Safety of dual biological therapy in Crohn's disease: a case series of vedolizumab in combination with other biologics

Combination treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: Present status and future perspectives

The treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), especially those with severe or refractory disease, represents an important challenge for the clinical gastroenterologist. It seems to be no exaggeration to say that in these patients, not only the scientific background of the gastroenterologist is tested, but also the abundance of "gifts" that he should possess (insight, intuition, determination, ability to take initiative, etc.) for the successful outcome of the treatment. In daily clinical practice, depending on the severity of the attack, IBD is treated with one or a combination of two or more pharmaceutical agents. These combinations include not only the first-line drugs (e.g., mesalazine, corticosteroids, antibiotics, etc) but also second- and third-line drugs (immunosuppressants and biologic agents). It is a fact that despite the significant therapeutic advances there is still a significant percentage of patients who do not satisfactorily respond to the treatment applied. Therefore, a part of these patients are going to surgery. In recent years, several small-size clinical studies, reviews, and case reports have been published combining not only biological agents with other drugs (e.g., immunosuppressants or corticosteroids) but also the combination of two biological agents simultaneously, especially in severe cases. In our opinion, it is at least a strange (and largely unexplained) fact that we often use combinations of drugs in a given patient although studies comparing the simultaneous administration of two or more drugs with monotherapy are very few. As mentioned above, there is a timid tendency in the literature to combine two biological agents in severe cases unresponsive to the applied treatment or patients with severe extraintestinal manifestations. The appropriate dosage, the duration of the administration, the suitable timing for checking the clinical and laboratory outcome, as well as the treatment side-effects, should be the subject of intense clinical research shortly. In this editorial, we attempt to summarize the existing data regarding the already applied combination therapies and to humbly formulate thoughts and suggestions for the future application of the combination treatment of biological agents in a well-defined category of patients. We suggest that the application of biomarkers and artificial intelligence could help in establishing new forms of treatment using the available modern drugs in patients with IBD resistant to treatment.

Using clinical cases to guide healthcare

Evidence-based practice (EBP) has been the gold standard in healthcare for nearly three centuries and aims to assist physicians in providing the safest and most effective healthcare for their patients. The well-established hierarchy of evidence lists systematic reviews and meta-analyses at the top however these methodologies are not always appropriate or possible and in these instances case-control studies, case series and case reports are utilised to support EBP. Case-control studies allow simultaneous study of multiple risk factors and can be performed rapidly and relatively cheaply. A recent example was during the Coronavirus pandemic where case-control studies were used to assess the efficacy of personal protective equipment for healthcare workers. Case series and case reports also play a role in EBP and are particularly useful to study rare diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease in transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. They are also vital in generating and disseminating early signals and encouraging further research. Whilst these methodologies have weaknesses, particularly with regards to bias and loss of patient confidentiality for rare pathologies, they have an important part to play in EBP and when appropriately utilised can significantly impact upon clinical practice.

Dual targeted therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis and spondyloarthritis: a real-world multicenter experience from Spain

Dual targeted therapy (DTT) has emerged as a promising approach in patients with refractory spondyloarthritis (SpA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and extra-musculoskeletal manifestations of both diseases, but its effectiveness/safety ratio still remains unclear. This is a retrospective, real-world multicenter study in refractory SpA and PsA patients with simultaneous use of two biological or synthetic targeted agents. Effectiveness was assessed using Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score with C-reactive protein (ASDAS-CRP) and Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score. We identified 39 different DTT combinations in 36 patients (22 SpA; 14 PsA), 25 of them with concomitant inflammatory bowel disease. The most commonly used combinations were TNF inhibitor plus antagonist of the IL12/23 pathway, followed by TNF inhibitor plus IL-17 antagonist. During a median exposure of 14.86 months (IQR 8-20.2), DTT retention rate was 69.4% (n=25/36; 19 SpA, 6 PsA). Major clinical improvement (change in ASDAS-CRP > 2 or improvement > 85% in DAPSA) was achieved in 69.4% of patients (n=25/36 therapeutical combinations; 17/21 SpA, 8/15 PsA), with a 58.3% (n=21/36 combinations; 15/20 SpA, 6/13 PsA) low-activity/remission rate. Of the patients who were receiving glucocorticoids, 55% managed to withdraw them during follow-up. Interestingly, only four serious adverse events in three patients were observed, leading to DTT discontinuation.

Review of Dual Biologics in Specialty Pharmacy Practice

OBJECTIVE

To describe and review the published evidence on use of multiple biologics within specialty pharmacy practice.

DATA SOURCES

A search of PubMed and Embase was conducted from October 2021 through September 2022. Keywords included biologics for immune-mediated conditions along with the terms "dual," "add-on," and "combination."

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All human studies in the English language were considered. Published abstracts, case reports, case series, randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Although evidence is limited, there are published meta-analyses of combined biologic use within gastroenterology and rheumatology. There are also numerous case reports within dermatology. Clinical trials of dual biologics for severe rheumatologic conditions and inflammatory bowel disease are in progress. Existing evidence for use in pulmonology and allergy suggest dual biologic therapy can be safe and effective, but data are limited. Literature describing use of monoclonal antibodies for other overlapping conditions is lacking.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

This article reviews the evidence describing combination biologic use and outlines remaining knowledge gaps. It also describes the essential role that specialty pharmacists play in managing therapeutic mAbs.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality evidence describing combination biologic use is limited and long-term safety data are lacking. Pharmacists should utilize their specialized training to assess appropriateness of therapy, provide patient counseling and monitor for safety and efficacy.

Use of teduglutide for short bowel syndrome and Crohn's disease in a patient treated with ustekinumab and vedolizumab dual biologic therapy

Surgery in Crohn's disease may be the cause of short bowel syndrome that may lead to kidney dysfunction. Dual biologic therapy is rarely needed to control activity. We present a case of a 61-year-old steroid dependent (A2L1B3p) female who had undergone surgery on three occasions: ileocecal resection (resection of 15 cm of terminal ileum); resection of right and left colon up to sigmoid; proctectomy with intersphincteric resection along with ileostomy due to a rectovaginal fistula. She had been previously treated with prednisone, azathioprine, methotrexate, infliximab and adalimumab but the treatment was discontinued owing to adverse effects. Vedolizumab was started, showing good control of the luminal activity but the rectovaginal fistula recurred. Treatment changed to ustekinumab, the fistula activity was controlled but the mucosa activity recurred. 11 months after commencing with ustekinumab, vedolizumab was added to the treatment and complete remission was achieved for three years. Simultaneously, the patient developed renal dysfunction derived from the short bowel syndrome that led to chronic kidney failure. In the face of potential renal replacement therapy, a new therapy with 2.5 mg/sc/d teduglutide was started achieving stable figures of creatinine and normalization of the glomerular filtration rate.

Efficacy and Safety of Dual Targeted Therapy for Partially or Non-responsive Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Dual targeted therapy (DTT) has emerged as an attractive therapeutic option for select patients with active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who are unable to achieve remission with biologic or small molecule monotherapy. We conducted a systematic review of specific DTT combinations in patients with IBD.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL Complete, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Library to identify articles related to the use of DTT for the treatment of Crohn Disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) published before February 2021.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were identified comprising 288 patients started on DTT for partially or non-responsive IBD. We identified 14 studies with 113 patients receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and anti-integrin therapies (i.e., vedolizumab and natalizumab), 12 studies with 55 patients receiving vedolizumab and ustekinumab, nine studies with 68 patients receiving vedolizumab and tofacitinib, five studies with 24 patients receiving anti-TNF therapy and tofacitinib, six studies with 18 patients receiving anti-TNF therapy and ustekinumab, and three studies with 13 patients receiving ustekinumab and tofacitinib.

CONCLUSION

DTT is a promising approach to improve IBD treatment for patients with incomplete responses to targeted monotherapy. Larger prospective clinical studies are needed to confirm these findings as is additional predictive modeling to identify the patient subgroups most likely to require and benefit from this approach.

Advanced Combination Treatment With Biologic Agents and Novel Small Molecule Drugs for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The use of combination therapy with a biologic agent and immunosuppressant has well-established efficacy and safety and is common practice in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Current research has shifted focus toward the use of advanced combination treatment (ACT). This term was coined to describe combination therapy using 2 or more advanced treatments (biologic agents and/or oral small molecule drugs) with the aim of achieving optimal disease control in selected patients. An ACT approach may be particularly beneficial in patients with documented medically refractory IBD and in patients with a poor prognosis, extraintestinal manifestations, or concomitant immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. To date, the body of evidence for ACT strategies in IBD is largely comprised of uncontrolled retrospective case series and cohort studies in highly refractory patients. Recently, results from the VEGA trial have suggested that combination induction therapy with guselkumab and golimumab was more effective in ulcerative colitis than either agent alone. However, questions remain about issues such as related costs, ACT duration, and optimal combinations to adopt. Future randomized controlled trials are likely to evaluate rationally selected combinations of agents. This article summarizes the available literature on ACT, including comparisons with traditional combination therapy and the rheumatology field, and discusses practical recommendations, profiles of IBD patients who should be considered for combination approaches in clinical practice, and remaining knowledge gaps.

Emerging role of dual biologic therapy for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

Biologic agents have now been used in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) for many years where experience, expertise and confidence in their use has developed over time. In the United Kingdom, there are well established guidelines and recommendations for both single agent biologic treatments, and with combination therapy of a biologic agent with a small molecule agent in maintenance therapy. In recent times, there has been increasing interest and experience using dual biologic therapy (DBT) in IBD, primarily in difficult to treat and refractory cases with high disease burden. However, published data on use, experience and safety profiles is limited and large-scale studies remain low in number in this developing area. We therefore aim to present a summary and review of the available published data in this area to help us better understand the emerging role of DBT in IBD.

Breaking through the therapeutic ceiling of inflammatory bowel disease: Dual-targeted therapies

Emerging biologics and small-molecule drugs have changed the clinical status quo of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, current treatments remain at a standstill in terms of response and remission in many cases. Accumulating evidence indicates that dual-targeted therapy (DTT) could be promising in overcoming the existing ceiling of IBD treatment. However, data on the efficacy and safety of DTT on Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis are still limited or insufficient. Moreover, there is a lack of studies delineating the mechanisms of DTT. Given that various targeted drugs have different targets among the extensive redundant inflammatory networks, DTT could result in various outcomes. In this review, we have summarized the current data on the safety, effectiveness, and clinical development status of novel targeted drugs related to refractory IBD, and have explored the mechanism of action of therapy. We have categorized therapeutic agents into "Therapeutic Agents Targeting Cellular Signaling Pathways" and "Therapeutic Agents Targeting Leukocyte Trafficking" based on the different therapeutic targets, and also by classifying therapeutic agents targeting the cellular signaling pathways into "JAK-dependent" and "JAK-independent," and placed the existing drug combinations into 3 categories based on their mechanisms, namely, overlapping, synergistic, and complementary effects. Lastly, we have proposed the possible mechanisms of DTT to conceive a theoretical framework for clinical decision-making and further drug development and research from an IBD standpoint.

Customer-centric product presentations for monoclonal antibodies

Delivering customer-centric product presentations for biotherapeutics, such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), represents a long-standing and paramount area of engagement for pharmaceutical scientists. Activities include improving experience with the dosing procedure, reducing drug administration-related expenditures, and ultimately shifting parenteral treatments outside of a controlled healthcare institutional setting. In times of increasingly cost-constrained markets and reinforced with the coronavirus pandemic, this discipline of "Product Optimization" in healthcare has gained momentum and changed from a nice-to-have into a must. This review summarizes latest trends in the healthcare ecosystem that inform key strategies for developing customer-centric products, including the availability of a wider array of sustainable drug delivery options and treatment management plans that support dosing in a flexible care setting. Three disease area archetypes with varying degree of implementation of customer-centric concepts are introduced to highlight relevant market differences and similarities. Namely, rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis, and oncology have been chosen due to differences in the availability of subcutaneously dosed and ready-to-use self-administration products for mAb medicines and their follow-on biologics. Different launch scenarios are described from a manufacturer's perspective highlighting the necessity of platform approaches. To unfold the full potential of customer-centric care, value-based healthcare provider reimbursement schemes that incentivize the efficiency of care need to be broadly implemented.

Role of the combination of biologics and/or small molecules in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a group of chronic diseases that includes ulcerative colitis, Crohn’s disease, and indeterminate colitis. Patients with IBD require prolonged treatment and high utilization of healthcare resources for proper management. The treatment of patients with IBD is focused on achieving therapeutic goals including clinical, biochemical, and endoscopic variables that result in improvement of the quality of life and prevention of disability. Advanced IBD treatment includes tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, integrin antagonist, antagonist of the p40 subunit of interleukin 12/23, and small molecule drugs. However, despite the multiple treatments available, about 40% of patients are refractory to therapy and present with persistent symptoms that have a great impact on their quality of life, with hospitalization and surgery being necessary in many cases. Dual therapy, a strategy sometimes applicable to refractory IBD patients, includes the combination of two biologics or a biologic in combination with a small molecule drug. There are two distinct scenarios in IBD patients in which this approach can be used: (1) Refractory active luminal disease without extraintestinal manifestations; and (2) patients with IBD in remission, but with active extraintestinal manifestations or immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. This review provides a summary of the results (clinical response and remission) of different combinations of advanced drugs in patients with IBD, both in adults and in the pediatric population. In addition, the safety profile of different combinations of dual therapy is analyzed. The use of newer combinations, including recently approved treatments, the application of new biomarkers and artificial intelligence, and clinical trials to establish effectiveness during long-term follow-up, are needed to establish new strategies for the use of advanced treatments in patients with refractory IBD.

Combining Pentoxifylline With Vedolizumab for Crohn's Disease: Results of a Randomised, Placebo-controlled Pilot Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The efficacy of current biologics may be limited by targeting only one pathway. Pentoxifylline [PTX] interferes with tumour necrosis factor [TNF] gene expression. We performed a randomised, placebo-controlled pilot study to determine if PTX plus vedolizumab [VDZ] in patients with Crohn's disease [CD] is safe and improves response compared with VDZ monotherapy.

METHODS

Thirty adult patients with active CD were randomised to VDZ/PTX or VDZ/placebo and followed for 24 weeks. Endoscopic activity and inflammatory cytokines were measured at baseline and Week 24. Descriptive statistics were used to determine estimates of effect.

RESULTS

Demographics were similar but baseline disease activity was higher in the VDZ/PTX group. There was no difference in clinical remission at Week 14 (60.0% vs 66.67%, odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 3.51) or steroid-free clinical remission at Week 24 in patients receiving VDZ/PTX. Improved clinical response was noted in the VDZ/PTX group at Weeks 6, 14, and 24 [Week 6: 20% vs 6.67%, Week 14: 26.67% vs 6.67%, Week 24: 40% vs 20%]. The rate of endoscopic remission was similar between the groups [40% vs 33.33%], with a greater mean decrease in Simple Endoscopic Score-CD [SES-CD] and C-reactive protein [CRP] with VDZ/PTX [SES-CD -3.17 vs -0.15, CRP -5.56 vs 0.46]. An increase in serum TNF-α concentration was observed with VDZ/placebo group; PTX mitigated this effect. No serious adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

VDZ/PTX did not provide benefit over VDZ monotherapy in clinical or endoscopic remission but appeared to improve clinical response and was safe. These data should inform a fully powered study.

Effectiveness of Dual Biologic or Small Molecule Therapy for Achieving Endoscopic Remission in Refractory Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic autoimmune disease with relapse-remission courses. A number of patients may present with a refractory disease with partial or no response to treatment. Others may present with extra-intestinal manifestations that makes the treatment with one biologic challenging. Dual target therapy (DTT), combining biologics and/or small molecule drugs, may offer a chance to achieve remission in these cases and improve patients' quality of life despite the limited evidence regarding this approach. We present a case series of refractory inflammatory bowel disease cases managed with DTT. Seven patients with refractory IBD achieved steroid free, clinical, and endoscopic remission by using DTT. These results support that DTT could be an effective approach in selected patients with refractory IBD or with concomitant extra-intestinal manifestations (EIM). Larger studies, ideally randomized controlled trials, are needed to further support the evidence and confirm the efficacy and safety of DTT for IBD.

Combining biological therapies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a Finnish multi-centre study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Therapy with two concomitant biologicals targeting different inflammatory pathways has emerged as a new therapy option for treatment refractory inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Data on the efficacy and safety of dual biological therapy (DBT) are scarce and are investigated in this study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data on all patients treated with a combination of two biologicals in four Finnish tertiary centres were collected and analysed. Remission was assessed by a physician on the basis of biomarkers, endoscopic evaluation and alleviation of symptoms.

RESULTS

A total of 16 patients with 22 trials of DBT were included. Fifteen patients had Crohn's disease. The most common combination of DBT was adalimumab (ADA) and ustekinumab (USTE; 36%) with median follow-up of nine months (range 2-31). Altogether seven (32%) patients were in remission at the end of follow-up and in two trials response to DBT was assessed to be partial with the relief of patient symptoms. In a total of four trials DBT reduced the need for corticosteroids. The majority of patients achieving a response to DBT were treated with the combination of ADA and USTE (56%). At the end of follow-up all nine (41%) patients responding to DBT continued treatment. Infection complications occurred in three patients (19%).

CONCLUSION

DBT is a promising alternative treatment for refractory IBD, and half of our patients benefitted from it. More data on the efficacy and safety of DBT are needed especially in long-term follow up.

Dual Advanced Therapies and Novel Pharmacotherapies for Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease

Over the past 2 decades, there have been incredible advances in the pharmacotherapeutic options for the treatment of patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. Despite the leaps and strides in safety, efficacy, and mechanistic specificity of treatment targets, a significant portion (up to ∼20-50%) of patients have refractory Crohn's disease ± concomitant rheumatologic disease/extraintestinal manifestations for which existing biologic and small molecule therapies are ineffective. In this review, we will explore the available evidence for the use of dual advanced therapies (combination of biologic and/or small molecule therapies) and novel pharmacotherapies in phase 2 to 3 clinical trials.

Future challenges in gastroenterology and hepatology, between innovations and unmet needs: A SIGE Young Editorial Board's perspective

Gastroenterology, Digestive Endoscopy and Hepatology have faced significant improvements in terms of diagnosis and therapy in the last decades. However, many fields still remain poorly explored, and many questions unanswered. Moreover, basic-science, as well as translational and clinical discoveries, together with technology advancement will determine further steps toward a better, refined care for many gastroenterological disorders in the future. Therefore, the Young Investigators of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE) joined together, offering a perspective on major future innovations in some hot clinical topics in Gastroenterology, Endoscopy, and Hepatology, as well as the current pitfalls and the grey zones.

Dual biologic therapy with Vedolizumab and Ustekinumab for refractory Crohn's disease in children

There is a paucity of treatment options for patients who have failed multiple biologics. A drawback of biologic therapies is their selectivity in targeting a single pathway. We report the use of dual biologic therapy with vedolizumab and ustekinumab for three highly refractory patients who previously failed both of these medications as monotherapy. The dual biologic therapy led to the closure of a recto-vaginal fistula and restoration of continuity after takedown of a stoma.

Dual biologic therapy with ocrelizumab for multiple sclerosis and vedolizumab for Crohn’s disease: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the safety and efficacy of using two or more biologics for the treatment of immune-mediated diseases, including Crohn’s disease (CD).

CASE SUMMARY

This case report and narrative review demonstrate the potential safety of dual biologic therapy (DBT) in a 45-year-old female with two separate immune-mediated diseases. She had a history of multiple sclerosis for which she was receiving treatment with ocrelizumab, and she had been recently diagnosed with CD after presenting with diarrhoea. The CD diagnosis was confirmed radiologically, endoscopically, histologically, and biochemically. The patient received treatment with vedolizumab, a gut-specific inhibitor of the α₄β₇ integrin on leukocytes. No adverse reactions were observed for the duration of treatment. The safety of ocrelizumab and vedolizumab for the treatment of different immune-mediated diseases was demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

DBT may be a safe and effective option for the treatment of refractory disease or multiple immune-mediated diseases. Newer biologics, which have improved safety profiles and gut specificity, may provide promising avenues for treatment. However, caution must be exercised in the appropriate selection of biologics given their inherent immunosuppressive properties, side effects, and efficacy profiles. Current evidence suggests that biologic therapy is not associated with a worse prognosis in patients with coronavirus disease 2019, but treatment decisions should be made in a multidisciplinary setting. Further research from controlled trials is needed to better understand the safety profile of DBT in CD. The immunopathological mechanisms underlying DBT also remain to be clarified.

Dual Biologic or Small Molecule Therapy for Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize emerging data on the safety and effectiveness of dual biologic therapy in combination or with tofacitinib in patients with refractory inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

Through a systematic search of multiple electronic databases through November 9, 2020, we identified cohort studies or case series (>10 patients) reporting the safety and effectiveness of simultaneous use of biologic agents in combination or with tofacitinib in patients with IBD. Rates of adverse events, clinical remission, and endoscopic remission were synthesized using pooled data, and we identified factors associated with successful dual therapy.

RESULTS

We identified 30 studies reporting 288 trials of dual biologic or small molecule therapy in 279 patients (76% Crohn's disease; median duration of treatment 24 weeks (IQR₂₅-IQR₇₅ 1332)). The main indications for dual therapy included medically refractory IBD (81%) and concurrent extra-intestinal manifestations or rheumatologic disease (12%). The most common combinations of dual therapy included tumor necrosis factor-α antagonists & anti-integrins (48%), ustekinumab & anti-integrins (19%); 61% of patients had previously failed at least one of the two therapies used in combination. Over a median follow-up of 32 weeks (IQR₂₅-IQR₇₅ 24-52), pooled rates of adverse and serious adverse events were 31% (95% CI, 13%-54%) and 6.5% (95% CI, 2.1%-13.1%); pooled rates of clinical and endoscopic remission were 59% (95% CI, 42%-74%), and 34% (95% CI, 23%-46%), respectively. 12% (95% CI, 4%-24%) of patients required surgery. Rates of success were higher in patients on dual therapy due to EIM. Heterogeneity was not significant for endoscopic response (P = .88, I² = 0%), endoscopic remission (P = .44, I² = 0%), and malignancy (P = .87, I² = 0%). However, significant heterogeneity existed for other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual biologic or small molecule therapy may be a possible option in highly selected, refractory IBD patients at specialized centers. Higher quality combination of therapies with a significant improvement in the quality of data is required prior to more widespread use.

Systematic Review With Meta-analysis: Safety and Effectiveness of Combining Biologics and Small Molecules in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Background

Combining biologics and small molecules could potentially overcome the plateau of drug efficacy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and effectiveness of dual biologic therapy (DBT), or small molecule combined with a biologic therapy (SBT) in IBD patients.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Clinical trials.gov until November 3, 2020, including studies with 2 or more IBD patients on DBT or SBT. Main outcome was safety assessed as pooled rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) for each combination. Effectiveness was reported as pooled rates of clinical, endoscopic, and/or radiographic response and remission. The certainty of evidence was rated according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.

Results

Of the 3688 publications identified, 13 studies (1 clinical trial, 12 observational studies) involving 266 patients on 7 different combinations were included. Median number of prior biologics ranged from 0 to 4, and median duration of follow-up was 16-68 weeks. Most common DBT and SBT were vedolizumab (VDZ) with anti-tumor necrosis factor (aTNF, n = 56) or tofacitinib (Tofa, n = 57), respectively. Pooled rates of SAE for these were 9.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-21.4) for VDZ-aTNF and 1.0% (95% CI, 0.0-7.6) for Tofa-VDZ. The overall certainty of evidence was very low due to the observational nature of the studies, and very serious imprecision and inconsistency.

Conclusions

DBT or SBT appears to be generally safe and may be effective in IBD patients, but the evidence is very uncertain.

Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in inflammatory bowel disease: the story continues

In the 1990s, tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor therapy ushered in the biologic therapy era for inflammatory bowel disease, leading to marked improvements in treatment options and patient outcomes. There are currently four tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors approved as treatments for ulcerative colitis and/or Crohn's disease: infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab and certolizumab pegol. Despite the clear benefits of tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors, a subset of patients with inflammatory bowel disease either do not respond, experience a loss of response after initial clinical improvement or report intolerance to anti-tumour necrosis factor-α therapy. Optimizing outcomes of these agents may be achieved through earlier intervention, the use of therapeutic drug monitoring and thoughtful switching within class. To complement these approaches, evolving predictive biomarkers may help inform and optimize clinical decision making by identifying patients who might potentially benefit from an alternative treatment strategy. This review will focus on the current use of tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors in inflammatory bowel disease and the application of personalized medicine to improve future outcomes for all patients.

Triple therapy with adalimumab, ustekinumab and methotrexate for induction of remission in moderate to severe ileocolonic Crohn's disease with upper gastrointestinal involvement in a biologic-experienced individual

Induction of remission in biologic-experienced individuals with moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD) can be a challenge. We hereby present a case of CD with secondary non-response to infliximab. Adding methotrexate and switching to ustekinumab plus methotrexate did not stop the inflammatory process. Therefore, combination therapy with two classes of biologics consisting of ustekinumab and adalimumab plus methotrexate was initiated. He achieved clinical remission in 4 weeks and remained on triple therapy for 6 months which was subsequently tailored to adalimumab/methotrexate combination therapy due to insurance restriction on ustekinumab. He remained in remission for the duration of follow-up, 14 months after initiation of triple therapy and 8 months after switching to methotrexate/adalimumab biologic monotherapy. Triple therapy with anti-TNF, IL-12/23 inhibitor and methotrexate could potentially be an option for induction of remission in biologic-experienced individuals with good initial clinical response to anti-TNF agents.

Preclinical development of a bispecific TNFα/IL-23 neutralising domain antibody as a novel oral treatment for inflammatory bowel disease

Anti-TNFα and anti-IL-23 antibodies are highly effective therapies for Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis in a proportion of patients. V56B2 is a novel bispecific domain antibody in which a llama-derived IL-23p19-specific domain antibody, humanised and engineered for intestinal protease resistance, V900, was combined with a previously-described TNFα-specific domain antibody, V565. V56B2 contains a central protease-labile linker to create a single molecule for oral administration. Incubation of V56B2 with trypsin or human faecal supernatant resulted in a complete separation of the V565 and V900 monomers without loss of neutralising potency. Following oral administration of V900 and V565 in mice, high levels of each domain antibody were detected in the faeces, demonstrating stability in the intestinal milieu. In ex vivo cultures of colonic biopsies from IBD patients, treatment with V565 or V900 inhibited tissue phosphoprotein levels and with a combination of the two, inhibition was even greater. These results support further development of V56B2 as an oral therapy for IBD with improved safety and efficacy in a greater proportion of patients as well as greater convenience for patients compared with traditional monoclonal antibody therapies.

Dual Targeted Therapy for the Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The burden of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is increasing globally and imposes a high morbidity in patients with IBD. Advances have been made in medical management of IBD with the advent of novel therapies such as the biologics and small molecule drugs (SMDs). However, response to these medications is limited; with only 40% of patients achieving clinical remission at 1 year with a biologic. Hence, medical management of IBD is a rapidly evolving paradigm in which not only are new medications being developed but understanding how, when and in whom to use them is evolving. Dual targeted therapy (DTT), which is the combination of biologics and/or SMDs is an attractive concept as it is theoretically a potent and multidimensional anti-inflammatory treatment strategy. In this review, we present the published literature on the use of DTT and highlight its utility in clinical practice. The majority of studies on DTT are case reports and case series on the combination of dual biologic therapy. From the limited evidence available in patients with IBD, dual biologic therapy may be a safe option for patients with refractory IBD who have failed multiple biologic therapies and to manage extraintestinal manifestation of IBD. There are a handful of reports of combination therapy with a biologic and a SMD in patients with IBD. Further studies and randomized control trials are required to comprehensivretain hereely evaluate the safety and efficacy of DTT in IBD.

Efficacy and Safety of Dual Biologic Therapy in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Review of the Literature

Using 2 or more treatment modalities to achieve a synergistic effect in patients with refractory inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been an area of focus for many years. This methodology, known as combination therapy, has been proposed for various therapeutic agents, most commonly biologics and immunomodulators. Although the mainstay of biologic therapy for IBD has traditionally focused on agents targeting tumor necrosis factor, the development of newer biologics with different targets, such as vedolizumab and ustekinumab, has introduced the possibility of concomitant dual biologic therapy. Dual biologic therapy has been proposed in the treatment algorithm for 2 types of patients with IBD: those with well-controlled luminal IBD and uncontrolled extraintestinal symptoms (secondary indications such as arthritis or psoriasis) and those with refractory, uncontrolled IBD. Thus far, the data on the efficacy and safety of dual biologic therapy as a treatment for Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis remain quite limited. In fact, the overwhelming majority of the literature consists of case reports and case series. Given this paucity of high-level data, physicians have looked to larger studies on dual biologic therapy in other fields of medicine, such as rheumatology and dermatology. The goal of this article is to summarize the current literature on the use of dual biologics in IBD, address the potential adverse effects or risks associated with combination therapy, and highlight future directions in the use of this therapeutic modality.

Inflammatory bowel disease and psoriasis: modernizing the multidisciplinary approach

Psoriasis and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are immune-mediated diseases occurring in barrier organs whose main task is to protect the organism from attack. These disorders are highly prevalent especially in northern Europe where psoriasis has a prevalence of around 3-4% and IBD around 0.3%. The prevalence of IBD in North America has been estimated at around 0.4%. The total incidence rates in northern Europe have been estimated at around 6 for Crohn's disease and 11 for ulcerative colitis per 100 000 person-years, compared with an incidence rate of around 280 per 100 000 person-years for psoriasis. Both diseases are less common in countries with a lower index of development. The rise in IBD appears to occur as populations adopt a westernized lifestyle, whereas psoriasis seems more stable and prevalence differences may derive more from variation in genetic susceptibility. The gut microbiota is clearly an important driver of IBD pathogenesis; in psoriasis, changes in gut and skin microbiota have been reported, but it is less clear whether and how these changes contribute to the pathogenesis. Large studies show that most identified genes are involved in the immune system. However, psoriasis and IBD are highly heterogeneous diseases and there is a need for more precise and deeper phenotyping to identify specific subgroups and their genetic, epigenetic and molecular signatures. Epigenetic modifications of DNA such as histone modifications, noncoding RNA effects on transcription and translation and DNA methylation are increasingly recognized as the mechanism underpinning much of the gene-environment interaction in the pathogenesis of both IBD and psoriasis. Our understanding of underlying pathogenetic mechanisms has deepened fundamentally over the past decades developing hand in hand with novel therapies targeting pathways and proinflammatory cytokines incriminated in disease. There is not only substantial overlap between psoriasis and IBD, but also there are differences with implication for therapy. In psoriasis, drugs targeting interleukin-23 and interleukin-17 have shown superior efficacy compared with anti-TNFs, whilst in IBD, drugs targeting interleukin-17 may be less beneficial. The therapeutic toolbox for psoriasis is impressive and is enlarging also for IBD. Still, there are unmet needs reflecting the heterogeneity of both diseases and there is a need for closer molecular diagnostics to allow for the development of precise therapeutics.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

A Review of Drug-Drug Interactions for Biologic Drugs Used in the Treatment of Psoriasis

Biologic drugs are increasingly being prescribed for the treatment of psoriasis. Very little information is available in the literature regarding potential drug interactions with these medications. This paper serves as a guide for prescribers to be aware of possible interactions between biologic drugs approved for the treatment of psoriasis in North America and concomitant therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of reported drug interactions between biologic drugs and concomitant therapies.

METHODS

Reports of potential drug interactions were compiled through a search of Micromedex, drug monographs (Canadian, American, and European), as well as a PubMed search of each biologic drug with the term "drug interaction."

CONCLUSION

Generally, caution should be exercised when multiple immunosuppressive therapies are prescribed due to increased risk of infection. However, this is more the result of a synergistic effect as opposed to a true drug interaction. There have been cases where multiple biologic therapies have been concomitantly used without adverse events, as their mechanisms involved different pathways. The sources used to compile this guide were often comprised of low levels of evidence, reinforcing the idea that further studies are required to better direct prescribers.

Combination of Biological Agents in Moderate to Severe Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Case Series and Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Treatment with biological agents such as anti-tumor necrosis factors (TNFs) has become standard of care in moderate to severe pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, a significant proportion of patients experience loss of response to anti-TNFs, need treatment escalation, or develop side effects. There is no data in the literature regarding combination of biological agents in pediatric IBD.

METHODS

At our hospital, which is a tertiary referral center, we have combined the anti-TNF infliximab with either vedolizumab or ustekinumab in patients with severe pediatric IBD. The indications for dual biological therapy were insufficient efficacy of infliximab or vedolizumab monotherapy, or side effects such as psoriasis due to anti-TNFs.

RESULTS

Eight patients (four boys) aged 14-17.5 years received a combination of infliximab and vedolizumab due to only a partial response to infliximab, four with Crohn's disease (CD) and four with ulcerative colitis (UC). Clinical remission was achieved in four patients (3 UC) and four had a colectomy (3 CD, 1 UC). Five CD patients (3 girls) aged 11-17 years, on maintenance therapy with infliximab, developed psoriasis resistant to topical treatment. A combination of infliximab and ustekinumab resulted in clinical remission of CD without skin symptoms. No serious adverse events occurred in any of the patients on combination therapy. Thirteen publications report on combining biologicals, all in adult IBD.

CONCLUSION

In pediatric IBD, combining biological agents seems to be safe and beneficial in selected patients. The safety should be addressed in long-term follow-up studies.

Efficacy and safety of simultaneous treatment with two biologic medications in refractory Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Biologic therapies in patients with Crohn's disease often yield low clinical and endoscopic remission rates. After multiple failed therapies, combining two biologic therapies is possibly the sole medical alternative to recurrent surgery. However, data on this approach are limited.

AIMS

To assess the efficacy and safety of concomitant use of two biologic therapies in the largest cohort to date of refractory Crohn's disease patients.

METHODS

Data were extracted from Crohn's disease patients started on dual biologic therapy at two referral centres. Biologics utilised include infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, certolizumab and golimumab. The primary outcome was endoscopic improvement (>50% reduction in Simplified Endoscopic Score-Crohn's disease [SES-CD] or explicitly stated). Endoscopic remission (SES-CD < 3 or stated), clinical response (Crohn's disease-patient-reported outcome-2 score [PRO2] reduced by 8), clinical remission (PRO2 < 8), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 22 patients with 24 therapeutic trials of dual biologic therapy were identified. The majority of patients had prior surgical resections (91%), stricturing (59%) or penetrating (36%) phenotype, and perianal fistulas (50%). Median number of prior failed biologics was 4. Endoscopic improvement occurred in 43% of trials and 26% achieved endoscopic remission. Fifty per cent had clinical response and 41% achieved clinical remission. There were significant post-treatment reductions in median SES-CD (14.0 [12.0-17.5] to 6.0 [2.5-8.0], P = 0.0005], PRO-2 (24.1 [20.3-27.0] to 13.4 [4.6-21.8], P = 0.002] and CRP (17.0 [11.0-24.0] to 9.0 [4.0-14.0], P = 0.02). Presence of perianal fistulas decreased from 50% to 33%. Adverse events occurred in 13% of trials.

CONCLUSION

Dual biologic therapy was associated with clinical, biomarker and endoscopic improvements in selected patients with refractory Crohn's disease who failed multiple biologics. Further studies are needed to validate this approach.

The use of combination biological or small molecule therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

There are limited data on using more than one biologic or small molecule drug combined to treat patients with inflammatory bowel disease. The aim of our study was to determine the effectiveness and safety of combination biologic use in inflammatory bowel disease.

METHODS

We identified patients with Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis who received treatment with a combination of two biologics or a biologic and a small molecule drug from 2015 to 2019 for persistent disease activity or concomitant rheumatological or dermatological disease. The primary end-point was effectiveness, based on improvements in inflammatory markers, clinical, and endoscopic remission. The secondary end-point was safety.

RESULTS

Of the 50 patients treated with combination therapy there were significantly more patients in clinical and endoscopic remission at follow-up compared to baseline (50% vs 14%, P = 0.0018, delta 36%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.53; and 34% vs 6%, P = 0.0039, delta 28%, 95% CI 0.09-0.47), respectively. Median erythrocyte sedimentation rate (17 mm/h vs 13 mm/h, P = 0.002) and C-reactive protein (5.00 mg/dL vs 2.35 mg/dL, P = 0.002) also decreased posttreatment. There were eight serious adverse events and no deaths CONCLUSIONS: Combination biologic therapy appears to be an effective option for patients with refractory inflammatory bowel disease or concomitant autoimmune disease that is inadequately controlled by biologic monotherapy. There was an increased risk of serious infection compared with biologic monotherapy; however, this risk might be minimized by discontinuing immunomodulators prior to initiating combination therapy. Large prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Dual biological therapy with anti-TNF, vedolizumab or ustekinumab in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review with pool analysis

Background: Inflammatory bowel diseases patients eligible for biological therapy represent a group with considerable disease burden and biologics only achieve 40% clinical remission rates in responders after 1 year of therapy. Aims: To collect all the published data about patients treated with dual biological therapy with an Anti-TNF, vedolizumab or ustekinumab, for a period of at least 3 months and to pool the data about the effectiveness and safety. Methods: A MEDLINE, and Web of Science search of all studies published in English until 1 January 2019 was conducted. Results: We included 7 studies with a total of 18 patients. Fifteen patients were treated with a combination of an anti-TNF and vedolizumab, 3 patients were treated with vedolizumab and ustekinumab. Fifty-six percent of patients were affected by Crohn's disease and 50% of patients were treated with an immunosuppressant drug or steroid too. A clinical improvement was obtained in 100% of patients, and an endoscopic improvement in 93% of patients. No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions: The use of dual biological therapy is an attractive therapeutic option and may be an opportunity to better tailor and personalize the therapies for patients. Further studies, as randomized control trials, to provide comparative efficacy and safety endpoints of combination therapies, and to clarify potential advantages of combined biological therapies, are needed.