Comparison of corticosteroid and sulphasalazine therapy in ulcerative colitis

Corticosteroids in inflammatory bowel disease: Are they still a therapeutic option?

Despite the development and incorporation of new therapeutic strategies, such as biologic therapy and small molecules, corticosteroids still play an important role in inducting inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) remission. Variables like indicating the right doses at the right time, in adequate intervals, the security of these drugs and the pharmacological alternatives available must be considered by the providers when they are indicated to patients with IBD. Although the use of corticosteroids is considered as a marker of quality of care in patients with IBD, the use of these drugs in the clinical practice of IBD is far from being the correct one. This review article is not intended to be just a classic review of the indications for corticosteroids. Here we explain the scenarios in which, in our opinion, steroids would not be an appropriate option for our patients, as well as the most frequent mistakes we make in our daily practice when using them.

Ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis is a lifelong inflammatory disease affecting the rectum and colon to a variable extent. In 2023, the prevalence of ulcerative colitis was estimated to be 5 million cases around the world, and the incidence is increasing worldwide. Ulcerative colitis is thought to occur in people with a genetic predisposition following environmental exposures; gut epithelial barrier defects, the microbiota, and a dysregulated immune response are strongly implicated. Patients usually present with bloody diarrhoea, and the diagnosis is based on a combination of clinical, biological, endoscopic, and histological findings. The aim of medical management is, first, to induce a rapid clinical response and normalise biomarkers and, second, to maintain clinical remission and reach endoscopic normalisation to prevent long-term disability. Treatments for inducing remission include 5-aminosalicylic acid drugs and corticosteroids. Maintenance treatments include 5-aminosalicylic acid drugs, thiopurines, biologics (eg, anti-cytokines and anti-integrins), and small molecules (Janus kinase inhibitors and sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators). Although the therapeutic options are expanding, 10-20% of patients still require proctocolectomy for medically refractory disease. The keys to breaking through this therapeutic ceiling might be the combination of therapeutics with precision and personalised medicine.

Factors Associated with Response to Systemic Corticosteroids in Active Ulcerative Colitis: Results from a Prospective, Multicenter Trial

BACKGROUND

Among patients with ulcerative colitis, 30-50% receive corticosteroids within the first five years after diagnosis. We aimed to reconsider their effectiveness in the context of the biologic era.

METHODS

In this prospective, multicenter study, patients with active ulcerative colitis (Lichtiger score ≥ 4) were eligible if initiating systemic corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was clinical response (decrease in the Lichtiger score of ≥50%) at week 4. Secondary endpoints included combined response defined as clinical response and any reduction in elevated biomarkers (CRP and/or calprotectin). Steroid dependence was assessed after three months.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients were included. Clinical response was achieved by 73% of patients, and combined response by 68%. A total of 15% of patients were steroid-dependent. Activity of colitis did not influence short-term response to treatment but increased the risk for steroid dependence. Biologic-naïve patients responded better than biologic-experienced patients. Past smoking history (OR 5.38 [1.71, 20.1], p = 0.003), hemoglobin levels (OR 0.76 [0.57, 0.99] for higher levels, p = 0.045), and biologic experience (OR 3.30 [1.08, 10.6], p = 0.036) were independently associated with nonresponse.

CONCLUSION

Disease activity was not associated with short-term response to systemic corticosteroids but was associated with steroid dependence in patients with active ulcerative colitis. Exposure to biologics negatively affects response rates.

Fecal microbiota transplantation for patients with active ulcerative colitis: A cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Growing studies have demonstrated clinical benefits of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) therapy (administered by colonoscopy, enema, or both) for active ulcerative colitis (UC). This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of standard treatment with and without FMT therapy for mild-to-moderate active UC from the perspective of US healthcare provider.

METHODS

A 10-year Markov model was developed to evaluate the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of standard treatment plus FMT therapy versus standard treatment alone. Model inputs were retrieved from publish data in literature. Base-case and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, standard treatment plus FMT therapy was more effective than standard treatment alone (by 0.068 QALYs). Comparing to standard treatment alone, standard treatment plus FMT therapy varied from cost-saving to incremental cost, subject to the number of FMT administrations. One-way sensitivity analysis identified the relative risk of achieving remission with FMT therapy to be the most influential factor on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of standard treatment plus FMT therapy. Monte-Carlo simulations showed that standard treatment plus FMT therapy with 3 and 6 administrations per FMT course was cost-effective (at willingness-to-pay threshold = 50 000 USD/QALY) in 90.77% and 67.03% of time, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Standard treatment plus FMT therapy appears to be more effective in gaining higher QALYs than standard therapy alone for patients with mild-to-moderate active UC. Cost-effectiveness of standard treatment plus FMT therapy is highly subject to the relative improvement in achieving remission with standard therapy plus FMT therapy and number of FMT administrations per FMT course.

Fecal microbiota transplantation versus glucocorticoids for the induction of remission in mild to moderate ulcerative colitis

Objective

To compare efficacy and safety of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) with glucocorticoid as induction therapy in ulcerative colitis (UC).

Methods

The patients with active mild to moderate UC were recruited into the single-center, prospective cohort study. The patients were treated with either FMT (FMT group) or glucocorticoids (GCs group). Patients received FMT administration for 3 days. The primary outcome was clinical and endoscopic remission at week 12. Inflammatory parameters were assessed by routine blood tests. Safety was assessed by adverse events recorded. The serum levels of TNF-α, IFN-γ, IL-1β, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-10 IL-8, IL-12p70, IL-13, IL-17A and IL-23 following FMT were measured by Luminex multiplex assay.

Results

Of the 122 patients, 62 patients were treated with FMT and 60 with glucocorticoids. 34 patients in FMT group (54.8%) and 29 in GCs group (48.3%) reached the primary outcome (p = 0.30). The incidence of adverse events in GCs group (35/60, 58.3%) was significantly higher than that in FMT group (14/62, 22.6%) and two serious adverse events were observed following GCs. Patients in FMT group were stratified into responders (RE) and non-responders (NR) groups. The level of TNF-α and IL-6 decreased significantly in RE group, while IL-10 decreased significantly in NR group.

Conclusion

FMT therapy was as effective as glucocorticoids to induce remission in active mild to moderate UC, accompanied by fewer adverse events. The modification of serum TNF-α, IL-6 and IL-10 might be related to the efficacy of FMT in UC.

Trial registration This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02435160). Registered on 6 April, 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT02435160&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=

Hypertriglyceridemia during hospitalization independently associates with mortality in patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Alteration in blood triglyceride levels have been found in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the association between hypertriglyceridemia and mortality in COVID-19 patients is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between alteration in triglyceride level and mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of 600 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 diagnosis (ICD10CM:U07.1) and/or SARS-CoV-2 positive testing results between March 1, 2020 and December 21, 2020 at a tertiary academic medical center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. De-identified data, including demographics, medical history, and blood triglyceride levels were collected and analyzed. Of the 600 patients, 109 patients died. The triglyceride value on admission was considered the baseline and the peak was defined as the highest level reported during the entire period of hospitalization. Hypertriglyceridemia was defined as greater than 150 mg/dl. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between hypertriglyceridemia and mortality.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in baseline triglyceride levels between non-survivors (n = 109) and survivors (n = 491) [Median 127 vs. 113 mg/dl, p = 0.213]. However, the non-survivors had significantly higher peak triglyceride levels during hospitalization [Median 179 vs. 134 mg/dl, p < 0.001]. Importantly, hypertriglyceridemia independently associated with mortality [odds ratio=2.3 (95% CI: 1.4-3.7, p = 0.001)], after adjusting for age, gender, obesity, history of hypertension and diabetes, high CRP, high leukocyte count and glucocorticoid treatment in a multivariable logistic regression model.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypertriglyceridemia during hospitalization is independently associated with 2.3 times higher mortality in COVID-19 patients. Prospective studies are needed to independently validate this retrospective analysis.

Glucocorticoid Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Mechanisms and Clinical Practice

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) comprises ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). IBD etiopathology is multifactorial and involves alteration of immune cells and chronic activation of the inflammatory cascade against yet unknown environmental factors that trigger the disease. IBD therapy aims at improving the quality of life and reducing the risk of disease-related complications to avoid the need for surgery. There is no specific cure for IBDs, and the focus of therapy is supportive measures and use of anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive drugs. Glucocorticoids (GCs) are powerful anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory agents used to treat many acute and chronic inflammatory diseases. GCs remain basic treatment for moderate-to-severe IBD, but their use is limited by several important adverse drug effects. Topical administration of a second-generation of GCs, such as budesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), represents a valid alternative to use of older, systemic GCs. Administration of second-generation GCs shows promisingly high topical activity and less systemic toxicity, but maintenance therapy with these new GCs in IBD patients is associated with multiple adverse effects. In this review, we make a comparative analysis of the efficacy of first-generation and second-generation GCs in IBD treatment. Unraveling GC biology at the molecular level to uncouple their clinical benefits from detrimental effects is important. One approach is to consider new GC mediators, such as glucocorticoid-induced leucine zipper, which may have similar anti-inflammatory properties, but avoids the side effects of GCs. This in-depth analysis can help to improve the development and the clinical outcomes of GC therapies in IBD.

The Historical Role and Contemporary Use of Corticosteroids in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The use of corticosteroids to treat patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] has been the bedrock of IBD therapeutics since the pioneering work of Truelove and Witts in the UK in the 1950s and subsequent large cohort studies in the USA and Europe. Nevertheless, although effective for induction of remission, these agents do not maintain remission and are associated with a long list of recognised side effects, including a risk of increased mortality. With the arrival of an increasing number of therapies for patients with IBD, the question arises as to whether we are using these agents appropriately in contemporary practice. This review discusses the historical background to steroid usage in IBD, and also provides a brief review of the literature on side effects of corticosteroid treatment as relevant to IBD patients. Data on licensed medications are presented with specific reference to the achievement of corticosteroid-free remission. We review available international data on the incidence of corticosteroid exposure and excess, and discuss some of the observations we and others have made concerning health care and patient-level factors associated with the risk of corticosteroid exposure, including identification of 'at-risk' populations.

Steroid use and misuse: a key performance indicator in the management of IBD

Corticosteroids remain an important tool for inducing remission in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) but they have no role in maintenance of remission. The significant adverse side effect profile of these drugs means their use should be avoided where possible or measures taken to reduce their risk. Despite an expanding array of alternative therapies, corticosteroid dependency and excess remain common. Appropriate steroid use is now regarded a key performance indicator in the management of IBD. This article aims to outline indications for corticosteroid use in IBD, their risks and strategies to reduce their use and misuse.

Are we choosing wisely for inflammatory bowel disease care? The IG-IBD choosing wisely campaign

BACKGROUND

The "Choosing Wisely" campaigns have the aim of promoting a better clinician-patient relationship.

AIMS

The Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IG-IBD) conducted a choosing wisely campaign for IBD.

METHODS

Ten IG-IBD panellists conducted the campaign through a modified Delphi process. All IG-IBD members were asked to submit five statements starting with "Do not…" addressing any IBD-related procedure or treatment the necessity of which should be questioned. All recommendations were evaluated by the panellists who prioritised each item. The top ten recommendations were prioritised again by IG-IBD members, and the top five recommendations were identified.

RESULTS

110 members (mean age 42 ± 12; 62 males) participated in the campaign. The top five recommendations were as follow: 1. Do not use corticosteroids for maintenance therapy, or without a clear indication; 2. Do not forget venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalised patients with active disease; 3. Do not treat perianal Crohn's disease with biologics without prior surgical evaluation; 4. Do not discontinue IBD-related medications during pregnancy unless specifically indicated; 5. Do not delay surgery.

CONCLUSION

The IG-IBD promoted a campaign with a bottom-up approach, identifying five recommendations that could be useful for providing a better IBD care, especially among non-IBD experts.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

A current overview of corticosteroid use in active ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory condition that causes continuous mucosal inflammation of the colon. New biological drugs have been developed in order to avoid colectomy, but corticosteroids still play a crucial role in management of active UC. Areas covered: We reviewed the current literature about the importance of corticosteroid use in the treatment of ulcerative colitis. The evidence reviewed in this article is a summation of relevant scientific publications, expert opinion statements, and current practice guidelines. This review is a summary of expert opinion in the field without a formal systematic review of evidence. Expert opinion: Corticosteroids represent the mainstay of treatment in patients with severe UC and are very effective in inducing remission in mild to moderate flares not responding to combined oral and topical mesalazine. A valid alternative to systemic corticosteroids is represented by poorly absorbed steroids, such as Beclomethasone dipropionate and Budesonide MMX. In mild-moderate distal disease topical administration of corticosteroids (both systemic and BDP) is an effective alternative to topical mesalazine. However, corticosteroids do not represent a therapeutic option as a maintenance treatment since they are associated with multiple adverse effects.

A comprehensive review and update on ulcerative colitis. Dis Mon 2019;65:100851. [PMID: 30837080 DOI: 10.1016/j.disamonth.2019.02.004]

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic idiopathic inflammatory bowel disorder of the colon that causes continuous mucosal inflammation extending from the rectum to the more proximal colon, with variable extents. UC is characterized by a relapsing and remitting course. UC was first described by Samuel Wilks in 1859 and it is more common than Crohn's disease worldwide. The overall incidence and prevalence of UC is reported to be 1.2-20.3 and 7.6-245 cases per 100,000 persons/year respectively. UC has a bimodal age distribution with an incidence peak in the 2nd or 3rd decades and followed by second peak between 50 and 80 years of age. The key risk factors for UC include genetics, environmental factors, autoimmunity and gut microbiota. The classic presentation of UC include bloody diarrhea with or without mucus, rectal urgency, tenesmus, and variable degrees of abdominal pain that is often relieved by defecation. UC is diagnosed based on the combination of clinical presentation, endoscopic findings, histology, and the absence of alternative diagnoses. In addition to confirming the diagnosis of UC, it is also important to define the extent and severity of inflammation, which aids in the selection of appropriate treatment and for predicting the patient's prognosis. Ileocolonoscopy with biopsy is the only way to make a definitive diagnosis of UC. A pathognomonic finding of UC is the presence of continuous colonic inflammation characterized by erythema, loss of normal vascular pattern, granularity, erosions, friability, bleeding, and ulcerations, with distinct demarcation between inflamed and non-inflamed bowel. Histopathology is the definitive tool in diagnosing UC, assessing the disease severity and identifying intraepithelial neoplasia (dysplasia) or cancer. The classical histological changes in UC include decreased crypt density, crypt architectural distortion, irregular mucosal surface and heavy diffuse transmucosal inflammation, in the absence of genuine granulomas. Abdominal computed tomographic (CT) scanning is the preferred initial radiographic imaging study in UC patients with acute abdominal symptoms. The hallmark CT finding of UC is mural thickening with a mean wall thickness of 8 mm, as opposed to a 2-3 mm mean wall thickness of the normal colon. The Mayo scoring system is a commonly used index to assess disease severity and monitor patients during therapy. The goals of treatment in UC are three fold-improve quality of life, achieve steroid free remission and minimize the risk of cancer. The choice of treatment depends on disease extent, severity and the course of the disease. For proctitis, topical 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) drugs are used as the first line agents. UC patients with more extensive or severe disease should be treated with a combination of oral and topical 5-ASA drugs +/- corticosteroids to induce remission. Patients with severe UC need to be hospitalized for treatment. The options in these patients include intravenous steroids and if refractory, calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine, tacrolimus) or tumor necrosis factor-α antibodies (infliximab) are utilized. Once remission is induced, patients are then continued on appropriate medications to maintain remission. Indications for emergency surgery include refractory toxic megacolon, colonic perforation, or severe colorectal bleeding.

Budesonide with multi-matrix technology as second-line treatment for ulcerative colitis: evaluation of long-term cost-effectiveness in the Netherlands

AIMS

Budesonide with multi-matrix technology (MMX) is an oral corticosteroid, shown to have high topical activity against ulcerative colitis (UC) while maintaining low systemic bioavailability with few adverse events. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of budesonide MMX versus commonly used corticosteroids, in the second-line treatment of active mild-to-moderate UC in the Netherlands.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An eight-state Markov model with an 8 week cycle length captured remission, four distinct therapy stages, hospitalization, possible colectomy and mortality. Remission probability for budesonide MMX was based on the CORE-II study. Population characteristics were derived from the Dutch Inflammatory Bowel Disease South Limburg cohort (n = 598) and included patients with proctitis (39%), left-sided (42%) and extensive disease (19%). Comparators (topical budesonide foam and enema, oral budesonide and prednisolone) were selected based on current Dutch clinical practice. Treatment effects were evaluated by network meta-analysis using a Bayesian framework. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed over a 5 year time horizon from a societal perspective, with costs, health-state and adverse event utilities derived from published sources. Outcomes were weighted by disease extent distribution and corresponding comparators.

RESULTS

Budesonide MMX was associated with comparable quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gain versus foam and oral formulations (+0.01 QALYs) in the total UC population, whilst being cost-saving (EUR 366 per patient). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis evaluated an 86.6% probability of budesonide MMX being dominant (cost-saving with QALY gain) versus these comparators. Exploratory analysis showed similar findings versus prednisolone.

LIMITATIONS

Differing definitions of trial end-points and remission across trials meant indirect comparison was not ideal. However, in the absence of head-to-head clinical data, these comparisons are reasonable alternatives and currently offer the only comparison of second-line UC treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present analysis, budesonide MMX was shown to be cost-effective versus comparators in the total UC population, for the second-line treatment of active mild-to-moderate UC in the Netherlands.

Preparation and characterization of pH-sensitive nanoparticles of budesonide for the treatment of ulcerative colitis

Objective

The aim of this study was to develop pH sensitive nanoparticles of budesonide for the treatment of ulcerative colitis.

Methods

The NPs system was characterized by the transmission electron microscopy (TEM), particle size, drug loading and encapsulation efficiency. In addition, in vitro drug release prop-erties and pharmacokinetics were also investigated in detail. The optimized formulation was examined for its in-vivo targeting potential using 2,4,6-trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid (TNBS)-induced colitis in a rat model.

Results

Dynamic light-scattering results showed that the particle size of budesonide-Eudragit S100/poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) nanoparticles was around 110.5 nm, with a polydispersity index of 0.098. Transmission electron microscopy images showed that BUD-ES100/PLGA NPs were spherical with uniform size and relatively smooth surfaces. In vitro release showed that BUD-ES100/PLGA NPs required minimal release of drugs during its transit in the stomach and the upper small intestine to ensure that a maximum dose reached the colon. After the pharma-codynamic treatment, the myeloperoxidase value of BUD-ES100/PLGA NPs was close to the normal group. The histopathological examination of rectum showed that no sign of damages such as epithelial necrosis and sloughing epithelial cells was detected.

Conclusion

Our findings suggested that BUD-ES100/PLGA NPs were a promising alternative to single pH-dependent systems for colitis therapy.

Glucocorticosteroid therapy in inflammatory bowel diseases: From clinical practice to molecular biology

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), such as ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, are chronic pathologies associated with a deregulated immune response in the intestinal mucosa, and they are triggered by environmental factors in genetically susceptible individuals. Exogenous glucocorticoids (GCs) are widely used as anti-inflammatory therapy in IBDs. In the past, patients with moderate or severe states of inflammation received GCs as a first line therapy with an important effectiveness in terms of reduction of the disease activity and the induction of remission. However, this treatment often results in detrimental side effects. This downside drove the development of second generation GCs and more precise (non-systemic) drug-delivery methods. Recent clinical trials show that most of these new treatments have similar effectiveness to first generation GCs with fewer adverse effects. The remaining challenge in successful treatment of IBDs concerns the refractoriness and dependency that some patients encounter during GCs treatment. A deeper understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying GC response is key to personalizing drug choice for IBDs patients to optimize their response to treatment. In this review, we examine the clinical characteristics of treatment with GCs, followed by an in depth analysis of the proposed molecular mechanisms involved in its resistance and dependence associated with IBDs. This thorough analysis of current clinical and biomedical literature may help guide physicians in determining a course of treatment for IBDs patients and identifies important areas needing further study.

Time to clinical response and remission for therapeutics in inflammatory bowel diseases: What should the clinician expect, what should patients be told?

An awareness of the expected time for therapies to induce symptomatic improvement and remission is necessary for determining the timing of follow-up, disease (re)assessment, and the duration to persist with therapies, yet this is seldom reported as an outcome in clinical trials. In this review, we explore the time to clinical response and remission of current therapies for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) as well as medication, patient and disease related factors that may influence the time to clinical response. It appears that the time to therapeutic response varies depending on the indication for therapy (Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis). Agents with the most rapid time to clinical response included corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, exclusive enteral nutrition, aminosalicylates and anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy which will work in most patients within the first 2 mo. Vedolizumab, methotrexate and thiopurines had a longer time to clinical response and can take several months to achieve maximal efficacy. Factors affecting the time to clinical response of therapies included use of concomitant therapy, disease duration, smoking status, disease phenotype and advanced age. There appears to be marked variation in time to clinical response for therapies used in IBD which is further influenced by disease and patient related factors. Understanding the expected time to therapeutic response is integral to inform further decision making, maintain a patient-centered approach and ensure treatment is given an appropriate timeframe to achieve maximal benefit prior to cessation.

Use of corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs in inflammatory bowel disease: Clinical practice guidelines of the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The two main forms of intestinal bowel disease, namely ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, are not curable but can be controlled by various medical therapies. The Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IG-IBD) has prepared clinical practice guidelines to help physicians prescribe corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs for these patients. The guidelines consider therapies that induce remission in patients with active disease as well as treatment regimens that maintain remission. These guidelines complement already existing guidelines from IG-IBD on the use of biological drugs in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases.

Budesonide for the treatment of ulcerative colitis

INTRODUCTION

Budesonide is a synthetic corticosteroid characterized by enhanced topical potency and limited systemic bioavailability. Its use in ulcerative colitis (UC) was limited to rectal preparations until recently when the new oral budesonide formulation incorporating the multi-matrix system technology was introduced. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the current role of oral and rectal budesonide in managing UC patients Areas covered: In this paper, we described the chemical structure and pharmacologic characteristics of the different oral and rectal budesonide preparations, provided a summary of the published trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of budesonide in UC, and discussed the current status of its use in this population Expert opinion: Budesonide is effective in inducing remission in a subset of patients with mild-moderate UC. Nevertheless, the current evidence suggests inferiority of oral budesonide to 5-aminosalisylates (5-ASA) and systemic steroids, whereas rectal applications are comparable to other rectal steroid preparations, but still inferior to rectal 5-ASA. In clinical practice, several issues need clarification including, its exact position in the line of induction agents; the role of combining budesonide and 5-ASAs; the role of combining oral and rectal budesonide; and the role of budesonide in maintenance therapy.

Physician Perspectives on Unresolved Issues in the Management of Ulcerative Colitis: The UC Horizons Project

BACKGROUND

There is still uncertainty about what constitutes the best therapeutic practice in ulcerative colitis (UC).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the "UC Horizons Project" was to raise a series of questions regarding the management of UC to provide responses based on the best scientific evidence available.

METHODS

The 11 members of the scientific committee prepared draft answers to the 10 questions from available evidence after a literature search. A total of 48 Spanish gastroenterology specialists nationwide participated in the project. The national meeting discussed the 10 issues in working groups and reached consensus regarding the recommendations by anonymous, interactive vote following the Delphi methodology. Final answers were developed, based on evidence and clinical experience of the participants.

RESULTS

All the recommendations achieved a high level of agreement in the plenary vote, although the quality of the evidence was markedly heterogeneous. The lowest percentage of agreement corresponded to the questions with the weakest level of evidence, highlighting the necessity of conducting further studies in these areas. The recommendations focused on (1) aminosalicylates therapy (regarding dose and appropriateness of coadministration with thiopurines), (2) corticosteroid therapy (regarding dose and route of administration), (3) thiopurine treatment (regarding indications and possibility of withdrawal), (4) anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy (regarding appropriateness of combination with thiopurines, intensification, or discontinuation of treatment), and (5) colorectal cancer (regarding risk and time trends).

CONCLUSIONS

The UC Horizons Project raised a series of eminently practical questions about the management of UC and provided responses based on the best scientific evidence available.

The role of endoscopy in inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a group of chronic immune-mediated disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. It is often the result of the interaction of genetic and environmental factors. The role of endoscopy in disease surveillance is unprecedented. However, there is considerable debate in therapeutic goals in IBD patients, ranging from the resolution of clinical symptoms to mucosal healing. Furthermore, deep remission has recently been advocated for altering disease course in these patients. Additionally, neoplasia continues to be a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in IBD patients. This review discussed the role of several endoscopic techniques in assessing mucosal healing and neoplasia with emphasis on novel non-invasive endoscopic techniques.

Oral prolonged release beclomethasone dipropionate and prednisone in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis: results from a double-blind, randomized, parallel group study

OBJECTIVES

Double-blind study comparing efficacy and safety of the topically acting corticosteroid beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) to prednisone (PD) in patients with active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

Overall, 282 patients were randomized to receive BDP-prolonged release tablets 5 mg once daily for 4 weeks and then every other day for an additional 4 weeks or oral PD 40 mg once daily for the initial 2 weeks tapered of 10 mg every 2 weeks during the 8-week study period. Efficacy end point was the non-inferiority of BDP vs. PD in terms of Disease Activity Index (DAI) score <3 or reduction by at least 3 points for patients with a baseline DAI ≥7 at week 4. Safety end point was the proportion of patients with steroid-related adverse events (AEs) and cortisol <150 nmol/l at week 4.

RESULTS

DAI response rates at week 4 were 64.6% and 66.2% with BDP and PD, respectively, demonstrating non-inferiority of BDP vs. PD (delta: -1.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) -13.00-9.88, P=0.78). Patients with steroid-related AEs and cortisol <150 nmol/l at week 4 were 38.7% in the BDP group and 46.9% in the PD group (P=0.17 between groups). No safety signals were observed in both the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

BDP was non-inferior to PD in the treatment of active UC, with a good safety profile in both the groups.

Conventional drug therapy for inflammatory bowel disease

Most patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are offered conventional medical therapy, because emerging therapies for IBD are regulated by health-care jurisdiction and often limited to academic centres. This review distils current evidence to provide a pragmatic approach to conventional IBD therapy, including aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, thiopurines, methotrexate, calcineurin inhibitors, infliximab and adalimumab. It addresses drug efficacy, safety and salient practice points for optimal and appropriate practice.

Italian Expert Panel on the management of patients with coexisting spondyloarthritis and inflammatory bowel disease

Spondyloarthritis (SpA) is a group of diseases with similar clinical, radiologic and serologic features, including SpA associated with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD-associated SpA). Several studies have estimated the occurrence of SpA in IBD patients as ranging from 17% to 39%, confirming that SpA is the most frequent extra-intestinal manifestation in patients with IBD. In this paper, the expert panel presents some red flags to guide clinicians - both rheumatologists and gastroenterologists - to make a correct diagnosis of IBD-associated SpA in clinical practice. IBD-associated SpA classification, clinical presentation and diagnostic work-up are also presented. From the therapeutic point of view, only separate recommendations/guidelines are currently available for the treatment of Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis and for both axial and peripheral SpA. However, when IBD and SpA coexist, the therapeutic strategy should be modulated to take into account the variable manifestations of IBD in terms of intestinal and extra-intestinal features, and the clinical manifestations of SpA, with particular attention to peripheral enthesitis, dactylitis and anterior uveitis. To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to define therapeutic algorithms for the integrated management of different IBD-associated SpA clinical scenarios.

Risks of inflammatory bowel disease treatment with glucocorticosteroids and aminosalicylates

BACKGROUND

Glucocorticosteroids and aminosalicylates, mainly mesalazine (5-ASA), are both standard therapeutics in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. The glucocorticosteroids are highly effective in inducing remission in both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, but their use is limited by the high incidence and the potentially serious nature of adverse events. In an attempt to limit systemic side effects, rapidly metabolized corticosteroids such as budesonide have been introduced. The safety profile of aminosalicylates differs between the formulations.

METHODS

We summarize the potential risks associated with glucocorticosteroid and aminosalicylate therapy in IBDs.

RESULTS

The numerous adverse events of glucocorticosteroids, particularly at high doses and prolonged treatment, include opportunistic infections, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, ocular effects (glaucoma and cataracts), psychiatric complications, hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression and increased fracture risk. Partially, these systemic adverse events occur with budesonide, which only has a low systemic exposure. The safety profile of 5-ASA is comparable to placebo and superior to the old aminosalicylate prodrug sulfasalazine, which had a significantly higher incidence of intolerance reactions including allergic rashes. Only in rare cases has nephrotoxicity such as interstitial nephritis been associated with 5-ASA.

CONCLUSION

Considering the toxicity profile of conventional glucocorticosteroids, one primary goal of treatment in IBD should be corticosteroid-free remission. Therapy with budesonide may result in a better safety profile. 5-ASA treatment is usually well tolerated, but with regard to the rare nephrotoxic events, it is advisable to assess renal function before and during treatment with 5-ASA.

Clinical aspects of mucosal healing in inflammatory bowel diseases: what is it and what is the real value for the everyday practice?

The course of inflammatory bowel diseases is heterogeneous and varies over time. Therefore, the search for predictive factors has increasingly become the focus of research. Mucosal healing has emerged as an important objective, as evidence indicates that it is associated with improved disease outcome. Nevertheless, many unsolved questions remain, including the definition of complete or partial healing as well as the best assessment method using endoscopic or imaging techniques, most of which are relatively invasive and expensive procedures, which therefore are not ideal for frequent monitoring and it is not clear. This review summarizes the available evidence in order to assist clinicians when assessing the mucosal status in the everyday practice.

Steroids and 5-aminosalicylic acids in moderate ulcerative colitis: addressing the dilemma

Steroids have been a mainstay of ulcerative colitis (UC) therapy for many years, based on a thoroughly established efficacy profile for the induction of remission. However, in light of the considerable side effects and negative perceptions they carry, it is important to ensure such treatments are used as effectively as possible. For severe UC, the need for steroids is rarely questioned, and rightly so; it is for moderate UC that the role of steroids should be considered. Both patients and clinicians place a high importance on rapid, effective resolution of symptoms, yet at the same time wish to avoid unnecessary side effects. Through consideration of the available evidence, it becomes clear that both steroids and high-dose 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) are supported by robust trials demonstrating their efficacy. Indeed, both therapies have been shown to give rise to resolution of symptoms after 2 weeks in many patients. However, a paucity of head-to-head comparisons makes conclusive interpretation challenging. This paper therefore presents a practical approach, which builds on the available evidence and is developed from informed discussions with patients. This approach involves initiating therapy with high-dose 5-ASA, followed by a review of symptom improvements after 2-3 weeks. Steroids can then be introduced, when needed, with minimal delay. In this way, symptoms can be resolved rapidly, yet many patients may avoid unpleasant side effects.

Indian Society of Gastroenterology consensus on ulcerative colitis

In 2010, the Indian Society of Gastroenterology's Task Force on Inflammatory Bowel Diseases undertook an exercise to produce consensus statements on ulcerative colitis. This consensus, produced through a modified Delphi process, reflects our current understanding of the definition, diagnostic work up, treatment and complications of ulcerative colitis. The consensus statements are intended to serve as a reference point for teaching, clinical practice, and research in India.

[Guidelines for the management of ulcerative colitis]

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disorder characterized by a relapsing and remitting course. The quality of life can decreases significantly during exacerbations of the disease. The incidence and prevalence of UC in Korea are still lower than those of Western countries, but have been rapidly increasing during the past decades. Various medical and surgical therapies are currently used for the management of UC. However, many challenging issues exist and sometimes these lead to differences in practice between clinicians. Therefore, Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) Study Group of Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases (KASID) set out the Korean guidelines for the management of UC. These guidelines are made by the adaptation using several foreign guidelines and encompass treatment of active colitis, maintenance of remission and indication for surgery in UC. The specific recommendations are presented with the quality of evidence. These are the first Korean treatment guidelines for UC and will be revised with new evidences on treatment of UC.

Consensus guidelines for the management of inflammatory bowel disease

This is the first Brazilian Consensus on inflammatory bowel disease, carried out by the Brazilian Study Group of Inflammatory Bowel Disease, and discusses the treatment of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis in acute and remission phases. The first part of the text, brings out a review on the main drugs used in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease, as well as their mechanisms of action and cautions during their use. In the second part, the committee's opinions about the most recommended medical and surgical approaches for both diseases are presented on the basis of disease activity, location and behaviour status. The recommendations here presented were widely discussed in several scientific meetings with active participation of all members of the group and were highly based on scientific evidence covered by the literature.

Managing the long term care of inflammatory bowel disease patients: The cost to European health care providers

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Inflammatory Bowel Disease (which includes Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis), is a chronic condition characterised by substantial morbidity. Inflammatory Bowel Disease patients are considered expensive to manage, hence accurate estimates of care costs are crucial to help healthcare providers plan clinical management. The aim of this study is to estimate the cost of care for Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis patients in the United Kingdom and Western mainland Europe.

METHODS

Decision models were built to simulate the natural disease history of Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis, informed by United Kingdom and European clinical pathways. A healthcare provider perspective was adopted, model inputs were informed by published sources and expert opinion, and UK healthcare costs were used (2008 prices). Cohorts of 25 year old patients presenting with symptoms of varying severity were modelled over ten years, and annual treatment costs calculated per patient.

RESULTS

The average annual cost of care per Crohn's Disease/Ulcerative Colitis patient was £631/£762 (United Kingdom) and £838/£796 (Europe). Most costs were incurred immediately following diagnosis, particularly in European Crohn's patients, reflecting the earlier use of more aggressive treatments. Surgery, hospitalisation, and the use of biological therapies and mesalazine (in Ulcerative Colitis) were key cost drivers. The total annual cost to the United Kingdom National Health Service of caring for Inflammatory Bowel Disease patients was estimated to be £131million.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that Inflammatory Bowel Disease patients are expensive to manage and illustrates the importance of differentiating between alternative clinical management scenarios.

Mucosal healing predicts late outcomes after the first course of corticosteroids for newly diagnosed ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is uncertain whether mucosal healing after the first course of corticosteroids therapy predicts outcome in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). We evaluated whether early clinical and endoscopic responses to this therapy are associated with late outcomes in UC.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed UC who were prescribed corticosteroid therapy (n = 157) were followed up for 5 years. They were evaluated using clinical (Powel-Tuck [PT]) and endoscopic (Baron) indexes after 3 and 6 months, then every 6 months. Outcomes at month 3 (early response) were used to identify patients with complete (group A: PT, 0-1; Baron, 0), partial (group B: PT, 0-1; Baron, 1-3), or no response (group C: persistence of clinical and endoscopic activity). The association between early and late outcomes was assessed.

RESULTS

After 5 years, there were significant differences between complete and partial responders in the rates of hospitalization (25% in group A vs 48.7% in group B; P = .0152; odds ratio [OR], 2.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-6.72), immunosuppression therapy (5% in group A vs 25.6% in group B; P = .0030; OR, 6.55; 95% CI, 1.67-25.67), colectomy (3.3% in group A vs 18.0% in group B; P = .0265; OR, 6.34; 95% CI, 1.24-32.37), and their combination (26.7% in group A vs 48.7% in group B; P = .0249; OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.12-6.11). After multivariate analysis, lack of mucosal healing was the only factor associated with negative outcomes at 5 years (immunosuppressors: hazard risk [HR], 10.581; 95% CI, 2.193-51.039; P = .0033; hospitalization: HR, 3.634; 95% CI, 1.556-8.485; P = .0029; colectomy: HR, 8.397; 95% CI, 1.278-55.186; P = .0268).

CONCLUSIONS

No mucosal healing after corticosteroid therapy is associated with a more aggressive disease course.

New pathophysiological insights and modern treatment of IBD

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which comprises two main types, namely, Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, affects approximately 3.6 million people in the USA and Europe, and an alarming rise in low-incidence areas, such as Asia, is currently being observed. In the last decade, spontaneous mutations in a diversity of genes have been identified, and these have helped to elucidate pathways that can lead to IBD. Animal studies have also increased our knowledge of the pathological dialogue between the intestinal microbiota and components of the innate and adaptive immune systems misdirecting the immune system to attack the colon. Present-day medical therapy of IBD consists of salicylates, corticosteroids, immunosuppressants and immunomodulators. However, their use may result in severe side effects and complications, such as an increased rate of malignancies or infectious diseases. In clinical practice, there is still a high frequency of incomplete or absent response to medical therapy, indicating a compelling need for new therapeutic strategies. This review summarizes current epidemiology, pathogenesis and diagnostic strategies in IBD. It also provides insight in today's differentiated clinical therapy and describes mechanisms of promising future medicinal approaches.

Are colonoscopy and bowel ultrasound useful for assessing response to short-term therapy and predicting disease outcome of moderate-to-severe forms of ulcerative colitis?: a prospective study

OBJECTIVES

Mucosal healing has been proposed as an important sign of the efficacy of medical treatment of inflammatory bowel disease; however, direct evidence in ulcerative colitis (UC) is scarce. We evaluated the usefulness of colonoscopy and bowel ultrasound (US) as indexes of response to short-term therapy and as predictors of subsequent outcome in UC.

METHODS

A total of 83 patients with moderate-to-severe UC were recruited; endoscopic and US severity was graded 0-3 at entry according to validated scores. Of the recruited patients, 74, who were clinically responsive to steroids, were followed up with repeated colonoscopy and bowel US at 3, 9, and 15 months from recruitment. Concordance between clinical, endoscopic, and US scores at various visits was determined by kappa statistics. Multiple unconditional logistic regression models were used to assess the predictivity of clinical, endoscopic, and US scores measured at 3 and 9 months on the development of endoscopic UC relapse within 15 months.

RESULTS

A variable concordance was found over time between endoscopic and clinical score (weighted kappa between 0.38 and 0.95), with high and consistent concordance between endoscopic and US scores (weighted kappa between 0.76 and 0.90). On logistic regression analysis, moderate-to-severe endoscopic and US scores at 3 months were associated with a high risk of endoscopic activity at 15 months (odds ratio (OR): 5.2; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.6-17.6 and OR: 9.1; 95% CI: 2.5-33.5, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Bowel US may be used as a surrogate of colonoscopy in assessing the short-term response of severe forms of UC to therapy. Both US score and endoscopic score after 3 months of steroid therapy predict outcome of disease at 15 months.