Crohn's Disease Activity and Concomitant Immunosuppressants Affect the Risk of Serious and Opportunistic Infections in Patients Treated With Adalimumab

Common Mistakes in Managing Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Introduction: Errors are very common in medical practice and in particular, in the healthcare of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, most of these can be prevented. Aim: To address common errors in the management of IBD. Methods: Our approach to this problem consists in identifying mistakes frequently observed in clinical practice (according to our experience) in the management of patients with IBD, then reviewing the scientific evidence available on the subject, and finally proposing the most appropriate recommendation for each case. Results: The most common mistakes in the management of IBD include those related to diagnosis and differential diagnosis, prevention, nutrition and diet, treatment with different drugs (mainly 5-aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, thiopurines, and anti-TNF agents), extraintestinal manifestations, anemia, elderly patients, pregnancy, and surgery. Conclusions: Despite the availability of guidelines for both disease management and preventive aspects of IBD care, a considerable variation in clinical practice still remains. In this review, we have identified common mistakes in the management of patients with IBD in clinical practice. There is a clear need for a greater dissemination of clinical practice guidelines among gastroenterologists and for the implementation of ongoing training activities supported by scientific societies. Finally, it is desirable to follow IBD patients in specialized units, which would undoubtedly be associated with higher-quality healthcare and a lower likelihood of errors in managing these patients.

Ustekinumab Versus Anti-tumour Necrosis Factor Alpha Agents as Second-Line Biologics in Crohn's Disease

BACKGROUND

There are little data on positioning biologics in Crohn's disease (CD).

AIMS

We aimed to assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab vs tumour necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF) agents after first-line treatment with anti-TNF in CD.

METHODS

We used Swedish nationwide registers to identify patients with CD, exposed to anti-TNF who initiated second-line biologic treatment with ustekinumab or second-line anti-TNF therapy. Nearest neighbour 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the groups. The primary outcome was 3-year drug survival used as a proxy for effectiveness. Secondary outcomes included drug survival without hospital admission, CD-related surgery, antibiotics, hospitalization due to infection and exposure to corticosteroids.

RESULTS

Some 312 patients remained after PSM. Drug survival at 3 years was 35% (95% CI 26-44%) in ustekinumab compared to 36% (95% CI 28-44%) in anti-TNF-treated patients (p = 0.72). No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups in 3-year survival without hospital admission (72% vs 70%, p = 0.99), surgery (87% vs 92%, p = 0.17), hospital admission due to infection (92% vs 92%, p = 0.31) or prescription of antibiotics (49% vs 50%, p = 0.56). The proportion of patients continuing second-line biologic therapy did not differ by reason for ending first-line anti-TNF (lack of response vs intolerance) or by type of first-line anti-TNF (adalimumab vs infliximab).

CONCLUSION

Based on data from Swedish routine care, no clinically relevant differences in effectiveness or safety of second-line ustekinumab vs anti-TNF treatment were observed in patients with CD with prior exposure to anti-TNF.

The Risk of Serious Infections Before and After Anti-TNF Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Serious infections have been observed in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on anti-TNF use-but to what extent these infections are due to anti-TNF or the disease activity per se is hard to disentangle. We aimed to describe how the rates of serious infections change over time both before and after starting anti-TNF in IBD.

METHODS

Inflammatory bowel disease patients naïve to anti-TNF treatment were identified at 5 centers participating in the Swedish IBD Quality Register, and their medical records examined in detail. Serious infections, defined as infections requiring in-patient care, the year before and after the start of anti-TNF treatment were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 980 patients who started their first anti-TNF therapy between 1999 and 2016, the incidence rate of serious infections was 2.19 (95% CI,1.43-3.36) per 100 person years the year before and 2.11 (95% CI, 1.33-3.34) per 100 person years 1 year after treatment start. This corresponded to an incidence rate ratio 1 year after anti-TNF treatment of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.51-1.84). Compared with before anti-TNF therapy, the incidence of serious infection was significantly decreased more than 1 year after treatment (incidence rate ratio 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33-0.95; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

In routine clinical practice in Sweden, the incidence rate of serious infection among IBD patients did not increase with anti-TNF therapy. Instead, serious infections seemed to decrease more than 1 year after initiation of anti-TNF treatment.

Infliximab in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 (INFLIXCOVID): protocol for a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label phase II clinical study

Background

Despite the intense global research endeavour to improve the treatment of patients with COVID-19, the current therapy remains insufficient, resulting in persisting high mortality. Severe cases are characterised by a systemic inflammatory reaction driven by the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6 and tumour-necrosis-factor alpha (TNF-α). TNF-α-blocking therapies have proved beneficial in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases and could therefore pose a new treatment option in COVID-19. Hitherto, no results from randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness and safety of infliximab—a monoclonal antibody targeting TNF-α—in the treatment of COVID-19 have been published.

Methods

In this phase-2 clinical trial, patients with COVID-19 and clinical and laboratory signs of hyperinflammation will be randomised to receive either one dose of infliximab (5 mg/kg body weight) in addition to the standard of care or the standard of care alone. The primary endpoint is the difference in 28-day mortality. Further assessments concern the safety of infliximab therapy in COVID-19 and the influence of infliximab on morbidity and the course of the disease. For the supplementary scientific programme, blood and urine samples are collected to assess concomitant molecular changes. The Ethics Committee of the Friedrich Schiller University Jena (2021-2236-AMG-ff) and the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute (4513/01) approved the study.

Discussion

The results of this study could influence the therapy of patients with COVID-19 and affect the course of the disease worldwide, as infliximab is globally available and approved by several international drug agencies.

Trial registration

The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04922827, 11 June 2021) and at EudraCT (2021-002098-25, 19 May 2021).

Safety of sequential biological therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: results from a tertiary referral centre

BACKGROUND

Biologicals represent the cornerstone of treatment for moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Many patients cycle between biologicals when encountering loss of response or adverse events.

AIM

To assess the occurrence of serious infections and malignancies with exposure to several (classes of) biologicals.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study in a tertiary referral centre including consecutive IBD patients exposed to adalimumab, infliximab, ustekinumab or vedolizumab between 1996 and 2019. All serious infections and malignancies, as well as potential confounders, were accounted for.

RESULTS

In total, 1575 patients were included with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 10 (6-16) years and a duration of biological therapy of 71 (39-112) months. Incidence rates of serious infections were 3.4 per 100 patients' years (PY) in the post-biological setting. Serious infections after biological exposure were associated with systemic steroids in monotherapy (hazard ratio 2.96 [95% confidence interval 1.78-4.93], p < 0.0001), combination therapy of systemic steroids and a biological (2.44 [1.37-4.34], p = 0.002), female gender (1.25 [1.04-1.51], p = 0.02), and prior serious infections in the pre-biological setting (1.42 [1.03-1.96], p = 0.03). Malignancy rates were 1.06 per 100PY in the post-biological setting and increased with older age at biological initiation (1.04 [1.02-1.05], p < 0.0001). The risk for serious infections or malignancies was independent of type and number of biologicals to which the patient was exposed.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the sequential use of biological therapy in IBD does not seem to convey an overall higher risk of serious infections or malignancies, but that underlying more refractory disease seems to increase this risk.

Absence of Oral Opportunistic Infections in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Receiving Anti-TNF-α and Anti-Integrin-α4β7 Therapy

Biological therapy of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) carries an increased risk for the development of opportunistic infections due to immunomodulation. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and types of oral infections in IBD patients treated with biological (anti-TNF-α and anti-integrin-α4β7) and conventional medication protocols. The study included 20 IBD patients receiving anti-TNF-α therapy, 20 IBD patients receiving anti-integrin-α4β7 therapy and 20 IBD patients without immunomodulatory therapy. Participants completed questionnaires on medical information, oral lesions and symptoms. For each patient, clinical examination and a salivary flow rate test were performed, followed by a swab of the oral mucosa. The swab samples were cultured to identify Candida spp. and oral bacteria. No bacterial opportunistic infections were detected. Candidiasis was detected in four participants, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.765). Hyposalivation was most common in the anti-TNF-α group, with a significant difference between groups (p = 0.036). There were no significant differences between groups in self-reported oral mucosal lesions and symptoms (p > 0.05), or in the distribution of oral mucosal lesions (p > 0.05). This study suggests that IBD patients receiving biological therapy are at no greater risk of developing oral opportunistic infections than IBD patients not receiving immunomodulatory therapy.

Twenty-five years of biologicals in IBD: What´s all the hype about?

Twenty-five years ago the field was revolutionized by the introduction of infliximab as the first hybrid anti-TNF-antibody. Subsequently, other humanized anti-TNFs were developed and marketed, followed by antibodies to new targets including integrins (vedolizumab) and interleukin 12/23 (ustekinumab). All these so-called biologicals were shown in registrational trials to induce remission superior to placebo but consistently were effective in only a minority of patients. Even though in most trials only the responders were selected to continue on the respective medication for maintenance, many experienced a secondary loss of response and only a minority of usually <25% of the initial cohort achieved long-term (1 year) remission. In 'real life studies', the outcome was somewhat better, probably due to proper selection of patients and open, mostly retrospective study designs. A clear benefit of biologicals is apparent in otherwise treatment refractory patients, in extraintestinal manifestations and in Crohn´s disease (CD) with fistulizing complications. Biologicals achieve mucosal healing (MH) more often than corticosteroids or thiopurines, and MH is associated with improved prognosis. However, this does not justify escalating treatment until MH is reached since controlled trials proving this point of 'treat to target' are lacking both in ulcerative colitis and CD. Surgical rates have decreased with increasing use of biologicals, but disease progression has not been proven to improve. With the exception of opportunistic infections, serious adverse events are rare. In conclusion, biologicals have changed the scene considerably and expanded our armamentarium, but there is also a marketing hype fostering expectations without evidence.

Treatment-based risk stratification of infections in inflammatory bowel disease: A comparison between anti-tumor necrosis factor-α and nonbiological exposure in real-world setting

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Infective issues about anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α agents in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remain controversial, especially when compared with nonbiological treatments. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence and prevalence of several infections in anti-TNF-α-exposed patients compared with nonbiological treatments.

METHODS

All naïve IBD subjects treated with anti-TNF-α and matched nonbiologic-exposed patients were included.

RESULTS

Among 3453 patients in the database, 288 anti-TNF-α-exposed subjects and 288 nonbiologic-exposed IBD controls met inclusion criteria. Fifty-eight infections (20.1%) occurred during anti-TNF-α treatment versus 23 (8%) in the matched group (odds ratio [OR] 2.9, P < 0.001) (incidence 5.72 vs 0.96/100 patient-years, incidence ratio [IR] 6, P < 0.001). IR was higher for anti-TNF-α versus mesalamine/sulfasalazine (IR 40.8, P < 0.001), similar to azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine/methotrexate (IR 0.78, P = 0.32) and lower than corticosteroids (IR 0.05, P < 0.001). The incidence rate of serious infections was 1.3 in the anti-TNF-α-exposed versus 0.38/100 patient-years in nonexposed subjects (IR 3.44, P = 0.002), without significant difference between anti-TNF-α and azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine/methotrexate (1.3 vs 3.03/100 patient-years, IR 0.43, P = 0.1). Predictors of infections in anti-TNF-α-exposed patients were concomitant use of systemic steroids (OR 1.9, P = 0.02) or azathioprine (OR 2.6, P = 0.01) and a body mass index < 18.5 at time of infection (OR 2.2, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of developing infections during anti-TNF-α therapy remains high, although not dissimilar to that found for other immunosuppressants, while concomitant immunosuppression and malnutrition appear the most important causes of infection.

Immunosuppressants and immune modulators in luminal gastroenterology

Heritage small molecule immunosuppressants and the immune-acting biologics have a major place in the management of luminal gastrointestinal disease and especially so in inflammatory bowel disease. This narrative review considers their current use, concentrating on issues not already well addressed in the literature. An evidence-based approach is taken, supplemented by advice based on observations from clinical practice when data are missing. There is a general trend towards earlier use of the biologics for perceived greater safety and impact on disease modification, despite their substantially greater cost and systemic administration. Early semi-prophylactic treatment is now considered for patients with high-risk Crohn's disease. In other conditions the immune active agents remain a back-up for those failing to respond to simpler options. There are few and mostly unimportant differences between the different antibodies to TNFα, but it is beginning to be possible to identify patients who could be preferentially treated with an anti-integrin approach or by addressing other cytokines.

Pott's Puffy Tumor in an Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patient on Anti-TNF Therapy

Patient: Male, 14-year-old

Final Diagnosis: Pott’s puffy tumor

Symptoms: Face swelling

Medication: —

Clinical Procedure: —

Specialty: Gastroenterology and Hepatology • Infectious Diseases • Otolaryngology • Pediatrics and Neonatology

Safety and Efficacy of Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonists in Older Patients With Ulcerative Colitis: Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of Data From Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Treatment of older patients (more than 60 years) with ulcerative colitis (UC) can be a challenge, because they might be more vulnerable to adverse events (AEs). We determined the effects of age on the safety and efficacy of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in a pooled analysis of data from randomized trials.

METHODS

We obtained individual patient-level data from 4 trials of anti-TNF therapy for patients with UC from the Yale Open Data Access Project. Participants were assigned to groups of older age (60 years or older) and younger age (younger than 60 years). The primary outcome was difference in serious AEs (SAEs), defined as death, life-threatening event, hospitalization, and/or significant disability. Secondary outcomes were severe infections, non-severe infections, neoplasms, and achievement of clinical remission, defined by trial investigators as Mayo score ≤ 2 with no sub-score >1 at the end of induction or maintenance therapy. A random effects logistic regression model was fitted to estimate the effect of anti-TNF therapy on safety and efficacy by age, adjusting for confounders and trial-level effects.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 2257 patients (231 60 years or older). Higher proportions of older patients receiving anti-TNF therapy had SAEs (20%) and hospitalizations (14.4%), compared with younger patients (10.2% had SAEs and 5.2% were hospitalized); there were no significant differences between groups in proportions with severe or non-severe infections. Compared with placebo, there was no significant difference in safety risks associated with anti-TNF therapy (SAEs reduced by 5.4% in older patients vs reduction of 2.4% in younger patients; hospitalizations reduced by 6.7% in older patients vs reduction of 2.5% in younger patients; severe infections reduced by 3.1% vs increase of 0.7% in younger patients). There was no significant difference in between older vs younger patients in efficacy of anti-TNF therapy in inducing remission (odds risk ratio, 1.05, 95% CI, 0.33-3.39) or in maintaining remission (odds risk ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.18-1.33).

CONCLUSIONS

In a pooled analysis of data from randomized trials, we found that older patients with UC have an increased baseline increased risk of SAEs, but no increase in risk can be attributed to anti-TNF therapy in older vs younger patients.

Duration of combination therapy and risk of treatment failure in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Patients who receive infliximab (IFX) combined with a thiopurine, for inflammatory bowel disease, have a better clinical response and less frequent immunization towards IFX than those treated with IFX alone. The benefits of combination therapy must be weighed against the risks of infection and cancer. We studied the association between the duration of combination therapy and the risk of treatment failure by two year from initiation.

METHODS

Participants had Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis and were in clinical and biological remission, 6 months after initiation of combination therapy. The risk of subsequent treatment failure (i.e., undetectable trough IFX levels and/or clinical relapse followed by surgical treatment or switch of maintenance treatment) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and adjusted Hazard Ratios (aHRs), in patients whohadreceived 6 to 11 months vs. 12 months or more of combination therapy. We performed a similar analysis in which the follow-up was started at discontinuation of the immunosuppressant.

RESULTS

Among 139 patients (48% women; median age 31.1), with a median follow-up of 18.9 months, we observed 26 treatment failures (including 15 patients with undetectable trough IFX levels). After adjustment for gender and type of immunomodulator, a shorter duration of combination therapy was not associated with a higher risk of treatment failure (aHR=0.42; 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.13-1.40; p=0.16). When the follow-up was started at discontinuation of the immunosuppressant, a combination therapy of 6-11 months was associated with a numerically lower risk of treatment failure as compared with a longer combination therapy (HR=0.12; 95%CI: 0.01-1.05; p=0.055).

CONCLUSION

Our results do not show any benefit for continuation of combination therapy for more than 12 months after achieving clinical remission in IBD patients.

Effect of Concomitant Therapy With Steroids and Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonists for Induction of Remission in Patients With Crohn's Disease: A Systematic Review and Pooled Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is not clear whether concomitant therapy with corticosteroids and anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents is more effective at inducing remission in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) than anti-TNF monotherapy. We aimed to determine whether patients with active CD receiving corticosteroids during induction therapy with anti-TNF agents had higher rates of clinical improvement than patients not receiving corticosteroids during induction therapy.

METHODS

We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases, through January 20, 2016, for randomized trials of anti-TNF agents approved for treatment of CD and identified 14 trials (5 of adalimumab, 5 of certolizumab, and 4 of infliximab). We conducted a pooled meta-analysis of individual patient and aggregated data from these trials. We compared data from participants who continued oral corticosteroids during induction with anti-TNF therapy to those treated with anti-TNF agents alone. The endpoints were clinical remission (CD activity index [CDAI] scores <150) and clinical response (a decrease in CDAI of 100 points) at the end of induction (weeks 4-14 of treatment).

RESULTS

We included 4354 patients who received induction therapy with anti-TNF agents, including 1653 [38.0%] who were receiving corticosteroids. The combination of corticosteroids and an anti-TNF agent induced clinical remission in 32.0% of patients, whereas anti-TNF monotherapy induced clinical remission in 35.5% of patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74-1.17). The combination of corticosteroids and an anti-TNF agent induced a clinical response in 42.7% of patients, whereas anti-TNF monotherapy induced a clinical response in 46.8% (OR 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73-0.96). These findings did not change with adjustment for baseline CDAI scores and concurrent use of immunomodulators.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a meta-analysis of data from randomized trials of anti-TNF therapies in patients with active CD, patients receiving corticosteroids during induction therapy with anti-TNF agents did not have higher rates of clinical improvement compared with patients not receiving corticosteroids during induction therapy. Given these findings and the risks of corticosteroid use, clinicians should consider early weaning of corticosteroids during induction therapy with anti-TNF agents for patients with corticosteroid-refractory CD.

Frailty and Risk of Serious Infections in Biologic-treated Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

BACKGROUND

Identifying biologic-treated patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) at higher risk of serious infections is a priority. We conducted a retrospective cohort study evaluating frailty and risk of serious infections in biologic-treated patients with IBD.

METHODS

Using an administrative claims database, we identified biologic-treated patients with IBD between 2014 and 2018 with follow-up 1 year before and after treatment initiation. Using a validated claims-based hospital frailty risk scoring system, patients were classified as frail and nonfrail. We compared the risk of serious infections (infections requiring hospitalization) between frail and nonfrail patients using Cox proportional hazard analysis adjusting for age, comorbidities, disease characteristics, health care utilization, use of corticosteroids, immunomodulators, and opiates.

RESULTS

We included 5987 biologic-treated patients with IBD (4881 on TNFα antagonists, 1106 on vedolizumab), of whom 2350 (39.3%) were classified as frail; over 7115 person-years of follow-up was included, and 520 patients developed serious infection. Frailty was not associated with increased risk of serious infection (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.12; 95% CI, 0.93-1.36), whereas advanced age (older than 60 years), high comorbidity burden, corticosteroid use, opiate use, and prior serious infection were associated with increased risk of serious infection. On stratified analysis, frailty was associated with increased risk of serious infections in vedolizumab-treated patients (aHR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.03-2.79) but not in TNFα antagonist-treated patients (aHR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.83-1.27).

CONCLUSIONS

In biologic-treated patients with IBD, frailty assessed using a claims-based frailty index was not independently associated with increased risk of serious infections. Future studies evaluating objective and biological measures of frailty are warranted to risk-stratify older patients with IBD.

Perception of the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the Time of Telemedicine: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study

Background

After the COVID-19 outbreak, the Italian Government stopped most regular health care activity. As a result, patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) had limited access to outpatient clinics and hospitals.

Objective

This study aimed to analyze the perception of the COVID-19 emergency among patients with IBD during the early weeks of the lockdown.

Methods

We invited adult patients with IBD from the University of Salerno (Campania, South Italy) and the University of Padua (Veneto, North Italy) by email to answer an ad hoc anonymous survey about COVID-19. We also collected data on demographic and disease characteristics.

Results

In total, 167 patients with IBD from Padua and 83 patients from Salerno answered the survey (age: mean 39.7 years, SD 13.9 years; female: n=116, 46.4%). We found that patients with IBD were particularly worried about the COVID-19 pandemic (enough: 77/250, 30.8%; much/very much: 140/250, 56.0%), as they felt more vulnerable to COVID-19 due to their condition (enough: 70/250, 28.0%; much/very much: 109/250, 43.6%). Patients with IBD from the red zone of Veneto were more worried than patients from Campania (P=.001), and men felt more susceptible to the virus than women (P=.05). Additionally, remote medicine was appreciated more by younger patients than older patients (P=.04).

Conclusions

The results of our survey demonstrate that the lockdown had a significant impact on the psychological aspects of patients with IBD and suggest the need for increasing communication with patients with IBD (eg, through telemedicine) to ensure patients receive adequate health care, correct information, and proper psychological support.

Infectious complications of rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis during targeted and biological therapies: a viewpoint in 2020

Biological therapies have improved the outcomes of several major inflammatory, autoimmune and also neoplastic disorders. Those directed towards cytokines or other soluble mediators, cell-surface molecules or receptors or various components of intracellular signalling pathways may be associated with the occurrence of infections whose diversity depends on the particular immune target. In this context and following a keynote lecture given by one of us at the European League Against Rheumatism meeting on June 2018, a multidisciplinary group of experts deeply involved in the use of targeted and biological therapies in rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis decided to summarise their recent vision of the immunological basis and epidemiology of infections occurring during targeted and biological therapies, and provide useful indications for their management and prevention.

The shining DIAMOND for evidence-based treatment strategies for Crohn's disease

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antibodies are effective therapeutic agents to treat inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In the biologic era, the development of immunogenicity has been a critical issue for secondary loss of response. The superiority of anti-TNF therapy in combination with immunomodulators (IMs) is well-established for infliximab (IFX) but less evident for adalimumab (ADA). To clarify the contribution of thiopurines to ADA-treated patients with Crohn's disease (CD), the deep remission of immunomodulator and adalimumab combination therapy for Crohn's disease (DIAMOND) studies provided the first randomized comparison of efficacy between ADA monotherapy and ADA with thiopurine. The results of the DIAMOND and DIAMOND2 studies revealed the appropriate ADA therapeutic strategy for immunosuppressant-naïve patients with active CD based on therapeutic drug monitoring, endoscopic findings and clinical issues regarding the use of thiopurines.

Comparative safety and effectiveness of vedolizumab to tumour necrosis factor antagonist therapy for Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Direct comparisons are lacking between vedolizumab and tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-antagonist therapy in Crohn's disease (CD).

AIM

To compare safety and effectiveness of vedolizumab and TNF-antagonist therapy in adult CD patients.

METHODS

Retrospective observational cohort (May 2014-December 2017) propensity score-weighted comparison of vedolizumab vs TNF-antagonist therapy (infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab) in CD. Propensity scores were weighted for age, prior treatments, disease complications, extent and severity, steroid dependence, and concomitant immunosuppressive drug use. The primary outcome was comparative risk for infections or non-infectious serious adverse events (requiring antibiotics, antivirals, antifungals, hospitalisation, or treatment discontinuation, or resulting in death). Secondary comparative effectiveness outcomes were clinical remission (resolution of CD-related symptoms), steroid-free clinical remission and endoscopic remission (absence of ulcers/erosions).

RESULTS

We included 1266 patients (n = 659 vedolizumab). Rates of non-infectious serious adverse events (odds ratio [OR] 0.072, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.012-0.242), but not serious infections (OR 1.183, 95% CI 0.786-1.795), were significantly lower with vedolizumab vs TNF-antagonist therapy. Safety comparisons for non-infectious serious adverse events remained significant after adjusting for differences in duration of exposure. No significant difference was observed between vedolizumab and TNF-antagonist therapy for clinical remission (hazard ratio [HR] 0.932, 95% CI 0.707-1.228), steroid-free clinical remission (HR 1.250, 95% CI 0.677-2.310) or endoscopic remission (HR 0.827, 95% CI 0.595-1.151). TNF-antagonist therapy was associated with higher treatment persistence compared with vedolizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a lower risk of non-infectious serious adverse events, but not serious infections, with vedolizumab vs TNF-antagonist therapy, with no significant difference for achieving disease remission.

The Cost of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Management Matches with Clinical Course: A Single Outpatient Centre Analysis

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) have a large economic burden on health systems. Our single-centre observational retrospective study aimed to assess an economic evaluation in two IBD outpatient cohorts (biological and conventional therapy) in relation to disease activity within a three-year follow-up. Four hundred and seventeen consecutive IBD patients referred to our tertiary gastroenterology unit (Bari-Puglia-Southern Italy) on January 2014–December 2016 were included. For each group (conventional/biological), we assessed direct/indirect costs and clinical/endoscopic activity within the first year and along the three-year follow-up. Statistical analyses: Wilcoxon signed-rank test (continuous variables), chi-square and Fisher’s test (categorical variables), Spearman ranks (single outcome) and ANOVA (detection time, clinical/endoscopic scores) were used. Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation and range and/or median, interquartile range and range; categorical variables were expressed as proportions with 95% confidence interval. Direct and indirect cost items of 2014 and 2014–2016 were higher in patients treated with biological than conventional therapy. Subjects on biological therapy were younger and showed clinical and endoscopic moderate-to-severe disease activity. After three years, they reached a significant improvement from baseline. Conversely, disease activity was mild when conventional treatment had a beneficial effect. In conclusion, overall IBD management cost matches with clinical course and needs long-term evaluation in critical patients.

Clinical Trials for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Global Guidance During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]-causing coronavirus disease [COVID]-19 pandemic poses major challenges for patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] to be recruited and maintained in clinical trials. However, clinical trials offer patients who have failed multiple drugs access to study medications with alternative modes of action and the potential for relief from inflammation-mediated symptoms. Therefore, the continuation of clinical trials in IBD during the COVID-19 pandemic is important both for participants and for the community of IBD patients, due to the dire need for an expanded therapeutic armamentarium. As the safety of patients in clinical trials is the leading principle, we are providing ten specific rules to guide patients and principal investigators safely through the challenging time.

Screening for active COVID-19 infection and immunization status prior to biologic therapy in IBD patients at the time of the pandemic outbreak

Coronavirus disease 2019 has been recently classified as pandemic infection by the World Health Organization. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are invited to follow the national recommendations as any other person. It is unclear whether a more aggressive clinical course might develop in asymptomatic COVID-19 infected subjects during biological therapy and current evidence does not support treatment suspension. However, during pandemic, the start of treatment with immunosuppressive drugs and biologics should be postponed whenever possible and based on an individual risk assessment. When clinical conditions and the disease activity do not allow a treatment delay, before starting a biological therapy, screening of IBD patients for COVID-19 active infection by RT-PCR should be advisable, even in absence of clinical suspicion. Serum antibody testing, when available, could provide evidence of infection as well as identify patients already immune to the disease.

The Association of Medications and Vaccination with Risk of Pneumonia in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk for pneumonia, and corticosteroids are reported to amplify this risk. Less is known about the impact of corticosteroid-sparing IBD therapies on pneumonia risk or the efficacy of pneumococcal vaccination in reducing all-cause pneumonia in real-world IBD cohorts.

METHODS

We performed a population-based study using an established Veterans Health Administration cohort of 29,957 IBD patients. We identified all patients who developed bacterial pneumonia. Cox survival analysis was used to determine the association of corticosteroids at study entry and as a time-varying covariate, corticosteroid-sparing agents (immunomodulators and antitumor necrosis-alpha [TNF] inhibitors), and pneumococcal vaccination with the development of all-cause pneumonia.

RESULTS

Patients with IBD who received corticosteroids had a greater risk of pneumonia when controlling for age, gender, and comorbidities (hazard ratio [HR] 2.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.90-2.57 for prior use; HR = 3.42; 95% CI, 2.92-4.01 for use during follow-up). Anti-TNF inhibitors (HR 1.52; 95% CI, 1.02-2.26), but not immunomodulators (HR 0.91; 95% CI, 0.77-1.07), were associated with a small increase in pneumonia. A history of pneumonia was strongly associated with subsequent pneumonia (HR = 4.41; 95% CI, 3.70-5.27). Less than 15% of patients were vaccinated against pneumococcus, and this was not associated with a reduced risk of pneumonia (HR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.80-1.30) in this cohort.

CONCLUSION

In a large US cohort, corticosteroids were confirmed to increase pneumonia risk. Tumor necrosis-alpha inhibitors were associated with a smaller increase in the risk of pneumonia. Surprisingly, pneumococcal vaccination did not reduce all-cause pneumonia in this population, though few patients were vaccinated.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: biologics and risk of infection or cancer in elderly patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty exists concerning the risk of infection and cancer associated with biologic therapies in elderly patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

AIMS

To identify, synthesise and critically appraise the available evidence on the topic.

METHODS

We systematically searched Medline/PubMed, Embase and Scopus, through October 2019, and recent conference proceedings, to identify studies investigating the risk of serious infections, opportunistic infections, any infection and cancer in elderly IBD patients (>60 years) exposed to biologics as compared to those unexposed to biologics. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed each study's risk of bias. We examined heterogeneity, and calculated summary effect estimates using fixed- and random effects models. Quality of evidence was determined with GRADE.

RESULTS

We included 15 studies (one post hoc analysis of a randomised trial, nine cohort and five case-control studies). Elderly IBD patients treated with biologics were at increased risk of developing serious infections (random effects summary relative risk: 2.70, 95% CI: 1.56-4.66; seven studies; I²  = 57%) and opportunistic infections (3.16, 1.09-9.20; four studies; I²  = 73%). The occurrence of any infection (1.67, 0.51-5.43; five studies; I²  = 75%) and cancer (0.90, 0.64-1.26; nine studies; I²  = 0%) was not significantly affected. Nevertheless, our confidence in the effect estimates is rather limited; the quality of evidence is low to very low.

CONCLUSIONS

Biologics are likely to increase the risk of serious and opportunistic infections in old IBD patients. Large prospective studies are needed to further assess the biologic treatments' long-term safety profile in this population.

AGA Technical Review on the Management of Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis

A subset of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) present with, or progress to, moderate to severe disease activity. These patients are at high risk for colectomy, hospitalization, corticosteroid dependence, and serious infections. The risk of life-threatening complications and emergency colectomy is particularly high among those patients hospitalized with acute severe ulcerative colitis. Optimal management of outpatients or inpatients with moderate to severe UC often requires the use of immunomodulator and/or biologic therapies, including thiopurines, methotrexate, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, TNF-α antagonists, vedolizumab, tofacitnib, or ustekinumab, either as monotherapy or in combination (with immunomodulators), to mitigate these risks. Decisions about optimal drug therapy in moderate to severe UC are complex, with limited guidance on comparative efficacy and safety of different treatments, leading to considerable practice variability. Therefore, the American Gastroenterological Association prioritized development of clinical guidelines on this topic. To inform the clinical guidelines, this technical review was completed in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Focused questions in adult outpatients with moderate to severe UC included: (1) overall and comparative efficacy of different medications for induction and maintenance of remission in patients with or without prior exposure to TNF-α antagonists, (2) comparative efficacy and safety of biologic monotherapy vs combination therapy with immunomodulators, (3) comparative efficacy of top-down (upfront use of biologics and/or immunomodulator therapy) vs step-up therapy (acceleration to biologic and/or immunomodulator therapy only after failure of 5-aminosalicylates, and (4) role of continuing vs stopping 5-aminosalicylates in patients being treated with immunomodulator and/or biologic therapy for moderate to severe UC. Focused questions in adults hospitalized with acute severe ulcerative colitis included: (5) overall and comparative efficacy of pharmacologic interventions for inpatients refractory to corticosteroids, in reducing risk of colectomy, (6) optimal dosing regimens for intravenous corticosteroids and infliximab in these patients, and (7) role of adjunctive antibiotics in the absence of confirmed infections.

Clinical assessment of risk factors for infection in inflammatory bowel disease patients

PURPOSE

Recognizing patients with inflammatory bowel disease who are prone to infection would enable the adjustment of the type and intensity of immunosuppressive treatment. The aim of this study was to identify a clinical profile of risk for infections in IBD patients, based on the interaction of immunosuppressive treatment with factors inherent to the patient.

METHODS

A case-control study was performed among patients older than 18 years. Patients with any significant infection (any kind of severe or recurrent infection according to standard clinical criteria or a critical enough infection according to the patient) were defined as cases. Both cases and controls were randomly selected in a 1:3 ratio. All the period from diagnosis to the end of recruitment (June 2016) was analyzed. Risk factors for infection were identified by logistic regression analysis; the strength of association was reported by odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI).

RESULTS

A total of 112 cases and 270 controls were included. The independent risk factors for significant infection are the number of immunosuppressants (one drug: OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.53-3.11, two drugs: OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.01-5,56, and three drugs: OR 5.84, 95% CI 1.57-21.72), body mass index (OR 1.08; 95 %CI 1,01-1,16), the degree of comorbidity (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.04-2.21), and the intensity of inflammatory activity (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.19-1.71).

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of immunosuppression, several patient factors such as comorbidity, body mass index, or the inflammatory activity of the disease determine the individual risk of infectious complications and should be considered for an adequate risk assessment.

SMAC mimetics and RIPK inhibitors as therapeutics for chronic inflammatory diseases

New therapeutic approaches for chronic inflammatory diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatoid arthritis, and psoriasis are needed because current treatments are often suboptimal in terms of both efficacy and the risks of serious adverse events. Inhibitor of apoptosis proteins (IAPs) are E3 ubiquitin ligases that inhibit cell death pathways and are themselves inhibited by second mitochondria-derived activator of caspases (SMAC). SMAC mimetics (SMs), small-molecule antagonists of IAPs, are being evaluated as cancer therapies in clinical trials. IAPs are also crucial regulators of inflammatory pathways because they influence both the activation of inflammatory genes and the induction of cell death through the receptor-interacting serine-threonine protein kinases (RIPKs), nuclear factor κB (NF-κB)-inducing kinase, and mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs). Furthermore, there is an increasing interest in specifically targeting the substrates of IAP-mediated ubiquitylation, especially RIPK1, RIPK2, and RIPK3, as druggable nodes in inflammation control. Several studies have revealed an anti-inflammatory potential of RIPK inhibitors that either block inflammatory signaling or block the form of inflammatory cell death known as necroptosis. Expanding research on innate immune signaling through pattern recognition receptors that stimulate proinflammatory NF-κB and MAPK signaling may further contribute to uncovering the complex molecular roles used by IAPs and downstream RIPKs in inflammatory signaling. This may benefit and guide the development of SMs or selective RIPK inhibitors as anti-inflammatory therapeutics for various chronic inflammatory conditions.

Comparative Risk of Serious Infections With Biologic and/or Immunosuppressive Therapy in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative risk of serious infections with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists, non-TNF targeted biologics, tofacitinib, and immunosuppressive agents in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs).

METHODS

In a systematic search of publications, through March 18, 2018, we identified 15 observational studies (>500 person-years) of patients with IBD treated with TNF antagonists, non-TNF targeted biologics, tofacitinib, and/or immunosuppressive agents (thiopurines, methotrexate) that reported risk of serious infections. Only studies with active comparators were included, to allow appropriate comparative synthesis. We performed random-effects meta-analysis and estimated relative risk (RR) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Compared with anti-TNF monotherapy, risk of serious infection increased with the combination of anti-TNF and an immunosuppressive agent (in 6 cohorts: RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03-1.37), with anti-TNF and a corticosteroid (in 4 cohorts: RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.33-2.03), or with all 3 drugs (in 2 cohorts: RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.04-1.77); there was minimal heterogeneity among studies. In contrast, monotherapy with an immunosuppressive agent was associated with a lower risk of serious infections than monotherapy with a TNF antagonist (7 cohorts: RR, 0.61; 95% CI 0.44-0.84) or a TNF antagonist with an immunosuppressive agent (2 cohorts: RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.81). Infliximab-based therapy was associated with a lower risk of serious infections compared with adalimumab-based therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis (4 cohorts: RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.33-0.97), but not Crohn's disease (4 cohorts: RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.49-1.70). Few data were available on the comparative safety of biologic agents that do not inhibit TNF and tofacitinib.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapies for IBD that include TNF antagonists, especially with corticosteroids, are associated with a higher risk of serious infection, whereas monotherapy with an immunosuppressive agent is associated with a lower risk, compared with monotherapy with a TNF antagonist. Studies are needed to evaluate the comparative safety of non-TNF targeted biologics and small molecules for treatment of IBD.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

Overall and comparative safety of biologic and immunosuppressive therapy in inflammatory bowel diseases

Introduction: Efficacy and safety are key aspects when choosing therapies for patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). While several randomized trials and indirect comparisons have informed the comparative efficacy of medications, there has been a limited synthesis of safety of different agents. Areas covered: We focus on the overall and comparative risk of serious and opportunistic infections and malignancy of biologic and immunosuppressive therapy in IBD, based on randomized trials, open-label extension and registry studies, and real-world comparative observational studies. Expert opinion: TNFα antagonists may be more immunosuppressive than non-TNF-targeted biologic agents and increase the risk of systemic infections. Most consistent risk factors for serious infections include use of combination therapy with immunosuppressive agents and/or corticosteroids, moderate to severe disease activity, and older age. TNFα antagonists may also be associated with an increased risk of lymphoma, especially when combined with thiopurines. Real-world comparative safety studies, especially with newer biologic agents, are warranted to inform decision-making. Comparative safety of pharmacotherapy for IBD should be viewed in conjunction with efficacy and in the context of treatment strategies/approach, rather than in the context of specific agents used.

Relevant Infections in Inflammatory Bowel Disease, and Their Relationship With Immunosuppressive Therapy and Their Effects on Disease Mortality

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is controversy as to whether the risk of relevant infection in IBD is related to immunosuppressants or the disease itself. The aims of this study were to evaluate: [1] the life-long prevalence and types of relevant infections in patients with IBD related to immunosuppressive treatment, and [2] the relationship of both infection and patient comorbidity to mortality.

METHODS

Observational multicentre retrospective study of IBD patients that presented a relevant infection. For each case, four periods of infection exposure were analysed: P1: pre-IBD diagnosis, P2: from IBD diagnosis to immunosuppressant initiation, P3: during immunosuppressant therapy, and P4: after treatment withdrawal.

RESULTS

The life-long prevalence of relevant infection in the total cohort of patients [6914] was 3%, and 5% in immunosuppressed patients [4202]. 366 relevant infections were found in 212 patients [P1: 9, P2: 17, P3: 334, and P4: 6]. Differences between periods were significant [p < 0.0001]. The most frequent types of infection were respiratory, intestinal and urinary. The most frequent opportunistic infections were tuberculosis [prevalence: 2.6/1000] and herpes zoster [prevalence: 3.9/1000]. Herpes zoster infection was associated with thiopurines alone or in combination with anti-TNF in 75% of the cases, whereas tuberculosis was associated with anti-TNF in 94% of patients. The overall mortality was 4.2%. Infection-related mortality was 2.8% and it was not influenced by comorbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Relevant infections in IBD patients are rare and appear to be related to immunosuppression. Relevant infection is a major cause of death in IBD.

Early combined immunosuppression may be effective and safe in older patients with Crohn's disease: post hoc analysis of REACT

BACKGROUND

Physicians may be reluctant to prescribe combined immunosuppression in older patients with Crohn's disease due to perceived risk of treatment-related complications.

AIM

To evaluate the impact of age on risk of Crohn's disease-related complications in patients treated with early combined immunosuppression vs conventional management in a post hoc analysis of the randomised evaluation of an algorithm for Crohn's treatment (REACT), a cluster-randomised trial.

METHODS

We compared efficacy (time to major adverse outcome of Crohn's disease-related surgery, hospitalisation or serious complications; corticosteroid-free clinical remission) and safety outcomes at 24 months, between patients aged <60 vs ≥60 years randomised to early combined immunosuppression or conventional management, using Cox proportional hazard analysis or modified Poisson model. In the early combined immunosuppression arm, patients with failure to achieve clinical remission within 4-12 weeks of corticosteroids were treated with a combination of tumour necrosis factor-α antagonist plus anti-metabolite and sequentially escalated in a stepwise algorithm.

RESULTS

Of 1981 patients, 311 were ≥60 years (15.7%; 173 randomised to early combined immunosuppression and 138 to conventional management). Over 24 months, 10% of older patients developed Crohn's disease-related complications (early combined immunosuppression vs conventional management: 6.4% vs 14.5%) and 14 patients died (3.5% vs 5.8%). There was no difference between younger and older patients in risk of achieving corticosteroid-free clinical remission (<60 years, early combined immunosuppression (72.6%) vs conventional management (64.4%): relative risk [RR], 1.06 [95% CI, 0.98-1.15] vs ≥60 years, early combined immunosuppression (74.8%) vs conventional management (63.0%): RR, 1.09 [0.90-1.33], P-interaction = 0.78) or time to major adverse outcome (<60 years: hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [0.53-0.96] vs ≥60 years: HR, 0.69 [0.31-1.51], P-interaction = 0.92) with early combined immunosuppression vs conventional management.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed no difference in efficacy and safety of early combined immunosuppression compared to conventional management in older and younger patients. Early combined immunosuppression may be considered as a treatment option in selected older patients with Crohn's disease with suboptimal disease control. Clinical Trial Identifier: NCT01030809.

Antibiotics Potentiate Adherent-Invasive E. coli Infection and Expansion

BACKGROUND

Crohn's disease (CD) is an inflammatory bowel disease with a complex etiology. Paradoxically, CD is associated with the use of antibiotics and with an increased abundance of an unusual phenotypic group of Escherichia coli known as adherent-invasive E. coli (AIEC). However, the impact of antibiotics on AIEC infection has not been well studied in controlled models of infection.

METHODS

We infected mice with AIEC before or after treatment with a variety of different classes of antibiotics. We assessed levels of AIEC in the feces and tissues, AIEC localization by immunofluorescence microscopy, and tissue pathology.

RESULTS

We found that a wide range of antibiotic classes strongly potentiated initial AIEC infection and expanded AIEC in chronically infected mice. We found that the ability of antibiotics to potentiate AIEC infection did not correlate with a stereotyped shift in the gut bacterial community but was correlated with a decrease in overall diversity and a divergence from the pre-antibiotic state. We found that antibiotic-induced inflammation provided a fitness advantage for AIEC expansion through their use of oxidized metabolites in the postantibiotic period.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that antibiotics can render hosts more susceptible to initial AIEC infection and can worsen infection in previously colonized hosts. AIEC appears to exploit host inflammatory responses that arise in the postantibiotic period, highlighting a previously unknown interaction between CD risk factors.

Integrated Care for Crohn's Disease: A Plea for the Development of Clinical Decision Support Systems

Evolution in the management of Crohn's disease [CD] has been characterized by recent paradigm changes. First, new biological therapies induce intestinal healing and full disease control in a substantial number of patients, particularly when introduced early in the disease course. However, they are expensive and associated with potentially severe side effects, raising the question of optimal treatment duration. Secondly, progress in biomarkers and medical imaging performance has enabled better refinement of the definition and prediction of remission or relapse of the disease through monitoring [tight control]. This progress may help to improve tailoring treatment in relation to target ['treat-to target' approach], applying patient-centred and collaborative perspectives, consistent with other chronic disease management. Such an approach requires the integration of a potentially large number of parameters coming from different stakeholders. This integration would be difficult based solely on implementation of classical guidelines and the clinician's intuition. To this end, clinical decision support systems should be developed that integrate a combination of various outcomes to facilitate the treatment decision and to share information between patients, primary care specialists, and health insurance companies or health authorities. This should ease complex therapeutic decisions and serve as a basis for continued research into effectiveness of CD management.

Risk of infection associated with anti-TNF-α therapy

INTRODUCTION

The advent, more than two decades ago, of monoclonal antibodies and soluble receptors targeting tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α has revolutionized the therapeutic approach to otherwise difficult-to-treat autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. However, due to the pleiotropic functions played by this pro-inflammatory cytokine (with particular relevance in granuloma maintenance), TNF-α blockade may increase the incidence of serious infections. Areas covered: The present review summarizes the biological rationale supporting the impact of anti-TNF-α therapy on the host's susceptibility to infection. The structure, mode of action, and indications of available agents are reviewed, as well as the clinical evidence coming from clinical trials and observational registries. We discuss the impact of patient- and disease-related factors influencing the occurrence of infection. Finally, strategies for risk minimization are also covered, with particular attention to recommendations for screening of latent tuberculosis infection and management of chronic hepatitis B infection. Expert commentary: Methodological limitations (confounding by indication bias, patient dropout, or switching therapies) should be considered when interpreting observational data. Clinicians must individualize the infection risk assessment not only on the basis of the specific anti-TNF-α agent used or the expected duration of therapy, but also by taking into account the baseline susceptibility of a given patient.

Update on the Use of Thiopurines and Methotrexate in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The increased use of biologic agents over the past two decades has led to a reappraisal of the role of the immunomodulators (thiopurines and methotrexate) in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent data on the use of thiopurines and methotrexate either as monotherapy or as part of combination therapy with biologic agents.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have addressed the need for concomitant immunomodulatory therapy in treatment-naïve patients starting anti-TNF-α therapy, the appropriate dose of the immunomodulator in this setting, the minimum duration of combination therapy, and the possible mechanisms by which immunomodulators enhance the effectiveness of anti-TNF-α agents. Little is known about the role of immunomodulators in combination with agents belonging to other classes of biologic therapies. Recent studies have shown that methotrexate is not effective in inducing or maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis. Finally, several studies have broadened our understanding of the infection and malignancy risks of the immunomodulators. Immunomodulators continue to have a place in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. However, with the ever-increasing list of biologic agents, properly positioning the immunomodulators within the overall therapeutic scheme is a complicated task. In order to optimize outcomes, each patient requires an individualized approach, which takes into account risks, benefits, cost, alternatives, and patient preferences.

Risk of Serious and Opportunistic Infections Associated With Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The risk of infection associated with tumor necrosis factor antagonists (anti-TNF) and thiopurines (combination therapy) is uncertain. We assessed the risk of serious and opportunistic infections in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with thiopurine monotherapy, anti-TNF monotherapy, or combination therapy in a large cohort of patients in France.

METHODS

We performed a nationwide population-based study of patients (18 years or older) with a diagnosis of IBD in the French national health insurance database; we collected data from January 1, 2009 until December 31, 2014. The risks of serious and opportunistic infections associated with exposure to combination therapy, anti-TNF, and thiopurine monotherapies were compared using marginal structural Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for baseline and time-varying sociodemographic characteristics, medications, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

Among the 190,694 patients with IBD included in our analysis, 8561 serious infections and 674 opportunistic infections occurred. Compared with anti-TNF monotherapy, combination therapy was associated with increased risks of serious infection (hazard ratio [HR], 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.45) and opportunistic infection (HR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.32-2.91). Compared with thiopurine monotherapy, anti-TNF monotherapy was associated with increased risks of serious infection (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.56-1.88), mycobacterial infection (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.15-3.40), and bacterial infection (HR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.23-4.58, respectively). Conversely, anti-TNF monotherapy was associated with decreased risk of opportunistic viral infection compared with thiopurine monotherapy (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38-0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationwide cohort study of patients with IBD in France, we found heterogeneity in risks of serious and opportunistic infections in patients treated with immune-suppressive regimens. These should be carefully considered and weighed against potential benefits for IBD treatment in patient management.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis: first- and second-line biologic therapies for moderate-severe Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

There are limited data to inform positioning of agents for treating moderate-severe Crohn's disease (CD).

AIM

We assessed comparative efficacy and safety of first-line (biologic-naïve) and second-line (prior exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF]-α) agents) biologic therapy for moderate-severe CD, through a systematic review and network meta-analysis, and appraised quality of evidence (QoE) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with moderate-severe CD treated with approved anti-TNF agents, anti-integrin agents and anti-IL12/23 agents, first-line or second-line, and compared with placebo or another active agent. Efficacy outcomes were induction and maintenance of clinical remission; safety outcomes were serious adverse events and infections. Network meta-analyses were performed, and ranking was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities.

RESULTS

No head-to-head trials were identified. In biologic-naïve patients, infliximab (SUCRA,0.93) and adalimumab (SUCRA,0.75) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission (moderate QoE). In patients with prior anti-TNF exposure, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.91; low QoE, in patients with prior response or intolerance to anti-TNF agents) and ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.71) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission. In patients with response to induction therapy, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.97) and infliximab (SUCRA, 0.68) were ranked highest for maintenance of remission. Ustekinumab had lowest risk of serious adverse events (SUCRA, 0.72) and infection (SUCRA, 0.71; along with infliximab, SUCRA, 0.83) in maintenance trials.

CONCLUSION

Indirect comparisons suggest that infliximab or adalimumab may be preferred first-line agents, and ustekinumab a preferred second-line agent, for induction of remission in patients with moderate-severe CD. Head-to-head trials are warranted.

Lymphoma Risk and Overall Safety Profile of Adalimumab in Patients With Crohn's Disease With up to 6 Years of Follow-Up in the Pyramid Registry

OBJECTIVES

Real-world, prospective, long-term studies in Crohn's disease (CD) characterizing adalimumab safety data and lymphoma risk were lacking. We present the final results from the PYRAMID registry, which was designed to rule out a doubling of lymphoma risk in adalimumab-treated patients with CD.

METHODS

Patients with moderately to severely active CD newly prescribed or currently receiving adalimumab according to local product labels were followed for up to 6 years and analyzed for adverse events (AEs). The registry exposure-adjusted observed rate of lymphoma was compared with the estimated background lymphoma rate from a sex-matched general population in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 17 Registry database adjusted for anticipated prior or concurrent thiopurine use in a CD population.

RESULTS

A total of 5025 patients were evaluated (16680.4 PY of adalimumab registry exposure, ≈3 years/patient mean follow-up). Registry treatment-emergent AEs included 4129 serious AEs (n = 1853 [36.9%]; 24.8 E/100 PY), 792 serious infections (n = 556 [11.1%]; 4.7 E/100 PY), and 134 malignancies (n = 116 [2.3%]; 0.8 E/100 PY), including ten lymphomas. The observed lymphoma rate (0.060 E/100 PY) was lower than the estimated background rate (0.084 E/100 PY), and the upper bound of the one-sided 95% CI of the observed rate (0.102 E/100 PY) was lower than double the estimated rate (0.168 E/100 PY).

CONCLUSIONS

PYRAMID is the longest prospective adalimumab study in routine clinical practice, with up to 6 years of follow-up. No new safety signals were reported. The pre-specified registry objective of ruling out a doubling of lymphoma risk with adalimumab was met.

Infections and Cardiovascular Complications are Common Causes for Hospitalization in Older Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Prevalence of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in older patients is increasing. Risk-benefit trade-offs of therapy are poorly understood in older patients, who may be at higher risk of nonIBD and/or treatment-related complications, rather than disease-related complications. We conducted a nationally representative cohort study to estimate and compare annual burden, costs, and causes for hospitalization in older versus younger patients with IBD.

METHODS

Using the Nationwide Readmissions Database 2013, we created a cohort of 47,402 patients with IBD who had been hospitalized at least once between January-June 2013 and followed for rehospitalization until December 2013. We estimated annual burden (total days spent in hospital), costs, and causes (based on primary discharge diagnosis) of hospitalization in older (>64y, n = 15,428), middle-age (40-64y, n = 18,476), and younger (<40y, n = 13,498) patients.

RESULTS

Older patients with IBD spent more days in hospital annually [median interquartile range : 7 (3-13) days] than middle-age [6 (3-12) days], and younger patients [5 ([3-11) days], with significantly higher hospitalization-related costs $15,078 (7423-30,955) vs $12,921 (6367-28,182) vs.. $10,070 (5192-22,100), P < 0.01. Older patients were significantly more likely to be hospitalized due to serious infections (14.6% vs 10.6% vs 8.4%; P < 0.01) and cardiovascular complications (9.9% vs 4.3% vs 0.8%; P < 0.01), and they were less likely due to IBD-related complications (11.8% vs 23.5% vs 41.4%; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Older IBD patients have higher burden and costs of hospitalization than younger patients, mainly attributed to serious infections and cardiovascular complications, rather than disease-related complications. Careful assessment of comparative risks-benefits of different IBD therapies in older patients is warranted to identify the optimal treatment approach.

The Addition of an Immunosuppressant After Loss of Response to Anti-TNFα Monotherapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A 2-Year Study

BACKGROUND

The addition of an immunosuppressant (IM) after loss of response to anti-TNFα monotherapy is an emerging strategy of therapeutic optimization in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, few clinical data have been reported to date. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this selective combination therapy in patients with IBD.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with loss of response to anti-TNFα monotherapy despite an intensive dose optimization who added an IM from October 2014 to October 2016 were entered into a prospective database.

RESULTS

Among 630 patients treated with anti-TNFα agents during the study period, 46 (7.3%) added an IM. A total of 31 patients (67.4%) were treated with an intravenous anti-TNFα (infliximab, as originator or biosimilar), while 15 (32.6%) were treated with a subcutaneous anti-TNFα agent (10 adalimumab and 5 golimumab). The mean duration of follow-up was 12.8 ± 7.3 months. Twenty-one patients (45.7%) remained on combination therapy at the end of follow-up: 15 (32.6%) maintained a steroid-free remission, and 6 (13.0%) achieved a clinical response. In patients who experienced treatment success, the median value of C-reactive protein decreased from baseline to the end of follow-up (13.2 vs 3.0, P = 0.01; normal values <5 mg/L). Adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation were reported in 8 out of 46 patients (17.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

In the largest cohort on this argument reported to date, the addition of an IM was an effective and safe optimization strategy after loss of response to anti-TNFα monotherapy. Low doses of IM were sufficient to achieve a clinical response.

Long-term safety of adalimumab in clinical trials in adult patients with Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab is used to treat moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) when conventional therapies fail.

AIM

To update long-term adalimumab safety from CD and UC trials; the previous report was CD only, 3160 patients/3402 patient-years (PYs).

METHODS

Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs; first dose to 70 days after last dose/December 31, 2015) in adults in phase 2/3 and 3/3b trials and open-label extensions were coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA-v18.1). Rates were assessed as events/100 (E/100 PYs).

RESULTS

The database (16 trials; CD, N = 3606; UC, N = 1739) represented 4145 and 3397 PYs of exposure, respectively. For CD, incidences of any AEs with adalimumab were 60.8%-65.1%, depending on dose, and 71.5% with placebo; for UC, the incidences were 53.5%-54.8% and 56.1%, respectively. Rates of any AEs (CD, 605 E/100 PYs; UC, 361 E/100 PYs), serious AEs (CD, 36.1 E/100 PYs; UC, 18.9 E/100 PYs), and malignancies (CD, 1.2 E/100 PYs; UC, 1.0 E/100 PYs) were similar between current and prior analyses. Apparent rate of opportunistic infections was lowered to 0.3 and 0.2 E/100 PYs for CD and UC, respectively, by recent MedDRA changes excluding oral candidiasis and tuberculosis. Standardised incidence ratios for malignancies were similar to the general population (CD, 1.45 [95% CI, 0.90-2.22]; UC, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.84-2.07]). Demyelinating disorders were uncommon (CD, 0.1 E/100 PYs; UC, <0.1 E/100 PYs).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis continued to experience acceptable safety with adalimumab, without new safety signals.

Effect of tight control management on Crohn's disease (CALM): a multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Biomarkers of intestinal inflammation, such as faecal calprotectin and C-reactive protein, have been recommended for monitoring patients with Crohn's disease, but whether their use in treatment decisions improves outcomes is unknown. We aimed to compare endoscopic and clinical outcomes in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease who were managed with a tight control algorithm, using clinical symptoms and biomarkers, versus patients managed with a clinical management algorithm.

METHODS

CALM was an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 study, done in 22 countries at 74 hospitals and outpatient centres, which evaluated adult patients (aged 18-75 years) with active endoscopic Crohn's disease (Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity [CDEIS] >6; sum of CDEIS subscores of >6 in one or more segments with ulcers), a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) of 150-450 depending on dose of prednisone at baseline, and no previous use of immunomodulators or biologics. Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to tight control or clinical management groups, stratified by smoking status (yes or no), weight (<70 kg or ≥70 kg), and disease duration (≤2 years or >2 years) after 8 weeks of prednisone induction therapy, or earlier if they had active disease. In both groups, treatment was escalated in a stepwise manner, from no treatment, to adalimumab induction followed by adalimumab every other week, adalimumab every week, and lastly to both weekly adalimumab and daily azathioprine. This escalation was based on meeting treatment failure criteria, which differed between groups (tight control group before and after random assignment: faecal calprotectin ≥250 μg/g, C-reactive protein ≥5mg/L, CDAI ≥150, or prednisone use in the previous week; clinical management group before random assignment: CDAI decrease of <70 points compared with baseline or CDAI >200; clinical management group after random assignment: CDAI decrease of <100 points compared with baseline or CDAI ≥200, or prednisone use in the previous week). De-escalation was possible for patients receiving weekly adalimumab and azathioprine or weekly adalimumab alone if failure criteria were not met. The primary endpoint was mucosal healing (CDEIS <4) with absence of deep ulcers 48 weeks after randomisation. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial has been completed, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01235689.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 11, 2011, and Nov 3, 2016, 244 patients (mean disease duration: clinical management group, 0·9 years [SD 1·7]; tight control group, 1·0 year [2·3]) were randomly assigned to monitoring groups (n=122 per group). 29 (24%) patients in the clinical management group and 32 (26%) patients in the tight control group discontinued the study, mostly because of adverse events. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the tight control group achieved the primary endpoint at week 48 (56 [46%] of 122 patients) than in the clinical management group (37 [30%] of 122 patients), with a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test-adjusted risk difference of 16·1% (95% CI 3·9-28·3; p=0·010). 105 (86%) of 122 patients in the tight control group and 100 (82%) of 122 patients in the clinical management group reported treatment-emergent adverse events; no treatment-related deaths occurred. The most common adverse events were nausea (21 [17%] of 122 patients), nasopharyngitis (18 [15%]), and headache (18 [15%]) in the tight control group, and worsening Crohn's disease (35 [29%] of 122 patients), arthralgia (19 [16%]), and nasopharyngitis (18 [15%]) in the clinical management group.

INTERPRETATION

CALM is the first study to show that timely escalation with an anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy on the basis of clinical symptoms combined with biomarkers in patients with early Crohn's disease results in better clinical and endoscopic outcomes than symptom-driven decisions alone. Future studies should assess the effects of such a strategy on long-term outcomes such as bowel damage, surgeries, hospital admissions, and disability.

FUNDING

AbbVie.

Tacrolimus versus anti-tumor necrosis factor agents for steroid-refractory active ulcerative colitis based on the severity of endoscopic findings: a single-center, open-label cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

At Saitama Medical Center, for remission induction in active ulcerative colitis (UC) patients with endoscopic evidence of severe disease, we tend to preferentially use tacrolimus (TAC) over anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α agents. We conducted this study to evaluate the validity of our therapeutic strategies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted in 52 steroid-refractory active UC patients with a Clinical Activity Index (CAI) score of ≥7 who were receiving remission induction therapy with TAC or anti-TNF-α agents. The patients were divided into a TAC treatment group (TAC group, n = 29) and an anti-TNF-α agent treatment group (anti-TNF group, n = 23). The CAI, Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (UCEIS) and incidence of events (relapse, hospitalization and surgery) were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

At treatment initiation, the CAI score was 12.6 in the TAC group and 11.5 in the anti-TNF group (P = 0.09), while the corresponding values of the UCEIS were 6.5 and 5.1, respectively (P = 0.0035). The clinical remission rate at 12 weeks was 55% (65% when only the subgroup that received rapid induction therapy was included in the analysis) in the TAC group and 57% in the anti-TNF group, with no significant difference. The cumulative event-free rates at 1, 6 and 12 months were 65.5%, 39.4%, and 39.4%, respectively, in the TAC group and 95.7%, 77.2% and 71.7%, respectively, in the anti-TNF group (P = 0.0037).

CONCLUSION

Rapid induction therapy with TAC tended to be selected for active UC patients with endoscopic evidence of severe disease, and the present study supported the validity of this therapeutic approach. However, transition to the remission-maintenance phase was more favorable in the anti-TNF group.