Adalimumab or infliximab as monotherapy, or in combination with an immunomodulator, in the treatment of Crohn's disease

6-Thioguanine nucleotide levels are associated with infliximab but not adalimumab levels in inflammatory bowel disease patients on combination therapy

BACKGROUND

Thiopurine co-therapy with anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNFα) agents is associated with higher anti-TNFα drug levels and reduced immunogenicity in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the association between 6-thioguanine nucleotide (6-TGN) and anti-TNFα levels and the optimal 6-TGN threshold level associated with higher anti-TNFα levels in combination therapy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cross-sectional multicentre study of patients with IBD on combination anti-TNFα and thiopurine maintenance therapy between January 2015 and August 2021. Primary outcomes were infliximab and adalimumab levels. Secondary outcomes were antibodies to infliximab (ATI) or adalimumab (ATA). Univariable and multivariable linear regression were performed to identify variables associated with anti-TNFα levels. Receiver operator characteristic curves were used to define the optimal 6-TGN cut-off levels associated with therapeutic anti-TNFα levels.

RESULTS

The study included 743 paired 6-TGN and anti-TNFα levels (640 infliximab and 103 adalimumab). 6-TGN levels were associated with infliximab levels, but not adalimumab levels, on univariable and multivariable regression. The optimal 6-TGN cut-off associated with therapeutic infliximab levels (≥5 mcg/mL) was 261 pmol/8 × 108 red blood cell (RBC) (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.57) for standard infliximab dosing and 227.5 pmol/8 × 108 RBC (AUC = 0.58) for escalated dosing. For therapeutic adalimumab levels (≥7.5 mcg/mL), the 6-TGN cut-off was 218.5 pmol/8 × 108 RBC (AUC = 0.59) for standard adalimumab dosing and 237.5 pmol/8 × 108 RBC (AUC = 0.63) for escalated dosing.

CONCLUSION

6-TGN levels were weakly associated with infliximab but not adalimumab levels in combination therapy. 6-TGN levels in the lower end of the therapeutic range (230-260 pmol/8 × 108 RBC) may be adequate to maintain higher infliximab levels, particularly with escalated infliximab dosing.

Effectiveness of biologic therapies in achieving treatment targets in inflammatory bowel disease; real-world data from the Middle East (ENROLL study)

Background

Real-world data assessing the effectiveness of biologics in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in the Middle East are not well-established. In our study, we evaluated the effectiveness of biologic therapies in achieving clinical and endoscopic outcomes in biologic-naïve patients with IBD.

Design

A retrospective chart review was conducted at two tertiary care gastroenterology centers using electronic medical records of patients with moderate-to-severe IBD. The study period was from October 2017 to October 2023. Patients who were on infliximab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, or vedolizumab for 12 months were included in the analysis. The primary outcomes were the percentage of IBD-related hospitalizations or surgeries, achieving steroid-free remission, and endoscopic remission.

Results

A total of 422 patients were included in the study, of whom 264 (62.5%) patients had Crohn's disease (CD) and 158 (39%) had ulcerative colitis (UC). In patients with CD, endoscopic remission was attained in 51 (52%) of the patients on adalimumab, 38 (53%) of the patients on infliximab, 34 (56%) of the patients on ustekinumab, and 16 (51%) of the patients on vedolizumab. In patients with UC, endoscopic remission was attained in 40 (56%) of the patients on infliximab, 26 (61%) of the patients on adalimumab, 8 (55%) of the patients on ustekinumab, and 11 (53%) of the patients on vedolizumab.

Conclusion

adalimumab, infliximab, ustekinumab, and vedolizumab were all effective in achieving clinical and endoscopic clinical outcomes in IBD in both UC and CD. The findings of this study suggest that the efficacy of biologics in a Middle Eastern population is similar to that in a Western population.

How comparative studies can inform treatment decisions for Crohn's disease

INTRODUCTION

As new therapies for the treatment of Crohn's disease (CD) are approved, there is an increasing need for evidence that clarifies their positioning and sequencing.

AREAS COVERED

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) aims to inform physicians' decisions when they choose which intervention (drug or treatment strategy) to administer to their patients. Pragmatic head-to-head trials represent the best tools for CER, but only a few have been published in the IBD field. Network meta-analyses can point toward the superiority of one drug over another, but they do not reflect everyday clinical practice. Finally, real-world evidence complements that coming from head-to-head trials and network meta-analyses, assessing the real-life effectiveness of therapeutic interventions.

EXPERT OPINION

There is insufficient evidence to create a definitive therapeutic algorithm for CD, but some general considerations can be made. Anti-TNF-α agents seemingly represent the most 'sustainable' first-line choice, considering benefit-harm ratio and costs; vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and risankizumab may be considered as first-line choice when safety issues become prominent. In the event of pharmacodynamic failure, out-of-class swap is to be preferred - possibly with anti-IL23p19 as the best option, with unclear data regarding upadacitinib positioning; a second anti-TNF-α could be considered, as a second choice, after pharmacokinetic failure.

Therapeutic drug monitoring in inflammatory bowel diseases. Position statement of the Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis

The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease has undergone a significant transformation following the introduction of biologic drugs. Thanks to these drugs, treatment goals have evolved from clinical response and remission to more ambitious objectives, such as endoscopic or radiologic remission. However, even though biologics are highly effective, a significant percentage of patients will not achieve an initial response or may lose it over time. We know that there is a direct relationship between the trough concentrations of the biologic and its therapeutic efficacy, with more demanding therapeutic goals requiring higher drug levels, and inadequate exposure being common. Therapeutic drug monitoring of biologic medications, along with pharmacokinetic models, provides us with the possibility of offering a personalized approach to treatment for patients with IBD. Over the past few years, relevant information has accumulated regarding its utility during or after induction, as well as in the maintenance of biologic treatment, in reactive or proactive strategies, and prior to withdrawal or treatment de-escalation. The aim of this document is to establish recommendations regarding the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring of biologics in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, in different clinical practice scenarios, and to identify areas where its utility is evident, promising, or controversial.

Clinical use of biologics for Crohn's disease in adults: lessons learned from real-world studies

INTRODUCTION

The therapeutic armamentarium for managing Crohn's disease (CD) has expanded significantly in recent decades. Several biologics with three different mechanisms of action [anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, anti-integrin α4β7, and anti-IL 12/23] are currently available to manage CD.

AREA COVERED

This narrative review aims to summarize the most significant efficacy and safety data on the use of infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA), vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST) for the treatment of CD obtained from studies conducted in the real world (RW), compared to the results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

EXPERT OPINION

RW studies reported that biologic agents included in this analysis have higher remission rates and lower adverse event rates than findings from RCTs for treating patients with CD. All biological agents have proven effective and safe in RW studies, even when using biosimilars or switching to subcutaneous administration of the molecules for which they are available. Finally, anti-TNF-α agents, particularly IFX, have a higher rate of adverse events (AEs) than VDZ and UST. Therefore, patients at higher risk of AEs may benefit from other biologics than anti-TNF-α. However, further long-term RW studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Durability of the First Biologic in Patients with Crohn's Disease: A Nationwide Study from the epi-IIRN

BACKGROUND

In this nationwide study we aimed to compare the durability of the first initiated biologic in Crohn's disease [CD], stratified by monotherapy and combotherapy.

METHODS

We used data from the epi-IIRN cohort, which includes 98% of the Israeli inflammatory bowel disease population [2005-2020]. Durability was defined as consistent treatment without surgery or added medications [except for combination therapy with thiopurines or methotrexate]. All comparisons were based on stringent propensity-score matching and paired time-to-event analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 19 264 patients with CD were included, of whom 7452 [39%] received biologics with a median follow-up of 6.8 years (interquartile range [IQR] 3.6-10.7). Time to biologics decreased gradually from 6.7 years [IQR 2.7-10.4] in 2005 to 0.2 years [0.07-0.23] in 2020. The durability of the first biologic after 1 and 3 years was higher with adalimumab monotherapy [88%/61%] than vedolizumab monotherapy [81%/59%; n = 394 matched patients, p = 0.04] and similar between infliximab monotherapy and vedolizumab monotherapy [65%/43%; n = 182 matched patients, p = 0.1]. Durability was higher in adalimumab monotherapy vs infliximab monotherapy [83%/62% vs 71%/48% at 1/3 years; p <0.001] and it was similar in adalimumab monotherapy vs infliximab combotherapy [87%/63% vs 80%/58%, respectively; p = 0.1]. Durability was higher in combotherapy compared with monotherapy for both infliximab [85%/64% vs 67%/43%, respectively; n = 496 matched pairs, p <0.001], and adalimumab [93%/76% vs 82%/62%, respectively; n = 540 matched pairs, p <0.001].

CONCLUSION

Durability of the first biologic in CD was highest for adalimumab monotherapy. Combotherapy further increased the durability of adalimumab and infliximab. Unless otherwise indicated, our data may support using anti-tumour necrosis factors [TNFs] as first-line biologics in CD, particularly adalimumab if monotherapy is advised.

Dose escalation of adalimumab as a strategy to overcome anti-drug antibodies: A case report of infantile-onset inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Treatment of infantile-onset inflammatory bowel disease (IO-IBD) is often challenging due to its aggressive disease course and failure of standard therapies with a need for biologics. Secondary loss of response is frequently caused by the production of anti-drug antibodies, a well-known problem in IBD patients on biologic treatment. We present a case of IO-IBD treated with therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)-guided high-dose anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy, in which dose escalation monitoring was used as a strategy to overcome anti-drug antibodies.

CASE SUMMARY

A 5-mo-old boy presented with a history of persistent hematochezia from the 10th d of life, as well as relapsing perianal abscess and growth failure. Hypoalbuminemia, anemia, and elevated inflammatory markers were also present. Endoscopic assessment revealed skip lesions with deep colic ulcerations, inflammatory anal sub-stenosis, and deep fissures with persistent abscess. A diagnosis of IO-IBD Crohn-like was made. The patient was initially treated with oral steroids and fistulotomy. After the perianal abscess healed, adalimumab (ADA) was administered with concomitant gradual tapering of steroids. Clinical and biochemical steroid-free remission was achieved with good trough levels. After 3 mo, antibodies to ADA (ATA) were found with undetectable trough levels; therefore, we optimized the therapy schedule, first administering 10 mg weekly and subsequently up to 20 mg weekly (2.8 mg/kg/dose). After 2 mo of high-dose treatment, ATA disappeared, with concomitant high trough levels and stable clinical and biochemical remission of the disease.

CONCLUSION

TDM-guided high-dose ADA treatment as a monotherapy overcame ATA production. This strategy could be a good alternative to combination therapy, especially in very young patients.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes in Pediatric Patients with Ileocolonic Crohn Disease Treated with Infliximab Versus Adalimumab

OBJECTIVES

Infliximab is considered superior to adalimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis, especially in severe cases. Whether this is true for Crohn disease (CD) patients with colonic involvement is unclear. Our aim was to compare the clinical effectiveness of infliximab versus adalimumab in pediatric ileocolonic (L3) CD.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients <18 years with ileocolonic CD treated with infliximab or adalimumab between 2014 and 2021. Primary outcome was steroid-free clinical remission by week 52. Secondary outcomes were treatment modifications, drug discontinuation, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-associated hospitalizations, and surgery during the first year of treatment.

RESULTS

We identified 74 patients treated with adalimumab and 41 with infliximab, with comparable demographic features. Concomitant immunomodulator therapy at biologic initiation was significantly lower in the adalimumab group (28% vs 85%, P < 0.001). Rates of drug intensification were higher in the infliximab group at end of induction (EOI) and at 52 weeks (55% vs 32% and 88% vs 46%, P < 0.001). Given significant differences between initial median Pediatric Crohn Disease Activity Index scores (20.0 [interquartile range, IQR 15.0-27.5] vs 11.0 [IQR 7.5-20.0] for infliximab and adalimumab groups, respectively, P < 0.001), propensity score matching was performed. Following matching, the rate of patients in steroid-free clinical remission by EOI was significantly higher in the adalimumab group (93.8% vs 46.9%, P < 0.001), but comparable by 1 year. Moreover, inflammatory markers and fecal calprotectin values were also similar at these time points. Rates of drug discontinuation, IBD-associated admissions, and surgery were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In a retrospective study of patients with ileocolonic CD, adalimumab and infliximab had comparable outcomes by 52 weeks.

Use of biologics for the management of Crohn's disease: IG-IBD clinical guidelines based on the GRADE methodology

A cure for Crohn's disease (CD), a chronic inflammatory disease of the gastrointestinal tract of unknown etiology, is not available, so patients require lifelong management to keep inflammation under control. The therapeutic armamentarium has expanded with approval of several biological drugs, including infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab and ustekinumab - monoclonal antibodies that target different inflammatory pathways - and darvadstrocel, a suspension of expanded human allogeneic, adipose-derived, mesenchymal stromal cells for the treatment of refractory complex perianal fistula. Notwithstanding existing practice guidelines on medical therapy for CD, the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease felt the need to issue new guidelines focused on the use of biologics for managing the intestinal manifestations of CD and based on the GRADE methodology. This document presents recommendations regarding six clinical settings, from the induction to the maintenance of clinical remission, and from optimization and de-escalation of treatments to dealing with perianal CD and post-operative recurrence. The 19 evidence-based statements are supported by information on the quality of the evidence, agreement rate among panel members, and panel comments mainly based on evidence from real world studies.

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in comparison to infliximab for Crohn's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab (ADA) and infliximab (IFX) are the cornerstones of the treatment of Crohn’s disease (CD). It remains controversial whether there is a difference in the effectiveness and safety between IFX and ADA for CD.

AIM

To perform a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of ADA and IFX in CD.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched. Cohort studies were considered for inclusion. The primary outcomes were induction of response and remission, maintenance of response and remission, and secondary loss of response. Adverse events were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Fourteen cohort studies were included. There was no apparent difference between the two agents in the induction response [odds ratio (OR): 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93-1.74, P = 0.14] and remission (OR: 1.11, 95%CI: 0.78–1.57, P = 0.57), maintenance response (OR: 1.08, 95%CI: 0.76–1.53, P = 0.67) and remission (OR: 1.26, 95%CI: 0.87–1.82, P = 0.22), and secondary loss of response (OR: 1.01, 95%CI: 0.65–1.55, P = 0.97). Subgroup analysis revealed ADA and IFX had similar rates of response, remission, and loss of response either in anti-tumor necrosis factor-α naïve or non-naïve patients. Further, there was a similar result regardless of whether CD patients were treated with optimized therapy, including dose intensification, shortening interval, and combination immunomodulators. However, ADA had a fewer overall adverse events than IFX (OR: 0.62, 95%CI: 0.42–0.91, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

ADA and IFX have similar clinical benefits for anti-tumor necrosis factor-α naïve or non-naïve CD patients. Overall adverse events rate is higher in patients in the IFX group.

Ustekinumab versus adalimumab for induction and maintenance therapy in biologic-naive patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3b trial

BACKGROUND

Active-comparator trials are important to inform patient and physician choice. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of monotherapy with either ustekinumab or adalimumab in biologic-naive patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease.

METHODS

We conducted a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, active-comparator, phase 3b trial (SEAVUE) at 121 hospitals or private practices in 18 countries. We included biologic-naive patients aged 18 years or older with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease and a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of 220-450, who had not responded to or were intolerant to conventional therapy (or were corticosteroid dependent) and had at least one ulcer of any size at baseline endoscopic evaluation. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1; via an interactive web response system) to receive ustekinumab (approximately 6 mg/kg intravenously on day 0, then 90 mg subcutaneously once every 8 weeks) or adalimumab (160 mg on day 0, 80 mg at 2 weeks, then 40 mg once every 2 weeks, subcutaneously) through week 56. Study treatments were administered as monotherapy and without dose modifications. Patients, investigators, and study site personnel were masked to treatment group assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who were in clinical remission (CDAI score <150) at week 52 in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all patients who were randomly assigned to a treatment group). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03464136, and EudraCT, 2017-004209-41.

FINDINGS

Between June 28, 2018, and Dec 12, 2019, 633 patients were assessed for eligibility and 386 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ustekinumab (n=191) or adalimumab (n=195). 29 (15%) of 191 patients in the ustekinumab group and 46 (24%) of 195 in the adalimumab group discontinued study treatment before week 52. There was no significant difference between the ustekinumab and adalimumab groups in the occurrence of the primary endpoint; at week 52, 124 (65%) of 191 patients in the ustekinumab group versus 119 (61%) of 195 in the adalimumab group were in clinical remission (between-group difference 4%, 95% CI -6 to 14; p=0·42). Safety for both groups was consistent with previous reports. Serious infections were reported in four (2%) of 191 patients in the ustekinumab group and five (3%) of 195 in the adalimumab group. No deaths occurred through week 52 of the study.

INTERPRETATION

Both ustekinumab and adalimumab monotherapies were highly effective in this population of biologic-naive patients, with no difference in the primary outcome between the drugs.

FUNDING

Janssen Scientific Affairs.

Adalimumab vs Infliximab in Pediatric Patients With Crohn's Disease: A Propensity Score Analysis and Predictors of Treatment Escalation

INTRODUCTION

Two antitumor necrosis factor therapies (infliximab [IFX] and adalimumab [ADA]) have been approved for the treatment of pediatric Crohn's disease (CD) but have not been compared in head-to-head trials. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of ADA and IFX by propensity score matching in a prospective cohort of pediatric patients with luminal CD and at least a 24-month follow-up.

METHODS

Among 100 patients, 75 met the inclusion criteria, and 62 were matched by propensity score. We evaluated time to treatment escalation as the primary outcome and primary nonresponse, predictors of treatment escalation and relapse, serious adverse events, pharmacokinetics, and effect of concomitant immunomodulators as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

There was no difference between ADA and IFX in time to treatment escalation (HR = 0.63 [95% CI 0.31-1.28] P = 0.20), primary nonresponse (P = 0.95), or serious adverse events. The median (interquartile range) trough levels at the primary outcome were 14.05 (10.88-15.40) and 6.15 (2.08-6.58) µg/mL in the ADA and IFX groups, respectively. On a multivariate analysis, the combination of anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibody negativity and antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody positivity was a strong independent predictor of treatment escalation (HR 5.19, [95% CI 2.41-11.18], P < 0.0001). The simple endoscopic score for CD, L3 disease phenotype, and use of concomitant immunomodulators for at least the first 6 months revealed a trend toward significance on a univariate analysis.

DISCUSSION

Propensity score matching did not reveal substantial differences in efficacy or safety between ADA and IFX. The anti-S. cerevisiae antibody negativity and antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody positivity combination is a strong predictor of treatment escalation.

Is There a Best First Line Biological/Small Molecule in IBD: Are We Ready for Sequencing?

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic, life-long inflammatory condition of the gastrointestinal tract. Treatment strategy depends on the severity of the disease course. IBD physicians need to be aware of the life-long treatment options available. The goal is not only to achieve clinical remission but to halt or stabilize the chronic inflammation in the intestines to prevent further structural damage. Therefore, the use of early biologic therapy is recommended in moderate-to-severe IBD patients. However, in the last decade, use of therapeutic drug monitoring has increased considerably, opening an opportunity for sequencing. This review summarizes the available evidence on biologic and small molecules therapy in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) in different clinical scenarios, including perianal CD, the elderly, extra intestinal manifestations, and pregnancy.

Evidence-based efficacy of methotrexate in adult Crohn's disease in different intestinal and extraintestinal indications

INTRODUCTION

Methotrexate (MTX) is included in the therapeutic armamentarium of Crohn's disease (CD), although its positioning is currently uncertain in an era in which many effective biological drugs are available. No systematic reviews or meta-analysis have stratified the clinical outcomes of MTX according to the specific clinical scenarios of its use.

METHODS

Medline, PubMed and Scopus were used to extract eligible studies, from database inception to May 2021. A total of 163 studies were included. A systematic review was performed by stratifying the outcomes of MTX according to formulation, clinical indication and criteria of efficacy.

RESULTS

The use of MTX is supported by randomized clinical trials only in steroid-dependent CD, with similar outcomes to thiopurines. The use of MTX in patients with steroid-refractoriness, failure of thiopurines or in combination with biologics is not supported by high levels of evidence. Combination therapy with biologics can optimize the immunogenic profile of the biological drug, but the impact on long-term clinical outcomes is described only in small series with anti-TNFα. Other off-label uses, such as fistulizing disease, mucosal healing, postoperative prevention and extraintestinal manifestations, are described in small uncontrolled series. The best performance in most indications was shown by parenteral MTX, favouring higher doses (25 mg/week) in the induction phase.

DISCUSSION

Evidence from high-quality studies in favour of MTX is scarce and limited to the steroid-dependent disease, in which other drugs are the leading players today. Many limitations on study design have been found, such as the prevalence of retrospective underpowered studies and the lack of stratification of outcomes according to specific types of patients and formulations of MTX.

CONCLUSION

MTX is a valid option as steroid-sparing agent in steroid-dependent CD. Numerous other clinical scenarios require well-designed clinical studies in terms of patient profile, drug formulation and dosage, and criteria of efficacy.

Trends in the use of biologicals and their treatment outcomes among patients with inflammatory bowel diseases - a Danish nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) is rapidly evolving, with an expanding armoury of biological drugs at our disposal. However, real-world findings about treatment persistence and the impact of biologicals on surgery remain inconsistent.

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate trends in biological use and surgery rates in a nationwide cohort of biological-naïve IBD patients.

METHODS

Patients with IBD who initiated biological treatment between 2011 and 2018 were identified in the Danish National Patient Registry. Data on use of biologicals, surgeries and healthcare costs were retrieved and analysed for time trends.

RESULTS

Between 2011 and 2018, a total of 6,036 IBD (51% ulcerative colitis (UC), 49% Crohn's disease (CD)) patients received biological treatment for the first time. Cumulative use of biologicals increased from 5.0% to 10.8% among UC and 8.9%-14.5% among CD patients. Infliximab remained the most-prescribed first-line biological for UC and CD. Treatment persistence was 44.3% and 16.9% after 1 and 3 years in UC, compared to 59.9% and 33.6% in CD patients. Overall, 32.8% of patients switched to a second biological. Surgery rates decreased in both UC (P = 0.015) and CD (P = 0.008) patients and remained significant for UC in the Cox regression model (P = 0.002). Outpatient and surgical costs also fell among both UC and CD patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Persistence rates for first-line biologicals among IBD patients were low and one-third switched treatment. Surgery rates and direct costs decreased over time, but whether this is related to the use of biologicals has yet to be determined.

How to Choose the Biologic Therapy in a Bio-Naïve Patient with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The availability of biologic therapies in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is increasing significantly. This represents more options to treat patients, but also more difficulties in choosing the therapies, especially in the context of bio-naïve patients. Most evidence of safety and efficacy came from clinical trials comparing biologics with placebo, with a lack of head-to-head studies. Network meta-analysis of biologics and real-world studies have been developed to solve this problem. Despite the results of these studies, there are also other important factors to consider before choosing the biologic, such as patient preferences, comorbidities, genetics, and inflammatory markers. Given that resources are limited, another important aspect is the cost of biologic therapy, since biosimilars are widely available and have been demonstrated to be effective with a significant decrease in costs. In this review, we summarize the evidence comparing biologic therapy in both Crohn´s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) in different clinical situations. We also briefly synthesize the evidence related to predictors of biologic response, as well as the biologic use in extraintestinal manifestations and the importance of the drug-related costs.

Treatment patterns and intensification within 5 year of follow-up of the first-line anti-TNFα used for the treatment of IBD: Results from the VERNE study

BACKGROUND

Anti-TNFα represent one of the main treatment approaches for the management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Therefore,the evaluation of their treatment patterns over time provides valuable insights about the clinical value of therapies and associated costs.

AIMS

To assess the treatment patterns with the first anti-TNFα in IBD.

METHODS

Retrospective, observational study.

RESULTS

310 IBD patients were analyzed along a 5-year follow-up period. 56.2% of Crohn's disease (CD) patients started with adalimumab (ADA), while 43.8% started with infliximab (IFX). 12.9% of ulcerative colitis (UC) patients initiated with ADA, while 87.1% initiated with IFX. Treatment intensification was required in 28.9% of CD and 37.1% of UC patients. Median time to treatment intensification was shorter in UC than in CD (5.3 vs. 14.3 months; p = 0.028). Treatment discontinuation due to reasons other than remission were observed in 40.7% of CD and 40.5% of UC patients, although, in UC patients there was a trend to lower discontinuation rates with IFX (36.6%) than with ADA (66.7%). Loss of response accounted for approximately one-third of discontinuations, in both CD and UC.

CONCLUSIONS

Around one-third of IBD biologic-naive patients treated with an anti-TNFα required treatment intensification (earlier in UC) and around 40% discontinued the anti-TNFα due to inappropriate disease control.

Biologic monotherapy versus combination therapy with immunomodulators in the induction and maintenance of remission of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis

Despite current guidelines, the optimal treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains challenging. The available medications are not without risk and there is not a single correct treatment regimen for every patient. Personalizing treatment and selecting the most appropriate therapy is crucial for optimal response, remission, quality of life, and healthcare utilization. Biologics, especially anti-tumor necrosis factor-α medications, are widely used in the induction and maintenance of disease remission in patients with IBD. Similarly, immunomodulators, including thiopurines and methotrexate, are traditionally popular for the maintenance of remission. In this manuscript, we review the use of biologic monotherapy vs. combination therapy with immunomodulators for the treatment of ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. We examine overall remission, immunogenicity and adverse effects, mainly serious infections and malignancy, in an effort to help guide treatment decisions and weigh the risks and benefits of biologic monotherapy vs. combination therapy.

Head-to-head comparison of biological drugs for inflammatory bowel disease: from randomized controlled trials to real-world experience

During past years, the increasing knowledge of molecular mechanisms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have led to the development of several targeted biological therapies. This great expansion of available medical options has prompted the need for comparative data between drugs. For years, given that most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were performed only versus placebo, this demand has clashed with the absence of head-to-head trials comparing two or more treatments. The quality of evidence coming from real-world experience was low overall, so it was extremely difficult to clarify the correct positioning of the biologicals inside the therapeutic algorithms for IBD. Fortunately, times are changing: head-to-head comparative RCTs have been conducted or are ongoing, and the methodological quality of real-world studies is gradually increasing, mainly thanks to a higher rate of application of statistical methods capable of reducing the selection bias, such as the propensity score. In this evolving scenario, the increasing number of comparative RCTs is providing high-quality data for a correct drug positioning in IBD. In parallel, real-world observational studies are supporting the data coming from RCTs, and covering those comparisons not performed in the RCT setting. We believe that there is moderate evidence already available to support clinicians in the correct choice between different biologicals, and data will certainly be more robust in the near future.

Combination therapy in inflammatory bowel disease - from traditional immunosuppressors towards the new paradigm of dual targeted therapy

BACKGROUND

Combining immunosuppressors has been proposed as a strategy to enhance treatment efficacy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD).

AIM

To summarize current evidence on combinations of targeted therapies with traditional immunosuppressors or with other targeted therapies.

METHODS

A literature search on PubMed and Medline databases was performed to identify relevant articles.

RESULTS

Current evidence supports that the combination of infliximab and thiopurines is more effective than monotherapy with both agents in inducing remission in Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative colitis. Data on other combinations of other biologics and traditional immunosuppressors is lacking or show conflicting results. Vedolizumab seems a potentially effective maintenance regimen after calcineurin inhibitors-based rescue therapy in acute severe ulcerative colitis, as an alternative to thiopurines. Dual Targeted Therapy, which is the combination of 2 targeted therapies, might be a reasonable choice in patients with concomitant IBD and extraintestinal manifestations, or in patients with medical-refractory IBD who lack valid alternatives. Combinations with thiopurines are associated with an increased risk of infections and lymphoma. Data on other combinations is scarcer, but no specific safety issue has emerged so far.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapies seem to be effective in selected patients, with an overall acceptable safety profile.

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

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

Patient sex does not affect endoscopic outcomes of biologicals in inflammatory bowel disease but is associated with adverse events

PURPOSE

Biological therapies are currently the mainstay in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Several factors are known to influence the efficacy and tolerability of biologicals, such as CRP levels or previous biological use. Whether patient sex affects the efficacy or tolerability is unclear but would help with better risk and benefit stratification. This systematic review assesses patient sex on the efficacy and tolerability of biological therapies in IBD patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed using Embase (including MEDLINE), MEDLINE OvidSP, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and PubMed. The primary outcome was the influence of patient sex on endoscopic outcomes in IBD patients treated with biologicals. The secondary outcome was the influence of patient sex on adverse events. Studies were included in the assessment regardless of study type or setting.

RESULTS

The search yielded 19,461 citations; after review, 55 studies were included in the study, involving 28,465 patients treated with adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, infliximab, or vedolizumab. There was no significant association between patient sex and endoscopic efficacy in 41 relevant studies. Increased adverse events were associated with female sex in 7 out of 14 relevant studies.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence for a sex difference in endoscopically measured response to biological therapies in IBD patients. However, there is an influence of sex on the occurrence of adverse events.

Upfront Combination Therapy, Compared With Monotherapy, for Patients Not Previously Treated With a Biologic Agent Associates With Reduced Risk of Inflammatory Bowel Disease-related Complications in a Population-based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Although guidelines recommend inclusion of immune modulators in anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) initiation therapy for Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC), there are limited data on the incremental effectiveness of this treatment strategy from the real world.

METHODS

We collected data from the Manitoba Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Epidemiology database on persons with CD (n=852) or UC (n=303), from 2001 through 2016, who began treatment with a TNF antagonist. New and/or continuing users of immunomodulators at the time anti-TNF therapy began were considered recipients of combination therapy. The main outcome was treatment ineffectiveness (IBD-related hospitalization, intestinal resection, corticosteroid use, or change of anti-TNF agent) during TNF antagonist-based therapy or within 90 days after the anti-TNF agent was discontinued. We used Cox proportional hazards models to assess the association between concomitant use of immunomodulators and treatment ineffectiveness.

RESULTS

In patients with CD, combination therapy was associated with a significant decrease in likelihood of treatment ineffectiveness (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] for ineffectiveness, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49-0.79). However, this association was not significant in patients with UC (aHR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.56-1.20). In patients with CD, combination therapy was also associated with increased time to first IBD-related hospitalization (aHR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36-0.80) and switching anti-TNF agents (aHR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.97), but not associated with IBD-related surgery (aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.51-1.12) or new or recurrent use of corticosteroids (aHR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.55-1.04).

CONCLUSION

In an analysis of a database of real-world patients with IBD, we associated initiation therapy with a combination immune modulators and anti-TNF agents with a decreased likelihood of treatment ineffectiveness for patients with CD but not UC.

A Review on the Use of Anti-TNF in Children and Adolescents with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) presents with disabling symptoms and may lead to insufficient growth and late pubertal development in cases of disease onset during childhood or adolescence. During the last decade, the role of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) in the treatment of paediatric-onset IBD has gained more ground. The number of biologicals presently available for children and adolescents with IBD has increased, biosimilars have become available, and practices in adult gastroenterology with regards to anti-TNF have changed. The aim of this study is to review the current evidence on the indications, judicious use, effectiveness and safety of anti-TNF agents in paediatric IBD. A PubMed literature search was performed and included articles published after 2000 using the following terms: child or paediatric, Crohn, ulcerative colitis, inflammatory bowel disease, anti-TNF, TNF alpha inhibitor, infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab and biological. Anti-TNF agents, specifically infliximab and adalimumab, have proven to be effective in moderate and severe paediatric IBD. Therapeutic drug monitoring increases therapy effectiveness and safety. Clinical predictors for anti-TNF response are currently of limited value because of the variation in outcome definitions and follow-ups. Future research should comprise large cohorts and clinical trials comparing groups according to their risk profile in order to provide personalized therapeutic strategies.

A Propensity Score-matched Comparison of Infliximab and Adalimumab in Tumour Necrosis Factor-α Inhibitor-naïve and Non-naïve Patients With Crohn's Disease: Real-Life Data From the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is an unmet need to better understand the effectiveness of different biologics in inflammatory bowel diseases. We aimed at performing a multicentre, real-life comparison of the effectiveness of infliximab [IFX] and adalimumab [ADA] in Crohn's disease [CD].

METHODS

Data of consecutive patients with CD treated with IFX and ADA from January 2013 to May 2017 were extracted from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease. We used propensity score-matching accounting for the main baseline characteristics in TNF-α inhibitor-naïve and non-naïve patients.

RESULTS

A total of 632 patients [735 total treatments] were included. Among naïve patients, a clinical benefit [the sum of steroid-free remission plus clinical response] was achieved in 81.8% patients treated with ADA and in 77.6% patients treated with IFX (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.23, 95% CI 0.63-2-44, p = 0.547] at 12 weeks; after 1 year, a clinical benefit was achieved in 69.2% of patients treated with ADA and in 64.5% patients treated with IFX [adjusted OR: 1.10, 95% CI 0.61-1.96, p = 0.766]. Among non-naïve patients, a clinical benefit was achieved in 61.7% of patients treated with ADA and in 68.1% of patients treated with IFX [adjusted OR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.21-2.44, p = 0.600] at 12 weeks; after 1 year, a clinical benefit was achieved in 48.9% of patients treated with ADA and in 40.4% patients treated with IFX [adjusted OR: 1.23, 95% CI 0.54-2.86, p = 0.620].

CONCLUSIONS

In this propensity score-matched comparison of ADA and IFX in CD, both drugs showed high rates of clinical benefit, without significant differences between them.

Clinical effectiveness of golimumab in Crohn's disease: an observational study based on the Swedish National Quality Registry for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SWIBREG)

OBJECTIVE

The effectiveness of golimumab in Crohn's disease (CD) is largely unknown as it is not approved for the treatment of the disease. We aimed to identify the population of CD patients treated with golimumab in Sweden, to assess the effectiveness of golimumab (defined as the drug retention rate), and to identify predictors of drug discontinuation.

METHODS

Patients with CD who received at least one injection of golimumab were identified through the Swedish National Quality Registry for Inflammatory Bowel Disease, which includes prospectively collected clinical information. Cox regression models were used to identify predictors of golimumab discontinuation.

RESULTS

The study cohort involved 94 patients of whom the majority (96.8%) had previously discontinued at least one anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent. The drug retention rate at 12 weeks was 85.1%. Predictors of golimumab discontinuation at 12 weeks were previous surgery (adjusted HR = 7.52, 95% CI: 1.12-50.36), concomitant corticosteroid use at baseline (adjusted HR = 5.70, 95% CI: 1.13-28.68) and female sex (adjusted HR = 6.59; 95% CI: 1.04-41.62). The median duration of follow-up was 89 (IQR: 32-158) weeks. The drug retention at the most recent follow-up was 35.1%. Predictors of golimumab discontinuation at the most recent follow-up were corticosteroid use at baseline (adjusted HR = 2.60, 95% CI: 1.17-5.79) and female sex (adjusted HR = 2.24; 95% CI: 1.19-4.23).

CONCLUSION

Patients with CD treated with golimumab were a treatment-refractory group. Despite this, more than one-third of the patients appeared to have had clinical benefit after a median follow-up of more than 1.5 years.

Clinical activity is an independent risk factor of ischemic heart and cerebrovascular arterial disease in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Background and aims

In inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), the impact of established cardiovascular risk factors and disease-related factors on the risk of acute arterial events is still unclear. We aimed to identify risk factors of acute arterial events in patients with IBD.

Methods

All consecutive patients followed at Saint-Antoine Hospital between 1996 and 2015 with subsequent occurrence of acute arterial events (acute coronary syndrome or ischemic stroke) were identified. Traditional cardiovascular risk factors, treatment exposure, systemic inflammation (mean serum CRP level greater than or equal to 5 mg/L) and IBD clinical activity were assessed. A nested case-control study was performed including cases and controls without arterial ischemic event, matched on age, gender, and disease extent.

Results

A total of 30 patients (median age at acute vascular event occurrence: 42 years (interquartile range: 25–59)) developed acute coronary syndrome (n = 22) or ischemic stroke (n = 8). In univariate analysis, clinical disease activity and the persistence of systemic inflammation, diabetes, dyslipidemia and hypertension were significantly associated with an increased risk of acute arterial events. Neither protective nor aggravating effects associated with treatment exposure were identified. In multivariate analysis, the presence of diabetes (Odds ratio (OR): 14.5, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1–184.7) and clinical disease activity (OR: 10.4, 95% CI: 2.1–49.9) remained significantly associated with the risk of acute arterial event.

Conclusion

Disease activity may have an independent impact on the risk of acute arterial events in patients with IBD. These findings may highlight new potential benefits of optimizing anti-inflammatory treatment in patients with persisting clinical activity.

Interactions Between Thiopurine Metabolites, Adalimumab, and Antibodies Against Adalimumab in Previously Infliximab-Treated Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Interactions between thiopurines and infliximab presumably contribute to superior effect of infliximab-thiopurine combination therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We examined whether principal cytotoxic thiopurine metabolites influence adalimumab (ADL) and anti-ADL antibodies (Abs).

METHODS

Ninety-eight IBD patients previously treated with infliximab (96%) in whom trough ADL and anti-ADL Abs had been assessed as part of their clinical care were included. Thiopurine metabolites [6-thioguanine nucleotides (6-TGN) and methylated mercaptopurine metabolites (6-MeMP)] were determined at similar time points.

RESULTS

ADL-thiopurine combination therapy was not associated with reduced anti-ADL Ab positivity compared to ADL monotherapy: 8/31 (26%) versus 19/67 (28%), p = 1.00. Concentrations of thiopurine metabolites were similar in anti-ADL Ab-positive and negative patients (6-TGN median 109 pmol/8 × 10⁸ RBC vs. 112, p = 0.80; 6-MeMP 448 RBC vs. 720, p = 0.94). ADL trough levels did not differ between anti-ADL Ab-negative patients on ADL-thiopurine combination therapy and those on monotherapy (9.5 μg/mL vs. 7.6, p = 0.31). ADL levels were also comparable between patients on ADL mono- and combination therapy after stratification for 6-TGN/6-MeMP quartiles. There were no correlations between levels of 6-TGN and ADL (r_P = - 0.17, p = 0.45; r_S = - 0.38, p = 0.08), or 6-MeMP and ADL (r_P = - 0.23, p = 0.31; r_S = - 0.35, p = 0.11). Anti-ADL Ab positivity was associated with ADL treatment failure (OR 6 [2-20], p < 0.01). Higher trough ADL (9.6 μg/mL vs. 7.3, p < 0.05), but not concomitant thiopurine treatment, metabolite levels, or dosage, was associated with clinical remission.

CONCLUSION

Effectiveness of ADL therapy associated with circulating ADL levels and anti-ADL Ab formation. In this study, there appeared no direct interactions between thiopurine metabolites and ADL or anti-ADL Abs.

Long-term retention of adalimumab treatment and associated prognostic factors for 1189 patients with Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There are few studies on the long-term efficacy of adalimumab treatment for patients with Crohn's disease. We have conducted a large, multicenter, retrospective cohort study to evaluate the long-term retention rate and prognostic factors associated with the discontinuation of adalimumab treatment in patients with Crohn's disease.

METHODS

Data were collected from all patients with Crohn's disease who had received at least one induction dose of 160 mg of adalimumab between October 2010 and December 2013 at 41 institutions. The cumulative retention rates of adalimumab treatment following the first administration were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors related to the cumulative retention rates were evaluated by log-rank tests and multivariate Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1189 patients were included in the study. The 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year cumulative retention rates of adalimumab were 81%, 72%, 65%, and 62%, respectively. The multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed female sex, previous infliximab use, perianal disease, concomitant treatment with prednisolone at baseline, higher C-reactive protein levels, and lower albumin levels as significant independent predictors of poor retention rate of adalimumab treatment. Significantly, more female patients than male patients discontinued adalimumab because of adverse events, especially skin reactions, infections, and arthralgia.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrated a good retention rate of adalimumab in patients with Crohn's disease over a 4-year period. Female sex, perianal disease, concomitant treatment with prednisolone at baseline, previous infliximab use, higher C-reactive protein levels, and lower albumin levels were associated with poor retention of adalimumab treatment.

Incidence and Predictors of Success of Adalimumab Dose Escalation and De-escalation in Ulcerative Colitis: a Real-World Belgian Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab (ADM) has been shown efficacious in ulcerative colitis (UC). In randomized controlled trials, dose escalation from 40 mg ADM every other week to 40 mg every week was required in 20%-25% of patients within 1 year. Real-life data suggest higher escalation rates. Attempts for dose de-escalation have not been studied yet. We assessed the need for, outcome of, and predictors of dose escalation and de-escalation in a large retrospective cohort of UC patients treated with ADM.

METHODS

We included 231 consecutive patients from 10 Belgian centers initiating ADM treatment for active UC before September 1, 2015 (follow-up ≥1 year in each patient). We performed detailed chart review to identify variables associated with short-term clinical benefit (based on physician global assessment and absence of rectal bleeding at week 10), success of dose escalation, and dose de-escalation. Backward Cox regression and Wald Logistic regression were used to identify predictive variables.

RESULTS

Short-term clinical benefit was achieved in 101 patients (44%) and was less frequent in infliximab failures [37% vs 50%, Odds ratio 0.57 (95% CI 0.34-0.97), P = 0.038]. After a median of 2.8 (1.7-5.1) months, 164 patients (71%) needed ADM discontinuation (n = 35, 15%) or dose escalation (n = 129, 56%). Dose escalation was successful in 77/129 (60%). Dose de-escalation was attempted in 71% (55/77) after a median of 4.3 (2.9-7.2) months and was successful in 80% (43/54).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, 56% of patients with UC required ADM dose escalation with a 60% success rate. Of note, most patients could be successfully de-escalated later on.

Comparison of infliximab with adalimumab in 827 biologic-naïve patients with Crohn's disease: a population-based Danish cohort study

BACKGROUND

There are conflicting data on comparative effectiveness of adalimumab and infliximab in patients with Crohn's disease (CD).

AIMS

To compare the effectiveness and safety of adalimumab and infliximab in biologic-naïve patients with CD, in a nationwide register-based propensity score-matched cohort study in Denmark.

METHODS

A total of 2908 Danish adults with CD had been treated with adalimumab or infliximab as their first biologic agent between 2005-2014. By Cox regression, we compared rates of all-cause hospitalisation, CD-related hospitalisation, major abdominal surgery and serious infections after variable 2:1 propensity score matching, accounting for baseline disease characteristics, healthcare utilisation and use of CD-related medications.

RESULTS

After propensity-score matching, we included 315 adalimumab- (34.9 ± 12.9 years, 41.9% males) and 512 infliximab-treated (33.6 ± 12.6 years, 40.8% males) patients, with median disease duration 4.0 years; 36.9% had prior abdominal surgery. Over a median follow-up 2.3 years after starting biological therapy, there were no significant differences in rate of CD-related hospitalisation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81 [95% CI, 0.55-1.20]) or major abdominal surgery (HR, 1.24 [0.66-2.33]) between adalimumab- and infliximab-treated patients, though rate of all-cause hospitalisation was lower in adalimumab-treated patients (HR, 0.74 [0.56-0.97]). There was no significant difference in incidence of serious infections requiring hospitalisation (HR, 1.06 [0.26-4.21]). These results were stable in patients treated with biological monotherapy (all-cause hospitalisation: HR, 0.75 [0.53-1.05]; CD-related hospitalisation: HR, 0.82 [0.51-1.32], abdominal surgery: HR, 1.47 [0.63-3.47]) or in combination with immunomodulators (all-cause hospitalisation: HR, 0.70 [0.44-1.11]; CD-related hospitalisation: HR, 0.80 [0.42-1.52], abdominal surgery: HR, 1.02 [0.39-2.64]).

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based, propensity score matched, real-life cohort study using administrative claims, there was no significant difference in effectiveness and safety of adalimumab and infliximab in biologic-naïve patients with CD.

Combination Immunosuppression in IBD

Whether to use biologic treatment for inflammatory bowel disease as monotherapy or in combination with immunosuppressives has been a matter of debate in the last 2 decades. Combination therapy was not superior in any of the registration trials for Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis for TNF antagonists, vedolizumab, or ustekinumab. It needs to be mentioned, though, that none of these trials were powered to detect such differences, and that many patients entered the trial after having failed conventional immunosuppressives.Postmarketing studies revealed that patients on background immunosuppression have a lower risk of immunogenicity (often resulting in infusion/injection reactions) than patients on monotherapy. In the SONIC and UC-SUCCESS trials, superiority of the combination azathioprine-infliximab was demonstrated in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, respectively. This trial design has not been used with any other biologic for IBD, so far. Meanwhile, it has also become clear that combination treatment with TNF antagonists is associated with increased toxicity, mainly infections, but also malignancy such as lymphoproliferative disease. This toxicity could perhaps be reduced by using lower doses of immunosuppressives, a strategy that has been shown to be equally potent in reducing immunogenicity. Additionally, combination treatment could be used for a limited period of time (12 months or even shorter) since most immunogenicity develops in the beginning of the biologic treatment. Patients who develop anti-drug-antibodies later on can often be rescued by reintroduction of thiopurines or methotrexate.In summary, combination treatment is certainly beneficial with infliximab, at least in the first 12 months of treatment. With other TNF antagonists, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab, the available data do not offer clear guidance. In patients without increased risk of toxicity, and certainly in those with limited treatment options, it may be wise to offer combination treatment with all biologics for the time being and at least during the initiation phase.

Efficacy and safety of golimumab in Crohn's disease: a French national retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents have improved the care of Crohn's disease (CD). After the first anti-TNF discontinuation, it is possible to switch to another anti-TNF. Three anti-TNF agents are available for ulcerative colitis (infliximab, adalimumab and golimumab), but only the first 2 have been approved for CD because golimumab has not been studied for this indication.

AIM

To report the efficacy and safety of golimumab in CD.

METHODS

Crohn's disease patients who received golimumab were identified in 12 French tertiary centres and were retrospectively analysed. The primary endpoint was the duration of golimumab treatment before escalation or discontinuation. The clinical response was defined as a decrease of more than 3 points in the Harvey-Bradshaw index or by global physician assessment.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifteen patients were included. The golimumab treatment duration was 9.8 months (0.55-44), and 48.7% of the patients were still under treatment at the end of follow-up. Clinical response was observed in 55.8% of the patients after a mean duration of 3.8 months. The probability of remaining under treatment without escalation at 6, 12 and 24 months was 54.6%, 34.9% and 19.3% respectively. In multivariate analysis, discontinuation of the first anti-TNF agent due to intolerance (odds ratio, OR = 2.16; 95% CI, confidence interval [1.25-3.86]; P = .005) and co-immunosuppression for more than 6 months (OR = 3.98; 95% CI [2.3-7.1]; P < .0001) were predictive factors of efficacy. Six per cent of the patients discontinued treatment due to intolerance.

CONCLUSION

After failure of infliximab or adalimumab for Crohn's disease, golimumab was safe and seemed beneficial in half of the patients.

Significance of measurement of serum trough level and anti-drug antibody of adalimumab as personalised pharmacokinetics in patients with Crohn's disease: a subanalysis of the DIAMOND trial

BACKGROUND

Significance of monitoring adalimumab trough levels and anti-adalimumab antibodies (AAA) for disease outcome in Crohn's disease (CD) patients remained unclear.

AIM

To evaluate the association of adalimumab trough levels and AAA at week 26 with clinical remission at week 52, the effect of azathiopurine on AAA and factors influencing trough levels in CD patients in the DIAMOND trial.

METHODS

We performed this study using adalimumab trough levels, AAA at week 26 and 6-thioguanine nucleotide (TGN) in red blood cells at week 12. A multiple regression model and receiver operating analysis was performed to identify factors influencing adalimumab trough levels and AAA, and adalimumab thresholds for predicting disease activity.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference of adalimumab trough level at week 26 between patients with disease remission and without at week 52 (7.7 ± 3.3 μg/mL vs 5.4 ± 4.3 μg/mL: P <.001). Adalimumab trough level of 5.0 μg/mL yielded optimal sensitivity and specificity for remission prediction (80.2% and 55.6%, respectively). AAA development at week 26 significantly affected remission at week 52 (P = .021), which was strongly associated with adalimumab trough levels. Female gender and increasing body weight were independently associated with low adalimumab trough levels, and female gender was associated with AAA development. A cut-off 6TGN level of >222.5 p mol/8 ×10⁸ RBCs yielded sensitivity (100%) and specificity (60.6%) for AAA negativity.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab trough levels and AAA occurrence were significantly associated with clinical remission. Higher 6TGN affected AAA negativity. The combination therapy is beneficial in some relevant aspects for CD patients. (UMIN Registration No. 000005146).

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Adalimumab Monotherapy Versus Combination Therapy with Immunomodulators for Induction and Maintenance of Remission and Response in Patients with Crohn's Disease

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether the combination of adalimumab (ADA) and immunomodulators is superior to ADA monotherapy in patients with Crohn's disease.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and other databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials, open-label, prospective cohort, and retrospective studies, and pooled analyses were included. Primary outcomes were induction (≤12 wk) and maintenance (up to 56 wk) of remission and response. Secondary outcomes were severe adverse events, opportunistic infections, and development of antibodies to adalimumab.

RESULTS

Twenty-four of 1194 articles were eligible for inclusion. No significant difference was noted between regimens for induction of remission (odds ratio [OR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-1.06; P = 0.19) and response (OR 1.01; 95% CI: 0.62-1.65; P = 0.96). Similarly, no difference was noted for maintenance of remission (OR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.79-1.14; P = 0.75) or response (OR 0.91; 95% CI: 0.54-1.54; P = 0.74). Severe adverse events and opportunistic infections were not different between arms. Patients on combination therapy had lower odds of developing antibodies to adalimumab (OR 0.24; 95% CI: 0.07-0.82; P = 0.02). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed significantly higher odds of successful induction (OR 1.26; 95% CI: 1.06-1.49, P = 0.008) and opportunistic infections (OR 2.44; 95% CI: 1.07-5.54, P = 0.03) in anti-TNF-experienced patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ADA and immunomodulators does not seem superior to ADA monotherapy for induction and maintenance of remission and response in Crohn's disease. Combination therapy is associated with lower immunogenicity. Analyses associating combination therapy with better induction of remission in anti-TNF-experienced patients and a higher rate of opportunistic infections deserve further evaluation.

The benefit of combination therapy depends on disease phenotype and duration in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

The impact of combination therapy on disease-related morbidity in patients with established Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) remains to be well-defined.

AIM

To examine the effect of combination therapy on disease outcomes in CD and UC.

METHODS

Using a multicenter prospective cohort, we classified CD and UC patients as being on monotherapy with anti-TNF or on combination with an immunomodulator. The primary outcome was a composite of new IBD-related surgery, hospitalisations, penetrating complications, need for corticosteroids or new biological at 1 year. Multivariable regression models adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

We included 707 patients with CD (45% combination therapy) and 164 with UC (38% combination therapy). Combination therapy was not associated with reduction in the composite outcome in either CD (OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.63-1.22) or UC (OR: 1.45, 95% CI: 0.63-3.38). However, while no difference was noted in those with nonstricturing, nonpenetrating CD, a significant reduction in the likelihood of the outcome was seen in those with stricturing or penetrating CD (30% vs 39%, OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.37-0.90). A stronger effect was also observed in those with disease duration <5 years (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.14-0.87) compared to those with a longer duration (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.45-1.27). A similar reduction in occurrence of composite outcome was noted with infliximab and with other anti-TNF biologics.

CONCLUSION

The benefit of combination immunomodulator-biological therapy is stronger in those with complicated Crohn's disease, particularly early on in their disease course.

Treatment Persistence for Infliximab Versus Adalimumab in Crohn's Disease: A 14-Year Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADA) are widely used in the treatment of patients with Crohn's disease (CD). There are few published data on the treatment persistence of IFX and ADA in patients with CD.

METHODS

We aimed to compare the persistence rates of IFX versus ADA as first- and second-line tumor necrosis factor antagonist (anti-TNF), to identify factors potentially associated with persistence, and to evaluate reasons for treatment withdrawal in CD patients. We performed a retrospective, single-center cohort study of CD patients treated with IFX or ADA for at least 6 months between June 2002 and May 2016.

RESULTS

The median duration of follow-up was 5.4 years. For first-line anti-TNF agent, data on 487 patients with CD were analyzed. The mean (SD) duration of persistence was 3.6 (3.1) years and 2.5 (2.0) years in the IFX and ADA subgroups, respectively; the intergroup difference was not significant (P = 0.219). Factors associated with lower persistence were female sex (P = 0.0005) and stricturing behavior (P = 0.008). For second-line anti-TNF agent, data on 134 patients were analyzed. The mean (SD) duration of persistence was 2.4 (1.9) years and 2.6 (2.1) years in the IFX and ADA subgroups, respectively; again, the intergroup difference was not significant (P = 0.488). Age under 37.2 was the only factor associated with lower persistence (P = 0.016) for second-line treatment with an anti-TNF agent.

CONCLUSIONS

IFX and ADA show similar levels of persistence as first- and second-line anti-TNF treatments. Female sex and stricturing behavior were associated with poor persistence of first-line treatments, whereas age was the only factor associated with poor persistence of second-line treatments.