Yarur, Andres J

Abstract Background Pivotal trials have shown that ustekinumab is effective in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the population included in these trials do not represent the cohort of patients treated in the real world. In this study, we aimed to describe the effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in a clinical cohort of patients with UC. Methods We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study and included patients with active UC starting ustekinumab. Variables collected included demographics, clinical data, and disease activity (measured using partial Mayo score [PMS] and endoscopic Mayo score) at follow-up. The primary outcomes were cumulative rates of steroid-free clinical and biochemical remission (SFCBR), defined as a PMS <2 while off steroids and a normal C-reactive protein and/or fecal calprotectin. Results A total of 245 patients met inclusion criteria. The median time of follow-up was 33 (interquartile range, 17-53) weeks, and 214 (87.3%) had previous exposure to a biologic and/or tofacitinib. Rates of SFCBR, clinical remission, and endoscopic remission at 6 and 12 months were 12.0% (n = 16 of 139), 29.0% (n = 71 of 175), and 18.0% (n = 7 of 39), and 23.8% (n = 15 of 63), 54.3% (n = 57 of 105), and 31.0% (n = 9 of 29), respectively. Non-Hispanic White race, higher baseline PMS, and the use of concomitant corticosteroids were independently associated with failure to achieve SFCBR. Of the 73 that were dose escalated, 28.4% did not respond, 49.3% experienced a benefit, and 21.6% achieved remission. Conclusions In a population enriched with refractory UC, ustekinumab was well tolerated and induced remission in a significant number of patients. Larger studies with a longer follow-up are warranted.

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.

Abstract Background Combining biologics and small molecules could potentially overcome the plateau of drug efficacy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and effectiveness of dual biologic therapy (DBT), or small molecule combined with a biologic therapy (SBT) in IBD patients. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Clinical trials.gov until November 3, 2020, including studies with 2 or more IBD patients on DBT or SBT. Main outcome was safety assessed as pooled rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) for each combination. Effectiveness was reported as pooled rates of clinical, endoscopic, and/or radiographic response and remission. The certainty of evidence was rated according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results Of the 3688 publications identified, 13 studies (1 clinical trial, 12 observational studies) involving 266 patients on 7 different combinations were included. Median number of prior biologics ranged from 0 to 4, and median duration of follow-up was 16–68 weeks. Most common DBT and SBT were vedolizumab (VDZ) with anti-tumor necrosis factor (aTNF, n = 56) or tofacitinib (Tofa, n = 57), respectively. Pooled rates of SAE for these were 9.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5–21.4) for VDZ-aTNF and 1.0% (95% CI, 0.0–7.6) for Tofa-VDZ. The overall certainty of evidence was very low due to the observational nature of the studies, and very serious imprecision and inconsistency. Conclusions DBT or SBT appears to be generally safe and may be effective in IBD patients, but the evidence is very uncertain.

Abstract Background Clinical and molecular subcategories of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are needed to discover mechanisms of disease and predictors of response and disease relapse. We aimed to develop a study of a prospective adult research cohort with IBD (SPARC IBD) including longitudinal clinical and patient-reported data and biosamples. Methods We established a cohort of adults with IBD from a geographically diverse sample of patients across the United States with standardized data and biosample collection methods and sample processing techniques. At enrollment and at time of lower endoscopy, patient-reported outcomes (PRO), clinical data, and endoscopy scoring indices are captured. Patient-reported outcomes are collected quarterly. The quality of clinical data entry after the first year of the study was assessed. Results Through January 2020, 3029 patients were enrolled in SPARC, of whom 66.1% have Crohn’s disease (CD), 32.2% have ulcerative colitis (UC), and 1.7% have IBD-unclassified. Among patients enrolled, 990 underwent colonoscopy. Remission rates were 63.9% in the CD group and 80.6% in the UC group. In the quality study of the cohort, there was 96% agreement on year of diagnosis and 97% agreement on IBD subtype. There was 91% overall agreement describing UC extent as left-sided vs extensive or pancolitis. The overall agreement for CD behavior was 83%. Conclusion The SPARC IBD is an ongoing large prospective cohort with longitudinal standardized collection of clinical data, biosamples, and PROs representing a unique resource aimed to drive discovery of clinical and molecular markers that will meet the needs of precision medicine in IBD.

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.

Abstract Background Pivotal trials have shown that ustekinumab (UST) is effective in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the population included in these trials do not always represent the cohort of patients treated in the “real world”. In this study, we aimed to describe the effectiveness and safety of UST in a clinical cohort of patients with UC Methods We performed a multi-center cohort study and included patients with active UC starting UST. Variables collected included demographics, previous and current UC medications, disease activity (measured using partial and endoscopic Mayo score [PMS and EMS]) at 8 weeks, 6 months and end of follow-up. We also abstracted UST drug level and anti-UST antibodies (AUA), albumin and C-reactive protein levels. Primary outcomes were clinical response at week 8 defined as a reduction of 3 points in the PMS or PMS<2. Secondary outcomes were clinical remission defined as a PMS <2 and endoscopic remission defined as a MES ≤1, and the development of an adverse event (AE) attributed to UST. Results Ninety-five patients were included with a median age of 42 years (IQR:32-57) and 53 (56%) were female. Median follow-up was 5 months (IQR:2.2-7.4). Only 4 (4.3%) were naïve to biologics or tofacitinib and 62 (66%) had previous exposure to at least 2 other biologics. No variables were found to be associated with response at week 8 (Figure 2). Those patients who responded at week 8 had higher median albumin levels vs those who did not (median of 4.4 [IQR: 4.1-4.6] vs 4.1 g/dL [IQR:3.8-4.3]; p=0.02). There were no differences in baseline CRP levels (1mg/dL [IQR:0.6-2.8] vs 0.6 mg/dL [0.3-1.5]; p=0.06). Among the 33 patients who had follow-up endoscopic assessment, 7 (21.2%) had achieved endoscopic remission and 4 (12%) achieved histologic remission. Median UST level was 4.1 mcg/ml (IQR:2.5-5.1) and no patients had detectable AUA. Five patients underwent colectomy (5.3%). Only 6 patients (6.6%) presented with an AE (all minor that included, rash, headaches, arthralgias and infection). Conclusion In a population enriched with refractory UC, UST was well tolerated and induce response and remission in a significant number of patients. The rate of response was lower in obese patients and those with extensive colitis but was not associated with previous exposure to biologics and/or tofacitinib. Larger studies with a longer follow-up are warranted. Figure 1: Rates of clinical response and remission in patients with UC receiving ustekinumab Figure 2: Association between several baseline characteristics and response to ustekinumab in UC