Wong Emily C L, Dulai Parambir S, Marshall John K, Jairath Vipul, Reinisch Walter, Narula Neeraj
Department of Medicine (Division of Gastroenterology) and Farncombe Family Digestive Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada.
Division of Gastroenterology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60208, United States.
J Crohns Colitis. 2025 Jan 11;19(1). doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjaf006.
In inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), the number of eosinophils increases in the lamina propria of the intestinal tract, but their specific patho-mechanistic role remains unclear. Elevated blood eosinophil counts in active IBD suggest their potential as biomarkers for predicting response to biological therapies. This study evaluates blood eosinophil count trends and their predictive value for clinical response and endoscopic improvement in patients with IBD receiving ustekinumab or adalimumab induction therapy.
Participant-level data from phase 3 and 4 clinical trials (UNIFI, SEAVUE, VARSITY) evaluating ustekinumab and adalimumab for moderate-severe Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) were used. The primary outcome was clinical response, defined by reductions in disease activity scores. Eosinophil counts were compared between responders and non-responders at multiple time points using t-tests. Logistic regression assessed the odds of achieving a clinical response based on baseline eosinophil counts.
Among patients treated with ustekinumab for UC, responders had significantly higher baseline eosinophil counts compared to non-responders (0.21 × 109/L vs 0.18 × 109/L, P = .042). By week 8, responders showed a greater absolute (-0.07 × 109/L vs -0.01 × 109/L, P < .001) and percent decline (-33.33% vs -5.55%, P = .027) in eosinophil counts. In CD, ustekinumab responders also had higher baseline eosinophil counts and showed significant reductions by week 8. However, no significant differences in eosinophil counts were observed among CD patients treated with adalimumab or UC patients treated with vedolizumab.
Eosinophil reduction was identified as a marker for early response to ustekinumab in both UC and CD, but not adalimumab. No difference was observed among UC patients treated with vedolizumab either. Targeting the IL-12/IL-23 pathway may be more effective in managing eosinophil-associated inflammation in IBD.
在炎症性肠病(IBD)中,肠道固有层中的嗜酸性粒细胞数量会增加,但其具体的病理机制作用仍不清楚。活动期IBD患者血液中嗜酸性粒细胞计数升高表明它们有可能作为预测生物疗法反应的生物标志物。本研究评估了接受优特克单抗或阿达木单抗诱导治疗的IBD患者的血液嗜酸性粒细胞计数趋势及其对临床反应和内镜改善的预测价值。
使用了评估优特克单抗和阿达木单抗治疗中度至重度克罗恩病(CD)和溃疡性结肠炎(UC)的3期和4期临床试验(UNIFI、SEAVUE、VARSITY)的参与者水平数据。主要结局是临床反应,通过疾病活动评分的降低来定义。使用t检验在多个时间点比较反应者和无反应者的嗜酸性粒细胞计数。逻辑回归基于基线嗜酸性粒细胞计数评估实现临床反应的几率。
在接受优特克单抗治疗的UC患者中,反应者的基线嗜酸性粒细胞计数显著高于无反应者(0.21×10⁹/L对0.18×10⁹/L,P = 0.042)。到第8周时,反应者的嗜酸性粒细胞计数的绝对下降幅度更大(-0.07×10⁹/L对-0.01×10⁹/L,P < 0.001),百分比下降幅度也更大(-33.33%对-5.55%,P = 0.027)。在CD中,优特克单抗反应者的基线嗜酸性粒细胞计数也更高,到第8周时显著下降。然而,在接受阿达木单抗治疗的CD患者或接受维多珠单抗治疗的UC患者中,未观察到嗜酸性粒细胞计数有显著差异。
嗜酸性粒细胞减少被确定为UC和CD中对优特克单抗早期反应的标志物,但不是对阿达木单抗反应的标志物。在接受维多珠单抗治疗的UC患者中也未观察到差异。靶向IL-12/IL-23途径可能在管理IBD中与嗜酸性粒细胞相关的炎症方面更有效。