Addressing current treatment challenges in Crohn's disease in real life: a physician's survey

Treatment escalation and de-escalation decisions in Crohn's disease: Delphi consensus recommendations from Japan, 2021

BACKGROUND

We aimed to develop criteria for treatment intensification in patients with (1) luminal Crohn's disease (CD), (2) CD with perianal disease and/or fistula, (3) CD with small bowel stenosis, (4) in the postoperative setting, and (5) for discontinuing or reducing the dose of treatment in patients with CD.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched for studies published since 1998 which may be relevant to the five defined topics. Results were assessed for relevant studies, with preference given to data from randomized, controlled studies. For each question, a core panel of 12 gastroenterologists defined the treatment target and developed statements, based on the literature, current guidelines, and relevant additional studies. The evidence supporting each statement was graded using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine: Levels of Evidence (March 2009). A modified Delphi process was used to refine statements and gain agreement from 54 Japanese specialists at in-person and online meetings conducted between October 2020 and April 2021.

RESULTS

Seventeen statements were developed for treatment intensification in luminal CD (targeting endoscopic remission), six statements for treatment intensification in perianal/fistulizing CD (targeting healing of perianal lesions and complete closure of the fistula), six statements for treatment intensification in CD with small bowel stenosis (targeting resolution of obstructive symptoms), seven statements for treatment intensification after surgery (targeting endoscopic remission), and five statements for discontinuing or reducing the dose of treatment in patients with CD.

CONCLUSIONS

These statements provide guidance on how and when to intensify or de-intensify treatment for a broad spectrum of patients with CD.

Perspectives of Pediatric Rheumatologists on Initiating and Tapering Biologics in Patients with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A Formative Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined pediatric rheumatologists' approaches to treatment decision making for biologic therapy for patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). This study presents the qualitative research undertaken to support the development of a Best-Worst Scaling (BWS) survey for tapering in JIA. The study objectives were to (1) describe the treatment decision-making process of pediatric rheumatologists to initiate and taper biologics; and (2) select attributes for a BWS survey.

METHODS

Pediatric rheumatologists across Canada were recruited to participate in interviews using purposeful sampling. Interviews were conducted until saturation was achieved. Interview recordings were transcribed verbatim and transcripts were analyzed using deductive thematic analysis. Initial codes were organized into themes and subthemes using an iterative process. Attributes for the BWS survey were developed from these themes and a literature review was conducted in parallel to inform survey development. Further refinement of the attributes was done through consultation with the research team.

RESULTS

Five pediatric rheumatologists participated in the interviews. Shared decision making was part of the approach to initiating and tapering biologics in their practice. Tapering approaches differed; some pediatric rheumatologists preferred to stop biologics immediately, while others tapered by reducing dose and/or increasing the dose interval over time. A total of 14 attributes were developed for the BWS. Thirteen attributes were selected from the themes that emerged from the qualitative interviews and one attribute was included after review with the research team. Attributes related to patient characteristics included JIA subtype, time in remission, history or presence of joint damage or erosive disease, how challenging it was to achieve remission, and history of flares. Contextual attributes included accessibility of biologics and willingness to taper biologics.

CONCLUSION

This study contributes to the limited literature on pediatric rheumatologists' approaches to treatment decision making for biologics in JIA and identifies attributes that affect the decision to both initiate and taper. Further research is planned to implement the BWS survey to understand the importance of the attributes identified. Additional investigation is required to determine if these characteristics align with patient and parent preferences.

The Continental Divide: Anti-TNF Use in Pediatric IBD Is Different in North America Compared to Other Parts of the World

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Use of anti-TNF therapies varies internationally. As an initiative of the international Pediatric IBD Network (PIBDNet), we compared global pediatric IBD anti-TNF practice patterns.

METHODS

Physicians were surveyed about anti-TNF use in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Chi-squared, independent samples Mann-Whitney U, or related samples Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to compare groups.

RESULTS

344 physicians treating pediatric IBD responded from 43 countries (54% North America, 29% Europe, 6% Oceania, 6% Asia, 3% Africa, and 2% South America). Respondents treated a median 40 IBD patients. CD was more commonly treated with anti-TNF than UC (40% vs. 10%, p<0.001). North Americans more often used anti-TNF (median 50% vs. 30%, p<0.001) and before immunomodulator (80% vs. 35% CD, p<0.001; 76% vs. 43% steroid-dependent UC, p<0.001). Anti-TNF monotherapy was more common in North America. Anti-TNF in combination with methotrexate, instead of thiopurine, characterized North American practices. North Americans more often continued immunomodulator indefinitely and less often adhered to standard infliximab induction dosing. Access limitations were more common outside North America and Europe for both CD (67% vs. 31%, p<0.001) and UC (62% vs. 33%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-TNF use in North America varies significantly from elsewhere.

Dose escalation of biologics in Crohn's disease: critical review of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Biologics used to treat Crohn's disease (CD) may lose their effect over time, requiring dose escalation. Little information is available on this topic.

AIM

To summarize rates of dose escalation, duration, de-escalation in observational studies of CD in adults treated with adalimumab, infliximab, and vedolizumab in Europe.

METHODS

Two independent investigators searched Medline and Embase for observational studies published in 1998-2015 and proceedings from four major scientific meetings. Rates were summarized descriptively.

RESULTS

In total, 58 articles from 12 European countries were analyzed (49 full articles, nine abstracts), providing 65 reports with 7,850 patients; 35 reported on 3,830 patients with adalimumab (ADA), and 30 on 4,020 patients with infliximab (IFX). Overall, 29.9% ± 3.5% of patients required dose escalation; 32.8% ± 6.2% with ADA and 25.2% ± 2.4% with IFX (p = .35 between drugs). Rates increased according to line of treatment: 19% for first line, 37% second, and 41% third. The median time to loss of response was 12 months, and the weighted average was 15.1 ± 5.9 months. Median time to escalation was 6.7 months; 6.7 months for ADA and 7.5 for IFX (p = .86). Short-term response rates to escalation were 63% for ADA and 45% for IFX (p = .08). There were no papers available for vedolizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of patients receiving ADA or IFX for Crohn's disease require dose escalation after a short period of time.