Skip To Main Content
Lilly
Menu closed
Lilly
  • Account Login / Register
  • Medical Home
    • Medical Information
  • Medical Education
  • Science
Ask Lilly

We're here to help.

Chat
Chat with us Chat with us
Question Contact Us
Expand contact lilly
Lilly

You are now leaving the Lilly Medical website

The link you clicked on will take you to a site maintained by a third party, which is solely responsible for its content. Lilly USA, LLC does not control, influence, or endorse this site, and the opinions, claims, or comments expressed on this site should not be attributed to Lilly USA, LLC. Lilly USA, LLC is not responsible for the privacy policy of any third-party websites. We encourage you to read the privacy policy of every website you visit.
Click "Continue" to proceed or "Return" to return to Lilly Medical

  1. Medical Information Right
  2. Immunology Right
  3. Omvoh (mirikizumab-mrkz) injection Right
  4. What were the efficacy results in the phase 3 clinical trial of Omvoh® (mirikizumab-mrkz) for the treatment of Crohn's disease in adults?
Search Omvoh (mirikizumab-mrkz) injection (type in keywords)
Search Medical Information

If you wish to report an adverse event or product complaint, please call 1-800-LILLYRX (1-800-545-5979)

Loading icon

Omvoh ® (mirikizumab-mrkz) injection

300 mg/15 mL, 100 mg/mL

Full Prescribing Information

This information is provided in response to your request. Resources may contain information about doses, uses, formulations and populations different from product labeling. See Prescribing Information above, if applicable.

What were the efficacy results in the phase 3 clinical trial of Omvoh® (mirikizumab-mrkz) for the treatment of Crohn's disease in adults?

A significantly greater proportion of patients in the mirikizumab group compared with the placebo group achieved both coprimary endpoints in the VIVID-1 study (p<.0001).

US_cFAQ_MIR700C_EFFICACY_ADULTS_CD
US_cFAQ_MIR700C_EFFICACY_ADULTS_CDen-US

Content Overview

Design of the VIVID-1 Phase 3 Study of Mirikizumab for the Treatment of Crohn's Disease

  • Key Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for Participant Selection 
  • Treatment Regimens for Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Among Randomized Groups
  • Primary and Secondary Objectives Evaluating Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Placebo or With Ustekinumab

Summary of Baseline Demographics and Clinical Characteristics Across Treatment Groups

  • Baseline Demographics
  • Baseline Disease Characteristics
  • Baseline and Prior Medication Use

Comparative Efficacy Analyses of Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo in the VIVID-1 Phase 3 Study of Mirikizumab for the Treatment of Crohn's Disease

  • Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Placebo in the VIVID-1 Study Primary Analysis Set
  • Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Ustekinumab in the VIVID-1 Study
  • Efficacy of Ustekinumab Compared With Placebo in the VIVID-1 Study
  • Comparative Changes in Biomarkers From Baseline Through Week 52 Among Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Groups
  • Histologic and Endoscopic-Histologic Response Among the Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Treatment Groups

Appendix

Design of the VIVID-1 Phase 3 Study of Mirikizumab for the Treatment of Crohn's Disease

VIVID-1 was a 52-week, phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active- and placebo-controlled, treat-through study in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease.1

Key Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for Participant Selection 

Key Inclusion Criteria

To be eligible for the study, participants had to

  • be aged 18 to 80 years
  • have a diagnosis of Crohn's disease or fistulizing Crohn's disease for at least 3 months prior to study enrollment
  • have moderately to severely active Crohn's disease, defined as
    • an unweighted baseline daily average loose stool frequency (SF) of at least 4, and/or
    • an unweighted baseline daily average abdominal pain (AP) of at least 2
  • have a Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease (SES-CD) of at least 7 in patients with ileal-colonic disease or at least 4 in patients with isolated ileal disease within 21 days before randomization, and
  • have had an inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to at least 1 conventional corticosteroid, immunomodulator, or approved biologic therapy for Crohn's disease.1

During the early stages of enrollment, the protocol was amended to permit the inclusion of a specific group of patients with an SES-CD of ≥3 to <7 for colonic or ileal-colonic disease, or SES-CD <4 for individuals with isolated ileal disease. These patients were randomly assigned and included in the study for exploratory analyses. While they were included in safety analyses, they were not considered part of the primary population for efficacy analyses.1

Key Exclusion Criteria

Patients who had previously received anti-interleukin-23 antibodies, except for no more than 2 doses of ustekinumab and had not failed or had an intolerance to ustekinumab, were excluded from the study.1

Treatment Regimens for Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Among Randomized Groups

In this treat-through study, a total of 1152 patients were randomized 6:3:2 to either

  • mirikizumab 900 mg infused intravenously (IV) every 4 weeks for 3 doses followed by 300 mg injected subcutaneously (SC) every 4 weeks through week 52
  • ustekinumab 6 mg/kg infused IV for one dose followed by 90 mg injected SC every 8 weeks through week 52, or
  • placebo.1

From weeks 8 through 20, all patients received their assigned treatment and matching placebo via both intravenous infusion and subcutaneous injection.1

Randomization was stratified by

  • biologic-failed status (yes or no)
  • baseline corticosteroid use (yes or no)
  • baseline SES-CD total score (<12 or ≥12)
  • region (North America, Europe, or other), and
  • combined stratification factor using either
    • baseline SF≥7 and/or
    • baseline AP score ≥2.5 (yes or no).1

Treatment Protocol for Patients Randomized to Placebo Based on Response at Week 12

Patients randomized to placebo received an intravenous infusion every 4 weeks for 3 doses. At week 12, patients were classified as responders if they had achieved at least a 30% decrease in loose SF and/or AP, with neither score higher than baseline. Accordingly,

  • placebo responders received another 3 doses of placebo infused IV every 4 weeks for 3 doses followed by placebo injected SC every 4 weeks through week 52, and
  • placebo nonresponders received mirikizumab 900 mg infused IV every 4 weeks for 3 doses followed by 300 mg injected SC every 4 weeks through week 52.1

Primary and Secondary Objectives Evaluating Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Placebo or With Ustekinumab

Corresponding endpoints and their definitions for the objectives below are defined in Primary and Major Secondary Endpoints in the VIVID-1 Clinical Trial in the Appendix.

Coprimary Efficacy Objectives

The primary objective of the VIVID-1 study was to evaluate the superiority of the efficacy of mirikizumab to placebo in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease as assessed by

  • clinical response by patient-reported outcomes (PRO) at week 12 and endoscopic response at week 52, and
  • clinical response by PRO at week 12 and clinical remission by Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at week 52.1

Major Secondary Objectives

The major secondary objectives of the VIVID -1 study, which evaluated the superiority of the efficacy of mirikizumab to placebo in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease, were multiplicity controlled and assessed by

  • endoscopic response at week 12
  • clinical remission by CDAI at week 12
  • clinical response by PRO at week 12
  • endoscopic remission at week 12
  • Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) scores at week 12
  • endoscopic response at week 52
  • clinical remission by CDAI at week 52, and
  • clinical response by PRO at week 12 and
    • clinical remission by PRO at week 52
    • corticosteroid-free clinical remission by CDAI at week 52, and
    • endoscopic remission at week 52.1

Additional multiplicity adjusted secondary objectives at week 52 were to assess the

  • superiority of mirikizumab to ustekinumab in achieving endoscopic response, and
  • noninferiority of mirikizumab to ustekinumab in achieving clinical remission by CDAI.1

Scoring Methodology for Endoscopic Evaluations

Endoscopies were video-recorded and scored by 2 blinded central readers independently. If a discrepancy in scoring occurred between the first 2 readers, a third central reader was added. The final score was the mean of all readers' scores.1

Summary of Baseline Demographics and Clinical Characteristics Across Treatment Groups

Baseline Demographics

Baseline demographics were similar across treatment groups (Baseline Demographics Across Treatment Groups in the Primary Analysis Set of VIVID-1).1 

Baseline Demographics Across Treatment Groups in the Primary Analysis Seta of VIVID-11,2

 

Mirikizumab (n=579)

Ustekinumab (n=287)

Placebo (n=199)

Age, mean (SD), y

36.0 (13.2)

36.6 (12.7)

36.3 (12.7)

Male, n (%)

332 (57.3)

137 (47.7)

118 (59.3)

Weight, mean (SD), kg

68.02 (18.3)

66.86 (17.6)

69.55 (19.0)

BMI, mean (SD)

23.2 (5.4)

23.3 (5.5)

23.8 (5.8)

Underweight (<18.5 kg/m2)

109 (18.8)

52 (18.1)

38 (19.1)

Normal (≥18.5 and <25 kg/m2)

289 (49.9)

141 (49.1)

94 (47.2)

Overweight (≥25 and <30 kg/m2)

115 (19.9)

62 (21.6)

31 (15.6)

Obese (≥30 and <40 kg/m2)

60 (10.4)

27 (9.4)

34 (17.1)

Race, n (%)

White

408 (71.5)

201 (70.3)

144 (74.6)

Black or African American

10 (1.8)

8 (2.8)

5 (2.6)

Asian

148 (25.9)

74 (25.9)

42 (21.8)

American Indian or Alaska Native

2 (0.4)

2 (0.7)

2 (1.0)

Multiple

3 (0.5)

1 (0.3)

0 (0.0)

Geographic region, n (%)

North America

77 (13.3)

37 (12.9)

27 (13.6)

Europe and rest of world

319 (55.1)

155 (54.0)

117 (58.8)

Central America or South America

30 (5.2)

20 (7.0)

9 (4.5)

Asia

153 (26.4)

75 (26.1)

46 (23.1)

Abbreviations: BMI = body mass index; SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease.

aThe primary analysis set is comprised of those participants who received ≥1 dose of study drug and had a baseline SES-CD ≥7 (or ≥4 for isolated ileal disease).

Baseline Disease Characteristics

Baseline disease characteristics were similar across treatment groups (Baseline Disease Characteristics Across Treatment Groups in the Primary Analysis Set of the VIVID-1 Study).1 

The mean (SD) duration of Crohn's disease across treatment groups was 7.4 (7.9) years (Baseline Disease Characteristics Across Treatment Groups in the Primary Analysis Set of the VIVID-1 Study).1

Baseline Disease Characteristics Across Treatment Groups in the Primary Analysis Seta of the VIVID-1 Study1

 

Mirikizumab (n=579)

Ustekinumab (n=287)

Placebo (n=199)

Duration of Crohn's disease mean (SD), y

7.4 (8.2)

7.2 (7.7)

7.8 (7.4)

CDAI, mean (SD)

323.1 (85.8)

318.5 (93.2)

318.9 (86.2)

SF daily average, mean (SD)

5.7 (3.0)

5.7 (2.9)

5.8 (3.2)

AP daily average, mean (SD)

2.1 (0.6)

2.1 (0.6)

2.1 (0.6)

SES-CD total score, mean (SD)

13.5 (6.6)

13.9 (6.6)

13.1 (6.0)

CRP, mean (IQR), mg/L

8.5 (2.9-25.0)

8.9 (3.4-24.8)

7.6 (2.9-18.8)

FCal, mean (IQR), mg/kg

1315.0 (444.0-2676.0)

1489.0 (519.0-2814.0)

1161.0 (324.0-2170.0)

Disease location, n (%)

Ileum only

65 (11.2)

29 (10.1)

19 (9.5)

Colon only

225 (38.9)

120 (41.8)

77 (38.7)

Ileum and colon

289 (49.9)

138 (48.1)

103 (51.8)

Abbreviations: AP = abdominal pain; CDAI = Crohn's Disease Activity Index; CRP = C-reactive protein; FCal = fecal calprotectin; IQR = interquartile range; SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease; SF = stool frequency.

aThe primary analysis set is comprised of those participants who received &ge;1 dose of study drug and had a baseline SES-CD ≥7 (or ≥4 for isolated ileal disease).

Baseline and Prior Medication Use

Baseline and prior use of medications for the treatment of Crohn's disease were similar across treatment groups (Baseline and Prior Medication Use Across Treatment Groups in the Primary Analysis Set of the VIVID-1 Study).1

Approximately half of the patients in each treatment group had failed at least one biologic, and the proportion of patients who had failed more than one biologic was

  • 18.3% of patients in the mirikizumab group
  • 16.7% of patients in the ustekinumab group, and
  • 15.6% of patients in the placebo group.1
Baseline and Prior Medication Use Across Treatment Groups in the Primary Analysis Seta of the VIVID-1 Study1,3

Treatmentb

Mirikizumab (n=579)

Ustekinumab (n=287)

Placebo (n=199)

Baseline treatment use

Corticosteroid use

177 (30.6)

90 (31.4)

58 (29.1)

Prednisone equivalent dose, median (range), mg

20 (3-30)

16 (5-100)

15 (5-30)

Budesonide use

63 (10.9)

27 (9.4)

23 (11.6)

Immunomodulator use

146 (25.2)

87 (30.3)

58 (29.1)

Prior treatment use

Prior ustekinumab use

4 (0.7)

1 (0.3)

2 (1.0)

Prior anti-TNF failure

265 (45.8)

133 (46.3)

89 (44.7)

Prior anti-integrin failure

68 (11.7)

31 (10.8)

24 (12.1)

Prior biologic failure

281 (48.5)

139 (48.4)

97 (48.7)

Number of failed biologics

0

298 (51.5)

148 (51.6)

102 (51.3)

1

175 (30.2)

91 (31.7)

66 (33.2)

2

82 (14.2)

42 (14.6)

25 (12.6)

>2

24 (4.1)

6 (2.1)

6 (3.0)

Abbreviations: SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease; TNF = tumor necrosis factor.

aIncludes the 1065 patients who qualified for the primary analysis set, meaning the patients received at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline SES-CD ≥7 (or ≥4 for isolated ileal disease).

bData presented as n (%) unless otherwise indicated.

Comparative Efficacy Analyses of Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo in the VIVID-1 Phase 3 Study of Mirikizumab for the Treatment of Crohn's Disease

Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Placebo in the VIVID-1 Study Primary Analysis Set

A total of 1150 patients who were randomized in the VIVID-1 study received at least one dose of study drug, of which 1065 had a baseline SES-CD of at least 7 (or ≥4 for isolated ileal disease) and represented the efficacy population.1

A total of 80 patients (40.2%) originally randomized to placebo did not achieve PRO clinical response at week 12 and were switched to blinded mirikizumab treatment.1

Week 12 and Week 52 Coprimary Composite Efficacy Endpoints of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo

Both of the coprimary endpoints were met (Comparative Efficacy of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo on Coprimary Endpoints By Biologic Failure Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results, NRI).1

The week 52 endoscopic response composite was achieved by

  • 38.0% of patients in the mirikizumab treatment group, and
  • 9.0% of patients in the placebo treatment group (p<.0001).1

The week 52 CDAI clinical remission composite was achieved by

  • 45.4% of patients in the mirikizumab treatment group, and
  • 19.6% of patients in the placebo treatment group (p<.0001).1

The significant differences between the mirikizumab and placebo treatment groups were observed with and without prior biologic failure.1

Comparative Efficacy of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo on Coprimary Endpoints By Biologic Failure Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results, NRI1

Endpointa

Mirikizumab (n=579)

Placebo (n=199)

Difference vs Placebo

Week 12 PRO clinical responseb and week 52 endoscopic responsec

220/579 (38.0)

18/199 (9.0)

28.7 (20.6-36.8)d

Not biologic failed

117/298 (39.3)

12/102 (11.8)

27.5 (19.1-35.9)d

Biologic failed

103/281 (36.7)

6/97 (6.2)

30.5 (23.1-37.9)d

Week 12 PRO clinical responseb and week 52 CDAI clinical remissione

263/579 (45.4)

39/199 (19.6)

25.8 (15.9-35.6)d

Not biologic failed

141/298 (47.3)

27/102 (26.5)

20.8 (10.6-31.1)f

Biologic failed

122/281 (43.4)

12/97 (12.4)

31.0 (22.3-39.8)d

Abbreviations: AP = abdominal pain; CDAI = Crohn's Disease Activity Index; NRI = nonresponder imputation; PRO = patient-reported outcome; SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease; SF = stool frequency.

aTreatment group data presented as n/N (%). Difference vs placebo presented as adjusted risk difference (99.5% CI) for all participants and unadjusted risk difference (95% CI) for subgroups.

bDefined as ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline.

cDefined as ≥50% reduction from baseline in SES-CD total score.

dp<.0001.

eDefined as CDAI total score <150.

fp<.01.

Major Secondary Endpoints of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo

Week 12 and Week 52 Composite Endpoints

A significantly greater proportion of patients who received mirikizumab compared with those who received placebo achieved all of the week 12 and week 52 composite endpoints at week 12, which included

  • endoscopic remission-composite (mirikizumab, 23.5%; placebo, 4.0%; p<.0001), and
  • corticosteroid-free clinical remission composite (mirikizumab, 43.7%; placebo, 18.6%; p<.0001).1

Comparative Efficacy of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo on Secondary Composite Endpoints By Biologic Failure Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results, NRI presents additional data for these endpoints stratified by biologic failed status.

Comparative Efficacy of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo on Secondary Composite Endpoints By Biologic Failure Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results, NRI1

Endpointa

Mirikizumab (n=579)

Placebo (n=199)

Unadjusted Risk Difference, Mirikizumab Vs Placebo

Week 12 PRO clinical responseb and week 52 PRO clinical remissionc

 263/579 (45.4)

39/199 (19.6) 

25.7 (15.9-35.6)d

Not biologic failed

141/298 (47.3)

28/102 (27.5)

19.9 (9.5-30.2)e

Biologic failed

122/281 (43.4)

11/97 (11.3)

32.1 (23.5-40.6)d

Week 12 PRO clinical responseb and CS-free from week 40 to week 52 and CDAI clinical remissionf at week 52

253/579 (43.7)

 37/199 (18.6)

 25.0 (15.2-34.7)d

Not biologic failed

139/298 (46.6)

25/102 (24.5)

22.1 (12.0-32.2)d

Biologic failed

114/281 (40.6)

12/97 (12.4)

28.2 (19.5-36.9)d

Week 12 PRO clinical responseb and week 52 endoscopic remissiong

92/579 (15.9)

4/199 (2.0)

13.8 (8.7-18.9)d

Not biologic failed

55/298 (18.5)

3/102 (2.9)

15.5 (10.0-21.0)d

Biologic failed

37/281 (13.2)

1/97 (1.0)

12.1 (7.7-16.6)d

Week 12 PRO clinical responseb and week 52 endoscopic remission (conventional)h

136/579 (23.5)

8/199 (4.0)

19.4 (13.1-25.7)d

Not biologic failed

82/298 (27.5)

6/102 (5.9)

21.6 (14.8-28.5)d

Biologic failed

54/281 (19.2)

2/97 (2.1)

17.2 (11.7-22.6)d

Abbreviations: AP = abdominal pain; CDAI = Crohn's Disease Activity Index; CS = corticosteroid; NRI = nonresponder imputation; PRO = patient-reported outcome; SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease; SF = stool frequency.

aTreatment group data presented as n/N (%). Difference vs placebo presented as adjusted risk difference (99.5% CI) for all participants and unadjusted risk difference (95% CI) for subgroups.

bDefined as ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline.

cDefined as SF ≤3 and not worse than baseline (per Bristol Stool Scale Category 6 or 7) and AP score <1 and no worse than baseline.

dp<.0001.

ep<.01.

fDefined as CDAI total score <150.

gDefined as SES-CD ≤4 and at least a 2-point reduction versus baseline and no subscore >1 (subscore representing segmental subscore), as scored by 2 independent central reviewers.

hDefined as SES-CD ≤4 and at least a 2-point reduction versus baseline and no subscore >1 in any individual variable (nonmultiplicity controlled), as scored by 2 independent central reviewers.

Week 12

A significantly greater proportion of patients who received mirikizumab compared with those who received placebo achieved all of the major secondary endpoints at week 12. These endpoints included

  • endoscopic response (mirikizumab, 32.5%; placebo, 12.6%; p<.0001)
  • clinical remission by CDAI (mirikizumab, 37.7%; placebo, 25.1%; p=.0014)
  • clinical response by PRO (mirikizumab, 70.6%; placebo, 51.8%; p<.0001), and
  • endoscopic remission (mirikizumab, 10.9%; placebo, 4.0%; p=.0034).1

Week 12 Comparative Efficacy of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo on Secondary Endpoints By Biologic Failure Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results, NRI presents additional data for these endpoints stratified by biologic failed status.

Week 12 Comparative Efficacy of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo on Secondary Endpoints By Biologic Failure Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results, NRI1

Endpointa

Mirikizumab (n=579)

Placebo (n=199)

Difference Vs Placebo

Endoscopic responseb

188/579 (32.5)

25/199 (12.6)

19.7 (11.1-28.2)c

Not biologic failed

113/298 (37.9)

17/102 (16.7)

21.3 (12.2-30.3)c

Biologic failed

75/281 (26.7)

8/97 (8.2)

18.4 (10.9-26.0)c

CDAI clinical remissiond

218/579  (37.7)

50/199 (25.1)

12.4 (2.2-22.7)e

Not biologic failed

118/298 (39.6)

26/102 (25.5)

14.1 (4.0-24.2)f

Biologic failed

100/281 (35.6)

24/97 (24.7)

10.8 (0.6-21.1)

PRO clinical responseg

409/579 (70.6)

103/199 (51.8)

18.9 (7.5-30.3)c

Not biologic failed

205/298 (68.8)

59/102 (57.8)

10.9 (0.0-21.9)h

Biologic failed

204/281 (72.6)

44/97 (45.4)

27.2 (16.0-38.4)c

Endoscopic remissioni

63/579 (10.9)

8/199 (4.0)

6.8 (1.6-12.1)j

Not biologic failed

43/298 (14.4)

6/102 (5.9)

8.5 (2.5-14.6)h

Biologic failed

20/281 (7.1)

2/97 (2.1)

5.1 (0.9-9.2)

Endoscopic remission (conventional)k

102/579 (17.6)

14/199 (7.0)

10.6 (4.1-17.2)l

Not biologic failed

65/298 (21.8)

12/102 (11.8)

10.0 (2.2-17.9)h

Biologic failed

37/281 (13.2)

2/97 (2.1)

11.1 (6.2-16.0)f

Abbreviations: AP = abdominal pain; CDAI = Crohn's Disease Activity Index; FACIT-F = Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue; LSM = least squares mean; NRI = nonresponder imputation; NRS = Numeric Rating Score; PRO = patient-reported outcome; SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease; SF = stool frequency.

aTreatment group data presented as n/N (%). Difference vs placebo presented as adjusted risk difference (99.5% CI) for all participants and unadjusted risk difference (95% CI) for subgroups.

bDefined as ≥50% reduction from baseline in SES-CD total score.

cp<.0001.

dDefined as CDAI total score <150.

ep=.0014.

fp<.01.

gDefined as ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline.

hp<.05.

iDefined as SES-CD ≤4 and at least a 2-point reduction versus baseline and no subscore >1 (subscore representing segmental subscore), as scored by 2 independent central reviewers.

jp=.0034.

kDefined as SES-CD ≤4 and at least a 2-point reduction versus baseline and no subscore >1 in any individual variable (nonmultiplicity controlled), as scored by 2 independent central reviewers.

lp=.0002.

Week 52

A significantly greater proportion of patients who received mirikizumab compared with those who received placebo achieved the major secondary endpoints at week 52. These endpoints included

  • endoscopic response (mirikizumab, 48.4%; placebo, 9.0%; p<.0001), and
  • clinical remission by CDAI (mirikizumab, 54.1%; placebo, 19.6%; p<.0001).1

Week 52 Comparative Efficacy of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo on Secondary Endpoints By Biologic Failure Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results presents additional data for these endpoints stratified by biologic failed status.

Week 52 Comparative Efficacy of Mirikizumab Versus Placebo on Secondary Endpoints By Biologic Failure Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results1

Endpointa

Mirikizumab (n=579)

Placebo (n=199)

Difference Vs Placebo

Endoscopic responseb

280/579 (48.4)

18/199 (9.0)

39.1 (31.0-47.2)c

Not biologic failed

154/298 (51.7)

12/102 (11.8)

39.9 (31.5-48.4)c

Biologic failed

126/281 (44.8)

6/97 (6.2)

38.7 (31.1-46.2)c

CDAI clinical remissiond

313/579 (54.1)

39/199 (19.6)

34.6 (24.7-44.4)c

Not biologic failed

169/298 (56.7)

27/102 (26.5)

30.2 (20.0-40.5)c

Biologic failed

144/281 (51.2)

12/97 (12.4)

38.9 (30.1-47.7)c

Abbreviations: CDAI = Crohn's Disease Activity Index; SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease.

aTreatment group data presented as n/N (%). Difference vs placebo presented as adjusted risk difference (99.5% CI) for all participants and unadjusted risk difference (95% CI) for subgroups. The treat-through result reflects the week 52 endpoint regardless of response status at week 12.

bDefined as ≥50% reduction from baseline in SES-CD total score.

cp<.0001.

dDefined as CDAI total score <150.

Improvements in Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Among the Mirikizumab and Placebo Treatment Groups

Improvement in Fatigue

Fatigue, as measured by FACIT-F, was significantly improved from baseline in the mirikizumab group compared with the placebo group at week 12 (p<.0001). The significant improvement from baseline to week 12 in FACIT-F for the mirikizumab group compared with the placebo group was demonstrated in patients who had and had not previously failed a biologic (Change From Baseline to Week 12 in FACIT-F With Mirikizumab Compared With Placebo by Biologic Failed Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results).1

Change From Baseline to Week 12 in FACIT-F With Mirikizumab Compared With Placebo by Biologic Failed Status in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: VIVID-1 Study Results1

Endpointa

Mirikizumab (n=579)

Placebo (n=199)

Difference Vs Placebo

Change from baseline in FACIT-F

5.9 (0.4)

2.6 (0.6)

3.2 (1.2-5.2)b

Not biologic failed

6.69 (0.511)

3.96 (0.863)

2.72 (0.8-4.7)c

Biologic failed

5.04 (0.504)

1.21 (0.854)

3.83 (1.9-5.8)b

Abbreviations: FACIT-F = Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue; LSM = least squares mean.

aData presented as LSM (SE). Difference vs placebo presented as adjusted risk difference (99.5% CI) for all participants and unadjusted risk difference (95% CI) for subgroups. 

bp<.0001.

cp<.01.

Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Ustekinumab in the VIVID-1 Study

Mirikizumab was noninferior to ustekinumab for CDAI clinical remission. At week 52, CDAI clinical remission was achieved by

  • 54.1% of patients who received mirikizumab, and
  • 48.4% of patients who received ustekinumab (Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Ustekinumab at Week 52 in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease in the VIVID-1 Study).1

Mirikizumab was not superior to ustekinumab for endoscopic response. At week 52, endoscopic response was achieved by

  • 48.4% of patients who received mirikizumab, and
  • 46.3% of patients who received ustekinumab (Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Ustekinumab at Week 52 in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease in the VIVID-1 Study).1

Mirikizumab was superior to ustekinumab in achieving the composite of CDAI clinical remission and endoscopic response (p<.05) at week 52 (Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Ustekinumab at Week 52 in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease in the VIVID-1 Study).3

The proportions of patients who achieved CDAI corticosteroid-free clinical remission and endoscopic remission were similar between the mirikizumab and ustekinumab treatment groups (Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Ustekinumab at Week 52 in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease in the VIVID-1 Study).1

Compared with ustekinumab, although not significant, a greater proportion of patients in the mirikizumab group who had previously failed a biologic for the treatment of Crohn's disease achieved CDAI clinical remission and endoscopic response (Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Ustekinumab at Week 52 in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease in the VIVID-1 Study).1

Efficacy of Mirikizumab Compared With Ustekinumab at Week 52 in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease in the VIVID-1 Study1,3

Endpointa,b

Mirikizumab

Ustekinumab

CDAI clinical remissionc

313/579 (54.1)d

139/287 (48.4)

Not biologic failed

169/298 (56.7)

81/148 (54.7)

Biologic failed

144/281 (51.2)

58/139 (41.7)

Endoscopic responsee

280/579 (48.4)

133/287 (46.3)

Not biologic failed

154/298 (51.7)

78/148 (52.7)

Biologic failed

126/281 (44.8)

55/139 (39.6)

CS-free CDAI remissionc

300/579 (51.8)

131/287 (45.6)

Not biologic failed

164/298 (55.0)

76/148 (51.4)

Biologic failed

136/281 (48.4)

55/139 (39.6)

Endoscopic remission SES-CD ≤4f

165/579 (28.5)

80/287 (27.9)

Composite of clinical remission by CDAIc and endoscopic responsee

199/579 (34.4)g

80/287 (27.9)

Abbreviations: CDAI = Crohn's Disease Activity Index; CS = corticosteroid; SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease.

aData presented as n/N (%).

bThe efficacy analyses for mirikizumab compared with ustekinumab included the multiplicity-adjusted secondary endpoints at week 52 of clinical remission by CDAI (noninferiority test with 10% margin) and endoscopic response (superiority test), and the nonmultiplicity-adjusted secondary endpoints at week 52 of endoscopic remission, CS-free CDAI remission, and the composite of CDAI clinical remission and endoscopic response. Missing data were imputed as nonresponse. Patients who switched to mirikizumab were subsequently treated as nonresponders.

cDefined as CDAI total score <150.

dNoninferiority met after accounting for multiplicity.

eDefined as ≥50% reduction from baseline in SES-CD total score.

fDefined as SES-CD total score ≤4 and ≥2-point reduction from baseline, and no subscore >1.

gp<.05 vs ustekinumab.

Efficacy of Ustekinumab Compared With Placebo in the VIVID-1 Study

Comparison of Secondary Endpoints for Ustekinumab Compared With Placebo presents data on secondary endpoints for ustekinumab versus placebo for week 12 and week 52 composite endpoints.

Comparison of Secondary Endpoints for Ustekinumab Compared With Placebo1

Endpointa

Ustekinumab (n=287)

Placebo (n=199)

Difference Ustekinumab Vs Placebo (95% CI)

Week 12 PRO clinical responseb and week 52 endoscopic responsec

107 (37.3)

18 (9.0)

27.8 (21.0-34.6)d

Week 12 PRO clinical responseb and week 52 CDAI clinical remissione

117 (40.8)

39 (19.6)

21.0 (13.1-28.8)d

Abbreviations: AP = abdominal pain; CDAI = Crohn's Disease Activity Index; PRO = patient-reported outcome; SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease; SF = stool frequency.

aData presented as n (%).

bDefined as ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline.

cDefined as ≥50% reduction from baseline in SES-CD total score.

dp<.0001.

eDefined as CDAI total score <150.

Comparative Changes in Biomarkers From Baseline Through Week 52 Among Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Groups

The least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in fecal calprotectin was significantly greater in the mirikizumab group compared with

  • the placebo group as early as week 4 (p<.001) and was sustained through week 52 (p<.001), and
  • the ustekinumab group at weeks 28 (p<.05), 44 (p<.01), and 52 (p<.001).1

The LSM change from baseline in C-reactive protein (CRP) was significantly greater in the mirikizumab group compared with

  • the placebo group as early as week 4 (p<.001) and was sustained through week 52 (p<.001), and
  • the ustekinumab group at weeks 16 (p<.01), 44 (p<.01), and 52 (p<.05).1

Change From Baseline in Fecal Calprotectin and C-Reactive Protein at Weeks 12 and 52 Among Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Groups in the VIVID-1 Clinical Trial shows the change from baseline in fecal calprotectin and CRP at weeks 12 and 52 among mirikizumab, ustekinumab, and placebo groups in the VIVID-1 clinical trial.

Change From Baseline in Fecal Calprotectin and C-Reactive Protein at Weeks 12 and 52 Among Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Groups in the VIVID-1 Clinical Trial1

Endpointa

Mirikizumab (n=579)

Ustekinumab (n=287)

Placebo (n=199)

Change from baseline in FCP

12 weeks

-1.05

-0.94

-0.09b

52 weeks

-1.41

-0.96b

-0.19b

Change from baseline in CRP

12 weeks

-0.73

-0.69

0.12b

52 weeks

-0.93

-0.75c

-0.08b

Abbreviations: CRP = C-reactive protein; FCP = fecal calprotectin; LSM = least squares mean.

aData presented as LSM (SE). For participants in the placebo group who switched to mirikizumab at week 12, the baseline values were carried forward to derive the change from baseline at week 52.

bp<.001 vs mirikizumab.

cp<.05 vs mirikizumab.

Histologic and Endoscopic-Histologic Response Among the Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Treatment Groups

At week 52, a significantly greater proportion of patients who received mirikizumab compared with those who received ustekinumab (p<.01) or placebo (p<.001) achieved histologic response, defined as a ≥50% reduction from baseline in the sum of 5 segments active Robarts Histopathology Index or active Global Histologic Disease Score (Histologic and Endoscopic-Histologic Response Among the Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Treatment Groups in the VIVID-1 Study).4

Likewise, a significantly greater proportion of patients who received mirikizumab compared with those who received placebo (p<.001) achieved endoscopic-histologic response, while the response was similar between patients who received mirikizumab or ustekinumab (Histologic and Endoscopic-Histologic Response Among the Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Treatment Groups in the VIVID-1 Study).4

Histologic response data stratified by biologic failed status are presented in Histologic and Endoscopic-Histologic Response Among the Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Treatment Groups in the VIVID-1 Study.

Histologic and Endoscopic-Histologic Responsea Among the Mirikizumab, Ustekinumab, and Placebo Treatment Groups in the VIVID-1 Study4

Endpointb

Mirikizumab

Ustekinumab

Placeboc

Histologic response

337/579 (58.2)

140/287 (48.8)d

32/199 (16.1)e

Not biologic failed

 169/273 (61.9)

 74/130 (56.9)

 24/91 (26.4)e

Biologic failed

 144/255 (56.5)

52/126 (41.3)d

6/88 (6.8)e

Endoscopic-histologic response

 217/528 (41.1)

88/256 (34.4)

 11/179 (6.1)e

Not biologic failed

 116/273 (42.5)

53/130 (40.8)

 10/91 (11.0)e

Biologic failed

101/255 (39.6)

35/126 (27.8)f

1/88 (1.1)e

Abbreviations: GHAS = Global Histologic Disease Activity Score; NRI = nonresponder imputation; RHI = Robarts Histopathology Index.

aTo achieve histologic response, the sum of 5 segments active RHI or active GHAS needed to be reduced by ≥50% from baseline.

bData presented as n/N (%).

cNRI used for binary outcomes at week 52 for patients who switched to mirikizumab at week 12. 

dp<.01 vs mirikizumab.

ep<.001 vs mirikizumab.

fp=.02 vs mirikizumab.

Enclosed Prescribing Information

OMVOH® (mirikizumab-mrkz) injection, for intravenous or subcutaneous use, Lilly

References

The published references below are available by contacting 1-800-LillyRx (1-800-545-5979).

1Ferrante M, D'Haens G, Jairath V, et al; VIVID Study Group. Efficacy and safety of mirikizumab in patients with moderately-to-severely active Crohn’s disease: a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled, treat-through study. Lancet. 2024;404(10470):2423-2436. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01762-8

2Jairath V, Sands BE, Bossuyt P, et al; VIVID Study Group. Efficacy of mirikizumab in comparison to ustekinumab in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease: results from the phase 3 VIVID 1 study. J Crohns Colitis. 2024;18(suppl 1):i62-i64. European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation abstract OP35. https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.0035

3Jairath V, Sands BE, Bossuyt P, et al. Efficacy of mirikizumab in comparison to ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease: results from the phase 3 VIVID 1 study. Poster presented at: 19th Congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation (ECCO); February 21-24, 2024; Stockholm, Sweden.

4D'Haens G, Danese S, Sands BE, et al. Efficacy of mirikizumab in comparison to ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease: results from the phase 3 VIVID 1 study. Poster presented at: Digestive Disease Week; May 19-21, 2024; Washington, DC.

Appendix

Primary and Major Secondary Endpoints in the VIVID-1 Clinical Trial1

Endpoint

Definition

Coprimary endpoints: mirikizumab vs placebo

Proportion of participants achieving PRO clinical response at week 12 and endoscopic response at week 52

Clinical response by PRO: a ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline; Endoscopic response: a ≥50% reduction from baseline in SES-CD total score

Proportion of participants achieving PRO clinical response at week 12 and CDAI clinical remission at week 52.

Clinical response by PRO: a ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline; CDAI clinical remission: a CDAI total score <150

Major secondary endpoints: mirikizumab vs placebo

Week 12

Proportion of patients achieving endoscopic response

A ≥50% reduction from baseline in SES-CD total score

Proportion of patients achieving endoscopic remission SES-CD ≤4

An SES-CD total score ≤4 and ≥2-point reduction from baseline, and no subscore >1

Proportion of patients achieving PRO clinical response

A ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline

Proportion of participants achieving CDAI clinical remission

A CDAI total score <150

Change from baseline in FACIT-F scores

NA

Week 52

Proportion of participants achieving endoscopic response

A ≥50% reduction from baseline in SES-CD total score

Proportion of patients achieving CDAI clinical remission

A CDAI total score <150

Week 12 and week 52 composite

Proportion of participants achieving PRO clinical response at week 12 and PRO clinical remission at week 52

Clinical response by PRO: a ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline; Clinical remission by PRO: an SF ≤3 and not worse than baseline (per Bristol Stool Scale Category 6 or 7) and AP score <1 and no worse than baseline

Proportion of participants achieving PRO clinical response at week 12 and endoscopic remission SES-CD ≤4 at week 52

Clinical response by PRO: a ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline; Endoscopic remission SES-CD ≤4: an SES-CD total score ≤4 and ≥2-point reduction from baseline, and no subscore >1

Proportion of participants achieving PRO clinical response at week 12 and corticosteroid-free from week 40 to week 52, and CDAI clinical remission at week 52

Clinical response by PRO: a ≥30% decrease in SF and/or AP score, with neither score worse than baseline; CDAI clinical remission: a CDAI total score <150

Major secondary endpoints: mirikizumab vs ustekinumab

Week 52

Proportion of participants achieving endoscopic response

A ≥50% reduction from baseline in SES-CD total score

Proportion of participants achieving CDAI clinical remission

A CDAI total score <150

Abbreviations: AP = abdominal pain; CDAI = Crohn's Disease Activity Index; FACIT-F = Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue; PRO = patient-reported outcome; SES-CD = Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease; SF = stool frequency per Bristol Stool Scale Category 6 or 7.

Date of Last Review: December 04, 2024

Additional related information:

  • Efficacy of Mirikizumab in Comparison to Ustekinumab in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Crohn’s Disease - Results from the Phase 3 VIVID-1 Study
  • Primary Efficacy and Safety of Mirikizumab in Moderate to Severe Crohn’s Disease - Results of the Treat-Through VIVID 1 Study
Are you satisfied with this content?

Can't find what you're looking for? Contact us for answers to your medical questions.

  • Copyright
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Statement
  • Consumer Health Privacy Notice
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Sitemap

    This site is intended for US Healthcare Professionals only.

    4.0.44 4/2025 | GLOOTH00001 04/2015 | © Lilly USA, LLC 2025. All rights reserved.

    Product names listed above are trademarks or registered trademarks owned by or licensed to Eli Lilly and Company, its subsidiaries, or affiliates

    California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) Opt-Out Icon Your Privacy Choices
    Cookie Settings
    facebook twitter linkedin
    visit www.phactmi.org
    Lilly