Gonzalez, Alejandro J

Abstract Background Immunosuppression is a recognized risk factor for severe and disseminated coccidioidomycosis; however, data describing outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving advanced therapy, including biologics and small molecules, remain limited. We aim to describe the prevalence, clinical presentation, treatment patterns, and outcomes of coccidioidomycosis in IBD patients receiving advanced therapy at an endemic tertiary care center. Methods We performed a retrospective observational study of adult patients with IBD at Mayo Clinic Arizona diagnosed with coccidioidomycosis between 2023 and 2026. Patients were included if IBD diagnosis preceded coccidioidomycosis diagnosis and advanced therapy had been active for at least 4 weeks before infection. Cases were classified as proven, probable, or possible based on microbiologic, clinical, radiographic, and serologic criteria. Clinical outcomes included antifungal treatment duration, hospitalization related to coccidioidomycosis or IBD, IBD treatment modification after diagnosis, re-emergence of coccidioidomycosis symptoms, and IBD-related surgery. Results A total of 48 patients met inclusion criteria. Among 1083 tested IBD patients receiving advanced therapy, coccidioidomycosis positivity prevalence was 4.4% when including all serologically positive patients and 1.9% when restricted to proven or probable cases. The median age at coccidioidomycosis diagnosis was 40 years (range 19-87 years), and 30 (62.5%) of 48 had Crohn’s disease. Proven or probable infection was identified in 21 (43.8%) of 48 patients, while 14 (29.2%) of 48 patients were classified as possible. Antifungal therapy was prescribed in 32 (66.7%) of 48 patients, including all proven cases, 15 (88.2%) of 17 probable cases, 9 (64.3%) of 14 possible cases, and 3 (25.0%) of 12 nondiagnostic cases. Among proven/probable/possible cases, the median antifungal treatment duration was 174 days (range 8-831 days). Advanced IBD therapy was continued in 3 (75.0%) of 4 proven cases, 9 (52.9%) of 17 probable cases, 12 (85.7%) of 14 possible cases, and all nondiagnostic cases. Hospitalization occurred in 6 (12.5%) of 48 of the cohort, all of which were proven/probable cases. Most patients remained on advanced therapy after diagnosis, although tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors were the most interrupted or discontinued agents. Conclusions In this endemic tertiary care cohort, management decisions varied according to diagnostic certainty. Patients with proven or probable coccidioidomycosis were more likely to receive antifungal therapy and undergo advanced IBD therapy modification, whereas most patients with possible or nondiagnostic serologic findings remained on advanced therapy without major IBD-related complications. Prolonged antifungal treatment was common, highlighting the complexity of managing coccidioidomycosis in immunosuppressed patients with IBD.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are immune-mediated disorders of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract that, despite involving different tissues, are increasingly recognized to coexist. Epidemiologic studies demonstrate a bidirectional association, with patients affected by one condition showing a higher-than-expected prevalence of the other, suggesting shared susceptibility rather than incidental overlap. Genetic and epigenetic data support partial convergence in immune regulatory pathways, while epithelial barrier dysfunction and antigen-driven immune activation emerge as common upstream features. Overlapping cytokine networks, including IL-4, IL-13, and IL-23 signaling, contribute to chronic inflammation in both diseases, although differences in tissue environment and immune dominance give rise to distinct inflammatory phenotypes and clinical behavior. Clinical outcomes in patients with dual diagnoses appear heterogeneous, with available data suggesting neither uniformly worsened nor clearly protective disease courses, underscoring the complexity of shared immune mechanisms operating within different anatomic contexts. Beyond inflammatory activity, coexistence of EoE and IBD poses important nutritional and quality-of-life challenges, as overlapping dietary restrictions and chronic symptoms increase the risk of malnutrition, micronutrient deficiencies, and psychosocial burden. Current therapies remain disease-specific, with strong evidence supporting proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical steroids, dietary therapy, and dupilumab in EoE, and biologics and small molecules targeting TNF-α, IL-12/23, IL-23, integrins, and JAK–STAT signaling in IBD, while evidence guiding treatment in patients with dual diagnosis remains limited. Together, current evidence supports a framework of shared immune machinery with tissue-specific expression that explains coexistence while preserving the distinct identities of EoE and IBD. By integrating emerging genetic, immunologic, and clinical evidence, this review aims to provide a framework for understanding and managing patients with coexisting EoE and IBD.

Background: Perianal fistulizing Crohn’s disease (CD) is associated with significant morbidity and remains difficult to treat. Although advanced medical therapies are widely used, much of the available evidence derives from heterogeneous fistula populations or luminal CD trials, with limited perianal-specific synthesis and inconsistent outcome definitions. We conducted a systematic review focusing exclusively on perianal-specific clinical, radiologic, and composite outcomes in adults with perianal fistula (PAF) CD. Methods: We performed a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA 2020. Electronic databases were searched from inception through November 2025. We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies enrolling adults with CD reporting outcomes specific to PAF. Interventions included biologics and small-molecule therapies, compared with placebo or other therapies. Due to substantial heterogeneity in outcome definitions and study designs, a meta-analysis was not performed. Risk of bias was assessed using Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) for randomized trials and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Results: Seven studies including >1200 participants with PAF-CD met inclusion criteria. Follow-up ranged from 24 weeks to 5 years. Across studies, outcome definitions and assessment modalities varied. Upadacitinib demonstrated significantly higher clinical fistula closure compared with placebo across multiple dose regimens at 52 weeks. In observational comparisons, ustekinumab and vedolizumab were associated with higher clinical closure rates than anti-TNF therapies. However, infliximab demonstrated higher closure rates than adalimumab as a first-line treatment. The definition for radiologic remission was less consistent across studies and often did not parallel clinical outcomes. Composite clinical–radiologic remission and response were reported in a limited number of studies, with filgotinib showing higher composite outcomes in comparison to placebo in a phase 2 trial. Surgical interventions, relapse outcomes, biomarkers [C-reactive protein (CRP)/fecal calprotectin (FCP)], and patient-reported outcomes were variably reported and not consistently significant across comparisons. Conclusions: Evidence for advanced therapies in PAF CD remains limited by heterogeneity in endpoint definitions, subjectivity in clinical observation, inconsistent radiologic reporting, and reliance on subgroup or observational comparisons. While anti-TNF therapy remains the most established option in guidelines, emerging data suggest significant benefits with ustekinumab, vedolizumab, and JAK inhibitors in selected patients. There is a need for PAF-specific, adequately powered randomized trials using standardized composite clinical and radiologic endpoints.

Acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) is a medical emergency affecting up to 25% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), with colectomy required in approximately 25–30% of cases during the initial admission. Intravenous corticosteroids remain the first-line therapy, though one-third of patients do not respond, necessitating rescue with infliximab or calcineurin inhibitors, which are both supported by randomized trials and guideline recommendations. Comparative studies and meta-analyses have shown similar efficacy between these agents, while sequential use is associated with higher adverse event rates and should be restricted to specialized centers. Recent data have refined infliximab use, with the PREDICT-UC trial showing no superiority of intensified dosing over standard regimens. Emerging therapies are under investigation: vedolizumab has been used as maintenance following calcineurin induction; ustekinumab has shown benefits in retrospective UC cohorts, particularly after cyclosporine; and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors represent the most recent addition. The randomized TACOS trial and the prospective TRIUMPH study demonstrated an improved short-term response with tofacitinib in steroid-refractory ASUC, and real-world reports suggest promising outcomes with upadacitinib. While infliximab and cyclosporine remain as standard rescue therapies, ongoing trials with novel agents are likely to broaden treatment options. This review summarizes the clinical features, initial management, and the role of advanced therapies in ASUC.