Cruz, Peter De

Background: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is an immune-mediated, chronic cholestatic liver disease. Currently, liver transplantation is the only established life-saving treatment. Several studies have evaluated the effect of different biologic therapies on PSC with inconclusive findings. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of biologics in PSC and associated inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods: MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase were searched up to July 31, 2023, for studies reporting the effects of biologics in patients with PSC-IBD. Effects of biologic therapy on alkaline phosphatase, total bilirubin, ulcerative colitis response score, and adverse events were calculated and expressed as standardized difference of means (SMD), proportions, and 95% CI using a random-effects model. Results: Six studies, including 411 PSC-IBD patients who received biologics, were included. Biologic treatment was associated with no change in alkaline phosphatase (SMD: 0.1, 95% CI: −0.07 −0.17, p=0.43), but a small and statistically significant increase in total bilirubin (SMD: 0.2, 95% CI: 0.05–0.35, p<0.01). 31.2% (95% CI: 23.8–39.7) of patients with IBD achieved endoscopic response, and there was a significant improvement in ulcerative colitis response score (SMD: −0.6,95% CI: −0.88 to 0.36, p<0.01). Furthermore, 17.6% (95% CI: 13.0–23.5) of patients experienced adverse events severe enough to discontinue therapy, and 29.9% (95% CI: 25.2–34.8) had a loss of response to biologics. Conclusions: Treatment of patients with PSC-IBD with biologics (vedolizumab, infliximab, and adalimumab) was not associated with improvement of biochemical markers of cholestasis. Biologics are effective in treating the colitis associated with PSC. Vedolizumab was associated with worsening liver enzymes in contrast to other biologics, a finding that warrants further study.

Abstract Background Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), together known as inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), affect approximately seven million people globally. The continuous rise in IBD prevalence and the aging of populations will inevitably lead to an increasing use of health care resources. In parallel with these trends, continuing innovations in IBD therapeutics, diagnostics, and preventatives are creating more options for IBD patients seeking to reduce their disease burden. These trends pose an imminent burden on health care systems and require that we identify modifiable cost drivers in IBD care and develop strategies for delivering equitable and affordable care for all patients. Methods This Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology Commission, consisting of a diverse faculty of health care professionals with expertise in the field of IBD and health economists, was formed to deliver an extensive summary of the literature and discuss key topics on the costs and cost-effectiveness of treating IBD in the present, and how this is likely to look in the future. Furthermore, it offers suggestions for how to deliver affordable IBD care in the coming years. The report’s focus was on high-income countries in Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand, and Asia. Results The Commission drew together a wide range of expertise to discuss the current costs of IBD care, the drivers of increasing costs, as well as how to deliver affordable care for IBD in the future. The key conclusions are that (i) increases in health care costs must be evaluated against improved disease control and reductions in indirect costs, and (ii) that overarching systems for data interoperability, registries, and big data approaches must be established for continuous assessment of effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of care. International collaborations should be sought in order to evaluate novel models of care (such as value-based health care, including integrated health care and participatory health care models), as well as to improve the education and training of clinicians, patients, and policymakers. Measures to reduce the costs of IBD care are summarised in Table 1. Conclusion Increases in health care costs must be evaluated against improved disease control and reductions in indirect costs. Evaluations should be systematically aligned between countries and regions. Detailed analysis of the current epidemiology and the likely effects of changing IBD management on disease course and socioeconomic outcomes is essential; and will become even more imperative in the era of precision medicine, where complex biotechnologies will require expensive analyses, highly skilled personnel, and drug development for what may sometimes be relatively small patient groups.