HIBISCUS II: A Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Etrolizumab With Adalimumab and Placebo in Participants With Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis (UC) in Participants Naive to Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) Inhibitors

Sponsor
Hoffmann-La Roche (Industry)
Overall Status
Completed
CT.gov ID
NCT02171429
Collaborator
(none)
358
90
3
66.3
4
0.1

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

This Phase III, double-blind, placebo and active-comparator controlled, multicenter study will investigate the efficacy and safety of etrolizumab in induction of remission in participants with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) who are naIve to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and refractory to or intolerant of prior immunosuppressant and/or corticosteroid treatment. In addition to this study, a second Phase III trial with identical study design (GA28948; NCT02163759) was independently conducted.

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase
Phase 3

Study Design

Study Type:
Interventional
Actual Enrollment :
358 participants
Allocation:
Randomized
Intervention Model:
Parallel Assignment
Masking:
Double (Participant, Investigator)
Primary Purpose:
Treatment
Official Title:
Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Study to Evaluate the Efficacy (Induction of Remission) and Safety of Etrolizumab Compared With Adalimumab and Placebo in Patients With Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis Who Are Naive to TNF Inhibitors
Actual Study Start Date :
Nov 14, 2014
Actual Primary Completion Date :
Mar 2, 2020
Actual Study Completion Date :
May 25, 2020

Arms and Interventions

Arm Intervention/Treatment
Placebo Comparator: Placebo

Participants will receive placebo matching to etrolizumab up to Week 12 and placebo matching to adalimumab up to Week 8.

Other: Adalimumab Placebo
Placebo matching to adalimumab will be administered SC at Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8.

Other: Etrolizumab Placebo
Placebo matching to etrolizumab will be administered SC once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]).

Active Comparator: Adalimumab

Participants will receive adalimumab up to Week 8 and placebo matching to etrolizumab up to Week 12.

Drug: Adalimumab
Adalimumab 160 milligrams (mg) will be administered subcutaneously (SC) at Week 0; 80 mg SC at Week 2; 40 mg SC at Weeks 4, 6 and 8.
Other Names:
  • Humira
  • Other: Etrolizumab Placebo
    Placebo matching to etrolizumab will be administered SC once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]).

    Experimental: Etrolizumab

    Participants will receive etrolizumab up to Week 12 and placebo matching to adalimumab up to Week 8.

    Other: Adalimumab Placebo
    Placebo matching to adalimumab will be administered SC at Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8.

    Drug: Etrolizumab
    Etrolizumab 105 mg will be administered SC every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]).
    Other Names:
  • PRO145223
  • RO5490261
  • RG7413
  • Outcome Measures

    Primary Outcome Measures

    1. Percentage of Participants in Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab Compared With Placebo, as Determined by the Mayo Clinic Score (MCS), GA28949 Population [Week 10]

      The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and associated 95% confidence interval for the stratification factors.

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    1. Percentage of Participants in Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS, GA28949 Population [Week 10]

      The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and associated 95% confidence interval for the stratification factors.

    2. Percentage of Participants in Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population [Week 10]

      The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and associated 95% confidence interval for the stratification factors.

    3. Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 10, as Determined by the MCS, GA28949 Population [Week 10]

      The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Clinical Response was defined as: MCS ≥3-point decrease and 30% reduction from baseline as well as ≥1-point decrease in rectal bleeding subscore or an absolute rectal bleeding score of 0 or 1. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9 or ≥10); the CMH test adjusted the differences in response rates and associated 95% CIs for the stratification factors.

    4. Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population [Week 10]

      The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Clinical Response was defined as: MCS ≥3-point decrease and 30% reduction from baseline as well as ≥1-point decrease in rectal bleeding subscore or an absolute rectal bleeding score of 0 or 1. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9 or ≥10); the CMH test adjusted the differences in response rates and associated 95% CIs for the stratification factors.

    5. Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Endoscopic Appearance of the Mucosa at Week 10, as Determined by the Mayo Endoscopy Subscore, GA28949 Population [Week 10]

      Improvement in endoscopic appearance of the mucosa was defined as a Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) endoscopy subscore ≤1. Blinded gastroenterologists experienced in inflammatory bowel disease performed central reading of endoscopies at an independent review facility. The rectum, sigmoid, and descending colon segments were assessed and each segment was assigned a score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. At baseline all segments were reviewed and the worst score from the three segments was recorded as the endoscopy subscore. Post-baseline the endoscopy score was the worst score of all segments that had been assessed at baseline, if the baseline endoscopy score had a sigmoid colon score ≤1. If at baseline the sigmoid colon score was ≥2, the post-baseline endoscopy score was the sigmoid colon score value. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment.

    6. Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Endoscopic Appearance of the Mucosa at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS Endoscopy Subscore, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population [Week 10]

      Improvement in endoscopic appearance of the mucosa was defined as a Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) endoscopy subscore ≤1. Blinded gastroenterologists experienced in inflammatory bowel disease performed central reading of endoscopies at an independent review facility. The rectum, sigmoid, and descending colon segments were assessed and each segment was assigned a score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. At baseline all segments were reviewed and the worst score from the three segments was recorded as the endoscopy subscore. Post-baseline the endoscopy score was the worst score of all segments that had been assessed at baseline, if the baseline endoscopy score had a sigmoid colon score ≤1. If at baseline the sigmoid colon score was ≥2, the post-baseline endoscopy score was the sigmoid colon score value. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment.

    7. Percentage of Participants in Endoscopic Remission at Week 10, as Determined by the MCS Endoscopy Subscore, GA28949 Population [Week 10]

      Endoscopic remission was defined as a Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) endoscopy subscore of 0. Blinded gastroenterologists experienced in inflammatory bowel disease performed central reading of endoscopies at an independent review facility. The rectum, sigmoid, and descending colon segments were assessed and each segment was assigned a score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. At baseline all segments were reviewed and the worst score from the three segments was recorded as the endoscopy subscore. Post-baseline the endoscopy score was the worst score of all segments that had been assessed at baseline, if the baseline endoscopy score had a sigmoid colon score ≤1. If at baseline the sigmoid colon score was ≥2, the post-baseline endoscopy score was the sigmoid colon score value. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment.

    8. Percentage of Participants in Endoscopic Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS Endoscopy Subscore, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population [Week 10]

      Endoscopic remission was defined as a Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) endoscopy subscore of 0. Blinded gastroenterologists experienced in inflammatory bowel disease performed central reading of endoscopies at an independent review facility. The rectum, sigmoid, and descending colon segments were assessed and each segment was assigned a score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. At baseline all segments were reviewed and the worst score from the three segments was recorded as the endoscopy subscore. Post-baseline the endoscopy score was the worst score of all segments that had been assessed at baseline, if the baseline endoscopy score had a sigmoid colon score ≤1. If at baseline the sigmoid colon score was ≥2, the post-baseline endoscopy score was the sigmoid colon score value. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment.

    9. Percentage of Participants With Histologic Remission at Week 10, as Determined by the Nancy Histological Index, GA28949 Population [Week 10]

      Histologic remission is defined by the resolution of neutrophilic inflammation (e.g., absence of neutrophils in the crypts and lamina propria), defined by a Nancy Histological Index (NHI) score of ≤1. The NHI score ranges from 0 to 4, with the following definitions for each grade: 0 is no histologically significant disease; 1 is chronic inflammatory infiltrate with no acute inflammatory infiltrate; and 2, 3, and 4 are mildly, moderately, and severely active disease, respectively. A small pool of central readers who were blinded to both treatment arm and timepoint performed the histologic scoring. The same reader scored all slides for a given participant based on biopsies from the most inflamed region of the sigmoid colon. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received rescue therapy prior to assessment. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and 95% CI for the stratification factors.

    10. Percentage of Participants With Histologic Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the Nancy Histological Index, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population [Week 10]

      Histologic remission is defined by the resolution of neutrophilic inflammation (e.g., absence of neutrophils in the crypts and lamina propria), defined by a Nancy Histological Index (NHI) score of ≤1. The NHI score ranges from 0 to 4, with the following definitions for each grade: 0 is no histologically significant disease; 1 is chronic inflammatory infiltrate with no acute inflammatory infiltrate; and 2, 3, and 4 are mildly, moderately, and severely active disease, respectively. A small pool of central readers who were blinded to both treatment arm and timepoint performed the histologic scoring. The same reader scored all slides for a given participant based on biopsies from the most inflamed region of the sigmoid colon. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received rescue therapy prior to assessment. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and 95% CI for the stratification factors.

    11. Change From Baseline in the MCS Rectal Bleeding Subscore at Week 6, GA28949 Population [Baseline, Week 6]

      Rectal bleeding data were collected via the participant's diaries and each day a participant provided a score from 0 to 3 according to the following definitions: 0 = no blood in the stool; 1 = streaks of blood with stool less than half the time; 2 = obvious blood with stool most of the time; 3 = blood alone passed. The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) rectal bleeding subscore was calculated as the worst value of three days of daily diary scores closest to anchor dates at baseline and post-baseline. The data was considered non-parametric and was reported using RANK analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the model adjusted for these stratification factors along with the baseline rectal bleeding (RB) subscore.

    12. Change From Baseline in the MCS Rectal Bleeding Subscore at Week 6 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population [Baseline, Week 6]

      Rectal bleeding data were collected via the participant's diaries and each day a participant provided a score from 0 to 3 according to the following definitions: 0 = no blood in the stool; 1 = streaks of blood with stool less than half the time; 2 = obvious blood with stool most of the time; 3 = blood alone passed. The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) rectal bleeding subscore was calculated as the worst value of three days of daily diary scores closest to anchor dates at baseline and post-baseline. The data was considered non-parametric and was reported using RANK analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the model adjusted for these stratification factors along with the baseline rectal bleeding (RB) subscore.

    13. Change From Baseline in the MCS Stool Frequency Subscore at Week 6, GA28949 Population [Baseline, Week 6]

      Stool frequency data were collected via the participant's diaries and each day a participant provided a score from 0 to 3 according to the following definitions: 0 = normal number of stools; 1 = 1 to 2 more stools than normal; 2 = 3 to 4 more stools than normal; 3 = 5 or more stools than normal. The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) stool frequency subscore was calculated as the average of three days daily diary scores closest to anchor dates at baseline and post-baseline. The data was considered non-parametric and was reported using RANK analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the model adjusted for these stratification factors along with the baseline stool frequency (SF) subscore.

    14. Change From Baseline in the MCS Stool Frequency Subscore at Week 6 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population [Baseline, Week 6]

      Stool frequency data were collected via the participant's diaries and each day a participant provided a score from 0 to 3 according to the following definitions: 0 = normal number of stools; 1 = 1 to 2 more stools than normal; 2 = 3 to 4 more stools than normal; 3 = 5 or more stools than normal. The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) stool frequency subscore was calculated as the average of three days daily diary scores closest to anchor dates at baseline and post-baseline. The data was considered non-parametric and was reported using RANK analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the model adjusted for these stratification factors along with the baseline stool frequency (SF) subscore.

    15. Change From Baseline in Ulcerative Colitis (UC) Bowel Movement Signs and Symptoms at Week 10, as Assessed by the UC Patient-Reported Outcome Signs and Symptoms (UC-PRO/SS), GA28949 Population [Baseline, Week 10]

      The UC-PRO/SS questionnaire was collected in the e-diary and completed by participants for at least 9 to 12 consecutive days prior to a study visit. The bowel movement domain score ranges from 0 to 27, with a higher score indicating a worse disease state. The most recent 7 daily scores available (not including the visit) were selected for the calculation of the visit score. For each item in the questionnaire, a score was calculated for a visit by taking the average of the selected daily scores. The domain score for a visit was calculated as the sum of the averaged items for each question. A Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis of the data included the fixed categorical effects of treatment, visit, study stratification factors, and treatment-by-visit interaction, and the continuous covariates of the baseline UC-PRO/SS domain and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit interaction. An unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the within-patient errors within the MMRM.

    16. Change From Baseline in Ulcerative Colitis Bowel Movement Signs and Symptoms at Week 10, as Assessed by the UC-PRO/SS, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population [Baseline, Week 10]

      The UC-PRO/SS questionnaire was collected in the e-diary and completed by participants for at least 9 to 12 consecutive days prior to a study visit. The bowel movement domain score ranges from 0 to 27, with a higher score indicating a worse disease state. The most recent 7 daily scores available (not including the visit) were selected for the calculation of the visit score. For each item in the questionnaire, a score was calculated for a visit by taking the average of the selected daily scores. The domain score for a visit was calculated as the sum of the averaged items for each question. A Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis of the data included the fixed categorical effects of treatment, visit, study stratification factors, and treatment-by-visit interaction, and the continuous covariates of the baseline UC-PRO/SS domain and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit interaction. An unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the within-patient errors within the MMRM.

    17. Change From Baseline in Ulcerative Colitis Functional Symptoms at Week 10, as Assessed by the UC-PRO/SS, GA28949 Population [Baseline, Week 10]

      The UC-PRO/SS questionnaire was collected in the e-diary and completed by participants for at least 9 to 12 consecutive days prior to a study visit. The functional symptoms domain score ranges from 0 to 12, with a higher score indicating a worse disease state. The most recent 7 daily scores available (not including the visit) were selected for the calculation of the visit score. For each item in the questionnaire, a score was calculated for a visit by taking the average of the selected daily scores. The domain score for a visit was calculated as the sum of the averaged items for each question. A Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis of the data included the fixed categorical effects of treatment, visit, study stratification factors, and treatment-by-visit interaction, and the continuous covariates of the baseline UC-PRO/SS domain and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit interaction. An unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the within-patient errors in the MMRM.

    18. Change From Baseline in Ulcerative Colitis Functional Symptoms at Week 10, as Assessed by the UC-PRO/SS, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population [Baseline, Week 10]

      The UC-PRO/SS questionnaire was collected in the e-diary and completed by participants for at least 9 to 12 consecutive days prior to a study visit. The functional symptoms domain score ranges from 0 to 12, with a higher score indicating a worse disease state. The most recent 7 daily scores available (not including the visit) were selected for the calculation of the visit score. For each item in the questionnaire, a score was calculated for a visit by taking the average of the selected daily scores. The domain score for a visit was calculated as the sum of the averaged items for each question. A Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis of the data included the fixed categorical effects of treatment, visit, study stratification factors, and treatment-by-visit interaction, and the continuous covariates of the baseline UC-PRO/SS domain and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit interaction. An unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the within-patient errors in the MMRM.

    19. Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission at Week 10, as Determined by the MCS, GA28949 Population [Week 10]

      The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Clinical remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the differences in remission rates and associated 95% confidence intervals for the stratification factors.

    20. Percentage of Participants in Remission at Week 10 and Week 14, as Determined by the MCS, GA28949 Population [Weeks 10 and 14]

      The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 or 14 assessments were missing or the participant received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the differences in remission rates and associated 95% confidence intervals for the stratification factors.

    21. Change From Baseline in Health-Related Quality of Life at Week 10, as Assessed by the Total Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) Score, GA28949 Population [Baseline, Week 10]

      The IBDQ is a 32-item questionnaire containing four domains: bowel symptoms (10 items), systemic symptoms (5 items), emotional function (12 items), and social function (5 items). An overall total IBDQ score was computed by summing the individual 32-item scores. The range for the IBDQ total score is 32 to 224, with higher scores denoting better health-related quality of life. The unadjusted mean and standard deviation for each study arm are reported. The change from baseline in the IBDQ score was analyzed using an ANCOVA model taking the stratification factors used at randomization into account (concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening [MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10]), and the baseline IBDQ score used as a covariate.

    22. Pharmacokinetics of Etrolizumab: Serum Concentration, GA28949 Population [Weeks 10 and 14]

      Serum concentrations of etrolizumab were evaluated at the primary endpoint visit (Week 10) and the secondary endpoint visit (Week 14). Both time points were two weeks after the most recent dose.

    23. Number and Percentage of Participants With at Least One Adverse Event by Severity, According to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 4.0 (NCI CTCAE v4.0), GA28949 Population [From Baseline until the end of study (up to 26 weeks)]

      An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation in which a patient is administered a pharmaceutical product, regardless of causal attribution. The investigator independently assessed the severity and seriousness of each recorded AE. The AE severity grading scale for the NCI CTCAE v4.0 was used for assessing severity; any AE not specifically listed was rated according to the following grading scale from 1 to 5: 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, 4 = life-threatening, 5 = death. AEs of special interest included: elevated AST/ALT in combination with either elevated bilirubin or clinical jaundice; suspected transmission of infectious agent by the study drug; anaphylactic, anaphylactoid and systemic hypersensitivity reactions; and neurological signs, symptoms, and AEs that may suggest possible progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML).

    24. Number and Percentage of Participants by Marked Laboratory Abnormality Status for Hematology Parameters as a Shift Table From Baseline to Week 10, GA28949 Population [From Baseline up to Week 10]

      Laboratory tests for hematology parameters were performed and values were compared with the Roche marked reference range. A marked abnormality was defined as a test result that was outside of the Roche marked reference range (labelled as 'High' or 'Low') and represented a clinically significant change from baseline. Not every laboratory abnormality qualified as an adverse event. A laboratory test result must have been reported as an adverse event if it met any of the following criteria: was accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment or a medical intervention; or was clinically significant in the investigator's judgment. The results are presented as a shift from the baseline status to the post-baseline (Week 10) status. Baseline was defined as the last available assessment prior to first receipt of study drug. The 'missing' status included participants with missing baseline or post-baseline values. Ery. = erythrocyte

    25. Number and Percentage of Participants by Marked Laboratory Abnormality Status for Chemistry Parameters as a Shift Table From Baseline to Week 10, GA28949 Population [From Baseline up to Week 10]

      Laboratory tests for chemistry parameters were performed and values were compared with the Roche marked reference range. A marked abnormality was defined as a test result that was outside of the Roche marked reference range (labelled as 'High' or 'Low') and represented a clinically significant change from baseline. Not every laboratory abnormality qualified as an adverse event. A laboratory test result must have been reported as an adverse event if it met any of the following criteria: was accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment or a medical intervention; or was clinically significant in the investigator's judgment. The results are presented as a shift from the baseline status to the post-baseline (Week 10) status. Baseline was defined as the last available assessment prior to first receipt of study drug. The 'missing' status included participants with missing baseline or post-baseline values.

    26. Number and Percentage of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) to Etrolizumab at Baseline and Anytime Post-Baseline, GA28949 Population [Pre-dose (0 hour) on Day 1 and Week 4, Week 10, Week 14, and early termination/end of safety follow-up (up to 26 weeks)]

      Anti-drug antibody (ADA) serum samples were collected from participants and analyzed using validated assays. Participants were considered to be ADA positive post-baseline if they were ADA negative or had missing data at baseline, but developed an ADA response following etrolizumab drug exposure (treatment-induced ADA response), or if they were ADA positive at baseline and the titer of one or more post-baseline samples was at least 0.60 titer units greater than the titer of the baseline sample (treatment-enhanced ADA response). Participants were considered to be ADA negative if they were ADA negative or had missing data at baseline and all post-baseline samples were negative, or if they were ADA positive at baseline but did not have any post-baseline samples with a titer that was at least 0.60 titer unit greater than the titer of the baseline sample (treatment unaffected).

    Eligibility Criteria

    Criteria

    Ages Eligible for Study:
    18 Years to 80 Years
    Sexes Eligible for Study:
    All
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
    No
    Inclusion Criteria:
    • Diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (UC) established at least 3 months prior to randomization (Day 1)

    • Moderately to severely active UC as determined by the MCS

    • Naive to treatment with TNF inhibitor therapy

    • An inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to prior corticosteroid and/or immunosuppressant treatment

    • Background UC therapy may include oral 5-aminosalisylate (5-ASA), budesonide, oral corticosteroids, probiotics, azathioprine (AZA), 6-mercaptopurine (6MP), or methotrexate (MTX) if doses have been stable for:

    • AZA, 6-MP, MTX: 8 weeks immediately prior to randomization

    • 5-ASA: 4 weeks immediately prior to randomization

    • Corticosteroids: 4 weeks immediately prior to randomization; if corticosteroids are being tapered, dose has to be stable for at least 2 weeks prior to randomization

    • Use of highly effective contraception method as defined by the protocol

    • Have received a colonoscopy within the past year or be willing to undergo a colonoscopy in lieu of a flexible sigmoidoscopy at screening

    Exclusion Criteria:
    Exclusion Criteria Related to Inflammatory Bowel Disease:
    • Prior extensive colonic resection, subtotal or total colectomy, or planned surgery for UC

    • Past or present ileostomy or colostomy

    • Diagnosis of indeterminate colitis

    • Suspicion of ischemic colitis, radiation colitis, or microscopic colitis

    • Diagnosis of toxic megacolon within 12 months of initial screening visit

    • Any diagnosis of Crohn's disease

    • Past or present fistula or abdominal abscess

    • A history or current evidence of colonic mucosal dysplasia

    • Patients with any stricture (stenosis) of the colon

    • Patients with history or evidence of adenomatous colonic polyps that have not been removed

    Exclusion Criteria Related to Prior or Concomitant Therapy:
    • Prior treatment with TNF-alpha antagonists

    • Any prior treatment with etrolizumab or other anti-integrin agents

    • Any prior treatment with rituximab

    • Any treatment with tofacitinib during screening

    • Any prior treatment with anti-adhesion molecules

    • Use of intravenous (IV) steroids within 30 days prior to screening with the exception of a single administration of IV steroid

    • Use of agents that deplete B or T cells

    • Use of anakinra, abatacept, cyclosporine, sirolimus, or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) within 4 weeks prior to randomization

    • Chronic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use

    • Patients who are currently using anticoagulants including, but not limited to, warfarin, heparin, enoxaparin, dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban

    • Patients who have received treatment with corticosteroid enemas/suppositories and/or topical (rectal) 5-ASA preparations within 2 weeks prior to randomization

    • Apheresis (i.e., Adacolumn apheresis) within 2 weeks prior to randomization

    • Received any investigational treatment including investigational vaccines within 5 half lives of the investigational product or 28 days after the last dose, whichever is greater, prior to randomization

    • History of moderate or severe allergic or anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions to chimeric, human, or humanized antibodies, fusion proteins, or murine proteins or hypersensitivity to etrolizumab (active drug substance) or any of the excipients (L histidine, L-arginine, succinic acid, polysorbate 20)

    • Patients administered tube feeding, defined formula diets, or parenteral alimentation/nutrition who have not discontinued these treatments within 3 weeks prior to randomization

    Exclusion Criteria Related to General Safety:
    • Pregnant or lactating

    • Lack of peripheral venous access

    • Hospitalization (other than for elective reasons) during the screening period

    • Significant uncontrolled comorbidity, such as cardiac (e.g., moderate to severe heart failure New York Heart Association Class III/IV), pulmonary, renal, hepatic, endocrine, or gastrointestinal disorders

    • Neurological conditions or diseases that may interfere with monitoring for PML

    • History of demyelinating disease

    • Clinically significant abnormalities on screening neurologic examination (PML Objective Checklist)

    • Clinically significant abnormalities on the screening PML Subjective Checklist

    • History of alcohol, drug, or chemical abuse less than 6 months prior to screening

    • Conditions other than UC that could require treatment with >10 mg/day of prednisone (or equivalent) during the course of the study

    • History of cancer, including hematologic malignancy, solid tumors, and carcinoma in situ, within 5 years before screening

    Exclusion Criteria Related to Infection Risk

    • Congenital or acquired immune deficiency

    • Patients must undergo screening for HIV and test positive for preliminary and confirmatory tests

    • Positive hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody test result

    • Positive hepatitis B virus (HBV) antibody test result

    • Evidence of or treatment for Clostridium difficile (as assessed by C. difficile toxin testing) within 60 days prior to randomization or other intestinal pathogens (as assessed by stool culture and ova and parasite evaluation) within 30 days prior to randomization

    • Evidence of or treatment for clinically significant cytomegalovirus (CMV) colitis (based on the investigator's judgment) within 60 days prior to randomization

    • History of active or latent TB

    • History of recurrent opportunistic infections and/or history of severe disseminated viral infections

    • Any serious opportunistic infection within the last 6 months prior to screening

    • Any current or recent signs or symptoms (within 4 weeks before screening and during screening) of infection

    • Any major episode of infection requiring treatment with IV antibiotics within 8 weeks prior to screening or oral antibiotics within 4 weeks prior to screening

    • Received a live attenuated vaccine within 4 weeks prior to randomization

    • History of organ transplant

    Exclusion Criteria Related to Laboratory Abnormalities (at Screening)

    • Serum creatinine >2 x upper limit of normal (ULN)

    • ALT or AST >3 x ULN or alkaline phosphatase >3 x ULN or total bilirubin >2.5 x ULN

    • Platelet count <100,000/uL

    • Hemoglobin <8 g/dL

    • Absolute neutrophil count <1500/uL

    • Absolute lymphocyte count <500/uL

    Contacts and Locations

    Locations

    Site City State Country Postal Code
    1 Center For Digestive Health Orlando Florida United States 32803
    2 Internal Medicine Specialists Orlando Florida United States 32806
    3 Cotton-O'Neil Clinical Research Center, Digestive Health Topeka Kansas United States 66606
    4 Great Lakes Gastroenterology Research, LLC Mentor Ohio United States 44060
    5 Centro de Investigaciones Medicas Mar Del Plata Mar del Plata Argentina B7600DHK
    6 Concord Repatriation General Hospital Concord New South Wales Australia 2139
    7 Royal Adelaide Hospital Adelaide South Australia Australia 5000
    8 Flinders Medical Centre Bedford Park South Australia Australia 5042
    9 St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne Fitzroy Victoria Australia 3065
    10 Footscray Hospital; Gastroenterology Footscray Victoria Australia 3011
    11 Hospital Universitario Prof Edgar Santos-Ufba; Ambulatorio Magalhaes Neto 3Andar- Dermatologia Salvador BA Brazil 41110-170
    12 Hospital Universitario Walter Cantidio - UFC Fortaleza CE Brazil 60430-370
    13 Centro Digestivo de Curitiba Curitiba PR Brazil 80430-160
    14 Hospital Ernesto Dornelles Porto Alegre RS Brazil 90160-092
    15 Pesquisare Saúde Sociedade Simples Santo Andre SP Brazil 09080-000
    16 Medical Centre "Asklepii", OOD Dupnitsa Bulgaria 2600
    17 DCC Sv. Pantaleymon OOD Pleven Bulgaria 5800
    18 Medical center Medconsult Pleven OOD Pleven Bulgaria 5800
    19 MHAT - Ruse, AD Ruse Bulgaria 7002
    20 MHAT "Hadzhi Dimitar", OOD Sliven Bulgaria 8800
    21 "City Clinic UMHAC" EOOD Sofia Bulgaria 1407
    22 Medical center CONVEX EOOD Sofia Bulgaria 1680
    23 Medical Center "Nov Rehabilitatsionen Tsentar", EOOD Stara Zagora Bulgaria 6000
    24 MHAT 'Sv. Marina', EAD Varna Bulgaria 9010
    25 RTS - Fundación Valle de Lili Cali Colombia 0
    26 Instituto de Coloproctologia ICO S.A.S. Medellin Colombia 050025
    27 Clinical Hospital Centre Osijek Osijek Croatia 31000
    28 Clinical Hospital Sveti Duh Zagreb Croatia 10000
    29 Fakultni nemocnice Hradec Kralove Hradec Kralove Czechia 500 05
    30 Hepato-Gastroenterologie HK, s.r.o. Hradec Kralove Czechia 500 12
    31 PreventaMed, s.r.o. Olomouc Czechia 779 00
    32 Pardubicka krajska nemocnice, a.s. Pardubice Czechia 532 03
    33 ISCARE a.s. Praha 7 Czechia 170 04
    34 Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud Pierre Benite France 69495
    35 University General Hospital of Heraklion Herakleion Greece 711 10
    36 Petz Aladar Megyei Oktato Korhaz Gyor Hungary 9024
    37 Central Outpatient Clinic Daugavpils Latvia LV-5401
    38 Pauls Stradins Clinical University Hospital Rīga Latvia LV-1002
    39 Digestive Diseases Center "Gastro" Rīga Latvia LV-1079
    40 Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health. Sciences Kaunas Clinics Kaunas Lithuania 50009
    41 Klaipeda Seamen's Hospital, Public Institution Klaipeda Lithuania 92288
    42 Vilnius University Hospital Santariskiu Clinic, Public Institution; Cardiology Vilnius Lithuania LT-08661
    43 Hospital Raja Perempuan Zainab II; Department of Medicine Kota Bahru Malaysia 15586
    44 Pusat Perubatan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Kuala Lumpur Malaysia 56000
    45 University Malaya Medical Centre Kuala Lumpur Malaysia 59100
    46 Hospital Tengku Ampuan Afzan Pahang Malaysia 25100
    47 North Shore Hospital Auckland New Zealand 0620
    48 Dunedin Hospital Dunedin New Zealand
    49 Waikato Hospital Hamilton New Zealand 3248
    50 Shakespeare Specialist Group Takapuna New Zealand 0620
    51 Tauranga Hospital Tauranga New Zealand 3143
    52 Pro Familia Altera Sp z o.o. Katowice Poland 40-645
    53 Nzoz All-Medicus Katowice Poland 40-660
    54 Uniwersyteckie Centrum Kliniczne im. prof. K. Gibinskiego SUM Katowice Poland 40-752
    55 Centrum Opieki Zdrowotnej Orkan-Med Ksawerow Poland 95-054
    56 Allmedica Badania Kliniczne Sp z o.o. Sp K. Nowy Targ Poland 34-400
    57 Centrum Medyczne Medyk Rzeszow Poland 35-055
    58 Gabinet Lekarski, Bartosz Korczowski Rzeszów Poland 35-302
    59 Niepubliczny Zaklad Opieki Zdrowotnej SONOMED Szczecin Poland 70-351
    60 Endoterapia PFG Sp. z o.o. Warszawa Poland 02-653
    61 LexMedica Osrodek Badan Klinicznych Wroclaw Poland 53-114
    62 AppleTreeClinics Sp. z o.o. Łódź Poland 90-349
    63 SBIH City Clinical Hospital #31 Sankt-peterburg Sankt Petersburg Russian Federation 197110
    64 SBEI HPE Altai State Medical University of MoH and SD; Out-patient Department Barnaul Russian Federation 656038
    65 Irkutsk State Medical Academy of Continuing Education Irkutsk Russian Federation
    66 FSBI "Scientific Research Institute of Physyology and Basic Medicine" under the SB of RAMS Novosibirsk Russian Federation 630117
    67 BHI of Omsk region Clinical Oncology Dispensary Omsk Russian Federation 644013
    68 Center of Emergency and Radiation Medicine; Pulmonology St. Petersburg Russian Federation 194044
    69 Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University St. Petersburg Russian Federation 197022
    70 SPb SHI "City Hospital #9" St. Petersburg Russian Federation 197110
    71 FSBEI HE "Stavropol State Medical University" of Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation Stavropol Russian Federation 355018
    72 Voronezh Regional Clinical Hospital #1 Voronezh Russian Federation 394066
    73 Ankara Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Research Hospital; Gastroenterology Ankara Turkey 06110
    74 Gaziantep University Medical Faculty Sahinbey Educational Research Hospital; Medical Oncology Gaziantep Turkey 27310
    75 Haydarpasa Numune Training and Research Hospital; Gastroenterology Istanbul Turkey 34668
    76 Kocaeli Universitesi Tip Fakultesi Kocaeli Turkey 41380
    77 CI of SRC Sumy RCH Dept of Gasroenterology Sumy SU MI Sumy Kharkiv Governorate Ukraine 40022
    78 CNE Kyiv CCH #18 Kyiv KIEV Governorate Ukraine 01030
    79 CI of Kyiv RC Kyiv Regional Clinical Hospital Kyiv KIEV Governorate Ukraine 04107
    80 Med Center of International Institute of Clinical Trials LLC; Medical Center "OK!Clinic+" Kyiv KIEV Governorate Ukraine 2091
    81 A.Novak Transcarpathian Regional Clinical Hospital Uzhgorod KIEV Governorate Ukraine 88018
    82 RCNECRCH Dept of Surgery, SHEI Ukr BSMU Chernivtsi Podolia Governorate Ukraine 58002
    83 SI inst. of Gastroenterology of NAMSU Dept of Stomach & Duodenum Diseases, D&ThN SI DMA of MoHU Dnipropetrovsk Ukraine 49074
    84 GI L.T.Malaya Therapy National Institute of the NAMS of Ukraine Kharkiv Ukraine 61039
    85 CI Kherson Afanasii and Olha Tropiny City Clinical Hospital Kherson Ukraine 73000
    86 M.V. Sklifosovskyi Poltava RCH Dept of Gastroenterology HSEIU UMSA Poltava Ukraine 36011
    87 Private Small Enterprise Medical Center Pulse Vinnytsia Ukraine 21001
    88 MCIC MC LLC Health Clinic Vinnytsia Ukraine 21029
    89 Zaporizhzhia SMU Zaporizhzhia Ukraine 69104
    90 LLC Diaservis Zaporizhzhia Ukraine 69106

    Sponsors and Collaborators

    • Hoffmann-La Roche

    Investigators

    • Study Director: Clinical Trials, Hoffmann-La Roche

    Study Documents (Full-Text)

    More Information

    Publications

    None provided.
    Responsible Party:
    Hoffmann-La Roche
    ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
    NCT02171429
    Other Study ID Numbers:
    • GA28949
    • 2013-004277-27
    First Posted:
    Jun 24, 2014
    Last Update Posted:
    Jul 23, 2021
    Last Verified:
    Jul 1, 2021
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product:
    Yes
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product:
    No
    Additional relevant MeSH terms:

    Study Results

    Participant Flow

    Recruitment Details
    Pre-assignment Detail Participants who were on concomitant background therapy were allowed to continue receiving stable baseline doses of the following non-investigational medicinal products during the study: oral 5-aminosalicylic acid; azathioprine; 6-mercaptopurine; methotrexate; corticosteroids up to 30 mg/day of prednisone (or equivalent); and/or budesonide up to 9 mg/day.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Period Title: Overall Study
    STARTED 72 143 143
    Completed Week 10 Visit 70 141 141
    COMPLETED 71 140 138
    NOT COMPLETED 1 3 5

    Baseline Characteristics

    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab Total
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). Total of all reporting groups
    Overall Participants 144 285 287 716
    Age (Years) [Mean (Standard Deviation) ]
    GA28949 Population
    40.3
    (12.5)
    39.7
    (12.6)
    41.1
    (14.4)
    40.4
    (13.3)
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    39.4
    (12.9)
    40.8
    (13.2)
    40.6
    (13.9)
    40.4
    (13.4)
    Sex: Female, Male (Count of Participants)
    Female
    34
    23.6%
    62
    21.8%
    59
    20.6%
    155
    21.6%
    Male
    38
    26.4%
    81
    28.4%
    84
    29.3%
    203
    28.4%
    Female
    67
    46.5%
    122
    42.8%
    129
    44.9%
    318
    44.4%
    Male
    77
    53.5%
    163
    57.2%
    158
    55.1%
    398
    55.6%
    Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) (Count of Participants)
    Hispanic or Latino
    5
    3.5%
    11
    3.9%
    12
    4.2%
    28
    3.9%
    Not Hispanic or Latino
    67
    46.5%
    130
    45.6%
    128
    44.6%
    325
    45.4%
    Unknown or Not Reported
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    3
    1%
    5
    0.7%
    Hispanic or Latino
    13
    9%
    27
    9.5%
    26
    9.1%
    66
    9.2%
    Not Hispanic or Latino
    130
    90.3%
    253
    88.8%
    256
    89.2%
    639
    89.2%
    Unknown or Not Reported
    1
    0.7%
    5
    1.8%
    5
    1.7%
    11
    1.5%
    Race/Ethnicity, Customized (Count of Participants)
    Asian
    4
    2.8%
    4
    1.4%
    4
    1.4%
    12
    1.7%
    Black or African American
    1
    0.7%
    4
    1.4%
    1
    0.3%
    6
    0.8%
    White
    65
    45.1%
    131
    46%
    133
    46.3%
    329
    45.9%
    Other
    2
    1.4%
    4
    1.4%
    5
    1.7%
    11
    1.5%
    Asian
    4
    2.8%
    6
    2.1%
    4
    1.4%
    14
    2%
    Black or African American
    3
    2.1%
    4
    1.4%
    2
    0.7%
    9
    1.3%
    White
    133
    92.4%
    261
    91.6%
    271
    94.4%
    665
    92.9%
    Other
    4
    2.8%
    14
    4.9%
    10
    3.5%
    28
    3.9%
    Disease Location (Count of Participants)
    Left-Sided Colitis
    48
    33.3%
    86
    30.2%
    86
    30%
    220
    30.7%
    Extensive Colitis
    7
    4.9%
    13
    4.6%
    11
    3.8%
    31
    4.3%
    Pancolitis
    17
    11.8%
    44
    15.4%
    46
    16%
    107
    14.9%
    Left-Sided Colitis
    92
    63.9%
    170
    59.6%
    175
    61%
    437
    61%
    Extensive Colitis
    17
    11.8%
    36
    12.6%
    33
    11.5%
    86
    12%
    Pancolitis
    35
    24.3%
    79
    27.7%
    79
    27.5%
    193
    27%
    Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ≤9 or ≥10 at Baseline (Count of Participants)
    MCS ≤9
    46
    31.9%
    96
    33.7%
    96
    33.4%
    238
    33.2%
    MCS ≥10
    26
    18.1%
    47
    16.5%
    47
    16.4%
    120
    16.8%
    MCS ≤9
    93
    64.6%
    192
    67.4%
    196
    68.3%
    481
    67.2%
    MCS ≥10
    51
    35.4%
    93
    32.6%
    91
    31.7%
    235
    32.8%
    Baseline Treatment: None, Corticosteroids (CS) or Immunosuppressants (IS) Alone, or Both CS and IS (Count of Participants)
    None
    27
    18.8%
    53
    18.6%
    55
    19.2%
    135
    18.9%
    Corticosteroids (CS) Alone
    23
    16%
    42
    14.7%
    40
    13.9%
    105
    14.7%
    Immunosuppressants (IS) Alone
    14
    9.7%
    28
    9.8%
    28
    9.8%
    70
    9.8%
    Both CS and IS
    8
    5.6%
    20
    7%
    20
    7%
    48
    6.7%
    None
    51
    35.4%
    104
    36.5%
    100
    34.8%
    255
    35.6%
    Corticosteroids (CS) Alone
    48
    33.3%
    88
    30.9%
    90
    31.4%
    226
    31.6%
    Immunosuppressants (IS) Alone
    29
    20.1%
    58
    20.4%
    60
    20.9%
    147
    20.5%
    Both CS and IS
    16
    11.1%
    35
    12.3%
    37
    12.9%
    88
    12.3%
    Nancy Histological Index (NHI) Score of ≤1 or >1, or Missing, at Baseline (Count of Participants)
    NHI Score ≤1
    9
    6.3%
    23
    8.1%
    21
    7.3%
    53
    7.4%
    NHI Score >1
    62
    43.1%
    114
    40%
    108
    37.6%
    284
    39.7%
    Missing
    1
    0.7%
    6
    2.1%
    14
    4.9%
    21
    2.9%
    NHI Score ≤1
    17
    11.8%
    38
    13.3%
    36
    12.5%
    91
    12.7%
    NHI Score >1
    124
    86.1%
    230
    80.7%
    228
    79.4%
    582
    81.3%
    Missing
    3
    2.1%
    17
    6%
    23
    8%
    43
    6%

    Outcome Measures

    1. Primary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants in Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab Compared With Placebo, as Determined by the Mayo Clinic Score (MCS), GA28949 Population
    Description The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and associated 95% confidence interval for the stratification factors.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    11.1
    7.7%
    18.2
    6.4%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments The null hypothesis (H0): the percentage of participants achieving remission at Week 10 was the same in both the placebo and etrolizumab arms. The alternative hypothesis (H1): the percentage of participants achieving remission at Week 10 was not the same in the placebo and etrolizumab arms.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1729
    Comments The threshold for statistical significance was a p-value <0.05.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value 7.2
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -3.83 to 16.12
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the placebo arm.
    2. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants in Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS, GA28949 Population
    Description The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and associated 95% confidence interval for the stratification factors.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 143 143
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    24.5
    17%
    18.2
    6.4%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1458
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value -6.8
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -16.26 to 2.73
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    3. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants in Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    Description The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and associated 95% confidence interval for the stratification factors.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in studies GA28948 & GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 285 287
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    23.5
    16.3%
    18.8
    6.6%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 3 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value -5.0
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -11.66 to 1.75
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    4. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 10, as Determined by the MCS, GA28949 Population
    Description The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Clinical Response was defined as: MCS ≥3-point decrease and 30% reduction from baseline as well as ≥1-point decrease in rectal bleeding subscore or an absolute rectal bleeding score of 0 or 1. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9 or ≥10); the CMH test adjusted the differences in response rates and associated 95% CIs for the stratification factors.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    38.9
    27%
    54.5
    19.1%
    52.4
    18.3%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 1 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1729
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Response Rates
    Estimated Value 14.0
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -0.12 to 27.19
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in response rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.6726
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Response Rates
    Estimated Value -2.5
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -13.83 to 9.01
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in response rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    5. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    Description The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Clinical Response was defined as: MCS ≥3-point decrease and 30% reduction from baseline as well as ≥1-point decrease in rectal bleeding subscore or an absolute rectal bleeding score of 0 or 1. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9 or ≥10); the CMH test adjusted the differences in response rates and associated 95% CIs for the stratification factors.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in studies GA28948 & GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 285 287
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    53.3
    37%
    54.7
    19.2%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 3 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Response Rates
    Estimated Value 1.2
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -6.98 to 9.26
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in response rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    6. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Endoscopic Appearance of the Mucosa at Week 10, as Determined by the Mayo Endoscopy Subscore, GA28949 Population
    Description Improvement in endoscopic appearance of the mucosa was defined as a Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) endoscopy subscore ≤1. Blinded gastroenterologists experienced in inflammatory bowel disease performed central reading of endoscopies at an independent review facility. The rectum, sigmoid, and descending colon segments were assessed and each segment was assigned a score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. At baseline all segments were reviewed and the worst score from the three segments was recorded as the endoscopy subscore. Post-baseline the endoscopy score was the worst score of all segments that had been assessed at baseline, if the baseline endoscopy score had a sigmoid colon score ≤1. If at baseline the sigmoid colon score was ≥2, the post-baseline endoscopy score was the sigmoid colon score value. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    30.6
    21.3%
    42.7
    15%
    39.9
    13.9%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 1 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.2372
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Response Rates
    Estimated Value 9.4
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -4.31 to 21.95
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in response rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.5341
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Response Rates
    Estimated Value -3.5
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -14.76 to 7.82
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in response rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    7. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Endoscopic Appearance of the Mucosa at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS Endoscopy Subscore, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    Description Improvement in endoscopic appearance of the mucosa was defined as a Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) endoscopy subscore ≤1. Blinded gastroenterologists experienced in inflammatory bowel disease performed central reading of endoscopies at an independent review facility. The rectum, sigmoid, and descending colon segments were assessed and each segment was assigned a score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. At baseline all segments were reviewed and the worst score from the three segments was recorded as the endoscopy subscore. Post-baseline the endoscopy score was the worst score of all segments that had been assessed at baseline, if the baseline endoscopy score had a sigmoid colon score ≤1. If at baseline the sigmoid colon score was ≥2, the post-baseline endoscopy score was the sigmoid colon score value. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in studies GA28948 & GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 285 287
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    37.9
    26.3%
    40.1
    14.1%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 3 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Response Rates
    Estimated Value 1.9
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -6.04 to 9.88
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in response rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    8. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants in Endoscopic Remission at Week 10, as Determined by the MCS Endoscopy Subscore, GA28949 Population
    Description Endoscopic remission was defined as a Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) endoscopy subscore of 0. Blinded gastroenterologists experienced in inflammatory bowel disease performed central reading of endoscopies at an independent review facility. The rectum, sigmoid, and descending colon segments were assessed and each segment was assigned a score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. At baseline all segments were reviewed and the worst score from the three segments was recorded as the endoscopy subscore. Post-baseline the endoscopy score was the worst score of all segments that had been assessed at baseline, if the baseline endoscopy score had a sigmoid colon score ≤1. If at baseline the sigmoid colon score was ≥2, the post-baseline endoscopy score was the sigmoid colon score value. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    8.3
    5.8%
    26.6
    9.3%
    19.6
    6.8%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 2 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.2372
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value 11.2
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    0.59 to 19.76
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1192
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value -7.5
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -17.20 to 2.33
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    9. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants in Endoscopic Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the MCS Endoscopy Subscore, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    Description Endoscopic remission was defined as a Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) endoscopy subscore of 0. Blinded gastroenterologists experienced in inflammatory bowel disease performed central reading of endoscopies at an independent review facility. The rectum, sigmoid, and descending colon segments were assessed and each segment was assigned a score of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. At baseline all segments were reviewed and the worst score from the three segments was recorded as the endoscopy subscore. Post-baseline the endoscopy score was the worst score of all segments that had been assessed at baseline, if the baseline endoscopy score had a sigmoid colon score ≤1. If at baseline the sigmoid colon score was ≥2, the post-baseline endoscopy score was the sigmoid colon score value. Non-responders also included participants with missing Week 10 assessments or those who had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in studies GA28948 & GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 285 287
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    23.5
    16.3%
    20.2
    7.1%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 5 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value -3.5
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -10.27 to 3.30
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    10. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants With Histologic Remission at Week 10, as Determined by the Nancy Histological Index, GA28949 Population
    Description Histologic remission is defined by the resolution of neutrophilic inflammation (e.g., absence of neutrophils in the crypts and lamina propria), defined by a Nancy Histological Index (NHI) score of ≤1. The NHI score ranges from 0 to 4, with the following definitions for each grade: 0 is no histologically significant disease; 1 is chronic inflammatory infiltrate with no acute inflammatory infiltrate; and 2, 3, and 4 are mildly, moderately, and severely active disease, respectively. A small pool of central readers who were blinded to both treatment arm and timepoint performed the histologic scoring. The same reader scored all slides for a given participant based on biopsies from the most inflamed region of the sigmoid colon. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received rescue therapy prior to assessment. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and 95% CI for the stratification factors.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Histology-Evaluable Population: included all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug and had documented neutrophilic inflammation (i.e., NHI >1) at baseline. This excludes participants who had no baseline histology assessment or had no indication of neutrophilic inflammation at baseline.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 62 114 108
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    21.0
    14.6%
    43.9
    15.4%
    30.6
    10.7%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 2 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.2729
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value 9.6
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -4.71 to 22.02
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.0215
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value -14.8
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -26.97 to -2.04
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    11. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants With Histologic Remission at Week 10 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, as Determined by the Nancy Histological Index, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    Description Histologic remission is defined by the resolution of neutrophilic inflammation (e.g., absence of neutrophils in the crypts and lamina propria), defined by a Nancy Histological Index (NHI) score of ≤1. The NHI score ranges from 0 to 4, with the following definitions for each grade: 0 is no histologically significant disease; 1 is chronic inflammatory infiltrate with no acute inflammatory infiltrate; and 2, 3, and 4 are mildly, moderately, and severely active disease, respectively. A small pool of central readers who were blinded to both treatment arm and timepoint performed the histologic scoring. The same reader scored all slides for a given participant based on biopsies from the most inflamed region of the sigmoid colon. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received rescue therapy prior to assessment. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the difference in remission rates and 95% CI for the stratification factors.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled, Histology-Evaluable Population: included all randomized participants in studies GA28948 & GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug and had documented neutrophilic inflammation (i.e., NHI >1) at baseline. This excludes participants who had no baseline histology assessment or had no indication of neutrophilic inflammation at baseline.
    Arm/Group Title Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 230 228
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    36.5
    25.3%
    36.8
    12.9%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 5 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value -0.3
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -9.13 to 8.45
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    12. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in the MCS Rectal Bleeding Subscore at Week 6, GA28949 Population
    Description Rectal bleeding data were collected via the participant's diaries and each day a participant provided a score from 0 to 3 according to the following definitions: 0 = no blood in the stool; 1 = streaks of blood with stool less than half the time; 2 = obvious blood with stool most of the time; 3 = blood alone passed. The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) rectal bleeding subscore was calculated as the worst value of three days of daily diary scores closest to anchor dates at baseline and post-baseline. The data was considered non-parametric and was reported using RANK analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the model adjusted for these stratification factors along with the baseline rectal bleeding (RB) subscore.
    Time Frame Baseline, Week 6

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Median (Inter-Quartile Range) [Score on a scale]
    0.0
    -1.0
    -1.0
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 2 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1729
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Rank ANCOVA
    Comments Model adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL), MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL, and RB score at BL.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.2864
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Rank ANCOVA
    Comments Model adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL), MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL, and RB score at BL.
    13. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in the MCS Rectal Bleeding Subscore at Week 6 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    Description Rectal bleeding data were collected via the participant's diaries and each day a participant provided a score from 0 to 3 according to the following definitions: 0 = no blood in the stool; 1 = streaks of blood with stool less than half the time; 2 = obvious blood with stool most of the time; 3 = blood alone passed. The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) rectal bleeding subscore was calculated as the worst value of three days of daily diary scores closest to anchor dates at baseline and post-baseline. The data was considered non-parametric and was reported using RANK analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the model adjusted for these stratification factors along with the baseline rectal bleeding (RB) subscore.
    Time Frame Baseline, Week 6

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in studies GA28948 & GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 285 287
    Median (Inter-Quartile Range) [Score on a scale]
    -1.0
    -1.0
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 5 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Rank ANCOVA
    Comments Model adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL), MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL, and RB score at BL.
    14. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in the MCS Stool Frequency Subscore at Week 6, GA28949 Population
    Description Stool frequency data were collected via the participant's diaries and each day a participant provided a score from 0 to 3 according to the following definitions: 0 = normal number of stools; 1 = 1 to 2 more stools than normal; 2 = 3 to 4 more stools than normal; 3 = 5 or more stools than normal. The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) stool frequency subscore was calculated as the average of three days daily diary scores closest to anchor dates at baseline and post-baseline. The data was considered non-parametric and was reported using RANK analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the model adjusted for these stratification factors along with the baseline stool frequency (SF) subscore.
    Time Frame Baseline, Week 6

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Median (Inter-Quartile Range) [Score on a scale]
    0.0
    -1.0
    -1.0
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 2 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1729
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Rank ANCOVA
    Comments Model adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL), MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL, and SF score at BL.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.4174
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Rank ANCOVA
    Comments Model adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL), MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL, and SF score at BL.
    15. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in the MCS Stool Frequency Subscore at Week 6 With Etrolizumab as Compared With Adalimumab, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    Description Stool frequency data were collected via the participant's diaries and each day a participant provided a score from 0 to 3 according to the following definitions: 0 = normal number of stools; 1 = 1 to 2 more stools than normal; 2 = 3 to 4 more stools than normal; 3 = 5 or more stools than normal. The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) stool frequency subscore was calculated as the average of three days daily diary scores closest to anchor dates at baseline and post-baseline. The data was considered non-parametric and was reported using RANK analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10); the model adjusted for these stratification factors along with the baseline stool frequency (SF) subscore.
    Time Frame Baseline, Week 6

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in studies GA28948 & GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 285 287
    Median (Inter-Quartile Range) [Score on a scale]
    -1.0
    -1.0
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 5 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Rank ANCOVA
    Comments Model adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL), MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL, and SF score at BL.
    16. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Ulcerative Colitis (UC) Bowel Movement Signs and Symptoms at Week 10, as Assessed by the UC Patient-Reported Outcome Signs and Symptoms (UC-PRO/SS), GA28949 Population
    Description The UC-PRO/SS questionnaire was collected in the e-diary and completed by participants for at least 9 to 12 consecutive days prior to a study visit. The bowel movement domain score ranges from 0 to 27, with a higher score indicating a worse disease state. The most recent 7 daily scores available (not including the visit) were selected for the calculation of the visit score. For each item in the questionnaire, a score was calculated for a visit by taking the average of the selected daily scores. The domain score for a visit was calculated as the sum of the averaged items for each question. A Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis of the data included the fixed categorical effects of treatment, visit, study stratification factors, and treatment-by-visit interaction, and the continuous covariates of the baseline UC-PRO/SS domain and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit interaction. An unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the within-patient errors within the MMRM.
    Time Frame Baseline, Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. The analysis only included participants with non-missing results at baseline and at least one post-baseline timepoint.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 59 111 108
    Least Squares Mean (Standard Error) [Score on a scale]
    -4.7
    (0.7)
    -5.9
    (0.5)
    -5.8
    (0.5)
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1659
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Mixed Model for Repeated Measures
    Comments Model adjusted for treatment, visit, stratification factors, treatment-by-visit, baseline UC-PRO/SS domain, and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Mean Difference (Net)
    Estimated Value -1.1
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -2.8 to 0.5
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.9182
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Mixed Model for Repeated Measures
    Comments Model adjusted for treatment, visit, stratification factors, treatment-by-visit, baseline UC-PRO/SS domain, and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Mean Difference (Net)
    Estimated Value 0.1
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -1.3 to 1.4
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus adalimumab arm.
    17. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Ulcerative Colitis Bowel Movement Signs and Symptoms at Week 10, as Assessed by the UC-PRO/SS, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    Description The UC-PRO/SS questionnaire was collected in the e-diary and completed by participants for at least 9 to 12 consecutive days prior to a study visit. The bowel movement domain score ranges from 0 to 27, with a higher score indicating a worse disease state. The most recent 7 daily scores available (not including the visit) were selected for the calculation of the visit score. For each item in the questionnaire, a score was calculated for a visit by taking the average of the selected daily scores. The domain score for a visit was calculated as the sum of the averaged items for each question. A Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis of the data included the fixed categorical effects of treatment, visit, study stratification factors, and treatment-by-visit interaction, and the continuous covariates of the baseline UC-PRO/SS domain and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit interaction. An unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the within-patient errors within the MMRM.
    Time Frame Baseline, Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in studies GA28948 & GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. The analysis only included participants with non-missing results at baseline and at least one post-baseline timepoint.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 109 217 225
    Least Squares Mean (Standard Error) [Score on a scale]
    -5.0
    (0.5)
    -5.8
    (0.4)
    -6.0
    (0.3)
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 4 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Mixed Model for Repeated Measures
    Comments Model adjusted for treatment, visit, stratification factors, treatment-by-visit, baseline UC-PRO/SS domain, and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Mean Difference (Net)
    Estimated Value -1.0
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -2.1 to 0.2
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 6 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Mixed Model for Repeated Measures
    Comments Model adjusted for treatment, visit, stratification factors, treatment-by-visit, baseline UC-PRO/SS domain, and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Mean Difference (Net)
    Estimated Value -0.3
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -1.2 to 0.7
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus adalimumab arm.
    18. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Ulcerative Colitis Functional Symptoms at Week 10, as Assessed by the UC-PRO/SS, GA28949 Population
    Description The UC-PRO/SS questionnaire was collected in the e-diary and completed by participants for at least 9 to 12 consecutive days prior to a study visit. The functional symptoms domain score ranges from 0 to 12, with a higher score indicating a worse disease state. The most recent 7 daily scores available (not including the visit) were selected for the calculation of the visit score. For each item in the questionnaire, a score was calculated for a visit by taking the average of the selected daily scores. The domain score for a visit was calculated as the sum of the averaged items for each question. A Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis of the data included the fixed categorical effects of treatment, visit, study stratification factors, and treatment-by-visit interaction, and the continuous covariates of the baseline UC-PRO/SS domain and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit interaction. An unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the within-patient errors in the MMRM.
    Time Frame Baseline, Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. The analysis only included participants with non-missing results at baseline and at least one post-baseline timepoint.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 59 111 108
    Least Squares Mean (Standard Error) [Score on a scale]
    -1.0
    (0.3)
    -1.8
    (0.2)
    -2.0
    (0.2)
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.0116
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Mixed Model for Repeated Measures
    Comments Model adjusted for treatment, visit, stratification factors, treatment-by-visit, baseline UC-PRO/SS domain, and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Mean Difference (Net)
    Estimated Value -1.0
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -1.7 to -0.2
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.6771
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Mixed Model for Repeated Measures
    Comments Model adjusted for treatment, visit, stratification factors, treatment-by-visit, baseline UC-PRO/SS domain, and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Mean Difference (Net)
    Estimated Value -0.1
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -0.8 to 0.5
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus adalimumab arm.
    19. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Ulcerative Colitis Functional Symptoms at Week 10, as Assessed by the UC-PRO/SS, GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population
    Description The UC-PRO/SS questionnaire was collected in the e-diary and completed by participants for at least 9 to 12 consecutive days prior to a study visit. The functional symptoms domain score ranges from 0 to 12, with a higher score indicating a worse disease state. The most recent 7 daily scores available (not including the visit) were selected for the calculation of the visit score. For each item in the questionnaire, a score was calculated for a visit by taking the average of the selected daily scores. The domain score for a visit was calculated as the sum of the averaged items for each question. A Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis of the data included the fixed categorical effects of treatment, visit, study stratification factors, and treatment-by-visit interaction, and the continuous covariates of the baseline UC-PRO/SS domain and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit interaction. An unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the within-patient errors in the MMRM.
    Time Frame Baseline, Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28948 & GA28949 Pooled Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in studies GA28948 & GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. The analysis only included participants with non-missing results at baseline and at least one post-baseline timepoint.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 109 217 225
    Least Squares Mean (Standard Error) [Score on a scale]
    -1.4
    (0.2)
    -1.6
    (0.2)
    -1.9
    (0.2)
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 4 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Mixed Model for Repeated Measures
    Comments Model adjusted for treatment, visit, stratification factors, treatment-by-visit, baseline UC-PRO/SS domain, and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Mean Difference (Net)
    Estimated Value -0.5
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -1.0 to 0.0
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. This comparison was part of Family 6 of the testing procedure; please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 1
    Comments p-value has been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Mixed Model for Repeated Measures
    Comments Model adjusted for treatment, visit, stratification factors, treatment-by-visit, baseline UC-PRO/SS domain, and baseline UC-PRO/SS domain-by-visit.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Mean Difference (Net)
    Estimated Value -0.3
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -0.7 to 0.1
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus adalimumab arm.
    20. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants in Clinical Remission at Week 10, as Determined by the MCS, GA28949 Population
    Description The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Clinical remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 assessments were missing or if they had received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the differences in remission rates and associated 95% confidence intervals for the stratification factors.
    Time Frame Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    11.1
    7.7%
    25.9
    9.1%
    18.9
    6.6%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1382
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value 7.9
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -3.19 to 16.87
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1163
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value -7.5
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -17.10 to 2.22
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    21. Secondary Outcome
    Title Percentage of Participants in Remission at Week 10 and Week 14, as Determined by the MCS, GA28949 Population
    Description The Mayo Clinic Score (MCS) ranges from 0 to 12 and is a composite of the four following assessments of disease activity: stool frequency subscore, rectal bleeding subscore, endoscopy subscore, and physician's global assessment (PGA) subscore. Each of the four assessments was rated with a score from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe disease. Remission was defined as MCS less than or equal to (≤)2 with individual subscores ≤1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0. Participants were also classified as non-remitters if Week 10 or 14 assessments were missing or the participant received permitted/prohibited rescue therapy prior to assessment. Participants were stratified by concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening (MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted the differences in remission rates and associated 95% confidence intervals for the stratification factors.
    Time Frame Weeks 10 and 14

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Number (95% Confidence Interval) [Percentage of participants]
    6.9
    4.8%
    14.7
    5.2%
    9.8
    3.4%
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.4772
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value 2.9
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -6.47 to 10.14
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.1801
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
    Comments Difference and 95% CI adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL) and MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Remission Rates
    Estimated Value -5.2
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -12.95 to 2.63
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Difference in remission rates was calculated as the etrolizumab arm minus the adalimumab arm.
    22. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Health-Related Quality of Life at Week 10, as Assessed by the Total Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) Score, GA28949 Population
    Description The IBDQ is a 32-item questionnaire containing four domains: bowel symptoms (10 items), systemic symptoms (5 items), emotional function (12 items), and social function (5 items). An overall total IBDQ score was computed by summing the individual 32-item scores. The range for the IBDQ total score is 32 to 224, with higher scores denoting better health-related quality of life. The unadjusted mean and standard deviation for each study arm are reported. The change from baseline in the IBDQ score was analyzed using an ANCOVA model taking the stratification factors used at randomization into account (concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at randomization and disease activity measured during screening [MCS ≤9/MCS ≥10]), and the baseline IBDQ score used as a covariate.
    Time Frame Baseline, Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Population, Modified Intent-to-Treat: including all randomized participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. The analysis only included participants with non-missing results at baseline and at least one post-baseline timepoint.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 62 125 125
    Mean (Standard Deviation) [Score on a scale]
    31.2
    (39.5)
    34.8
    (36.5)
    36.2
    (43.4)
    Statistical Analysis 1
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Placebo, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.4833
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method ANCOVA
    Comments Model adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL), MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL, and IBDQ score at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Adjusted Means
    Estimated Value 4.0
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -7.2 to 15.2
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus placebo arm.
    Statistical Analysis 2
    Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Etrolizumab, Etrolizumab
    Comments Primary and secondary outcome measures were evaluated for statistical significance in a hierarchical manner with a component-wise multistage gatekeeping procedure. Please refer to the statistical analysis plan for details. This comparison was not considered a key secondary outcome measure and was not part of the multiple testing procedure for statistical significance.
    Type of Statistical Test Superiority
    Comments
    Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.9931
    Comments Nominal p-value; it has not been adjusted for multiplicity.
    Method ANCOVA
    Comments Model adjusted for concomitant treatment with corticosteroids or immunosuppressants at baseline (BL), MCS (≤9 or ≥10) at BL, and IBDQ score at BL.
    Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Difference in Adjusted Means
    Estimated Value 0.0
    Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
    -9.2 to 9.1
    Parameter Dispersion Type:
    Value:
    Estimation Comments Mean difference was calculated as etrolizumab arm minus adalimumab arm.
    23. Secondary Outcome
    Title Pharmacokinetics of Etrolizumab: Serum Concentration, GA28949 Population
    Description Serum concentrations of etrolizumab were evaluated at the primary endpoint visit (Week 10) and the secondary endpoint visit (Week 14). Both time points were two weeks after the most recent dose.
    Time Frame Weeks 10 and 14

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Pharmacokinetics Evaluable Population: includes participants in study GA28949 who had received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one quantifiable concentration measured post-baseline. Only participants who were treated with etrolizumab were included in this analysis.
    Arm/Group Title Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 139
    Week 10
    12.4
    (5.51)
    Week 14
    15.5
    (6.49)
    24. Secondary Outcome
    Title Number and Percentage of Participants With at Least One Adverse Event by Severity, According to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 4.0 (NCI CTCAE v4.0), GA28949 Population
    Description An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation in which a patient is administered a pharmaceutical product, regardless of causal attribution. The investigator independently assessed the severity and seriousness of each recorded AE. The AE severity grading scale for the NCI CTCAE v4.0 was used for assessing severity; any AE not specifically listed was rated according to the following grading scale from 1 to 5: 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, 4 = life-threatening, 5 = death. AEs of special interest included: elevated AST/ALT in combination with either elevated bilirubin or clinical jaundice; suspected transmission of infectious agent by the study drug; anaphylactic, anaphylactoid and systemic hypersensitivity reactions; and neurological signs, symptoms, and AEs that may suggest possible progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML).
    Time Frame From Baseline until the end of study (up to 26 weeks)

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Safety Population: includes all participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment received.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Any Adverse Event (AE)
    33
    22.9%
    62
    21.8%
    63
    22%
    AE with Fatal Outcome
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Serious AE
    5
    3.5%
    3
    1.1%
    7
    2.4%
    AE Leading to Study Treatment Discontinuation
    1
    0.7%
    2
    0.7%
    4
    1.4%
    AE Leading to Dose Interruption
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    1
    0.3%
    Related AE
    9
    6.3%
    15
    5.3%
    12
    4.2%
    AE by Worst Severity, Grade 1
    14
    9.7%
    29
    10.2%
    30
    10.5%
    AE by Worst Severity, Grade 2
    13
    9%
    25
    8.8%
    24
    8.4%
    AE by Worst Severity, Grade 3
    6
    4.2%
    8
    2.8%
    8
    2.8%
    AE by Worst Severity, Grade 4
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    AE by Worst Severity, Grade 5
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Any AEs of Special Interest (AESIs), Except for Hypersensitivity Reactions
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    AESIs: Anaphylactic, Anaphylactoid, and Systemic Hypersensitivity Reactions
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Confirmed PML
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    Infections
    13
    9%
    18
    6.3%
    23
    8%
    Serious Infections
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    2
    0.7%
    Gastrointestinal Infections
    1
    0.7%
    0
    0%
    3
    1%
    Opportunistic Infections
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    Malignancies
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    0
    0%
    Injection Site Reactions
    2
    1.4%
    3
    1.1%
    2
    0.7%
    25. Secondary Outcome
    Title Number and Percentage of Participants by Marked Laboratory Abnormality Status for Hematology Parameters as a Shift Table From Baseline to Week 10, GA28949 Population
    Description Laboratory tests for hematology parameters were performed and values were compared with the Roche marked reference range. A marked abnormality was defined as a test result that was outside of the Roche marked reference range (labelled as 'High' or 'Low') and represented a clinically significant change from baseline. Not every laboratory abnormality qualified as an adverse event. A laboratory test result must have been reported as an adverse event if it met any of the following criteria: was accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment or a medical intervention; or was clinically significant in the investigator's judgment. The results are presented as a shift from the baseline status to the post-baseline (Week 10) status. Baseline was defined as the last available assessment prior to first receipt of study drug. The 'missing' status included participants with missing baseline or post-baseline values. Ery. = erythrocyte
    Time Frame From Baseline up to Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Safety Population: includes all participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment received.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Eosinophils Absolute Count (Abs) - Normal to Normal
    63
    43.8%
    133
    46.7%
    124
    43.2%
    Eosinophils Abs - Normal to High
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    Eosinophils Abs - Normal to Missing
    7
    4.9%
    9
    3.2%
    15
    5.2%
    Eosinophils Abs - High to Normal
    2
    1.4%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Eosinophils Abs - High to High
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Eosinophils Abs - Missing to Normal
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Hematocrit - Low to Low
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    1
    0.3%
    Hematocrit - Low to Normal
    3
    2.1%
    2
    0.7%
    5
    1.7%
    Hematocrit - Low to Missing
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Hematocrit - Normal to Low
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    2
    0.7%
    Hematocrit - Normal to Normal
    62
    43.1%
    128
    44.9%
    119
    41.5%
    Hematocrit - Normal to Missing
    7
    4.9%
    10
    3.5%
    14
    4.9%
    Hematocrit - Missing to Normal
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    1
    0.3%
    Hemoglobin - Low to Low
    3
    2.1%
    10
    3.5%
    13
    4.5%
    Hemoglobin - Low to Normal
    2
    1.4%
    7
    2.5%
    9
    3.1%
    Hemoglobin - Low to Missing
    2
    1.4%
    3
    1.1%
    4
    1.4%
    Hemoglobin - Normal to Low
    4
    2.8%
    4
    1.4%
    7
    2.4%
    Hemoglobin - Normal to Normal
    56
    38.9%
    113
    39.6%
    99
    34.5%
    Hemoglobin - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    6
    2.1%
    10
    3.5%
    Hemoglobin - Missing to Normal
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Lymphocytes Abs - Low to Low
    2
    1.4%
    2
    0.7%
    2
    0.7%
    Lymphocytes Abs - Low to Normal
    2
    1.4%
    9
    3.2%
    4
    1.4%
    Lymphocytes Abs - Low to Missing
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Lymphocytes Abs - Normal to Low
    1
    0.7%
    2
    0.7%
    2
    0.7%
    Lymphocytes Abs - Normal to Normal
    60
    41.7%
    121
    42.5%
    119
    41.5%
    Lymphocytes Abs - Normal to Missing
    7
    4.9%
    9
    3.2%
    14
    4.9%
    Lymphocytes Abs - Missing to Normal
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Ery. Mean Corpuscular Volume - Normal to Low
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    1
    0.3%
    Ery. Mean Corpuscular Volume - Normal to Normal
    65
    45.1%
    130
    45.6%
    126
    43.9%
    Ery. Mean Corpuscular Volume - Normal to Missing
    7
    4.9%
    9
    3.2%
    15
    5.2%
    Ery. Mean Corpuscular Volume - High to High
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Ery. Mean Corpuscular Volume - High to Missing
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Ery. Mean Corpuscular Volume - Missing to Normal
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    1
    0.3%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - Low to Low
    1
    0.7%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - Low to Normal
    0
    0%
    3
    1.1%
    4
    1.4%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - Low to Missing
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - Normal to Low
    0
    0%
    7
    2.5%
    4
    1.4%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - Normal to Normal
    55
    38.2%
    105
    36.8%
    105
    36.6%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - Normal to High
    1
    0.7%
    1
    0.4%
    2
    0.7%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - Normal to Missing
    8
    5.6%
    7
    2.5%
    15
    5.2%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - High to Normal
    3
    2.1%
    15
    5.3%
    7
    2.4%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - High to High
    4
    2.8%
    1
    0.4%
    5
    1.7%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - High to Missing
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    0
    0%
    Neutrophils, Total, Abs - Missing to Normal
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Platelets - Normal to Normal
    59
    41%
    128
    44.9%
    116
    40.4%
    Platelets - Normal to High
    1
    0.7%
    0
    0%
    3
    1%
    Platelets - Normal to Missing
    9
    6.3%
    9
    3.2%
    15
    5.2%
    Platelets - High to Normal
    2
    1.4%
    2
    0.7%
    4
    1.4%
    Platelets - High to High
    1
    0.7%
    2
    0.7%
    2
    0.7%
    Platelets - High to Missing
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    2
    0.7%
    Platelets - Missing to Normal
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    1
    0.3%
    White Blood Cell Count - Low to Low
    1
    0.7%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    White Blood Cell Count - Low to Normal
    0
    0%
    4
    1.4%
    2
    0.7%
    White Blood Cell Count - Low to Missing
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    White Blood Cell Count - Normal to Low
    0
    0%
    3
    1.1%
    2
    0.7%
    White Blood Cell Count - Normal to Normal
    64
    44.4%
    123
    43.2%
    124
    43.2%
    White Blood Cell Count - Normal to High
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    White Blood Cell Count - Normal to Missing
    7
    4.9%
    8
    2.8%
    14
    4.9%
    White Blood Cell Count - High to Normal
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    0
    0%
    White Blood Cell Count - Missing to Normal
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    26. Secondary Outcome
    Title Number and Percentage of Participants by Marked Laboratory Abnormality Status for Chemistry Parameters as a Shift Table From Baseline to Week 10, GA28949 Population
    Description Laboratory tests for chemistry parameters were performed and values were compared with the Roche marked reference range. A marked abnormality was defined as a test result that was outside of the Roche marked reference range (labelled as 'High' or 'Low') and represented a clinically significant change from baseline. Not every laboratory abnormality qualified as an adverse event. A laboratory test result must have been reported as an adverse event if it met any of the following criteria: was accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment or a medical intervention; or was clinically significant in the investigator's judgment. The results are presented as a shift from the baseline status to the post-baseline (Week 10) status. Baseline was defined as the last available assessment prior to first receipt of study drug. The 'missing' status included participants with missing baseline or post-baseline values.
    Time Frame From Baseline up to Week 10

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Safety Population: includes all participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment received.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 72 143 143
    Albumin - Low to Normal
    2
    1.4%
    3
    1.1%
    2
    0.7%
    Albumin - Low to Missing
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    Albumin - Normal to Low
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Albumin - Normal to Normal
    65
    45.1%
    134
    47%
    137
    47.7%
    Albumin - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    5
    1.8%
    2
    0.7%
    Alkaline Phosphatase - Normal to Normal
    67
    46.5%
    138
    48.4%
    137
    47.7%
    Alkaline Phosphatase - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    5
    1.8%
    5
    1.7%
    Alkaline Phosphatase - High to Normal
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Alanine Aminotransferase - Normal to Normal
    65
    45.1%
    134
    47%
    134
    46.7%
    Alanine Aminotransferase - Normal to High
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Alanine Aminotransferase - Normal to Missing
    6
    4.2%
    7
    2.5%
    5
    1.7%
    Alanine Aminotransferase - High to Normal
    1
    0.7%
    1
    0.4%
    2
    0.7%
    Alanine Aminotransferase - High to High
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    Aspartate Aminotransferase - Normal to Normal
    65
    45.1%
    135
    47.4%
    135
    47%
    Aspartate Aminotransferase - Normal to High
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    Aspartate Aminotransferase - Normal to Missing
    6
    4.2%
    8
    2.8%
    5
    1.7%
    Aspartate Aminotransferase - High to Normal
    1
    0.7%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Bicarbonate (CO2) - Low to Low
    1
    0.7%
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    Bicarbonate (CO2) - Low to Normal
    1
    0.7%
    3
    1.1%
    0
    0%
    Bicarbonate (CO2) - Normal to Low
    6
    4.2%
    9
    3.2%
    10
    3.5%
    Bicarbonate (CO2) - Normal to Normal
    55
    38.2%
    121
    42.5%
    116
    40.4%
    Bicarbonate (CO2) - Normal to High
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Bicarbonate (CO2) - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    7
    2.5%
    3
    1%
    Bicarbonate (CO2) - High to Normal
    4
    2.8%
    1
    0.4%
    10
    3.5%
    Bicarbonate (CO2) - High to High
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    1
    0.3%
    Bicarbonate (CO2) - High to Missing
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    2
    0.7%
    Blood Urea Nitrogen - Normal to Normal
    67
    46.5%
    138
    48.4%
    139
    48.4%
    Blood Urea Nitrogen - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    5
    1.8%
    4
    1.4%
    Calcium - Normal to Normal
    67
    46.5%
    138
    48.4%
    139
    48.4%
    Calcium - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    5
    1.8%
    4
    1.4%
    Chloride - Low to Low
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Chloride - Low to Missing
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Chloride - Normal to Low
    1
    0.7%
    1
    0.4%
    3
    1%
    Chloride - Normal to Normal
    66
    45.8%
    135
    47.4%
    136
    47.4%
    Chloride - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    5
    1.8%
    4
    1.4%
    Creatinine - Normal to Normal
    67
    46.5%
    138
    48.4%
    139
    48.4%
    Creatinine - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    5
    1.8%
    4
    1.4%
    Direct Bilirubin - Normal to Normal
    66
    45.8%
    132
    46.3%
    137
    47.7%
    Direct Bilirubin - Normal to Missing
    6
    4.2%
    10
    3.5%
    6
    2.1%
    Direct Bilirubin - Missing to Normal
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Potassium - Normal to Low
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Potassium - Normal to Normal
    66
    45.8%
    135
    47.4%
    137
    47.7%
    Potassium - Normal to Missing
    6
    4.2%
    7
    2.5%
    6
    2.1%
    Sodium - Normal to Normal
    67
    46.5%
    137
    48.1%
    139
    48.4%
    Sodium - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    6
    2.1%
    4
    1.4%
    Total Bilirubin - Normal to Normal
    66
    45.8%
    135
    47.4%
    136
    47.4%
    Total Bilirubin - Normal to High
    1
    0.7%
    3
    1.1%
    3
    1%
    Total Bilirubin - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    5
    1.8%
    4
    1.4%
    Protein, Total - Low to Normal
    1
    0.7%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Protein, Total - Normal to Low
    0
    0%
    1
    0.4%
    0
    0%
    Protein, Total - Normal to Normal
    64
    44.4%
    132
    46.3%
    135
    47%
    Protein, Total - Normal to High
    1
    0.7%
    5
    1.8%
    0
    0%
    Protein, Total - Normal to Missing
    5
    3.5%
    5
    1.8%
    5
    1.7%
    Protein, Total - High to Normal
    1
    0.7%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    Protein, Total - High to High
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    1
    0.3%
    27. Secondary Outcome
    Title Number and Percentage of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) to Etrolizumab at Baseline and Anytime Post-Baseline, GA28949 Population
    Description Anti-drug antibody (ADA) serum samples were collected from participants and analyzed using validated assays. Participants were considered to be ADA positive post-baseline if they were ADA negative or had missing data at baseline, but developed an ADA response following etrolizumab drug exposure (treatment-induced ADA response), or if they were ADA positive at baseline and the titer of one or more post-baseline samples was at least 0.60 titer units greater than the titer of the baseline sample (treatment-enhanced ADA response). Participants were considered to be ADA negative if they were ADA negative or had missing data at baseline and all post-baseline samples were negative, or if they were ADA positive at baseline but did not have any post-baseline samples with a titer that was at least 0.60 titer unit greater than the titer of the baseline sample (treatment unaffected).
    Time Frame Pre-dose (0 hour) on Day 1 and Week 4, Week 10, Week 14, and early termination/end of safety follow-up (up to 26 weeks)

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    GA28949 Safety Population: includes all participants in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug, with participants grouped according to the treatment received. The analysis of ADAs at baseline and post-baseline only included participants who received treatment with etrolizumab.
    Arm/Group Title Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    Measure Participants 141
    Positive for ADAs at Baseline (BL)
    7
    4.9%
    Negative for ADAs at BL
    134
    93.1%
    Post-BL: Positive for Treatment Emergent ADAs
    26
    18.1%
    Post-BL ADA Positive: Treatment-Induced ADAs
    26
    18.1%
    Post-BL ADA Positive: Treatment-Enhanced ADAs
    0
    0%
    Post-BL: Negative for Treatment Emergent ADAs
    115
    79.9%
    Post-BL ADA Negative: Treatment Unaffected
    7
    4.9%

    Adverse Events

    Time Frame From Baseline until the end of study (up to 26 weeks)
    Adverse Event Reporting Description The adverse events reported here are those that occurred only in participants enrolled in study GA28949 who received at least one dose of study drug. For the adverse events that occurred in participants enrolled in the identically designed study, GA28948, please refer to its study record, NCT02163759.
    Arm/Group Title Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Arm/Group Description The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive placebo matching to etrolizumab subcutaneously (SC) once every 4 weeks (Q4W) up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC once every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive adalimumab subcutaneously (SC) Q2W up to Week 8 (160 mg at Week 0 [Day 1], 80 mg at Week 2, 40 mg at Weeks 4, 6, and 8) and placebo matching to etrolizumab SC Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]). The double-blinded treatment period consisted of a 10-week induction period and an additional 4-week treatment period for participants who met the definition of clinical remission at Week 10. Participants with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis who were naive to TNF inhibitors were randomized to this arm to receive etrolizumab 105 mg subcutaneously (SC) Q4W up to Week 12 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 4, 8, and 12 [clinical remitters only]) and placebo matching to adalimumab SC Q2W up to Week 8 (at Weeks 0 [Day 1], 2, 4, 6, and 8).
    All Cause Mortality
    Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Affected / at Risk (%) # Events Affected / at Risk (%) # Events Affected / at Risk (%) # Events
    Total 0/72 (0%) 0/143 (0%) 1/143 (0.7%)
    Serious Adverse Events
    Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Affected / at Risk (%) # Events Affected / at Risk (%) # Events Affected / at Risk (%) # Events
    Total 5/72 (6.9%) 3/143 (2.1%) 7/143 (4.9%)
    Eye disorders
    Visual impairment 0/72 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1
    Gastrointestinal disorders
    Colitis ulcerative 2/72 (2.8%) 2 1/143 (0.7%) 1 1/143 (0.7%) 1
    Colon dysplasia 0/72 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1
    Pancreatitis acute 1/72 (1.4%) 1 0/143 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0
    Proctitis 0/72 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1
    Rectal haemorrhage 0/72 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1
    General disorders
    Sudden cardiac death 0/72 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1
    Infections and infestations
    Clostridium difficile infection 0/72 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1
    Pulpitis dental 0/72 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1
    Urinary tract infection 0/72 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1 0/143 (0%) 0
    Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
    Costochondritis 0/72 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1
    Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
    Anaplastic oligodendroglioma 0/72 (0%) 0 1/143 (0.7%) 1 0/143 (0%) 0
    Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
    Pulmonary embolism 1/72 (1.4%) 1 0/143 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0
    Vascular disorders
    Deep vein thrombosis 2/72 (2.8%) 2 0/143 (0%) 0 0/143 (0%) 0
    Other (Not Including Serious) Adverse Events
    Placebo Adalimumab Etrolizumab
    Affected / at Risk (%) # Events Affected / at Risk (%) # Events Affected / at Risk (%) # Events
    Total 14/72 (19.4%) 23/143 (16.1%) 20/143 (14%)
    Blood and lymphatic system disorders
    Anaemia 5/72 (6.9%) 5 2/143 (1.4%) 2 5/143 (3.5%) 5
    Gastrointestinal disorders
    Colitis ulcerative 8/72 (11.1%) 8 12/143 (8.4%) 12 11/143 (7.7%) 11
    Infections and infestations
    Upper respiratory tract infection 4/72 (5.6%) 5 3/143 (2.1%) 4 4/143 (2.8%) 4
    Nervous system disorders
    Headache 0/72 (0%) 0 9/143 (6.3%) 10 3/143 (2.1%) 3

    Limitations/Caveats

    [Not Specified]

    More Information

    Certain Agreements

    Principal Investigators are NOT employed by the organization sponsoring the study.

    The study being conducted under this agreement is part of the overall study. Investigator is free to publish in reputable journals or to present at professional conferences the results of the study, but only after the first publication or presentation that involves the overall study. The Sponsor may request that confidential information be deleted and/or the publication be postponed in order to protect the Sponsor's intellectual property rights.

    Results Point of Contact

    Name/Title Medical Communications
    Organization Hoffmann-La Roche
    Phone 800-821-8590
    Email genentech@druginfo.com
    Responsible Party:
    Hoffmann-La Roche
    ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
    NCT02171429
    Other Study ID Numbers:
    • GA28949
    • 2013-004277-27
    First Posted:
    Jun 24, 2014
    Last Update Posted:
    Jul 23, 2021
    Last Verified:
    Jul 1, 2021