucosa at
Week 52 (Table 5). In the subgroup of patients who achieved clinical response
at Week 6 and were receiving corticosteroid medication at baseline, a greater
proportion of patients in groups treated with ENTYVIO as compared to placebo
discontinued corticosteroids and were in clinical remission at Week 52 (Table
5).
The ENTYVIO every four week dosing regimen did not
demonstrate additional clinical benefit over the every eight dosing week
regimen. The every four week dosing regimen is not the recommended dosing
regimen [see DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION].
Table 5: Proportion of Patients Meeting Efficacy
Endpoints at Week 52* (UC Trial II)
Endpoint |
Placebo†
N=126 |
ENTYVIO Every 8 Weeks
N=122 |
p-value |
Treatment Difference and 95% CI |
Clinical remission at Week 52 |
16% |
42% |
<0.001 |
26% (15%, 37%) |
Clinical response at both Weeks 6 and 52 |
24% |
57% |
<0.001 |
33% (21%, 45%) |
Improvement of endoscopic appearance of the mucosa‡ at Week 52 |
20% |
52% |
<0.001 |
32% (20%, 44%) |
Clinical remission at both Weeks 6 and 52 |
9% |
21% |
0.008 |
12% (3%, 21%) |
Corticosteroid-free clinical remissions§ |
14%§ |
31%§ |
0.012 |
18% (4%, 31%) |
*Patients must have achieved
clinical response at Week 6 to continue into UC Trial II. This group includes
patients that were not in clinical remission at Week 6.
†The placebo group includes those patients who received ENTYVIO at Week 0 and Week
2 and were randomized to receive placebo from Week 6 through Week 52.
‡Improvement of endoscopic appearance of the mucosa: Mayo endoscopy subscore of
0 (normal or inactive disease) or 1 (erythema, decreased vascular pattern, mild
friability) at Week 52.
§Corticosteroid-free clinical remission: Assessed in the subgroup of
patients who were receiving corticosteroids at baseline and who were in
clinical response at Week 6 (n=72 for placebo and n=70 for ENTYVIO every eight
weeks). Corticosteroid-free clinical remission was defined as the proportion of
patients in this subgroup that discontinued corticosteroids by Week 52 and were
in clinical remission at Week 52. |
Clinical Studies In Crohn’s
Disease
The safety and efficacy of ENTYVIO were evaluated in
three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials (CD Trials
I, II, and III) in adult patients with moderately to severely active Crohn’s
disease (CD) (Crohn’s Disease Activity Index [CDAI] score of 220 to 450).1
Enrolled patients in the United States (US) had over the
previous five-year period an inadequate response or intolerance to
immunomodulator therapy (i.e., azathioprine, 6mercaptopurine, or methotrexate)
and/or an inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to one or more
TNF blockers. Outside the US, prior treatment with corticosteroids was
sufficient for entry if over the previous five-year period the patients were
corticosteroid dependent (i.e., unable to successfully taper corticosteroids
without a return of the symptoms of CD) or had an inadequate response or
intolerance to corticosteroids.
Patients that had received natalizumab ever in the past,
and patients that had received a TNF blocker in the past 30 to 60 days were
excluded from enrollment. Concomitant use of natalizumab or a TNF blocker was
not allowed.
CD Trial I
In CD Trial I, 368 patients were randomized in a
double-blind fashion (3:2) to receive ENTYVIO 300 mg or placebo by intravenous
infusion at Week 0 and Week 2. Efficacy assessments were at Week 6. Concomitant
stable dosages of aminosalicylates, corticosteroids (prednisone dosage
≤30 mg/day or equivalent), and immunomodulators (azathioprine,
6mercaptopurine or methotrexate) were permitted through Week 6.
At baseline, patients were receiving corticosteroids
(49%), immunomodulators (azathioprine, 6mercaptopurine, or methotrexate) (35%),
and/or aminosalicylates (46%). Forty-eight percent of the patients had an
inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to a TNF blocker therapy.
Seventeen percent of patients had inadequate response, inability to taper, or
intolerance to prior corticosteroid treatment only (i.e., had not received
prior immunomodulators or TNF blockers). The median baseline CDAI score was 324
in the ENTYVIO group and 319 in the placebo group.
In CD Trial I, a statistically significantly higher
percentage of patients treated with ENTYVIO achieved clinical remission
(defined as CDAI ≤150) as compared to placebo at Week 6 (Table 6). The
difference in the percentage of patients who demonstrated clinical response
(defined as a ≥100-point decrease in CDAI score from baseline), was
however, not statistically significant at Week 6.
CD Trial II
Compared to CD Trial I, CD Trial II enrolled a higher
number of patients who had over the previous five-year period had an inadequate
response, loss of response, or intolerance to one or more TNF blockers (76%);
this was the primary analysis population. In CD Trial II, 416 patients were
randomized in a double-blind fashion (1:1) to receive either ENTYVIO 300 mg or
placebo at Weeks 0, 2 and 6. Efficacy assessments were at Weeks 6 and 10.
Concomitant aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, and immunomodulators (azathioprine,
6-mercaptopurine, or methotrexate) were permitted through Week 10.
At baseline, patients were receiving corticosteroids
(54%), immunomodulators (azathioprine, 6mercaptopurine, or methotrexate) (34%),
and aminosalicylates (31%). The median baseline CDAI score was 317 in the
ENTYVIO group and 301 in the placebo group.
For the primary endpoint (clinical remission at Week 6),
treatment with ENTYVIO did not result in statistically significant improvement
over placebo (Table 6). Secondary endpoints including assessments at Week 10
were not tested because the primary endpoint was not statistically significant.
Table 6: Proportion of Patients in Clinical Remission
at Week 6 (CD Trials I and II)
|
Placebo |
ENTYVIO |
p-value |
Treatment Difference and 95% CI |
CD Trial I: Clinical Remission* at Week 6 |
7% (10/148) |
15% (32/220) |
0.041‡ |
8% (1%, 14%) |
CD Trial II†: Clinical Remission* at Week 6 |
12% (19/157) |
15% (24/158) |
NS§ |
3% (-5%, 11%) |
*Clinical Remission: CDAI
≤150
†The primary analysis population for CD Trial II was patients that had an
inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to one or more TNF
blockers (76% of the overall population)
‡Adjusted p-value for multiple comparisons of two primary endpoints
§NS: Not significant (Secondary endpoints including assessments at Week
10 were not tested because the CD Trial II primary endpoint was not
statistically significant) |
CD Trial III
In order to be randomized to
treatment in CD Trial III, patients had to have received ENTYVIO and be in
clinical response (defined as a ≥70-point decrease in CDAI score from
baseline) at Week 6. Patients could have come from either CD Trial I or from a
group who received ENTYVIO open-label.
In CD Trial III, 461 patients
were randomized in a double-blind fashion (1:1:1) to one of the following
regimens beginning at Week 6: ENTYVIO 300 mg every eight weeks, ENTYVIO 300 mg
every four weeks or placebo every four weeks. Efficacy assessments were at Week
52. Concomitant aminosalicylates and corticosteroids were permitted through
Week 52. Concomitant immunomodulators (azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, or
methotrexate) were permitted outside the US but were not permitted beyond Week
6 in the US.
At Week 6, patients were
receiving corticosteroids (59%), immunomodulators (azathioprine,
6mercaptopurine, or methotrexate) (31%), and aminosalicylates (41%). Fifty-one
percent of patients had an inadequate response, loss of response, or
intolerance to a TNF blocker therapy. At Week 6, the median CDAI score was 322
in the ENTYVIO every eight week group, 316 in the ENTYVIO every four week
group, and 315 in the placebo group. Patients who had achieved clinical
response (≥70 decrease in CDAI score from baseline) at Week 6 and were
receiving corticosteroids were required to begin a corticosteroid-tapering
regimen at Week 6.
In CD Trial III a greater
percentage of patients in groups treated with ENTYVIO as compared to placebo
were in clinical remission (defined as CDAI score ≤150) at Week 52. A
greater percentage of patients in groups treated with ENTYVIO as compared to
placebo had a clinical response (defined as ≥100 decrease in CDAI score
from baseline) at Week 52 (Table 7). In the subgroup of patients who were
receiving corticosteroids at baseline and who were in clinical response at Week
6 (defined as ≥70 decrease in CDAI score from baseline), a greater
proportion of patients in groups treated with ENTYVIO as compared to placebo
discontinued corticosteroids by Week 52 and were in clinical remission at Week
52 (Table 7).
The ENTYVIO every four week
dosing regimen did not demonstrate additional clinical benefit over the every
eight dosing week regimen. The every four week dosing regimen is not the
recommended dosing regimen [see DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION].
Table 7: Proportion of Patients Meeting Efficacy
Endpoints at Week 52* (CD Trial III)
|
Placebo†
N=153 |
ENTYVIO Every 8 Weeks
N=154 |
p-value |
Treatment Difference and 95% CI |
Clinical remission‡ at Week 52 |
22% |
39% |
0.001 |
17% (7%, 28%) |
Clinical response5 at Week 52 |
30% |
44% |
0.013 |
13% (3%, 24%) |
Corticosteroid-free clinical remission# |
16%# |
32%# |
0.015 |
16% (3%, 29%) |
*This group includes patients that were not in clinical
remission at Week 6. Patients must have achieved clinical response (defined as
≥70 decrease in CDAI from baseline) at Week 6 to continue into CD Trial
III.
†The placebo group includes those patients who received ENTYVIO at Week 0 and
Week 2, and were randomized to receive placebo from Week 6 through Week 52
‡Clinical remission: CDAI ≤150
§Clinical response: ≥100 decrease in CDAI from baseline
#Corticosteroid-free clinical remission: Assessed in the subgroup of patients
who were receiving corticosteroids at baseline and
who were in clinical response (defined as ≥70 decrease in CDAI from
baseline) at Week 6 (n=82 for placebo and n=82 for ENTYVIO every eight weeks).
Corticosteroid-free clinical remission was defined as the proportion of
patients in this subgroup that discontinued corticosteroids by Week 52 and were
in clinical remission at Week 52. |
REFERENCES
1. Best WR, Becktel JM,
Singleton JW, Kern F: Development of a Crohn's Disease Activity Index, National
Cooperative Crohn's Disease Study. Gastroenterology 1976; 70(3): 439444