使用guselkumab,抑制IL-23的双重机制是否有助于溃疡性结肠炎?

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q2 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Sheila A Doggrell
{"title":"使用guselkumab,抑制IL-23的双重机制是否有助于溃疡性结肠炎?","authors":"Sheila A Doggrell","doi":"10.1080/14712598.2025.2508836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Ulcerative colitis (UC) includes a dysregulated immune response. The conventional therapy includes immunosuppressants, and biologics targeting inflammatory mediators, but these are often inadequate, or subjects become unable to tolerate them.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>QUASAR: the induction and maintenance components of the phase 3 trial of guselkumab, which inhibits IL-23 by dual mechanisms, in subjects with moderate-to-severe UC. QUASAR enrolled those that had an inadequate response and/or intolerance to corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, biologics, or Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. In both parts of the trial, guselkumab improved clinical remission with no excess of adverse events.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>For those enrolled throughout, after the maintenance part, the benefit with guselkumab on clinical remission was 24% percentage points (45 vs 21%), which is relatively small. There is no direct comparison of guselkumab with other IL-23 inhibitors in UC. Indirectly comparing trials suggests the clinical remission rates at the end of the trials was higher with guselkumab than with the other approved IL-23, inhibitors, mirikizumab or risankizumab (17 or 15% points, respectively). Thus, guselkumab may be more efficacious than the other 1 L-23 antagonists, possibly due to its additional action to block the CD64 receptor. However, this needs to be tested in a direct comparison trial.</p>","PeriodicalId":12084,"journal":{"name":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"With guselkumab, does the dual mechanisms to inhibit IL-23, help in ulcerative colitis?\",\"authors\":\"Sheila A Doggrell\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14712598.2025.2508836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Ulcerative colitis (UC) includes a dysregulated immune response. The conventional therapy includes immunosuppressants, and biologics targeting inflammatory mediators, but these are often inadequate, or subjects become unable to tolerate them.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>QUASAR: the induction and maintenance components of the phase 3 trial of guselkumab, which inhibits IL-23 by dual mechanisms, in subjects with moderate-to-severe UC. QUASAR enrolled those that had an inadequate response and/or intolerance to corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, biologics, or Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. In both parts of the trial, guselkumab improved clinical remission with no excess of adverse events.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>For those enrolled throughout, after the maintenance part, the benefit with guselkumab on clinical remission was 24% percentage points (45 vs 21%), which is relatively small. There is no direct comparison of guselkumab with other IL-23 inhibitors in UC. Indirectly comparing trials suggests the clinical remission rates at the end of the trials was higher with guselkumab than with the other approved IL-23, inhibitors, mirikizumab or risankizumab (17 or 15% points, respectively). Thus, guselkumab may be more efficacious than the other 1 L-23 antagonists, possibly due to its additional action to block the CD64 receptor. However, this needs to be tested in a direct comparison trial.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2025.2508836\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2025.2508836","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

溃疡性结肠炎(UC)包括免疫反应失调。传统的治疗包括免疫抑制剂和针对炎症介质的生物制剂,但这些通常是不够的,或者受试者无法耐受它们。类星体:在中度至重度UC患者中,通过双重机制抑制IL-23的guselkumab 3期试验的诱导和维持成分。QUASAR纳入了那些对皮质类固醇、免疫抑制剂、生物制剂或Janus激酶(JAK)抑制剂反应不足和/或不耐受的患者。在试验的两个部分,guselkumab改善了临床缓解,没有过量的不良事件。专家意见:对于那些在整个过程中,在维持部分之后,使用guselkumab的临床缓解获益为24% (45 vs 21%),而相对较小。没有guselkumab与其他IL-23抑制剂在UC中的直接比较。间接比较试验表明,guselkumab在试验结束时的临床缓解率高于其他批准的IL-23、抑制剂、mirikizumab或risankizumab(分别为17%或15%)。因此,guselkumab可能比其他1种L-23拮抗剂更有效,可能是由于其阻断CD64受体的额外作用。然而,这需要在直接比较试验中进行测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
With guselkumab, does the dual mechanisms to inhibit IL-23, help in ulcerative colitis?

Introduction: Ulcerative colitis (UC) includes a dysregulated immune response. The conventional therapy includes immunosuppressants, and biologics targeting inflammatory mediators, but these are often inadequate, or subjects become unable to tolerate them.

Areas covered: QUASAR: the induction and maintenance components of the phase 3 trial of guselkumab, which inhibits IL-23 by dual mechanisms, in subjects with moderate-to-severe UC. QUASAR enrolled those that had an inadequate response and/or intolerance to corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, biologics, or Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. In both parts of the trial, guselkumab improved clinical remission with no excess of adverse events.

Expert opinion: For those enrolled throughout, after the maintenance part, the benefit with guselkumab on clinical remission was 24% percentage points (45 vs 21%), which is relatively small. There is no direct comparison of guselkumab with other IL-23 inhibitors in UC. Indirectly comparing trials suggests the clinical remission rates at the end of the trials was higher with guselkumab than with the other approved IL-23, inhibitors, mirikizumab or risankizumab (17 or 15% points, respectively). Thus, guselkumab may be more efficacious than the other 1 L-23 antagonists, possibly due to its additional action to block the CD64 receptor. However, this needs to be tested in a direct comparison trial.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 医学-生物工程与应用微生物
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy (1471-2598; 1744-7682) is a MEDLINE-indexed, international journal publishing peer-reviewed research across all aspects of biological therapy. Each article is structured to incorporate the author’s own expert opinion on the impact of the topic on research and clinical practice and the scope for future development. The audience consists of scientists and managers in the healthcare and biopharmaceutical industries and others closely involved in the development and application of biological therapies for the treatment of human disease. The journal welcomes: Reviews covering therapeutic antibodies and vaccines, peptides and proteins, gene therapies and gene transfer technologies, cell-based therapies and regenerative medicine Drug evaluations reviewing the clinical data on a particular biological agent Original research papers reporting the results of clinical investigations on biological agents and biotherapeutic-based studies with a strong link to clinical practice Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Collection format and includes the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results; Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信