Vedolizumab affects antibody responses to immunisation selectively in the gastrointestinal tract: randomised controlled trial results

Serological responses to vaccination in children exposed in utero to ustekinumab or vedolizumab: cross-sectional analysis of a prospective multicentre cohort

Evidence on serological responses to vaccination in children exposed to ustekinumab (UST) or vedolizumab (VDZ) in utero is lacking. This multicentre prospective study aimed to assess the impact of prenatal exposure to UST or VDZ due to maternal inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on serological responses to vaccination and other immunological parameters in exposed children. Children aged ≥ 1 year who were exposed in utero to UST or VDZ and completed at least 1-year of mandatory vaccination were included. We assessed the serological response to vaccination (non-live: tetanus, diphtheria, and Haemophilus influenzae B; live: mumps, rubella, and measles), whole blood count, and immunoglobulin levels. The control group comprised unexposed children born to mothers without IBD. A total of 23 children (median age, 25 months) exposed to UST (n = 13) or VDZ (n = 10) and 10 controls (median age, 37 months) were included. The serological response to vaccination was comparable between the UST and VDZ groups and controls, with an adequate serological response rate of ≥ 80%. Only children exposed to UST showed a slightly reduced serological response to mumps (67% vs. 86% in controls), whereas all children exposed to VDZ showed an adequate response. The majority of the exposed children had normal levels of individual immunoglobulin classes, similar to the controls. No severe pathology was observed in any of the children.Conclusion: Despite the limited sample size, our findings suggest that in utero exposure to VDZ or UST does not significantly impair the vaccine response or broader immunological parameters in exposed children.

Impact of Treatment Response on Risk of Serious Infections in Patients With Crohn's Disease: Secondary Analysis of the PYRAMID Registry

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Traditional risk factors for serious infections with advanced therapies in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) have been assessed at baseline before starting therapy. We evaluated the impact of treatment response on the risk of serious infections in adalimumab-treated patients with CD through secondary analysis of the PYRAMID registry (NCT00524537).

METHODS

We included patients with CD who initiated adalimumab and classified them as treatment responders (achieved steroid-free clinical remission based on patient-reported outcomes) vs nonresponders (not in steroid-free clinical remission) at 6 months after treatment initiation (landmark). We compared the risk of serious infections between responders vs nonresponders between 6 and 36 months after treatment initiation through stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Of 1515 adalimumab-treated patients, 763 (50.4%) were classified as responders at 6 months (37 ± 13 y; 56% female; disease duration, 9.5 ± 8.5 y). Compared with nonresponders, responders were less likely to have moderate to severe symptoms (55.6% vs 33%), or require steroids (45.5% vs 17.3%) or opiates (6.6% vs 1.3%) at baseline, without any differences in disease location, perianal disease, and prior CD complications. During follow-up evaluation, using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting, responders were 34% less likely to experience serious infections compared with nonresponders (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.96). Risk of gastrointestinal and extraintestinal infections was lower in responders vs nonresponders.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CD who respond to adalimumab have a lower risk of developing serious infections compared with nonresponders. These findings underscore that initiation of advanced therapy for CD may lower the risk of serious infections through effective disease control and avoidance of corticosteroids.

Antibody Responses to Influenza Vaccination are Diminished in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Infliximab or Tofacitinib

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We sought to determine whether six commonly used immunosuppressive regimens were associated with lower antibody responses after seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD].

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study including 213 IBD patients and 53 healthy controls: 165 who had received seasonal influenza vaccine and 101 who had not. IBD medications included infliximab, thiopurines, infliximab and thiopurine combination therapy, ustekinumab, vedolizumab, or tofacitinib. The primary outcome was antibody responses against influenza/A H3N2 and A/H1N1, compared to controls, adjusting for age, prior vaccination, and interval between vaccination and sampling.

RESULTS

Lower antibody responses against influenza A/H3N2 were observed in patients on infliximab (geometric mean ratio 0.35 [95% confidence interval 0.20-0.60], p = 0.0002), combination of infliximab and thiopurine therapy (0.46 [0.27-0.79], p = 0.0050), and tofacitinib (0.28 [0.14-0.57], p = 0.0005) compared to controls. Lower antibody responses against A/H1N1 were observed in patients on infliximab (0.29 [0.15-0.56], p = 0.0003), combination of infliximab and thiopurine therapy (0.34 [0.17-0.66], p = 0.0016), thiopurine monotherapy (0.46 [0.24-0.87], p = 0.017), and tofacitinib (0.23 [0.10-0.56], p = 0.0013). Ustekinumab and vedolizumab were not associated with reduced antibody responses against A/H3N2 or A/H1N1. Vaccination in the previous year was associated with higher antibody responses to A/H3N2. Vaccine-induced anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentration weakly correlated with antibodies against H3N2 [r = 0.27; p = 0.0004] and H1N1 [r = 0.33; p < 0.0001].

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination in both the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 seasons was associated with significantly higher antibody responses to influenza/A than no vaccination or vaccination in 2021-2022 alone. Infliximab and tofacitinib are associated with lower binding antibody responses to influenza/A, similar to COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses.

Gut-associated lymphoid tissue attrition associates with response to anti-α4β7 therapy in ulcerative colitis

Vedolizumab (VDZ) is a first-line treatment in ulcerative colitis (UC) that targets the α4β7- mucosal vascular addressin cell adhesion molecule 1 (MAdCAM-1) axis. To determine the mechanisms of action of VDZ, we examined five distinct cohorts of patients with UC. A decrease in naïve B and T cells in the intestines and gut-homing (β7+) plasmablasts in circulation of VDZ-treated patients suggested that VDZ targets gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT). Anti-α4β7 blockade in wild-type and photoconvertible (KikGR) mice confirmed a loss of GALT size and cellularity because of impaired cellular entry. In VDZ-treated patients with UC, treatment responders demonstrated reduced intestinal lymphoid aggregate size and follicle organization and a reduction of β7+IgG+ plasmablasts in circulation, as well as IgG+ plasma cells and FcγR-dependent signaling in the intestine. GALT targeting represents a previously unappreciated mechanism of action of α4β7-targeted therapies, with major implications for this therapeutic paradigm in UC.

Higher and Sustained Cell-Mediated Immune Responses After 3 Doses of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Studies suggest that the generation of durable T-cell immunity following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination protects against severe disease. The aim of this study was to measure cell-mediated immune response (CMIR) 1-2 months and 6 months after a third dose of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

METHODS

This prospective study (HumoRal and CellULar initial and Sustained immunogenicity in patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]) evaluated CMIR at 28-65 days (t 1 ) after dose 2, 28-65 days (t 2 ) (n = 183) and 6 months (±45 days) (t 3 ) (n = 167) after a third dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. A small cohort had blood sample available 28-65 days (t 4 ) (n = 55) after a fourth dose. Primary outcomes were CMIR at (t 2 ) and (t 3 ). Secondary outcomes included the effect of immunosuppressing IBD medications on CMIR and response at (t 4 ).

RESULTS

All patients had measurable CMIR at all time points. CMIR increased at t 2 compared with that at t 1 (median 1,467 responding cells per million (interquartile range [IQR] 410-5,971) vs 313 (94-960) P < 0.001). There was no significant waning in t 2 vs t 3 or significant boosting at t 4 . Those on anti-tumor necrosis factor monotherapy had a higher CMIR compared with those not on this therapy at t 2 (4,132 [IQR 1,136-8,795] vs 869 [IQR 343-3,221] P < 0.001) and t 3 (2,843 [IQR 596-6,459] vs 654 [IQR 143-2,067] P < 0.001). In univariable analysis, anti-tumor necrosis factor monotherapy was associated with a higher CMIR at t 2 ( P < 0.001) and t 3 ( P < 0.001) and confirmed in a multivariable model ( P < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

A third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine boosts CMIR, and the response is sustained in patients with IBD.

Vedolizumab and Ustekinumab Levels in Pregnant Women With Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Infants Exposed In Utero

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Vedolizumab and ustekinumab pharmacokinetics in pregnancy and the infant after in utero exposure remain incompletely defined. We aim to define the antenatal stability of ustekinumab and vedolizumab levels and the time at which infant drug levels become undetectable.

METHODS

This multicenter prospective observational cohort study recruited pregnant or preconception women with inflammatory bowel disease receiving vedolizumab or ustekinumab. Trough drug levels, clinical data, and biochemical data were documented preconception, during each trimester of pregnancy, and postpartum. Maternal and cord blood drug levels were measured at delivery and in infants until undetectable. Infant outcomes were assessed until 2 years of age.

RESULTS

A total of 102 participants (vedolizumab, n = 58) were included. The majority of mothers were, and remained, in clinical and biochemical remission. Maternal vedolizumab levels decreased over the course of pregnancy in association with increasing weight, rather than increasing gestation. Maternal ustekinumab levels remained stable. The median time to drug becoming undetectable in the infant was shorter for vedolizumab (11 wk; range, 5-19 wk; n = 32) than ustekinumab (14 wk; range, 9-36 wk; n = 17) and correlated positively with infant delivery level. Thirty-two of 41 (88%) and 17 of 30 (67%) vedolizumab- and ustekinumab-exposed infants had undetectable drug levels by 15 weeks of age, respectively. Pregnancy and infant outcomes were favorable. Twenty infants with undetectable drug levels received the rotavirus vaccine, with no adverse reactions reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Maternal vedolizumab levels decreased, whereas ustekinumab levels remained stable over the course of pregnancy. Most vedolizumab- and approximately half of ustekinumab-exposed infants had undetectable drug levels by 15 weeks of age. No concerning maternal or infant safety signals were identified.

Targeting T-cell integrins in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases

The recruitment of T cells to tissues and their retention there are essential processes in the pathogenesis of many autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. The mechanisms regulating these processes have become better understood over the past three decades and are now recognized to involve temporally and spatially specific interactions between cell-adhesion molecules. These include integrins, which are heterodimeric molecules that mediate in-to-out and out-to-in signalling in T cells, other leukocytes, and most other cells of the body. Integrin signalling contributes to T-cell circulation through peripheral lymph nodes, immunological synapse stability and function, extravasation at the sites of inflammation, and T-cell retention at these sites. Greater understanding of the contribution of integrin signalling to the role of T cells in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases has focused much attention on the development of therapeutics that target T-cell integrins. This literature review describes the structure, activation, and function of integrins with respect to T cells, then discusses the use of integrin-targeting therapeutics in inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis, and psoriasis. Efficacy and safety data from clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance are presented for currently approved therapeutics, therapeutics that have been withdrawn from the market, and novel therapeutics currently in clinical trials. This literature review will inform the reader of the current means of targeting T-cell integrins in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, as well as recent developments in the field.

Understanding the molecular mechanisms of anti-trafficking therapies and their clinical relevance in inflammatory bowel disease

In patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), a combination of dysbiosis, increased intestinal permeability, and insufficient regulatory responses facilitate the development of chronic inflammation, which is driven by a complex interplay between the mucosal immune system and the environment and sustained by immune priming and ongoing cellular recruitment to the gut. The localization of immune cells is mediated by their expression of chemokine receptors and integrins, which bind to chemokines and adhesion molecules, respectively. In this article, we review the mechanisms of action of anti-trafficking therapies for IBD and consider clinical observations in the context of the different mechanisms of action. Furthermore, we discuss the evolution of molecular resistance to anti-cytokines, in which the composition of immune cells in the gut changes in response to treatment, and the potential implications of this for treatment sequencing. Lastly, we discuss the relevance of mechanism of action to combination therapy for IBD.

The Underappreciated Role of Secretory IgA in IBD

Eighty percent of antibody secreting cells (ASCs) are found in the intestine, where they produce grams of immunoglobulin (Ig) A daily. immunoglobulin A is actively transcytosed into the lumen, where it plays a critical role in modulating the gut microbiota. Although loss of immune tolerance to bacterial antigens is the likely trigger of the dysregulated immune response that characterizes inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), little effort has been placed on understanding the interface between B cells, IgA, and the microbiota during initiation or progression of disease. This may be in part due to the misleading fact that IgA-deficient humans are mostly asymptomatic, likely due to redundant role of secretory (S) IgM. Intestinal B cell recruitment is critically dependent on integrin α4β7-MAdCAM-1 interactions, yet antibodies that target α4β7 (ie, vedolizumab), MAdCAM-1 (ie, ontamalimab), or both β7 integrins (α4β7 and αE [CD103] β7; etrolizumab) are in clinical use or development as IBD therapeutics. The effect of such interventions on the biology of IgA is largely unknown, yet a single dose of vedolizumab lowers SIgA levels in stool and weakens the oral immunization response to cholera vaccine in healthy volunteers. Thus, it is critical to further understand the role of these integrins for the migration of ASC and other cellular subsets during homeostasis and IBD-associated inflammation and the mode of action of drugs that interfere with this traffic. We have recently identified a subset of mature ASC that employs integrin αEβ7 to dock with intestinal epithelial cells, predominantly in the pericryptal region of the terminal ileum. This role for the integrin had not been appreciated previously, nor the αEβ7-dependent mechanism of IgA transcytosis that it supports. Furthermore, we find that B cells more than T cells are critically dependent on α4β7-MAdCAM-1 interactions; thus MAdCAM-1 blockade and integrin-β7 deficiency counterintuitively hasten colitis in interleukin-10-deficient mice. In both cases, de novo recruitment of IgA ASC to the intestinal lamina propria is compromised, leading to bacterial overgrowth, dysbiosis, and lethal colitis. Thus, despite the safe and effective use of anti-integrin antibodies in patients with IBD, much remains to be learned about their various cell targets.

Comparative Risk of Serious Infections With Biologic Agents and Oral Small Molecules in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Safety is a key consideration when choosing advanced therapies (biologic agents and oral small-molecule inhibitors/modulators) in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the risk of serious infections with advanced therapies in active comparator studies.

METHODS

Through a systematic search until February 28, 2022, we included 20 head-to-head studies comparing risk of serious infections with tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) antagonists, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, tofacitinib, filgotinib, and ozanimod in patients with IBD. We performed random-effects meta-analysis comparing different advanced therapies.

RESULTS

No significant difference was observed in the risk of serious infections between vedolizumab vs TNFα antagonists in all patients with IBD (17 cohorts: odds ratio [OR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68-1.04), with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 37%); on subgroup analysis, vedolizumab was associated with a lower risk of serious infections in patients with ulcerative colitis (11 cohorts: OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83; I2 = 0%), but not in Crohn's disease (CD) (9 cohorts: OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.78-1.35; I2 = 42%). Age, sex, prior biologic exposure, and use of biologic monotherapy did not influence this association. In patients with CD, ustekinumab was associated with a lower risk of serious infections vs TNFα antagonists (3 cohorts: OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.93; I2 = 16%) and vs vedolizumab (3 cohorts: OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.17-0.93; I2 = 67%). Few studies compared other advanced therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Vedolizumab may offer net benefit over TNFα antagonists in patients with ulcerative colitis, but not in CD. Ustekinumab may offer net benefit over TNFα antagonists and vedolizumab in patients with CD.

Emerging drugs for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: review of phase II and III clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Current therapeutic options for patients with ulcerative colitis comprise monoclonal antibodies against tumor necrosis factor (TNF), alpha4/beta7 integrin, and interleukin (IL)12/23 as well as small molecules such as tofacitinib, upadacitinib, ozanimod, and filgotinib. However, many patients fail to respond to these agents or have loss of response over time. Therefore, there is a large unmet clinical need for new therapeutic agents.

AREAS COVERED

Here, we review recent phase 2/3 studies in active ulcerative colitis and discuss preliminary data on the efficacy (clinical, endoscopic, and histologic remission) and safety of novel drugs including Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, IL23 blockers, integrin inhibitors, and S1P1R modulators.

EXPERT OPINION

We highlight the potential impact of these agents for the future therapeutic landscape of this disease with special emphasis on clinical impact, unmet needs, safety aspects, and advanced combination therapy.

COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Shot Preserves T Cells Immune Response Based on Interferon-Gamma Release Assay in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Patients on Anti-TNFα Treatment

Immune-modifying treatment in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) impairs the humoral response. The role of T lymphocytes in this setting is still unclear. This study aims to assess if a booster shot (third dose) of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine enhanced the humoral response and elicited cellular immunity in IBD patients on different immuno-therapy regimens compared to healthy controls (HCs). Five months after a booster dose, serological and T-cell responses were assessed. The measurements were described using geometric means with 95% confidence intervals. The differences between study groups were assessed by Mann–Whitney tests. Seventy-seven subjects (n = 53 IBD patients and n = 24 HCs), who were fully vaccinated and not previously SARS-CoV-2 infected, were recruited. Regarding the IBD patients, 19 were affected by Crohn’s disease and 34 by ulcerative colitis. During the vaccination cycle, half of the patients (53%) were on stable treatment with aminosalicylates, and 32% were on biological therapy. No differences in antibody concentrations between IBD patients and HCs, nor T-cell responses, were found. Stratifying IBD patients based on the type of treatment (anti-TNFα agents vs. other treatment regimens), a decrease only in antibody titer (p = 0.008), but not in cellular response, was observed. Even after the COVID-19 vaccine booster dose, the TNFα inhibitors selectively decreased the humoral immune response compared to patients on other treatment regimens. The T-cell response was preserved in all study groups. These findings highlight the importance of evaluating T-cell immune responses following COVID-19 vaccination in a routine diagnostic setting, particularly for immunocompromised cohorts.

COVID-19 und chronisch-entzündliche Darmerkrankungen

Die Pandemie durch die Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) beeinflusst weiter das Leben von Patient*innen mit chronisch-entzündlichen Darmerkrankungen (CED). Umfangreiche Untersuchungen der letzten 3 Jahre ergaben, dass die allermeisten Infektionen durch „severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2“ (SARS-CoV-2) bei CED-Patient*innen blande verlaufen. In der Regel wird die Krankheitsaktivität der CED nicht negativ beeinflusst; bei einem Teil der Patient*innen können passager gastrointestinale Symptome auftreten. Häufig eingesetzte immunmodulierende Medikamente hatten mit Ausnahme systemischer Glukokortikoide keinen Einfluss auf den Schweregrad einer COVID-19-Erkrankung und die Gesamtletalität unterschied sich nicht von der übrigen Bevölkerung. Die Impfantwort ist jedoch substanzabhängig erniedrigt. In dieser Übersichtsarbeit werden die wichtigsten Studien praxisrelevant zusammengefasst.

Systemic and T cell-associated responses to SARS-CoV-2 immunisation in gut inflammation (STAR SIGN study): effects of biologics on vaccination efficacy of the third dose of mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppressed patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experience increased risk of vaccine-preventable diseases such as COVID-19.

AIMS

To assess humoral and cellular immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination in immunosuppressed IBD patients and healthy controls.

METHODS

In this prospective, multicentre, case-control study, 139 IBD patients treated with biologics and 110 healthy controls were recruited. Serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG concentrations were measured 2-16 weeks after receiving a third mRNA vaccine dose. The primary outcome was to determine if humoral immune responses towards booster vaccines differ in IBD patients under anti-TNF versus non-anti-TNF therapy and healthy controls. Secondary outcomes were antibody decline, impact of previous infection and SARS-CoV-2-targeted T cell responses.

RESULTS

Anti-TNF-treated IBD patients showed reduced anti-spike IgG concentrations (geometric mean 2357.4 BAU/ml [geometric SD 3.3]) when compared to non-anti-TNF-treated patients (5935.7 BAU/ml [3.9]; p < 0.0001) and healthy controls (5481.7 BAU/ml [2.4]; p < 0.0001), respectively. In multivariable modelling, prior infection (geometric mean ratio 2.00 [95% CI 1.34-2.90]) and vaccination with mRNA-1273 (1.53 [1.01-2.27]) increased antibody concentrations, while anti-TNF treatment (0.39 [0.28-0.54]) and prolonged time between vaccination and antibody measurement (0.72 [0.58-0.90]) decreased anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies. Antibody decline was comparable in IBD patients independent of anti-TNF treatment and antibody concentrations could not predict breakthrough infections. Cellular and humoral immune responses were uncoupled, and more anti-TNF-treated patients than healthy controls developed inadequate T cell responses (15/73 [20.5%] vs 2/100 [2.0%]; p = 0.00031).

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-TNF-treated IBD patients have impaired humoral and cellular immunogenicity following SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination. Fourth dose administration may be beneficial for these patients.

Emerging drugs for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

INTRODUCTION

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α have been the mainstay therapy for Crohn's (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) for decades. With growing need for highly effective therapy, various therapeutic targets have been introduced including anti-integrins, anti-interleukin (IL) 12/23, selective anti-IL23, Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors, sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulators, and mRNA-124 splicing agent.

AREAS COVERED

The current state of available IBD therapies and those in development are reviewed, with recommendations made on positioning in clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

Selecting and sequencing IBD therapies remains a clinical challenge. Disease phenotype, severity of symptoms, patient comorbidities, and prior drug exposure should be considered when considering therapy options. Anti-TNF remains a time-tested option that is effective in both UC and CD. The perception that newer biologics have slower onset of action is probably overestimated and providers should reconsider need for concurrent corticosteroid. JAK-inhibitors provide rapid symptom improvement in patients with moderate-severe UC. Due to safety concerns, it is recommended as a second-line therapy for UC. The goal for IBD treatment should be personalized, have rapid onset of action, induce durable clinical and endoscopic remission, and have excellent safety.

[Inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic: manifestations and management]

The COVID-19 pandemic is significantly affecting the lives of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Those affected and their relatives have numerous questions about the risk of the disease, the course of a possible SARS-CoV-2 infection or the influence of CED-specific therapy on these. Many IBD patients also have additional questions about the safety and effectiveness of a vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this review is to summarize the latest findings on COVID-19 and IBD, but also to discuss vaccine response (humoral/cellular), the influence of ongoing therapy on the vaccine response as well as the frequency of side effects and the importance of booster immunizations and to create an evidence-based basis for discussion with patients.

Higher Cell-Mediated Immune Responses in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Anti-TNF Therapy After COVID-19 Vaccination

BACKGROUND

Some patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on immunosuppressive therapies may have a blunted response to certain vaccines, including the messenger RNA (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. However, few studies have evaluated the cell-mediated immune response (CMIR), which is critical to host defense after COVID-19 infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the humoral immune response and CMIR after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IBD.

METHODS

This prospective study (HERCULES [HumoRal and CellULar initial and Sustained immunogenicity in patients with IBD] study) evaluated humoral immune response and CMIR after completion of 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in 158 IBD patients and 20 healthy control (HC) subjects. The primary outcome was the CMIR to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in patients with IBD. The secondary outcomes were a comparison of (1) the CMIR in patients with IBD and HC subjects, (2) CMIR and humoral immune response in all participants, and (3) correlation between CMIR and humoral immune response.

RESULTS

The majority (89%) of patients with IBD developed a CMIR, which was not different vs HC subjects (94%) (P = .6667). There was no significant difference (P = .5488) in CMIR between immunocompetent (median 255 [interquartile range, 146-958] spike T cells per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells) and immunosuppressed patients (median 377 [interquartile range, 123-1440]). There was no correlation between humoral and cell-mediated immunity after vaccination (P = .5215). In univariable analysis, anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy was associated with a higher CMIRs (P = .02) and confirmed in a multivariable model (P = .02). No other variables were associated with CMIR.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with IBD achieved CMIR to a COVID-19 vaccine. Future studies are needed evaluating sustained CMIR and clinical outcomes.

Comparative Outcomes and Safety of Vedolizumab vs Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonists for Older Adults With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

IMPORTANCE

Observational comparative effectiveness studies can inform the positioning of biologic therapies for older patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who are underrepresented in clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab vs tumor necrosis factor (TNF) for older patients with IBD.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This active comparator, new-user design, comparative effectiveness study was conducted between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2018, among 754 older patients (aged ≥50 years) with IBD from the Danish National Patient Register. The mean follow-up after treatment initiation took place at 32 to 40 weeks. Statistical analysis was performed from February 1 to April 27, 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

Treatment with vedolizumab or TNF antagonists.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary effectiveness outcome was treatment failure, defined as the composite risk of IBD-related hospitalization, IBD-related surgery, or a new corticosteroid prescription more than 6 weeks after initiation of treatment with biologic therapy. Secondary effectiveness outcomes were time to each individual component of the composite effectiveness outcome. The primary safety outcome was the risk of serious infections, defined as infections requiring hospitalization. A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was conducted, accounting for patient-, disease-, and treatment-associated factors.

RESULTS

The study compared 377 older patients with IBD with incident use of vedolizumab (202 women [53.6%]; mean [SD] age, 61.2 [8.3] years; 177 [46.9%] with Crohn disease) vs 377 patients with incident use of TNF antagonists (206 women [54.6%]; mean [SD] age, 61.3 [8.1] years; 182 [48.3%] with Crohn disease). Overall, vedolizumab was associated with an increased risk of treatment failure compared with TNF antagonists (1-year risk, 45.4% vs 34.7%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.02-1.69), including higher risk of IBD-related hospitalization (1-year risk, 27.8% vs 16.3%; adjusted HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.03-2.15) and IBD-related major abdominal surgery (1-year risk, 21.3% vs 8.0%; adjusted HR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.45-3.94). In subgroup analysis by IBD phenotype, among patients with Crohn disease, vedolizumab was associated with a 77% higher risk of treatment failure (adjusted HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.21-2.58), while no difference in risk of treatment failure was seen among patients with ulcerative colitis (adjusted HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.75-1.43; P = .03 for interaction). There was no significant difference in the risk of serious infections, overall (1-year risk, 8.2% vs 8.7%; adjusted HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.58-1.85) and by IBD phenotype.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this comparative effectiveness study of older patients with IBD, vedolizumab was associated with a higher risk of treatment failure compared with TNF antagonists, particularly among patients with Crohn disease, without offering a significant safety advantage.

Hepatitis E infection with a benign course during vedolizumab treatment for Crohn's disease: A case report

We present a 49 year old female patient with Crohn's disease (CD) in remission on vedolizumab therapy who experienced a symptomatic, though benign, course of acute hepatitis E. Routine blood tests showed substantial elevation of liver enzymes and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing confirmed hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection. Vedolizumab therapy was paused, liver enzymes improved three weeks after infection and normalized after six months. The patient recovered completely from mild symptoms. This case shows that hepatitis E is a potential cause of acute hepatitis during vedolizumab therapy, and in this case the infection has run a benign course.

The impact of biologic therapies on extra-intestinal manifestations in inflammatory bowel disease: A multicenter study

Introduction

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have a high risk of developing extra-intestinal manifestations (EIMs). We aimed to assess the cumulative incidence and clinical course of EIMs in patients treated with Vedolizumab (VDZ) and non-gut selective biologic drugs.

Materials and methods

In this multicenter observational study, we enrolled 1,182 patients with IBD under biologic treatment in tertiary care centers, collecting the rate of new-onset EIMs and the clinical course of new and pre-existing EIMs since the introduction of the ongoing biologic drug (259 VDZ vs. 923 non-gut selective agents, median time 3 vs. 4 years).

Results

Among 1,182 patients with IBD (median age of 46 years; 55% men) on biologics, the overall cumulative incidence of new onset EIMs was 4.1% (49/1,182), in particular 6.6% (17/259) on VDZ vs. 3.5% (32/923) on non-gut selective biologics (p = 0.02). Among 224 patients reporting new or pre-existing EIMs, those on VDZ showed a higher rate of clinical worsening compared with non-gut selective therapies (15.5 vs. 7.3%, p = 0.08). However, both showed a similar rate of modification of the therapeutic regimen. Female gender [hazard ratio (HR) 2.18], a longer course of ongoing biologic therapy (HR 1.18), ulcerative colitis (UC) (HR 1.83), and VDZ therapy (HR 1.85) were significant risk factors for developing new EIMs.

Discussion

Our study suggests that the type of biologic treatment might affect the risk of developing EIMs, with a slightly higher risk in patients on gut-selective therapies. However, a similar clinical course is observed in the two groups.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are believed to play a key role in the suppression of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, patients suffering from inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) were excluded from SARS-CoV-2 vaccines trials. Therefore, concerns regarding vaccination efficacy and safety among those patients were raised. Overall, vaccination is well tolerated in the IBD population, and different gastroenterological societies recommend vaccinating patients with IBD at the earliest opportunity to do so. Nevertheless, very little is known about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in special IBD populations such as pregnant and breastfeeding women or pediatric patients, and further research on this matter is crucial. The available data on vaccine efficacy are promising and show high seroconversion rates in IBD patients on different immune-modifying therapies. However, patients treated with high doses of systemic corticosteroids, infliximab or infliximab and immunomodulators may have a blunted response to the vaccination. The data on COVID-19 vaccination willingness among patients with IBD are conflicting. Nevertheless, vaccine effectiveness and safety are reported to be the most common reasons for hesitancy. This review examines the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines and describes vaccination willingness and the reasons for potential hesitancy among patients with IBD.

Vedolizumab for perianal fistulizing Crohn's disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Perianal fistulas are a debilitating manifestation of Crohn's disease (CD). Despite the advent of anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy, the medical management of fistulizing CD continues to be challenged by unmet needs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of vedolizumab for the management of perianal fistulizing CD.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library was performed from inception to June 2020 for studies reporting rates of perianal fistula healing in CD patients treated with vedolizumab. The primary outcome of interest was complete healing of perianal fistulas and the secondary outcome was partial healing. The pooled fistula healing rates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated utilizing a random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 74 studies were initially identified, 4 of which met the inclusion criteria. A total of 198 patients with active perianal fistulas were included, 87% of whom had failed previous anti-TNF therapy. The pooled complete healing rate was 27.6% (95% CI, 18.9%-37.3%) with moderate heterogeneity (I2=49.4%) and the pooled partial healing rate was 34.9% (95% CI, 23.2%-47.7%) with high heterogeneity (I2=67.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a meta-analysis of 4 studies that included 198 patients with perianal fistulizing CD, the majority of whom had failed previous anti-TNF therapy, vedolizumab treatment led to healing of perianal fistulas in nearly one-third of the patients. The lack of high-quality data and significant study heterogeneity underscores the need for future prospective studies of fistula healing in patients receiving anti-integrin therapy.

COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses in immunosuppressed patients with inflammatory bowel disease (VIP): a multicentre, prospective, case-control study

BACKGROUND

The effects that therapies for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have on immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are not yet fully known. Therefore, we sought to determine whether COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses were altered in patients with IBD on commonly used immunosuppressive drugs.

METHODS

In this multicentre, prospective, case-control study (VIP), we recruited adults with IBD treated with one of six different immunosuppressive treatment regimens (thiopurines, infliximab, a thiopurine plus infliximab, ustekinumab, vedolizumab, or tofacitinib) and healthy control participants from nine centres in the UK. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and had received two doses of COVID-19 vaccines (either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [Oxford-AstraZeneca], BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech], or mRNA1273 [Moderna]) 6-12 weeks apart (according to scheduling adopted in the UK). We measured antibody responses 53-92 days after a second vaccine dose using the Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. The primary outcome was anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody concentrations in participants without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, adjusted by age and vaccine type, and was analysed by use of multivariable linear regression models. This study is registered in the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN13495664, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between May 31 and Nov 24, 2021, we recruited 483 participants, including patients with IBD being treated with thiopurines (n=78), infliximab (n=63), a thiopurine plus infliximab (n=72), ustekinumab (n=57), vedolizumab (n=62), or tofacitinib (n=30), and 121 healthy controls. We included 370 participants without evidence of previous infection in our primary analysis. Geometric mean anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody concentrations were significantly lower in patients treated with infliximab (156·8 U/mL [geometric SD 5·7]; p<0·0001), infliximab plus thiopurine (111·1 U/mL [5·7]; p<0·0001), or tofacitinib (429·5 U/mL [3·1]; p=0·0012) compared with controls (1578·3 U/mL [3·7]). There were no significant differences in antibody concentrations between patients treated with thiopurine monotherapy (1019·8 U/mL [4·3]; p=0·74), ustekinumab (582·4 U/mL [4·6]; p=0·11), or vedolizumab (954·0 U/mL [4·1]; p=0·50) and healthy controls. In multivariable modelling, lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody concentrations were independently associated with infliximab (geometric mean ratio 0·12, 95% CI 0·08-0·17; p<0·0001) and tofacitinib (0·43, 0·23-0·81; p=0·0095), but not with ustekinumab (0·69, 0·41-1·19; p=0·18), thiopurines (0·89, 0·64-1·24; p=0·50), or vedolizumab (1·16, 0·74-1·83; p=0·51). mRNA vaccines (3·68, 2·80-4·84; p<0·0001; vs adenovirus vector vaccines) were independently associated with higher antibody concentrations and older age per decade (0·79, 0·72-0·87; p<0·0001) with lower antibody concentrations.

INTERPRETATION

For patients with IBD, the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines varies according to immunosuppressive drug exposure, and is attenuated in recipients of infliximab, infliximab plus thiopurines, and tofacitinib. Scheduling of third primary, or booster, doses could be personalised on the basis of an individual's treatment, and patients taking anti-tumour necrosis factor and tofacitinib should be prioritised.

FUNDING

Pfizer.

Response to Vaccines in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Narrative Review

Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), such as rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, are at increased risk of infection. International guidelines recommend vaccination to limit this risk of infection, although live attenuated vaccines are contraindicated once immunosuppressive therapy has begun. Biologic therapies used to treat IMIDs target the immune system to stop chronic pathogenic process but may also attenuate the protective immune response to vaccines. Here, we review the current knowledge regarding vaccine responses in IMID patients receiving treatment with biologic therapies, with a focus on the interleukin (IL)-12/23 inhibitors. B cell-depleting therapies, such as rituximab, strongly impair vaccines immunogenicity, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) fusion protein abatacept are also associated with attenuated antibody responses, which are further diminished in patients taking concomitant immunosuppressants. On the other hand, integrin, IL-6, IL-12/23, IL-17, and B-cell activating factor (BAFF) inhibitors do not appear to affect the immune response to several vaccines evaluated. Importantly, treatment with biologic therapies in IMID patients is not associated with an increased risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or developing severe disease. However, the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on IMID patients may be reduced compared with healthy individuals. The impact of biologic therapies on the response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines seems to replicate what has been described for other vaccines. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination appears to be safe and well tolerated in IMID patients. Attenuated but, in general, still protective responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the context of certain therapies warrant current recommendations for a third primary dose in IMID patients treated with immunosuppressive drugs.

Comparative Risk of Serious Infections With Tumor Necrosis Factor α Antagonists vs Vedolizumab in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing the risk of serious infections between patients treated with tumor necrosis factor-a (TNFa) antagonists vs. vedolizumab in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD).

METHODS

Using an administrative claims database, we identified patients with IBD who were new-users of either TNFa antagonists or vedolizumab between 2014-2018 and had insurance coverage for at least 1y before and after treatment initiation. We compared the risk of serious infections (infections requiring hospitalization) between patients treated with vedolizumab or TNFa antagonists using marginal structural Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for baseline disease characteristics, healthcare utilization, comorbidities, and time-varying use of corticosteroids, immunomodulators and opiates.

RESULTS

We included 4881 patients treated with TNFa antagonists (age, 41 ± 15y, 60% with Crohn's disease [CD]) of whom 434 developed serious infections over 5786 person-year [PY] follow-up, and 1106 patients treated with vedolizumab (age, 44 ± 16y, 39% with CD) of whom 86 developed serious infections over 1040-PY follow-up. Vedolizumab was associated with 46% lower risk of serious infections as compared with TNFa antagonists in patients with ulcerative colitis (HR,0.54 [95% CI,0.35-0.83), but no significant differences were observed in patients with CD (HR,1.30 [0.80-2.11]). Vedolizumab was associated with lower risk of extra-intestinal serious infections in patients with UC, but higher risk of gastrointestinal serious infections in patients with CD.

CONCLUSIONS

In an observational study of patients with IBD, vedolizumab was associated with lower risk of serious infections as compared with TNFa antagonists, in patients with UC, but not in patients with CD.

Humoral Immune Response in IBD Patients Three and Six Months after Vaccination with the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronovirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Vaccination is considered the core approach to containing the pandemic. There is currently insufficient evidence on the efficacy of these vaccines in immunosuppressed inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the humoral response in immunosuppressed IBD patients after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. In this prospective study, IgG antibody levels (AB) against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (spike-protein) were quantitatively determined. For assessing the potential neutralizing capacity, a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate neutralization test (sVNT) was employed in IBD patients (n = 95) and healthy controls (n = 38). Sera were examined prior to the first/second vaccination and 3/6 months after second vaccination. Patients showed lower sVNT (%) and IgG-S (AU/mL) AB both before the second vaccination (sVNT p < 0.001; AB p < 0.001) and 3 (sVNT p = 0.002; AB p = 0.001) and 6 months (sVNT p = 0.062; AB p = 0.061) after the second vaccination. Although seroconversion rates (sVNT, IgG-S) did not differ between the two groups 3 months after second vaccination, a significant difference was seen 6 months after second vaccination (sVNT p = 0.045). Before and three months after the second vaccination, patients treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents showed significantly lower AB than healthy subjects. In conclusion, an early booster shot vaccination should be discussed for IBD patients on anti-TNF therapy.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease: expert consensus statement by KASID

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel coronavirus, is threatening global health worldwide with unprecedented contagiousness and severity. The best strategy to overcome COVID-19 is a vaccine. Various vaccines are currently being developed, and mass vaccination is in progress. Despite the very encouraging clinical trial results of these vaccines, there is insufficient information on the safety and efficacy of vaccines for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients facing various issues. After reviewing current evidence and international guidelines, the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases developed an expert consensus statement on COVID-19 vaccination issues for Korean IBD patients. This expert consensus statement emphasizes that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination be strongly recommended for IBD patients, and it is safe for IBD patients receiving immunomodulatory therapy.

Antibody secreting cells are critically dependent on integrin α4β7/MAdCAM-1 for intestinal recruitment and control of the microbiota during chronic colitis

T and B cells employ integrin α4β7 to migrate to intestine under homeostatic conditions. Whether those cells differentially rely on α4β7 for homing during inflammatory conditions has not been fully examined. This may have implications for our understanding of the mode of action of anti-integrin therapies in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Here, we examined the role of α4β7 integrin during chronic colitis using IL-10^-/- mice, β7-deficient IL-10^-/-, IgA-deficient IL-10^-/- mice, and antibody blockade of MAdCAM-1. We found that α4β7 was predominantly expressed by B cells. β7 deficiency and MAdCAM-1 blockade specifically depleted antibody secreting cells (ASC) (not T cells) from the colonic LP, leading to a fecal pan-immunoglobulin deficit, severe colitis, and alterations of microbiota composition. Colitis was not due to defective regulation, as dendritic cells (DC), regulatory T cells, retinaldehyde dehydrogenase (RALDH) expression, activity, and regulatory T/B-cell cytokines were all comparable between the strains/treatment. Finally, an IgA deficit closely recapitulated the clinical phenotype and altered microbiota composition of β7-deficient IL-10^-/- mice. Thus, a luminal IgA deficit contributes to accelerated colitis in the β7-deficient state. Given the critical/nonredundant dependence of IgA ASC on α4β7:MAdCAM-1 for intestinal homing, B cells may represent unappreciated targets of anti-integrin therapies.

Management of inflammatory bowel disease and serum level of infliximab in newborn exposed to anti-TNF therapy during pregnancy: Case report and literature review

RATIONALE

Heightened inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) activity during pregnancy is associated with higher rates of preterm birth, miscarriage, and low birth weight. Therefore, its adequate treatment is essential, considering the risk-benefit of medication use. Although previous literature has described the management of IBD during pregnancy, few studies have assessed the pharmacokinetics of IBD drugs in the newborn. In this case report, we describe the management of ulcerative colitis during pregnancy and discuss the benefits of checking serum levels of infliximab in newborns exposed to the medication during pregnancy.

PATIENT CONCERN

A 37-year-old patient with ulcerative colitis in clinical and endoscopic remission had been undergoing treated with infliximab since 2008. The patient became pregnant in 2018.

DIAGNOSIS AND INTERVENTION

Infliximab medication was discontinued at the 29th week of pregnancy.

OUTCOMES

The pregnancy was uneventful, and the levels of infliximab in the umbilical cord were >20 μg/dL. Live vaccinations were postponed until the baby was 6 months old, when a new serum drug level proved to be undetectable.

LESSONS

Our case suggests that the use of infliximab is safe in pregnancy, and drug discontinuation could be considered from the 24th week of pregnancy onward to reduce placental transfer to the newborn in patients at low risk of relapse. Vaccines with live attenuated organisms should be delayed for at least 6 months or until the serum level of the medication is undetectable.

Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccines among Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Japan

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is recommended for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines has not been sufficiently evaluated in patients with IBD. We aimed to assess the acceptance and hesitancy of COVID-19 vaccination and related factors among these patients. A retrospective cohort study using a self-reported questionnaire was performed among patients with IBD between 22 June 2021 and 30 August 2021. Of the 187 participants, 10.2% (n = 19) were hesitant to be vaccinated. Patients in the vaccine-hesitant group were younger (p = 0.009) and had a shorter disease duration (p = 0.020). Vedolizumab was prescribed more frequently (p = 0.024) and immunomodulators were less frequently used (p = 0.027) in this group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-1.00, p = 0.042) and the use of immunomodulators (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.01-0.66, p = 0.019) as independent significant factors for vaccine hesitancy. The COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy rate in patients with IBD in Japan was 10% in this study. The Japanese COVID-19 vaccination campaign appears to be successful. The risk of COVID-19 among patients with IBD requires adequate measures to ensure that vaccines are accepted by vaccine-hesitant patients. These findings may be helpful in achieving adequate vaccination rates.

Serological Response to BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccines in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Biologic Therapies

Introduction: The immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on biologic therapies is not well studied. The goal of this study was to measure the serological response to BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines in patients with IBD receiving different biologic therapies. Methods: We performed a multi-center prospective study between 1 August 2021 and 15 September 2021. We measured the seropositivity of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (SARS-CoV-2 IgG) and neutralizing antibody concentrations in patients with IBD receiving biologic therapies 4-10 weeks after their second dose or 3-6 weeks after their first dose of BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines. Results: A total of 126 patients were enrolled (mean age, 31 years; 60% male; 71% Crohn's disease, 29% ulcerative colitis). Of these, 92 patients were vaccinated with the BNT162b2 vaccine (73%) and 34 patients with the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (27%). In patients being treated with infliximab and adalimumab, the proportion of patients who achieved positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels after receiving two doses of the vaccine were 44 out of 59 patients (74.5%) and 13 out of 16 patients (81.2%), respectively. In contrast, of those receiving ustekinumab and vedolizumab, the proportion of patients who achieved positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels after receiving two doses of the vaccine were 100% and 92.8%, respectively. In patients receiving infliximab and adalimumab, the proportion of patients who had positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody levels after two-dose vaccination was 40 out of 59 patients (67.7%) and 14 out 16 patients (87.5%), respectively. On the other hand, the proportion of patients who had positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody levels were 12 out of 13 patients (92.3%) and 13 out of 14 patients (92.8%) in patients receiving ustekinumab and vedolizumab, respectively. Conclusions: The majority of patients with IBD who were on infliximab, adalimumab, and vedolizumab seroconverted after two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. All patients on ustekinumab seroconverted after two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are both likely to be effective after two doses in patients with IBD on biologics. Larger follow-up studies are needed to evaluate if decay of antibodies occurs over time.

Vaccinations in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) frequently requires administration of immunosuppressive therapies, which increases susceptibility to a number of infectious pathogens. However, many infections can be prevented by correct and appropriate utilization of vaccinations. While several guidelines have been published on vaccination schedules in patients with IBD, vaccination rates remain suboptimal and even lower than those in the general population. This is due to many factors including poor awareness of the importance of vaccines by gastroenterologists and general practitioners as well as potential prejudices of patients regarding the safety and benefits of vaccines. With the aim of increasing awareness about the key role of immunization in the management of patients with IBD, the present review examines the existing literature relating to the main vaccinations and their application in these patients. We also summarize current evidence in order to provide clinicians with an easy source of reference for the principal recommendations for prevention of infectious diseases in patients with IBD. In addition, the recommendations about traveling for IBD patients are briefly explored. Lastly, since it is important for gastroenterologists to be aware of recommendations on vaccination, we recommend implementing educational programs to ensure compliance with current guidelines.

Crohn's and Colitis Canada's 2021 Impact of COVID-19 and Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Canada: COVID-19 Vaccines-Biology, Current Evidence and Recommendations

The COVID-19 pandemic has ushered a globally focused vaccine development program that produced multiple successful vaccines within a year. Four SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been approved for use in Canada, using two different technologies, all of which have shown excellent efficacy in reducing the rate of symptomatic COVID-19 infection and 100% efficacy in preventing death from COVID-19. People with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), like many others with immune-mediated chronic diseases, were excluded from the pivotal trials of these vaccines, leading to early hesitancy by regulatory bodies to endorse administering the vaccines to these groups. However, recent data has shown that the adverse event rate to SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among people with IBD is similar to the general population. Early data has further shown that people with IBD are capable of mounting a robust immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, particularly following a second dose, whereas the response to the first dose is blunted in those receiving anti-TNF therapy or conventional immunosuppressants (azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, methotrexate). Based on these data and evidence from previous vaccine programs among people with IBD, multiple national and international expert panels have recommended that individuals with IBD receive complete vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 as soon as possible.

High Serum Creatine Kinase Levels in Infliximab and Vedolizumab-Treated Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients

Background

TNF inhibitors are relatively safe drugs, but asymptomatic infliximab-induced high serum creatine kinase (CK) levels have been reported in >30% of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Whether high serum CK levels are a specific effect of treatment with TNF inhibitors has not been studied in detail. CK levels were therefore compared between infliximab- and vedolizumab-treated IBD patients.

Methods

In this retrospective, monocentric study, 131 IBD cases (82 with Crohn's disease (CD), 49 with ulcerative colitis) of the Basel University Hospital IBD cohort treated either with infliximab or vedolizumab were included. Serum samples for measuring CK, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), C-reactive protein (CRP), and fecal calprotectin (FCal) levels were collected longitudinally and analyzed using mixed additive models.

Results

No significant differences in CK levels between infliximab and vedolizumab-treated patients were observed over time. Infliximab-treated males, however, showed significantly higher CK levels than females and former smokers treated with infliximab showed significantly lower CK levels than nonsmokers. No such differences were observed in vedolizumab-treated patients. LDH and CRP were not significantly different between infliximab- and vedolizumab-treated patients, while adjusted groups showed substantially higher LDH levels with increasing age and significantly lower LDH levels in patients with longer disease duration. Infliximab patients with CD showed significantly lower CRP. However, significantly higher FCal concentrations were noted in infliximab patients independent of diagnosis, gender, disease duration, smoking behavior, and age.

Conclusion

In our cohort, high serum CK levels are not an infliximab- or vedolizumab-specific effect.

Lower incidence of COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with non-gut selective biologic therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, concerns have been raised as to whether inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients under biologic therapy may be more susceptible to the disease. This study aimed to determine the incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 in a large cohort of IBD patients on biologic therapy.

METHODS

This observational retrospective multicenter study collected data about COVID-19 in IBD patients on biologic therapy in Italy, between February and May 2020. The main end-points were (i) to assess both the cumulative incidence and clinical outcome of COVID-19, according to different biologic agents and (ii) to compare them with the general population and a cohort IBD patients undergoing non-biologic therapies.

RESULTS

Among 1816 IBD patients, the cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was 3.9 per 1000 (7/1816) with a 57% hospitalization rate and a 29% case-fatality rate. The class of biologic agents was the only risk factor of developing COVID-19 (P = 0.01). Non-gut selective agents were associated with a lower incidence of COVID-19 cases, related symptoms, and hospitalization (P < 0.05). Compared with the general population of Lombardy, an overall lower incidence of COVID-19 was observed (3.9 vs 8.5 per 1000, P = 0.03). Compared with 565 IBD patients on non-biologic therapies, a lower rate of COVID-19 symptoms was observed in our cohort (7.5% vs 18%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the general population, IBD patients on biologic therapy are not exposed to a higher risk of COVID-19. Non-gut selective agents are associated with a lower incidence of symptomatic disease, supporting the decision of maintaining the ongoing treatment.

Targeting Leukocyte Trafficking in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

In the last two decades, understanding of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) immunopathogenesis has expanded considerably. Histopathological examination of the intestinal mucosa in IBD demonstrates the presence of a chronic inflammatory cell infiltrate. Research has focused on identifying mechanisms of immune cell trafficking to the gastrointestinal tract that may represent effective gut-selective targets for IBD therapy whilst avoiding systemic immunosuppression that may be associated with off-target adverse effects such as infection and malignancy. Integrins are cell surface receptors that can bind to cellular adhesion molecules to mediate both leukocyte homing and retention. In 2014, Vedolizumab (Entyvio^®) was the first anti-integrin (anti-α4ß7 monoclonal antibody) treatment to be approved for use in IBD. Several other anti-integrin therapies are currently in advanced stages of development, including novel orally administered small-molecule drugs. Drugs targeting alternative trafficking mechanisms such as mucosal addressin cellular adhesion molecule-1 and sphingosine-1-phosphate receptors are also being evaluated. Here, we summarise key established and emerging therapies targeting leukocyte trafficking that may play an important role in realising the goal of stratified precision medicine in IBD care.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)-Part 2: Inactivated Vaccines

Background and Aims

The effectiveness and safety of vaccinations can be altered by immunosuppressive therapies, and perhaps by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) itself. These recommendations developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on immunizations in adult and pediatric patients with IBD. This publication focused on inactivated vaccines.

Methods

Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines in patients with IBD, other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and the general population were performed. Critical outcomes included mortality, vaccine-preventable diseases, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was considered a surrogate outcome for vaccine efficacy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Key questions were developed through an iterative online platform, and voted on by a multidisciplinary group. Recommendations were formulated using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. Strong recommendation means that most patients should receive the recommended course of action, whereas a conditional recommendation means that different choices will be appropriate for different patients.

Results

Consensus was reached on 15 of 20 questions. Recommendations address the following vaccines: Haemophilus influenzae type b, recombinant zoster, hepatitis B, influenza, pneumococcus, meningococcus, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis, and human papillomavirus. Most of the recommendations for patients with IBD are congruent with the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Canada’s National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommendations for the general population, with the following exceptions. In patients with IBD, the panel suggested Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine for patients older than 5 years of age, recombinant zoster vaccine for adults younger than 50 year of age, and hepatitis B vaccine for adults without a risk factor. Consensus was not reached, and recommendations were not made for 5 statements, due largely to lack of evidence, including double-dose hepatitis B vaccine, timing of influenza immunization in patients on biologics, pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines in adult patients without risk factors, and human papillomavirus vaccine in patients aged 27–45 years.

Conclusions

Patients with IBD may be at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable diseases. Therefore, maintaining appropriate vaccination status in these patients is critical to optimize patient outcomes. In general, IBD is not a contraindication to the use of inactivated vaccines, but immunosuppressive therapy may reduce vaccine responses.

[SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination for Adult Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Expert Consensus Statements by KASID]

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel coronavirus, is threatening global health worldwide with unprecedented contagiousness and severity. The best strategy to overcome COVID-19 is a vaccine. Various vaccines are currently being developed, and mass vaccination is in progress. Despite the very encouraging clinical trial results of these vaccines, there is insufficient information on the safety and efficacy of vaccines for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients facing various issues. After reviewing current evidence and international guidelines, the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases (KASID) developed an expert consensus statement on COVID-19 vaccination issues for Korean IBD patients. This expert consensus statement emphasizes that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination be strongly recommended for IBD patients, and it is safe for IBD patients receiving immunomodulatory therapy.

Turkish IBD Organization's Position Statement on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Management Recommendations During COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has resulted in high mortality and morbidity worldwide and is still a growing problem. Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammatory disease for which a substantial number of patients are treated with immunosuppressive medications, either occasionally or long-term. Despite the accumulating evidence, there is still a lack of knowledge about the impact of COVID-19 on IBD patients, especially those who are under immunosuppressive treatment. Moreover, following the emergence of several COVID vaccines, there are concerns regarding vaccine effectiveness and possible side effects in such patients. In this context, we tried to briefly summarize the accumulating evidence and recommendations for the management of IBD in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)-Part 2: Inactivated Vaccines

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The effectiveness and safety of vaccinations can be altered by immunosuppressive therapies, and perhaps by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) itself. These recommendations developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on immunizations in adult and pediatric patients with IBD. This publication focused on inactivated vaccines.

METHODS

Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines in patients with IBD, other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and the general population were performed. Critical outcomes included mortality, vaccine-preventable diseases, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was considered a surrogate outcome for vaccine efficacy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Key questions were developed through an iterative online platform, and voted on by a multidisciplinary group. Recommendations were formulated using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. Strong recommendation means that most patients should receive the recommended course of action, whereas a conditional recommendation means that different choices will be appropriate for different patients.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 15 of 20 questions. Recommendations address the following vaccines: Haemophilus influenzae type b, recombinant zoster, hepatitis B, influenza, pneumococcus, meningococcus, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis, and human papillomavirus. Most of the recommendations for patients with IBD are congruent with the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommendations for the general population, with the following exceptions. In patients with IBD, the panel suggested Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine for patients older than 5 years of age, recombinant zoster vaccine for adults younger than 50 year of age, and hepatitis B vaccine for adults without a risk factor. Consensus was not reached, and recommendations were not made for 5 statements, due largely to lack of evidence, including double-dose hepatitis B vaccine, timing of influenza immunization in patients on biologics, pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines in adult patients without risk factors, and human papillomavirus vaccine in patients aged 27-45 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBD may be at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable diseases. Therefore, maintaining appropriate vaccination status in these patients is critical to optimize patient outcomes. In general, IBD is not a contraindication to the use of inactivated vaccines, but immunosuppressive therapy may reduce vaccine responses.

Administration of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised patients

Since the beginning of vaccination programs against COVID-19 in different countries, several populations such as patients with specific immunological conditions have been considered as the priorities for immunization. In this regard, patients with autoimmune diseases or those receiving immunosuppressive agents and anti-cancer therapies, need special attention. However, no confirmed data is presently available regarding COVID-19 vaccines in these populations due to exclusion from the conducted clinical trials. Given the probable suppression or over-activation of the immune system in such patients, reaching a consensus for their vaccination is critical, besides gathering data and conducting trials, which could probably clarify this matter in the future. In this review, besides a brief on the available COVID-19 vaccines, considerations and available knowledge about administering similar vaccines in patients with cancer, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, solid organ transplantation, multiple sclerosis (MS), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and rheumatologic and dermatologic autoimmune disorders are summarized to help in decision making. As discussed, live-attenuated viruses, which should be avoided in these groups, are not employed in the present COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, the main concern regarding efficacy could be met using a potent COVID-19 vaccine. Moreover, the vaccination timing for maximum efficacy could be decided according to the patient’s condition, indicated medications, and the guides provided here. Post-vaccination monitoring is also advised to ensure an adequate immune response. Further studies in this area are urgently warranted.

Management of hepatitis B virus infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease under immunosuppressive treatment

Hepatitis B remains a significant global clinical problem, despite the implementation of safe and effective vaccination programs. The prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) largely follows the regional epidemiologic status. Serological screening with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and antibodies to hepatitis B surface (anti-HBs) and core (anti-HBc) proteins is a key element in the management of IBD patients and, ideally, should be performed at IBD diagnosis. Stratification of individual cases should be done according to the serologic profile and the IBD-specific treatment, with particular emphasis in patients receiving immunosuppressive regimens. In patients who have not contracted HBV, vaccination is indicated to accomplish protective immunity. Vaccination in immunosuppressed patients, however, is a challenging issue and several strategies for primary and revaccination have been proposed. The risk of HBV reactivation in patients with IBD should be considered in both HBsAg-positive and HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients, when immunosuppressive therapies are administered. HBV reactivation is preventable via the administration of prophylactic nucleot(s)ide analogues and should be the standard approach in HBsAg-positive patients. HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients represent a non-homogeneous group and bear a significantly lower risk of HBV reactivation. Biochemical, serological and molecular monitoring is currently the recommended approach for anti-HBc patients. Acute HBV infection is rarely reported in IBD patients. In the present review, we outline the problems associated with HBV infection in patients with IBD and present updated evidence for their management.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

The current COVID-19 pandemic, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has drastically impacted societies worldwide. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is expected to play a key role in the management of this pandemic. Inflammatory conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) often require chronic immunosuppression, which can influence vaccination decisions.

AIM

This review article aims to describe the most commonly available SARS-CoV-2 vaccination vectors globally, assess the potential benefits and concerns of vaccination in the setting of immunosuppression and provide medical practitioners with guidance regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with IBD.

METHODS

All published Phase 1/2 and/or Phase 3 and 4 studies of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations were reviewed. IBD international society position papers, safety registry data and media releases from pharmaceutical companies as well as administrative and medicines regulatory bodies were included. General vaccine evidence and recommendations in immunosuppressed patients were reviewed for context. Society position papers regarding special populations, including immunosuppressed, pregnant and breast-feeding individuals were also evaluated. Literature was critically analysed and summarised.

RESULTS

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is supported in all adult, non-pregnant individuals with IBD without contraindication. There is the potential that vaccine efficacy may be reduced in those who are immunosuppressed; however, medical therapies should not be withheld in order to undertake vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are safe, but data specific to immunosuppressed patients remain limited.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is essential from both an individual patient and community perspective and should be encouraged in patients with IBD. Recommendations must be continually updated as real-world and trial-based evidence emerges.

A Review of Vaccinations in Adult Patients with Secondary Immunodeficiency

Vaccine-preventable diseases and their related complications are associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients with altered immunocompetence. Optimised immunisation in this patient population is challenging because of limited data from vaccine trials, suboptimal vaccine efficacy and safety concerns. Reliable efficacy data are lacking among patients with altered immunocompetence, and existing recommendations are mainly based on expert consensus and may vary geographically. Inactivated vaccines can be generally used without risks in this group, but their efficacy may be reduced, and immunisation schedules vary according to local guidelines, age, and type and stage of the underlying disease. Live vaccines, if indicated, should be administered with care because of the risk of vaccine-associated disease. We have reviewed the current evidence on vaccination principles and recommendations in adult patients with secondary immunodeficiencies, including asplenia, HIV infection, stem cell and solid organ transplant, haematological malignancies, inflammatory bowel disease and other chronic disorders.

Review of pregnancy in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) frequently affects women of childbearing age and can have implications in pregnancy. Most women with IBD have comparable fertility with women in the general population. Fertility is reduced in women with active disease or previous ileal-pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) surgery and is temporarily reduced in men taking sulfasalazine. Women with IBD have an increased risk of preterm delivery, low birth weight, small-for-gestational-age infants and Cesarean section (CS) delivery, however, no increased risk of congenital abnormalities. These adverse outcomes are particularly prevalent for women with active IBD compared with those with quiescent disease. Conception should occur during disease remission to optimize maternal and fetal outcomes and reduce the risk of disease exacerbations during pregnancy. Pre-conception counseling is therefore pertinent to provide patient education, medication review for risk of teratogenicity and objective disease assessment. Most medications are safe during pregnancy and breastfeeding, with the exception of methotrexate, ciclosporin, allopurinol and tofacitinib. Delivery modality should be guided by obstetric factors in most cases; however, CS is recommended for women with active perianal disease and can be considered for women with inactive perianal disease or IPAA. In conclusion, most women with IBD have uncomplicated pregnancies. Active IBD is the predominant predictor of poor outcomes and disease exacerbations; therefore, maintenance of disease remission during and before pregnancy is crucial.

Safety of New Biologics (Vedolizumab and Ustekinumab) and Small Molecules (Tofacitinib) During Pregnancy: A Review

Two new biological drugs (vedolizumab and ustekinumab) and one small molecule (tofacitinib) have been recently approved for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Therefore, we must be familiar with the safety of these "new" drugs during pregnancy and breastfeeding. In the present article, we critically review available data on the safety of new biologics (vedolizumab and ustekinumab) and small molecules (tofacitinib) during pregnancy and breastfeeding, with special focus on women with inflammatory bowel disease. Bibliographical searches (MEDLINE) up to April 2020 were performed. The timing and mechanisms of placental transfer of vedolizumab and ustekinumab are expected to be similar to anti-TNF agents. Animal studies show no evidence of adverse effects on pre- or post-natal development after administration of vedolizumab and ustekinumab. Just a few studies including patients treated with vedolizumab or ustekinumab during pregnancy have been published, reporting uneventful pregnancies in most cases. The clinical programme of both drugs and post-marketing studies showed no new safety concerns. Due to the expected safety of vedolizumab and ustekinumab during pregnancy, it may be recommended to plan the final pregnancy dose approximately 8 or 12 weeks, respectively, before the estimated date of delivery. Live vaccines should be avoided for up to a year in children exposed in utero to vedolizumab or ustekinumab unless drug elimination has been documented. Miniscule amounts of vedolizumab and ustekinumab are transferred to breast milk, so breastfeeding is probably safe. There is no evidence of adverse effect of vedolizumab or ustekinumab paternal exposure. Regarding tofacitinib, it is reasonable to assume that this molecule crosses the placenta from the beginning of pregnancy. In animal studies, tofacitinib was feticidal and teratogenic in rats and rabbits, although at exposures many times greater than the standard human dose. Reported outcomes of pregnancy cases identified from tofacitinib randomised controlled trials, post-approval and non-interventional studies, and spontaneous adverse-event reporting appear similar to those observed in the general population. Nevertheless, at present, the use of tofacitinib during pregnancy should be avoided. Although no human studies have reported outcomes of breastfeeding with small molecules such as tofacitinib, this drug is present in lactating rat milk so, at present, breastfeeding should be avoided. Pregnancy among patients with paternal exposure to tofacitinib appears to be safe. In summary, we can conclude that new biologic agents (vedolizumab and ustekinumab) and small molecules (tofacitinib) should be used during pregnancy only if the benefits to the mother outweigh the risks to the mother and unborn child.