Infliximab for the treatment of acute exacerbations of ulcerative colitis

Rectal stump management in inflammatory bowel disease: a cohort study, systematic review and proportional analysis of perioperative complications

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to analyse local single-institution data and perform a systematic review of the literature to calculate precise risk estimates of rectal stump-related morbidity and mortality following subtotal colectomy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including Crohn's colitis, ulcerative colitis and indeterminate colitis.

METHODS

Institutional information systems were interrogated to obtain local patient data. A systematic review of MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed to identify relevant articles. Fixed-effects or random-effects meta-analysis of proportions was performed to calculate pooled incidence estimates, including local data.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients were included locally and all had their rectal stump closed intra-abdominally. Four patients (8.3%) had a rectal stump perforation and 30-day mortality was 0. Fourteen papers were included in our review alongside local data, with a total of 1330 patients included. Pooled mortality was 1.7% (95% confidence interval, CI 1.0-2.8), pooled incidence of pelvic abscess/sepsis, stump leak and wound infection was 5.7% (95% CI 4.4-7.3), 4.9% (95% CI 3.7-6.6) and 11.3% (95% CI 7.8-16), respectively. Subcutaneous placement of the stump was associated with the highest incidence of stump leak (12.6%, 95% CI 8.3-18.6), and closure of the stump with both staples and suture was associated with the highest incidence of pelvic abscess (11.1%, 95% CI 5.8-20.3). Mortality and the incidence of wound infection were similar across stump closure techniques. There was evidence suggesting considerable heterogeneity and publication bias among studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides estimates of morbidity associated with the rectal stump after subtotal colectomy for IBD. A closed intra-abdominal stump seems to be associated with the highest rate of pelvic abscess/sepsis. Further work in form of an international collaborative project would allow individual patient data analysis and identification of risk factors for complications.

Cost-effectiveness of vedolizumab compared with conventional therapy for ulcerative colitis patients in the UK

Objective

To examine the clinical and economic impact of vedolizumab compared with conventional therapy in the treatment of moderately-to-severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) in the UK based on results of the GEMINI I trial.

Methods

A decision-analytic model in Microsoft Excel was used to compare vedolizumab with conventional therapy (aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, immunomodulators) for the treatment of patients with UC in the UK. We considered the following three populations: the overall intent-to-treat population from the GEMINI I trial, patients naïve to anti-TNF therapy, and those who had failed anti-TNF-therapy. Population characteristics and efficacy data were obtained from the GEMINI I trial. Other inputs (eg, unit costs, probability of surgery, mortality) were obtained from published literature. Time horizon was a lifetime horizon, with costs and outcomes discounted by 3.5% per year. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to measure the impact of parameter uncertainty.

Results

Vedolizumab had incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £4,095/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), £4,423/QALY, and £5,972/QALY compared with conventional therapy in the intent-to-treat, anti-TNF-naïve, and anti-TNF-failure populations, respectively. Patients on vedolizumab accrued more QALYs while incurring more costs than patients on conventional therapy. The sensitivity analyses showed that the results were most sensitive to induction response and transition probabilities for each treatment.

Conclusion

The results suggest that vedolizumab results in more QALYs and may be a cost-effective treatment option compared with conventional therapy for both anti-TNF-naïve and anti-TNF-failure patients with moderately-to-severely active UC.

Randomised controlled trial. Comparison Of iNfliximab and ciclosporin in STeroid Resistant Ulcerative Colitis: Trial design and protocol (CONSTRUCT)

INTRODUCTION

Many patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) present with acute exacerbations needing hospital admission. Treatment includes intravenous steroids but up to 40% of patients do not respond and require emergency colectomy. Mortality following emergency colectomy has fallen, but 10% of patients still die within 3 months of surgery. Infliximab and ciclosporin, both immunosuppressive drugs, offer hope for treating steroid-resistant UC as there is evidence of their short-term effectiveness. As there is little long-term evidence, this pragmatic randomised trial, known as Comparison Of iNfliximab and ciclosporin in STeroid Resistant Ulcerative Colitis: a Trial (CONSTRUCT), aims to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of infliximab and ciclosporin for steroid-resistant UC.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Between May 2010 and February 2013, 52 UK centres recruited 270 patients admitted with acute severe UC who failed to respond to intravenous steroids but did not need surgery. We allocated them at random in equal proportions between infliximab and ciclosporin.The primary clinical outcome measure is quality-adjusted survival, that is survival weighted by Crohn's and Colitis Questionnaire (CCQ) participants' scores, analysed by Cox regression. Secondary outcome measures include: the CCQ-an extension of the validated but community-focused UK Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) to include patients with acute severe colitis and stoma; two general quality of life measures-EQ-5D and SF-12; mortality; survival weighted by EQ-5D; emergency and planned colectomies; readmissions; incidence of adverse events including malignancies, serious infections and renal disorders; disease activity; National Health Service (NHS) costs and patient-borne costs. Interviews investigate participants' views on therapies for acute severe UC and healthcare professionals' views on the two drugs and their administration.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Research Ethics Committee for Wales has given ethical approval (Ref. 08/MRE09/42); each participating Trust or Health Board has given NHS Reseach & Development approval. We plan to present trial findings at international and national conferences and publish in high-impact peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN

22663589; EudraCT number: 2008-001968-36.

Cost-Effectiveness of Infliximab for the Treatment of Acute Exacerbations of Ulcerative Colitis in the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

Infliximab is registered for the treatment of moderate-to-severe active ulcerative colitis (UC) adult patients who have had an inadequate response, or are intolerant, or have medical contraindications to therapy including corticosteroids and 5-aminosalicylates or thiopurines (6-mercaptopurine [6-MP] or azathioprine [AZA]). The authors estimate the costs and effects and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of infliximab at the licensed dose of 5 mg/kg versus cyclosporine or surgery for the treatment of adult Dutch patients hospitalized with acute exacerbations of UC, refractory to intravenous steroids.

METHOD

An existing decision analytical model was updated to simulate disease progression of hospitalized UC patients in the Netherlands, refractory to intravenous corticosteroids, and to estimate the costs and benefits associated with infliximab compared to cyclosporine and surgery over a 1-year time horizon. Colectomy rates were derived from infliximab and cyclosporine randomized trials and synthesized using multiple treatment comparison methods. The utility estimates associated with health states of ulcerative colitis patients were obtained from the literature. Resource use and drug use frequencies as well as unit costs were obtained from Dutch sources. The primary effectiveness measure used in the analysis was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

RESULTS

For a typical UC patient with body weight of 70 kg, the costs of treatment with infliximab, cyclosporine, and surgery over a 1-year treatment period were €17,062, €14,784, €13,979, respectively. The associated numbers of QALYs were 0.80, 0.70, and 0.58 for infliximab, cyclosporine, and surgery respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for infliximab was €24,277 per QALY gained compared to cyclosporine, and €14,639 per QALY gained compared to surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Infliximab induction regimen appears to be a cost-effective treatment option in comparison to cyclosporine and surgery for hospitalized patients with acute exacerbations of UC, refractory to intravenous corticosteroids in the Netherlands.

Optimal use and cost-effectiveness of biologic therapies in inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), namely Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, are burdened by high medical costs which are mostly dependent on hospital inpatient treatment. New biologic therapies, which target specific cytokines in the inflammatory cascade leading to the intestinal lesions, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, have revolutionized the management of IBD by offering a therapeutic chance to patients in whom conventional therapies failed. However, the relatively high costs of biologic drugs, together with their potential toxicity due to infections and malignancies, have led to debate regarding their indiscriminate use in IBD patients. The purpose of this review is to deal with the optimal use and cost-effectiveness of the two main monoclonal anti-TNF-α agents currently used in the management of IBD patients, i.e. the chimeric human/murine antibody infliximab and the fully human antibody adalimumab.