No Benefit of Concomitant 5-Aminosalicylates in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis Escalated to Biologic Therapy: Pooled Analysis of Individual Participant Data From Clinical Trials

Sequential rescue therapy with JAK inhibitors in corticosteroid and infliximab-refractory acute severe ulcerative colitis: a case series

Acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) is a life-threatening medical emergency affecting over 20% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Up to 40% of patients are refractory to intravenous corticosteroids (IVCS) and require rescue medical therapy or immediate colectomy. The potent Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, upadacitinib and tofacitinib, have proven efficacy in a randomised control trial setting for moderate-to-severe UC, but not ASUC. We describe a case series of sequential rescue therapy with JAK inhibitors following the failure of dose-intensified infliximab in corticosteroid-refractory ASUC. Six adult (>16 years old) patients received sequential rescue therapy with a JAK inhibitor (upadacitinib n = 5, tofacitinib n = 1) following failure of IVCS and dose-intensified infliximab at the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital (QLD, Australia) between October 2023 and April 2024. All patients met the Truelove and Witts criteria for ASUC on admission. Data were captured during admission and at 90-days post-discharge. Co-primary outcomes were 90-day colectomy-free survival and inpatient clinical response (<4 non-bloody stools per day) 72 h after JAK-inhibitor initiation. Secondary outcomes included 90-day clinical (PRO-2 score < 1) and biochemical (faecal calprotectin (FCP) < 150 µg/g and C-reactive protein (CRP) < 5 mg/L) corticosteroid-free remission and adverse events. Median CRP on admission was 100 mg/L (interquartile range (IQR) 58-105), median FCP 3400 µg/g (IQR 910-4950) and median Mayo Endoscopic Score 3. Four out of six patients had a clinical response within 72 h of sequential JAK-inhibitor rescue therapy. Two patients underwent emergent inpatient colectomy for refractory disease - one of whom developed post-operative sepsis. Among the four JAK-responders at 90 days, all achieved corticosteroid-free clinical remission and three achieved biochemical remission. No other adverse events were recorded. There is a promising role for JAK inhibitors as sequential rescue therapy following the failure of dose-intensified infliximab in select patients with corticosteroid-refractory ASUC.

A practical approach to positioning therapies in ulcerative colitis

The therapeutic landscape of ulcerative colitis (UC) has undergone significant change over the last 2 decades. While there are multiple new therapies for the management of UC, long-term remission rates remain low, and this may be in part due to the difficulty of navigating a successful treatment strategy. In this review, we propose a rational framework for treatment selection, sequencing, and optimization in patients with UC. We outline treatment goals and targets for UC, followed by a discussion of the challenges in treatment selection and considerations to help guide a sequencing strategy. These include an assessment of a therapy's efficacy and safety, the convenience in the delivery of the therapy, ease of access, and patient-related factors. We then provide an overview of the currently approved therapies for UC, with an in-depth analysis of their advantages and disadvantages. Finally, we conclude with future directions in the management of UC, which include the use of naturopathic therapies, faecal microbiota therapy, the use of precision medicine, and other strategies such as combination therapy.

Research progress in the combined treatment of ulcerative colitis

In recent years, more and more drugs have been used in the treatment of ulcerative colitis, but the efficacy of monotherapy is limited, especially for patients with refractory moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC). Combination therapy is mainly used for patients with a poor response or partial efficacy of monotherapy and has become a new direction for exploring the treatment strategy of ulcerative colitis. Therefore, the authors review the combined treatment options of ulcerative colitis in the context of the existing literature and discuss considerations for the practical application of combination therapy, hoping to provide new ideas for clinicians in the treatment of ulcerative colitis.

Understanding the therapeutic toolkit for inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), encompassing ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, is a group of chronic, immune-mediated disorders of the gastrointestinal tract that present substantial clinical challenges owing to their complex pathophysiology and tendency to relapse. A treat-to-target approach is recommended, involving iterative treatment adjustments to achieve clinical response, reduce inflammatory markers and achieve long-term goals such as mucosal healing. Lifelong medication is often necessary to manage the disease, maintain remission and prevent complications. The therapeutic landscape for IBD has evolved substantially; however, a ceiling on therapeutic efficacy remains and surgery is sometimes required (owing to uncontrolled disease activity or complications). Effective IBD management involves comprehensive care, including medication adherence and a collaborative clinician-patient relationship. This Review discusses current therapeutic options for IBD, detailing mechanisms of action, efficacy, safety profiles and guidelines for use of each drug class. We also explore emerging therapies and the role of surgery. Additionally, the importance of a multidisciplinary team and personalized care in managing IBD is emphasized, advocating for patient empowerment and involvement in treatment decisions. By synthesizing current knowledge and emerging trends, this Review aims to equip healthcare professionals with a thorough understanding of therapeutic options for IBD, enhancing informed, evidence-based decisions in clinical practice.

Evaluating the effects of 5-aminosalicylic acid on tofacitinib treatment in ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Tofacitinib and aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) are commonly used to treat ulcerative colitis (UC). However, evidence on the effect of concomitant 5-ASA use in patients receiving tofacitinib is limited. This study investigated the effects of 5-ASA combined with tofacitinib in UC patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used data from the Medical Data Vision database, including patients with UC treated with tofacitinib from May 2018 to April 2022. Patients were grouped according to tofacitinib dosage and assessed for the efficacy of concomitant 5-ASA use. The primary endpoint was clinical relapse.

RESULTS

A total of 1213 patients with UC were included in the analysis, with 416 in the 5 mg BID group and 797 in the 10 mg BID group. In the 5 mg BID group, the cumulative relapse-free rate was significantly higher in patients receiving concomitant 5-ASA (P < 0.0001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed that concomitant 5-ASA use significantly reduced the risk of clinical relapse (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-0.70). In the 10 mg BID group, no significant difference was noted in the cumulative relapse-free rate between patients treated with and without 5-ASA (P = 0.445). Similarly, multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that concomitant 5-ASA use did not significantly affect relapse risk (adjusted HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.71-1.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant 5-ASA use reduced the risk of relapse in patients on 5 mg tofacitinib BID, suggesting benefits at lower doses. However, no significant benefit was observed with 5-ASA use in those 10 mg tofacitinib BID.

Etrasimod as a Monotherapy or With Concomitant Use of Corticosteroids and/or Aminosalicylates: Results From the ELEVATE UC Clinical Program

BACKGROUND

Etrasimod is an oral, once daily (QD), selective sphingosine 1-phosphate1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). We assessed the benefit of etrasimod monotherapy and the impact of concomitant corticosteroids (CS) and/or 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) therapy.

METHODS

In ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12, patients with moderately to severely active UC were randomized 2:1 to etrasimod 2 mg QD or placebo for 52 and 12 weeks, respectively. Oral CS or 5-ASA were allowed at baseline. Patients in the monotherapy subgroup received etrasimod or placebo without concomitant CS and/or 5-ASA at baseline. Predefined primary (clinical remission) and key secondary efficacy endpoints aligned with those from both trials and were assessed at Week 12 and Week 52. Safety was assessed up to Week 52.

RESULTS

Clinical remission rates at Weeks 12 and 52 were significantly higher for etrasimod compared with placebo in patients receiving monotherapy (Week 12: 26.2% vs 4.8%; Week 52: 35.7% vs 4.0%). Differences vs placebo were statistically significant for all predefined endpoints at both time points in patients receiving monotherapy or etrasimod with concomitant 5-ASA only (all P < .05); numerical differences, due to small sample sizes, vs placebo were observed for all endpoints in the CS only and CS + 5-ASA subgroups. Safety was consistent with the overall population.

CONCLUSIONS

Etrasimod monotherapy showed consistent efficacy and safety vs placebo; no apparent benefit was observed with concomitant CS and/or 5-ASA in patients receiving etrasimod.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03945188; NCT03996369.

Dissecting Innate and Adaptive Immunity in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Immune Compartmentalization, Microbiota Crosstalk, and Emerging Therapies

The intestinal immune system is the largest immune organ in the human body. Excessive immune response to intestinal cavity induced by harmful stimuli including pathogens, foreign substances and food antigens is an important cause of inflammatory diseases such as celiac disease and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Although great progress has been made in the treatment of IBD by some immune-related biotherapeutic products, yet a considerable proportion of IBD patients remain unresponsive or immune tolerant to immunotherapeutic strategy. Therefore, it is necessary to further understand the mechanism of immune cell populations involved in enteritis, including dendritic cells, macrophages and natural lymphocytes, in the steady-state immune tolerance of IBD, in order to find effective IBD therapy. In this review, we discussed the important role of innate and adaptive immunity in the development of IBD. And the relationship between intestinal immune system disorders and microflora crosstalk were also presented. We also focus on the new findings in the field of T cell immunity, which might identify novel cytokines, chemokines or anti-cytokine antibodies as new approaches for the treatment of IBD.

Medication Burden Before and After Prescription of Biologics in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Background: Biologics are a cornerstone in the treatment of severe cases of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and aim to control the disease and improve quality of life. This study investigated changes in nonbiologic medication prescriptions for IBD patients initiating biologic therapy in Germany. Methods: This study used data from anonymized pharmacy records in the German longitudinal prescription (LRx) database and included biologic-naive IBD patients who received their first biologic therapy prescription between 2016 and 2022. Changes in prescription rates and pill counts for nonbiologic medications (corticosteroids, 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA), proton pump inhibitors, analgesics, immunosuppressants, Vitamin D, iron, and antibiotics) before and after the initiation of biologic therapy were assessed using descriptive statistics, McNemar's tests, and Poisson regression models, adjusting for age and sex. Results: A total of 29,559 biologic-naive IBD patients were included. Prior to index, 91.2% received at least one nonbiologic medication prescription, where corticosteroids and 5-ASA were the most common. Postindex, the overall prescription rate decreased to 87.7%, with significant reductions in prescriptions observed for corticosteroids, 5-ASA, and immunosuppressants (p-values < 0.001). The mean (SD) pill count dropped from 704 (1712) to 514 (1651), with the largest mean differences (95% CI) having been for corticosteroids (-77.9 [-80.3 to -75.5]), 5-ASA (-61.6 [-65.2 to -58.1]), and immunosuppressants (-55.0 [-57.5 to -52.6]). Older patients tended to have greater decreases in pill counts for corticosteroids and 5-ASA, while males showed statistically significant reductions in pill count for immunosuppressants compared with females. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that the prescription of nonbiologic medications significantly decreased after biologic therapy initiation. The use of biologics may therefore lead to improved disease management and potentially better patient outcomes.

Acute severe ulcerative colitis trials: the past, the present and the future

Acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC), characterised by bloody diarrhoea and systemic inflammation, is associated with a significant risk of colectomy and a small risk of mortality. The landmark trial of cortisone in 1955 was pivotal for two reasons: first, for establishing the efficacy of a drug that remains a first-line therapy today and, second, for producing the first set of disease severity criteria and clinical trial endpoints that shaped the subsequent ASUC trial landscape. Trials in the 1990s and at the turn of the millennium established the efficacy of infliximab and ciclosporin, but since then, there has been little progress in drug development for this high-risk population. This systematic review evaluates all interventional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in patients hospitalised with severe UC. It provides an overview of the efficacy of treatments from past to present and assesses the evolution of trial characteristics with respect to study populations, eligibility criteria and study designs over time. This review details ongoing RCTs in this field and provides a perspective on the challenges for future clinical trial programmes and how these can be overcome to help deliver novel ASUC therapies.

Continuing or stopping 5-aminosalicylates in patients with inflammatory bowel disease on anti-TNF therapy: A nationwide population-based study

BACKGROUND

The impact of continuing or stopping 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) after commencing anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains unclear.

AIMS

To compare the outcomes of patients with IBD who stopped or continued 5-ASA after starting anti-TNF therapy.

METHODS

We analysed data from the Korean National Health Insurance claims database between 2007 and 2020. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients who stopped or continued 5-ASA within 90 days of anti-TNF initiation. The primary outcome was any adverse clinical event defined as a composite of new corticosteroid use, IBD-related hospitalisation, or intestinal surgery.

RESULTS

Among 7442 patients included for analysis (4479 [60.2%] with Crohn's disease [CD] and 2963 [39.8%] with ulcerative colitis [UC]), 1037 (13.9%) discontinued 5-ASA within 90 days of starting anti-TNF therapy. During a median 4.3-year follow-up, discontinuation of 5-ASA was not associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical events (adjusted hazard ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.93-1.10). The cumulative incidence of each adverse clinical event and the composite outcome were not significantly different between groups (all, p > 0.05). Additionally, separate analyses in CD and UC cohorts revealed no differences in adverse clinical outcomes between the 5-ASA continuation and discontinuation groups. Subgroup analyses by presumed risk factors for disease relapse showed no significant differences in the risk of adverse events between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide population-based study, discontinuing 5-ASA after starting anti-TNF therapy was not associated with an increased risk of adverse events in patients with IBD.

Common Instances of Low-value Care in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Value-based care focuses on improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of health care while controlling costs. Low-value care implies services or interventions that provide little or no benefit to patients, have the potential to cause harm, incur unnecessary cost to patients, or waste limited health care resources. In this review, we discuss common instances of low-value care along the spectrum of management in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). These include low value care in: (1) diagnosis and monitoring of IBD: utilization of serological markers to screen and diagnose IBD, over-reliance on symptoms for monitoring disease, failure to employ treat-to-target strategies in symptomatic patients with IBD, and annual surveillance colonoscopies in patients at low risk of developing dysplasia; (2) treatment of IBD: use of 5-aminosalicylates in Crohn's disease, continuation of 5-aminosalicylates after escalation to immunosuppressive therapy, chronic corticosteroid use without steroid-sparing strategies, step therapy for Crohn's disease, failure to optimize tumor necrosis factor antagonists in patients with active disease and subsequently de-intensification of therapies in those who have achieved stable remission; and (3) management of hospitalized patients with IBD: routine cross-sectional imaging for patients with IBD presenting to the emergency department, withholding pharmacological prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in patients hospitalized with IBD flare, and prolonged use of high-dose intravenous corticosteroids in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis. This review is meant to bring attention to value-based care in IBD and provide guidance to treating practitioners. Future studies on systematic evaluation of high- and low-value care in patients with IBD are warranted.

Discontinuation of therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: Current views

The timely introduction and adjustment of the appropriate drug in accordance with previously well-defined treatment goals is the foundation of the approach in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The therapeutic approach is still evolving in terms of the mechanism of action but also in terms of the possibility of maintaining remission. In patients with achieved long-term remission, the question of de-escalation or discontinuation of therapy arises, considering the possible side effects and economic burden of long-term therapy. For each of the drugs used in IBD (5-aminosalycaltes, immunomodulators, biological drugs, small molecules) there is a risk of relapse. Furthermore, studies show that more than 50% of patients who discontinue therapy will relapse. Based on the findings of large studies and meta-analysis, relapse of disease can be expected in about half of the patients after therapy withdrawal, in case of monotherapy with aminosalicylates, immunomodulators or biological therapy. However, longer relapse-free periods are recorded with withdrawal of medication in patients who had previously been on combination therapies immunomodulators and anti-tumor necrosis factor. It needs to be stressed that randomised clinical trials regarding withdrawal from medications are still lacking. Before making a decision on discontinuation of therapy, it is important to distinguish potential candidates and predictive factors for the possibility of disease relapse. Fecal calprotectin level has currently been identified as the strongest predictive factor for relapse. Several other predictive factors have also been identified, such as: High Crohn's disease activity index or Harvey Bradshaw index, younger age (< 40 years), longer disease duration (> 40 years), smoking, young age of disease onset, steroid use 6-12 months before cessation. An important factor in the decision to withdraw medication is the success of re-treatment with the same or other drugs. The decision to discontinue therapy must be based on individual approach, taking into account the severity, extension, and duration of the disease, the possibility of side adverse effects, the risk of relapse, and patient's preferences.

Impact of Concomitant 5-Aminosalicylic Acid Therapy on Vedolizumab Efficacy and Safety in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Post Hoc Analyses of Clinical Trial Data

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The benefit of continuing 5-aminosalicylic acid [5-ASA] treatment when escalating to advanced therapies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] is unclear. Vedolizumab is a gut-selective monoclonal anti-α4β7-integrin antibody used to treat moderate to severe IBD. Clinical trial data were analysed post hoc to assess the impact of 5-ASA co-treatment on vedolizumab efficacy and safety in patients with IBD.

METHODS

Data were analysed from patients aged 18-80 years with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis [UC]/Crohn's disease [CD] receiving intravenous [IV]/subcutaneous [SC] vedolizumab. Efficacy data were from four studies [GEMINI 1 and 2 and VISIBLE 1 and 2]; safety data were from seven studies [GEMINI 1‒3 and long-term, VISIBLE 1, 2, and open-label extension]. The impact of 5-ASA co-treatment on clinical and endoscopic outcomes at Weeks 6 and 52 was assessed using multivariate analysis (adjusted odds ratios [aORs] with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in UC clinical remission [Mayo score ≤2, no subscore >1] rates with vs without 5-ASA at Week 6 [20.7% vs 20.4%, respectively; aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.43-1.38] or at Week 52 [45.1% vs 40.6%; aOR 1.14, 0.70-1.86], and in CD clinical remission [CD activity index score ≤150] rates at Week 6 [41.4% vs 35.1%; 1.26, 0.86-1.85] or at Week 52 [49.6% vs 37.8%; 1.35, 0.91-1.99]. The incidence of enteric and all infections in vedolizumab IV/SC-treated patients was low with and without 5-ASA.

CONCLUSION

Continuation of concomitant oral 5-ASA after starting vedolizumab had no significant impact on clinical and endoscopic outcomes.

CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIERS

GEMINI 1: NCT00783718, EudraCT 2008-002782-32; GEMINI 2: NCT00783692, EudraCT 2008-00278-33; GEMINI 3: NCT01224171, EudraCT 2009-016488-12; GEMINI long-term safety study: NCT00790933, EudraCT 2008-002784-14; VISIBLE 1: NCT02611830, EudraCT 2015-000480-14; VISIBLE 2: NCT02611817, EudraCT 2015-000481-58; VISIBLE open-label extension: NCT02620046, EudraCT 2015-000482-31.

Natural History of Pediatric Patients With Crohn's Disease Treated With Mesalamine Therapy

Background

5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) are used to treat mild to moderate ulcerative colitis. Despite their lack of efficacy in Crohn disease (CD), they are still used in real-world practice. Additionally, when patients have progressive disease, they may escalate to biologic therapy, at which time 5-ASA may or may not be discontinued.

Objectives

The aim of this study is to assess the clinical outcomes of patients started on 5-ASA for the treatment of pediatric CD. The secondary aims were to evaluate the outcomes of those who continue 5-ASA to those who discontinue 5-ASA upon biologic escalation.

Methods

We performed a single-center retrospective chart review of pediatric CD patients from 2010 to 2019 who were initially treated with 5-ASA. Demographics, medication and laboratory data, and clinical disease activity were collected.

Results

Sixty-one patients were included in the study; the majority had inflammatory CD with ileocolonic involvement. Twenty-four patients were on a concomitant immunomodulator. The majority of patients (85.2%) required escalation to biologics. Thirty-two patients (61.5%) who escalated to biologic therapy continued on 5-ASA. Eighty percent of patients achieved clinical remission at 1 year, and there was no difference between those who continued 5-ASA at time of biologic initiation compared to those who did not continue the medication. Patients who discontinued 5-ASA had an average annual cost savings of $6741.

Conclusion

5-ASA is not a durable monotherapy for the treatment of pediatric CD. Patients who require escalation from 5-ASA to biologic therapy do not benefit from concomitant 5-ASA therapy. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

De-escalation of Therapy in Patients with Quiescent Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Inflammatory bowel disease is a chronic disease of unknown origin that requires long-term treatment. The optical duration of maintenance treatment once remission has been achieved remains unclear. When discussing a de-escalation strategy, not only the likelihood of relapse but also, the outcome of retreatment for relapse after de-escalation should be considered. Previous evidence has demonstrated controversial results for risk factors for relapse after de-escalation due to the various definitions of remission and relapse. In fact, endoscopic or histologic remission has been suggested as a treatment target; however, it might not always be indicative of a successful drug withdrawal. For better risk stratification of relapse after de-escalation, it may be necessary to evaluate both the current and previous treatments. Following de-escalation, biomarkers should be closely monitored. In addition to the risk of relapse, a comprehensive understanding of the overall outcome, such as the long-term safety, patient quality of life, and impact on healthcare costs, is necessary. Therefore, a shared decision-making with patients on a case-by-case basis is imperative.

Korean clinical practice guidelines on biologics and small molecules for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC), a relapsing-remitting chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), has a variable natural course but potentially severe disease course. Since the development of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents has changed the natural disease course of moderate-to-severe UC, therapeutic options for patients who failed conventional treatments are expanding rapidly. IBD clinical trials have demonstrated the potential efficacy and safety of novel biologics such as anti-integrin α4β7 and anti-interleukin-12/23 monoclonal antibodies and small molecules such as a Janus kinase inhibitor. Anti-TNF biosimilars also have been approved and are widely used in IBD patients. Wise drug choices should be made considering evidence-based efficacy and safety. However, the best position of these drugs remains several questions, with limited data from direct comparative trials. In addition, there are still concerns to be elucidated on the effect of therapeutic drug monitoring and combination therapy with immunomodulators. The appropriate treatment regimens in acute severe UC and the risk of perioperative use of biologics are unclear. As novel biologics and small molecules have been approved in Korea, we present the Korean guidelines for medical management of adult outpatients with moderate-to-severe UC and adult hospitalized patients with acute severe UC, focusing on biologics and small molecules.

Corticosteroids and Mesalamine Versus Corticosteroids for Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment for hospitalized patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC). However, whether the addition/continuation of mesalamine with corticosteroids during hospitalization is superior to corticosteroids alone is unknown.

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled, investigator-blinded, clinical trial conducted in 10 centers in 7 countries. Patients hospitalized with ASUC (Lichtiger score ≥10) were eligible. Patients received corticosteroids alone or corticosteroid + mesalamine (4 g/day mesalamine) by a stratified randomization according to mesalamine use before admission. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients who responded to treatment by day 7, defined by a drop >3 points in the Lichtiger score and an absolute score <10 without the need for rescue medications or colectomy.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-six patients were screened, and 149 were included (70/149 female; median age, 41 years). Of these, 73 received corticosteroids + mesalamine, and 76 received corticosteroids alone. For the primary outcome, 53 of 73 patients (72.6%) receiving corticosteroids with mesalamine responded versus 58 of 76 patients (76.3%) on corticosteroids alone (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-1.72; P = .60). There was no difference between groups in duration of hospitalization, C-reactive protein normalization rate, or colectomy rate up to day 90. The need for biologics among patients receiving combination of corticosteroids with mesalamine was numerically lower by day 30 (P = .11) and day 90 (P = .07).

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized controlled trial, combination of mesalamine with corticosteroids did not benefit hospitalized patients with ASUC more than corticosteroids alone. An exploratory signal for a reduced need for biologics at 90 days in the mesalamine group merits further evaluation.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov ID: NCT01941589.

Protective Effect of Dietary Polysaccharides from Yellow Passion Fruit Peel on DSS-Induced Colitis in Mice

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a complex inflammatory disorder characterized by chronic and spontaneously relapsing inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract. IBD includes two idiopathic disorders: Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). In particular, UC causes inflammation and ulceration of the colon and rectum. There is no cure for UC. The pharmacological treatment is aimed at controlling and/or reducing the inflammatory process and promoting disease remission. The present study investigated the possible protective effects of soluble dietary fiber (SDF) isolated from yellow passion fruit peel in the dextran sulfate sodium- (DSS-) induced colitis model in mice, induced by 5% of DSS. The animals were treated with SDF (10, 30, or 100 mg/kg (po)), and the disease activity index was monitored. Colon tissues were collected, measured, and prepared for oxidative stress, inflammation, and histology analysis. SDF improved body weight loss, colon length, and disease activity index and prevented colonic oxidative stress by regulating GSH levels and SOD activity. Furthermore, SDF reduced colonic MPO activity, TNF-α, and IL-1β levels and increased IL-10 and IL-6 levels. As observed by histological analysis, SDF treatment preserved the colonic tissue, the mucus barrier, and reduced inflammatory cell infiltration. Although this is a preliminary study, taken together, our data indicate that SDF may improve the course of DSS-UC. More studies are needed to explore and understand how SDF promotes this protection.

Older Adult Patients Use More Aminosalicylate Monotherapy Compared With Younger Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: TARGET-IBD

GOAL

The goal of this study was to describe medication utilization patterns in older inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients.

BACKGROUND

Despite a growing population of older patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), questions remain regarding medication utilization patterns in comparison to younger populations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected data from the 34 sites in TARGET-IBD, a multicenter, observational cohort. The primary outcome in this study was the IBD-specific therapy utilized among older patients with IBD compared with younger age groups. Therapy use was analyzed using pairwise comparisons and then the odds of IBD-specific therapy use among patients older than age 65 were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

We identified 2980 patients with IBD (61% CD). In multivariable analysis, younger patients with UC were significantly less likely to utilize aminosalicylate monotherapy when compared with patients above 65 years [age 18 to 29: adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33-0.78]. In patients with CD, younger patients were significantly less likely to use aminosalicylate monotherapy when compared with patients above 65 (greatest difference age 18 to 29: aOR=0.31, 95% CI: 0.18-0.52). Younger patients with CD and UC were significantly more likely to use anti-tumor necrosis factor monotherapy than patients above 65 years (age 18 to 29: aOR=3.87, 95% CI: 2.47-6.06 and aOR=2.68, 95% CI: 1.29-5.58, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Older patients with IBD demonstrate significant differences in medication utilization, including more aminosalicylate monotherapy and less anti-tumor necrosis factor monotherapy compared with younger age groups. Given the aging population in the United States, these utilization patterns may have long-term implications for disease control.

5-Aminosalicylic Acid Chemoprevention in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Is It Necessary in the Age of Biologics and Small Molecules?

BACKGROUND

Due to the increased incidence of colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), the value of chemoprevention for this patient group has been repeatedly debated in the past decade. This review describes available evidence and the current recommendations for chemoprevention in national and international guidelines IBD guidelines.

SUMMARY

5-Aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) compounds are the preferred therapeutic option for mild to moderate ulcerative colitis (UC). Aside from the known anti-inflammatory effects, their chemopreventive abilities have been described in vitro and in vivo. Pooling the increasing number of retrospective and population-based clinical studies over the last 15 years, 7 consecutive meta-analyses revealed partially conflicting results for the chemopreventive efficacy of 5-ASA, and thus, not all IBD guidelines currently recommend chemoprevention with mesalamine compounds. Accumulating evidence for decreasing the colorectal cancer (CRC) risk in support of thiopurines more recently shows a protective effect. This effect seems solely mediated by control of intestinal inflammation since, for this drug class, another mechanistic interference in IBD-associated CRC pathogenesis is not known. The results regarding chemopreventive efficacy for ursodeoxycholic acid or folic acid are equivocal, and the use of these medications to prevent CRC is not firmly established. Like UC, the risk of CRC is also significantly increased in patients with Crohn's disease (CD), especially Crohn's colitis. However, no published studies exclusively assess the effects of surveillance on the early detection of cancer or CRC chemoprevention in CD patients. In meta-analyses, which predominantly included UC patients, 5-ASA or thiopurines were not beneficial in small CD subgroups. The level of evidence for anti-TNFα agents, anti-integrin (e.g., vedolizumab), or anti-IL-12/IL-23 agents (e.g., ustekinumab) and Janus kinase inhibitors is currently too low or nonexistent to use them solely for chemoprevention in UC or CD patients.

KEY MESSAGE

Intestinal inflammation is one of the main risk factors for developing CRC in IBD, and all drugs that induce and maintain mucosal healing most likely also decrease the IBD-associated CRC risk. Thus, a therapeutic strategy of adding a 5-ASA therapy to a successfully mucosal healing-inducing therapy, for example, with a biologic or a small molecule merely to prevent CRC appears to be obsolete.

Concomitant 5-Aminosalicylate Therapy in Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis Patients Escalated to Infliximab Is Not Beneficial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

While there is recent literature to support the discontinuation of 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA) upon the initiation of biologics, continuing 5-ASA after treatment failure is relatively common. We aimed to assess the impact of concomitant 5-ASA therapy on clinical outcomes in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients escalated to infliximab.

METHODS

This is a retrospective chart review of patients with moderate-to-severe UC started on infliximab between January 2012 and December 2017 at the University of Alberta. The primary outcome was clinical remission (partial Mayo score < 2) at 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcomes included endoscopic (endoscopic Mayo < 2) and deep remission (combined clinical and endoscopic remission) as well as the need for rescue therapy, hospitalization or colectomy. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratios and 95% CI for the outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-one patients were followed over a period of 47 (SD = 34) months. Patients on 5-ASA had increased concomitant immunomodulator use (73.3% vs. 54.1%, p = 0.03). There was no difference in clinical remission at 6 (aOR 2.59, p = 0.07) or 12 months (aOR 0.43, p = 0.06). At 12 months, patients on concomitant 5-ASA were less likely to achieve endoscopic (aOR 0.08, p = 0.01) and deep remission (aOR 0.07, p = 0.02). Adverse outcomes such as need for rescue therapy, hospitalization, and colectomy did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that 5-ASA may be stopped in patients with moderate-to-severe UC who have been escalated to infliximab therapy as it has no additional benefit to control inflammation.

Effect of IBD medications on COVID-19 outcomes: results from an international registry

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate COVID-19 clinical course in patients with IBD treated with different medication classes and combinations.

DESIGN

Surveillance Epidemiology of Coronavirus Under Research Exclusion for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SECURE-IBD) is a large, international registry created to monitor outcomes of IBD patients with confirmed COVID-19. We used multivariable regression with a generalised estimating equation accounting for country as a random effect to analyse the association of different medication classes with severe COVID-19, defined as intensive care unit admission, ventilator use and/or death.

RESULTS

1439 cases from 47 countries were included (mean age 44.1 years, 51.4% men) of whom 112 patients (7.8%) had severe COVID-19. Compared with tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonist monotherapy, thiopurine monotherapy (adjusted OR (aOR) 4.08, 95% CI 1.73 to 9.61) and combination therapy with TNF antagonist and thiopurine (aOR 4.01, 95% CI 1.65 to 9.78) were associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19. Any mesalamine/sulfasalazine compared with no mesalamine/sulfasalazine use was associated with an increased risk (aOR 1.70, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.29). This risk estimate increased when using TNF antagonist monotherapy as a reference group (aOR 3.52, 95% CI 1.93 to 6.45). Interleukin-12/23 and integrin antagonists were not associated with significantly different risk than TNF antagonist monotherapy (aOR 0.98, 95% CI 0.12 to 8.06 and aOR 2.42, 95% CI 0.59 to 9.96, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Combination therapy and thiopurines may be associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19. No significant differences were observed when comparing classes of biologicals. These findings warrant confirmation in large population-based cohorts.MKH should be changed to MDK for co-last author line.

Cost-Effectiveness of 5-Aminosalicylate Therapy in Combination With Biologics or Tofacitinib in the Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis

INTRODUCTION

Medications are major cost drivers in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Recent analyses suggest that there is no added efficacy in continuing nor harm in stopping 5-aminosalicylate (ASA) therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease escalated to biological therapies or tofacitinib. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of discontinuing 5-ASA therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis on biological therapies or tofacitinib, compared with continuing 5-ASA therapy.

METHODS

We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of 5-ASA with biologic therapy and tofacitinib compared with the same treatment without 5-ASA. Our primary outcome was to determine whether biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy was cost-effective compared with biologic/tofacitinib and 5-ASA combination therapy using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at a willingness to pay of $50,000/quality-adjusted life year. Owing to the uncertainty surrounding outcome probabilities, probabilistic sensitivity analyses with 10,000 simulations were also performed. We conducted a sensitivity analysis comparing biologic/tofacitinib and 5-ASA therapy compared with biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy, whereby vedolizumab was the first biologic used, followed by infliximab and finally tofacitinib.

RESULTS

Our model shows that biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy dominates (cheaper and more effective) combination therapy of biologics/tofacitinib with 5-ASA. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses simulations resulted in biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy dominating 100% of the scenarios, with mean cost savings of $24,483.01 over 2 years. When vedolizumab was the first-line therapy in the sensitivity analysis, biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy continued to dominate the combination of 5-ASA and biologic/tofacitinib therapy.

DISCUSSION

This analysis in patients with ulcerative colitis who require treatment with biologics or tofacitinib demonstrates that continuing 5-ASA therapy is not a cost-effective strategy. Discontinuation of 5-ASA therapy in these patients is safe and less expensive and should be recommended.

Description of the inflammatory bowel disease natural history in Tehran province, Iran: Mixed panel approaches

AIM

Description of the inflammatory bowel disease natural history in Tehran province.

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a non-homogeneous disorder with an unpredictable natural history that impairs a patient's quality of life over the course of their life. As a result, providing evidence for efficient patient management is critical.

METHODS

In this case series study, 198 IBD patients who were visited in our clinic at least three times routinely from Oct 2015 to May 2020 were included. Then, two panel-based approaches, the Multi-State Model (MSM) and random-effect ordered logistic, were used to deduce the clinical course of IBD, which included remission, mild, moderate to severe, and surgical states.

RESULTS

For ulcerative colitis (UC), women had a slightly poorer condition for remission but better for moderate to severe and a faster transition from moderate to severe to mild (HR=1.490, 95% CI: 1.02-2.16) compared to men. For Crohn's disease (CD), they had a better condition for remission but a slightly poorer condition for the severe state and higher transition from mild to moderate to severe (HR=1.221, 95% CI: 0.471-3.22) than men. Oral 5-ASA had better efficacy in people with remission and/or mild states but not for those with moderate to severe states, especially in CD (mild to moderate to serve, HR=1.526, 95% CI: 0.59-3.89). Immunosuppressive drugs were better for patients with lower disease severity, especially with UC (mild to remission, HR=1.258, 95% CI: 0.75-2.09).

CONCLUSION

Panel approaches have the potential efficacy to tackle the unpredictable clinical course of IBD (UC/CD). Hence, we highly recommend that our findings be included into the Iranian routine clinical environment of IBD and/or that related studies be conducted in Iran and other regions to gain a better understanding of the natural history of IBD.

De-escalation of medical therapy in inflammatory bowel disease

Treatment strategies for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) now increasingly target deep remission, yet the resultant more aggressive use of medical therapy is associated with potentially serious adverse events and significant costs. It is, therefore, of vital importance to consider when, how and in whom medical therapy may be safely de-escalated. This issue is of great potential relevance in the current SARS-Cov-2 pandemic. In this review, we first discuss the rationale for drug withdrawal in IBD, before considering the available data on withdrawal of 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA), immunomodulators (IM) and biological therapy in both ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's Disease (CD). We consider how to identify patients most appropriate for drug withdrawal and outline a potential monitoring strategy for the early detection of relapse following drug withdrawal. We conclude with important future perspectives in this challenging field, and highlight ongoing trials that are likely to shape practice in the years to come.

No benefit of continuing vs stopping 5-aminosalicylates in patients with ulcerative colitis escalated to anti-metabolite therapy

BACKGROUND

Whilst continuation of 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) after escalation to biologic therapy is considered ineffective in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), their role in patients escalated to anti-metabolites is unclear.

AIM

To compared patterns and outcomes of continuing vs stopping 5-ASA in patients with UC who escalated to anti-metabolite monotherapy, using a de-identified administrative claims database.

METHODS

We identified patients with UC who were new users of anti-metabolite monotherapy who were receiving 5-ASA, and were followed for at least 12 months after starting anti-metabolite therapy. We evaluated patterns of 5-ASA use (stopped 5-ASA, short-term 5-ASA use for <6 months after starting anti-metabolites, persistent 5-ASA use for >6 months after starting anti-metabolites). We compared outcomes (risk of UC-related hospitalisation and/or surgery, need for corticosteroids, treatment escalation to biologic therapy) by pattern of 5-ASA use, using Cox proportional hazard analysis adjusting for age, sex, race, comorbidity burden, and hospitalisation or emergency department visit, abdominal surgery and corticosteroid use in the previous 12 months (as measures of disease severity), with a 12-month immortal time period.

RESULTS

Of 4068 patients with UC who were new-users of anti-metabolite monotherapy, 578 (14.2%), 782 (19.2%) and 2708 (66.6%) stopped 5-ASA, used 5-ASA transiently or persistently, respectively. Compared to patients who stopped 5-ASA after starting anti-metabolites, persistent 5-ASA use was associated with a higher risk of UC-related hospitalisation (HR, 1.40 [1.07-1.83]) and corticosteroid use (HR, 1.48 [1.28-1.70]), without an increase in risk of UC-related surgery (HR, 1.32 [0.86-2.00]) or treatment escalation (HR, 0.80 [0.53-1.20]). Sensitivity analyses using a 3 months window after initiation of anti-metabolites to classify patients as continuing vs stopping 5-ASA showed similar results. Residual confounding by disease severity could not be excluded.

CONCLUSION

5-ASA are usually continued long-term even after escalating to anti-metabolite therapy in patients with UC without clinical benefit.

Review article: withdrawal of 5-aminosalicylates in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) are widely used in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but emerging evidence suggests that they may be safely withdrawn in significant subsets of patients. This is important to address: 5-ASA therapy accounts for up to 25% of total healthcare costs in ulcerative colitis (UC), while almost a third of patients with Crohn's disease (CD) receive long-term 5-ASA despite no clear evidence of benefit. Further, rationalising medication burden may improve overall adherence and outcome.

AIMS

To summarise the rationale for 5-ASA withdrawal, review the current evidence in both UC and CD and consider the data surrounding colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention, guiding an evidence-based withdrawal strategy.

METHODS

PubMed was searched to identify relevant studies. Only papers published in English were reviewed, with priority given to randomised clinical trials and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

For patients with UC, consideration of 5-ASA withdrawal should be made on a case-by-case basis, but it appears safest for those in deep remission without any of the following risk factors: younger age (<40 years), remission for less than 2 years, a history of multiple flares, extensive disease. 5-ASA withdrawal should also be considered in patients with UC escalated to biologic therapy who have achieved remission and in all patients with CD. Although 5-ASA therapy may have chemopreventive benefits for CRC, the cost-benefit ratio appears significant, and this indication is not justified by evidence in those who have achieved remission and are continuing therapy with other agents, or in those in sustained remission without a history of extensive disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the majority of patients with IBD receive 5-ASA during their disease course, safe withdrawal appears possible in many, with important implications for both health economics and patient experience. A number of unanswered questions, however, remain.

Risk of neutropenia in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with TNF inhibitors: A single-center, retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND/AIM

Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) have become the mainstay of treatment in moderate-to-severe cases of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Neutropenia has been reported in patients receiving TNFi for IBD and other diseases. In this study, we aimed to ascertain the relationship between the use of TNFi and the development of neutropenia in patients with IBD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study including all adult patients with IBD receiving TNFi at a tertiary care center over an 11-year period. The primary outcome was the development of any neutropenic episode after starting a TNFi. For our secondary outcomes, we evaluated the impact of concomitant use of 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) or an immunomodulator on the risk of developing neutropenia.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 281 patients. Of those included, 34.2% developed at least one episode of neutropenia while on a TNFi. The majority of these episodes (67.7%) were mild with ANC between 1000 and 1500/mm3. No significant difference was observed in the age, gender, agent used or type of IBD between those who developed neutropenia and those who did not. Concomitant use of azathioprine (OR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.26-4.28; P = 0.007) or 5-ASA (OR = 3.15, 95% CI: 1.55-6.39; P = 0.001) were significant independent predictors of developing neutropenia.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, mild neutropenia was common among patients with IBD on TNFi. Future prospective studies are required to further clarify the significance of neutropenia in patients with IBD receiving TNFi.

Stopping Mesalamine Therapy in Patients With Crohn's Disease Starting Biologic Therapy Does Not Increase Risk of Adverse Outcomes

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Little is known about the effects of discontinuing mesalamine therapy for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) who initiate therapy with an anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent. We analyzed data from 2 national population cohorts to compare outcomes of patients with CD already on mesalamine therapy who started treatment with an anti-TNF agent and then either stopped or continued mesalamine.

METHODS

The primary outcome was any adverse clinical event, defined as a composite of new corticosteroid use or CD-related hospitalization or surgery. We collected data from the Truven MarketScan (IBM, Armonk, NY) health claims database in the United States and the Danish health registers. Our analysis included patients with CD who started anti-TNF therapy after at least 90 days of oral mesalamine therapy. Patients were classified as stopping mesalamine if therapy was discontinued within 90 days of starting anti-TNF. We performed multivariable Cox regression models controlling for demographics, clinical factors, and health care utilization. Adjusted hazard ratios with 95% CIs were calculated, comparing stopping mesalamine with continuing mesalamine.

RESULTS

A total of 3178 patients with CD were included in our final analysis (2960 in the United States and 218 in Denmark). Stopping mesalamine after initiating anti-TNF therapy was not associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical events in the US cohort (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.03; P = .13) or in the Danish cohort (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.68-1.87; P = .63). Similar results were obtained from sensitivity analyses of concomitant immunomodulator use and duration of mesalamine treatment before initiation of anti-TNF therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In a retrospective analysis of 2 national databases, we found that stopping mesalamine therapy for patients with CD who were starting anti-TNF therapy did not increase their risk of adverse clinical events. These results should be validated in a prospective study.

AGA Technical Review on the Management of Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis

A subset of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) present with, or progress to, moderate to severe disease activity. These patients are at high risk for colectomy, hospitalization, corticosteroid dependence, and serious infections. The risk of life-threatening complications and emergency colectomy is particularly high among those patients hospitalized with acute severe ulcerative colitis. Optimal management of outpatients or inpatients with moderate to severe UC often requires the use of immunomodulator and/or biologic therapies, including thiopurines, methotrexate, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, TNF-α antagonists, vedolizumab, tofacitnib, or ustekinumab, either as monotherapy or in combination (with immunomodulators), to mitigate these risks. Decisions about optimal drug therapy in moderate to severe UC are complex, with limited guidance on comparative efficacy and safety of different treatments, leading to considerable practice variability. Therefore, the American Gastroenterological Association prioritized development of clinical guidelines on this topic. To inform the clinical guidelines, this technical review was completed in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Focused questions in adult outpatients with moderate to severe UC included: (1) overall and comparative efficacy of different medications for induction and maintenance of remission in patients with or without prior exposure to TNF-α antagonists, (2) comparative efficacy and safety of biologic monotherapy vs combination therapy with immunomodulators, (3) comparative efficacy of top-down (upfront use of biologics and/or immunomodulator therapy) vs step-up therapy (acceleration to biologic and/or immunomodulator therapy only after failure of 5-aminosalicylates, and (4) role of continuing vs stopping 5-aminosalicylates in patients being treated with immunomodulator and/or biologic therapy for moderate to severe UC. Focused questions in adults hospitalized with acute severe ulcerative colitis included: (5) overall and comparative efficacy of pharmacologic interventions for inpatients refractory to corticosteroids, in reducing risk of colectomy, (6) optimal dosing regimens for intravenous corticosteroids and infliximab in these patients, and (7) role of adjunctive antibiotics in the absence of confirmed infections.

Solving the questions regarding 5-aminosalitylate formulation in the treatment of ulcerative colitis

5-aminosalicylate is a fundamental treatment for patients with ulcerative colitis with mild-to-moderate disease; however, evidence for 5-aminosalicylate treatment is unclear in some situations. This review discusses the clinical guidelines and previous studies, and highlights the following points: (1) Although rectal 5-aminosalicylate is effective for proctitis, physicians should endeavor to reduce patient's distress when administering suppositories or enema as the first-line therapy. It should be clarified whether oral 5-aminosalicylate alone with a drug delivery system that allows higher 5-aminosalicylate concentrations to reach the distal colon would be as effective as rectal 5-aminosalicylate therapy. (2) There has been no direct evidence demonstrating the clinical efficacy of switching the 5-aminosalicylate treatment to other 5-aminosalicylate formulations. However, switching to a different 5-aminosalicylate formulation may be indicated if clinical symptoms are not progressive. (3) Several studies have shown that colonic mucosal 5-aminosalicylate concentration correlates with clinical and endoscopic severity; however, it is unclear whether a high 5-aminosalicylate concentration has therapeutic efficacy. (4) The maximum dose of 5-aminosalicylate is necessary for patients with risk factors for recurrence or hospitalization. (5) Optimization of 5-aminosalicylate dosage may be indicated even for quiescent patients with ulcerative colitis if mucosal healing is not obtained, and if patients have multiple risk factors for recurrence. (6) Furthermore, the discontinuation of 5-aminosalicylate is acceptable when biologics are used. Because there are many "old studies" providing evidence for 5-aminosalicylate formulations, more clinical studies are needed to establish new evidence.

Ulcerative Colitis: Current and Emerging Treatment Strategies

Historically, medical therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC) was limited to corticosteroids. Excitingly, over the past just 1-2 decades, the options for medical therapy have expanded and include biologics and small molecules, with more agents actively being developed. In this article, we review the current and emerging treatment strategies for UC stratified according to disease severity.

Inpatient Management of Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) is a potentially life-threatening presentation of ulcerative colitis that in nearly all cases requires inpatient management and coordinated care from hospitalists, gastroenterologists, and surgeons. Even with ideal care, a substantial proportion of patients will ultimately require colectomy, but most patients can avoid surgery with intravenous corticosteroid treatment and if needed, appropriate rescue therapy with infliximab or cyclosporine. In-hospital management requires not only therapies to reduce the inflammation at the heart of the disease process, but also to avoid complications of the disease and its treatment. Care for ASUC must be anticipatory, with patient education and evaluation starting at the time of admission in advance of the possible need for urgent medical or surgical rescue therapy. Here we outline a general approach to the treatment of patients hospitalized with ASUC, highlighting the common pitfalls and critical points in management.

Real-World Data on Topical Therapies and Annual Health Resource Utilization in Hospitalized Swiss Patients with Ulcerative Colitis

Objectives

Topical treatment with aminosalicylates and/or budesonide was shown to be highly effective in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), while reducing the likelihood of systemic adverse effects. However, previous research has shown that topical treatment is clearly underused. We aimed to evaluate the use of topical therapy in the real-world setting.

Methods

This is an observational study based on claims data of 201 Swiss adult patients who were hospitalized for UC between 2012 and 2014 and who were then followed for 1 year. A variety of factors presumably associated with topical treatment were examined. Annual health care utilization (UC-related medications, diagnostic procedures, consultations, and rehospitalizations) of patients with versus without topical therapy was compared.

Results

Of the 201 hospitalized UC patients, 82 (40.8%) were treated with topical 5-acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and/or topical rectal steroids. The main factors significantly and positively associated with receiving topical treatment were the use of topical treatment in the year prior to the hospitalization, receiving oral 5-ASA, and living in an urban area. The mode of administration was further related to the language area. Patients with topical therapy significantly more often received other UC-related medications, such as combinations with systemic steroids. They significantly more often underwent colonoscopies and calprotectin measurements, and more often consulted a gastroenterologist in the follow-up, while there was no significant difference regarding rehospitalizations.

Conclusions

Topical treatment is underused in patients with UC, which stands in contrast to the current European Crohn's and Colitis Organization guidelines. Patients' preferences and considerations need to be taken into account when prescribing medical therapy.

Concomitant Use of Aminosalicylates Is Not Associated With Improved Outcomes in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis Escalated to Vedolizumab

Vedolizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting α₄β₇ leukocyte integrins, has demonstrated efficacy for induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis (UC).¹ However, it remains unclear whether oral aminosalicylates should be continued or stopped after treatment escalation to vedolizumab. Singh et al² have demonstrated no significant difference in clinical remission, clinical response, or mucosal healing rates between patients treated with or without concomitant aminosalicylates at entry in clinical trials of infliximab or golimumab. We evaluate the impact of concomitant oral aminosalicylates on clinical outcomes for vedolizumab-treated UC patients.

Maneuvering Clinical Pathways for Ulcerative Colitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent years have brought about several advances in the treatment of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Here, we discuss salient recommendations of recent treatment guidelines; review the efficacy, safety, and real-world data of vedolizumab and tofacitinib; appraise their place vis-à-vis established agents; and consider the newly proposed approaches of risk-stratified and treat-to-target therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Once daily oral mesalamine dosing is equivalent to split dosing in mild-moderate UC. Real-world data are accumulating on the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab for moderate to severe UC, while there are few such data on the most recently approved agent, tofacitinib. High-dose infliximab is being investigated for severe UC. New approaches are challenging the established paradigm of selecting therapy based on current disease activity. The risk-stratified approach incorporates long-term risk as well as the current burden of inflammation. The treat-to-target approach aims at improved long-term outcomes by adjusting therapy to resolve intestinal inflammation. The therapeutic options for UC are continually expanding. Risk-stratified therapy and the treat-to-target approach represent paradigm shifts in UC management. Optimal disease control requires an individualized approach that takes into consideration current inflammatory burden, long-term risk, patient preferences, and ongoing assessment of response to treatment.

Impact and risk factors of non-adherence to 5-aminosalicylates in quiescent ulcerative colitis evaluated by an electronic management system

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of non-adherence to 5-Aminosalicylates (5-ASA) on the risk of flares and to identify risk factors of non-adherence.

METHODS

Observational, cohort study of ulcerative colitis (UC) patients in clinical remission at least 6 months on 5-ASA monotherapy maintenance prescribed by an electronic management program. Adherence was considered when 80% of the prescribed 5-ASA had been dispensed at the pharmacy. The study analyzed the existence and degree of 5-ASA adherence, disease course, UC phenotypic expression, and 5-ASA dose and regimen, and consumption of non-UC chronic drugs during 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

The study included 274 patients, 49% males with a median age of 38 (27-49) years old. Overall, 41% of patients were non-adherent to 5-ASA. Risk of flares was reduced in the adherent group (36% vs 54%; OR = 0,484; p = 0,004), mainly the mild ones (26% vs 38%; OR = 0,559; p = 0,031). Non-adherence was associated with younger age at diagnosis (32 (26-45) vs 41.5 (21-50), p = 0.000) and no-consumption of other chronic treatments (1.1 vs 2.1; OR = 1709; p = 0,048).

CONCLUSION

Non-adherence to 5-ASA evaluated by the pharmaceutical management system was at 41% with a higher risk of relapse. Younger patients and patients who do not receive non-UC chronic treatments showed lower adherence rate.

Stopping 5-aminosalicylates in patients with ulcerative colitis starting biologic therapy does not increase the risk of adverse clinical outcomes: analysis of two nationwide population-based cohorts

OBJECTIVE

The benefit of continuing 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who initiate anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF) biologics is unknown. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes in patients with UC already on 5-ASA who started anti-TNF and then either stopped or continued 5-ASA.

DESIGN

Our primary outcome was any adverse clinical event defined as a composite of new corticosteroid use, UC-related hospitalisation or surgery. We used two national databases: the United States (US) Truven MarketScan health claims database and the Danish health registers. Patients with UC who started anti-TNF after having been on oral 5-ASA for at least 90 days were included. Patients were classified as stopping 5-ASA if therapy was discontinued within 90 days of starting anti-TNF. We performed multivariable Cox regression models controlling for demographics, clinical factors and healthcare utilisation. Adjusted HRs (aHR) with 95% CI are reported comparing stopping 5-ASA with continuing 5-ASA.

RESULTS

A total of 3589 patients with UC were included (2890 US and 699 Denmark). Stopping 5-ASA after initiating anti-TNF was not associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical events in the U.S. cohort (aHR 1.04; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.21, p=0.57) nor in the Danish cohort (aHR 1.09; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.49, p=0.60). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses investigating concomitant immunomodulator use and duration of 5-ASA treatment before initiating anti-TNF.

CONCLUSION

In two national databases, stopping 5-ASA in patients with UC starting anti-TNF therapy did not increase the risk of adverse clinical events. These results should be validated in a prospective clinical trial.

De-escalation of IBD Therapy: When, Who, and How?

When patients with inflammatory bowel disease reach clinical remission with biologic therapy, a question that often comes up is, “when can I stop my biologic medication?” This is a question fraught with challenges for both physicians and patients. For physicians, there are valid concerns that stepping down from a successful therapy will lead to relapse and disease exacerbation, and that stepping down could lead to anti-biologic antibodies. For patients, the question is often driven by concerns about long-term side effects and costs of biologics. This review provides an overview of the rationale for, and risks of, withdrawal of IBD therapy. Selected studies have shown how to identify subsets of patients in whom de-escalation can be performed with low risk of relapse. Practical guidance on when and how to de-escalate IBD therapy is provided.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Ulcerative Colitis in Adults

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is an idiopathic inflammatory disorder. These guidelines indicate the preferred approach to the management of adults with UC and represent the official practice recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology. The scientific evidence for these guidelines was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process. In instances where the evidence was not appropriate for GRADE, but there was consensus of significant clinical merit, "key concept" statements were developed using expert consensus. These guidelines are meant to be broadly applicable and should be viewed as the preferred, but not only, approach to clinical scenarios.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: high prevalence and cost of continued aminosalicylate use in patients with ulcerative colitis escalated to immunosuppressive and biological therapies

BACKGROUND

Aminosalicylates are the most frequently prescribed treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC). In the absence of empirical evidence, clinicians are uncertain whether to continue aminosalicylates in patients with UC after escalating therapy.

AIMS

To quantify concomitant aminosalicylate use in UC randomised clinical trials (RCTs), identify factors associated with their use, and estimate treatment costs of concomitant aminosalicylate therapy.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 1 March 2017 for placebo-controlled RCTs of immunosuppressants, biologics, or oral small molecules in adults with UC. The proportion of patients prescribed concomitant aminosalicylates at trial entry was pooled using a random-effects model. Meta-regression was performed to assess trial-level factors associated with aminosalicylate use. Treatment costs were estimated using 2018 formulary data from five Canadian provinces.

RESULTS

Thirty-two trials were included (23 induction only, nine induction, and maintenance trials). The pooled proportion of patients co-prescribed aminosalicylates was 80.7% (95% CI 75.5%-85.1%), with considerable observed heterogeneity (I²  = 95%). In univariable meta-regression, aminosalicylate use was not associated with trial design, setting, year of publication, disease severity, disease duration, or drug class. The estimated direct annual treatment cost of concomitant aminosalicylates is ~$20 million for the Canadian UC population, assuming conservative estimates of UC prevalence, aminosalicylate use and dose, and the lowest cost formulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 80% of UC patients entering clinical trials of immunosuppressants, biologics, or oral small molecules continue to use aminosalicylates. An RCT is needed to inform the benefits and harms of continuing vs stopping aminosalicylates in patients escalating therapy.

Overview and experience of the YODA Project with clinical trial data sharing after 5 years

The Yale University Open Data Access (YODA) Project has facilitated access to clinical trial data since 2013. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the Project, describe key decisions that were made when establishing data sharing policies, and suggest how our experience and the experiences of our first two data generator partners, Medtronic, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson, can be used to enhance other ongoing or future initiatives.