Exploratory Study of the Effectiveness of Granulocyte and Monocyte Adsorptive Apheresis Before Initiation of Steroids in Patients With Active Ulcerative Colitis (EXPECT Study): A Multicenter Prospective Clinical Trial

Adsorptive cytapheresis in ulcerative colitis: A non-pharmacological therapeutic approach revisited

Adsorptive cytapheresis proves effective in a proportion of patients affected by ulcerative colitis. Relatively high cost and the need for apheresis facilities, prevented the widespread use of this therapeutic approach. More so following the introduction of anti-TNFα biosimilars which proved both effective and inexpensive. Anti-TNFα agents, however, are burdened by high rate of primary and secondary non-response and prompt switching to new, high-cost biologics, and small molecules. The present review analyzes advantages and disadvantages of adsorptive cytapheresis in the present clinical scenario and suggests its repositioning in the therapeutic workup of selected subgroups of ulcerative colitis patients. The extremely favorable safety profile makes adsorptive cytapheresis a viable therapeutic option in elderly and high-risk UC patients, as well as potential second-line treatment in corticosteroid-dependent patients and poor responders to first-line biologics.

Concomitant pharmacologic medications influence the clinical outcomes of granulocyte and monocyte adsorptive apheresis in patients with ulcerative colitis: A multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Granulocyte and monocyte adsorptive apheresis (GMA) with Adacolumn has been used as a remission induction therapy for patients with active ulcerative colitis (UC). Herein, we investigated the influence of concomitant medications in the remission induction of GMA in patients with active UC.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective cohort study included patients with UC underwent GMA in five independent institutions in Japan from January 2011 to July 2021. Factors including concomitant medications associated with clinical remission (CR) were analyzed statistically.

RESULT

A total of 133 patients were included. Seventy-four patients achieved a CR after GMA. The multivariable analysis revealed that concomitant medication with 5-aminosalicylic acid, Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES), and concomitant medication with immunosuppressors (IMs) remained as predictors of CR after GMA. In the subgroup analysis in patients with MES of 2, concomitant medication with IMs was demonstrated as a significant negative factor of CR after GMA (P = .042, OR 0.354). Seventy-four patients who achieved CR after GMA were followed up for 52 weeks. In the multivariable analysis, the maintenance therapy with IMs was demonstrated as a significant positive factor of sustained CR up to 52 weeks (P = .038, OR 2.214). Furthermore, the rate of sustained CR in patients with biologics and IMs was significantly higher than that in patients with biologics only (P = .002).

CONCLUSION

GMA was more effective for patients with active UC that relapsed under treatment without IMs. Furthermore, the addition of IMs should be considered in patients on maintenance therapy with biologics after GMA.

Apheresis: A cell-based therapeutic tool for the inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is a hallmark of leukocyte infiltration, followed by the release of cytokines and interleukins. Disease progression to Ulcerative Colitis (UC) or Crohn’s Disease (CD) remained largely incurable. The genetic and environmental factors disrupt enteral bacteria in the gut, which hampers the intestinal repairing capability of damaged mucosa. Commonly practiced pharmacological therapies include 5-aminosalicylic acid with corticosteroids and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α. New interventions such as CDP571 and TNF-blocking RDP58 report the loss of patient response. This review discusses the non-pharmacologic selective granulocyte–monocyte-apheresis (GMA) and leukocytapheresis (LCAP) that have been proposed as treatment modalities that reduce mortality. GMA, an extracorporeal vein-to-vein technique, presents a strong safety profile case for its use as a viable therapeutic option compared to GMA's conventional medication safety profile. GMA reported minimal to no side effects in the pediatric population and pregnant women. Numerous studies report the efficacious nature of GMA in UC patients, whereas data on CD patients is insufficient. Its benefits outweigh the risks and are emerging as a favored non-pharmacological treatment option. On the contrary, LCAP uses a general extracorporeal treatment that entraps leukocytes and suppresses cytokine release. It has been deemed more efficacious than conventional drug treatments, the former causing better disease remission, and maintenance. Patients with UC/CD secondary to complications have responded well to the treatment. Side effects of the procedure have remained mild to moderate, and there is little evidence of any severe adverse event occurring in most age groups. LCAP decreases the dependence on steroids and immunosuppressive therapies for IBD. The review will discuss the role of GMA and LCAP.