21.09.2023 Views

Gastroenterology Today Autumn 2023

Gastroenterology Today Autumn 2023

Gastroenterology Today Autumn 2023

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

NEWS<br />

Inflammatory bowel disease<br />

treatments reach inflection<br />

point requiring active<br />

comparators, says GlobalData<br />

At Digestive Disease Week (DDW)<br />

<strong>2023</strong>, a comment was made following a<br />

presentation discussing the preliminary<br />

induction findings from GlobalData, a<br />

leading data and analytics company.<br />

The attendant continued by pointing out that<br />

GUS was shown to only effect remission in less<br />

than a quarter of the treated patients (22.5%),<br />

with a moderate benefit over placebo of only<br />

approximately 12%. The commenter concluded<br />

the argument with the observation that GUS and<br />

many other inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)<br />

therapies do not meet the historical therapeutic<br />

standards, referencing a recent meta-analysis<br />

study that showed that treatments generally<br />

achieve a 20% delta over placebo.<br />

Adeleke Badejo, Senior Analyst – Immunology<br />

at GlobalData, comments: “At the crux of this<br />

line of thought is a lack of evidence to support the<br />

market narrative and messaging of high-quality<br />

current and upcoming IBD therapies, and a need<br />

for better data.”<br />

Observed from recent interviews of key opinion<br />

leaders (KOLs) within IBD conducted by<br />

GlobalData, the unmet need for more evidence<br />

to define the most efficacious therapy in the<br />

field has been echoed repeatedly. One such<br />

thought leader acknowledged the current status<br />

quo with companies being able to “get away, so<br />

to speak, in the IBD field with these placebocontrolled<br />

trials”.<br />

Adding that the sole use of placebo is not the<br />

norm with other indications. “I think you see more<br />

comparative effectiveness trials in some of the<br />

other fields, certainly in oncology… it’s always<br />

the standard of care versus the new thing”.<br />

Addressing this situation, not only improves the<br />

quality of care for the IBD patient population,<br />

but it also would benefit companies in a quickly<br />

evolving and expanding market.<br />

Badejo continues: “The significance of<br />

addressing this unmet need is of increased<br />

importance in light of recent bets within IBD and<br />

immunology through mergers and acquisitions,<br />

such as the purchase of Prometheus<br />

Biosciences by Dice Therapeutics.”<br />

In addition to the effect these strategic<br />

transactions will have on the market in the coming<br />

years, long-established agents such as Humira<br />

and Stelara are transitioning to legacy assets,<br />

providing the opportunity for the next generation<br />

of treatments to capture significant market share.<br />

The current situation would be best addressed<br />

through clinical asset evaluation through trials<br />

with active comparators, but of the eight latestage<br />

pipeline agents at the beginning of this<br />

year, only Lilly’s mirikizumab and AstraZeneca’s<br />

brazikumab were being evaluated against<br />

active comparators (ustekinumab and<br />

adalimumab respectively), with the former<br />

program ending following assessment of the<br />

competitive landscape.<br />

Badejo concludes: “The apparent risk with<br />

higher probability of failure associated with<br />

incorporating active comparators during therapy<br />

development is known, but the benefit in<br />

establishing confidence with decision makers<br />

should not be overlooked.”<br />

GASTROENTEROLOGY TODAY – AUTUMN <strong>2023</strong><br />

26

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!