Clinical outcome of adalimumab therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis previously treated with infliximab: a Danish single-center cohort study

Real-World Patterns and Economic Burden Associated With Treatment Failure With Advanced Therapies in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Background

Some patients lose response during treatment for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to characterize real-world treatment failure patterns and associated economic burdens during use of first-line advanced therapies for UC.

Methods

IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases were used to identify adults initiating ≥ 1 advanced therapy for UC (January 1, 2010-September 30, 2019). Treatment failure was defined as augmentation with non-advanced therapy, discontinuation, dose escalation/interval shortening, failure to taper corticosteroids, UC-related surgery, or UC-related urgent care ≤ 12 months after treatment initiation. The index date was the date of treatment failure (treatment failure cohort) or 12 months after treatment initiation (persistent cohort). Treatment failure rates were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses. All-cause and UC-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs 12 months post-index were also assessed.

Results

Analysis of treatment failure patterns included data from 6745 patients; HCRU and cost analyses included data from 5302 patients (treatment failure cohort, n = 4295; persistent cohort, n = 1007). In the overall population, 75% experienced treatment failure within the first 12 months (median: 5.1 months). Augmentation with non-advanced therapy (39%) was the most common first treatment failure event. The treatment failure cohort had significantly (P < .001) higher mean costs than the persistent cohort (all-cause, $74 995 vs $56 169; UC-related, $57 096 vs $47 347) mainly attributed to inpatient admissions and outpatient visits. Dose escalation/interval shortening accounted for the highest total costs ($101 668) across treatment failure events.

Conclusions

Advanced therapies for moderate-to-severe UC are associated with high rates of treatment failure and significant economic burden. More efficacious and durable treatments are needed.

Selection strategy of second-line biologic therapies in adult patients with ulcerative colitis following prior biologic treatment failure: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Optimizing second-line biologic therapies for adult ulcerative colitis (UC) post first-line failure is essential.

OBJECTIVE

Compare second-line biologic therapy efficacy in adult UC patients with prior treatment failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of electronic databases up to May 2023 was conducted to assess second-line biologic therapy efficacy using a random effects model. Parameters analyzed included clinical remission rate, clinical response rate, mucosal healing rate, annual discontinuation rate, and colectomy rates.

RESULTS

Forty-three research papers were analyzed. Clinical remission rates for second-line biologics were ranked at 6-14 weeks: Infliximab (30%) was followed by Vedolizumab (29%), Ustekinumab (27%), and Adalimumab (19%). At 52-54 weeks, the order shifted, with Vedolizumab (35%) followed by Infliximab (32%), Ustekinumab (31%), and Adalimumab (26%). The mucosal healing rate was 21%, ranked as: Infliximab (31%), Vedolizumab (21%), Adalimumab (21%), and Ustekinumab (14%). The annual discontinuation rate stood at 20%, with Adalimumab (25%), Vedolizumab (18%), Infliximab (17%), and Ustekinumab (16%). Discontinuation rates due to primary failure (PF), secondary failure (SF), and adverse events (AE) were 6%, 12%, and 3%, respectively. The annual colectomy rate was 9%, with Adalimumab (15%) followed by Vedolizumab (10%), Ustekinumab (9%), and Infliximab (5%), and colectomy rates of 10% due to PF, 12% due to SF, and 4% due to AE.

CONCLUSION

For UC patients with first-line treatment failure, it is recommended to prioritize infliximab or vedolizumab as second-line biologic therapies, while avoiding adalimumab as the primary choice. Further clinical trials are necessary to assess ustekinumab efficacy accurately.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Loss of Response and Need for Dose Escalation of Infliximab and Adalimumab in Ulcerative Colitis

BACKGROUND

Loss of response to infliximab or adalimumab in ulcerative colitis occurs frequently, and dose escalation may aid in regaining clinical benefit. This study aimed to systematically assess the annual loss of response and dose escalation rates for infliximab and adalimumab in ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted from August 1999 to July 2021 for studies reporting loss of response and dose escalation during infliximab and/or adalimumab use in ulcerative colitis patients with primary response. Annual loss of response, dose escalation rates, and clinical benefit after dose escalation were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed for studies with 1-year follow-up or less.

RESULTS

We included 50 unique studies assessing loss of response (infliximab, n = 24; adalimumab, n = 21) or dose escalation (infliximab, n = 21; adalimumab, n = 16). The pooled annual loss of response for infliximab was 10.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1-14.3) and 13.6% (95% CI, 9.3-19.9) for studies with 1-year follow-up. The pooled annual loss of response for adalimumab was 13.4% (95% CI, 8.2-21.8) and 23.3% (95% CI, 15.4-35.1) for studies with 1-year follow-up. Annual pooled dose escalation rates were 13.8% (95% CI, 8.7-21.7) for infliximab and 21.3% (95% CI, 14.4-31.3) for adalimumab, regaining clinical benefit in 72.4% and 52.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Annual loss of response was 10% for infliximab and 13% for adalimumab, with higher rates during the first year. Annual dose escalation rates were 14% (infliximab) and 21% (adalimumab), with clinical benefit in 72% and 52%, respectively. Uniform definitions are needed to facilitate more robust evaluations.

Systematic Literature Review of Real-World Evidence on Dose Escalation and Treatment Switching in Ulcerative Colitis

Background

Currently approved biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis have well-established efficacy. However, many patients fail to respond or lose response, leading to dose escalation or treatment switching.

Objective

We sought to identify real-world evidence on dose escalation and treatment switching and associated clinical and economic outcomes among adults with ulcerative colitis treated with infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, or tofacitinib.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE (up to 26 August 2020), and conference proceedings (2017-2020) for studies in adults with ulcerative colitis to assess clinical response and remission, colectomy, adverse events, and economic outcomes related to dose escalation and treatment switching.

Results

In 56 studies, dose escalation and treatment switching involving infliximab and/or adalimumab were most frequently investigated. Rates of clinical response after dose escalation were 20-95% (1.8-36 months), clinical remission rates were 10-94% (1.8-36 months), colectomy rates were 0-33% (12-38 months), and adverse event rates were 0-18%. Treatment switching rates in 21 studies were 4-70% over 3-62 months, with switch due to loss of response rates of 4-35% over 12-62 months (7 studies). Up to 35% of patients underwent colectomy 12-120 weeks after switching, and 13-38% experienced adverse events. Data relating to economic outcomes were limited to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, but demonstrated increased direct costs associated with both dose escalation and treatment switching.

Conclusion

Dose escalation and treatment switching are common with existing therapies. However, clinical response and remission rates vary, and a proportion of patients fail to achieve optimal clinical and economic outcomes. This highlights the need for more efficacious and durable treatments for patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis.

Optimizing biologic therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus in the United Arab Emirates

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are chronic, relapsing-remitting inflammatory conditions with a substantial negative impact on health-related quality of life and work productivity. Treatment of IBD has been revolutionized by the advent of biologic therapies, initially with anti-TNF agents and more recently with multiple alternatives targets, and yet more under development.

OBJECTIVES

Approximatively one third of patients do not respond to biologic therapy and more importantly a significant proportion experiences partial response or loss of response during treatment. The latter are common clinical situations and paradoxically are not addressed in the commercial drug labels and available guidelines. There is therefore a clinical need for physicians to understand when and how eventually to optimize the biologic therapy.

DESIGN

This consensus using a Delphi methodology was promoted and supported by the Emirates Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology to close this gap.

DATA SOURCES AND METHODS

Following an extensive systematic review of over 60,000 studies, 81 studies with dose escalation and five addressing drug monitoring were selected and in addition five systematic reviews and three guidelines.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

after three rounds of voting 18 statements were selected with agreement ranging from of 80% to 100.

Real-world data for golimumab treatment in patients with ulcerative colitis in Japan: interim analysis in post-marketing surveillance

Background/Aims

Golimumab (GLM) is an anti-tumor necrosis factor-α drug approved for treating moderate-to-severe active ulcerative colitis (UC). A 52-week post-marketing surveillance (PMS) was initiated to evaluate its safety and effectiveness in patients with UC in Japan. We present an interim report of the ongoing PMS.

Methods

Patients received 200 mg of subcutaneous GLM at week 0, 100 mg at week 2, and 100 mg 4 weekly thereafter. The safety analysis set included 392 patients with UC, and the effectiveness analysis set 387 patients. Safety and effectiveness were assessed at week 6.

Results

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were reported in 8.2% (32/392) and serious ADRs in 4.6% (18/392). The most frequent ADRs were infection and infestation (3.3%), with herpes zoster being the most common. ADRs were significantly higher in patients with concomitant corticosteroid use (odds ratio [OR], 3.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.40–9.68). No significant difference in ADR incidence was observed between patients aged ≥65 and <65 years (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.35–3.47). Six-week effectiveness of GLM was confirmed by a decrease in the partial Mayo score (–2.3; 95% CI, –2.6 to –2.1) and C-reactive protein levels (–0.64; 95% CI, –0.92 to –0.36), including in the biologics-experienced population.

Conclusions

The safety and effectiveness of GLM at week 6 in a real-world setting were demonstrated in patients with UC in Japan. ADR patterns were consistent with previous reports with no new safety signals. Concomitant corticosteroid use may be associated with increased ADR incidence. The final results of the ongoing PMS are necessary for further evaluation.

Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes of Infliximab versus Adalimumab Treatment in Biologic-Naïve Patients with Ulcerative Colitis

Background/Aims

The tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors infliximab and adalimumab are standard treatments for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC). However, there has been no headto- head comparison of treatment efficacy and outcomes between the two agents. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and long-term outcomes of infliximab versus adalimumab treatment in biologic-naïve patients with UC.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the records of 113 biologic-naïve patients with UC who were treated between September 2012 and December 2017 (the infliximab group [n=83] and the adalimumab group [n=30]). We compared remission and response rates between these groups at 8 and 52 weeks. We used Kaplan-Meier curves to compare long-term outcomes, and logistic regression analysis and Cox-proportional hazard regression models to assess factors affecting outcomes.

Results

The median follow-up duration was 25.8 months. Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the rate of clinical remission or clinical response at 8 or 52 weeks. Multivariate analyses also showed that long-term outcomes were not significantly different (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 2.56; p=0.208). An elevated C-reactive protein level (greater than 5 mg/L) was a significant predictive factor for poor outcomes (adjusted HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.37 to 3.70; p=0.001). During the follow-up period, the rates of adverse event were not significantly different between the two groups (p=0.441).

Conclusions

In our study, infliximab and adalimumab had similar treatment efficacy and longterm outcomes in biologic-naïve patients with moderate to severe UC.

Efficacy And Safety Of Adalimumab Biosimilar (Exemptia) In Moderate-To-Severe Steroid-Refractory Ulcerative Colitis Patients: Real-Life Outcomes In Resource-Constrained Setting At 24-Weeks Follow-Up

Background

Adalimumab (ADA) is approved for the management of lcerative colitis (UC) not responding to conventional therapy. Use of biologics in resource-constrained settings is very challenging. Currently, real-life data on the safety and efficacy of ADA biosimilar (Exemptia) in steroid-refractory UC patients are limited.

Aim and objectives

To assess the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilar (Exemptia) to treat steroid-refractory difficult-to-treat UC patients in a resource-constrained Indian setting at 24-weeks follow-up.

Materials and methods

This was a retrospective single-center study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilar (Exemptia) in steroid-refractory UC patients. All the eligible patients who received induction dose of 160 mg at week 0, 80 mg at week 2 and 40 mg at week 4 and 40 mg every 4 weeks as maintenance regimen from 01 September 2017 to 31 Jan 2019 were retrospectively included in this single-center analysis. Those patients who had shown sub-optimal response at 12 weeks received 40 mg every 2 weeks as maintenance therapy. Outcomes in terms of clinical remission, clinical response and mucosal healing were evaluated in the short term at 12 weeks and 24 weeks.

Results

Twenty-five patients were retrospectively included between the time period of 1 September 2017 to 31 July 2018 with a mean age of 35 years. ADA biosimilar was effective in inducing clinical remission in 16% patients at 12 and 24 weeks, clinical response was seen in 48% at week 12 and 44% at week 24. The mean baseline total Mayo score (TMS) for all patients was 10.16 which decreased to a mean score of 5.72 at 12 weeks and 5.52 at 24 weeks with therapy with the decrease of the score being statistically significant both at 12 and 24 weeks (p<0.05). Two patients (8%) developed pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). ADA biosimilar frequency was accelerated to once in 2 weeks in 14 (56%) patients who did not show an optimal response at 12 weeks. Of these 14 patients, 5 were responders and 9 were non-responders at 12 weeks. At 24 weeks, 6 patients showed clinical response and 7 were non-responders, while one patient had developed TB.

Conclusion

ADA biosimilar (Exemptia) therapy is a safe and cost-effective alternative to original biologics in difficult-to-treat UC patients in resource-constrained Indian setting with comparable efficacy. Maintenance therapy at four weekly intervals can be considered in those patients who have shown an early clinical response at 12 weeks to minimize costs, but more studies are needed to confirm the same.

Dose escalation and switching of biologics in ulcerative colitis: a systematic literature review in real-world evidence

Background: Biologics used to treat ulcerative colitis (UC) may lose their effect over time, requiring patients to undergo dose escalation or treatment switching, and systematic literature reviews of real-world evidence on these topics are lacking. Aim: To summarize the occurrence and outcomes of dose escalation and treatment switching in UC patients in real-world evidence. Methods: Studies were searched through MEDLINE, MEDLINE IN PROCESS, Embase and Cochrane (2006-2017) as well as proceedings from three major scientific meetings. Results: In total, 41 studies were included in the review among which 35 covered dose escalation and 12 covered treatment switching of biologics. Tumor necrosis factor antagonist (anti-TNF) escalation for all patients included at induction ranged from 5% (6 months) to 50% (median 0.67 years) and 15.2% to 70.8% (8 weeks) for anti-TNF induction responders. Mean/median time to dose escalation on anti-TNF ranged from 1.84 to 11 months. The most common switching pattern, infliximab → adalimumab, occurred in 3.8% (median 5.6 years) to 25.5% (mean 3.3 years) of patients. Conclusions: Dose escalation and treatment switching of biologics may be considered as indicators of suboptimal therapy suggesting a lack of long-term remission and response under current therapies.

Efficacy of Infliximab in Crohn's Disease Patients with Prior Primary-Nonresponse to Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonists

BACKGROUND

Tumor necrosis factor antagonists (TNFs) are effective for moderate-severe Crohn's disease (CD). Approximately one-third of patients have primary-nonresponse to TNFs, which is reported to predict worse response to subsequent TNF therapy. However, this is based on treatment with subcutaneously (SC) administered, fixed-dose TNFs after failure of intravenously (IV) administered, weight-based TNFs. No study has specifically assessed the clinical and endoscopic effectiveness of IV TNFs following primary-nonresponse to SC TNFs. We hypothesize that IV, weight-based TNF dosing offers advantages over SC, fixed-dose TNFs and may be effective despite primary-nonresponse to previous SC fixed-dose TNFs.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study identified patients with moderate-severe CD with primary-nonresponse to one or more SC TNFs who subsequently received the IV TNF, infliximab for ≥ 12 weeks. We described baseline characteristics, and clinical, endoscopic and biochemical response to therapy.

RESULTS

Key characteristics of 17 patients are described in Table 1. After ≥ 12 weeks of infliximab, 11 of 15 (73.3%) patients with clinical data reported clinical response and remission. Of 11 patients with endoscopic data, restaging colonoscopy revealed mucosal improvement in seven (63.6%) patients. Of these, five (45.5%) had endoscopic remission and three (27.3%) had mucosal healing. Table 1 Baseline characteristics of CD patients with primary-nonresponse to subcutaneous (SC) tumor necrosis antagonists (TNF), subsequently treated with intravenous (IV) TNF therapy Characteristics N 17 Mean age, years (range) 37.5 (18-67) Mean BMI, kg/m² (range) 26.6 (17.8-40.6) Mean albumin prior to infliximab, g/dL (range) RR: 3.5-5.2 g/dL 3.57 (2.5-4.2) Female sex [n (%)] 7 (41.2) Tobacco use [n (%)]  Never 15 (88.2)  Former 1 (5.88)  Current 1 (5.88) Age at diagnosis [n (%)]  Less than 17 2 (11.8)  17-40 11 (64.7)  Over 40 4 (23.5) Mean disease duration, yrs (range) 7.76 (1-24) Disease extent [n (%)]  Ileal 2 (11.8)  Colonic 5 (29.4)  Ileocolonic 10 (64.7) Disease behavior [n (%)]  Nonstenosing, nonpenetrating 10 (58.8)  Stenosing 3 (17.6)  Penetrating 2 (11.8)  Stenosing and penetrating 2 (11.8) History of gastrointestinal surgery [n (%)] 4 (23.5)  Ileocecal resection (n) 2  Hemicolectomy (n) 2 Prior therapy [n (%)]  IV corticosteroids 3 (17.6)  Oral corticosteroids 14 (82.4)  5-ASA 12 (70.6)  Thiopurine 14 (82.4)  Methotrexate 10 (58.8) Prior biologic therapy  Adalimumab only 12 (70.6)  Certolizumab pegol only 2 (11.8)  Adalimumab and certolizumab pegol 2 (11.8)  Adalimumab, certolizumab pegol and golimumab 1 (5.88) Dose escalation of prior SC TNF [n (%)]  Adalimumab 9 (52.9)  Certolizumab pegol 0 (0.0)  Golimumab 0 (0.0) During infliximab, concomitant therapy [n (%)]  Immunomodulator 13 (76.5)  Corticosteroid 5 (29.4) CONCLUSIONS: Patients with moderate-severe CD with prior primary-nonresponse to SC, fixed-dose TNFs, subsequently treated with IV, weight-based TNF have high rates of clinical and endoscopic response and remission. Therefore, despite primary-nonresponse to SC TNFs, patients may benefit from IV TNF therapy and may not require a change to a different class of biologic therapy.

Risk factors and timing for colectomy in chronically active refractory ulcerative colitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

In patients with chronic refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) the precise timing for indication to colectomy is unclear.

AIMS

We performed a systematic review of the literature on the risk factors for colectomy in patients with chronic refractory UC in the biologic era.

METHODS

PubMed Central/Medline and Embase were systemically searched for records published between January 2000 and December 2017. Current evidence was summarized and filtered by expert opinion.

RESULTS

70 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Several factors were found to be associated with a higher or reduced risk for colectomy, including variables at baseline - such as progression from proctitis/left-sided to extensive colitis, extensive colitis at diagnosis, high baseline C Reactive Protein or erythrocyte sedimentation rate, male gender, and younger age at diagnosis - previous medical history, and factors arising during therapy with biologics, including the absence of clinical response after induction with infliximab or adalimumab, and the lack of mucosal healing during therapy with anti-TNFs.

CONCLUSIONS

Two main points may help physicians to decide when the surgical option may be considered in patients with chronic refractory UC: (1) a first risk stratification can be obtained by analyzing factors at baseline and medical history, including the previous exposure to anti-TNFs; (2) during therapy with biologics, the early assessment (after 12-16 weeks of treatment) of clinical and endoscopic response is a strong predictor of the subsequent risk of colectomy.

Individualized Dosing of Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibodies-a Changing Treatment Paradigm?

The introduction of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was an important medical milestone. MAbs have been demonstrated as safe and efficacious treatments of IBD. However, a large percentage of patients either fail to respond initially or lose response to therapy after a period of treatment. Although there are factors associated with poor treatment outcomes in IBD, one cause for treatment failure may be low mAb exposure. Consequently, gastroenterologists have begun using therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to guide dose adjustment. However, while beneficial, TDM does not provide sufficient information to effectively adjust doses. The pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of mAbs are complex, with numerous factors impacting on mAb PK and PD. The concept of dashboard-guided dosing based on Bayesian PK models allows physicians to combine TDM with factors influencing mAb PK to individualize therapy more effectively. One issue with TDM has been the slow turnaround of assay results, either necessitating an additional clinic visit for a sample or reacting to TDM results at a subsequent, rather than the current, dose. New point-of-care (POC) assays for mAbs are being developed that would potentially allow physicians to determine drug concentration quickly. However, work remains to understand how to determine what target exposure is needed for an individual patient, and whether the combination of POC assays and dashboards presents a safe approach with substantial outcome benefit over the current standard of care.

Efficacy and Safety of Adalimumab in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis: A Real-life Experience from the SIGENP-IBD Registry

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of adalimumab (ADA) in children with ulcerative colitis (UC) previously treated with infliximab (IFX).

METHODS

Retrospective study including children with UC from a national registry who received ADA therapy. The primary endpoint was the rate of corticosteroid-free remission at week 52. Secondary outcomes were the rate of sustained clinical remission, primary nonresponse, and loss of response at weeks 12, 30, and 52 and rate of mucosal healing and side effects at week 52.

RESULTS

Thirty-two children received ADA (median age 10 ± 4 years). Median disease duration before ADA therapy was 27 months. All patients received previous IFX (43% intolerant, 50% nonresponders [37.5% primary, 42.5% secondary nonresponders], 6.7% positive anti-IFX antibodies). Fifty-two weeks after ADA initiation, 13 patients (41%) were in corticosteroid-free remission. Mucosal healing occurred in 9 patients (28%) at 52 weeks. The cumulative probability of a clinical relapse-free course was 69%, 59%, and 53% at 12, 30, and 52 weeks, respectively. Ten patients (31%) had a primary failure and 5 (15%) a loss of response to ADA. No significant differences in efficacy were reported between not-responders and intolerant to IFX (P = 1.0). Overall, 19 patient (59%) maintained ADA during 52-week follow-up. Seven patients (22%) experienced an adverse event, no serious side effects were observed and none resulted in ADA discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our data, ADA seems to be effective in children with UC, allowing to recover a significant percentage of patients intolerant or not-responding to IFX. The safety profile was good.

ADALIMUMAB FOR ULCERATIVE COLITIS: RESULTS OF A BRAZILIAN MULTICENTER OBSERVATIONAL STUDY

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab is a monoclonal antibody, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) inhibitor that has efficacy for inducing and maintaining remission in moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. Real world studies with adalimumab in Latin American ulcerative colitis patients are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical remission rates in induction and maintenance with adalimumab therapy in ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

Observational, multicenter and retrospective study on a case series of patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis under adalimumab therapy. The variables analyzed were: demographic data, previous infliximab status, concomitant drugs, the Montreal Classification, disease activity (Mayo score) at weeks 0, 8, 26 and 52, or until the last follow-up. Clinical remission was defined as a partial Mayo score ≤2 and Last observation carried forward (LOCF) and Non responder imputation (NRI) analysis were used.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were included in the study. With LOCF analysis, remission rates at weeks 8, 26 e 52 were of 41.7%, 47.2% and 47.2%, respectively. With NRI analysis, remission rates at weeks 8, 26 and 52 were of 41.7%, 41.7% and 27.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab was effective in the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. Clinical remission was observed in approximately 40% of the patients at weeks 8 and 26, and in almost a quarter of the patients after 1 year of follow up.

Effectiveness of adalimumab for the treatment of ulcerative colitis in clinical practice: comparison between anti-tumour necrosis factor-naïve and non-naïve patients

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative colitis (UC) treatment is focused to achieve mucosal healing, avoiding disease progression. The study aimed to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of adalimumab (ADA) in UC and to identify predictors of remission to ADA.

METHODS

This cohort study used data from the ENEIDA registry. Clinical response, clinical remission, endoscopic remission, adverse events (AE), colectomy, and hospitalisations were evaluated; baseline characteristics and biological parameters were compared to determine predictors of response.

RESULTS

We included 263 patients (87 naïve and 176 previously exposed to anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha, TNF). After 12 weeks, clinical response, clinical remission, and endoscopic remission rates were 51, 26, and 14 %, respectively. The naïve group demonstrated better response to treatment than the anti-TNF-exposed group at short-term. Clinical and endoscopic remission within 1 year of treatment was better in the naïve group (65 vs. 49 and 50 vs. 35 %, respectively). The rates of AE, dose-escalation, hospitalisations, and colectomy during the first year were higher in anti-TNF-exposed patients (40, 43, and 27 % vs. 26, 21, and 11 %, respectively). Patients with primary failure and intolerance to the first anti-TNF and severe disease were associated with worse clinical response. Primary non-response to prior anti-TNF treatment and severe disease were predictive of poorer clinical remission. Low levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and faecal calprotectin (FC) at baseline were predictors of clinical remission.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical practice, ADA was effective in UC, especially in anti-TNF naïve patients. FC and CRP could be predictors of treatment effectiveness.

Outcomes After Primary Infliximab Treatment Failure in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Primary infliximab treatment failure is common in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and represents a challenge to clinicians. Treatment options are limited. This study assessed the prognosis, defined as surgery-free survival, in patients with primary infliximab treatment failure as compared to patients without primary failure (initial responders). Furthermore, this study assessed the specter of medical therapies used after primary infliximab treatment failure along with treatment outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective, observational, cohort study of patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with infliximab as first-line anti-tumor necrosis factor treatment at a tertiary center. Primary infliximab treatment failure was defined as no clinical improvement during infliximab induction therapy resulting in discontinuation of infliximab therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 560 patients (Crohn's disease n = 353 and ulcerative colitis n = 207) were treated with infliximab. Among these, 81 (15%) had primary infliximab treatment failure after a median of 3 infusions (weeks 0, 2, and 6) (interquartile range 2-4). The median surgery-free survival was 196 days from first infusion. One year after primary infliximab treatment failure, the majority of patients (n = 51, 63%) had inflammatory bowel disease-related surgery (Crohn's disease n = 19, 58%; ulcerative colitis n = 32, 67%; P = 0.49). There was a markedly increased risk of surgery in patients with primary infliximab treatment failure as compared to initial responders: odds ratio 6.3 (3.8-10.6), P < 0.0001. Among 30 patients handled by medical therapies, 16 (53%) still had active disease 1 year after primary infliximab treatment failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary infliximab treatment failure is associated with poor outcome including high risk of surgery or sustained active disease despite medical interventions.

Outcome of inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with TNF-α inhibitors: two-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Biological medications, particularly TNF-α inhibitors, are used increasingly for active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Even though they are superior to many older medications in achieving remission and mucosal healing, primary nonresponse and loss of response remain significant problems, and a remarkable proportion of patients still need surgery at some point.

OBJECTIVE

To study the outcome of IBD patients treated with TNF-α inhibitors, either infliximab or adalimumab, with a two-year follow-up.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patient data from the hospital electronic patient documents of IBD patients treated with TNF-α inhibitors were studied. The main targets of interest were treatment response, the remission rate and the number of patients operated, as well as reasons for the discontinuation of treatment. Remission was defined both endoscopically and by faecal calprotectin.

RESULTS

Altogether 100 patients were included. Only 29% of the patients achieved remission during the two-year follow-up. 26% of the Crohn's disease patients and 36% of the ulcerative colitis patients underwent surgery during the follow-up. A significant proportion of patients experienced side effects of the medication (21%) or discontinued the therapy for other reasons (altogether 63%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this single centre study of 100 IBD patients treated with TNF-α inhibitors, less than one-third of the patients achieved remission, and a significant proportion had side effects and needed surgery during the two-year follow-up. There is an obvious need for more effective therapies with less side effects for IBD patients.

Comparison of real-world outcomes of adalimumab and infliximab for patients with ulcerative colitis in the United States

OBJECTIVE

We compared the real-world effectiveness of initiating adalimumab and infliximab among patients in the US who were naïve to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted to evaluate the real-world effectiveness among adults with ulcerative colitis (UC) initiating adalimumab or infliximab. Charts of patients with UC were abstracted by treating physicians (randomly selected from a nationally representative panel) in April 2014. Patient eligibility criteria included: adalimumab or infliximab initiation on/after 1 October 2012; no prior anti-TNF therapy, history of Crohn's disease, or colectomy; and ≥6 months of follow-up. Information on clinical outcomes (partial Mayo score, remission rate, physician global assessment (PGA), stool frequency, and rectal bleeding) and treatment patterns (dose escalations, discontinuations, switches, and treatment augmentations) were retrospectively reported by treating physicians. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the time to clinical outcomes and treatment changes for each therapy.

RESULTS

Overall, 170 physicians participated, contributing data on 380 and 424 patients who initiated adalimumab and infliximab, respectively. Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between groups. Both adalimumab- and infliximab-treated patients showed substantial improvements from baseline to follow-up in effectiveness measures; results of these measures were similar between the adalimumab and infliximab cohorts. Time to remission (p = 0.5241), no rectal bleeding (p = 0.7648), normal stool count (p = 0.9941), and normal PGA (p = 0.7697) showed no significant differences between therapies in unadjusted and adjusted comparisons. Unadjusted and adjusted time to event analysis of discontinuation (p = 0.7151), dose escalation (p = 0.6310), treatment augmentation (p = 0.1209), and switching (p = 0.7975) showed no significant differences between the two cohorts.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, observational design.

CONCLUSIONS

Adalimumab and infliximab were similarly effective in the treatment of moderate-to-severe UC in the real-world clinical setting.