Efficacy of Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonist Treatment in Patients With Refractory Ulcerative Proctitis

Letter: Ulcerative proctitis-A step towards addressing the knowledge gap, and a call for greater detail, in trial data-Authors' reply

This article is linked to Ferreiro‐Iglesias et al papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.18133 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.18248

Efficacy and Safety of Etrasimod in Patients with Moderately to Severely Active Isolated Proctitis: Results From the Phase 3 ELEVATE UC Clinical Programme

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pivotal trials in ulcerative colitis have historically excluded patients with isolated proctitis. Etrasimod is an oral, once-daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. This post hoc analysis assessed efficacy and safety of etrasimod 2 mg once daily in patients with isolated proctitis (centrally read) from the phase 3 ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 trials.

METHODS

Patients, including those with isolated proctitis (<10 cm rectal involvement) who met all other inclusion criteria in ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12, were randomised 2:1 to receive etrasimod or placebo. Primary, secondary and other identified efficacy endpoints and safety were assessed.

RESULTS

We analysed data from 64 and 723 patients at Week 12 (both trials pooled), and 36 and 397 patients at Week 52 (ELEVATE UC 52 only) with isolated proctitis and more extensive colitis (≥10 cm rectal involvement), respectively. Patients with isolated proctitis receiving etrasimod demonstrated significant improvements versus placebo, including clinical remission rates at Weeks 12 (42.9% vs 13.6%) and 52 (44.4% vs 11.1%), endoscopic improvement (52.4% vs 22.7%) at Week 12 and bowel urgency numerical rating scale score at Week 12 (all p < 0.01). Generally similar trends were observed in patients with more extensive colitis. Safety was consistent across subgroups, with no new findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Etrasimod demonstrated significant improvements versus placebo in patients with isolated proctitis, and those with more extensive disease, in most efficacy endpoints at Week 12 and 52. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03945188; NCT03996369.

Need for therapeutic escalation in patients with refractory ulcerative proctitis: Results from the PROCU study of the ENEIDA registry

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative proctitis (UP) can have a milder, less aggressive course than left-sided colitis or extensive colitis. Therefore, immunosuppressants tend to be used less in patients with this condition. Evidence, however, is scarce because these patients are excluded from randomised controlled clinical trials. Our aim was to describe the characteristics of patients with refractory UP and their disease-related complications, and to identify the need for immunosuppressive therapies.

METHODS

We identified patients with UP from the prospective ENEIDA registry sponsored by the GETECCU. We evaluated socio-demographic data and complications associated with immunosuppression. We defined immunosuppression as the use of immunomodulators, biologics and/or small molecules. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with immunosuppressive therapy.

RESULTS

From a total of 34,716 patients with ulcerative colitis, we identified 6281 (18.1%) with UP; mean ± SD age 53 ± 15 years, average disease duration of 12 ± 9 years. Immunosuppression was prescribed in 11% of patients, 4.2% needed one biologic agent and 1% needed two; 2% of patients required hospitalisation, and 0.5% underwent panproctocolectomy or subtotal colectomy. We identified 0.2% colorectal tumours and 5% extracolonic tumours. Patients with polyarthritis (OR 3.56, 95% CI 1.86-6.69; p < 0.001) required immunosuppressants.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with refractory UP, 11% required immunosuppressant therapy, and 4.2% required at least one biologic agent.

Management of proctitis in ulcerative colitis and the place of biological therapies

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 20-30% of the patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) may present with isolated proctitis. Ulcerative proctitis (UP) is a challenging condition to manage due to its significant burden in terms of disabling symptoms.

AREAS COVERED

PubMed was searched up to March 2024 to identify relevant studies on UP. A comprehensive summary and critical appraisal of the available data on UP are provided, highlighting emerging treatments and areas for future research.

EXPERT OPINION

Patients with UP are often undertreated, and the disease burden is often underestimated in clinical practice. Treat-to-target management algorithms can be applied to UP, aiming for clinical remission in the short term, and endoscopic remission and maintenance of remission in the long term. During their disease, approximately one-third of UP patients require advanced therapies. Escalation to biologic therapy is required for refractory or steroid dependent UP. For optimal patient care and management of UP, it is necessary to include these patients in future randomized clinical trials.

Effectiveness of Tofacitinib in Ulcerative Proctitis Compared to Left Sided Colitis and Pancolitis

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative proctitis (UP), though associated with high symptom burden and poor quality of life, is excluded from most of the randomized controlled trials in UC, including the OCTAVE trials. We aimed to analyse the effectiveness of tofacitinib in UP, and compare it to that in left sided colitis (LSC) and pancolitis (PC).

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study. Patients with either steroid-dependent or refractory ulcerative colitis, who received tofacitinib, were divided into three groups based on the disease extent [UP, LSC and PC]. The primary outcome was comparison of proportion of patients in clinical remission in the three groups, at weeks 8, 16 and 48. Safety outcomes were reported using incidence rate per patient year of exposure.

RESULTS

Clinical remission was achieved in 47%(15/32), 24%(23/94), and 43%(23/54) of patients at week 8, 56%(18/32), 37%(35/94), and 56%(30/54) of patients at week 16, and 59%(19/32), 38%(36/94), and 24%(13/54) of patients at week 48 in groups UP, LSC and PC, respectively. Corticosteroid-free clinical remission rates were significantly higher in patients in groups UP at week 48. Five (15%) patients with UP were primary non-responders to tofacitinib at week 16, while three (9%) patients had secondary loss of response at week 48. The probability of sustained clinical response was highest in patients with UP. Patients with UP had the lowest incidence of adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of tofacitinib in inducing and maintaining clinical remission is greater in patients with UP compared to LSC and PC.

Tofacitinib for Patients with Anti-TNF Refractory Ulcerative Proctitis: A Multicentre Cohort Study from the GETAID

BACKGROUND

Although ulcerative proctitis [UP] can dramatically impair quality of life, treatment efficacy has been poorly investigated in UP as it was historically excluded from phase 2/3 randomised controlled trials in ulcerative colitis. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib for the treatment of UP.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, multicentre study in 17 GETAID centres, including consecutive patients with UP treated with tofacitinib. The primary endpoint was steroid-free remission between Week 8 and Week 14, defined as a partial Mayo score of 2 [and no individual subscore above 1]. Secondary outcomes included clinical response and steroid-free remission after induction and at 1 year.

RESULTS

All the 35 enrolled patients previously received anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] therapy and 88.6% were exposed to at least two lines of biologics. At baseline, the median partial Mayo score was 7 (intequartile range [IQR] [5.5-7]). After induction [W8-W14], 42.9% and 60.0% of patients achieved steroid-free remission and clinical response, respectively. At 1 year, the steroid-free clinical remission and clinical response rates were 39.4% and 45.5%, respectively, and 51.2% [17/33] were still receiving tofacitinib treatment. Survival without tofacitinib withdrawal was estimated at 50.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] [35.5-71.6]) at 1 year. Only a lower partial Mayo at baseline was independently associated with remission at induction (0dds ratio [OR] = 0.56 for an increase of 1, (95% CI [0.33-0.95], p = 0.03). Five [14.3%] adverse events were reported, with one leading to treatment withdrawal [septic shock secondary to cholecystitis].

CONCLUSION

Tofacitinib may offer a therapeutic option for patients with refractory UP.

Outcome of Biological Therapies and Small Molecules in Ulcerative Proctitis: A Belgian Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several advanced therapies (biologic therapies and small molecules) have been approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. The registration trials for these agents typically excluded patients with isolated proctitis, leaving an evidence gap. We evaluated efficacy and safety of advanced therapies in patients with ulcerative proctitis (UP).

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients with active UP (Mayo endoscopy subscore of ≥2, rectal inflammation up to 15 cm) initiating advanced therapy, after failing conventional therapy. The primary end point was short-term steroid-free clinical remission (total Mayo score ≤2 with no individual subscore >1). In addition, drug persistence and relapse-free and colectomy-free survival were assessed. Both binary logistic and Cox regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In total, 167 consecutive patients (52.0% female; median age 41.0 years; 82.0% bionaive) underwent 223 courses of therapy for UP (38 adalimumab, 14 golimumab, 54 infliximab, 9 ustekinumab, 99 vedolizumab, 9 tofacitinib). The primary end point was achieved with 36.3% of the treatment courses, and based on multivariate analysis, more commonly attained in bionaive patients (P = .001), patients treated with vedolizumab (P = .001), patients with moderate endoscopic disease activity (P = .002), and a body mass index <25 kg/m2 (P = .018). Drug persistence was significantly higher in patients treated with vedolizumab (P < .001) and patients with a shorter disease duration (P = .006). No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced therapies are also efficacious and safe in patients with ulcerative colitis limited to the rectum. Therefore, the inclusion of patients with UP in future randomized-controlled trials should be considered.

Clinical Features and Natural History of Paediatric Patients with Ulcerative Proctitis: A Multicentre Study from the Paediatric IBD Porto Group of ESPGHAN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Ulcerative proctitis [UP] is an uncommon presentation in paediatric patients with ulcerative colitis. We aimed to characterize the clinical features and natural history of UP in children, and to identify predictors of poor outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study involving 37 sites affiliated with the IBD Porto Group of ESPGHAN. Data were collected from patients aged <18 years diagnosed with UP between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020.

RESULTS

We identified 196 patients with UP (median age at diagnosis 14.6 years [interquartile range, IQR 12.5-16.0]), with a median follow-up of 2.7 years [IQR 1.7-3.8]. The most common presenting symptoms were bloody stools [95%], abdominal pain [61%] and diarrhoea [47%]. At diagnosis, the median paediatric ulcerative colitis activity index [PUCAI] score was 25 [IQR 20-35], but most patients exhibited moderate-severe endoscopic inflammation. By the end of induction, 5-aminosalicylic acid administration orally, topically or both resulted in clinical remission rates of 48%, 48%, and 73%, respectively. The rates of treatment escalation to biologics at 1, 3, and 5 years were 10%, 22%, and 43%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, the PUCAI score at diagnosis was significantly associated with initiation of systemic steroids, or biologics, and subsequent acute severe colitis events and inflammatory bowel disease-associated admission, with a score ≥35 providing an increased risk for poor outcomes. By the end of follow-up, 3.1% of patients underwent colectomy. Patients with UP that experienced proximal disease progression during follow-up [48%] had significantly higher rates of a caecal patch at diagnosis and higher PUCAI score by the end of induction, compared to those without progression.

CONCLUSION

Paediatric patients with UP exhibit high rates of treatment escalation and proximal disease extension.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: Medical therapies for treatment of ulcerative proctitis

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative proctitis (UP) is a common highly symptomatic form of ulcerative colitis that can be difficult to treat.

AIM

To assess the efficacy of medical treatments for UP.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL on 23 November 2022 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of medical therapy for adults with UP. Primary outcomes included induction and maintenance of clinical remission. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each outcome.

RESULTS

We included 53 RCTs (n = 4096) including 46 induction studies (n = 3731) and seven maintenance studies (n = 365). First-line therapies included topical 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA), conventional corticosteroids, budesonide, and oral 5-ASA. Therapy for refractory UP included topical tacrolimus and small molecules. Topical 5-ASA was superior to placebo for induction (RR 2.72, 95% CI 1.94-3.82) and maintenance of remission (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.26-3.46). Topical corticosteroids were superior to placebo for induction of remission (RR 2.83, 95% CI 1.62-4.92). Topical budesonide was superior to placebo for induction of remission (RR 2.34, 95% CI 1.44-3.81). Combination therapy with topical 5-ASA and topical corticosteroids was superior to topical monotherapy with either agent. Topical tacrolimus was superior to placebo. Etrasimod was superior to placebo for induction (RR 4.71, 95% CI 1.2-18.49) and maintenance of remission (RR 2.08, 95% CI 1.31-3.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Topical 5-ASA and corticosteroids are effective for active UP. Topical 5-ASA may be effective for maintenance of remission. Tacrolimus may be effective for induction of remission. Etrasimod may be effective for induction and for maintenance of remission. Trials should include UP to expand the evidence base for this under-represented population.

Ustekinumab for treatment of refractory ulcerative colitis in an elderly patient: A case report

BACKGROUND

Refractory ulcerative colitis is clinically irresponsive or intolerant to multiple drugs, with recurrent episodes and difficulties in treatment.

CASE SUMMARY

The patient in this case was diagnosed with ulcerative colitis due to repeated bloody stools for 4 mo after hemorrhoid surgery. After multiple drug treatment failures, the off-label treatment with ustekinumab was effective, and the patient's condition was under control.

CONCLUSION

The diagnosis and treatment of refractory ulcerative colitis should not be limited to the indications of existing drugs. Integrating domestic and foreign medical experiences and guidelines can broaden the diagnosis and treatment approach and bring benefits to such patients.

Personalize, participate, predict, and prevent: 4Ps in inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which includes Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), is a complex, immune-mediated, disorder which leads to several gastrointestinal and systemic manifestations determining a poor quality of life, disability, and other negative health outcomes. Our knowledge of this condition has greatly improved over the last few decades, and a comprehensive management should take into account both biological (i.e., disease-related, patient-related) and non-biological (i.e., socioeconomic, cultural, environmental, behavioral) factors which contribute to the disease phenotype. From this point of view, the so called 4P medicine framework, including personalization, prediction, prevention, and participation could be useful for tailoring ad hoc interventions in IBD patients. In this review, we discuss the cutting-edge issues regarding personalization in special settings (i.e., pregnancy, oncology, infectious diseases), patient participation (i.e., how to communicate, disability, tackling stigma and resilience, quality of care), disease prediction (i.e., faecal markers, response to treatments), and prevention (i.e., dysplasia through endoscopy, infections through vaccinations, and post-surgical recurrence). Finally, we provide an outlook discussing the unmet needs for implementing this conceptual framework in clinical practice.

Placebo Rates in Randomized Controlled Trials of Proctitis Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Placebo Response in Proctitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Treatment options for proctitis are limited. To assist trial design for novel therapeutics, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of proctitis randomized controlled trials [RCTs] to quantify placebo rates and identify factors influencing them.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL from inception to June 2021. Placebo-controlled trials of pharmacological interventions for proctitis were eligible. Placebo clinical response and remission rates for induction and maintenance trials were extracted and pooled using a random-effects model. Mixed-effects meta-regression was used to evaluate the impact of patient and study-level characteristics.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs [17 induction and four maintenance phases] were included. The most common intervention was aminosalicylates and most studies investigated topical medications. The pooled placebo clinical response and remission rates for induction trials were 28% (95% confidence interval [CI] 22-35%; n = 17) and 20% [95% CI 12-32%; n = 9], respectively. Pooled placebo endoscopic response and remission rates were 32% [95% CI 26-39%, n = 12] and 18% [95% CI 9-33%, n = 6], respectively. For maintenance trials, the pooled placebo clinical remission rate was 29% [95% CI 16-46%, n = 17]. Trials published after 2005 and trials with a longer duration of follow-up were associated with significantly lower placebo response rates. Nineteen of 20 studies were assessed as having an unclear risk of bias, reflecting the historical nature of trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Placebo response and remission rates in proctitis trials are influenced by trial phase and the endpoint being assessed. These contemporary rates will inform trial design for novel therapeutics for treatment of proctitis, which is a large unmet need.

Seronegative spondyloarthropathy-associated inflammatory bowel disease

Seronegative spondyloarthropathy (SpA) usually starts in the third decade of life with negative rheumatoid factor, human leukocyte antigen-B27 genetic marker and clinical features of spinal and peripheral arthritis, dactylitis, enthesitis and extra-articular manifestations (EAMs). Cases can be classified as ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, reactive arthritis, enteropathic arthritis, or juvenile-onset spondyloarthritis. Joint and gut inflammation is intricately linked in SpA and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), with shared genetic and immunopathogenic mechanisms. IBD is a common EAM in SpA patients, while extraintestinal manifestations in IBD patients mostly affect the joints. Although individual protocols are available for the management of each disease, the standard therapeutic guidelines of SpA-associated IBD patients remain to be established. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are recommended as initial therapy of peripheral and axial SpA, whereas their use is controversial in IBD due to associated disease flares. Conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs are beneficial for peripheral arthritis but ineffective for axial SpA or IBD therapy. Anti-tumor necrosis factor monoclonal antibodies are effective medications with indicated use in SpA and IBD, and a drug of choice for treating SpA-associated IBD. Janus kinase inhibitors, approved for treating SpA and ulcerative colitis, are promising therapeutics in SpA coexistent with ulcerative colitis. A tight collaboration between gastroenterologists and rheumatologists with mutual referral from early accurate diagnosis to appropriately prompt therapy is required in this complex clinical scenario.

Efficacy of Pharmacological Agents for Ulcerative Proctitis: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative proctitis is a common and often highly symptomatic form of inflammatory bowel disease. We performed a systematic review to assess the efficacy of different therapies in the management of patients with ulcerative proctitis.

METHODS

We identified randomized controlled trials in adults with ulcerative proctitis treated with oral or topical therapies for induction of response or remission, or prevention of relapse.

RESULTS

A total of 32 randomized controlled trials were included [27 induction/2839 participants, five maintenance/334 participants]. Follow-up varied from 3 to 8 weeks for induction, and from 6 to 24 months for maintenance of remission. 5-Aminosalicylic acid [5-ASA] suppository was the most frequently evaluated treatment [14/32, 43.7%], followed by steroid enema [7/32, 21.9%]. Topical 5-ASA demonstrated effectiveness for induction of clinical response or remission and prevention of relapse in several studies. Combined topical steroids and 5-ASA was more effective than topical 5-ASA or topical steroids alone to induce response [100% of patients for combination vs 70% for beclomethasone alone and 76% for 5-ASA alone]. One observational study suggested azathioprine may be effective in patients with ulcerative proctitis. Only two cohort studies evaluated the efficacy of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in ulcerative proctitis. Small molecules, anti-integrins and anti-interleukin therapies have not been evaluated in isolated ulcerative proctitis.

CONCLUSION

The role of topical 5-ASA as a treatment for ulcerative proctitis has been confirmed in this systematic literature review, for induction and maintenance of remission. Future trials are needed to investigate the efficacy of more recent and upcoming drug classes in patients with ulcerative proctitis.

Positioning biologics in the treatment of IBD: A practical guide - Which mechanism of action for whom?

The number of available biological therapies have doubled over the last 10 years and the arrival of novel molecules (interleukin 23p19 inhibitors) is ongoing alongside the development of small molecules. As a result of this vast landscape of treatment, positioning advanced therapies (according to clinical situation, efficacy and safety) is of paramount importance to providing personalized, appropriate IBD treatment. In this publication the recent available literature is summarized for practical integration into clinical practice including comparative efficacy data, patient and disease demographics. We refer to recent publications and expert opinion in order to facilitate the decision making process of positioning biologicals IBD treatment.

When disease extent is not always a key parameter: Management of refractory ulcerative proctitis

Background

Patients with ulcerative proctitis represent a sub-group of ulcerative colitis patients with specific characteristics. Disease-related symptoms, endoscopic findings and patient's personality perspectives create a difficult-to-assess condition in certain cases.

Objectives

To summarize available evidence on the management of refractory ulcerative proctitis and provide insights in treatment options.

Results

/Conclusion: Topical therapy plays a central role due to the location of the disease. However, well-established treatment options may become exhausted in a considerable proportion of ulcerative proctitis patients, indicating the need to advance to more potent therapies in order to induce and maintain clinical response and remission in these refractory cases. Systemic corticosteroids, thiopurines, calcineurin inhibitors, biologic agents and small molecules have all been tested with variable success rates. Investigational interventions as well as surgical procedures are kept as the ultimate resort in multi-treatment resistant cases. Identifying early prognostic factors that herald a disabling disease progression will help in optimizing treatment and avoiding surgery.

Unmet needs in inflammatory bowel disease

Despite the recent developments in the diagnosis and management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), patients still suffer from disabling bowel symptoms and significant disease complications and many questions remain to improve their care. IBD is a chronic disease, whose management could be divided into the five different stages of chronic diseases, ranging from the pre-treatment evaluation phase to the induction therapy, maintenance therapy, monitor and re-establishment of control and the cessation of the disease. Reconciling these phases with the current unmet needs in IBD could help tailor priorities for research. In this review, some of the unanswered questions in the management of both Crohn’s Disease and Ulcerative Colitis will be addressed, by following this paradigm of chronic diseases’ management.

Orphan patients with inflammatory bowel disease - when we treat beyond evidence

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic condition that requires continuous medical treatment. To date, the medical management of patients with moderately-to-severely active IBD who develop dependence or resistance to corticosteroids is based on immunomodulator drugs. Such therapies are licenced after passing through three phases of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and are subsequently adopted in clinical practice. However, the real-life population of IBD patients who require these therapies can significantly differ from those included in RCTs. As a matter of fact, there is a number of exclusion criteria – nearly ubiquitous in all RCTs – that prevent the enrolment of specific patients: Chronic refractory pouchitis or isolated proctitis in ulcerative colitis, short-bowel syndrome and stomas in Crohn’s disease, ileorectal anastomosis in both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, and elderly age are some representative examples. In this frontier article, we aim to give an overview of current literature on this topic, in order to address the main knowledge gaps that need to be filled in the upcoming years.

Clinical guidelines for the management of inflammatory bowel disease: Update of a French national consensus

BACKGROUND

New treatments and therapeutic approaches repeatedly emerged in the field of inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM

to update the French treatment algorithms for Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

A formal consensus method was used to determine changes to the treatment algorithms for various situations of CD and UC. Thirty-seven experts voted on questions that had been drafted by the steering committee ahead of time. Consensus was defined as at least 66% of experts agreeing on a response.

RESULTS

Anti-TNF were reinforced as a first-line therapy rather than the use of immunosuppressant alone. Vedolizumab for UC, ustekinumab for CD took place as second-line maintenance therapy and potentially as a first-line therapy in the setting of unrestricted reimbursement for vedolizumab. Tofacitinib was recommended by the experts in case of vedolizumab failure for UC. Algorithms for complicated CD with abscess, intestinal and complex anal fistula were updated according to recent prospective cohort studies.

CONCLUSION

The changes incorporated to the algorithms provide up-to-date and easy-to-use guidelines to treat patients with IBD.

Long-term outcomes of patients with ulcerative proctitis: Analysis from a large referral centre cohort

INTRODUCTION

Long-term outcomes of patients with ulcerative proctitis (UP) have been poorly investigated, since these patients are excluded from participation in randomized controlled clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic and therapeutic long-term outcomes of patients with UP.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients with UP followed at our referral centre between 1 January 1998 and 1 January 2019 was performed. Treatment success was defined as clinical response (significant improvement in UP-related symptoms) and endoscopic response (mayo endoscopic sub-score of 0 or 1) if available at last follow-up.

RESULTS

From a total of 1561 patients with ulcerative colitis, 118 patients with UP were identified. A total of 36 (31%) patients were refractory to rectal and oral therapy with 5-ASA and corticosteroids, necessitating azathioprine as monotherapy in 19 (16%) patients and/or biological therapies in 33 (28%) patients. After a median follow-up of 71 months (interquartile range 29-149 months), treatment success was observed in 103/118 (87%) UP patients and in 25/36 (69%) patients with refractory UP. Clinical response rates were significantly higher for refractory UP patients treated with biologicals (23/33; 70%) compared to ones treated with azathioprine (2/19; 11%; p  =  0.001).

CONCLUSION

Good clinical outcomes were recorded in UP, with treatment success in 87% of patients. Nevertheless, 28% needed escalation to biologicals. Long-term outcome in patients on biologicals was superior to azathioprine.