Desai, Aakash

Abstract Background Semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, has shown sustained and clinically significant weight loss in the general population. There are limited data on outcomes of its use in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted between June 4, 2021, and December 11, 2023, using TriNetX, a U.S. multi-institutional database in patients with obesity who had IBD compared with patients without IBD. The primary aim was to assess the mean total body weight (TBW) change between 6 and 15 months from initiation of semaglutide compared with baseline between the 2 cohorts. One-to-one (1:1) propensity score matching was performed for demographics, comorbid conditions, smoking status, and mean body mass index. A 2-sample t test was performed to assess mean TBW change from baseline, with a P value <.05 considered to be statistically significant. We also compared the risk of IBD-specific outcomes with and without semaglutide use in patients with IBD. Results Out of 47 424 patients with IBD and obesity, 150 (0.3%) patients were prescribed semaglutide (mean age 47.4 ± 12.2 years; mean TBW 237 ± 54.8 pounds; mean body mass index 36.9 ± 6.5 kg/m2; 66% Crohn’s disease). There was no difference in mean TBW change after initiation of semaglutide in the IBD and non-IBD cohorts (−16 ± 13.4 pounds vs −18 ± 12.7 pounds; P = .24). There was no difference in mean TBW change between 6 and 12 months (−16 ± 13 pounds vs −15 ± 11.2 pounds; P = .24) and 12 and 15 months (−20 ± 13.2 pounds vs −21 ± 15.3 pounds; P = .49) between the 2 cohorts. There was no difference in the risk of oral or intravenous steroid use and any-cause hospitalization in the semaglutide group compared with the group without semaglutide use in patients with IBD. Conclusion Semaglutide use is effective in patients with IBD and obesity similar to patients without IBD, with >5% mean weight loss. There was no increased risk of IBD-specific adverse events with semaglutide use.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of developing respiratory infections. Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a common respiratory virus with adverse outcomes in older adults. This study aimed to determine whether patients with IBD are at increased risk of a serious infection due to RSV. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using the multi-institutional research network TriNetX to assess the risk of hospitalization in a cohort of patients with IBD compared with that in a non-IBD control cohort with RSV infection from January 1, 2007, to February 27, 2023. One-to-one (1:1) propensity score matching was performed for demographic variables and RSV risk factors between the 2 cohorts. Risk was expressed as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: There were 794 patients in the IBD-RSV cohort and 93,074 patients in the non–IBD-RSV cohort. The mean age of the IBD-RSV cohort was 55.6 ± 20 years, 59% were female, 80% were White, and 56.9% had Crohn's disease. The IBD-RSV cohort was at an increased risk of hospitalization (aOR 1.30, 95% CI 1.06–1.59). There was no difference in the risk (aOR 0.83, 95% CI 0.58–1.19) of a composite outcome of hospitalization-related complications between the 2 cohorts. Recent systemic corticosteroid use (<3 months) was associated with an increased risk of hospitalization (aOR 1.86, 95% CI 1.30–2.59) in the IBD-RSV cohort. DISCUSSION: We found that adult patients with IBD and RSV infection are at an increased risk of hospitalization and may benefit from the new RSV vaccine recommended for adults aged 60 years and older.

Abstract Background Recombinant zoster vaccine [RZV] reduces the short-term risk of herpes zoster [HZ] in patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. However, there is lack of data regarding the long-term effectiveness in this population. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted in adults ≥50 years old using TriNetX database between patients with IBD who received two doses of RZV [IBD-RZV cohort] and patients who did not receive RZV [IBD control cohort]. The primary outcome was risk of incident HZ. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed for demographic parameters, comorbid conditions, and IBD medications. Risk was expressed as adjusted odds ratio [aOR] with 95% confidence intervals [CI]. Results The IBD-RZV cohort [n = 5489; mean age 63.2 ± 9.1 years; 57.2% females] was identified with a mean follow-up of 900.9 days. IBD-RZV cohort had a lower risk of HZ [aOR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32-0.62] compared with IBD control cohort. The risk of HZ was lower in patients aged 50–65 years [aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.25-0.68] and patients &gt;65 years [aOR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.96]. There was a lower risk of HZ in patients with ulcerative colitis [aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.27-0.63] and Crohn’s disease [aOR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26-0.74] in the IBD-RZV cohort compared with IBD control cohort. Conclusion RZV is associated with a lower long-term risk of HZ in patients ≥50 years old with IBD. Given the widespread availability and safety of RZV, more effective vaccination strategies are needed to improve RZV use in this high-risk population.

LINKED CONTENTThis article is linked to Kochhar et al papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.17570 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.17697

Abstract Background Tixagevimab and cilgavimab (Evusheld) are 2 fully human monoclonal antibodies that received emergency-use authorization on December 21, 2021, for pre-exposure prophylaxis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients who are moderate–severely immunocompromised. The real-world efficacy of Evusheld in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is not known. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using TriNetX, a multi-institutional database in patients with IBD who received Evusheld compared to patients with IBD who did not receive Evusheld (12.1.2021–10.28.2022). The primary outcome was to assess the risk of COVID-19 within 6 months. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was performed for demographic parameters, comorbid conditions, IBD medications, and history of COVID-19. Risk was expressed as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Four hundred and eight patients (0.19%) with IBD received Evusheld (mean age 58.6 ± 15.4 years old, female 47.7%) during the study period. After PSM, there was no difference in the risk (aOR 0.88, 95% CI, 0.33–2.35) of COVID-19 in the Evusheld cohort compared to the IBD control cohort. No patients required ICU care or intubation/respiratory support or were deceased in the Evusheld cohort. Conclusions Our study did not show that Evusheld decreases the risk of COVID-19 in patients with IBD. Prevention of moderate–severe COVID-19 in these patients should focus on vaccination strategies and early COVID-19 therapies.

Abstract Background There is evidence that SARS-CoV2 infection can increase the risk of herpes zoster (HZ) in the general population. However, the risk in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is not known. Methods The TriNetX database was utilized to conduct a retrospective cohort study in patients with IBD after SARS-CoV2 infection and patients without a SARS-CoV2 infection (IBD control cohort). The primary outcome was to evaluate the risk of HZ between the 2 cohorts. One-to-one (1:1) propensity score matching was performed for demographic parameters, HZ risk factors and IBD medications between the 2 cohorts. Adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Results After propensity score matching, patients with IBD with a SARS-CoV2 infection were at an increased risk for HZ (aOR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.53-3.04) compared with IBD control cohort in the pre-COVID-19 vaccine era. There was no difference in the risk (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.44-1.75) of a composite outcome of HZ complications (hospitalization, post-herpetic neuralgia, and neurologic complications) between the 2 cohorts. The IBD SARS-CoV2 cohort was also at an increased risk for HZ (aOR, 3.04; 95% CI, 1.48-6.24) compared with IBD control cohort in the postvaccine era. However, the risk of HZ in the postvaccine era was decreased (aOR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27-0.76) compared with IBD SARS-CoV2 cohort in the prevaccine era. Conclusions Our study showed that SARS-CoV2 infection is associated with an increased risk of HZ in patients with IBD.

Introduction and Aim: A growing body of evidence suggests a negative impact of obesity on the disease activity of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The primary aim of the study was to evaluate disease outcomes of IBD in patients after bariatric surgery (BS). Methods: Patients with IBD and morbid obesity who underwent BS were compared with patients with IBD and morbid obesity without BS in a retrospective, propensity-score matched cohort study using TriNetX, a multi-institutional database. The primary aim was to assess the 2-year risk of a composite of disease-related complications, which included intravenous steroid use or IBD-related surgery. Risk was expressed as adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: In all, 482 patients (3.4%) with IBD and morbid obesity underwent BS (mean age 46.9±11.2 y old, mean BMI 42.1±7.72 kg/m2, Crohn’s disease 60%). After propensity-score matching, the BS cohort had a lower risk (aOR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17-0.56) of a composite of IBD-related complications compared with the control cohort. After propensity-score matching, the BS cohort with sleeve gastrectomy had a decreased risk (aOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31-0.66) of a composite of IBD-related complications. There was no difference in the risk (aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.45–1.31) of a composite of IBD-related complications between the BS cohort with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) compared with the control cohort. Conclusion: Sleeve gastrectomy but not Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is associated with improved disease-specific outcomes in patients with IBD and morbid obesity.

SummaryBackgroundThere is limited real‐world data on comparative effectiveness of different biologic or small molecule agents as second‐line therapies in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior exposure to a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using TriNetX, a multi‐institutional database to assess the efficacy of tofacitinib, vedolizumab and ustekinumab in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior exposure to a TNFi. Failure of medical therapy was defined as a composite outcome of intravenous steroids or colectomy within 2 years. One‐to‐one propensity score matching was performed for demographics, disease extent, mean haemoglobin, C‐reactive protein, albumin and calprotectin, prior IBD medications and steroid use between cohorts.ResultsAmong 2141 patients with UC and prior exposure to TNFi, 348 (16.2%), 716 (33.4%) and 1077 (50.3%) were switched to tofacitinib, ustekinumab and vedolizumab, respectively. After propensity‐score matching, there was no difference in the composite outcome (aOR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.55–1.07) but higher risk of colectomy (aOR: 2.69, 95% CI: 1.31–5.50) in the tofacitinib cohort than the vedolizumab cohort. There was no difference in the risk of composite outcome (aOR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.89–1.86) but higher risk of colectomy (aOR: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.24–5.58) in the tofacitinib cohort than the ustekinumab cohort. The vedolizumab cohort had a higher risk of composite outcome (aOR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.29–2.16) than the ustekinumab cohort.ConclusionUstekinumab might be the preferred second‐line therapy over tofacitinib and vedolizumab in patients with UC that were previously exposed to a TNFi.

Abstract Aim There are limited data on the impact of 2 vs 3 doses of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The primary aim of the study was to assess the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccine based on number of administered doses in patients with IBD. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using TriNetX, a multi-institutional database to compare patients with IBD who received 1, 2, or 3 doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 to unvaccinated IBD patients (1.1.2020-7.26.2022) to assess the risk of COVID-19 after 1:1 propensity score matching. We also evaluated the impact of vaccine on a composite of severe COVID-19 outcomes including hospitalization, intubation, intensive care unit care, acute kidney injury, or mortality. Results After propensity score matching, vaccinated patients with 2 (adjusted OR [aOR], 0.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-0.9) and 3 doses (aOR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) were found to have a lower risk of COVID-19 compared with unvaccinated patients. Vaccinated patients with IBD had a lower risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes (aOR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9) compared with unvaccinated patients. There was no difference in the risk of COVID-19 in IBD patients with 2 compared with 3 doses (aOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.7-1.3). However, IBD patients with 2 doses were at an increased risk for hospitalization due to COVID-19 (aOR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.02-3.11) compared with those that received 3 doses. Conclusion Vaccinated patients with IBD had a lower risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes compared with unvaccinated patients. A third dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared with 2 doses decreases the risk of hospitalization but not breakthrough infection in patients with IBD.