Rapid Test for Infliximab Drug Concentration Allows Immediate Dose Adaptation

Best Practice for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Infliximab: Position Statement from the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology

BACKGROUND

Infliximab, an anti-tumor necrosis factor monoclonal antibody, has revolutionized the pharmacological management of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). This position statement critically reviews and examines existing data on therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of infliximab in patients with IMIDs. It provides a practical guide on implementing TDM in current clinical practices and outlines priority areas for future research.

METHODS

The endorsing TDM of Biologics and Pharmacometrics Committees of the International Association of TDM and Clinical Toxicology collaborated to create this position statement.

RESULTS

Accumulating data support the evidence for TDM of infliximab in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases, with limited investigation in other IMIDs. A universal approach to TDM may not fully realize the benefits of improving therapeutic outcomes. Patients at risk for increased infliximab clearance, particularly with a proactive strategy, stand to gain the most from TDM. Personalized exposure targets based on therapeutic goals, patient phenotype, and infliximab administration route are recommended. Rapid assays and home sampling strategies offer flexibility for point-of-care TDM. Ongoing studies on model-informed precision dosing in inflammatory bowel disease will help assess the additional value of precision dosing software tools. Patient education and empowerment, and electronic health record-integrated TDM solutions will facilitate routine TDM implementation. Although optimization of therapeutic effectiveness is a primary focus, the cost-reducing potential of TDM also merits consideration.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful implementation of TDM for infliximab necessitates interdisciplinary collaboration among clinicians, hospital pharmacists, and (quantitative) clinical pharmacologists to ensure an efficient research trajectory.

Formation and clearance of TNF-TNF inhibitor complexes during TNF inhibitor treatment

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Millions of patients with inflammatory diseases are treated with tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (TNFi). Individual treatment response varies, in part related to variable drug clearance. The role of TNF-TNFi complexes in clearance of the different TNFi is controversial. Moreover, mechanistic insight into the structural aspects and biological significance of TNF-TNFi complexes is lacking. We hypothesized a role for Fc-mediated clearance of TNF-TNFi immune complexes. Therefore, we investigated circulating TNF-TNFi complexes upon treatment with certolizumab-lacking Fc tails-in comparison with adalimumab, golimumab, infliximab and etanercept.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Drug-tolerant ELISAs were developed and used to quantify TNF during adalimumab, golimumab, etanercept, certolizumab and infliximab treatment in patients with inflammatory arthritis or ulcerative colitis for a maximum follow-up of 1 year. Effects on in vitro TNF production and Fc-mediated uptake of TNF-TNFi complexes were investigated for all five TNFi.

KEY RESULTS

Circulating TNF concentrations were >20-fold higher during certolizumab treatment compared with adalimumab, reaching up to 23.1 ng·ml-1 . Internalization of TNF-TNFi complexes by macrophages depended on Fc valency, with efficient uptake for the full antibody TNFi (three Fc tails), but little or no uptake for etanercept and certolizumab (one and zero Fc tail, respectively). TNF production was not affected by TNFi. Total TNF load did not affect clearance rate of total TNFi.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Differences in TNFi structure profoundly affect clearance of TNF, while it is unlikely that TNF itself significantly contributes to target-mediated drug disposition of TNFi.

Is tumor necrosis factor-α monoclonal therapy with proactive therapeutic drug monitoring optimized for inflammatory bowel disease? Network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) monoclonal antibody therapy [adalimumab (ADA) and infliximab (IFX)] with therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), which has been proposed for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients, are still controversial.

AIM

To determine the efficacy and safety of anti-TNF-α monoclonal antibody therapy with proactive TDM in patients with IBD and to determine which subtype of IBD patients is most suitable for proactive TDM interventions.

METHODS

As of July 2023, we searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to compare anti-TNF-α monoclonal antibody therapy with proactive TDM with therapy with reactive TDM or empiric therapy. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were used to determine the IBD patient subtype that achieved clinical remission and to determine the need for surgery.

RESULTS

This systematic review and meta-analysis yielded 13 studies after exclusion, and the baseline indicators were balanced. We found a significant increase in the number of patients who achieved clinical remission in the ADA [odds ratio (OR) = 1.416, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.196-1.676] and RCT (OR = 1.393, 95%CI: 1.182-1.641) subgroups and a significant decrease in the number of patients who needed surgery in the proactive vs reactive (OR = 0.237, 95%CI: 0.101-0.558) and IFX + ADA (OR = 0.137, 95%CI: 0.032-0.588) subgroups, and the overall risk of adverse events was reduced (OR = 0.579, 95%CI: 0.391-0.858) according to the pairwise meta-analysis. Moreover, the network meta-analysis results suggested that patients with IBD treated with ADA (OR = 1.39, 95%CI: 1.19-1.63) were more likely to undergo TDM, especially in comparison with patients with reactive TDM (OR = 1.38, 95%CI: 1.07-1.77).

CONCLUSION

Proactive TDM is more suitable for IBD patients treated with ADA and has obvious advantages over reactive TDM. We recommend proactive TDM in IBD patients who are treated with ADA.

Attitudes, perceptions and barriers in implementing therapeutic drug monitoring for anti-TNFs in inflammatory bowel disease: a survey from the Middle East

Background

A growing body of evidence underscores the beneficial impact of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Objectives

We surveyed clinician attitudes, perceptions and barriers related to TDM in IBD in the Middle East.

Design

A 15-question survey was distributed through national gastroenterological societies in five Middle Eastern countries (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Lebanon and Egypt).

Methods

Data on clinician characteristics, demographics, utilization patterns and obstacles related to the adoption of TDM with anti-TNFs were gathered. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict factors influencing the utilization of TDM.

Results

Among 211 respondents (82% male), 82% were consultants, 8% were physicians with an interest in gastroenterology (GI), and 6% were GI trainees. Of these, 152 met inclusion criteria, treating >5 IBD patients per month and ⩾1 with an anti-TNF per month. TDM was used in clinical practice by 78% (95% CI: 71-85) of respondents. TDM was utilized following the loss of response (LOR) in 93%, for primary non-response (PNR) in 40% and before restarting anti-TNF therapy after a drug holiday in 33% of respondents, while 34% used TDM proactively. No specific factors were associated with the use of TDM. Barriers to TDM use included cost (85%), time lag to results (71%) and lack of insurance reimbursement (65%). Overall knowledge of TDM (70%), interpretation and actioning of results (76%) or awareness of clinical guidelines (57%) were not perceived as barriers. If barriers were removed, 95% would use TDM more frequently; 93% for LOR, 60% for PNR, 50% when restarting after a drug holiday, and 54% would use TDM proactively.

Conclusion

Most gastroenterologists use TDM for LOR, with cost, time lag and insurance reimbursement being significant barriers. Addressing these barriers would increase the judicious use of reactive and proactive TDM to optimize anti-TNF therapy in IBD.

Validation Study of Novel Point-of-Care Tests for Infliximab, Adalimumab and C-Reactive Protein in Capillary Blood and Calprotectin in Faeces in an Ambulatory Inflammatory Bowel Disease Care Setting

Background and aims: Point-of-care tests (POCT) allow instant measurement of inflammatory markers and drug concentrations. Here, we studied agreement between a novel POCT device and reference methods of measuring infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADL) serum concentrations and C-reactive protein (CRP) and faecal calprotectin (FCP) concentrations of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods: In this single-centre validation study, IBD patients were recruited in which IFX, ADL, CRP and/or FCP tests were required. IFX, ADL and CRP POCT were performed on capillary whole blood (CWB), obtained via finger prick. Additionally, IFX POCT was performed on serum samples. FCP POCT was performed on stool samples. Agreement between POCT and reference methods was tested using Passing-Bablok regression, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots. Results: In total, 285 patients participated. Passing-Bablok regression identified differences between the reference method and IFX CWB POCT (intercept = 1.56), IFX serum POCT (intercept = 0.71, slope = 1.10) and ADL CWB POCT (intercept = 1.44). There were also differences in the Passing-Bablok regressions of CRP (intercept = 0.81, slope = 0.78) and FCP (intercept = 51 and slope = 0.46). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that IFX and ADL concentrations were slightly higher with the POCT and CRP and FCP were slightly lower with POCT. The ICC demonstrated almost perfect agreement with IFX CWB POCT (ICC = 0.85), IFX serum POCT (ICC = 0.96), ADL CWB POCT (ICC = 0.82) and CRP CWB POCT (ICC = 0.91) and moderate agreement with FCP POCT (ICC = 0.55). Conclusions: IFX and ADL results were slightly higher with this novel rapid and user-friendly POCT, whereas CRP and FCP results were slightly lower compared to the reference methods.

Therapeutic drug monitoring in inflammatory bowel disease: implementation, utilization, and barriers in clinical practice in Scandinavia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) may optimize biologic and thiopurine therapies in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The study aimed to investigate implementation and utilization of TDM in Scandinavia.

METHODS

A web-based questionnaire on the use of TDM was distributed to Scandinavian gastroenterologists via the national societies.

RESULTS

In total, 297 IBD physicians prescribing biologic therapies, equally distributed between community and university hospitals, were included (response rate 42%) (Norway 118 (40%), Denmark 86 (29%), Sweden 50 (17%), Finland 33 (11%), Iceland 10 (3%)). Overall, TDM was applied during biologic therapies by 87%, and for TNF-inhibitors >90%. Among the users, reactive and proactive TDM were utilized by 90% and 63%, respectively. Danish physicians were significantly less inclined to use TDM compared to other Scandinavian countries; (58% vs 98%); OR 0.03 [0.01-0.09], p < 0.001). Reactive TDM was commonly applied at primary (74%) and secondary (99%) treatment failure. Proactive TDM was used by 80% during maintenance therapy and 56% during induction and more commonly utilized in Norway (p < 0.001), and by physicians managing >10 IBD patients/week (p = 0.005). TDM scenarios were interpreted in accord with available evidence but with discrepancies for proactive TDM. The main barriers to TDM were lack of guidelines (51%) and time lag between sampling and results (49%). TDM of thiopurines was routinely used by 87%.

CONCLUSION

TDM of biologic and thiopurine therapies has been broadly implemented into clinical practice in Scandinavia. However, physicians call for TDM guidelines detailing indications and interpretations of test results along with improved test response times.

A Systematic Review on the interest of Drug Tolerant assay in the monitoring of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Many patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapies, of which infliximab (IFX) is most commonly used. Loss of response (LOR) to anti-TNF therapy due to immunogenic failure accounts for 20% of subsequent medical intervention and is defined, using a drug sensitive assay, as low or undetectable concentration of drug with high titers of anti-drug antibodies (ADAb). We performed a systematic review to investigate the use of a drug tolerant assay during both induction and maintenance to monitor patients treated with anti-TNFs. After the search on PubMed, 90 publications were reviewed. Most ADAb detection methods are drug sensitive, cannot detect ADAb in the presence of drug, and therefore cannot be used close to drug administration, when the drug concentration is too high. To overcome this major limitation, several drug-tolerant techniques have been developed and will be discussed in this review. Using drug-tolerant assays ADAb against infliximab (IFX) or adalimumab (ADM) can be detected during induction and predict primary non-response or LOR. Drug sensitive assays do not allow detection of ADAb during the induction phase as IFX or ADM concentration is typically high.

Ultra-proactive Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Infliximab Based on Point of Care Testing in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Results of a Pragmatic Trial

BACKGROUND

With point of care testing [POCT] for infliximab [IFX], ultraproactive therapeutic drug monitoring [TDM] with ad-hoc dose optimisation is possible in patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD].

AIM

To compare the clinical outcomes of an ultraproactive TDM algorithm of IFX based on POCT with reactive TDM in patients with IBD, in a pragmatic clinical trial.

METHODS

All patients with IBD and maintenance IFX treatment were included between June and August 2018 in two centres. Centre A applied an ultra-proactive TDM algorithm incorporating POCT, and centre B applied reactive TDM. Primary endpoint was failure of IFX therapy after 1 year. Secondary endpoints included sustained clinical remission and mucosal remission.

RESULTS

In total 187 patients [n = 115/72 cohort A/B] were included. Cohort A had more trough level [TL] measurements compared with cohort B [8.8 vs 1/patient/year; p <0.0001], leading to a significant higher number of dose optimisations. POCT testing was required in 27% after the first round of ultra-proactive TDM and in a mean of 6.3% (standard deviation [SD] 1.9) in the subsequent rounds. Ad-hoc extra dosing was needed in 13% of the POCT. After 1 year, no difference was seen between cohort A and cohort B in IFX failure [19% vs 10%; p = 0.08], nor in sustained clinical remission [75% vs 83%; p = 0.17]. Mucosal remission was evaluated in 71 patients [38%], and was more frequent in the reactive TDM cohort [p = 0.02].

CONCLUSIONS

Ultra-proactive TDM in patients with IBD and maintenance IFX treatment leads to equal clinical outcomes as reactive TDM after 1 year of follow-up.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of biologics in inflammatory bowel disease: unmet needs and future perspectives

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) has emerged as a useful tool for optimising the use of biologics, and in particular anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy, in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, challenges remain and are hindering the widespread implementation of TDM in clinical practice. These barriers include identification of the optimal drug concentration to target, the lag time between sampling and results, and the proper interpretation of anti-drug antibody titres among different assays. Solutions to overcome these barriers include the harmonisation of TDM assays and the use of point-of-care testing. Other unmet needs include well designed prospective studies and randomised controlled trials focusing on proactive TDM, particularly during induction therapy. Future studies should also investigate the utility of TDM for biologics other than anti-TNF therapies in both IBD and other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis, and the use of pharmacokinetic modelling dashboards and pharmacogenetics towards individual personalised medicine.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonists in Crohn Disease: A Theoretical Construct to Apply Pharmacokinetics and Guidelines to Clinical Practice

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is the measurement of drug and antidrug antibody concentrations in individuals to guide treatment decisions. In patients with Crohn disease (CD), TDM, used either reactively or proactively, is emerging as a valuable tool for optimization of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonist therapy. Reactive TDM is carried out in response to treatment failure, whereas proactive TDM involves the periodic monitoring of patients responding to TNF antagonist therapy to allow treatment optimization. In patients with CD, most of the available data for TDM relate to the first-to-market TNF antagonist infliximab and, to a lesser extent, to adalimumab and certolizumab pegol. Several gastroenterology associations, including the American Gastroenterology Association, have endorsed the use of reactive TDM in patients with active CD. However, fewer recommendations currently exist for the use of proactive TDM, although several new prospective randomized controlled trials evaluating proactive TDM strategies have been published. In this review, the current evidence for reactive and proactive TDM is discussed, and a proactive treatment algorithm for certolizumab pegol based on previously published threshold concentrations is proposed.

Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model-based exploration of alternative ustekinumab dosage regimens for patients with Crohn's disease

AIMS

In the UNITI endoscopy sub-study, only 17.4% of patients with Crohn's disease (CD) on ustekinumab achieved endoscopic response and 10.9% of patients achieved endoscopic remission at week (w)44. We aimed to evaluate the impact of alternative ustekinumab dosage regimens on endoscopic outcomes based on population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (popPK-PD) modelling and simulation analysis.

METHODS

Real-world data were obtained from 83 patients with moderate-to-severe CD (95% biological-refractory) enrolled in a prospective cohort study receiving intravenous ustekinumab (~6 mg/kg) followed by every eight-week (q8w) subcutaneous maintenance therapy (90 mg). Three sequential models were developed: a two-compartment popPK model linking ustekinumab dose to ustekinumab exposure, an indirect response popPK-PD model describing the effect of ustekinumab exposure on fecal calprotectin (fCal), and a logistic regression outcome model linking fCal to endoscopic outcomes.

RESULTS

Ustekinumab clearance increased with decreasing serum albumin and increasing bodyweight. fCal decreased with increasing ustekinumab exposure. The probability of endoscopic response at w24 increased from 10.0% to 17.9% with fCal at w8 decreasing from 1800 μg/g to 694 μg/g (EC₅₀ ). The probability of endoscopic remission at w24 increased from 2.1% to 10.0% with fCal at w8 decreasing from 1800 μg/g to 214 μg/g (EC₅₀ ). Simulation-based comparison of q8w and q4w maintenance dosing regimens predicted 16.7% and 22.2% endoscopic response rates, respectively. Endoscopic remission rates were estimated to be 4.2% on q8w dosing and 6.7% on q4w dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

The developed models can guide clinical trial design and support model-informed dose optimization (stratified or individualized dosing) to improve endoscopic outcomes.

Impact of infliximab therapeutic drug level monitoring on outcomes of patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A real-world experience from a Middle Eastern cohort

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) through measurement of infliximab (IFX) trough levels and antibodies to infliximab (ATI) is performed to guide IFX intensification strategies and improve its efficacy. We conducted this study to explore the relationship between clinical and endoscopic/radiological remission and IFX and ATI levels in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with IFX and to evaluate the appropriateness of treatment decision post TDM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of a cohort of adult patients with IBD. Serum IFX trough concentrations and ATI were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 129 patients [104] with ulcerative colitis (UC) and 25 with Crohn's disease (CD)] were included in this study, of whom 61.2% were men. The mean disease duration was 6.7 years, and 72% of patients with UC had extensive colitis. The mean serum IFX trough level was 4.1 µg/mL; the IFX trough levels were subtherapeutic in 75 patients (58%), therapeutic in 37 patients (29%), and supratherapeutic in 17 patients (13%). Positivity to ATI was found in 16 patients (12.4%). Only 43 patients (33.3%) underwent an appropriate change in therapy after TDM, patients with penetrating CD disease had low IFX levels and higher C-reactive protein levels at 12 months before TDM.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBD with therapeutic IFX levels tend to have increased endoscopic/radiological remission rates. However, an appropriate change in management based on TDM was absent in the majority of patients, potentially reflecting the need to have a dashboard to support and guide clinicians in decision-making.

Advances in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Biologic Therapies for Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease

In the current era of treat-to-target strategies, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) has emerged as a potential tool in optimizing the efficacy of biologics for children diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The incorporation of TDM into treatment algorithms, however, has proven to be complex. "Proactive" TDM is emerging as a therapeutic strategy due to a recently published pediatric RCT showing a clear benefit of "proactive" TDM in anti-TNF therapy. However, target therapeutic values for different biologics for different disease states [ulcerative colitis (UC) vs. Crohn's disease (CD)] and different periods of disease activity (induction vs. remission) require further definition. This is especially true in pediatrics where the therapeutic armamentarium is limited, and fixed weight-based dosing may predispose to increased clearance leading to decreased drug exposure and subsequent loss of response (pharmacokinetic and/or immunogenic). Model-based dosing for biologics offers an exciting insight into dose individualization thereby minimizing the chances of losing response. Similarly, point-of-care testing promises real-time assessment of drug levels and individualized decision-making. In the current clinical realm, TDM is being used to prolong drug durability and efficacy and prevent loss of response. Ongoing innovations may transform it into a personalized tool to achieve optimal therapeutic endpoints.

The effects of COVID-19 on IBD prescribing and service provision in a UK tertiary centre

BACKGROUND

To quantify the effects of COVID-19 on our inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) unit, including service provision, prescribing practices and use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM).

METHODS

We performed a single centre retrospective observational cohort study. Data was extracted from our IBD database, electronic patient records and radiology/endoscopy reporting systems between 16/3/20-17/4/20 and the corresponding period in 2019.

RESULTS

A similar number of patients commenced biologic therapy before COVID-19 (n = 37) and during the pandemic (n = 36). Patients in the pre-COVID-19 cohort were older (median 36 vs 29 years, P = 0.009) with a longer median disease duration (9.3 vs 5.2 years, P = 0.02). During COVID-19 there was a nonsignificant increase in prescribing of vedolizumab (8/37, 22% vs 14/36, 39%, P = 0.13) and a higher proportion of patients were anti-TNF-naïve (3/17, 18% vs 18/24, 74%, P = 0.0004). There was a reduction in use of concomitant immunomodulators (22/29, 76% vs 4/34, 12%, P < 0.0001) and increased biologic use in thiopurine-naïve patients (3/37, 8% vs 15/36, 42%, P = 0.001). Use of TDM fell by 75% (240 vs 59 tests). Outpatient appointments fell by 68% and were conducted via telemedicine. MRI scanning, endoscopy, luminal surgery and inpatient numbers fell by 87%, 85%, 100% and 82% respectively. IBD Clinical Nurse Specialist and Pharmacist helpline contacts increased by 76% and 228% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed prescribing differences during COVID-19, bypassing the initiation of immunomodulators and/or anti-TNF therapy in favour of vedolizumab with a reduction in immunomodulator prescribing. We also observed a rapid reorganisation of service provision, including a shift towards telemedicine and online solutions.

Monitoring vedolizumab and ustekinumab drug levels in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: hype or hope?

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) plays a vital role in implementing precision medicine in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and may contribute to increased effectiveness, lower rates of drug toxicity and cost savings. While expert panels advocate the use of reactive TDM for anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents, TDM is not yet widely recommended for non-anti TNF biologicals. We provide an overview of the observational evidence of the value of TDM in case of vedolizumab and ustekinumab. We also shed light on obstacles that need to be addressed before establishing wide acceptance of TDM in the field of IBD. In this respect, new analytical techniques and modelling approaches are being developed to further optimize efficacy of TDM and to facilitate general acceptance of this tool in personalizing IBD management.

Exposure-Response Relationship of Certolizumab Pegol and Achievement of Low Disease Activity and Remission in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) drugs are often prescribed for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Although this treatment has been shown to be effective in many patients, up to 40% of patients do not achieve disease control. Drug concentration in plasma may be a factor affecting the observed variability in therapeutic response. In this study, we aimed to identify the plasma concentrations of the anti-TNF certolizumab pegol (CZP), associated with improvement in disease activity in patients with RA. Data were pooled from three randomized, controlled clinical trials with a combined total of 1,935 patients analyzed. Clinical outcomes of low disease activity (LDA) and remission were defined as Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28(CRP)) ≤ 2.7 and < 2.3, respectively. Quartile analysis results indicated that there may be an exposure-response relationship between CZP concentration and LDA/remission outcomes at weeks 12 and 24; the association was strongest for LDA (P < 0.05). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed that CZP concentrations ≥ 28.0 μg/ml at week 12, and ≥ 17.6 μg/ml at week 24, were associated with a greater likelihood of achieving LDA/remission outcomes. Although confirmatory studies are warranted to define the optimal CZP therapeutic range at weeks 12 and 24, these data indicate that CZP concentrations may be associated with improvement of disease activity.

How, When, and for Whom Should We Perform Therapeutic Drug Monitoring?

The implementation of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in the inflammatory bowel disease practice has evolved over the years. In the early days, the focus was merely on measuring and reporting drug concentrations. Later, these concentrations were considered in light of target concentrations that are related to clinical response. This not only allowed passively predicting a patient's future response, but it also triggered physicians and pharmacists to actively use the information to optimize the drug dosage to induce and maintain a clinical response in the future. Although reactive TDM, testing at time of loss of response, is widely accepted in practice, especially for anti-tumor necrosis factor antibodies, there are less data for the other monoclonal antibodies belonging to other classes. Besides reactive testing, there is a movement toward proactively adjusting biologic dosing to prevent loss of response, in keeping with the tight control philosophy of inflammatory bowel disease care. This review highlights the various assays available to measure drug concentrations and antidrug antibodies, as well as algorithmic approaches to TDM, the unmet needs and required studies to enable pharmacokinetics principles to be applied in the future.

Precision Dosing Priority Criteria: Drug, Disease, and Patient Population Variables

The administered dose of a drug modulates whether patients will experience optimal effectiveness, toxicity including death, or no effect at all. Dosing is particularly important for diseases and/or drugs where the drug can decrease severe morbidity or prolong life. Likewise, dosing is important where the drug can cause death or severe morbidity. Since we believe there are many examples where more precise dosing could benefit patients, it is worthwhile to consider how to prioritize drug-disease targets. One key consideration is the quality of information available from which more precise dosing recommendations can be constructed. When a new more precise dosing scheme is created and differs significantly from the approved label, it is important to consider the level of proof necessary to either change the label and/or change clinical practice. The cost and effort needed to provide this proof should also be considered in prioritizing drug-disease precision dosing targets. Although precision dosing is being promoted and has great promise, it is underutilized in many drugs and disease states. Therefore, we believe it is important to consider how more precise dosing is going to be delivered to high priority patients in a timely manner. If better dosing schemes do not change clinical practice resulting in better patient outcomes, then what is the use? This review paper discusses variables to consider when prioritizing precision dosing candidates while highlighting key examples of precision dosing that have been successfully used to improve patient care.

On-Site Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

Recent technological advances have stimulated efforts to bring personalized medicine into practice. Yet, traditional application fields like therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) have remained rather under-appreciated. Owing to clear dose-response relationships, TDM could improve patient outcomes and reduce healthcare costs. While chromatography-based routine practices are restricted due to high costs and turnaround times, biosensors overcome these limitations by offering on-site analysis. Nevertheless, sensor-based approaches have yet to break through for clinical TDM applications, due to the gap between scientific and clinical communities. We provide a critical overview of current TDM practices, followed by a TDM guideline to establish a common ground across disciplines. Finally, we discuss how the translation of sensor systems for TDM can be facilitated, by highlighting the challenges and opportunities.

An Indian national survey of therapeutic drug monitoring with anti-tumor necrosis (TNF) medications in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Evidence supports therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in improving efficacy and cost-effectiveness of anti-TNF therapy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Data on perceptions and barriers to TDM use are limited and no data are available from India. Our objective was to assess clinicians' attitudes and barriers to TDM use in IBD.

METHODS

A 16-question survey was distributed to members of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology. Information on clinician characteristics, demographics, use and barriers towards TDM with anti-TNFs was collected. Logistic regression was used to predict factors influencing TDM use.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-two respondents participated (92.5% male); 83% were consultant gastroenterologists. Of 104 respondents meeting inclusion criteria (treating > 5 IBD patients and at least 1 with an anti-TNF per month), complete responses were available for 101 participants. TDM was utilized by 20% (n = 20) of respondents. Of them, 89.5% (n = 17) used TDM for secondary loss of response; 73.7% (n = 14) for primary non-response and 5.3% (n = 1) proactively. Barriers to TDM use were cost (71.2%), availability (67.8%), time lag in results (58.7%) and the perception that TDM is time-consuming (45.7%). Clinicians treating > 30 IBD patients were more likely to check TDM (OR = 4.9, p = 0.02). Of 81 respondents not using TDM, 97.5% (n = 79) would do so if all the barriers were removed.

CONCLUSION

Significant barriers to TDM use were availability, cost and time lag for results. If these barriers were removed, almost all the clinicians would use TDM at least reactively and 25% would use proactively. There is an urgent need to address these barriers and optimize anti-TNF therapy for optimal outcomes.

Monitoring a Combination of Calprotectin and Infliximab Identifies Patients With Mucosal Healing of Crohn's Disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In the TAILORIX trial, no benefit could be shown by infliximab dose escalation based on pharmacokinetic (infliximab serum concentrations) and pharmacodynamic (biomarkers and symptoms) monitoring compared with dose escalation based on symptoms alone in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). We investigated whether integration of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic monitoring can be used to evaluate responses to infliximab induction and maintenance therapy, based on findings from endoscopy.

METHODS

We performed a post hoc analysis of patients with CD included in a trial to test the effects of infliximab dose escalation, based on biomarkers and serum concentrations of infliximab, on symptoms (the Study Investigating Tailored Treatment With Infliximab for Active Crohn's Disease trial; n = 122). We analyzed data from this study to determine whether concentrations of biomarkers and serum concentrations of infliximab were associated with endoscopic outcomes (n = 116). The primary end points were endoscopic response (CD endoscopic index of severity decrease ≥50% from baseline), endoscopic remission (CD endoscopic index of severity, <3), and absence of ulcers at weeks 12 and 54 of infliximab treatment.

RESULTS

Infliximab trough concentrations greater than 23.1 mg/L at week 2 and greater than 10.0 mg/L at week 6 were associated with endoscopic remission at week 12 (positive predictive values, 72% and 76%; negative predictive values, 65% and 59%, respectively). During maintenance therapy, we found evidence for an exposure-response relationship only after dose escalation; trough concentrations greater than 10.6 mg/L were associated with the absence of ulcers at week 54 (positive predictive value, 49%; negative predictive value, 92%). Low fecal concentrations of calprotectin during therapy were associated with endoscopic response and remission (P < .05). Dose escalations increased trough concentrations of infliximab; persistent increase in fecal concentration of calprotectin, despite dose escalation, was associated with a lack of endoscopic response and remission. A significantly higher proportion of patients with antibodies to infliximab, identified by a drug-tolerant assay, dropped out of the study compared with patients without antibodies (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In a post hoc analysis of data from a trial to test the effects of infliximab dose escalation on symptoms, we found that during maintenance therapy, the combination of fecal concentration of calprotectin and trough concentration of infliximab can guide dose adjustment and increase the chances for endoscopic response and remission. ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu EudraCT no: 2011-003038-14.

Factors Influencing Drug Disposition of Monoclonal Antibodies in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Implications for Personalized Medicine

Monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies have revolutionized the treatment of several chronic inflammatory diseases, including the inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis. While efficacious, responses to these therapies vary considerably from patient to patient, due in part to inter- and intra-individual variability in pharmacokinetics (PK) and drug exposure. The concept of personalized medicine to monitor drug exposure and to adjust dosing in individual patients is consequently gaining acceptance as a powerful tool to optimize mAb therapy for improved outcomes in IBD. This review provides a brief overview of the different mAbs currently approved or in development for the treatment of IBD, including their presumed mechanisms of action and PK properties. Specifically described are (1) the factors known to affect mAb PK and drug exposure in patients with IBD, (2) the value of population PK/pharmacodynamic (PD) modeling to identify and understand the influence of these factors on drug exposure and effect, and (3) the clinical evidence for the potential of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to improve IBD outcomes in response to mAb-based therapy. Incorporation of PK/PD parameters into clinical decision support tools has the potential to guide therapeutic decision making and aid implementation of personalized medicine strategies in patients with IBD.

UK National Survey of Gastroenterologists' attitudes and barriers toward therapeutic drug monitoring of anti-TNF therapy in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Evidence supports use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in improving efficacy and cost-effectiveness of anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Our objective was to assess attitudes and barriers towards TDM use with anti-TNF's in the UK.

METHODS

A 17-question survey was distributed to members of the British Society of Gastroenterology by email.

RESULTS

Of 243 respondents (51.6% male), 237 respondents met inclusion criteria. Of these, 46% were consultants (gastroenterologist, GI), 39.2% IBD nurse specialists (clinical nurse specialists, CNS), 14.8% registrars. TDM is used by 96.9% for secondary loss of response; 72.5% for primary non-response and 54.1% used TDM proactively. Barriers were time lag in receiving results (49.8%), lack of awareness of guidelines (46.4%) and cost (29.9%). Clinicians working at a teaching hospital (OR 2.6, 95% CI 0.71 to 9.8), IBD CNS and GI registrars (OR 2.6, 95% CI 0.7 to 10 and OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.3 to 7.2, respectively) were more likely to use TDM. Clinicians practising for >20 years (OR 4.1, 95% CI 0.4 to 41.8) and a large volume IBD practice (>50% IBD patients per month) were more likely to use TDM (OR 45.7, 95% CI 7.5 to 275). Proactive TDM, was more likely to be used in tertiary care (OR 2.25, 95% CI 0.84 to 6.1), IBD CNS (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.7 to 2.1) and clinicians managing >50% IBD patients per month (OR 10.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 90.3). Clinicians with 5-9 years of experience in practice were more likely to use proactive TDM (OR 2.6 and CI 1.04 to 6.4).

CONCLUSION

Validation of point of care and lower cost assays, reduced time lag from test to result, lower cost of testing and dissemination of current recommendations may further optimise treatment strategies.

Achieving Mucosal Healing in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Which Drug Concentrations Need to Be Targeted?

Biologicals introduced a major shift in the treatment of patients suffering from inflammatory bowel diseases. Despite providing a tight disease control for many patients, a considerable proportion of patients will fail to respond favorably to treatment or will lose response over time. Therapeutic drug monitoring emerged as a valuable tool to guide clinical decision making as serum drug concentrations have been linked to outcomes. Focusing on mucosal healing as the ultimate treatment goal, different drug concentration thresholds to achieve this outcome have been identified in the literature and are summarized in this review. For therapeutic drug monitoring to be successful in guiding clinical decision making, the used assay, the sampling time point, and the outcome that is aimed for should be taken into account when interpreting drug concentration thresholds. Awareness of these essential aspects among clinicians will improve the implementation of therapeutic drug monitoring and aid in making an evidence‐based decision.

Appropriate Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Biologic Agents for Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is widely available for biologic therapies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We reviewed current data and provided expert opinion regarding the clinical utility of TDM for biologic therapies in IBD.

METHODS

We used a modified Delphi method to establish consensus. A comprehensive literature review was performed regarding the use of TDM of biologic therapy in IBD and presented to international IBD specialists. Subsequently, 28 statements on the application of TDM in clinical practice were rated on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 = strongly disagree and 10 = strongly agree) by each of the panellists. Statements were accepted if 80% or more of the participants agreed with a score ≥7. The remaining statements were discussed and revised based on the available evidence followed by a second round of voting.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 24 (86%) statements. For anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies, proactive TDM was found to be appropriate after induction and at least once during maintenance therapy, but this was not the case for the other biologics. Reactive TDM was appropriate for all agents both for primary non-response and secondary loss of response. The panellists also agreed on several statements regarding TDM and appropriate drug and anti-drug antibody (ADA) concentration thresholds for biologics in specific clinical scenarios.

CONCLUSION

Consensus was achieved towards the utility of TDM of biologics in IBD, particularly anti-TNF therapies. More data are needed especially on non-anti-TNF biologics to further define optimal drug concentration and ADA thresholds as these can vary depending on the therapeutic outcomes assessed.

Ustekinumab Exposure-outcome Analysis in Crohn's Disease Only in Part Explains Limited Endoscopic Remission Rates

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Ustekinumab, an anti-IL12/23p40 monoclonal antibody, has been approved for Crohn's disease [CD]. Real-life data in CD patients receiving ustekinumab intravenously [IV] during induction, followed by subcutaneous [SC] maintenance, are lacking. We assessed efficacy of ustekinumab and studied exposure-response correlations.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study in 86 CD patients predominantly refractory or intolerant to anti-tumour necrosis factor agents and/or vedolizumab. All received ustekinumab 6 mg/kg IV induction, with 90 mg SC every 8 weeks thereafter. Endoscopic response (50% decrease in Simple Endoscopic Score for CD [SES-CD] at Week 24), endoscopic remission [SES-CD ≤2], and clinical remission [daily stool frequency ≤2.8 and abdominal pain score ≤1] were assessed at weeks 4,8,16, and 24. Further serial analyses included patient-reported outcomes [PRO2], faecal calprotectin [fCal], and ustekinumab serum levels.

RESULTS

SES-CD decreased from 11.5 [8.0-18.0] at baseline to 9.0 [6.0-16.0] at week [w]24 [p = 0.0009], but proportions of patients achieving endoscopic response [20.5%] or endoscopic remission [7.1%] were low. Clinical remission rates were 39.5% at w24. After IV induction, fCal dropped from baseline [1242.9 μg/g] to w4 [529.0 μg/g] and w8 [372.2 μg/g], but increased again by w16 [537.4 μg/g] and w24 [749.0 μg/g]. A clear exposure-response relationship was observed, both during induction and during maintenance therapy, with different thresholds depending on the targeted outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of refractory CD patients, ustekinumab showed good clinical remission rates but limited endoscopic remission after 24 weeks. Our data suggest that higher doses may be required to achieve better endoscopic outcomes.

Immunogenicity is not the driving force of treatment failure in vedolizumab-treated inflammatory bowel disease patients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The pivotal GEMINI trials reported low immunogenicity of vedolizumab. However, anti-vedolizumab antibodies (AVA) are frequently underestimated because most assays are not drug-tolerant and unable to detect antidrug antibodies while there is drug in the circulation. This study aimed to explore which antidrug antibody assay is best suited to detect AVA and investigated immunogenicity of vedolizumab in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients discontinuing vedolizumab therapy.

METHODS

A drug-tolerant affinity capture elution (ACE) assay was developed for the measurement of AVA in the presence of vedolizumab and compared with the previously established drug-resistant and drug-sensitive assays. Vedolizumab and AVA were measured at week 6, at the last infusion, and 12-20 weeks after treatment discontinuation in a cohort of 40 vedolizumab-treated IBD patients who stopped treatment due to primary non-response, loss of response, or adverse events.

RESULTS

The drug-tolerant ACE assay could detect AVA in samples that the drug-resistant and drug-sensitive assays were unable to. Using the drug-tolerant ACE assay, 3 (8%) out of 40 vedolizumab-treated IBD patients who discontinued therapy were AVA positive at week 6, whereas no AVA were detected at the last infusion nor after treatment discontinuation. Primary non-responders had numerically lower median vedolizumab concentrations at week 6 compared with patients with loss of response (20.3 vs 30.7 μg/mL, respectively, P = 0.0570).

CONCLUSIONS

Immunogenicity of vedolizumab is not the driving force of treatment failure, and AVA do not increase upon treatment discontinuation in vedolizumab-treated IBD patients. Underexposure during induction might partially be responsible for primary non-response.

Therapeutic drug monitoring with biologic agents in immune mediated inflammatory diseases

: Most exposure-response relationship studies show a positive correlation between biologic drug concentrations and favorable therapeutic outcomes in IMID with higher drug concentrations typically associated with more objective outcomes. Clinically, reactive TDM rationalizes the management of PNR and SLR to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy and is emerging as the new standard of care in IBD as it is also more cost-effective than empiric dose escalation. Preliminary data suggest that proactive TDM with the goal to achieve a threshold drug concentration is associated with better therapeutic outcomes when compared to empiric drug optimization and/or reactive TDM of infliximab and adalimumab in IBD. However, more data from well-designed prospective studies are needed to prove the benefit of TDM-based algorithms in real life clinical practice in IMID.

Predictors of anti-TNF treatment failure in anti-TNF-naive patients with active luminal Crohn's disease: a prospective, multicentre, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Anti-TNF drugs are effective treatments for the management of Crohn's disease but treatment failure is common. We aimed to identify clinical and pharmacokinetic factors that predict primary non-response at week 14 after starting treatment, non-remission at week 54, and adverse events leading to drug withdrawal.

METHODS

The personalised anti-TNF therapy in Crohn's disease study (PANTS) is a prospective observational UK-wide study. We enrolled anti-TNF-naive patients (aged ≥6 years) with active luminal Crohn's disease at the time of first exposure to infliximab or adalimumab between March 7, 2013, and July 15, 2016. Patients were evaluated for 12 months or until drug withdrawal. Demographic data, smoking status, age at diagnosis, disease duration, location, and behaviour, previous medical and drug history, and previous Crohn's disease-related surgeries were recorded at baseline. At every visit, disease activity score, weight, therapy, and adverse events were recorded; drug and total anti-drug antibody concentrations were also measured. Treatment failure endpoints were primary non-response at week 14, non-remission at week 54, and adverse events leading to drug withdrawal. We used regression analyses to identify which factors were associated with treatment failure.

FINDINGS

We enrolled 955 patients treated with infliximab (753 with originator; 202 with biosimilar) and 655 treated with adalimumab. Primary non-response occurred in 295 (23·8%, 95% CI 21·4-26·2) of 1241 patients who were assessable at week 14. Non-remission at week 54 occurred in 764 (63·1%, 60·3-65·8) of 1211 patients who were assessable, and adverse events curtailed treatment in 126 (7·8%, 6·6-9·2) of 1610 patients. In multivariable analysis, the only factor independently associated with primary non-response was low drug concentration at week 14 (infliximab: odds ratio 0·35 [95% CI 0·20-0·62], p=0·00038; adalimumab: 0·13 [0·06-0·28], p<0·0001); the optimal week 14 drug concentrations associated with remission at both week 14 and week 54 were 7 mg/L for infliximab and 12 mg/L for adalimumab. Continuing standard dosing regimens after primary non-response was rarely helpful; only 14 (12·4% [95% CI 6·9-19·9]) of 113 patients entered remission by week 54. Similarly, week 14 drug concentration was also independently associated with non-remission at week 54 (0·29 [0·16-0·52] for infliximab; 0·03 [0·01-0·12] for adalimumab; p<0·0001 for both). The proportion of patients who developed anti-drug antibodies (immunogenicity) was 62·8% (95% CI 59·0-66·3) for infliximab and 28·5% (24·0-32·7) for adalimumab. For both drugs, suboptimal week 14 drug concentrations predicted immunogenicity, and the development of anti-drug antibodies predicted subsequent low drug concentrations. Combination immunomodulator (thiopurine or methotrexate) therapy mitigated the risk of developing anti-drug antibodies (hazard ratio 0·39 [95% CI 0·32-0·46] for infliximab; 0·44 [0·31-0·64] for adalimumab; p<0·0001 for both). For infliximab, multivariable analysis of immunododulator use, and week 14 drug and anti-drug antibody concentrations showed an independent effect of immunomodulator use on week 54 non-remission (odds ratio 0·56 [95% CI 0·38-0·83], p=0·004).

INTERPRETATION

Anti-TNF treatment failure is common and is predicted by low drug concentrations, mediated in part by immunogenicity. Clinical trials are required to investigate whether personalised induction regimens and treatment-to-target dose intensification improve outcomes.

FUNDING

Guts UK, Crohn's and Colitis UK, Cure Crohn's Colitis, AbbVie, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Napp Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, and Celltrion.

Early vedolizumab trough levels at induction in inflammatory bowel disease patients with treatment failure during maintenance

BACKGROUND

Vedolizumab (VDZ) is effective as an induction and maintenance treatment for Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, but, as observed with antitumour necrosis factor-α (anti-TNFα) agents, some patients are nonetheless experiencing loss of response.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of the pharmacokinetics of VDZ during induction on long-term treatment response.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study focused on a single cohort of 103 inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with VDZ. VDZ trough levels (TLs) were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (n=536 samples), and thereafter correlated to clinical, biological, endoscopic and serological data. For patients exposed previously to infliximab, antibodies to infliximab were measured at baseline. On the basis of the outcome at the end of follow-up, patients were then categorized into long-term response, optimized and treatment failure groups.

RESULTS

During VDZ induction, at week 6, inflammatory bowel disease patients with long-term response had higher TLs compared with patients in the treatment failure group (33 vs. 24 µg/ml, P=0.02). A cut-off TL of 28 µg/ml predicted a sustained response in the follow-up with an area under curve of 0.723 (95% confidence interval=0.567-0.878, P=0.02). Patients with mucosal healing in maintenance had higher TLs at week 6 (41.65 µg/ml) compared with patients with mild (26 µg/ml) or severe endoscopic activity (20.8 µg/ml), P=0.009. Positive perinuclear antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody serology was associated with lower TLs. Patients previously exposed to anti-TNFα had lower TLs than naive patients (22.5 vs. 36 µg/ml, P=0.03) without any impact of detectable antibodies to infliximab. Finally, the presence of an immunomodulator at induction did not impact on VDZ TLs at induction.

CONCLUSION

We confirmed that a drug exposure-efficacy association was found early on at induction. This study emphasizes that previous exposure to anti-TNFα and positive perinuclear antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody serology are important factors influencing VDZ TLs at induction.

Infliximab in inflammatory bowel disease

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy has revolutionized the medical treatment of the inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), Crohn’s disease (CD), and ulcerative colitis. Twenty years ago, infliximab became the first anti-TNF agent approved for IBD. Data from randomized controlled trials, large observational cohort studies, postmarketing registries, and meta-analyses show that infliximab is a very effective treatment for moderate to severe IBD with a good safety profile. Infliximab has been also used to treat pouchitis following an ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA) after restorative proctocolectomy and to prevent postoperative recurrence following an ileocolonic resection for CD with good results. Nevertheless, up to 30% of patients show no clinical benefit following induction and up to 50% lose response over time. Both these unwanted outcomes can be largely explained by inadequate drug concentrations and frequently by the development of antibodies to infliximab. Loss of response can be managed efficiently and often prevented by applying therapeutic drug monitoring. Recently, the first biosimilars of infliximab have been approved and are utilized in clinical practice with comparable efficacy and safety with the originator. This review will mainly focus on the efficacy of infliximab in IBD.

Optimising infliximab induction dosing for patients with ulcerative colitis

AIMS

The therapeutic failure of infliximab therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis remains a challenge even 2 decades after its approval. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) has shown value during maintenance therapy, but induction therapy has still not been explored. Patients may be primary nonresponders or underexposed with the standard dosing regimen. We aimed to: (i) develop a population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model; (ii) identify the best exposure metric that predicts mucosal healing; and (iii) build an exposure-response (ER) model to demonstrate model-based dose finding during induction therapy with infliximab.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected from a clinical database. A total of 583 samples, from 204 patients, was used to develop a population pharmacokinetic model to generate exposure metrics for subsequent ER modelling. A subset of 159 patients was used to develop a logistic regression ER model, describing the relationship between infliximab exposure and ordered transitions between Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES) 3, 2 and ≤1 (baseline to post-induction).

RESULTS

A 1-compartment population pharmacokinetic model with interindividual and interoccasion variability was found to fit the data best. Covariates influencing exposure were C-reactive protein, albumin, baseline MES, fat-free mass, concomitant corticosteroid use and pancolitis. The cumulative area under the infliximab concentration-time curve until endoscopy (CAUC_endoscopy ) was found to be the best exposure metric for predicting mucosal healing (baseline MES >1 and post-induction MES ≤1). The model predicted that 70% of patients will attain mucosal healing with infliximab administered at days 0, 14 and 42 and a target CAUC_endoscopy of 3752 mg/L*day at day 84.

CONCLUSIONS

TDM-based dose individualisation targeting CAUC_endoscopy has the potential to improve the effectiveness of infliximab during induction therapy.

Advances in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring for Small-Molecule and Biologic Therapies in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is increasingly utilized as a strategy to optimize inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) therapeutics. As management paradigms have evolved towards treat-to-target strategies, there has been growing interest in expanding the role of TDM to guide drug optimization for achieving objective endpoints. This review summarizes the evidence for using TDM with biologic and oral small-molecule therapies, evaluates the role of reactive versus proactive TDM in treatment algorithms, and identifies potential future applications for TDM.

RECENT FINDINGS

Achieving therapeutic drug concentrations has been associated with important clinical, endoscopic, and histologic outcomes in IBD. However, the optimal drug concentration varies by therapeutic agent, disease phenotype, inflammatory burden, phase of treatment, and target outcome. Traditionally, TDM has been used reactively to define pharmacokinetic versus mechanistic failures after loss of response to a tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF) antagonist and while observational data suggests a benefit to proactive TDM, this has not been definitively confirmed in prospective randomized controlled trials. The role of TDM in optimizing vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib remains unclear, given differences in pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity compared to TNF antagonists. Measuring drug action at the site of inflamed tissue may provide additional insights into treatment optimization. The use of TDM offers the possibility of a more personalized treatment approach for patients with IBD. High-quality studies are needed to delineate the role of proactive TDM for maintaining remission, for optimizing induction regimens, and for novel agents.

Contemporary Medical Management of Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Acute severe ulcerative colitis is a medical emergency that requires prompt recognition, evaluation, and intervention. Patients require hospital admission with laboratory, radiographic, and endoscopic evaluation with initiation of corticosteroid treatment. Despite early intervention, many patients require salvage medical therapy, with some progressing to colectomy. Here we review important concepts and recent advances in the evaluation and medical management of adult and pediatric patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis.

Analytical and clinical performance evaluation of two POC tests for therapeutic drug monitoring of infliximab

Background

Infliximab (IFX) is an effective therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Serum IFX trough concentrations correlate well with clinical, biological and endoscopic outcomes. Therefore, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of infliximab is useful for dose optimization and prevention of secondary treatment failure. In the present study, analytical and clinical performance of two point-of-care (POC) tests, RIDA®QUICK IFX Monitoring assay (R-biopharm) and Quantum Blue® Infliximab assay (Bühlmann), have been evaluated and compared to our established enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (apDia IFX ELISA).

Methods

Analytical performance was assessed according to the CLSI EP5-A2 protocol using the manufacturer’s kit controls and different serial dilution series. Method comparison with our established ELISA was done using a wide range of consecutive patient samples (n=180). Clinical concordance was evaluated by categorization based on well-known therapeutic cut-off points (3–7 μg/mL).

Results

The analytical performance of both POC tests was inferior to the established ELISA, but acceptable based on the manufacturer’s quality claims. Eight-point serial dilution confirmed the analytical performance data in the low-level measuring range. Eleven-point serial dilution demonstrated linearity for both POC tests over the studied concentration range. Method comparison with the ELISA showed significant negative proportional bias for the RIDA®QUICK IFX Monitoring assay. However, good correlation and clinical concordance were shown. Quantum Blue® Infliximab assay showed a significant positive proportional and a negative systematic bias in comparison with the ELISA, resulting in overestimation of IFX levels with impact on clinical concordance data.

Conclusions

Both POC tests have their own specific benefits and drawbacks but are suitable for therapeutic drug monitoring of IFX. However, long-term monitoring of IFX trough levels requires measurement of IFX concentrations with the same assay.

Clinical Outcomes With Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effectiveness of therapeutic drug monitoring [TDM] to improve clinical outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha [anti-TNF] drugs.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Epub Ahead of Print, EMBASE and Cochrane up to October 2017 for randomized trials [RCTs] and cohort studies comparing proactive or reactive TDM to each other or empiric care. Outcomes included clinical remission [primary], clinical relapse, endoscopic remission, anti-TNF response durability, cost and adverse events [secondary]. Pooled odds ratios and mean differences were calculated.

RESULTS

The search identified nine studies [three RCTs, six observational], focused on infliximab maintenance therapy in adults. Neither proactive nor reactive TDM was associated with superior clinical remission rates compared to empiric dose optimization. However, evidence of a cost benefit, particularly for reactive TDM vs empiric care, was identified. In several studies, TDM, particularly proactive TDM, was associated with favourable outcomes related to durability of anti-TNF response, such as lower drug discontinuation rates compared to empiric care and reactive TDM, and lower relapse rates compared to empiric care. No consistent benefit was found for endoscopic or surgical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The existing limited evidence does not support an association between any TDM strategy and superior clinical remission rates but does support a cost savings benefit [particularly for reactive TDM] and suggests a potential benefit for anti-TNF durability [particularly proactive TDM]. Additional, longer-term studies are needed, particularly to further investigate proactive TDM, and to generate data on other anti-TNF agents, the induction period and paediatric populations.

Individualized Dosing of Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibodies-a Changing Treatment Paradigm?

The introduction of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was an important medical milestone. MAbs have been demonstrated as safe and efficacious treatments of IBD. However, a large percentage of patients either fail to respond initially or lose response to therapy after a period of treatment. Although there are factors associated with poor treatment outcomes in IBD, one cause for treatment failure may be low mAb exposure. Consequently, gastroenterologists have begun using therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to guide dose adjustment. However, while beneficial, TDM does not provide sufficient information to effectively adjust doses. The pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of mAbs are complex, with numerous factors impacting on mAb PK and PD. The concept of dashboard-guided dosing based on Bayesian PK models allows physicians to combine TDM with factors influencing mAb PK to individualize therapy more effectively. One issue with TDM has been the slow turnaround of assay results, either necessitating an additional clinic visit for a sample or reacting to TDM results at a subsequent, rather than the current, dose. New point-of-care (POC) assays for mAbs are being developed that would potentially allow physicians to determine drug concentration quickly. However, work remains to understand how to determine what target exposure is needed for an individual patient, and whether the combination of POC assays and dashboards presents a safe approach with substantial outcome benefit over the current standard of care.

SERUM INFLIXIMAB MEASUREMENT IN INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE PATIENTS IN REMISSION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TWO DIFFERENT METHODS IN A MULTICENTRIC BRAZILIAN COHORT

BACKGROUND

Infliximab (IFX) therapeutic drug monitoring is an important tool to guide therapeutic decision in inflammatory bowel disease patients. Currently, there are two methods to measure trough levels of IFX, ELISA assays or rapid tests. Despite that the ELISA assay is the most used method in therapeutic drug monitoring, the results take long to be available for clinical use, and it needs to be performed by trained personnel. In contrary, the results of a rapid test take 20 to 30 minutes to be available and can be performed by non-trained lab personnel.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to compare a rapid test (QB-IFX) for quantitative determination of IFX level to one ELISA assay in a cohort of inflammatory bowel disease patients.

METHODS

Cross-sectional multicentric study with 49 inflammatory bowel disease patients on maintenance therapy with IFX. Blood samples for IFX serum levels were collected immediately before infusion. IFX serum levels were classified as undetectable, low (<3.0 μg/mL), adequate (3.1-7.0 μg/mL) or high (>7.1 μg/mL). A sensitivity and specificity of each test and a comparison between tests was based on ROC curves.

RESULTS

Thirty-four Crohn's disease patients and 15 ulcerative colitis patients in clinical remission were evaluated. The majority of patients had low or adequate serum levels of IFX. In relation to the serum levels proportions with the two methods, there was no significant difference (P=0.84). The ROC analysis identified a concentration threshold >2.9 μg/mL with the QB-IFX test (area under the ROC, 0.82; P<0.0001, sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 61.9%), and >3.83 μg/mL using the ELISA assay (area under the ROC, 0.96; P<0.0001, sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 92.9%).

CONCLUSION

QB-IFX and ELISA assays to measure IFX levels were comparable. Both methods had accurate sensitivity and specificity to detect undetectable, low and adequate levels, but had showed low specificity for supra therapeutic levels of IFX.

Clinical relevance of detecting anti-infliximab antibodies with a drug-tolerant assay: post hoc analysis of the TAXIT trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical relevance of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) measured using a drug-tolerant assay in a post hoc analysis of the Trough Concentration (TC) Adapted Infliximab Treatment (TAXIT) randomised controlled trial.

DESIGN

ADA in serum samples (n=221) of 76 patients enrolled in TAXIT, who presented with an infliximab TC <3 µg/mL at screening, were reanalysed after optimisation and at the end of the study using a drug-tolerant ADA assay. Patients underwent dose escalation to achieve therapeutic TCs between 3 µg/mL and 7 µg/mL prior to randomisation. Patients were grouped into quartiles (Q1-4) according to ADA concentration at screening.

RESULTS

Using a drug-tolerant assay, the immunogenicity detection rate increased from 21% (drug-sensitive assay) to 63% at screening, from 0% to 51% after optimisation and from 3% to 42% at the end of TAXIT. Patients in ADA Q4 required a higher cumulative infliximab dose (2390 (880-2998) mg) to achieve target TCs, resulting in a higher drug cost (€10 712 (4120-13 596)) compared with ADA-negative patients (€2060 (1648-3296)) and patients in ADA Q1/Q2 (€2060 (1648-4120)/€2060 (1751-3296), p<0.001). However, all but one patient belonging to ADA Q4 were also ADA-positive using a drug-sensitive assay.

CONCLUSIONS

Upon dose intensification, low concentration ADAs, not detectable using a drug-sensitive assay, disappear in more than half of the patients over time and are clinically non-relevant. In contrast, high concentration ADAs which are typically also detected in a drug-sensitive assay, persist over time and necessitate a higher cumulative dose and drug cost. In the latter group, proactive drug switching may be more cost-efficient.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTER

2011-002061-38; Post-results.

Anti-infliximab antibody concentrations can guide treatment intensification in patients with Crohn's disease who lose clinical response

BACKGROUND

The presence of antibodies towards infliximab (ATI) is associated with lower infliximab (IFX) trough concentrations and loss of response. IFX treatment intensification is effective for restoring response in most, but not all patients with Crohn's disease (CD).

AIM

To compare outcome, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of treatment intensification strategies in patients with CD who lost clinical response to IFX.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted, including 103 patients with CD who lost clinical response during IFX maintenance therapy and therefore received a double dose IFX (10 mg/kg) and/or a next infusion after a shortened interval. IFX and ATI concentrations were measured in consecutive trough samples, just before (T0) and after (T+1) treatment intensification.

RESULTS

Clinical response (physicians' global assessment) and biological response and remission (CRP) were restored in 63%, 42% and 24% of patients (evaluated at T+1). Treatment intensification increased IFX trough concentrations from 1.2 μg/mL [0.3-3.6] at T0 to 3.6 μg/mL [0.5-10.2] at T+1 (P < .0001). Using a drug tolerant assay, ATI were detected in the T0 sample of 47% of patients. ATI negatively impacted the achieved IFX trough concentration (Spearman r -0.57, P < .0001) and the probability of clinical response (P = 0.034) at T+1. When ATI were quantifiable but <282 ng/mL eq. at T0, combined interval shortening and dose doubling was more effective for restoring therapeutic IFX trough concentrations (≥3 μg/mL at T+1) than dose doubling alone, which in turn was more effective than interval shortening alone (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Antibodies towards infliximab can guide clinical decision-making on treatment intensification.

A Survey Study of Gastroenterologists' Attitudes and Barriers Toward Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Anti-TNF Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) may improve the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of anti-TNF therapy. A standardized approach of utilizing TDM has not been established. The objective of this study was to determine gastroenterologists' attitudes and barriers toward TDM of anti-TNF therapy in clinical practice.

METHODS

An 18-question survey was distributed to members of the American College of Gastroenterology and Crohn's and Colitis Foundation via email. We collected physician characteristics, practice demographics, and data regarding TDM use and perceived barriers to TDM. Factors associated with the use of TDM were determined by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 403 gastroenterologists from 42 US states (76.4% male) met inclusion criteria: 90.1% use TDM, mostly reactively for secondary loss of response (87.1%) and primary nonresponse (66%); 36.6% use TDM proactively. The greatest barriers to TDM implementation were uncertainty about insurance coverage (77.9%), high out-of-pocket patient costs (76.4%), and time lag from serum sample to result (38.5%). Factors independently associated with the use of TDM and proactive TDM were practice in an academic setting (P = 0.019), and more IBD patients seen per month (P = 0.015), and Crohn's and Colitis Foundation membership (P < 0.001), and more IBD patients on anti-TNF therapy per month (P = 0.006), respectively. If all barriers were removed, an additional one-third of physicians would apply proactive TDM.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of insurance coverage, high out-of-pocket costs, and the time lag from test to result limit use of TDM in the United States. Validation of low-cost assays, point of care testing, and studies that standardize the use of TDM are needed to make TDM more commonplace.

Practical recommendations for the use of therapeutic drug monitoring of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory diseases

Biopharmaceuticals directed against tumor necrosis factor-alpha, integrins, interleukins, interferons and their receptors have become key agents for the management of inflammatory diseases in the fields of gastroenterology, rheumatology, dermatology and neurology. However, response to these treatments is far from optimal. Therapeutic failure has been attributed in part to inadequate serum concentrations of the drug and the formation of antidrug antibodies (ADA). Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) based on drug concentrations and ADA represents a pharmacologically sound tool for guiding dosage adjustments to optimize exposure. Although becoming standard practice in tertiary care centers, the widespread accessibility and recognition of TDM is hindered by several hurdles, including a lack of education of health care providers on TDM. In this paper, the Monitoring of monoclonal Antibodies Group in Europe (MAGE) provides an introduction on the fundamental principles of the concept of TDM, aiming to educate clinicians and assist them in the process of implementing TDM of anti-inflammatory biopharmaceuticals.

Defining and predicting deep remission in patients with perianal fistulizing Crohn’s disease on anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy

Perianal fistulas can occur to up to one-third of patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) leading to significant disabling disease and morbidity. Fistulising perianal CD treatment often necessitates a combined pharmacological and surgical approach. Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy, particularly infliximab, has been shown to be very effective for both perianal and internal fistulising CD. Nevertheless, current data suggest that sustained remission and long-term complete fistula healing can be achieved in only 30% to 50% of patients. Moreover, these percentages refer mostly to clinical rather than deep remission, defined as endoscopic and radiologic remission, which is quickly emerging as the preferred goal of therapy. Unfortunately, the therapeutic options for perianal fistulising CD are still limited. As such, it would be of great value to be able to predict, and more importantly, prevent treatment failure in these patients by early and continued optimization of anti-TNF therapy. Similar to ulcerative colitis and luminal CD, recent data demonstrate that higher infliximab concentrations are associated with better clinical outcomes in patients with perianal fistulising CD. This suggests that therapeutic drug monitoring and a treat-to-trough therapeutic approach may emerge as the new standard of care for optimizing anti-TNF therapy in patients with perianal fistulising CD.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring During Induction of Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Defining a Therapeutic Drug Window

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy has revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, up to 30% of patients with IBD show no clinical benefit and are defined as having a primary nonresponse. Primary nonresponse to a biologic can be attributed to either pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic issues, such as those involved in secondary loss of response. Pharmacokinetic issues are linked to undetectable or subtherapeutic drug concentrations because of either an accelerated non-immune-mediated clearance or immunogenicity and the development of antidrug antibodies, whereas pharmacodynamic issues are likely related to "non-TNF driven" disease. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), defined as the evaluation of drug concentrations and antidrug antibodies, has been proven effective for optimizing anti-TNF therapy in IBD. Nevertheless, most of the data for TDM relate to patients losing response during maintenance therapy, whereas much less is known about the therapeutic drug window and use of TDM during anti-TNF induction therapy. Recent exposure-response relationship studies, though, demonstrate that high serum anti-TNF drug concentrations during and early after induction therapy are associated with favorable therapeutic outcomes in IBD. This suggests that early optimization of anti-TNF therapy may prevent some of the primary nonresponse related to pharmacokinetic issues (low drug concentrations) and lead to better short- and long-term outcomes. This review will focus on the role of TDM during the induction phase of anti-TNF therapy.