Loftus, Edward V.

Abstract Background The expanding use of biologic and small-molecule therapies for ulcerative colitis (UC) has raised concerns regarding perioperative safety. We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare short-term postoperative complications associated with preoperative exposure to these agents in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Methods We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library through September 15, 2025, for cohort studies of adults with UC who were exposed to biologic or small-molecule therapy within 12 weeks prior to surgery. Interventions included biologic therapy, small-molecule therapy, and no biologic or small-molecule therapy (control). The primary outcome was overall postoperative complications at 30 and 90 days. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) was assessed as a key secondary outcome. Random-effects network meta-analysis was performed using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Sixteen retrospective cohort studies involving 3235 patients were included. At 30 days, ustekinumab and tofacitinib were associated with lower overall postoperative complication rates than control (RR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.09-0.96; and RR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.46-0.96, respectively). Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy was associated with higher complication rates compared with vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib at 30 days (RR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.00-1.63; RR: 3.67; 95% CI: 1.12-12.03; and RR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.14-2.27, respectively). At 90 days, anti-TNF therapy was associated with higher complication rates than control (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03-1.40), although the 90-day analysis was based on limited data. VTE rates were similar across treatments at both time points. Conclusion Preoperative ustekinumab and tofacitinib were associated with fewer 30-day postoperative complications than control or anti-TNF therapy, while vedolizumab was associated with fewer complications than anti-TNF therapy. At 90 days, anti-TNF therapy was associated with higher complication rates compared with control. These findings, particularly at 90 days based on limited data, should be interpreted with caution and require confirmation in well-designed prospective studies with rigorous adjustment for confounding factors.

INTRODUCTION: Normalized quality of life represents a crucial long-term treatment goal in Crohn's disease (CD). We evaluated the effect of risankizumab (RZB) vs ustekinumab (UST) on achieving clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported outcomes in the phase 3b head-to-head SEQUENCE study. METHODS: Adults with moderate-to-severe CD whose previous anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy failed were randomized 1:1 to recommended induction and maintenance doses of RZB or UST. The proportion of patients who achieved Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) response, IBDQ remission, and improvements in 36-item short-form health survey physical and mental component summary (physical component summary and mental component summary, respectively) scores was evaluated at weeks 24 and 48. The proportion of patients experiencing improvement in select symptoms of the IBDQ was reported. RESULTS: Analysis included 520 patients (RZB: N = 255; UST: N = 265). At week 24, greater proportions(all P ≤ .01) of RZB- vs UST-treated patients achieved IBDQ response (75.3% vs 64.2%), IBDQ remission (52.5% vs 30.9%), and improvements in 36-item short-form health survey physical component summary (65.9% vs 53.2%). At 24 weeks, lower proportions (all P ≤ .05) of RZB- vs UST-treated patients experienced fatigue (51.4% vs 69.1%), difficulty sleeping (37.7% vs 54.3%), depression (34.1% vs 42.6%), anxiety (34.1% vs 49.8%), and bowel urgency (27.1% vs 40.0%) all of the time to some of the time. Improvements were sustained through week 48. DISCUSSION: RZB was more effective than UST in achieving sustained clinically meaningful patient-reported outcome improvements including IBDQ response and remission, and in reducing frequency of select symptoms of the IBDQ through week 48 among patients with moderate-to-severe CD.

Abstract Background & Aims Central reading of endoscopy and histopathology is the current standard for disease activity assessment in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) clinical trials but is limited by interreader and intrareader variability, operational delays, and cost. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) offer the potential to improve accuracy, efficiency, and reproducibility. The International Organization for the Study of IBD (IOIBD) developed consensus statements on AI/ML use for endoscopic and histologic endpoint assessment in IBD trials. Methods As part of the IOIBD endpoints cluster initiative, a narrative, evidence-informed review with literature searches of Medline and Embase (January 2018-February 2025) identified studies applying AI/ML to endoscopy or histology in IBD. Relevant evidence informed 36 survey statements formulated by a steering committee. Seventy-two IOIBD members were invited to vote online; consensus required ≥80% agreement (score: 7-10 on a 10-point scale). Results Forty-five members completed the survey. Consensus was reached for 28 statements related to endoscopy, pathology, and trial design. Experts agreed that AI-based central reading could improve diagnostic accuracy, expedite processes, reduce costs, and enhance reproducibility. Combining human and AI assessments was favored over AI replacement. The key limitations identified included insufficient validation, generalizability concerns, and dependence on human-annotated training datasets. Conclusions This IOIBD consensus supports the integration of AI/ML into central reading for IBD clinical trials to improve objectivity, efficiency, and consistency, while maintaining human oversight. Further research should address validation, regulatory frameworks, and multimodal integration to enable broader adoption in both trials and clinical practice.

Abstract Background and Aims Upadacitinib (UPA)—an oral, reversible selective Janus kinase inhibitor—has a favorable benefit–risk profile for patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). We evaluated the benefit–risk of UPA in select subgroups with CD or UC. Methods Patients were randomized to UPA 45 mg (UPA45) once daily (QD) or placebo (PBO) induction for 12 (CD: U-EXCEED, U-EXCEL) or 8 weeks (UC: U-ACHIEVE, U-ACCOMPLISH). Clinical responders were re-randomized to QD UPA 15 mg (UPA15), UPA 30 mg (UPA30), or PBO for 52-week maintenance (CD: U-ENDURE; UC: U-ACHIEVE). This exploratory post hoc analysis assessed efficacy and safety outcomes (adverse events of special interest [AESIs]: serious infections, major adverse cardiovascular [CV] events, malignancies, and venous thromboembolic events) by CV risk, prior treatment failure, and age. Results This analysis included 1021 patients with CD and 1097 with UC during induction, and 673 with CD and 746 with UC during maintenance. Improved efficacy outcomes comparable to the overall study populations were observed with UPA versus PBO across subgroups. Patients receiving UPA30 generally showed numerically higher rates of improvements versus UPA15. AESI rates were generally comparable between UPA and PBO across subgroups except for numerically higher rates of herpes zoster and serious infections in CD with UPA. Conclusions UPA resulted in consistent benefit versus placebo across CV risk, prior treatment failure, and age subgroups. No treatment differences were seen in AESIs across subgroups except herpes zoster and serious infections, reinforcing the favorable benefit–risk profile for UPA in CD and UC seen in the overall study populations. Clinical trial numbers NCT02819635, NCT03653026, NCT03345836, NCT03345849, NCT03345823

Abstract Importance and Objective Upadacitinib, an oral, reversible Janus kinase inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease (CD). Limiting corticosteroid exposure is an important goal in treating CD. This posthoc analysis evaluated the corticosteroid-sparing effects of upadacitinib in patients with CD. Design and Setting This study included pooled data from two phase 3, multicenter, double-blind induction trials and one maintenance trial. Randomization was stratified by corticosteroid use at induction baseline, with a mandatory corticosteroid taper starting at induction week 4. Efficacy was evaluated by baseline corticosteroid use and by achieving corticosteroid-free outcomes through year 2 of maintenance therapy. Safety was also assessed. Results At baseline, 34.7% (234/674) and 35.7% (124/347) of upadacitinib 45 mg and placebo-treated patients were taking corticosteroids, respectively. At induction week 12 and maintenance week 52, higher rates of upadacitinib-treated patients were corticosteroid-free among all patients and among patients with baseline corticosteroid use compared with placebo; upadacitinib-treated patients achieved higher rates of corticosteroid-free outcomes, compared with placebo, including corticosteroid-free clinical remission (stool frequency/abdominal pain score [SF/APS]: 42.7% vs 16.1%; CD activity index [CDAI]: 41.2% vs 23.4%) and corticosteroid-free endoscopic response (37.0% vs 8.1%), with similar results observed among responders to upadacitinib induction therapy at maintenance week 52. Corticosteroid-free outcomes were sustained through year 2 of maintenance therapy. The safety profile was similar to the overall population, with no new safety risks identified. Conclusions and Relevance The results from pivotal studies demonstrated that upadacitinib effectively induced early and sustainable corticosteroid-free clinical remission with a manageable safety profile in patients with moderate-to-severe CD. Clinical trial identifiers U-EXCEL, U-EXCEED, and U-ENDURE ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03345849, NCT03345836, and NCT03345823.

Abstract Background and Aims Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is increasingly used to monitor treatment efficacy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) trials. However, standardized definitions for response, remission, and optimal assessment timing remain undefined. An international expert consensus meeting was held to establish IUS endpoints for clinical trials. Methods A panel of 35 international gastroenterologists and radiologists participated in a modified Delphi process, reviewing the literature and developing consensus statements. Agreement was defined as at least 75% consensus. Results Consensus was reached on 150 statements across four domains: general IBD (30 statements), luminal Crohn’s disease (CD) (43), perianal CD (51), and ulcerative colitis (UC) (26). For luminal CD and UC, ultrasound response was defined by: (1) a ≥25% reduction in bowel wall thickness (BWT) from baseline, or (2) multifactorial improvement, combining BWT reduction with ≥1 grade decrease in color Doppler signal (CDS) or another IUS parameter. Assessments were set at weeks 4-8 for the colon and week 12 for the terminal ileum. Ultrasound remission in luminal CD was defined as: (1) BWT normalization (≤3 mm) or (2) normalization of multiple parameters, including BWT, CDS, and all other IUS parameters. Similar remission criteria were proposed for UC, but the sigmoid BWT normal range (3-4 mm) remained uncertain. The bowel ultrasound score (BUSS) for CD and the Milan ultrasound criteria (MUC) for UC were supported as standardized scoring systems for trials. Conclusion This consensus provides standardized IUS definitions to enhance consistency in IBD trials, supporting the integration of IUS in future research.