Clinical Outcomes of Golimumab as First, Second or Third Anti-TNF Agent in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis

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.

Clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with two consecutive anti-TNF agents: data from the ENEIDA registry

Background

Infliximab seems to be the most efficacious of the three available anti-TNF agents for ulcerative colitis (UC) but little is known when it is used as the second anti-TNF.

Objectives

To compare the clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in UC patients.

Design

Retrospective observational study.

Methods

Patients from the ENEIDA registry treated consecutively with infliximab and a subcutaneous anti-TNF (or vice versa), naïve to other biological agents, were identified and grouped according to the administration route of the first anti-TNF into IVi (intravenous initially) or SCi (subcutaneous initially).

Results

Overall, 473 UC patients were included (330 IVi and 143 SCi). Clinical response at week 14 was 42.7% and 48.3% in the IVi and SCi groups (non-statistically significant), respectively. Clinical remission rates at week 52 were 32.8% and 31.4% in the IVi and SCi groups (nonsignificant differences), respectively. A propensity-matched score analysis showed a higher clinical response rate at week 14 in the SCi group and higher treatment persistence in the IVi group. Regarding long-term outcomes, dose escalation and discontinuation due to the primary failure of the first anti-TNF and more severe disease activity at the beginning of the second anti-TNF were inversely associated with clinical remission.

Conclusion

The use of a second anti-TNF for UC seems to be reasonable in terms of efficacy, although it is particularly reduced in the case of the primary failure of the first anti-TNF. Whether the second anti-TNF is infliximab or subcutaneous does not seem to affect efficacy.

Effectiveness and Factors Associated with Response to Golimumab in Japanese Patients with Ulcerative Colitis in Real Clinical Practice: The Phoenix Study

Introduction

There have been limited reports on the clinical efficacy of golimumab (GLM) in Japanese patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) in real clinical practice. This study aimed to explore the real-life effectiveness and factors associated with response to GLM in Japanese patients with UC.

Methods

This observational, retrospective, multicenter study was conducted in hospitals with expertise in inflammatory bowel disease treatment. Sixty-three patients treated with GLM and active UC were included in the analysis. Clinical remission (CR) (partial Mayo (pMayo) score ≤2) in the induction and maintenance phases after GLM treatment and associated factors were evaluated.

Results

The proportion of patients achieving CR in the induction and maintenance phases was 41.3% (26/63) and 46.0% (29/63, the last observation carried forward method was used for patients who discontinued treatment for reasons other than inadequate response), respectively. The median pMayo score was 5 (interquartile range (IQR): 4-6) at baseline, 3 (IQR: 1-5) in the induction phase, and 1 (IQR: 0-3) in the maintenance phase. Hemoglobin, platelet, and C-reactive protein levels changed, consistent with the pMayo score. Multivariate logistic analysis revealed that biologic-naive status was an independent factor associated with CR in the induction (p = 0.0200) and maintenance (p = 0.0459) phases, and a disease duration of >60 months until GLM initiation was associated with CR in the induction phase (p = 0.0427).

Conclusions

The effectiveness of GLM in daily clinical practice has been confirmed in Japanese patients with active UC. Biologic-naive patients responded more to GLM in the induction and maintenance phases, and patients with disease duration of >60 months until initiation of GLM were more responsive in the induction phase.

Insurance Approval Delay of Biologic Therapy Dose Escalation Associated with Disease Activity in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Dose escalation of self-injectable biologic therapy for inflammatory bowel diseases may be required to counteract loss of response and/or low drug levels. Payors often require completion of a prior authorization (PA), which is a complex approval pathway before providing coverage. If the initial PA request is denied, clinic staff must complete a time and resource-intensive process to obtain medication approval.

AIMS

This study measured time from decision to dose escalate to insurance approval and evaluated impact of approval time on disease activity.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective analysis of adult patients with IBD prescribed an escalated dose of biologic therapy at an academic center with an integrated specialty pharmacy team from January to December 2018. Outcomes included time to insurance approval and the association between approval time and follow-up C-reactive protein (CRP) and Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ) scores. Associations were tested using linear regression analyses.

RESULTS

220 patients were included, median age 39, 53% female, and 96% white. Overall median time from decision to dose escalate to insurance approval was 7 days [interquartile range (IQR) 1, 14]. Approval time was delayed when an appeal was required [median of 29 days (IQR 17, 43)]. Patients with a longer time to insurance approval were less likely to have CRP improvement (p = 0.019). Time to insurance approval did not significantly impact follow-up SIBDQ scores.

CONCLUSION

Patients who had a longer time to insurance approval were less likely to have improvement in CRP, highlighting the negative clinical impact of a complex dose escalation process.

Predictors and optimal management of tumor necrosis factor antagonist nonresponse in inflammatory bowel disease: A literature review

Tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) antagonists, the first biologics approved for treating patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), are effective for the induction and maintenance of remission and significantly improving prognosis. However, up to one-third of treated patients show primary nonresponse (PNR) to anti-TNF-α therapies, and 23%-50% of IBD patients experience loss of response (LOR) to these biologics during subsequent treatment. There is still no recognized predictor for evaluating the efficacy of anti-TNF drugs. This review summarizes the existing predictors of PNR and LOR to anti-TNF in IBD patients. Most predictors remain controversial, and only previous surgical history, disease manifestations, drug concentrations, antidrug antibodies, serum albumin, some biologic markers, and some genetic markers may be potentially predictive. In addition, we also discuss the next steps of treatment for patients with PNR or LOR to TNF antagonists. Therapeutic drug monitoring plays an important role in treatment selection. Dose escalation, combination therapy, switching to a different anti-TNF drug, or switching to a biologic with a different mechanism of action can be selected based on the concentration of the drug and/or antidrug antibodies.

Dose Escalation Patterns of Advanced Therapies in Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Dose escalation is one of the treatment approaches studied and suggested in advanced therapies for Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). This study aimed to identify and characterize the dosing escalation patterns of advanced therapies in CD and UC.

METHODS

Two systematic literature reviews (SLRs) were conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE®, Embase®, and Cochrane Library were searched for articles published between January 2011 and October 2021 and limited to non-interventional studies in English language. Congress and bibliographic searches were also conducted. Articles were screened by two independent researchers. Dose escalation patterns were described and summarized considering the regional regulatory label recommendation (in North America [NA] or outside of North America [ONA]).

RESULTS

Among 3190 CD and 2116 UC articles identified in the Ovid searches, 100 CD and 54 UC studies were included in the SLR, with more studies conducted ONA. Most studies reported an initial maintenance dose pattern aligned with the lower starting dose per local regulatory label; however, several ONA studies (n = 13 out of 14) reported ustekinumab every 8 weeks as starting maintenance pattern in CD. In ONA studies, the median within-guideline escalation rates in CD and UC were 43% in ustekinumab (CD only), 33% and 32% for vedolizumab; 29% and 39% for adalimumab; and 14% and 10% for infliximab. Evidence regarding dose escalation patterns for tofacitinib, certolizumab pegol, and golimumab was limited. Some dose escalation patterns outside of label recommendations were observed including ustekinumab every 8 weeks to every 4 weeks and vedolizumab every 8 weeks to every 6 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Dose escalation strategies are widely documented in the literature. The reported dose escalation patterns and escalation rates vary by region and by CD and UC. Most escalation patterns reported were aligned with regulatory recommendations while some reported more diverse or aggressive dose escalation.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42021289251.

The Efficacy of Currently Licensed Biologics for Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis: A Literature Review

Biologics have been emerging as promising therapies in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients who are refractory to conventional medical treatment. This literature review aims to appraise the existing evidence on the efficacy and safety of NICE approved biological therapies, of which there are currently five licensed drugs, available for the treatment of UC in adults. An initial search was performed using National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines. A further literature search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, Science Direct and Cochrane Library databases was done, resulting in a total of 62 studies being included in this review. Recent and seminal papers were included. Inclusion criteria for this review were adult participants and English papers only. In most studies, anti-tumour necrosis factor ɑ (TNFɑ) naïve patients were found to have improved clinical outcomes. Infliximab was found to be highly effective in inducing short-term clinical response, clinical remission as well as mucosal healing. However, loss of response was common and dose escalation was often required for achievement of long-term efficacy. Adalimumab was found to have both short-term and long-term efficacy which was also supported by real-world data. Golimumab was shown to have comparable efficacy and safety profiles to other biologics, although lack of therapeutic dose monitoring and loss of response is a barrier to optimising golimumab treatment efficacy. Vedolizumab was shown to have higher clinical remission rates when compared to adalimumab in a head-to-head trial, and the most cost-effective biologic when calculating quality-adjusted life years. Ustekinumab was found to significantly improve clinical remission rates in UC patients who were previously unresponsive to other biological treatments. However, as this is a newly licensed drug, there is limited literature currently available. Further, head-to-head studies are required to help determine the optimal treatment for patients with UC. With patents expiring, the development of biosimilars will help to reduce costs and increase the availability of these drugs to patients.

Comparison of Short- and Long-Term Effectiveness between Anti-TNF and Ustekinumab after Vedolizumab Failure as First-Line Therapy in Crohn’s Disease: A Multi-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: The effectiveness of anti-TNF or ustekinumab (UST) as a second-line biologic after vedolizumab (VDZ) failure has not yet been described. Aims and Methods: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, We aim to investigate the effectiveness of anti-TNF and UST as second-line therapy in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) who failed VDZ as a first-line treatment. The primary outcome was clinical response at week 16–22. Secondary outcomes included the rates of clinical remission, steroid-free clinical remission, CRP normalization, and adverse events. Results: Fifty-nine patients who failed on VDZ as a first-line treatment for CD were included; 52.8% patients received anti-TNF and 47.2% UST as a second-line therapy. In initial period (Week 16–22), the clinical response and remission rate was similar between both groups: 61.2% vs. 68%, p = 0.8 and 48.3% vs. 56%, p = 0.8 on anti-TNF and UST therapy, respectively. Furthermore, in the maintenance period the rate was similar: 75% vs. 82.3%, p = 0.8 and 62.5% vs. 70.5%, p = 0.8, respectively. Of the patients, 12 out of the 59 stopped the therapy, without a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.6). Conclusion: Second-line biological therapy after VDZ failure therapy was effective in >60% of the patients with CD. No differences in effectiveness were detected between the use of anti-TNF and UST as a second line.

Meta-analysis: Real-world effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in patients with ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Evidence on real-world outcomes of ustekinumab for ulcerative colitis (UC) patients is needed.

AIMS

To summarise evidence on the real-world outcomes of ustekinumab for UC and conduct a meta-analysis of effectiveness and safety data.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted through September 2022 in electronic databases for observational studies evaluating ustekinumab for UC. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to calculate the pooled effect sizes (percentages or incidence rates [IRs]) of effectiveness and safety outcomes.

RESULTS

In all, 19 studies were included with 3786 patients. More than 92% of patients were previously treated with any biologic, 61.1% with both anti-TNF and vedolizumab and 16.4% with any biologic and tofacitinib. Clinical remission was achieved in 45.4% at week 8 (95% CI: 30.1%-60.6%), 43.8% (38.4%-49.2%) at weeks 12-16, 44.6% (35.9%-53.3%) at month 6, and 50.6% (36.3%-64.8%) at month 12. Response was achieved in 61.2%, 59.4%, 65.2% and 76.8% at weeks 8, 12-16, month 6 and 12, respectively. CS-free remission was achieved in 18.7%, 36.8%, 34.5% and 39% at weeks 8, 12-16, month 6 and 12, respectively. Overall, 58.2% of patients had endoscopic improvement at month 12. Almost 30% of the patients needed dose escalation, which was effective in 40% of these patients. The IRs of colectomy, adverse events (AEs), serious AEs and serious infections were 4.8, 7.9, 0.8 and 0.3 per 100 patient-years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis confirms the effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in a highly treatment-refractory population of UC patients.

Systematic Literature Review of Real-World Evidence on Dose Escalation and Treatment Switching in Ulcerative Colitis

Background

Currently approved biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis have well-established efficacy. However, many patients fail to respond or lose response, leading to dose escalation or treatment switching.

Objective

We sought to identify real-world evidence on dose escalation and treatment switching and associated clinical and economic outcomes among adults with ulcerative colitis treated with infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, or tofacitinib.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE (up to 26 August 2020), and conference proceedings (2017-2020) for studies in adults with ulcerative colitis to assess clinical response and remission, colectomy, adverse events, and economic outcomes related to dose escalation and treatment switching.

Results

In 56 studies, dose escalation and treatment switching involving infliximab and/or adalimumab were most frequently investigated. Rates of clinical response after dose escalation were 20-95% (1.8-36 months), clinical remission rates were 10-94% (1.8-36 months), colectomy rates were 0-33% (12-38 months), and adverse event rates were 0-18%. Treatment switching rates in 21 studies were 4-70% over 3-62 months, with switch due to loss of response rates of 4-35% over 12-62 months (7 studies). Up to 35% of patients underwent colectomy 12-120 weeks after switching, and 13-38% experienced adverse events. Data relating to economic outcomes were limited to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, but demonstrated increased direct costs associated with both dose escalation and treatment switching.

Conclusion

Dose escalation and treatment switching are common with existing therapies. However, clinical response and remission rates vary, and a proportion of patients fail to achieve optimal clinical and economic outcomes. This highlights the need for more efficacious and durable treatments for patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis.

Effectiveness and Safety Profiles of Biological Therapies in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Real Life Data from an Active Pharmacovigilance Project

Post-marketing surveillance is essential to evaluate the risk/benefit profile of drugs; however, pharmacovigilance studies comparing persistence and safety of biologic therapies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are scant. The aim of this study was to prospectively investigate persistence together with safety profiles of biologics in a cohort of patients diagnosed with Crohn's Disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) followed by the IBD unit of Messina and treated with infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA), golimumab (GOL), vedolizumab (VED), and ustekinumab (UST) from 2017 through 2021. Descriptive and treatment persistence analyses with predictors for discontinuation and occurrence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were performed. A total of 675 IBD patients were enrolled. A higher persistence rate was noted for UST and ADA in the first year (83.8% and 83.1%, respectively) and for IFX in the fifth year of treatment (58.1%). GOL, VED, and UST-all used as second/third-line therapies-seemed to have a higher risk of non-persistence than IFX (in order HR: 2.19; CI 95%: 1.33-3.61, 1.45; 1.04-2.04, 2.25; 1.25-4.07) as well as switchers and those who had at least one ADR (18.1; 13.22-24.68 and 1.55; 1.20-1.99, respectively). The reported ADRs, which were generally mild-moderate, were largely known. However, real-world data should be implemented to further study undetected safety concerns, including risk of malignancy.

Continuous clinical remission with biologics in ulcerative colitis: the 'AURORA' comparison study

OBJECTIVES

Comparative trials among biological drugs for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) provided conflicting results. After patent expire of infliximab originator, adalimumab, infliximab biosimilar, golimumab and vedolizumab have been approved in Italy.We compared the efficacy of these four biologics in UC according to the concept of continuous clinical remission (CCR).

METHODS

In a retrospective, multicentre study, all UC patients treated with adalimumab, infliximab biosimilar, golimumab or vedolizumab between 2014 and 2019 were included. All drugs were compared to each other according to the 1-year CCR rate, defined as Mayo partial score ≤2, with bleeding subscore = 0, without any relapse or optimization with dose escalation, topical treatments or steroid use after first clinical remission.

RESULTS

Four-hundred sixteen patients (adalimumab = 90, infliximab biosimilar = 105, golimumab = 79, vedolizumab = 142) were included. CCR was achieved in similar percentages among the groups (33%, 37%, 28%, 37%, respectively). All drugs were equivalent in biologic-naive patients, while vedolizumab was better than a second anti-TNFα in prior anti-TNFα agent failures. No differences were found according to type of adverse events or severe adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a strict definition of clinical remission, all biologics appear equally effective at 1 year. Changing to vedolizumab is more effective than switching to another anti-TNFα in TNFα failures.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Golimumab for Ulcerative Colitis in a Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center in Japan

PURPOSE

Golimumab (GLM) is an anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antibody preparation known to be less immunogenic than infliximab (IFX) or adalimumab. Few reports on GLM in pediatric patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are available. This study aimed to review the long-term durability and safety of GLM in a pediatric center.

METHODS

The medical records of 17 pediatric patients (eight boys and nine girls) who received GLM at the National Center for Child Health and Development were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The median age at GLM initiation was 13.9 (interquartile range 12.0-16.3) years. Fourteen patients had pancolitis, and 11 had severe disease (pediatric ulcerative colitis activity index ≥65). Ten patients were biologic-naïve, and 50% achieved corticosteroid-free remission at week 54. Two patients discontinued prior anti-TNF-α agents because of adverse events during remission. Both showed responses to GLM without unfavorable events through week 54. However, the efficacy of GLM in patients who showed primary nonresponse or loss of response to IFX was limited. Four of the five patients showed non-response at week 54. Patients with severe disease had significantly lower corticosteroid-free remission rate at week 54 than those without severe disease. No severe adverse events were observed during the study period.

CONCLUSION

GLM appears to be safe and useful for pediatric patients with UC. Patients with mild to moderate disease who responded to but had some adverse events with prior biologics may be good candidates for GLM. Its safety and low immunogenicity profile serve as favorable options for selected children with UC.

Vedolizumab as the first line of biologic therapy for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease - a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of vedolizumab in bio-naïve patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) remain unknown.

AIMS

To perform a meta-analysis regarding vedolizumab as first line of biological therapy for UC or CD.

METHODS

A systematic review of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases per December 2020 was undertaken. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models.

RESULTS

This systematic review identified 79 eligible studies with 4,520 and 3,494 bio-naïve patients with UC and CD, respectively, and 8,105 and 11,140 bio-exposed patients. Among bio-naïve patients with UC, a total of 40.0% (95%CI 27.0-54.0, I²=86%) and 63.9% (95%CI 47.0-79.2, I²=36%) achieved clinical remission at weeks 14 and 52, respectively. The corresponding rates in CD were 54.0% (95%CI 42.0-66.0, I²=23%), and 61.7% (95%CI 55.2-68.1, I²=0%). Bio-naïvety was associated with a higher probability of clinical remission at week 52 in UC (relative risk (RR)=1.32 (95%CI 1.14-1.53)), while this was only apparent until week 26 in CD (RR=1.60 (95%CI 1.30-1.95)). Finally, bio-naïve UC patients had a lower risk of serious adverse events (RR=0.29 (95%CI 0.09-0.95)).

CONCLUSION

Vedolizumab was found to have a favorable efficacy and safety profile in bio-naïve patients with UC and CD. The findings have implications in the management of IBD.

Subcutaneous Infliximab [CT-P13], a True Biologic 2.0. Real Clinical Practice Multicentre Study

Background: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, is characterized by chronic relapsing intestinal inflammation. There are few data on the efficacy and safety in clinical practice of infliximab (CT-P13) in subcutaneous formulation (SC) for the treatment of patients with IBD. Methods: Multicenter, prospective study of patients with IBD in clinical remission, who had their treatment changed from intravenous (IV) infliximab to SC. Two groups of patients were evaluated according to whether they were on IV infliximab treatment at standard or intensified doses before the switch. Results: A total of 30 patients were on standard dosing and another 30 in intensified therapy. Treatment persistence in both groups at 6 months was greater than 95%. In both groups after the change, neither the biomarkers of inflammation nor the activity indices underwent significant changes at 3 and 6 months compared to the baseline value. Similarly, in both groups, infliximab trough levels showed a significant increase 3 and 6 months after the change to SC. No serious adverse events were registered. Conclusions: The CT-P13 SC brings a new anti-TNF era. Achieving much higher drug levels that are constant over time opens new paths to explore the management of patients with IBD: less immunogenicity, better perianal disease control and higher achievement of mucosal healing.

Association of golimumab trough concentrations during maintenance with clinical, biological, endoscopic and histologic remission in patients with ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Optimal golimumab concentration thresholds for important outcomes during maintenance are lacking.

AIMS

To investigate the association of golimumab trough concentrations during maintenance with key outcomes, including endoscopic and histologic remission, and long-term event-free persistence with golimumab, in patients with UC.

METHODS

This multi-centre, cross-sectional study included patients with UC on golimumab maintenance recruited either in remission or during a flare. Colonoscopy was scheduled, and study-specific rectocolonic biopsies were taken for blind central histologic reading. Samples for golimumab trough concentrations were collected close to colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were included. Median golimumab trough concentrations (μg/ml) were significantly higher in patients who had clinical remission (2.01 vs. 0.72, p = 0.047), combined clinical-biochemical remission (PMS ≤2 + faecal calprotectin <250 μg/g) (2.21 vs. 1.47, p = 0.041), endoscopic healing (Mayo endoscopic subscore 0) (2.52 vs. 1.47, p = 0.003), histologic remission (Geboes index ≤2.0) (2.33 vs. 1.50, p = 0.02) and disease clearance (clinical remission endoscopic healing + histologic remission) (2.52 vs. 1.70, p = 0.009), compared with those not meeting these criteria. Golimumab concentrations were significantly higher in patients who avoided golimumab dose escalation/discontinuation during follow-up (2.24 vs. 0.98, p = 0.012). Receiver-operating characteristic analyses identified golimumab thresholds [area under the curve] of 0.85 [0.76], 1.90 [0.76], 2.29 [0.75], 1.79 [0.68], 2.29 [0.72] and 1.56 [0.71] μg/ml as associated with clinical remission, combined remission, endoscopic healing, histologic remission, disease clearance and long-term event-free persistence with golimumab, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Golimumab trough concentrations during maintenance are associated with favourable treatment outcomes including endoscopic healing, histologic remission and long-term persistence on golimumab. We identified the optimal golimumab thresholds most closely associated with key outcomes.

Anti-TNFα antibody versus non-anti-TNFα molecular agents for ulcerative colitis patients who failed initial anti-TNFα therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)α antibody (ATA) and biologics/molecular targeted agents with other mechanisms (non-ATA) are currently available for refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the knowledge about optimal drug selection after the initial treatment with ATA failure is lacking. This study assessed whether the response to the initial ATA could be a basis for selecting subsequent agents in UC patients.

METHODS

Ulcerative colitis patients treated with ATA or non-ATA as the subsequent biologic after the failure of initial ATA were retrospectively analyzed. The efficacy at 14 weeks was examined according to the response to initial ATA.

RESULTS

Of 163 patients treated with the first ATA, the efficacy of subsequent ATA and non-ATA was evaluated in 63 and 36, respectively. Remission and response to subsequent-line therapy, regardless of ATA or non-ATA, were lower in patients with primary nonresponse (PNR) to initial ATA than in patients with efficacy to initial ATA (33.3% vs 69.2%, P < 0.01). In patients with PNR to initial ATA, the remission rate with subsequent ATA was significantly lower than with subsequent non-ATA (4.3% vs 26.3%, P = 0.04). In patients who showed efficacy to initial ATA, the remission rate with subsequent ATA was also lower than that with subsequent non-ATA (30.6% vs 56.3%, P = 0.08). PNR with initial ATA was the predictor of PNR to subsequent ATA (odds ratio: 5.62, 95% confidence interval: 1.50-21.7).

CONCLUSION

Non-ATA may be suitable in UC patients as the subsequent biologics regardless of the outcome of the first ATA.

Integrated Analysis Reveals the Targets and Mechanisms in Immunosuppressive Effect of Mesalazine on Ulcerative Colitis

Background

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is an inflammatory bowel disease that causes inflammation and ulcers in the digestive tract. Approximately 3 million US adults suffer from this disease. Mesalazine, an anti-inflammatory agent, is commonly used for the treatment of UC. However, some studies have demonstrated side effects of mesalazine, such as acute pancreatitis and hypereosinophilia. Therefore, a better understanding of the anti-inflammatory mechanism of mesalazine in UC could help improve the effectiveness of the drug and reduce its side effects. In this study, we used a dextran sodium sulfate-induced UC mouse model, and applied network pharmacology and omics bioinformatics approaches to uncover the potential pharmaceutical targets and the anti-inflammatory mechanism of mesalazine.

Results

Network pharmacology analysis identified the core targets of mesalazine, biological processes, and cell signaling related to immunity and inflammatory responses mediated by mesalazine. Molecular docking analysis then indicated possible binding motifs on the core targets (including TNF-α, PTGS2, IL-1β, and EGFR). Metabolomics and 16S metagenomic analyses highlighted the correlation between gut microbiota and metabolite changes caused by mesalazine in the UC model.

Conclusions

Collectively, the omics and bioinformatics approaches and the experimental data unveiled the detailed molecular mechanisms of mesalazine in UC treatment, functional regulation of the gut immune system, and reduction of intestinal inflammation. More importantly, the identified core targets could be targeted for the treatment of UC.

Use of biologics and small molecule drugs for the management of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis: IG-IBD clinical guidelines based on the GRADE methodology

The management of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis has undergone significant changes over the past 15 years due to the regulatory approval of several new drugs. In particular, following the approval of the first biological, i.e. infliximab, a number of further biological drugs, such as adalimumab, golimumab, vedolizumab and ustekinumab, and small molecules, such as tofacitinib, have been approved, thus enriching the therapeutic armamentarium for ulcerative colitis. Choice of therapy must take into consideration not only the need to induce and maintain disease remission according to the patient's profile, but also age, co-morbidities, and prior treatments. To guide these decisions, the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease has developed clinical guidelines that supersede its earlier document from 2011. These new guidelines were developed following the GRADE methodology for rating the quality of the evidence and for determining the strength of the recommendations. This article presents the methodology and results, in the form of 20 statements with commentary on the use of the five biologics and tofacitinib for managing the intestinal manifestations of active ulcerative colitis and for maintaining remission. A separate technical review reports the analyses of the evidence upon which the present recommendations are based.

Effectiveness of golimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis: results of a real-life study in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors have improved treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC), but loss of response remains a frequent problem. The anti-TNF agent, golimumab, was approved in Switzerland for the treatment of UC in 2014. This study aims to summarize the experience of golimumab in a real-world setting in Switzerland.

METHODS

We analyzed real-world data from 1769 UC patients from the Swiss Inflammatory Bowel Disease Cohort (SIBDC) study and performed a chart review of golimumab-treated patients. We extracted the partial Mayo score at t₀ (baseline), t₁ (2-16 weeks), t₂ (17-35 weeks), and t₃ (36-89 weeks). The primary endpoint was clinical response at t₁, defined as marked improvement in partial Mayo score and objective parameters. Clinical remission was defined as resolution of symptoms and normalization of objective parameters.

RESULTS

Our chart review included 103 UC patients with golimumab treatment (5.8% of all SIBDC UC patients); only 16 (15.5%) were anti-TNF naïve. Sixty-three patients remained on golimumab (61.2%) after 180 days, 51 (44.7%) after 365 days, and 34 (33%) after 630 days after the start of treatment. Upon golimumab treatment, the partial Mayo score decreased from 4 [interquartile range (IQR): 2-6] at t₀ to 2 (IQR: 0-4) at t₁, 1 (IQR: 0-3.5) at t₂, and 1 (IQR: 0-3) at t₃ (p < 0.001 for all comparisons with t₀). The primary endpoint, clinical response at t₁, could be evaluated in 52 patients and was met in 15 individuals (28.8%). Clinical remission at t₁ was observed in 8 out of 52 patients (15.4%). Golimumab was generally well tolerated, one patient developed meningitis. The most frequent reasons to stop treatment were primary and secondary non-response.

CONCLUSION

Golimumab was used in 5.8% of Swiss UC patients, mainly in biologic-experienced individuals. Golimumab treatment was associated with a sustained reduction of symptoms and clinical response in approximately 30% of patients.[ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00488631].

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Tofacitinib in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis: Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of the real-world effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib for ulcerative colitis (UC) is relevant to confirm the benefit observed in clinical trials.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the real-world effectiveness of tofacitinib for moderate to severely active UC. The primary outcome was clinical remission evaluated at week 8, weeks 12 to 16, and month 6. Secondary outcomes were response, corticosteroid-free remission, mucosal healing, colectomy, and safety.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies with a total of 1162 patients with UC were included. Remission (11 studies) was achieved in 34.7% of patients at week 8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.4%-45.1%), 47% at weeks 12 to 16 (95% CI, 40.3%-53.6%), and 38.3% at month 6 (95% CI, 29.2%-47.5%) at month 6 duplicated. Response was achieved in 62.1%, 64.2%, 50.8%, and 41.8% of patients at week 8, weeks 12 to 16, month 6, and month 12, respectively. Corticosteroid-free remission (5 studies) was achieved in 38.4%, 44.3%, 33.6%, and 31% of patients at week 8, weeks 12 to 16, month 6, and month 12, respectively. Mucosal healing was achieved in 48.3% and 45.3% of patients at week 8 and weeks 12 to 16, respectively. Patients who were biologic-naïve (11.6%) had a significantly higher rate of response at week 8 (1.38; 95% CI, 1.03-1.84). The incidence rates of serious adverse events and herpes zoster was 8.9 and 6.9 per 100 patient-years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of real-world studies confirms the effectiveness of tofacitinib in a highly refractory population of patients with moderate to severely active UC. Tofacitinib showed an acceptable safety profile. These findings were consistent with clinical trials and further support the use of tofacitinib in UC.

Effectiveness and Safety of Golimumab in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: A Multicenter, Prospective, Postmarketing Surveillance Study

Background/Aims

Golimumab has been used for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) since 2013. However, there is limited data on the effectiveness and safety of the real-world use of golimumab in Asian patients.

Methods

This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study. We enrolled patients with moderate-to-severe UC who were administered subcutaneous golimumab at 46 medical centers between May 2014 and November 2019. The primary outcome was the effectiveness and safety of golimumab at week 22. Clinical outcomes and adverse events were assessed according to partial Mayo score at weeks 0, 2, 6, 14, and 22.

Results

A total of 130 patients were included (mean age 45.7±16.0 years). The clinical response/remission rates at weeks 2, 6, 14, and 22 were 40.4%/22.9%, 56.0%/35.8%, 70.6%/49.5%, and 67.9%/48.6%, respectively. Based on full Mayo score at week 14, clinical response and remission rates were 84.2% and 39.5%, respectively. Mucosal healing rate was 65.8%. In multivariate analysis with logistic regression, longer disease duration was significantly associated with a higher clinical response rate (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.136; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.006 to 1.282; p=0.040 at week 6; aOR, 1.256; 95% CI, 1.049 to 1.503; p=0.013 at week 22). A higher baseline Mayo endoscopic subscore was significantly associated with a lower clinical response rate at week 6 (aOR, 0.248; 95% CI, 0.089 to 0.692; p=0.008). The incidence of adverse drug reactions was 4.6% (6/130, nine events). No serious unexpected adverse drug reactions or deaths were reported.

Conclusions

Golimumab was effective and safe as an induction and maintenance treatment for Korean patients with moderate-to-severe UC.

Clinical effectiveness of golimumab in ulcerative colitis: a prospective multicentre study based on the Swedish IBD Quality Register, SWIBREG

OBJECTIVES

Clinical trials demonstrated that golimumab is effective in anti-TNF naïve patients with ulcerative colitis. We aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness of golimumab in a real-world setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study, conducted at 16 Swedish hospitals. Data were collected using an electronic case report form. Patients with active ulcerative colitis, defined as Mayo endoscopic subscore ≥2 were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcomes were clinical effectiveness at 12 weeks and 52 weeks, i.e. response (defined as a decrease in Mayo score by ≥3 points or 30% from baseline) and remission (defined as a Mayo score of ≤2 with no individual subscores >1).

RESULTS

Fifty patients were included. At study entry, 70% were previously exposed to anti-TNF, 16% to vedolizumab, and 96% to immunomodulators. The 12 and 52-week drug continuation rates were 37/50 (74%) and 23/50 (46%), respectively. The 12-week response rate was 14/50 (28%), the remission rate, 8/50 (16%) and the corresponding figures at week 52 were 13/50 (26%) and 10/50 (20%). Among patients who continued golimumab, the median Mayo score decreased from 7 (6-9) at baseline to 1 (0-5) at 52 weeks (p < .01) and the faecal calprotectin decreased from 862 (335-1759) µg/g to 90 (34-169) µg/g (p < .01). Clinical response at week 12 was highly predictive of clinical remission at week 52 (adjusted OR: 73.1; 95% CI: 4.5‒1188.9).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of golimumab treated patients represented a treatment refractory patient-group. Despite this, our results confirm that golimumab is an effective therapy in ulcerative colitis.

Real-world data for golimumab treatment in patients with ulcerative colitis in Japan: interim analysis in post-marketing surveillance

Background/Aims

Golimumab (GLM) is an anti-tumor necrosis factor-α drug approved for treating moderate-to-severe active ulcerative colitis (UC). A 52-week post-marketing surveillance (PMS) was initiated to evaluate its safety and effectiveness in patients with UC in Japan. We present an interim report of the ongoing PMS.

Methods

Patients received 200 mg of subcutaneous GLM at week 0, 100 mg at week 2, and 100 mg 4 weekly thereafter. The safety analysis set included 392 patients with UC, and the effectiveness analysis set 387 patients. Safety and effectiveness were assessed at week 6.

Results

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were reported in 8.2% (32/392) and serious ADRs in 4.6% (18/392). The most frequent ADRs were infection and infestation (3.3%), with herpes zoster being the most common. ADRs were significantly higher in patients with concomitant corticosteroid use (odds ratio [OR], 3.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.40–9.68). No significant difference in ADR incidence was observed between patients aged ≥65 and <65 years (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.35–3.47). Six-week effectiveness of GLM was confirmed by a decrease in the partial Mayo score (–2.3; 95% CI, –2.6 to –2.1) and C-reactive protein levels (–0.64; 95% CI, –0.92 to –0.36), including in the biologics-experienced population.

Conclusions

The safety and effectiveness of GLM at week 6 in a real-world setting were demonstrated in patients with UC in Japan. ADR patterns were consistent with previous reports with no new safety signals. Concomitant corticosteroid use may be associated with increased ADR incidence. The final results of the ongoing PMS are necessary for further evaluation.

GETECCU 2020 guidelines for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Developed using the GRADE approach

INTRODUCTION

Since the first edition of the Guidelines was published in 2013, much information has been generated around the treatment of ulcerative colitis, and new drugs and action protocols have been introduced. Clinical practice has changed substantially, warranting new approaches and a comprehensive review and update of the evidence.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Once again, we used the GRADE approach, supported by an electronic tool (https://gradepro.org). The clinical scenarios are the same as in the previous version (induction and maintenance in severe and mild-moderate flare-ups), as are the variables and their evaluation. However, in the updated guidelines, three questions have been deleted, 14 added and 30 maintained, making a total of 44 clinical questions. After an exhaustive review of the evidence, the recommendations are now updated.

RESULTS

Of the 44 questions analysed, no recommendation could be established in two due to the very low quality of the evidence, while in the other 42, based on different degrees of quality of evidence, recommendations were made according to the GRADE system. In 25 of these questions the final recommendation is strongly in favour, in six strongly against, in seven weakly in favour and in four weakly against. According to the scenarios and recommendations, six algorithms are proposed as a simple guide for practical decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

The aim of this update of the 2013 guidelines is to provide answers, based on the GRADE approach, to the different questions we ask ourselves daily when deciding the most appropriate treatment for our patients with ulcerative colitis in the different clinical scenarios.

Efficacy of switching from infliximab to golimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis in deep remission

BACKGROUND-AIM

Intravenously administered biologicals are associated with a huge pressure to Infusion Units and increased cost. We aimed to assess the impact of switching infliximab to golimumab in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients in deep remission. Patients and method: In a prospective, single-centre pilot study UC patients on infliximab mono-therapy for = 2 years, whowere in deep remission, consented to switch to golimumab and were followed for 1 year with clinical assessment, serum and faecal biomarkers, work productivity, satisfaction with treatment and quality of life parameters. Endoscopic remission was assessed by colonoscopy at 1 year. Patients fulfilling the same inclusion criteria, who did not consent to switch to golimumab and continued to receive infliximab mono-therapy, for the same period, served as controls.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a prospective, single-centre pilot study UC patients on infliximab mono-therapy for ≥ 2 years, who were in deep remission, consented to switch to golimumab and were followed for 1 year with clinical assessment, serum and faecal biomarkers, work productivity, satisfaction with treatment and quality of life parameters. Endoscopic remission was assessed by colonoscopy at 1 year. Patients fulfilling the same inclusion criteria, who did not consent to switch to golimumab and continued to receive infliximab mono-therapy, for the same period, served as controls.

RESULTS

Between October 2015 and October 2017, 20 patients were recruited; however one patient stopped therapy because of pregnancy. All 19 patients who were switched to golimumab were still in clinical, biomarker and endoscopic remission at 1 year and maintained excellent quality of life without any complications. In the control group, 18 of 19 patients were also in deep remission, since only one patient had a flare which was managed with IFX dose intensification. During a median 3 years extension treatment with golimumab only 2 patients experienced a flare of colitis.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study indicates that switching from in-fliximab to golimumab in UC patients in deep remission does not compromise treatment effectiveness or the course of disease; golimumab offers a valid alternative to intravenous infliximab infusions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Effectiveness of Third-Class Biologic Treatment in Crohn's Disease: A Multi-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies have described the effectiveness of ustekinumab (UST) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) failing anti- Tumor necrosis factors (TNFs); however, the effectiveness of VDZ or UST as a third-class biologic has not yet been described.

AIMS AND METHODS

In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of VDZ and UST as a third-class biologic in patients with CD.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and four patients were included; 156/204 (76%) patients received VDZ as a second- and UST as a third-class therapy (group A); the remaining 48/204 (24%) patients received UST as a second- and VDZ as a third-class therapy (group B). At week 16-22, 87/156 (55.5%) patients and 27/48 (56.2%) in groups A and B, respectively, responded to treatment (p = 0.9); 41/156 (26.2%) and 15/48 (31.2%) were in clinical remission (p = 0.5). At week 52; 89/103 (86%) patients and 25/29 (86.2%) of the patients with available data had responded to third-class treatment in groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.9); 31/103 (30%) and 47/29 (24.1%) were in clinical remission (p = 0.5).

CONCLUSION

Third-class biological therapy was effective in more than half of the patients with CD. No differences in effectiveness were detected between the use of VDZ and UST as a third-class agent.

Golimumab (anti-TNF monoclonal antibody): where we stand today

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) is a pro-inflammatory cytokine and its overexpression has been implicated in the pathophysiology of several chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Biological therapies, like TNF inhibitors, have been revolutionizing the course of these disorders. Golimumab is a transgenic anti-TNF monoclonal antibody that acts primarily by targeting and neutralizing TNF, thus preventing inflammation. It is approved for the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis, Ankylosing Spondylitis, Nonradiographic axial Spondyloarthritis, Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis, and Ulcerative Colitis. Clinical trials are also being conducted in other conditions. This review charts the clinical development of golimumab and outlines the data that support its potential use across several Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.

Trends in Morbidity and Mortality Following Colectomy Among Patients with Ulcerative Colitis in the Biologic Era (2002-2013): A Study Using the National Inpatient Sample

BACKGROUND

Total abdominal colectomy (TAC) is a treatment modality of last recourse for patients with severe and/or refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). The goal of this study is to evaluate temporal trends and treatment outcomes following TAC among hospitalized UC patients in the biologic era.

METHODS

We queried the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to identify patients older than 18 years with a primary diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (UC) who underwent TAC between 2002 and 2013. We evaluated postoperative morbidity and mortality as outcomes of interest. Logistic regression was used to explore factors associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality after TAC.

RESULTS

A weighted total of 307,799 UC hospitalizations were identified. Of these, 27,853 (9%) resulted in TAC. Between 2002 and 2013, hospitalizations for UC increased by over 70%; however, TAC rates dropped significantly from 111.1 to 77.1 colectomies per 1000 UC admissions. Overall, 2.2% of patients died after TAC. Mortality rates after TAC decreased from 3.5% in 2002 to 1.4% in 2013. Conversely, morbidity rates were stable throughout the study period. UC patients with emergent admissions, higher comorbidity scores and who had TAC in low volume colectomy hospitals had poorer outcomes. Regardless of admission type, outcomes were worse if TAC was performed more than 24 h after admission.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increased hospitalizations for UC, rates of TAC have declined during the post-biologic era. For UC patients who undergo TAC, mortality has declined significantly while morbidity remains stable. Older age, race, emergent admissions and delayed surgery are predictive factors of both postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Frequency and Effectiveness of Empirical Anti-TNF Dose Intensification in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Loss of response to antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies in inflammatory bowel disease occurs in a high proportion of patients. Our aim was to evaluate the loss of response to anti-TNF therapy, considered as the need for dose intensification (DI), DI effectiveness and the possible variables influencing its requirements. Bibliographical searches were performed.

SELECTION

prospective and retrospective studies assessing DI in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis patients treated for at least 12 weeks with an anti-TNF drug.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

studies using anti-TNF as a prophylaxis for the postoperative recurrence in Crohn's disease or those where DI was based on therapeutic drug monitoring.

DATA SYNTHESIS

effectiveness by intention-to-treat (random effects model). Data were stratified by medical condition (ulcerative colitis vs. Crohn's disease), anti-TNF drug and follow-up.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-three studies (33,241 patients) were included. Overall rate of the DI requirement after 12 months was 28% (95% CI 24-32, I2 = 96%, 41 studies) in naïve patients and 39% (95% CI 31-47, I2 = 86%, 18 studies) in non-naïve patients. The DI requirement rate was higher both in those with prior anti-TNF exposure (p = 0.01) and with ulcerative colitis (p = 0.02). The DI requirement rate in naïve patients after 36 months was 35% (95% CI 28-43%; I2 = 98%; 18 studies). The overall short-term response and remission rates of empirical DI in naïve patients were 63% (95% CI 48-78%; I2 = 99%; 32 studies) and 48% (95% CI: 39-58%; I2 = 92%; 25 studies), respectively. The loss of response to anti-TNF agents-and, consequently, DI-occurred frequently in inflammatory bowel disease (approximately in one-fourth at one year and in one-third at 3 years). Empirical DI was a relatively effective therapeutic option.

Efficacy and Safety of Tofacitinib Re-treatment for Ulcerative Colitis After Treatment Interruption: Results from the OCTAVE Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Here, we evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib re-treatment following treatment interruption in patients with ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

Here, patients with clinical response to tofacitinib 10 mg b.d. induction therapy were randomised to receive placebo in OCTAVE Sustain. Those experiencing treatment failure after Week 8 of OCTAVE Sustain entered OCTAVE Open and re-initiated tofacitinib 10 mg b.d. [re-treatment subpopulation]; efficacy and safety data are presented up to Month 36 of OCTAVE Open.

RESULTS

Median time to treatment failure following interruption was 169 (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.0-179.0) and 123 [95% CI, 91.0-168.0] days for induction remitters, and induction responders but non-remitters, respectively. Following re-treatment with tofacitinib, rates (non-responder imputation after a patient discontinued; latest observation carried forward imputation after a patient advanced to a subsequent study [NRI-LOCF]) of clinical response, remission, and endoscopic improvement were 74.0%, 39.0%, and 55.0% at Month 2, and 48.5%, 37.4%, and 42.4% at Month 36, respectively. Among induction remitters and induction responders but non-remitters, clinical response rates at Month 36 were 60.6% and 42.4% [NRI-LOCF], respectively. Efficacy was recaptured regardless of prior tumour necrosis factor inhibitor failure status. The safety profile of tofacitinib 10 mg b.d. re-treatment was consistent with the overall cohort and demonstrated no new safety risks associated with exposure of ≤36 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Median time to treatment failure was numerically higher in induction remitters versus induction responders but non-remitters. Following treatment interruption, efficacy was safely and successfully recaptured with tofacitinib 10 mg b.d. re-treatment in a substantial proportion of patients [ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT01458574;NCT01470612].

Medical therapy versus surgery in moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis, a chronic inflammatory condition that affects the colon from rectum to caecum, is characterized by periods of increased bowel movements, blood in feces, rectal urgency, tenesmus, and abdominal pain, with periods of remission and flares of disease, which negatively impact quality of life. A number of therapeutic options are available for patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis, however, no clear treatment algorithm exists. Therapeutic goals include short-term benefits for patients (i.e., the reduction/absence of symptoms, essentially stool frequency and rectal bleeding) and long-term benefits (i.e., sustained clinical remission, steroid-free remission, and mucosal healing). Therapies currently approved and available for the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis include monoclonal antibodies such as those targeting anti-tumor necrosis factor α (i.e., infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab), anti-adhesion molecules (i.e., vedolizumab), anti-interleukin 12/23 agents (i.e., ustekinumab), and Janus Kinase inhibitors (i.e., tofacitinib). Surgical approaches should also be considered in patients refractory to medical therapy or with complications (including toxic megacolon or colonic dysplasia/cancer). This review provides an overview of currently available treatment options for patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis and summarizes factors that should be considered during the therapeutic decision.

Two-year effectiveness and safety of golimumab in ulcerative colitis: An IG-IBD study

Background

Few data exist regarding the long‐term effectiveness of golimumab in ulcerative colitis. No data have been reported on real‐world continuous clinical response.

Objective

This study aimed to describe the long‐term outcomes in a large cohort of patients on golimumab who had ulcerative colitis.

Methods

Consecutive patients with active ulcerative colitis, started on golimumab, were enrolled and prospectively followed up. The primary end point was to evaluate the long‐term persistence on golimumab therapy.

Results

A total of 173 patients with ulcerative colitis were studied. Of these, 79.2% were steroid dependent, and 46.3% were naïve to anti‐tumour necrosis factor alpha agents. The median duration of golimumab therapy was 52 weeks (range: 4–142 weeks). The cumulative probability of maintaining golimumab treatment was 47.3% and 22.5% at 54 and 108 weeks, respectively. Biological‐naïve status (odds ratio [OR] = 3.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.44–6.29; p = 0.003) and being able to discontinue steroids at Week 8 (OR = 3.32, 95% CI: 1.34–8.30; p = 0.010) and Week 14 (OR = 2.94, 95% CI: 1.08–8.02; p = 0.036) were associated with longer persistence on therapy. At Week 54, 65/124 (52.4%) postinduction responders were in continuous clinical response. A continuous clinical response was associated with a lower likelihood of golimumab discontinuation throughout the subsequent year of therapy (p < 0.01). Overall, 40 (23.1%) patients were in clinical remission at the last follow‐up visit. Twenty‐six adverse events were recorded, leading to golimumab withdrawal in 9.2% of patients.

Conclusions

: Biological‐naïve status and not requiring steroids at Weeks 8 and 14 seem to be associated with a longer persistence on golimumab therapy in ulcerative colitis.

Endoscopic remission can be predicted by golimumab concentrations in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with the changed label

BACKGROUND

In 2018, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) replaced a fixed 50 mg every 4-week maintenance regimen of golimumab for ulcerative colitis (UC) patients weighing <80 kg with new, flexible dosing that allows reactive dose optimization to 100 mg if clinically needed. We analyzed the endoscopic remission rates and pharmacokinetics of this new dosing regimen in real-life settings.

METHODS

We prospectively recruited 30 consecutive (17 with body weight <80 kg) patients with UC who received golimumab with the new EMA label. The primary endpoint was endoscopic remission (Mayo ≤1) assessed by centrally-read endoscopy at week 14 and year 1. Golimumab concentrations, measured at nine prespecified timepoints, were correlated with endoscopic remission and identified cut-offs.

RESULTS

Endoscopic remission was achieved in 15/30 (50%) and 10/30 (33%) patients at week 14 and year 1, respectively. Reactive dose optimization to 100 mg maintenance was needed in 13/17 (76%) patients. Golimumab concentrations at week 6 predicted week 14 and year 1 endoscopic remission. Week 6 concentrations >10.7 µg/ml were a strong predictor for achievement and maintenance of endoscopic remission during the first year of treatment, while concentrations <5.1 µg/ml identified the opposite.

CONCLUSION

One-third of the patients reached and maintained endoscopic remission during the first year of golimumab treatment, but the need for dose optimization to 100 mg every 4 weeks of maintenance was high in patients weighing <80 kg. Golimumab concentrations <5.1 µg/ml at week 6 identified patients who are unlikely to reach and maintain endoscopic remission with the new, flexible EMA label.

Second Mexican consensus on biologic therapy and small-molecule inhibitors in inflammatory bowel disease

INTRODUCTION

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic and incurable entity. Therapy with anti-TNF-α agents was the first biologic therapy approved in Mexico for IBD. New biologic agents, such as vedolizumab and ustekinumab, have recently been added, as have small-molecule inhibitors.

AIM

To update the biologic therapeutic approach to IBD in Mexico with new anti-TNF-α agents and novel biologics whose mechanisms of action induce and maintain remission of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis (UC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mexican specialists in the areas of gastroenterology and inflammatory bowel disease were summoned to participate. The consensus was divided into 3 modules, with 49 statements. The Delphi method was applied, sending the statements to all participants to be analyzed and edited, before the face-to-face meeting. During said meeting, the clinical studies were shown, emphasizing the level of clinical evidence, and the final discussion and voting round on the level of agreement of all the statements was conducted.

RESULTS

In this second Mexican consensus, recommendations are made for new anti-TNF-α agents, such as golimumab, new biologics with other mechanisms of action, such as vedolizumab and ustekinumab, as well as for the small-molecule inhibitor, tofacitinib.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated recommendations focus on patient-reported outcomes, biologic therapy, small-molecule inhibitors, and the safety aspects of each of the drugs.

Efficacies of first and second tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in refractory ulcerative colitis patients in real-world practice

BACKGROUND

Switching tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors is an important treatment option for refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) patients who fail the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy, although many questions about this option remain unanswered.

METHODS

The efficacy of the second anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy in refractory UC patients who failed the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy was examined using the Mayo score as a measure of disease activity at week 8. The efficacy of the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy before treatment and at weeks 8 and 52 was also evaluated in real-world practice.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in remission induction and maintenance between infliximab and adalimumab as the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy in UC patients. Of 123 UC patients, 21 (17.1%) switched tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors. Eight (38.1%), 4 (19.0%), 7 (33.3%), and 2 (9.5%) patients switched from infliximab to adalimumab, infliximab to golimumab, adalimumab to infliximab, and adalimumab to golimumab, respectively. Three (100%) with intolerance to the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy, 5 (41.7%) with loss of response to the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy, and 1 (20.0%) with no improvement with the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy had clinical remission at week 8.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors is more effective for refractory UC patients who are intolerant and lose response to the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy rather than for those showing no improvement with the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy. Patients with primary failure of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy should be switched to another class of drug.

Treatment persistence and colectomy-free outcomes in patients with ulcerative colitis receiving golimumab or adalimumab: a UK experience

Objective

To examine real-world treatment persistence, colectomy-free survival and treatment switching patterns in UK patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) prescribed golimumab or adalimumab.

Design

This was a retrospective chart review study in adult patients diagnosed with UC using data from 16 National Health Service sites in the UK. Patient records were included in the study if they had initiated first or second-line adalimumab or golimumab between 1 March 2016 and 30 September 2017 (index date). Subjects were required for ≥6 months post treatment initiation. Demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment-related data and colectomy data were extracted over a follow-up period of 6–12 months. Treatment persistence rate was the primary outcome. Colectomy-free survival and treatment switching were secondary outcomes. Outcomes were compared between treatments using χ² tests and Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The t-tests were used for continuous variables. Time-to-event variables were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests.

Results

The study included a total of 183 patients (96 (52.5%) prescribed adalimumab; 87 (47.5%) golimumab), and patients were mostly first line (79.8%). Demographic and clinical characteristics were generally similar between treatment groups. Persistence rates within 12 months were 64.6% for adalimumab and 64.4% for golimumab (p=0.681). Overall, 20.2% switched to other therapy within 1 year, with 8.2% golimumab and 12.0% adalimumab switching to another biologic. Of patients prescribed adalimumab, 14.6% had ≥1 dose change, mainly dose escalations. In the 12 months post treatment initiation, 8.2% of patients underwent colectomy, with no significant difference in colectomy-free survival by treatment, p=0.73.

Conclusion

This study provides evidence of clinical outcomes and real-world persistence for adalimumab and golimumab in UC. The persistence rates of both therapies were above 64.0% at 12 months following treatment initiation. In addition, the 1-year colectomy-free survival was relatively similar between the two treatments.

Switching biologics used in inflammatory bowel diseases: how to deal with in practice?

Inflammatory bowel disease patients do not all respond to biological treatment since several patients will initially respond but will lose response or develop side effects over time. In such cases, a switch from one biologic to another offers a valuable clinical solution. This requires to evaluate both patient and drug profiles in combination with the reason(s) for switching in order to adequately select the second-line biologic. Therapeutic drug monitoring is obviously a useful tool but is currently limited to the use of anti-TNFα. In this review paper, we provide overview and guidance on switching biologics in clinical practice, with the emphasis on the motivations for switching, the selection of the second-line biologic, as well as explanations on how and when to switch.

Real-life experience with 4 years of golimumab persistence in ulcerative colitis patients

Golimumab has demonstrated its long-term efficacy and safety in ulcerative colitis in clinical trials, but no data of long-term persistence has been published from real world. To estimate long-term persistence of golimumab, as well as factors associated with longer persistence, in patients with ulcerative colitis in real life. Observational multicentre study including adult patients with ulcerative colitis treated with golimumab and with at least twelve months of follow-up. We included 190 patients, 105 (55.26%) naive to anti-TNF, with mean disease duration of 9.32 ± 8.09 years. Probability of persistence was 63%, 46%, 39% and 27% at 1, 2, 3 and 4 years, respectively. Persistence was lower in patients with primary failure to previous anti-TNF. Eighty-two (43.16%) patients needed dose intensification during follow-up, with a mean time until intensification of 8.03 ± 8.64 months. Dose intensification and lower disease duration predicted higher persistence with golimumab (p = 0.037 and p = 0.008, respectively). During a follow-up of 17.25 ± 15.83 months, 32 (16.5%) patients needed hospitalisation and 11 (6%) underwent colectomy. No unexpected adverse events were reported. Golimumab has demonstrated good persistence and safety profile for long treatment in ulcerative colitis patients.

Differences in the need for adalimumab dose optimization between Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis

AIM

to compare the need for and time to adalimumab dose escalation and de-escalation between patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

this observational cohort study included patients with luminal CD or patients with UC treated with adalimumab. Adalimumab dose optimization was decided based on the Harvey-Bradshaw index (CD) or the partial Mayo score (UC). The co-primary endpoints were the differences in the rate of dose escalation and the cumulative probability of escalation-free survival between cohorts. We also evaluated the rates of de-escalation and predictors of adalimumab dose escalation and de-escalation.

RESULTS

twenty-four of 43 CD patients (56%) and 28 of 43 UC patients (65%) required adalimumab dose escalation. UC patients had a higher adjusted rate of dose escalation (hazard ratio [HR] 2.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19-4.56; p = 0.013) than CD patients. The median time to dose escalation was significantly shorter for UC than CD patients (3.2 months, interquartile range [IQR]: 2.0-10.3 vs 12.2 months, IQR: 6.1-35.7; p = 0.001). Survival curves showed that UC patients had an increased probability of dose escalation (p < 0.001). Prior anti-TNF therapy was associated with dose escalation (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.05-4.34; p = 0.037). Adalimumab dose de-escalation was attempted in 32% of UC patients and 50% of CD patients. Survival curves showed that CD patients had an increased probability of dose de-escalation (p = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

UC patients more frequently required adalimumab dose escalation than CD patients. UC patients required optimization earlier than CD patients. More CD patients than UC patients can be dose de-escalated later on during treatment.

Personalizing Treatment in IBD: Hype or Reality in 2020? Can We Predict Response to Anti-TNF?

The advent of anti-TNF agents as the first approved targeted therapy in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients has made a major impact on our existing therapeutic algorithms. They have not only been approved for induction and maintenance treatment in IBD patients, but have also enabled us to define and achieve novel therapeutic outcomes, such as combination of clinical symptom control and endoscopic remission, as well as mucosal healing. Nevertheless, approximately one third of treated patients do not respond to initiated anti-TNF therapy and these treatments are associated with sometimes severe systemic side-effects. There is therefore the currently unmet clinical need do establish predictive markers of response to identify the subgroup of IBD patients, that have a heightened probability of response. There have so far been approaches from different fields of IBD research, to descry markers that would empower us to apply TNF-inhibitors in a more rational manner. These markers encompass findings from disease-related and clinical factors, pharmacokinetics, biochemical markers, blood and stool derived parameters, pharmacogenomics, microbial species, metabolic compounds, and mucosal factors. Furthermore, changes in the intestinal immune cell composition in response to therapeutic pressure of anti-TNF treatment have recently been implicated in the process of molecular resistance to these drugs. Insights into factors that determine resistance to anti-TNF therapy give reasonable hope, that a more targeted approach can then be utilized in these non-responders. Here, IL-23 could be identified as one of the key factors determining resistance to TNF-inhibitors. Growing insights into the molecular mechanism of action of TNF-inhibitors might also enable us to derive critical molecular markers that not only mediate the clinical effects of anti-TNF therapy, but which level of expression might also correlate with its therapeutic efficacy. In this narrative review, we present an overview of currently identified possible predictive markers for successful anti-TNF therapy and discuss identified molecular pathways that drive resistance to these substances. We will also point out the necessity and difficulty of developing and validating a diagnostic marker concerning clinically relevant outcome parameters, before they can finally enter daily clinical practice and enable a more personalized therapeutic approach.

Vedolizumab for ulcerative colitis: Real world outcomes from a multicenter observational cohort of Australia and Oxford

BACKGROUND

Vedolizumab (VDZ), a humanised monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits alpha4-beta7 integrins is approved for use in adult moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) patients.

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of VDZ in the real-world management of UC in a large multicenter cohort involving two countries and to identify predictors of achieving remission.

METHODS

A retrospective review of Australian and Oxford, United Kingdom data for UC patients. Clinical response at 3 mo, endoscopic remission at 6 mo and clinical remission at 3, 6 and 12 mo were assessed. Cox regression models and Kaplan Meier curves were performed to assess the time to remission, time to failure and the covariates influencing them. Safety outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

Three hundred and three UC patients from 14 centres in Australia and United Kingdom, [60% n = 182, anti-TNF naïve] were included. The clinical response was 79% at 3 mo with more Australian patients achieving clinical response compared to Oxford (83% vs 70% P = 0.01). Clinical remission for all patients was 56%, 62% and 60% at 3, 6 and 12 mo respectively. Anti-TNF naive patients were more likely to achieve remission than exposed patients at all the time points (3 mo 66% vs 40% P < 0.001, 6 mo 73% vs 46% P < 0.001, 12 mo 66% vs 51% P = 0.03). More Australian patients achieved endoscopic remission at 6 mo compared to Oxford (69% vs 43% P = 0.01). On multi-variate analysis, anti-TNF naïve patients were 1.8 (95%CI: 1.3-2.3) times more likely to achieve remission than anti-TNF exposed (P < 0.001). 32 patients (11%) had colectomy by 12 mo.

CONCLUSION

VDZ was safe and effective with 60% of UC patients achieving clinical remission at 12 mo and prior anti-TNF exposure influenced this outcome.

Predictors of Primary Response to Biologic Treatment [Anti-TNF, Vedolizumab, and Ustekinumab] in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: From Basic Science to Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD]-ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease-are commonly treated with biologic drugs. However, only approximately two-thirds of patients have an initial response to these therapies. Personalised medicine has the potential to optimise efficacy, decrease the risk of adverse drug events, and reduce costs by establishing the most suitable therapy for a selected patient.

AIM

The present study reviews the potential predictors of short-term primary response to biologic treatment, including not only anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] agents [such as infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab, and golimumab] but also vedolizumab and ustekinumab.

METHODS

We performed a systematic bibliographical search to identify studies investigating predictive factors of response to biologic therapy.

RESULTS

For anti-TNF agents, most of the evaluated factors have not demonstrated usefulness, and many others are still controversial. Thus, only a few factors may have a potential role in the prediction of the response, including disease behaviour/phenotype, disease severity, C-reactive protein, albumin, cytokine expression in serum, previous anti-TNF therapy, some proteomic markers, and some colorectal mucosa markers. For vedolizumab, the availability of useful predictive markers seems to be even lower, with only some factors showing a limited value, such as the expression of α4β7 integrin in blood, the faecal microbiota, some proteomic markers, and some colorectal mucosa markers. Finally, in the case of ustekinumab, no predictive factor has been reported yet to be helpful in clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

In summary, currently no single marker fulfils all criteria for being an appropriate prognostic indicator of response to any biologic treatment in IBD.

Long-term safety of approved biologics for ulcerative colitis

INTRODUCTION

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a type of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) affecting the large intestine and carrying a heavy burden of morbidity for patients. Conventional treatment is based on mesalamine, corticosteroids, and immunosuppressants. In the last two decades, biologic therapies have revolutionized the treatment of UC, increasing the number of therapeutic options and providing better disease control.

AREAS COVERED

Most biologics have been approved in recent years and long-term data are still scarce. The aim of this review is to summarize safety data on long-term use of biologics in ulcerative colitis. The authors searched the literature up to May 2020 for studies assessing biological drugs' safety in UC with a follow-up longer than one year and present the key findings.

EXPERT OPINION

Biologics long-term safety is consistent with what expected from shorter term studies and no main new concerns emerged from longer follow-up. Real world experience is consistent with clinical trials data. Although comparisons are difficult, safety profiles are not equal among different biologics.

Real-Life Effectiveness and Safety of Golimumab and Its Predictors of Response in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis

BACKGROUND

Golimumab is a new anti-TNF-alpha monoclonal antibody for patients with ulcerative colitis.

AIMS

To assess the short- and long-term effectiveness and safety of golimumab in daily clinical practice and to identify predictors of response.

METHODS

Consecutive patients treated with golimumab in 22 Italian centers were enrolled. Clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data were prospectively collected before and during treatment. A subgroup of patients completed a questionnaire to assess personal satisfaction with a golimumab autoinjector system.

RESULTS

A total of 196 patients were included. After 3 months, 130 patients were responders (66.3%) and showed significant reductions in mean partial, total, and endoscopic Mayo scores and in mean ESR, C-reactive protein, and fecal calprotectin levels (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that a higher total Mayo score (p < 0.001, OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.8) and naïve status to anti-TNF-alpha (p = 0.015, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.5) were predictive of a favorable response. Seventy-seven (39.3%) of the 130 responders maintained a response at month 12 of therapy. There were 17 adverse events, 28 patients needed hospitalization, and 15 patients underwent surgery. Self-administration of the drug was appreciated by most patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and safety of golimumab in daily clinical practice were confirmed for the short- and long-term treatment of patients with active ulcerative colitis. Patients naïve to the anti-TNF-alpha monoclonal antibody and those with a higher total Mayo score were more likely to respond to golimumab.

Comparative efficacy and safety of vedolizumab and infliximab in ulcerative colitis after failure of a first subcutaneous anti-TNF agent: a multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Few data exist to help select a second biologic agent in patients with refractory ulcerative colitis (UC).

AIM

To compare the efficacy of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in UC patients who failed a first subcutaneous anti-tumor necrosing factor (TNF) agent.

METHODS

Consecutive UC patients from 12 French centres starting IFX or VDZ after at least one injection of adalimumab or golimumab have been included in a retrospective study. Outcomes were clinical remission at week 14, survival without treatment discontinuation and survival without UC-related event.

RESULTS

Among the 225 patients included, clinical remission at week 14 was achieved in 40/154 (26%) patients treated with IFX and in 35/71 (49%) treated with VDZ (P = 0.001). After a propensity score matching analysis, this difference remained significant (odds ratio: 1.67; 95% confidence interval: 1.08-2.56; P = 0.02). With a median follow-up of 117 weeks, survival rates without treatment discontinuation at years 1 and 3 were 50% and 29% with IFX, and 80% and 55% with VDZ, respectively (P < 0.001). Regarding survival without UC-related event, they were 49% and 27% with IFX, and 74% and 52% with VDZ (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

After failure of a first subcutaneous anti-TNF agent, UC patients were more likely to achieve clinical remission with VDZ than those treated with IFX. Although due to prescription habits patients in the IFX group had a significantly more severe disease, these differences remained after adjustments and subgroup analyses. Such results have to be confirmed prospectively and warrant dedicated head-to-head trials.