Association Between Vedolizumab Levels, Anti-vedolizumab Antibodies, and Endoscopic Healing Index in a Large Population of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Vedolizumab serum trough concentrations with and without thiopurines in ulcerative colitis: The prospective VIEWS pharmacokinetics study

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory condition requiring continuous treatment and monitoring. There is limited pharmacokinetic data on vedolizumab during maintenance therapy and the effect of thiopurines on vedolizumab trough concentrations is unknown.

AIM

To investigate the exposure-response relationship of vedolizumab and the impact of thiopurine withdrawal in UC patients who have achieved sustained clinical and endoscopic remission during maintenance therapy.

METHODS

This is a post-hoc analysis of prospective randomized clinical trial (VIEWS) involving UC patients across 8 centers in Australia from 2018 to 2022. Patients in clinical and endoscopic remission were randomized to continue or withdraw thiopurine while receiving vedolizumab. We evaluated vedolizumab serum trough concentrations, presence of anti-vedolizumab antibodies, and clinical outcomes over 48 weeks to assess exposure-response association and impact of thiopurine withdrawal.

RESULTS

There were 62 UC participants with mean age of 43.4 years and 42% were females. All participants received vedolizumab as maintenance therapy with 67.7% withdrew thiopurine. Vedolizumab serum trough concentrations remained stable over 48 weeks regardless of thiopurine use, with no anti-vedolizumab antibodies detected. Patients with clinical remission had higher trough concentrations at week 48. In quartile analysis, a threshold of > 11.3 μg/mL was associated with sustained clinical remission, showing a sensitivity of 82.4%, specificity of 60.0%, and an area of receiver operating characteristic of 0.71 (95%CI: 0.49-0.93). Patients discontinuing thiopurine required higher vedolizumab concentrations for achieving remission.

CONCLUSION

A positive exposure-response relationship between vedolizumab trough concentrations and UC outcomes suggests that monitoring drug levels may be beneficial. While thiopurine did not influence vedolizumab levels, its withdrawal may necessitate higher vedolizumab trough concentrations to maintain remission.

Challenges in IBD Research 2024: Pragmatic Clinical Research

Pragmatic clinical research is 1 of the 5 focus areas of the Challenges in IBD Research 2024, a multidisciplinary effort by scientists, clinicians, patients, and funders to identify priorities for patient-centric research. This summary provides a comprehensive overview of current gaps in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) clinical research and actionable approaches to address them. This review is focused on identifying research that is needed to achieve the best outcomes for patients in clinical practice. Research gaps include understanding the needs of understudied patient groups and addressing barriers to care so all patients receive optimal care, validating and using biomarkers to enable early diagnosis and result in better outcomes for adults and children with IBD, and determining the optimal sequencing of treatments (medical, surgical, adjunct) in children and adults. Inclusive pragmatic research is needed to address these gaps and lead to improvements in patient care and outcomes for all populations of patients with IBD.

A Review of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Receiving Combination Therapy

Background: Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) impacts millions worldwide, presenting a major challenge to healthcare providers and patients. The advent of biologic therapies has enhanced the prognosis, but many patients exhibit primary or secondary non-response, underscoring the need for rigorous monitoring and therapy optimization to improve outcomes. Objective: This narrative review seeks to understand the role of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in optimizing treatment for IBD patients, especially for those on combination therapies of biologics and immunomodulators. Methods: A comprehensive synthesis of the current literature was undertaken, focusing on the application, benefits, limitations, and future directions of TDM in patients receiving a combination of biologic therapies and immunomodulators. Results: While biological therapies have improved outcomes, rigorous monitoring and therapy optimization are needed. TDM has emerged as a pivotal strategy, enhancing outcomes cost-effectively while reducing adverse events. While most data pertain to monotherapies, TDM's applicability also extends to combination therapy. Conclusion: TDM plays a crucial role in the treatment optimization of IBD patients on combination therapies. Further research is needed to fully understand its potential and limitations in the broader context of IBD management.