Letter: risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes associated with inflammatory bowel disease medications-reassuring insights from the United Kingdom PREPARE-IBD multicentre cohort study

SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: comparison between the first and second pandemic waves

BACKGROUND

In Italy, the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection peaked in April and November 2020, defining two pandemic waves of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study compared the characteristics and outcomes of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and SARS-CoV-2 infections between pandemic waves.

METHODS

Observational longitudinal study of IBD patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with established diagnoses of IBD and of SARS-CoV-2 infection were consecutively enrolled in two periods: (i) first wave, from 1 March 2020 to 31 May 2020; and (ii) second wave, from 15 September to 15 December 2020.

RESULTS

We enrolled 937 IBD patients (219 in the first wave, 718 in the second wave). Patients of the first wave were older (mean ± SD: 46.3 ± 16.2 vs. 44.1 ± 15.4 years, p = 0.06), more likely to have ulcerative colitis (58.0% vs. 44.4%, p < 0.001) and comorbidities (48.9% vs. 38.9%; p < 0.01), and more frequently residing in Northern Italy (73.1% vs. 46.0%, p < 0.001) than patients of the second wave. There were no significant differences between pandemic waves in sex (male: 54.3% vs. 53.3%, p = 0.82) or frequency of active IBD (44.3% vs. 39.0%, p = 0.18). The rates of negative outcomes were significantly higher in the first than second wave: pneumonia (27.8% vs. 11.7%, p < 0.001), hospital admission (27.4% vs. 9.7%, p < 0.001), ventilatory support (11.9% vs. 5.4%, p < 0.003) and death (5.5% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Between the first and second SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves, demographic, clinical and geographical features of IBD patients were different as were the symptoms and outcomes of infection. These differences are likely due to the different epidemiological situations and diagnostic possibilities between the two waves.

Inflammatory bowel disease and COVID-19 outcomes: a meta-analysis

There is conflicting evidence concerning the effect of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on COVID-19 incidence and outcome. Hence, we aimed to evaluate the published evidence through a systematic review process and perform a meta-analysis to assess the association between IBD and COVID-19. A compressive literature search was performed in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to July 2021. A snowball search in Google, Google Scholar, Research Gate, and MedRxiv; and bibliographic research were also performed to identify any other relevant articles. Quantitative observational studies such as cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies that assessed the incidence, risk, and outcomes of COVID-19 among the adult IBD patients published in the English language, were considered for this review. The incidence and risk of COVID-19, COVID-19 hospitalization, the severity of COVID-19, and mortality were considered as the outcomes of interest. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist was used for quality assessment. A subgroup and sensitivity analysis were performed to explore the heterogeneity and robustness of the results, respectively. A total of 86 studies out of 2828 non-duplicate records were considered for this meta-analysis. The studies were single or multicentric internationally from settings such as IBD centres, medical colleges, hospitals, or from the general public. Most of the studies were observed to be of good quality with an acceptable risk of bias. The pooled prevalence of COVID-19, COVID-19 hospitalization, severe COVID-19, and mortality in the IBD population were 6.10%, 10.63%, 40.43%, and 1.94%, respectively. IBD was not significantly (p > 0.05) associated with the risk of COVID-19, COVID-19 hospitalization, severe COVID-19, and mortality. In contrast, ulcerative colitis was significantly associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 (OR 1.37; p = 0.01), COVID-19 hospitalization (OR 1.28; p < 0.00001), and severe COVID-19 (OR 2.45; p < 0.0007). Crohn's disease was significantly associated with a lesser risk of severe COVID-19 (OR 0.48; p = 0.02). Type of IBD was a potential factor that might have contributed to the higher level of heterogeneity. There was a significant association between ulcerative colitis and increased risk of COVID-19, COVID-19 hospitalization, and severe COVID-19 infection. This association was not observed in patients with Crohns' disease or in those diagnosed non-specifically as IBD.

Treatment adaptations and outcomes of patients experiencing inflammatory bowel disease flares during the early COVID-19 pandemic: the PREPARE-IBD multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic offered a unique opportunity to understand inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management during unexpected disruption. This could help to guide practice overall.

AIMS

To compare prescribing behaviour for IBD flares and outcomes during the early pandemic with pre-pandemic findings METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study comprising patients who contacted IBD teams for symptomatic flares between March and June 2020 in 60 National Health Service trusts in the United Kingdom. Data were compared with a pre-pandemic cohort after propensity-matching for age and physician global assessment of disease activity.

RESULTS

We included 1864 patients in each of the pandemic and pre-pandemic cohorts. The principal findings were reduced systemic corticosteroid prescription during the pandemic in Crohn's disease (prednisolone: pandemic 26.5% vs. 37.1%; p < 0.001) and ulcerative colitis (UC) (prednisolone: pandemic 33.5% vs. 40.7%, p < 0.001), with increases in poorly bioavailable oral corticosteroids in Crohn's (pandemic 15.6% vs. 6.8%; p < 0.001) and UC (pandemic 11.8% vs. 5.2%; p < 0.001). Ustekinumab (Crohn's and UC) and vedolizumab (UC) treatment also significantly increased. Three-month steroid-free remission in each period was similar in Crohn's (pandemic 28.4% vs. 32.1%; p = 0.17) and UC (pandemic 36.4% vs. 40.2%; p = 0.095). Patients experiencing a flare and suspected COVID-19 were more likely to have moderately-to-severely active disease at 3 months than those with a flare alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite treatment adaptations during the pandemic, steroid-free outcomes were comparable with pre-pandemic levels, although concurrent flare and suspected COVID-19 caused worse outcomes. These findings have implications for IBD management during future pandemics and for standard practice.

Outcomes and Long-Term Effects of COVID-19 in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases - A Danish Prospective Population-Based Cohort Study with Individual-Level Data

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The health consequences of coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] among patients with ulcerative colitis [UC] and Crohn's disease [CD] remain largely unknown. We aimed to investigate the outcomes and long-term effects of COVID-19 in patients with UC or CD.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, population-based study covering all Danish patients with CD or UC and confirmed COVID-19 between January 28, 2020 and April 1, 2021, through medical records and questionnaires.

RESULTS

All 319 patients with UC and 197 patients with CD who developed COVID-19 in Denmark were included in this study and compared with the Danish background population with COVID-19 [N = 230 087]. A significantly higher risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization was observed among patients with UC (N = 46 [14.4%], relative risk [RR] = 2.49 [95% confidence interval, CI, 1.91-3.26]) and CD (N = 24 [12.2%], RR = 2.11 [95% CI 1.45-3.07]) as compared with the background population (N = 13 306 [5.8%]). A similar pattern was observed for admission to intensive care (UC: N = 8 [2.51%], RR = 27.88 [95% CI 13.88-56.00]; CD: N = 3 [1.52%], RR = 16.92 [95% CI 5.46-52.46]). After a median of 5.1 months (interquartile range [IQR] 4.5-7.9), 58 [42.3%] and 39 [45.9%] patients with UC and CD, respectively, reported persisting symptoms which were independently associated with discontinuation of immunosuppressive therapies during COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.50 [95% CI 1.07-10.22], p = 0.01) and severe COVID-19 (OR = 2.76 [95% CI 1.05-3.90], p = 0.04), but not with age or presence of comorbidities.

CONCLUSION

In this population-based study of 516 patients with IBD and COVID-19, 13.6% needed hospitalization and 2.1% required intensive care. Furthermore, sequelae were frequent, affecting 43.7% of COVID-19-infected patients. These findings might have implications for planning the healthcare of patients in the post-COVID-19 era.

Impact of biologics and small molecules for inflammatory bowel disease on COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and Aim

The use of biologics and small molecules has been a concern for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to assess the association between the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and these agents.

Methods

We made a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies from December 2019 to September 2021 to identify studies that reported COVID-19-related hospitalization in IBD patients receiving biologic therapies or tofacitinib. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) to compare the relative risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization in patients receiving these medications to those who were not, at the time of the study.

Results

Eighteen studies were included. The relative risk of hospitalization was significantly lower in patients with IBD and COVID-19 who were receiving biologic therapy (RR = 0.47 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.42-0.52, P < 0.00001]) compared to patients not receiving biologics. The RR was lower in patients receiving anti-tumor necrosis factors (TNFs) compared to those who were not (RR = 0.48 [95% CI: 0.41-0.55, P < 0.00001]). A similar finding was observed in patients taking ustekinumab (RR = 0.55 [95% CI: 0.43-0.72, P < 0.00001]). Combination therapy involving anti-TNF and an immunomodulator did not lower the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization (RR = 0.98 [95% CI: 0.82-1.18, P = 0.84]). The use of vedolizumab (RR = 1.13 [95% CI: 0.75-1.73, P = 0.56]) or tofacitinib (RR = 0.81 [95% CI: 0.49-1.33, P = 0.40]) was not associated with a lower risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization.

Conclusion

Regarding COVID-19-related hospitalization in IBD, anti-TNFs and ustekinumab were associated with decreased risk of hospitalization. In addition, vedolizumab and tofacitinib were not associated with COVID-19-related hospitalization.

Risk of adverse outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease patients infected with SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Between people with and without inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), there was no statistically significant difference in the probability of contracting the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, the risk of adverse outcomes in IBD patients after virus infection remains unclear.

METHODS

Eligible studies conducted from January 1, 2020 to March 17, 2022 were obtained by searching PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Information was collected in tables from the included studies. Random-effects and fixed-effects models were used as measures for the pooled estimates. All data were estimated by R version 4.1.3.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies were included. The risk ratio (RR) of adverse outcomes in COVID-19 patients with IBD increased by 32% (RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.06-1.66) relative to COVID-19 patients without IBD. The RR of mortality was higher in COVID-19 patients with IBD from Europe (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.11-2.67) than in those that were not from Europe (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.79-1.26; χ² = 4.67; P = 0.03). Patients with ulcerative colitis were at higher risk of adverse outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection than patients with Crohn's disease patients (RR1.38; 95% CI 1.27-1.50). The IBD drugs treatment was associated with the risk of adverse outcomes, the pooled odds ratio (OR) of mesalazine (1.79; 95% CI 1.59-2.02), immunomodulators (1.30; 95% CI 1.10-1.53), and anti-TNF (0.47; 95% CI 0.41-0.53) were assessed.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 patients with IBD had an increased risk of adverse outcomes than those without IBD, whereas anti-TNF treatment might reduce the risk.

Predictors of Covid-19 vaccination acceptance in IBD patients: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Adherence to vaccinations is unsatisfactory in the inflammatory diseases (IBD) population because of concerns regarding adverse events or low perception of infectious risk. The aim of this study was to maximise adherence to anti-Covid-19 vaccination in IBD patients.

METHODS

In the third trimester of 2020, all IBD patients were informed concerning the need for anti-Covid-19 vaccination and family physicians were advised to proceed with anti-Influenza and anti-pneumococcus vaccinations. Demographic data, disease-related data together with acceptance of vaccinations were recorded. From May 2021, vaccinations of IBD patients were directly arranged at our hospital. We registered performance, procrastination or denial of anti-Covid-19 vaccination, type of vaccine and adverse events.

RESULTS

Five hundred and twenty-three patients were included (Crohn's: 266, ulcerative colitis: 257; M/F 289/234; mean age 48 ± 17 years); 53 patients were excluded from analysis as they became infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the study period; overall adherence to vaccination was 400/470 (85%), procrastinators 44 (9%) and 27 patients (6%) refused. Compared with influenza (58%) and pneumococcus (65%) vaccinations, acceptance was higher for anti-Covid-19 vaccination (P < 0.0001, both). Mild adverse events occurred in 31% and two (0.5%) needed precautionary but uneventful hospitalization. On multiple stepwise regression analysis, factors positively associated with adherence to vaccination were age (P < 0.039; OR, 1.016, 95% CI: 1.001-1.031) and previous anti-influenza vaccination (P < 0.008; OR, 2.071, 95% CI: 1.210-3.545).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct counselling and on-site administration were associated with a satisfactory acceptance of anti-Covid-19 vaccination, whereas vaccinations against influenza and pneumococcus remained below expected levels. Increased risk perception may account for the observed differences.