Siegel, Corey A

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the real-world effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab (UST) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: This study used a retrospective, multicenter, multinational consortium of UST-treated CD patients. Data included patient demographics, disease phenotype, disease activity, treatment history, and concomitant medications. Cumulative rates of clinical, steroid-free, endoscopic, and radiographic remissions were assessed using time-to-event analysis, and clinical predictors were assessed by using multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses. Serious infections and adverse events were defined as those requiring hospitalization or treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: A total of 1,113 patients (51.8% female, 90% prior antitumor necrosis factor exposure) were included, with a median follow-up of 386 days. Cumulative rates of clinical, steroid-free, endoscopic, and radiographic remissions at 12 months were 40%, 32%, 39%, and 30%, respectively. Biologic-naive patients achieved significantly higher rates of clinical and endoscopic remissions at 63% and 55%, respectively. On multivariable analyses, prior antitumor necrosis factor (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.49–0.99) and vedolizumab exposure (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.48–0.88) were independently associated with lower likelihoods of achieving endoscopic remission. In patients who experienced loss of remission, 77 of 102 (75%) underwent dose optimization, and 44 of 77 (57%) achieved clinical response. An additional 152 of 681 patients (22.3%) were dose-optimized because of primary nonresponse incomplete response to UST, of whom 40.1% (61 of 152) responded. Serious infections occurred in 3.4% of patients while other noninfectious adverse events (lymphoma [n = 1], arthralgia [n = 6], rash [n = 6], headache [n = 3], hepatitis [n = 3], hair loss [n = 3], neuropathy [n = 1], and vasculitis [n = 1]) occurred in 2.4% of patients. DISCUSSION: UST represents a safe and effective treatment option for CD, with 40% of patients from a highly refractory cohort achieving clinical remission by 12 months. The greatest treatment effect of UST was seen in biologic-naive patients, and dose escalation may recapture clinical response.

AbstractBackgroundThe safety of a third dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease is unknown.MethodsWe compared symptoms following a third SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose with symptoms after the second dose in IBD.ResultsThe study group included 594 patients (70% female, 58% BNT162b2). Overall, 41% reported symptoms after a third dose. Symptom frequency and severity were lower after the third dose relative to the second dose for every organ system, except for gastrointestinal symptoms which were marginally worse.ConclusionThe frequency and severity of symptoms after a third mRNA vaccine dose are generally similar or milder than after a second dose for most organ systems.

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.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biologics is a rapidly evolving field. We aimed to provide a consensus statement regarding the clinical utility of TDM for biologics in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). A modified Delphi method was applied to develop consensus statements. A comprehensive literature review was performed regarding TDM of biologic therapies in IBD, and 45 statements were subsequently formulated on the potential application of TDM in IBD. The statements, along with literature, were then presented to a panel of 10 gastroenterologists with expertise in IBD and TDM who anonymously rated them on a scale of 1–10 (1 = strongly disagree and 10 = strongly agree). An expert consensus development meeting was held virtually to review, discuss, refine, and reformulate statements that did not meet criteria for agreement or that were ambiguous. During the meeting, additional statements were proposed. Panelists then confidentially revoted, and statements rated ≥7 by 80% or more of the participants were accepted. During the virtual meeting, 8 statements were reworded, 7 new statements were proposed, and 19 statements were rerated. Consensus was finally reached in 48/49 statements. The panel agreed that reactive TDM should be used for all biologics for both primary nonresponse and secondary loss of response. It was recommended that treatment discontinuation should not be considered for infliximab or adalimumab until a drug concentration of at least 10–15 μg/mL was achieved. Consensus was also achieved regarding the utility of proactive TDM for anti–tumor necrosis factor therapy. It was recommended to perform proactive TDM after induction and at least once during maintenance. Consensus was achieved in most cases regarding the utility of TDM of biologics in IBD, specifically for reactive and proactive TDM of anti–tumor necrosis factors.

SummaryBackgroundHyperbaric oxygen has been reported to improve disease activity in hospitalised ulcerative colitis (UC) patients.AimTo evaluate dosing strategies with hyperbaric oxygen for hospitalised UC patients.MethodsWe enrolled UC patients hospitalised for acute flares (Mayo score 6‐12). Initially, all patients received 3 days of hyperbaric oxygen at 2.4 atmospheres (90 minutes with two air breaks) in addition to intravenous steroids. Day 3 responders (reduction of partial Mayo score ≥ 2 points and rectal bleeding score ≥ 1 point) were randomised to receive a total of 5 days vs 3 days of hyperbaric oxygen.ResultsWe treated 20 patients with hyperbaric oxygen (75% prior biologic failure). Day 3 response was achieved in 55% (n = 11/20), with significant reductions in stool frequency, rectal bleeding and CRP (P < 0.01). A more significant reduction in disease activity was observed with 5 days vs 3 days of hyperbaric oxygen (P = 0.03). Infliximab or colectomy was required in only three patients (15%) despite a predicted probability of 80% for second‐line therapy. Day 3 hyperbaric oxygen responders were less likely to require re‐hospitalisation or colectomy by 3 months vs non‐responders (0% vs 66%, P = 0.002). No treatment‐related adverse events were observed.ConclusionHyperbaric oxygen appears to be effective for optimising response to intravenous steroids in UC patients hospitalised for acute flares, with low rates of re‐hospitalisation or colectomy at 3 months. An optimal clinical response is achieved with 5 days of hyperbaric oxygen. Larger phase 3 trials are needed to confirm efficacy and obtain labelled approval.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment options for patients with moderate-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) are increasing. The appropriateness of their use in mild-moderate UC is less clear, as is the role of surgical intervention. Our aim was to define the appropriateness of therapeutic options in a range of clinical scenarios in mild-moderate UC METHODS: We applied the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to rate appropriateness of treatment choices in patients with mild-moderate UC; severe disease (likely to need hospitalization or surgery within 2 weeks) was excluded. A literature review was presented to the BRIDGe group, a panel of 13 IBD specialists, as well as 1 external IBD expert and 2 IBD surgical experts. 12 chapters were constructed including failed 5-ASA, steroid or thiopurine therapy, and primary/secondary non-response to biologics or tofacitinib. Scenarios were also divided by disease extent (proctitis vs more extensive) and activity (mild vs moderate) creating 260 scenarios in all. Panellists used a modified Delphi method to anonymously rate the appropriateness of a therapy on a 1-9 scale (1-3 not appropriate, 4-6 uncertain, 7-9 appropriate). Disagreement was assessed using a validated index (DI) and was defined as a DI > 1. The panellists then convened in person to discuss areas of disagreement, followed by a second round of rating. Scenarios rated a median of 7 or higher were deemed appropriate and those rated 3 or lower were deemed inappropriate. Scenarios rated 4-6 were considered uncertain, as were any with a DI > 1 RESULTS: Appropriateness was agreed in 131 and inappropriateness in 47 scenarios. Greatest disagreement was around the use of thiopurines, but no scenario had a DI > 1. There were 82 scenarios were rated uncertain. Biologics and tofacitinib were more likely to be rated appropriate for treatment resistance and greater disease activity; disease extent less likely to influence decision making. Surgery was felt to be appropriate in 8 scenarios, generally in more extensive and active disease that had failed to respond to medical therapy. Surgery was felt to be inappropriate in 16 scenarios and was uncertain in 24 CONCLUSION: Although there was little disagreement amongst an expert panel of IBD physicians and surgeons, there remained uncertainty about the use of medical and surgical therapy in nearly one third of situations in patients with mild-moderate UC. These results could be used to guide the design of clinical trials for these patient groups in order to guide best practice.

Abstract Background Vedolizumab effectiveness estimates immediately after Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD) are limited by use in refractory populations. We aimed to compare treatment patterns and outcomes of vedolizumab in 2 time frames after FDA approval. Methods We used 2 data sets for time trend analysis, an academic multicenter vedolizumab consortium (VICTORY) and the Truven MarketScan database, and 2 time periods, May 2014–June 2015 (Era 1) and July 2015–June 2017 (Era 2). VICTORY cumulative 12-month clinical remission, corticosteroid-free remission, and mucosal healing rates, and Truven 12-month hospitalization and surgery rates, were compared between Eras 1 and 2 using time-to-event analyses. Results A total of 3661 vedolizumab-treated patients were included (n = 1087 VICTORY, n = 2574 Truven). In both cohorts, CD and UC patients treated during Era 2 were more likely to be biologic naïve. Compared with Era 1, Era 2 CD patients in the VICTORY consortium had higher rates of clinical remission (31% vs 40%, P = 0.03) and mucosal healing (42% vs 58%, P < 0.01). These trends were not observed for UC. In the Truven database, UC patients treated during Era 2 had lower rates of inflammatory bowel disease–related hospitalization (22.4% vs 9.6%, P < 0.001) and surgery (17.2% vs 9.4%, P = 0.008), which was not observed for CD. Conclusion Since FDA approval, remission and mucosal healing rates have increased for vedolizumab-treated CD patients, and vedolizumab-treated UC patients have had fewer hospitalizations and surgeries. This is likely due to differences between patient populations treated immediately after drug approval and those treated later.