Benefit of measuring vedolizumab concentrations in inflammatory bowel disease patients in a real-world setting

The systemic immune-inflammation index is superior to predicting clinical remission and relapse for ulcerative colitis patients treated with vedolizumab

Background

Vedolizumab (VDZ), a novel biologic targeting α4β7 integrin, is safe and effective for the treatment of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). The objective of this study was to compare the potential of the Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) in predicting clinical remission and treatment failure in patients with moderate-to-severe UC on VDZ therapy and to explore the risk factors for treatment failure.

Methods

Seventy-four UC patients treated with VDZ at our institution between December 1, 2020, and October 1, 2023, who had medical records were included in this study. We retrospectively collected baseline NLR, PLR, and SII values and assessed the predictive ability of the three indices for clinical remission and treatment failure using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

Results

Patients in the severe group (n = 47) had significantly higher baseline PLR and SII values than those in the moderate group (n = 27) (p < 0.05). Patients with MES3 had significantly higher PLR and SII values than patients with MES2 (p < 0.05). At 14 weeks after VDZ treatment, 28 patients obtained steroid-free clinical remission, whereas 46 did not. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for SII was 0.659 for predicting clinical remission and exhibited the best predictive ability. Of the 52 patients who achieved long-term remission, 35 patients responded consistently to VDZ, whereas 17 patients experienced disease relapse. The SII, with an AUC of 0.793, showed the best predictive ability (sensitivity: 94.1%; specificity: 57.1%; cut-off value: 602.0). Cox regression analysis revealed that SII ≥602.0, was a potential predictor of relapse after VDZ treatment in UC patients (p = 0.048, hazard ratio: 8.651; 95% confidence interval: 1.017-73.593).

Conclusion

The SII performed better than NLR and PLR in predicting clinical remission and relapse for UC patients on VDZ therapy. Moreover, patients with high SII may relapse after VDZ treatment and should be treated with caution.

Real-life treatment persistence and treatment outcomes of Finnish patients with inflammatory bowel disease receiving vedolizumab as first-line biological treatment

Purpose

To analyze treatment persistence and treatment outcomes of vedolizumab as first-line biological treatment in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) patients in a Finnish real-world setting.

Methods

Observational, retrospective, multi-center chart review study that included adult CD and UC patients initiating vedolizumab as first-line biological treatment between 2014 and 2020.

Results

The cohort consisted of 54 CD and 69 UC patients. At month 12, treatment persistence was 84.9 % in CD and 64.7 % in UC. Most vedolizumab discontinuations (CD, n = 11; UC, n = 26) were due to inefficacy. Discontinuations due to adverse events were rare (n < 5). Efficacy improvements were observed in treatment persistent patients at 12 months vs. baseline in the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (CD, 1.8 vs. 3.9, p = 0.001), Partial Mayo Score (UC, 1.0 vs. 4.9, p < 0.001), Physician's Global Assessment (CD, 0.9 vs. 1.8, p < 0.001; UC, 0.4 vs. 2.1, p < 0.001), along with positive endoscopic and biochemical outcomes. Clinical remission was 90.9 % vs. 63.0 % for CD, and 81.6 % vs. 12.3 % for UC, while corticosteroid use was 15.9 % vs. 53.7 % for CD, and 14.6 % vs. 92.8 % for UC at 12 months and baseline, respectively.

Conclusion

Vedolizumab was associated with improvements in efficacy, endoscopic activity, biochemical parameters, and decreased corticosteroid burden when used as a first-line biological treatment.

Approach to loss of response to advanced therapies in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Remarkable progress over the last decade has equipped clinicians with many options in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Clinicians now have the unique opportunity to provide individualized treatment that can achieve and sustain remission in many patients. However, issues of primary non-response (PNR) and secondary loss of response (SLOR) to non-tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) therapies remains a common problem. Specific issues include the choice of optimization of therapy, identifying when dose optimization will recapture response, establishing optimal dose for escalation and when to switch therapy.

AIM

To explores the issues of PNR and SLOR to non-TNFi therapies.

METHODS

This review explores the current evidence and literature to elucidate management options in cases of PNR/SLOR. It will also explore potential predictors for response following SLOR/PNR to therapies including the role of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM).

RESULTS

In the setting of PNR and loss of response to alpha-beta7-integrin inhibitors and interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 inhibitors dose optimization is a reasonable option to capture response. For Janus kinase inhibitors dose optimization can be utilized to recapture response with loss of response.

CONCLUSION

The role of TDM in the setting of advanced non-TNFi therapies to identify patients who require dose optimization and as a predictor for clinical remission is not yet established and this remains an area that should be addressed in the future.

Therapeutic drug monitoring in inflammatory bowel diseases. Position statement of the Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis

The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease has undergone a significant transformation following the introduction of biologic drugs. Thanks to these drugs, treatment goals have evolved from clinical response and remission to more ambitious objectives, such as endoscopic or radiologic remission. However, even though biologics are highly effective, a significant percentage of patients will not achieve an initial response or may lose it over time. We know that there is a direct relationship between the trough concentrations of the biologic and its therapeutic efficacy, with more demanding therapeutic goals requiring higher drug levels, and inadequate exposure being common. Therapeutic drug monitoring of biologic medications, along with pharmacokinetic models, provides us with the possibility of offering a personalized approach to treatment for patients with IBD. Over the past few years, relevant information has accumulated regarding its utility during or after induction, as well as in the maintenance of biologic treatment, in reactive or proactive strategies, and prior to withdrawal or treatment de-escalation. The aim of this document is to establish recommendations regarding the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring of biologics in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, in different clinical practice scenarios, and to identify areas where its utility is evident, promising, or controversial.