Topic Highlight Open Access
Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Oct 7, 2014; 20(37): 13234-13238
Published online Oct 7, 2014. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i37.13234
Biological therapy for ulcerative colitis: An update
Geom Seog Seo, Department of Gastroenterology, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Digestive Disease Research Institute, Chonbuk 570-749, South Korea
Soo-Cheon Chae, Department of Pathology, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Digestive Disease Research Institute, Chonbuk 570-749, South Korea
Author contributions: Seo GS wrote the first draft of the paper; Chae SC revised the manuscript.
Supported by Grants from Wonkwang University in 2013
Correspondence to: Soo-Cheon Chae, PhD, Professor, Department of Pathology, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Digestive Disease Research Institute, 460 Iksandae-ro, Iksan, Cheonbuk 570-749, South Korea. chaesc@wonkwang.ac.kr
Telephone: +82-63-8506793 Fax: +82-63-8522110
Received: February 28, 2014
Revised: June 16, 2014
Accepted: July 22, 2014
Published online: October 7, 2014

Abstract

Of the diverse biological agents used for patients with ulcerative colitis, the anti-tumor necrosis factor-α agents infliximab and adalimumab have been used in large-scale clinical trials and are currently widely used in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease patients. Recent studies have indicated that golimumab, oral tofacitinib and vedolizumab reportedly achieved good clinical response and remission rates in ulcerative colitis patients. Thus, we believe that the detailed investigation of various studies on clinical trials may provide important information for the selection of appropriate biological agents, and therefore, we have extensively reviewed such trials in the present study.

Key Words: Ulcerative colitis, Immune dysfunction, Biological therapy, Remission, Clinical trial, Inflammatory bowel disease

Core tip: In the last two years, the use of the Janus kinase 3 inhibitor (oral tofacitinib) and the α4β7 integrin blocker (vedolizumab) reportedly achieved good clinical response and remission rates in ulcerative colitis patients. Thus, we believe that the detailed investigation of various studies on clinical trials performed thus far may provide important information for the selection of appropriate biological agents, and therefore, we have extensively reviewed such trials in the present study.



INTRODUCTION

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which is broadly classified as ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD), is characterized by chronic intestinal inflammation. Although its causes have not been clearly understood, it is believed to be influenced by genetic susceptibility, changes in the commensal enteric flora, and immune imbalance[1-5]. Increase in the production of T cells, cytokines, and chemokines, as well as increased trafficking of immune cells is associated with immune imbalance, and is considered as therapeutic targets for the biological treatment of IBD[6-9]. The current treatment goals of UC include induction of clinical remission, maintenance of clinical remission, and prevention of UC-related complications[10,11].

Although the therapeutic agents of UC, such as aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, thiopurines, and cyclosporine, are effective in most cases, biological agents are needed in cases where the disease is refractory or intolerant to therapeutic agents. Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α agents are biological agents that are relatively safe and have been utilized for a long duration in UC patients. Anti-TNF-α agents appear to exert their effects by inhibiting the large amount of TNF-α present in the deeper layers of colonic tissues in UC patients[7]. In addition to anti-TNF-α agents, many studies have been performed on the use of molecules involved in varied inflammatory pathways as biological agents. However, in the present study, we aimed to focus on the mechanism of action, clinical outcomes, and future prospects of infliximab, adalimumab, and golimumab (anti-TNF-α agents); tofacitinib (a Janus kinase (JAK) 3 inhibitor); and vedolizumab (an α4β7 integrin blocker).

ANTI-TNF-α AGENTS: CLASSIC OR NEW GENERATION

Infilximab and adalimumab, the most commonly used anti-TNF-α agents at present, are administered intravenously and subcutaneously, respectively, and have been found to be effective for the treatment of moderate-to-severe UC in clinical trials. Anti-TNF-α, which was first officially approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of CD in 1998, was also approved by the FDA for the treatment of UC in 2010.

Both infliximab - chimeric mouse-human recombinant monoclonal antibody (25% murine and 75% human) - and adalimumab - completely human anti-TNF-α IgG1 - exert their effects by binding to free and membrane-bound TNF-α in order to prevent TNF-α from attaching to TNF-receptor type1/receptor type2. In ACT1 and ACT2 studies that reported the effects of infliximab in UC patients[12], no difference in the effect was noted between the 5-mg/kg administration group and the 10-mg/kg administration group, although a marked improvement was observed in the clinical response and remission rates after 8 wk (P < 0.001, Table 1), along with a significant improvement in mucosal healing (P < 0.001). Similar effects in the clinical remission rate were observed after 30 and 54 wk of treatment (Table 1). No differences in adverse effects were noted between the infliximab and placebo groups. Moreover, infliximab is well known as a useful rescue therapy to avoid colectomy[13,14].

Table 1 Summary of ACT1, ACT2, ULTRA1 and ULTRA2 trials for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis.
TrialClinical scenarioDrugDosagePatients(n)Follow-up (wk)Outcome and P value
ACT1 Rutgeerts et al[12]Moderate- to-severe active UCInfliximab5 mg/kg IV 10 mg/kg IV (intravenously at weeks 0, 2, and 6 and then every eight weeks)121 12254Clinical response at week 8 (placebo/5 mg/10 mg) -37.2%/69.4%/61.5% (P < 0.001, P < 0.001) Clinical remission at week 8 -14.9%/38.8%/32.0% (P < 0.001, P = 0.002) Clinical remission at week 54 -8.9%/25.7%/16.4% (P = 0.006, P = 0.149)
ACT2 Rutgeerts et al[12]Moderate- to-severe active UCInfliximab5 mg/kg IV 10 mg/kg IV121 12030Clinical response at week 8 (placebo/5 mg/10 mg) -29.3%/64.5%/69.2% (P < 0.001, P < 0.001) Clinical remission at week 8 -5.7%/33.9%/27.5% (P < 0.001, P < 0.001) Clinical remission at week 30 -3.3%/18.3%/27.3% (P = 0.010, P < 0.001)
ULTRA1 Reinisch et al[15]Moderate- to-severe active UCAdalimumab160/80 mg SC (160 mg at week 0, 80 mg at week 2, 40 mg at weeks 4 and 6) 80/40 mg SC (80 mg at week 0, 40 mg at weeks 2, 4 and 6)130 1308Clinical remission at week 8 (placebo/ADA160/80mg/ADA80/40 mg) - 9.2%/18.5%/10.0% (P = 0.031, P = 0.833)
ULTRA2 Sandborn et al[16]Moderate- to-severe active UCAdalimumab160/80 mg SC (160 mg at week 0, 80 mg at week 2, and then 40 mg every other week)24852Clinical remission at week 8 (placebo/ADA) - 9.3%/16.5% (P = 0.019) Clinical remission at week 52 - 8.5%/17.3% (P = 0.004)

In the first 8-wk multicenter randomized controlled study that utilized adalimumab, defined as ULTRA 1, the subjects were divided into 160/80 mg and 80/40 mg groups, based on the loading dose, and were then compared with the placebo group[15]. The clinical remission rate at week 8 in the adalimumab 160/80 mg group was 2 times higher than that of the placebo group, whereas this value in the adalimumab 80/40 mg group did not differ from that of the placebo group. Thereafter, a 52-wk randomized controlled study, defined as ULTRA2, was performed, which indicated that the clinical remission rate at week 52 in the adalimumab 160/80 mg group was 2 times higher than that of the placebo group (P = 0.004, Table 1)[16]. Following a subanalysis, it was observed that the anti-TNF-α naïve patient group exhibited approximately 2 times higher clinical remission rates at week 8 and week 52, respectively compared to the placebo group (21.3% vs 11.0%, 22.0% vs 12.4%) In the recently performed study on the effects of adalimumab on hospitalization for UC, the first 8 wk of adalimumab therapy indicated a significant reduction in the risk of all-cause, UC-related, and UC- or drug- related hospitalization compared to the placebo group (40%, 50%, and 47%, P < 0.05 for all comparisons)[17]; however, significant differences were not observed in the rates of colectomy between the groups. The adalimumab and placebo groups did not show any differences in the adverse events[15,16,18]. The primary failure rate of anti-TNF induction therapy is reportedly 40% in IBD clinical trials; when switching to another anti-TNF agent, the treatment becomes effective at 50%[19]. A secondary loss of response can also occur at 1 year after anti-TNF initiation in IBD patients[19], and solutions for the issues in anti-TNF-α treatment of UC are expected to be elucidated in the future.

Golimumab - a novel, completely human IgG1 anti-TNF-α antagonist - is subcutaneously administered and is approved for use in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis patients[20-22]. As shown in the PURSUIT-SC study, at week 6, the clinical response and remission rates showed a noticeable change in both the golimumab 200/100 mg and 400/200 mg groups (all P < 0.0001, Table 2)[23]. The PURSUIT- maintenance study, which is a phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal study, compared the clinical response and remission rates between the golimumab 50/100 mg group and placebo group up to week 54 at intervals of 4 wk; they observed that a notable change was observed in the golimumab 100 mg administration group (P < 0.001, P = 0.004, Table 2)[24]. After adjusting for the follow-up duration, no difference was noted in adverse events between the placebo and golimumab 100 mg groups.

Table 2 Studies for the use of Golimumab, Tofacitinib and Vedolizumab for the treatment of ulcerative colitis.
TrialClinical scenarioDrugDosagePatients(n)Follow-up(wk)Outcome and P value
PURSUIT- SC Sandborn et al[23]Moderate- to-severe active UCGolimumab100/50 mg SC 200/100 mg SC 400/200 mg SC (2 wk apart)71 331 3316Clinical response at week 6 (placebo/GLM 200/100 mg/GLM 400/200mg) - 30.3%/51.0%/54.9% (P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001) Clinical remission at week 6 - 6.4%/17.8%/17.9% (P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001)
PURSUIT- Maintenance Sandborn et al[24]Moderate- to-severe active UCGolimumab50 mg SC 100 mg SC (every 4 wk)151 15154Clinical response at week 54 (placebo/GLM 50 mg/GLM100 mg) - 31.2%/47.0%/49.7% (P = 0.010, P < 0.001) Clinical remission at weeks 30 and 54 - 15.6%/23.2%/27.8% (P = 0.122, P = 0.004)
Sandborn et al[32]Moderate- to-severe active UCTofacitinib0.5 mg, 3 mg, 10 mg, 15 mg oral (twice daily for 8 wk)31/33/33/ 498Clinical response at week 8 (placebo/0.5 mg/3 mg/10 mg/15 mg) - 42%/32%/48%/61%/78% (P = 0.39, P = 0.55, P = 0.10, P < 0.001) Clinical remission at week 8 -10%/13%/33%/48%/41% (P = 0.76, P = 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001) Endoscopic remission at week 8 -2%/10%/18%/30%/27% (P = 0.14, P = 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001)
Gemini 1 Feagan et al[41]Moderate- to-severe active UCVedolizumab300 mg IV (at weeks 0, 2 and then every 8 or 4 wk)Cohort 1 (225) Cohort 2 (521)52Clinical response at week 6 (placebo/Vedolizumab) - 25.5%/47.1% (P < 0.001) Clinical remission at week 6 - 5.4%/16.9% (P = 0.001) Clinical remission at week 52 (placebo/Vedolizumab every 8 wk/Vedolizumab every 4 wk) - 15.9%/41.8%/44.8% (P < 0.001, P < 0.001)
PROMISING JAK1/JAK3 INHIBITOR AND INTEGRIN BLOCKING ANTIBODY

The JAK-STAT pathway is associated with inflammation, autoimmune diseases, hematopoietic disorders, and transplant rejection[25-30]. Tofacitinib (formally known as CP-690550) is a selective oral inhibitor of JAK 1 and 3, which is known to inhibit the differentiation of pathogenic Th1 and Th17 cells and innate immune cell signaling[31]. The effects of tofacitinib in active UC patients showed clinical response rates at week 8 of 32%, 48%, 61%, and 78% for the 0.5 mg, 3 mg, 10 mg, and 15 mg twice daily groups, respectively. The tofacitinib 3 mg, 10 mg, and 15 mg twice daily groups exhibited marked differences in clinical and endoscopic remission rates compared to the placebo group (all P≤ 0.001, Table 2)[32]. The levels of low-density and high- density lipoprotein cholesterol increased in a dose-dependent manner, and an absolute neutrophil count of < 1500 was observed in 2% of patients in the tofacitinib group. Thus, tofacitinib is considered to be an effective and safe drug for moderate-to-severe UC patients.

α4β7 integrin, a molecule that is expressed on circulating B and T lymphocytes, interacts with the ligand of the mucosal addressin-cell adhesion molecule (MAdCAM-1)[33,34]. The bound lymphocyte migrates to the lamina propria and tissues, and then induces the inflammatory cascade[35]. Vedolizumab - a humanized monoclonal antibody that inhibits the binding of α4β7 integrin complex and MAdCAM-1-selectively blocks gut lymphocyte trafficking[36,37], and thus demonstrates therapeutic effects in IBD patients[38,39]. Consequently, unlike natalizumab which is a α4β7 and α4β1 integrin antagonist, vedolizumab does not affect the cerebrospinal fluid T-lymphocyte immunophenotype and therefore, it does not cause progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy[40]. When vedolizumab (300 mg) was administered at week 0 and week 2 and then administered at intervals of 4 or 8 wk, a marked response in the clinical response and remission rates was noted after week 6 (P < 0.001, P = 0.001, respectively, Table 2)[41]. A noticeable change in the clinical remission rate at week 52 was observed, regardless of whether the medication was administered at 4- or 8-wk intervals (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Biological agents have been used for UC treatment for 10 years, and various types of biological agents have been developed and used worldwide, with the most common being anti-TNF-α agents. This increase in the development of biological agents provides further immunologic information in addition to offering a wide range of drugs for use. Thus, biological agents may serve as another appropriate option for clinicians in the treatment of UC patients who may not be effectively treated with conventional drugs. Since an accurate understanding of biological agents can be achieved through clinical trials, performed as part of large-scale randomized controlled studies, we have reviewed them in detail. In the future, we believe that biological agents with superior therapeutic effects and fewer side effects, compared to those used currently, will be developed, thus bridging the therapeutic gap present in the treatment of UC patients.

Footnotes

P- Reviewer: George V, Shetty P S- Editor: Ma YJ L- Editor: A E- Editor: Wang CH

References
1.  Ahmad T, Tamboli CP, Jewell D, Colombel JF. Clinical relevance of advances in genetics and pharmacogenetics of IBD. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:1533-1549.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 130]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 116]  [Article Influence: 5.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
2.  Kucharzik T, Maaser C, Lügering A, Kagnoff M, Mayer L, Targan S, Domschke W. Recent understanding of IBD pathogenesis: implications for future therapies. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2006;12:1068-1083.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 169]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 162]  [Article Influence: 9.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
3.  Xavier RJ, Podolsky DK. Unravelling the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease. Nature. 2007;448:427-434.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 2894]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3117]  [Article Influence: 183.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (8)]
4.  Baumgart DC, Carding SR. Inflammatory bowel disease: cause and immunobiology. Lancet. 2007;369:1627-1640.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1299]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1364]  [Article Influence: 80.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (1)]
5.  Hisamatsu T, Kanai T, Mikami Y, Yoneno K, Matsuoka K, Hibi T. Immune aspects of the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease. Pharmacol Ther. 2013;137:283-297.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 63]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 69]  [Article Influence: 6.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
6.  Dharmani P, Chadee K. Biologic therapies against inflammatory bowel disease: a dysregulated immune system and the cross talk with gastrointestinal mucosa hold the key. Curr Mol Pharmacol. 2008;1:195-212.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 43]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 49]  [Article Influence: 3.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
7.  Lee TW, Fedorak RN. Tumor necrosis factor-α monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: clinical practice pharmacology. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2010;39:543-557.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 33]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 37]  [Article Influence: 2.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
8.  Danese S. New therapies for inflammatory bowel disease: from the bench to the bedside. Gut. 2012;61:918-932.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 226]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 221]  [Article Influence: 18.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
9.  Pedersen J, Coskun M, Soendergaard C, Salem M, Nielsen OH. Inflammatory pathways of importance for management of inflammatory bowel disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20:64-77.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in CrossRef: 97]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 97]  [Article Influence: 9.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (3)]
10.  Kornbluth A, Sachar DB; Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Ulcerative colitis practice guidelines in adults: American College Of Gastroenterology, Practice Parameters Committee. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105:501-523; quiz 524.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 899]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 891]  [Article Influence: 63.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
11.  Blonski W, Buchner AM, Lichtenstein GR. Treatment of ulcerative colitis. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2014;30:84-96.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 26]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 26]  [Article Influence: 2.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
12.  Rutgeerts P, Sandborn WJ, Feagan BG, Reinisch W, Olson A, Johanns J, Travers S, Rachmilewitz D, Hanauer SB, Lichtenstein GR. Infliximab for induction and maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2462-2476.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 2744]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2694]  [Article Influence: 141.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (2)]
13.  Kohn A, Daperno M, Armuzzi A, Cappello M, Biancone L, Orlando A, Viscido A, Annese V, Riegler G, Meucci G. Infliximab in severe ulcerative colitis: short-term results of different infusion regimens and long-term follow-up. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007;26:747-756.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 120]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 91]  [Article Influence: 5.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
14.  Sandborn WJ, Rutgeerts P, Feagan BG, Reinisch W, Olson A, Johanns J, Lu J, Horgan K, Rachmilewitz D, Hanauer SB. Colectomy rate comparison after treatment of ulcerative colitis with placebo or infliximab. Gastroenterology. 2009;137:1250-1260; quiz 1520.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
15.  Reinisch W, Sandborn WJ, Hommes DW, D’Haens G, Hanauer S, Schreiber S, Panaccione R, Fedorak RN, Tighe MB, Huang B. Adalimumab for induction of clinical remission in moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: results of a randomised controlled trial. Gut. 2011;60:780-787.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 588]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 626]  [Article Influence: 48.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
16.  Sandborn WJ, van Assche G, Reinisch W, Colombel JF, D’Haens G, Wolf DC, Kron M, Tighe MB, Lazar A, Thakkar RB. Adalimumab induces and maintains clinical remission in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 2012;142:257-265.e1-3.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
17.  Feagan BG, Sandborn WJ, Lazar A, Thakkar RB, Huang B, Reilly N, Chen N, Yang M, Skup M, Mulani P. Adalimumab therapy is associated with reduced risk of hospitalization in patients with ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 2014;146:110-118.e3.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
18.  Suzuki Y, Motoya S, Hanai H, Matsumoto T, Hibi T, Robinson AM, Mostafa NM, Chao J, Arora V, Camez A. Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in Japanese patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. J Gastroenterol. 2014;49:283-294.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 118]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 120]  [Article Influence: 12.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
19.  Ben-Horin S, Kopylov U, Chowers Y. Optimizing anti-TNF treatments in inflammatory bowel disease. Autoimmun Rev. 2014;13:24-30.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 238]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 260]  [Article Influence: 23.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
20.  Kay J, Matteson EL, Dasgupta B, Nash P, Durez P, Hall S, Hsia EC, Han J, Wagner C, Xu Z. Golimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite treatment with methotrexate: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:964-975.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 204]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 204]  [Article Influence: 12.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
21.  Kavanaugh A, van der Heijde D, McInnes IB, Mease P, Krueger GG, Gladman DD, Gómez-Reino J, Papp K, Baratelle A, Xu W. Golimumab in psoriatic arthritis: one-year clinical efficacy, radiographic, and safety results from a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64:2504-2517.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 147]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 160]  [Article Influence: 13.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
22.  Braun J, Baraliakos X, Hermann KG, van der Heijde D, Inman RD, Deodhar AA, Baratelle A, Xu S, Xu W, Hsu B. Golimumab reduces spinal inflammation in ankylosing spondylitis: MRI results of the randomised, placebo- controlled GO-RAISE study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71:878-884.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 62]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 64]  [Article Influence: 4.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
23.  Sandborn WJ, Feagan BG, Marano C, Zhang H, Strauss R, Johanns J, Adedokun OJ, Guzzo C, Colombel JF, Reinisch W. Subcutaneous golimumab induces clinical response and remission in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 2014;146:85-95; quiz e14-15.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
24.  Sandborn WJ, Feagan BG, Marano C, Zhang H, Strauss R, Johanns J, Adedokun OJ, Guzzo C, Colombel JF, Reinisch W. Subcutaneous golimumab maintains clinical response in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 2014;146:96-109.e1.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
25.  Pesu M, Laurence A, Kishore N, Zwillich SH, Chan G, O’Shea JJ. Therapeutic targeting of Janus kinases. Immunol Rev. 2008;223:132-142.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 178]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 170]  [Article Influence: 11.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
26.  Ghoreschi K, Laurence A, O’Shea JJ. Selectivity and therapeutic inhibition of kinases: to be or not to be? Nat Immunol. 2009;10:356-360.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 191]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 182]  [Article Influence: 12.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
27.  Kremer JM, Bloom BJ, Breedveld FC, Coombs JH, Fletcher MP, Gruben D, Krishnaswami S, Burgos-Vargas R, Wilkinson B, Zerbini CA. The safety and efficacy of a JAK inhibitor in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: Results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIa trial of three dosage levels of CP-690,550 versus placebo. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;60:1895-1905.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 413]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 412]  [Article Influence: 27.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
28.  Fleischmann R, Kremer J, Cush J, Schulze-Koops H, Connell CA, Bradley JD, Gruben D, Wallenstein GV, Zwillich SH, Kanik KS. Placebo-controlled trial of tofacitinib monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:495-507.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 704]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 700]  [Article Influence: 58.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
29.  Boy MG, Wang C, Wilkinson BE, Chow VF, Clucas AT, Krueger JG, Gaweco AS, Zwillich SH, Changelian PS, Chan G. Double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study to evaluate the pharmacologic effect of CP-690,550 in patients with psoriasis. J Invest Dermatol. 2009;129:2299-2302.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 118]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 126]  [Article Influence: 8.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
30.  Vincenti F, Tedesco Silva H, Busque S, O’Connell P, Friedewald J, Cibrik D, Budde K, Yoshida A, Cohney S, Weimar W. Randomized phase 2b trial of tofacitinib (CP-690,550) in de novo kidney transplant patients: efficacy, renal function and safety at 1 year. Am J Transplant. 2012;12:2446-2456.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 113]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 125]  [Article Influence: 10.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
31.  Ghoreschi K, Jesson MI, Li X, Lee JL, Ghosh S, Alsup JW, Warner JD, Tanaka M, Steward-Tharp SM, Gadina M. Modulation of innate and adaptive immune responses by tofacitinib (CP-690,550). J Immunol. 2011;186:4234-4243.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 438]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 464]  [Article Influence: 35.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
32.  Sandborn WJ, Ghosh S, Panes J, Vranic I, Su C, Rousell S, Niezychowski W. Tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, in active ulcerative colitis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:616-624.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 585]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 583]  [Article Influence: 48.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
33.  Arihiro S, Ohtani H, Suzuki M, Murata M, Ejima C, Oki M, Kinouchi Y, Fukushima K, Sasaki I, Nakamura S. Differential expression of mucosal addressin cell adhesion molecule-1 (MAdCAM-1) in ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. Pathol Int. 2002;52:367-374.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 107]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 106]  [Article Influence: 4.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
34.  Meenan J, Spaans J, Grool TA, Pals ST, Tytgat GN, van Deventer SJ. Altered expression of alpha 4 beta 7, a gut homing integrin, by circulating and mucosal T cells in colonic mucosal inflammation. Gut. 1997;40:241-246.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
35.  Gledhill T, Bodger K. New and emerging treatments for ulcerative colitis: a focus on vedolizumab. Biologics. 2013;7:123-130.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
36.  Fedyk ER, Wyant T, Yang LL, Csizmadia V, Burke K, Yang H, Kadambi VJ. Exclusive antagonism of the α4 β7 integrin by vedolizumab confirms the gut-selectivity of this pathway in primates. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2012;18:2107-2119.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 96]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 110]  [Article Influence: 9.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
37.  Haanstra KG, Hofman SO, Lopes Estêvão DM, Blezer EL, Bauer J, Yang LL, Wyant T, Csizmadia V, ‘t Hart BA, Fedyk ER. Antagonizing the α4β1 integrin, but not α4β7, inhibits leukocytic infiltration of the central nervous system in rhesus monkey experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J Immunol. 2013;190:1961-1973.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 65]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 73]  [Article Influence: 6.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
38.  Tilg H, Kaser A. Vedolizumab, a humanized mAb against the α4β7 integrin for the potential treatment of ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. Curr Opin Investig Drugs. 2010;11:1295-1304.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
39.  Jovani M, Danese S. Vedolizumab for the treatment of IBD: a selective therapeutic approach targeting pathogenic a4b7 cells. Curr Drug Targets. 2013;14:1433-1443.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 43]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 49]  [Article Influence: 4.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
40.  Milch C, Wyant T, Xu J, Parikh A, Kent W, Fox I, Berger J. Vedolizumab, a monoclonal antibody to the gut homing α4β7 integrin, does not affect cerebrospinal fluid T-lymphocyte immunophenotype. J Neuroimmunol. 2013;264:123-126.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 64]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 57]  [Article Influence: 5.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
41.  Feagan BG, Rutgeerts P, Sands BE, Hanauer S, Colombel JF, Sandborn WJ, Van Assche G, Axler J, Kim HJ, Danese S. Vedolizumab as induction and maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:699-710.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1576]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1637]  [Article Influence: 148.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]