Yarur, Andrés

Abstract Background The SEQUENCE trial, in bio-exposed Crohn's disease (CD) patients, demonstrated non-inferiority for clinical remission at 24 weeks and superiority for endoscopic remission at week 48 for risankizumab (RZB) compared to ustekinumab (UST). However, this comparison has not been adequately explored in bio-naive CD patients. Our study aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness among bio-naive CD patients treated with RZB vs. UST in a real-world setting, using data from a US-based multicenter cohort. Methods This retrospective cohort study utilized data from the TriNetX US Collaborative Network, comprising sixty-eight tertiary institutions, to examine adult (≥18 years) bio-naive CD patients initiated on RZB or UST from June 17th, 2022 (FDA approval date) to October 31st, 2024. Patients with prior advanced therapy usage and those with approved rheumatologic disease indications for RZB/UST were excluded. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted to balance cohorts on demographics, baseline comorbidities, and indicators of CD severity, including CD phenotype, extraintestinal manifestations, concurrent corticosteroid use, hemoglobin, and body weight. Cox proportional hazards models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) in matched cohorts for one-year post-treatment composite outcomes (need for corticosteroids, hospitalizations, emergency room visits, surgeries) with a priori significance threshold of p < 0.05. Results The study sample included 1,630 bio-naive CD patients treated with RZB and 3,105 with UST. Among patients on UST, 658 (21%) were dosed every four to six weeks, after the first dose. Baseline characteristics of the PSM RZB and UST cohorts are shown in Table 1 with 1,568 patients in each cohort. After PSM (Figure 1), there were no significant differences in composite outcome (HR 1.077, p = 0.170), corticosteroid use (HR 1.099, p = 0.110), CD-related surgery (HR 1.231, p = 0.284), hospitalization (HR 0.947, p = 0.615) or ER visits (HR 1.041, p = 0.687). Additionally, no significant differences were observed in opioid use (HR 1.062, p = 0.366), switch to different advanced therapy (HR 1.097, p = 0.468) or elevated disease biomarkers, including CRP (>10mg/l, HR 1.186 p = 0.101) or fecal calprotectin (>150 µg/g; HR 1.109, p = 0.407) at 1-year follow-up. Conclusion In this real-world experience allowing for drug optimization, no difference was observed in bio naïve patients between UST and RZB as far as clinical remission and progression of CD.

Abstract Background Etrasimod is an oral, once daily (QD), selective sphingosine 1-phosphate1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). We assessed the benefit of etrasimod monotherapy and the impact of concomitant corticosteroids (CS) and/or 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) therapy. Methods In ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12, patients with moderately to severely active UC were randomized 2:1 to etrasimod 2 mg QD or placebo for 52 and 12 weeks, respectively. Oral CS or 5-ASA were allowed at baseline. Patients in the monotherapy subgroup received etrasimod or placebo without concomitant CS and/or 5-ASA at baseline. Predefined primary (clinical remission) and key secondary efficacy endpoints aligned with those from both trials and were assessed at Week 12 and Week 52. Safety was assessed up to Week 52. Results Clinical remission rates at Weeks 12 and 52 were significantly higher for etrasimod compared with placebo in patients receiving monotherapy (Week 12: 26.2% vs 4.8%; Week 52: 35.7% vs 4.0%). Differences vs placebo were statistically significant for all predefined endpoints at both time points in patients receiving monotherapy or etrasimod with concomitant 5-ASA only (all P < .05); numerical differences, due to small sample sizes, vs placebo were observed for all endpoints in the CS only and CS + 5-ASA subgroups. Safety was consistent with the overall population. Conclusions Etrasimod monotherapy showed consistent efficacy and safety vs placebo; no apparent benefit was observed with concomitant CS and/or 5-ASA in patients receiving etrasimod. Clinical trial registration NCT03945188; NCT03996369.

Abstract Background Pivotal trials have shown that ustekinumab is effective in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the population included in these trials do not represent the cohort of patients treated in the real world. In this study, we aimed to describe the effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in a clinical cohort of patients with UC. Methods We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study and included patients with active UC starting ustekinumab. Variables collected included demographics, clinical data, and disease activity (measured using partial Mayo score [PMS] and endoscopic Mayo score) at follow-up. The primary outcomes were cumulative rates of steroid-free clinical and biochemical remission (SFCBR), defined as a PMS <2 while off steroids and a normal C-reactive protein and/or fecal calprotectin. Results A total of 245 patients met inclusion criteria. The median time of follow-up was 33 (interquartile range, 17-53) weeks, and 214 (87.3%) had previous exposure to a biologic and/or tofacitinib. Rates of SFCBR, clinical remission, and endoscopic remission at 6 and 12 months were 12.0% (n = 16 of 139), 29.0% (n = 71 of 175), and 18.0% (n = 7 of 39), and 23.8% (n = 15 of 63), 54.3% (n = 57 of 105), and 31.0% (n = 9 of 29), respectively. Non-Hispanic White race, higher baseline PMS, and the use of concomitant corticosteroids were independently associated with failure to achieve SFCBR. Of the 73 that were dose escalated, 28.4% did not respond, 49.3% experienced a benefit, and 21.6% achieved remission. Conclusions In a population enriched with refractory UC, ustekinumab was well tolerated and induced remission in a significant number of patients. Larger studies with a longer follow-up are warranted.

INTRODUCTION: Limited guidance exists for the postdischarge care of patients with ulcerative colitis hospitalized for moderate-severe flares. METHODS: RAND methodology was used to establish appropriateness of inpatient and postdischarge steroid dosing, discharge criteria, follow-up, and postdischarge biologic or small molecule initiation. A literature review informed on the panel's voting, which occurred anonymously during 2 rounds before and after a moderated virtual session. RESULTS: Methylprednisolone 40–60 mg intravenous every 24 hours or hydrocortisone 100 mg intravenous 3 times daily is appropriate for inpatient management, with methylprednisolone 40 mg being appropriate if intolerant of higher doses. It is appropriate to discharge patients once rectal bleeding has resolved (Mayo subscore 0–1) and/or stool frequency has returned to baseline frequency and form (Mayo subscore 0–1). It is appropriate to discharge patients on 40 mg of prednisone after observing patients for 24 hours in hospital to ensure stability before discharge. For patients being discharged on steroids without in-hospital biologic or small molecule therapy initiation, it is appropriate to start antitumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy after discharge for anti-TNF-naive patients. For anti-TNF-exposed patients, it is appropriate to start vedolizumab or ustekinumab for all patients and tofacitinib for those with a low risk of adverse events. It is appropriate to follow up patients clinically within 2 weeks and with lower endoscopy within 4–6 months after discharge. DISCUSSION: We provide recommendations on the inpatient and postdischarge management of patients with ulcerative colitis hospitalized for moderate-severe flares.

Abstract Background Combining biologics and small molecules could potentially overcome the plateau of drug efficacy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and effectiveness of dual biologic therapy (DBT), or small molecule combined with a biologic therapy (SBT) in IBD patients. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Clinical trials.gov until November 3, 2020, including studies with 2 or more IBD patients on DBT or SBT. Main outcome was safety assessed as pooled rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) for each combination. Effectiveness was reported as pooled rates of clinical, endoscopic, and/or radiographic response and remission. The certainty of evidence was rated according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results Of the 3688 publications identified, 13 studies (1 clinical trial, 12 observational studies) involving 266 patients on 7 different combinations were included. Median number of prior biologics ranged from 0 to 4, and median duration of follow-up was 16–68 weeks. Most common DBT and SBT were vedolizumab (VDZ) with anti-tumor necrosis factor (aTNF, n = 56) or tofacitinib (Tofa, n = 57), respectively. Pooled rates of SAE for these were 9.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5–21.4) for VDZ-aTNF and 1.0% (95% CI, 0.0–7.6) for Tofa-VDZ. The overall certainty of evidence was very low due to the observational nature of the studies, and very serious imprecision and inconsistency. Conclusions DBT or SBT appears to be generally safe and may be effective in IBD patients, but the evidence is very uncertain.

Abstract Background Clinical and molecular subcategories of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are needed to discover mechanisms of disease and predictors of response and disease relapse. We aimed to develop a study of a prospective adult research cohort with IBD (SPARC IBD) including longitudinal clinical and patient-reported data and biosamples. Methods We established a cohort of adults with IBD from a geographically diverse sample of patients across the United States with standardized data and biosample collection methods and sample processing techniques. At enrollment and at time of lower endoscopy, patient-reported outcomes (PRO), clinical data, and endoscopy scoring indices are captured. Patient-reported outcomes are collected quarterly. The quality of clinical data entry after the first year of the study was assessed. Results Through January 2020, 3029 patients were enrolled in SPARC, of whom 66.1% have Crohn’s disease (CD), 32.2% have ulcerative colitis (UC), and 1.7% have IBD-unclassified. Among patients enrolled, 990 underwent colonoscopy. Remission rates were 63.9% in the CD group and 80.6% in the UC group. In the quality study of the cohort, there was 96% agreement on year of diagnosis and 97% agreement on IBD subtype. There was 91% overall agreement describing UC extent as left-sided vs extensive or pancolitis. The overall agreement for CD behavior was 83%. Conclusion The SPARC IBD is an ongoing large prospective cohort with longitudinal standardized collection of clinical data, biosamples, and PROs representing a unique resource aimed to drive discovery of clinical and molecular markers that will meet the needs of precision medicine in IBD.