Bayes-based dosing of infliximab in inflammatory bowel diseases: Short-term efficacy

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

"Getting the Dose Right"-Revisiting the Topic With Focus on Biologic Agents

Nearly two decades after the Peck and Cross article '"Getting the dose right: facts, a blueprint, and encouragements" was published, a review of dose recommendations for biologics shows that the success in getting the dose right appears to have improved given the relatively low incidence of drug withdrawals and dosing/label changes. However, the clinical experience with monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) following approval has been less than perfect. In inflammatory diseases, the disease burden changes with time and high treatment failure rates have been reported. In addition, the use of concomitant steroids and immunosuppressant drugs with MAbs is common. These concomitant agents have their own safety issues and many immunosuppressant agents are not well-tolerated although they have been shown to reduce the incidence of anti-drug antibodies (ADA). This same complexity is seen in MAbs used in oncology as well, although with these agents the doses appear to be higher than needed, which results in high treatment costs and incidence of adverse events. Given the complexity of MAb pharmacokinetics, which makes providing a detailed description of dose options difficult, product labeling should include the options for alternative dose strategies and potentially include the use of therapeutic drug monitoring with dose individualization which have been shown to improve clinical response and reduce the incidence of ADA. So, while the recommended dosing for biologics seems improved over the issues noted 17 years ago, we still have some work to do.

De-escalation of Biologic Treatment in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Comprehensive Review

INTRODUCTION

Biologic therapy is an effective treatment for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. However due to cost and safety concerns, dose de-escalation strategies after achieving remission have been suggested.

AIM

To critically review available data on dose de-escalation of biologics [or other advanced therapies] in IBD. We will focus on studies evaluating de-escalation to standard dosing in patients initially optimised, and also on studies assessing de-escalation from standard dosing.

METHODS

A systematic bibliographic search was performed.

RESULTS

The mean frequency of de-escalation after previous dose intensification [12 studies, 1,474 patients] was 34%. The corresponding frequency of de-escalation from standard dosing [five studies, 3,842 patients] was 4.2%. The relapse rate of IBD following anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] de-escalation to standard dosing in patients initially dose-escalated [10 studies, 301 patients] was 30%. The corresponding relapse rate following anti-TNF de-escalation from standard dosing [nine studies, 494 patients] was 38%. The risk of relapse was lower for patients in clinical, biologic, and endoscopic/radiological remission at the time of de-escalation. A role of anti-TNF therapeutic drug monitoring in the decision to dose de-escalate has been demonstrated. In patients relapsing after de-escalation, re-escalation is generally effective. De-escalation is not consistently associated with a better safety profile. The cost-effectiveness of the de-escalation strategy remains uncertain. Finally, there is not enough evidence to recommend dose de-escalation of biologics different from anti-TNFs or small molecules.

CONCLUSIONS

Any consideration for de-escalation of biologic therapy in IBD must be tailored, taking into account the risks and consequences of a flare and patients' preferences.

Therapeutic drug monitoring in inflammatory bowel disease patients on vedolizumab

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate whether vedolizumab (VDZ) levels were associated with inflammatory markers or clinical or endoscopic scoring in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

Besides demographic data, clinical scoring, endoscopic data, and laboratory markers of IBD patients treated with VDZ from 2015 to 2020 who had trough levels drawn on maintenance therapy were collected at baseline and at follow-up (after at least 8 weeks on VDZ therapy or after change in dose frequency). Low drug levels were defined as VDZ trough <20 μg/mL.

RESULTS

We identified 89 patients with a mean age of 42.9 years. Of the 90 total trough levels drawn, 61.1% were low. Among patients on every 8 week (Q8 week) VDZ dosing, 81.5% had low troughs. After increasing dosing frequency to Q4 weeks, all patients showed improvement in VDZ levels, but 30.6% remained <20 μg/mL. Higher VDZ levels on Q8 week dosing were associated with higher albumin levels (P = 0.01). While higher VDZ levels on Q4 week dosing were associated with higher albumin (P = 0.02), lower erythrocyte sedimentation rate (P = 0.04) and higher likelihood of having mild disease or endoscopic remission (P = 0.01). No significant association was found between VDZ levels and clinical scoring, body mass index, hemoglobin, vitamin D or platelet levels on either Q8 or Q4 week dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher VDZ troughs were associated with higher albumin, mild endoscopic disease or endoscopic remission. Patients who continue to have low VDZ troughs despite Q4 week dosing may require a change in therapy.

Therapeutic drug monitoring in inflammatory bowel disease: A practical approach

The global burden of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) is estimated at 4.9 million and the global prevalence exceeds 0.3%. Multiple newer therapeutic agents have broadened the options for the therapy of IBD in the last three decades. Thiopurines, however, have retained their place as maintenance therapy in IBD, especially in resource-constrained setting. But thiopurines have narrow therapeutic range, often needing discontinuation due to side effects or lack of efficacy. Biologic agents revolutionized the treatment of IBD, but the efficacy is lost in 50% of patient after one year. These outcomes are often due to inadequate drug concentrations that may lead to the development of antibodies as well as pharmacodynamic failure. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was proposed to reduce loss of response and to optimize the therapy in patients on thiopurine and biologic therapy. TDM is based on exposure-response relationship, suggesting a positive correlation between elevated serum anti-TNF concentrations and favorable therapeutic outcomes. TDM has multiple facets. This article discusses the benefits, evidence and limitations of TDM. The practical use of TDM in clinical practice is highlighted. Newer developments in the field and their relevance in practice are discussed.

Drug Clearance in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Treated with Biologics

Biological therapy is very effective for treating patients with moderate to severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, up to 40% can have primary non-response, and up to 50% of the patients can experience a loss of response to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. These undesirable outcomes can be attributed to either a mechanistic failure or pharmacokinetic (PK) issues characterized by an inadequate drug exposure and a high drug clearance. There are several factors associated with accelerated clearance of biologics including increased body weight, low serum albumin and immunogenicity. Drug clearance has gained a lot of attention recently as cumulative data suggest that there is an association between drug clearance and therapeutic outcomes in patients with IBD. Moreover, clearance is used by model informed precision dosing (MIDP) tools, or PK dashboards, to adjust the dosing for reaching a target drug concentration threshold towards a more personalized application of TDM. However, the role of drug clearance in clinical practice is yet to be determined. This comprehensive review aims to present data regarding the variables affecting the clearance of specific biologics, the association of clearance with therapeutic outcomes and the role of clearance monitoring and MIPD in patients with IBD.

Personalized Dosing of Infliximab in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Using a Bayesian Approach: A Next Step in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

Although biological agents have revolutionized the management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), a significant proportion of patients show primary non-response or develop secondary loss of response. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is advocated to maintain the efficacy of biologic agents. Reactive TDM can rationalize the management of primary non-response and secondary loss of response and has shown to be more cost-effective compared with empiric dose escalation. Proactive TDM is shown to increase clinical remission and the durability of the response to a biologic agent. However, the efficacy of proactive and reactive TDM has been questioned in recent studies and meta-analyses. Hence, we need a different approach to TDM, which addresses inflammatory burden, the individual patient, and disease factors. Bayesian approaches, which use population pharmacokinetic models, enable clinicians to make better use of TDM for dose adjustment. With rapid improvement in computer technology, these Bayesian model-based software packages are now available for clinical use. Bayesian dashboard systems allow clinicians to apply model-based dosing to understand an individual's pharmacokinetics and achieve a target serum drug concentration. The model is updated using previously measured drug concentrations and relevant patient factors, such as body weight, C-reactive protein, and serum albumin concentration, to maintain effective drug concentrations in the serum. Initial studies have found utility for the Bayesian approach in induction and maintenance, in adult and pediatric patients, in clinical trials, and in real-life situations for patients with IBD treated with infliximab. This needs confirmation in larger studies. This article reviews the Bayesian approach to therapeutic drug monitoring in IBD.

Ulcerative Colitis and Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis Patients Are Overlooked in Infliximab Population Pharmacokinetic Models: Results from a Comprehensive Review

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is part of the inflammatory bowels diseases, and moderate to severe UC patients can be treated with anti-tumour necrosis α monoclonal antibodies, including infliximab (IFX). Even though treatment of UC patients by IFX has been in place for over a decade, many gaps in modelling of IFX PK in this population remain. This is even more true for acute severe UC (ASUC) patients for which early prediction of IFX pharmacokinetic (PK) could highly improve treatment outcome. Thus, this review aims to compile and analyse published population PK models of IFX in UC and ASUC patients, and to assess the current knowledge on disease activity impact on IFX PK. For this, a semi-systematic literature search was conducted, from which 26 publications including a population PK model analysis of UC patients receiving IFX therapy were selected. Amongst those, only four developed a model specifically for UC patients, and only three populations included severe UC patients. Investigations of disease activity impact on PK were reported in only 4 of the 14 models selected. In addition, the lack of reported model codes and assessment of predictive performance make the use of published models in a clinical setting challenging. Thus, more comprehensive investigation of PK in UC and ASUC is needed as well as more adequate reports on developed models and their evaluation in order to apply them in a clinical setting.

Proactive infliximab optimisation using a pharmacokinetic dashboard versus standard of care in patients with Crohn's disease: study protocol for a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label study (the OPTIMIZE trial)

INTRODUCTION

Preliminary data indicates that proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is associated with better outcomes compared with empiric dose escalation and/or reactive TDM, and that pharmacokinetic (PK) modelling can improve the precision of individual dosing schedules in Crohn's disease (CD). However, there are no data regarding the utility of a proactive TDM combined PK-dashboard starting early during the induction phase, when disease activity and drug clearance are greatest. The aim of this randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label trial is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a proactive TDM combined PK dashboard-driven infliximab dosing compared with standard of care (SOC) dosing in patients with moderately to severely active CD.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Eligible adolescent and adult (aged ≥16-80 years) patients with moderately to severely active CD will be randomised 1:1 to receive either infliximab monotherapy with proactive TDM using a PK dashboard (iDose, Projections Research) or SOC infliximab therapy, with or without a concomitant immunomodulator (IMM) (thiopurine or methotrexate) at the discretion of the investigator. The primary outcome of the study is the proportion of subjects with sustained corticosteroid-free clinical remission and no need for rescue therapy from week 14 throughout week 52. Rescue therapy is defined as any IFX dose escalation other than what is forecasted by iDose either done empirically or based on reactive TDM; addition of an IMM after week 2; reintroduction of corticosteroids after initial tapering; switch to another biologic or need for CD-related surgery. The secondary outcomes will include both efficacy and safety end points, such as endoscopic and biological remission, durability of response and CD-related surgery and hospitalisation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol has been approved by the Institutional Review Board Committee of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (IRB#:2021P000391). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04835506.

External Model Performance Evaluation of Twelve Infliximab Population Pharmacokinetic Models in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Infliximab is approved for treatment of various chronic inflammatory diseases including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, high variability in infliximab trough levels has been associated with diverse response rates. Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) with population pharmacokinetic models could help to individualize infliximab dosing regimens and improve therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive performance of published infliximab population pharmacokinetic models for IBD patients with an external data set. The data set consisted of 105 IBD patients with 336 infliximab concentrations. Literature review identified 12 published models eligible for external evaluation. Model performance was evaluated with goodness-of-fit plots, prediction- and variability-corrected visual predictive checks (pvcVPCs) and quantitative measures. For anti-drug antibody (ADA)-negative patients, model accuracy decreased for predictions > 6 months, while bias did not increase. In general, predictions for patients developing ADA were less accurate for all models investigated. Two models with the highest classification accuracy identified necessary dose escalations (for trough concentrations < 5 µg/mL) in 88% of cases. In summary, population pharmacokinetic modeling can be used to individualize infliximab dosing and thereby help to prevent infliximab trough concentrations dropping below the target trough concentration. However, predictions of infliximab concentrations for patients developing ADA remain challenging.

External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models and Bayes-Based Dosing of Infliximab

Despite the well-demonstrated efficacy of infliximab in inflammatory diseases, treatment failure remains frequent. Dose adjustment using Bayesian methods has shown in silico its interest in achieving target plasma concentrations. However, most of the published models have not been fully validated in accordance with the recommendations. This study aimed to submit these models to an external evaluation and verify their predictive capabilities. Eight models were selected for external evaluation, carried out on an independent database (409 concentrations from 157 patients). Each model was evaluated based on the following parameters: goodness-of-fit (comparison of predictions to observations), residual error model (population weighted residuals (PWRES), individual weighted residuals (IWRES), and normalized prediction distribution errors (NPDE)), and predictive performances (prediction-corrected visual predictive checks (pcVPC) and Bayesian simulations). The performances observed during this external evaluation varied greatly from one model to another. The eight evaluated models showed a significant bias in population predictions (from -7.19 to 7.38 mg/L). Individual predictions showed acceptable bias and precision for six of the eight models (mean error of -0.74 to -0.29 mg/L and mean percent error of -16.6 to -0.4%). Analysis of NPDE and pcVPC confirmed these results and revealed a problem with the inclusion of several covariates (weight, concomitant immunomodulatory treatment, presence of anti-drug antibodies). This external evaluation showed satisfactory results for some models, notably models A and B, and highlighted several prospects for improving the pharmacokinetic models of infliximab for clinical-biological application.

Systematic review: efficacy of escalated maintenance anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Loss of response to anti-TNF agents is a common clinical problem. Dose escalation may be effective for reestablishing clinical response in Crohn's disease (CD).

AIMS

To perform a systematic review assessing the efficacy of escalated maintenance anti-TNF therapy in CD.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases were searched for English language publications through to April 25, 2021. Full-text articles evaluating escalated maintenance treatment (infliximab or adalimumab) in adult CD patients were included.

RESULTS

A total of 4733 records were identified, and 68 articles met eligibility criteria. Rates of clinical response (33%-100%) and remission (15%-83%) after empiric dose escalation for loss of response to standard anti-TNF therapy were high but varied across studies. Dose intensification strategies (doubling the dose versus shortening the therapeutic interval) were similarly efficacious. Dose-escalated patients tended to have higher serum drug levels compared to those on standard dosing. An exposure-response relationship following dose escalation was found in a number of observational studies. Randomised controlled trials comparing therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to empiric treatment intensification have failed to reach their primary end-points. Strategies including Bayesian dashboard-dosing and early treatment escalation targeting biomarker normalisation were found to be associated with improved long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Empiric escalation of maintenance anti-TNF therapy can recapture clinical response in a majority of patients with secondary loss of response to standard maintenance doses. Proactive optimisation of maintenance dosing might prolong time to loss of response in some patients.

Personalized Medicine of Monoclonal Antibodies in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Pharmacogenetics, Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, and Beyond

The pharmacotherapy of inflammatory bowel diseases (Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis) has experienced significant progress with the advent of monoclonal antibodies (mABs). As therapeutic proteins, mABs display peculiar pharmacokinetic characteristics that differentiate them from chemical drugs, such as aminosalicylates, antimetabolites (i.e., azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, and methotrexate), and immunosuppressants (corticosteroids and cyclosporine). However, clinical trials have demonstrated that biologic agents may suffer from a pharmacokinetic variability that could influence the desired clinical outcome, beyond primary resistance phenomena. Therefore, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) protocols have been elaborated and applied to adaptation drug doses according to the desired plasma concentrations of mABs. This activity is aimed at maximizing the beneficial effects of mABs while sparing patients from toxicities. However, some aspects of TDM are still under discussion, including time-changing therapeutic ranges, proactive and reactive approaches, the performance and availability of instrumental platforms, the widely varying individual characteristics of patients, the severity of the disease, and the coadministration of immunomodulatory drugs. Facing these issues, personalized medicine in IBD may benefit from a combined approach, made by TDM protocols and pharmacogenetic analyses in a timeline that necessarily considers the frailty of patients, the chronic administration of drugs, and the possible worsening of the disease. Therefore, the present review presents and discusses the activities of TDM protocols using mABs in light of the most recent results, with special attention on the integration of other actions aimed at exploiting the most effective and safe therapeutic effects of drugs prescribed in IBD patients.