Farraye, Francis A.

Abstract Background and Aims Active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) at conception is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. International guidelines address antenatal care, but contraception counseling and risk assessment are not addressed. Data on healthcare professionals’ guidance for women with IBD regarding contraception are scarce. We aimed to describe contraceptive use, preferences, knowledge, and barriers among women with IBD. Methods A 34-item questionnaire was administered to female IBD patients aged 18-45. Disease control was measured using PRO-2 and IBD-control questionnaire, and contraceptive preferences were assessed by the contraceptive features survey. Logistic regression explored associations between contraceptive use, attitudes, disease remission status, and other factors. Results Of 338 women surveyed, 243 (74%) used some form of contraception. Oral birth control pills (28%) and barrier methods (18%) were most used but 20% used long-acting methods. Women with active disease were more likely to use long-acting contraception (23%) compared to those in remission (17%). Contraceptive priorities were effectiveness (78%), ease of use (75%), and minimal side effects (68%). Only 25% women had discussed reproductive issues with their IBD clinician, though 85% were comfortable to do so. Preferred sources for reproductive counseling were IBD nurses (79%), general practitioners (75%), IBD doctors (68%), and gynecologists (49%). Conclusions A quarter of women with IBD were not using any contraception, and long-acting contraceptive use was low. Women prefer effective, easy-to-use contraceptives with minimal side effects but lack knowledge on effective contraception-related issues. Better education and proactive discussions between healthcare providers and patients could improve reproductive health in women with IBD.

Objective: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are commonly treated with immunosuppressive therapies that increase the risk for infections, including hepatitis B (HepB) virus. Adult patients with IBD have suboptimal seroprotection rates after vaccination with a 3-dose recombinant recombinant HepB vaccine. Heplisav-B is an adjuvanted 2-dose HepB series that is more immunogenic in the general adult population. Herein, we evaluated the immunogenicity of Heplisav-B in adult patients with IBD. Patients and Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study of adult patients with IBD who were not seroprotected to HepB virus and received a Heplisav-B series with postimmunization HepB surface antibody (anti-HBs) serologic testing. Postimmunization anti-HBs ≥10 IU/mL was considered seroprotection. The primary outcome was the rate of seroprotection. Secondary outcomes were rates of seroprotection in different age groups, those on immunosuppressive therapy, and previous HepB vaccine nonresponders using a univariate analysis. Results: Eighty-five patients met the inclusion criteria with the majority (72%) achieving seroprotection with a median anti-HBs level of 48.7 IU/mL and 28 patients (33%) having an anti-HBs level >100 IU/mL. Those on immunosuppressive therapy [49 (58%), 18 nonresponders, odds ratio: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.12-0.99] and primary nonresponders to a previous HepB series [22 (26%), 11 nonresponders, odds ratio: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.09-0.73] were less likely to achieve seroprotection. Seven patients who did not respond received a third dose of Heplisav-B, and 2 achieved seroprotection. Conclusions: Heplisav-B achieved higher rates of seroprotection than those seen with 3-dose recombinant HepB vaccines in patients with IBD and may be the preferred option.

Abstract Introduction There is limited real-world evidence comparing the effectiveness of ozanimod to vedolizumab as first-line advanced therapies in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using TriNetX, a multi-institutional US database in adults with UC who were initiated on ozanimod compared to vedolizumab between January 1, 2021 and 22 June, 2024. The primary outcome was to compare the risk of a composite outcome of corticosteroid use, colectomy, or change to another advanced therapy between the 2 cohorts within 12 months. 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed for demographics, comorbid conditions, disease extent, laboratory parameters, and previous corticosteroid use. The risk was expressed as an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% CIs. Results We identified 222 patients in the ozanimod cohort (mean age 41.2 ± 15.7, 46.3% male sex, 68% White, and 22.5% ulcerative proctitis), and 4145 patients in the vedolizumab cohort (mean age 47.4 ± 18.3, 45.2% male sex, 69.7% White, and 17.2% ulcerative proctitis). After PSM, there was no significant difference in the risk of the composite outcome (aOR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.63-1.36) and corticosteroid use (aOR 0.80, 95% CI, 0.53-1.18) between the 2 cohorts within 12 months. There was a higher risk of change in therapy in the ozanimod cohort (aOR 1.95, 95% CI, 1.09-3.49) compared to the vedolizumab cohort. Colectomy rates were low in both cohorts (<0.04%). Conclusions Our real-world study showed that ozanimod use is associated with similar corticosteroid use but higher odds of a change in therapy compared to vedolizumab when used as first-line therapy in patients with UC. Further prospective studies are needed to understand long-term outcomes.