Biedermann, Luc

Abstract Background Long-term use of corticosteroids (CS) is a concern for patients with Crohn’s disease (CD), as prolonged use is associated with increased mortality and adverse outcomes. Upadacitinib (UPA), an oral, selective, reversible Janus kinase inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe CD and demonstrated CS-sparing efficacy, with a consistent safety profile through maintenance week (wk) 52.1-4 Here, we evaluated the long-term efficacy of UPA in achieving CS-free clinical and endoscopic outcomes in patients enrolled in the ongoing U-ENDURE long-term extension (LTE) study. Methods Patients who completed the U-ENDURE 52-wk maintenance study were eligible for the subsequent LTE study wherein they continued their previously assigned treatment (once daily UPA 15 mg [UPA15] or UPA 30 mg [UPA30]). Efficacy was assessed from LTE wk 0-wk48, among patients with 2 year (yr) (100 wk) of total maintenance therapy, within the overall population and in patients with baseline CS use (induction wk 0). CS-free endpoints (without CS use for ≥90 days before evaluation), included clinical remission (per stool frequency/abdominal pain score [SF/APS] and CD Activity Index [CDAI]), endoscopic response, and endoscopic remission, were evaluated using both as-observed and nonresponder imputation (NRI) methods, with NRI analysis presented in text. Safety was not evaluated here but was reported previously.3 Results Among patients with 2 yr of total maintenance therapy, 35.7% (87/244) received CS at baseline, with 13.1% (32/244) receiving CS at any time during the LTE study regardless of baseline CS use. Among patients taking baseline CS and those who received CS at any time during the LTE study (n=20), the median (range) time of CS use was 127.5 (2-1589) days. CS-free clinical remission was achieved at LTE wk 0 and wk 48 per SF/APS (overall population: UPA15, 71.7%, 58.9%; UPA30, 81.8%, 57.7%; patients with baseline CS use: UPA15, 71.8%, 53.8%; UPA30, 79.2%, 54.2%, NRI, Fig.1A-B) and CDAI criteria (overall population: UPA15, 74.8%, 60.7%; UPA30, 83.9%, 65.0%; patients with baseline CS use: UPA15, 74.4%, 56.4%; UPA30, 81.3%, 58.3%, NRI, Fig.1C-D). At LTE wk 48, a high fraction of UPA-treated patients achieved CS-free endoscopic response (overall population: UPA15, 48.6%; UPA30, 55.5%; patients with baseline CS use: UPA15, 38.5%; UPA30, 60.4%, NRI) and CS-free endoscopic remission (overall population: UPA15, 33.6%; UPA30, 46.0%; patients with baseline CS use: UPA15, 28.2%; UPA30, 54.2%, NRI, Fig.2). Conclusion Patients with moderate-to-severe CD who received long-term UPA maintenance treatment sustained high rates of CS-free clinical and endoscopic outcomes, suggesting that UPA may serve as an effective long-term CS-sparing therapy. References 1.RINVOQ [package insert], extended-release tablets, FDA Prescribing Information. AbbVie Inc; 2022. Accessed 1 June 2022.2. 2.RINVOQ [package insert], prolonged-release tablets. EMA Summary of Product Characteristics. AbbVie; 2022. Accessed 1 June 2022. 3.Loftus EV and Panes J et al. N Engl J Med 2023;388:1966-1980. J 4.M C Dubinsky, et al. JCC, 17; (Supp_1); 2023: i104–i106.

Importance The clinical effects of risankizumab (a monoclonal antibody that selectively targets the p19 subunit of IL-23) for the treatment of ulcerative colitis are unknown. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of risankizumab when administered as an induction and a maintenance therapy for patients with ulcerative colitis. Design, Setting, and Participants Two phase 3 randomized clinical trials were conducted. The induction trial was conducted at 261 clinical centers (in 41 countries) and enrolled 977 patients from November 5, 2020, to August 4, 2022 (final follow-up on May 16, 2023). The maintenance trial was conducted at 238 clinical centers (in 37 countries) and enrolled 754 patients from August 28, 2018, to March 30, 2022 (final follow-up on April 11, 2023). Eligible patients had moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis; a history of intolerance or inadequate response to 1 or more conventional therapies, advanced therapies, or both types of therapies; and no prior exposure to risankizumab. Interventions For the induction trial, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive 1200 mg of risankizumab or placebo administered intravenously at weeks 0, 4, and 8. For the maintenance trial, patients with a clinical response (determined using the adapted Mayo score) after intravenous treatment with risankizumab were randomized 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous treatment with 180 mg or 360 mg of risankizumab or placebo (no longer receiving risankizumab) every 8 weeks for 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was clinical remission (stool frequency score ≤1 and not greater than baseline, rectal bleeding score of 0, and endoscopic subscore ≤1 without friability) at week 12 for the induction trial and at week 52 for the maintenance trial. Results Among the 975 patients analyzed in the induction trial (aged 42.1 [SD, 13.8] years; 586/973 [60.1%] were male; and 677 [69.6%] were White), the clinical remission rates at week 12 were 132/650 (20.3%) for 1200 mg of risankizumab and 20/325 (6.2%) for placebo (adjusted between-group difference, 14.0% [95% CI, 10.0%-18.0%], P < .001). Among the 548 patients analyzed in the maintenance trial (aged 40.9 [SD, 14.0] years; 313 [57.1%] were male; and 407 [74.3%] were White), the clinical remission rates at week 52 were 72/179 (40.2%) for 180 mg of risankizumab, 70/186 (37.6%) for 360 mg of risankizumab, and 46/183 (25.1%) for placebo (adjusted between-group difference for 180 mg of risankizumab vs placebo, 16.3% [97.5% CI, 6.1%-26.6%], P < .001; adjusted between-group difference for 360 mg of risankizumab vs placebo, 14.2% [97.5% CI, 4.0%-24.5%], P = .002). No new safety risks were detected in the treatment groups. Conclusion and Relevance Compared with placebo, risankizumab improved clinical remission rates in an induction trial and in a maintenance trial for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. Further study is needed to identify benefits beyond the 52-week follow-up. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03398148 and NCT03398135

Summary Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is the most common cause of esophageal food impaction (EFI). Approaches to management of EFI due to EoE have not been well characterized. We conducted a web-based survey to understand approaches to management of EFI due to EoE among endoscopists. Questions focused on management of patients from presentation to post-endoscopy follow-up. The survey was administered to a list of eligible candidates provided by societies of gastroenterology. A total of 308 endoscopists completed the questionnaire. The majority (83%) practiced in Europe and treated adults (78%). Most agreed patients should be advised to seek emergency care (66%) within 1 to 2 hours (41% agreement). There was agreement that medications to induce vomiting should be avoided (84%) and that blood tests or imaging studies were usually not required before endoscopy. By contrast, there was more variability in the type of sedation recommended and the need for endotracheal intubation, especially when comparing more experienced with less experienced EoE-endoscopists. Overall, fewer than half (43%) respondents recommended obtaining esophageal biopsies during the initial endoscopy. However, there were significant differences in the proportion who recommended biopsies based on level of EoE-experience (25, 52, 77%, P < 0.001; less vs. moderate vs. very experienced) and comparing pediatric and adult endoscopists (32, vs. 79%, P < 0.001; adult vs. pediatric). There exists heterogeneity among endoscopists in recommendations to manage EFI in patients with EoE. These findings support development of clinical guidelines and new studies to clarify the rationale for best practices. Key summary: Established knowledge—The optimal management of patients with esophageal food impaction due to eosinophilic esophagitis from presentation at the emergency department to postendoscopy care is unclear. New findings—Considerable recommendation variation exists in the management of EFI in patients with EoE. Our findings provide a rationale for the creation of consensus practice guidelines and further study into best practices.

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of obesity on disease activity and disease outcome in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.Patients and methodsThe impact of obesity on inflammatory bowel disease disease activity and outcome was retrospectively assessed in 3075 patients enrolled in the prospective nation‐wide Swiss inflammatory bowel disease cohort between July 2006 and September 2018. Baseline characteristics, disease activity and disease course in 325 obese inflammatory bowel disease patients (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2) were compared to 1725 normal weight inflammatory bowel disease individuals (body mass index 18.5‐24.9).ResultsAmong 3075 patients in the prospective Swiss inflammatory bowel disease cohort, 325 patients (10.6%) were obese, namely, 194 Crohn’s disease patients, 131 ulcerative colitis, and inflammatory bowel disease‐unclassified patients. Disease activity scores were elevated in obese Crohn’s disease (Crohn’s Disease Activity Index 33 vs 20, p = 0.001), but not ulcerative colitis patients. Obese Crohn’s disease, but not ulcerative colitis patients were less likely to be in remission based on a Crohn’s Disease Activity Index less than 100 and a calprotectin less than 100 ug/g. In a multivariate regression model, obesity was negatively associated with disease remission in Crohn’s disease (odds ratio 0.610, 95% confidence interval 0.402–0.926, p = 0.020), but not ulcerative colitis. Increased soft stool frequency was observed in both obese Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis patients. Adjusted Cox regression models revealed increased risk of complicated disease course in obese Crohn’s disease patients (hazard ratio 1.197, 95% confidence interval 1.046–1.370, p = 0.009). No association between obesity and disease progression, index treatment failure was seen neither in Crohn’s disease nor ulcerative colitis.ConclusionObesity is associated with decreased rates of disease remission and increased risk of complicated disease course in Crohn’s disease over a six‐year follow‐up period. No effects were seen on disease progression and index treatment failure neither in Crohn’s disease nor ulcerative colitis.

Summary As the awareness among gastroenterologists regarding endoscopic features suggesting eosinophilic esophagitis is increasing, individuals without symptoms of esophageal dysfunction are increasingly being found to have esophageal eosinophilia on biopsies performed during upper gastrointestinal endoscopies. However, the course of disease and the management of these asymptomatic individuals with esophageal eosinophilia remain elusive. In this review, we propose a definition of asymptomatic individuals with esophageal eosinophilia and discuss the prevalence, risk factors, and course of disease of this specific patient group. Furthermore, we have established a diagnostic and therapeutic pathway based on the most recent available data.

Abstract Background Dysphagia is the main symptom of adult eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We describe a novel syndrome, referred to as “food‐induced immediate response of the esophagus” (FIRE), observed in EoE patients. Methods Food‐induced immediate response of the esophagus is an unpleasant/painful sensation, unrelated to dysphagia, occurring immediately after esophageal contact with specific foods. Eosinophilic esophagitis experts were surveyed to estimate the prevalence of FIRE, characterize symptoms, and identify food triggers. We also surveyed a large group of EoE patients enrolled in the Swiss EoE Cohort Study for FIRE. Results Response rates were 82% (47/57) for the expert and 65% (239/368) for the patient survey, respectively. Almost, 90% of EoE experts had observed the FIRE symptom complex in their patients. Forty percent of EoE patients reported experiencing FIRE, more commonly in patients who developed EoE symptoms at a younger age (mean age of 46.4 years vs 54.1 years without FIRE; P < .01) and in those with high allergic comorbidity. Food‐induced immediate response of the esophagus symptoms included narrowing, burning, choking, and pressure in the esophagus appearing within 5 minutes of ingesting a provoking food that lasted less than 2 hours. Symptom severity rated a median 7 points on a visual analogue scale from 1 to 10. Fresh fruits/vegetables and wine were the most frequent triggers. Endoscopic food removal was significantly more commonly reported in male patients with vs without FIRE (44.3% vs 27.6%; P = .03). Conclusions Food‐induced immediate response of the esophagus is a novel syndrome frequently reported in EoE patients, characterized by an intense, unpleasant/painful sensation occurring rapidly and reproducibly in 40% of surveyed EoE patients after esophageal contact with specific foods.

SummaryBackgroundWell informed patients who are in cohesive partnership with physicians and who have realistic expectations towards therapy are more likely to be adherent, which results in better disease control.AimTo assess which therapy goals adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis consider relevant.MethodsFollowing refinement during three focus groups, a study brochure and questionnaire were sent to 148 patients. Patients ranked the importance (five levels) of short‐term (in the next 3 months) and long‐term (≥1 year) treatment effect on symptoms, quality of life (QoL), histologically‐detected inflammation and fibrosis, endoscopically‐detected inflammation, and stricture formation as well as achieving histological remission while asymptomatic. Patients’ characteristics associated with treatment goals were identified using logistic regression.ResultsOf 109 respondents (mean age 43 years), 85 were men. Over 90% chose symptoms and QoL improvement as important short‐ and long‐term therapy goals. A greater proportion attributed more importance to long‐term reduction in endoscopic (90% vs 73%, P < 0.001) and histological (81% vs 62%, P = 0.002) inflammation, and histologically‐detected fibrosis (79% vs 64%, P = 0.018) when compared to short‐term reduction in these features. Patients (88%) ranked achieving histological remission while being asymptomatic as important. Gender, therapy use, education level, QoL, symptom severity, and history of dilation were associated with patients’ choice of treatment goals.ConclusionsPatients attributed most importance to improvement in symptoms and QoL. Reduction in biological activity was judged less important, but more relevant in the long‐ compared to the short‐term.