Premedication Use Before Infliximab Administration: A Cross-sectional Analysis

Anaphylaxis to a Vedolizumab Infusion following Drug Holiday in a Patient with Ulcerative Colitis: A Case Report

Introduction

Vedolizumab is a commonly prescribed biologic agent due to its safety profile and clinical efficacy. Severe infusion-related reactions are exceedingly rare, with no previously documented cases of anaphylaxis to vedolizumab infusion following a drug holiday.

Case Presentation

We report the case of a 65-year-old male with ulcerative colitis who had a severe anaphylactic reaction to the first re-induction infusion of vedolizumab following a 30-month drug holiday. No pre-infusion prophylactic medication was administered. Upon commencement of the infusion, the patient developed anaphylactic symptoms including airway compromise that required intensive care unit admission and treatment with an adrenaline infusion.

Conclusion

Anaphylactic reactions to vedolizumab after a drug holiday can occur. As is done for infliximab, we recommend administration of an antipyretic, antihistamine, and corticosteroid prior to vedolizumab re-induction infusions when it is given after a drug holiday.

Infliximab desensitization in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases: a safe therapeutic alternative

BACKGROUND

Hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) to the administration of infliximab (IFX) in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) patients are not rare and usually lead to drug discontinuation. We report data on safety and effectiveness of desensitization to IFX in patients with previous HSR.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective monocentric observational study. Patients for whom a desensitization protocol to IFX was realized after a previous HSR were included. Anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and IFX trough levels at both inclusion and six months after desensitization were collected. Clinical outcomes, including recurrence of HSR were evaluated.

RESULTS

From 2005 to 2020, 27 patients (Crohn's Disease: 26 (96%) were included). Desensitization after HSR was performed after a median time of 10.4 months (2.9-33.1). Nineteen (70%) patients received immunosuppressants at time of desensitization. Eight (30%) patients presented HSR at first (n = 2), second (n = 4) or third (n = 2) IFX perfusion after desensitization. None led to intensive care unit transfer or death. Thirteen (48%) had clinical response at 6 months and 8 (29%) were still under IFX treatment two years after desensitization. IFX trough levels and ADA were available for 14 patients at time of desensitization. Most patients (12 out of 14) had ADA at a high level. At 6 months, among the 7 patients with long term response to IFX, 4 presented a decrease of ADA titers and 2 had a significant trough level of IFX.

CONCLUSION

IFX desensitization in patients with IBD is a safe therapeutic alternative and represents a potential option for patients refractory to multiple biologics.What is already known? Hypersensitivity reactions to the administration of infliximab is frequent. Occurrence of hypersensitivity reaction, either immediate or delayed, usually leads to permanent drug discontinuation.What is new here? Infliximab desensitization is well tolerated with no hypersensitivity reaction recurrence in 70% of patients. Clinical success at 6 months was of 48% and around a third of patients remained under infliximab therapy two years after desensitization. Antidrug antibodies decreased and infliximab trough levels increased in these patients showing the impact of desensitization on immunogenicity.How can this study help patient care? Infliximab desensitization represents a potential option for patients refractory to multiple biologics who presented hypersensitivity reaction to the drug.

De-adopting low-value care: The missing step in evidence-based practice?

BACKGROUND

Low-value care provides little or no benefit to pediatric patients, has the potential to cause harm, waste healthcare resources, and increase healthcare costs. Nursing has a responsibility to identify and de-adopt low-value practices to help promote quality care.

PURPOSE

1) Describe the process of identifying and de-adopting low-value clinical practices guided by a conceptual model using a case study approach. 2) Identify facilitators and barriers to de-adoption practices, including levels of stakeholder engagement, organizational structures, and the quality of available scientific and non-scientific evidence.

METHODOLOGY

An evidence-based practice (EBP) project investigating the efficacy of antihistamines in decreasing infusion reactions to infliximab identified a low-value practice within a pediatric infusion center. The Synthesis Model for the Process of De-adoption was then applied to guide the de-adoption of this low-value practice. Case study analysis highlighted facilitators and barriers to de-adoption efforts.

CONCLUSIONS

The process for de-adopting care is an essential component of EBP and, as such, should be explicated through robust, standardized EBP processes and education.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Nurses are best positioned to identify, assess and prioritize low-value practices and facilitate the de-adoption of low-value practice that impact pediatric patients and families. Models to support de-adoption and a focus on site-specific practices including a prepared nursing workforce, continuous evaluation of care processes and the use of resources to assess for contextual determinants facilitates success and sustainability of this essential EBP approach.

Rapid infusion of infliximab biosimilars and the incidence and severity of infusion-related reactions in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Infliximab is an anti-tumour necrosis factor agent used in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which includes Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. While the use of infliximab is well established in the treatment of IBD, there are now four recently FDA-approved infliximab biosimilars that are increasingly used due to their cost-benefit for patients, institutions and payors. In addition, shortening the length of infliximab infusions from 120 min (standard infusion) to 60 min or less (rapid infusion) has been shown to safely provide further cost-benefit while also improving patient convenience. The safety of rapid infusions has been well-established for the infliximab reference product, however, there are limited data available regarding the safety of rapid infusions for infliximab biosimilars. The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence and severity of infusion reactions among patients with IBD receiving rapid infusion of infliximab reference product compared with infliximab biosimilar.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of electronic health record data of patients with a diagnosis of IBD receiving an infliximab reference product or infliximab biosimilar infusion between December 2020 and December 2021. Patient-level variables included demographics, immunomodulator use, IBD-related hospitalization and infliximab trough concentration and antibody levels. Infusion-related variables of interest included total number of infusions, drug, dose, dosing interval, infusion time and use of pre-medications. Infusion-related reactions were defined as safety concerns documented by the administering nurse (anaphylaxis, shortness of breath, hypotension, swelling, rash, pruritus, hives, flushing, chest pain, muscle pain, joint pain, fevers, chills, headache or hypertension) or administration of emergency medications. Fisher's exact test was used to compare reaction rates.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 188 patients met inclusion criteria for analysis, and a total of 1124 infusions were administered during the study period. There were no statistically significant differences among any of the pre-specified outcomes. There were no differences in the incidence of infusion reactions among rapid infusion (60 min) infliximab and infliximab biosimilars (p = 0.863). Additionally, there were no differences in the incidence of infusion reactions among standard infusion (120 min) infliximab and infliximab biosimilars (p = 0.993). Finally, there were no differences among the rate of infusion reactions between rapid infusion of infliximab biosimilars and standard infusion of infliximab biosimilars (p = 0.536). Eight patients experienced safety issues, with three patients requiring emergency medications (1.6% of 188 patients).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS

Rapid infusions of infliximab biosimilars were not associated with an increase in the incidence of infusion reactions compared with: rapid infusion of infliximab reference product, standard infusion of infliximab biosimilars, or standard infusion of infliximab reference product. This should reassure clinicians that rapid infusions of infliximab biosimilars are safe in clinical practice.

Immunomodulatory Agents for Treatment of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (Review safety of anti-TNF, Anti-Integrin, Anti IL-12/23, JAK Inhibition, Sphingosine 1-Phosphate Receptor Modulator, Azathioprine / 6-MP and Methotrexate)

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

As treatment options for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) expand each class of medication will have specific safety concerns and side-effect profiles that need to be considered for optimal treatment of patients. We will review the most recent safety data for the newly approved immunomodulator therapies for the treatment of IBD.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are a growing number of publications outlining safety concerns for medications used to treat IBD. We reviewed safety profile of anti-tumor necrosis factor antibodies (TNF) with specific attention to combination therapy (anti-TNF plus immunomodulator). Recent publications have demonstrated increased risk of serious infection and malignancy (lymphoma and overall cancer rates) in patients receiving anti-TNF combination therapy when compared with patients receiving anti-TNF monotherapy or immunomodulator monotherapy. Recent publications on Janus Kinase Inhibitors indicate an increased risk of infection, specifically Herpes Zoster, and increased risk of major cardiovascular events and venous thromboembolic events resulting in a black box warning for the medication. In contrast, anti-interleukin 12/23 agents and gut selective anti-integrin antibody agents have demonstrated a favorable side-effect profile with low rates of infection and malignancy. The latest class of medications to be approved, sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulators, have cardiac and infectious precautions. The field of IBD treatment is rapidly evolving with several mechanistic classes of medications now available. While corticosteroids continue to be associated with the greatest, overall, safety risks, each of the newer mechanistic classes have unique safety concerns. In the future, as we gain more experience with these agents, we will need to continue to evaluate the safety profile of our therapies used alone or in combination to make informed treatment decisions with our patients.

The Efficacy of Antihistamines in Preventing Reactions to Infliximab in Patients With Crohn Disease/Ulcerative Colitis: A Review of the Evidence

Inflammatory bowel diseases, including Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis, are most often diagnosed during adolescence and young adulthood, with a rising incidence in pediatric populations. Infliximab is an effective treatment option for Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis. The most common adverse event with infliximab is an infusion reaction. Patients are often treated prophylactically with combinations of acetaminophen, intravenous steroid, and an antihistamine to prevent an infusion reaction. There is a high degree of practice variation regarding pretreatment for infliximab infusions, the efficacy of pretreatment with an antihistamine is unproven in preventing infusion-related reactions, and there is no national clinical standard. Unnecessary pretreatment in adolescence and young adulthood may be harmful, as this is a time to focus on developing self-care management skills. Antihistamine side effects including somnolence and dizziness may adversely affect adolescents and/or young adults' ability to complete schoolwork, drive, and transition toward autonomous management of their chronic illness. This report presents the findings of an evidence-based practice project reviewing the efficacy of pretreatment with an antihistamine in patients with Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis receiving infliximab. Practice implications are discussed.

How to Prevent and Mitigate Hypersensitivity Reactions to Biologicals Induced by Anti-Drug Antibodies?

Biologicals are widely used therapeutic agents for rheumatologic diseases, cancers, and other chronic inflammatory diseases. They are characterized by complex structures and content of variable amounts of foreign regions, which may lead to anti-drug antibodies (ADA) development. ADA onset may limit the clinical usage of biologicals because they may decrease their safety. In fact they are mainly associated with immediate hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). Development of ADAs is reduced by concomitant immunosuppressive treatment, while it is increased by longer intervals between drug administrations; thus, regular infusion regimens should be preferred to reduce HSRs. Once ADAs have formed, some procedures can be implemented to reduce the risk of HSRs. ADAs may belong to different isotype; the detection of IgE ADA is advisable to be assessed when high and early ADAs are detected, in order to reduce the risk of severe HRs. In patients who need to reintroduce the biological culprit, as alternative therapies are not available, drug desensitization (DD) may be applied. Desensitization should be conceptually dedicated to patients with an IgE-mediated HSR; however, it can be performed also in patients who had developed non-IgE-mediated HSRs. Although the underlying mechanisms behind successful DD has not been fully clarified, the DD procedure is associated with the inhibition of mast cell degranulation and cytokine production. Additionally, some data are emerging about the inhibition of drug-specific immune responses during DD.

TNF-Alpha Blockers in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Practical Recommendations and a User's Guide: An Update

BACKGROUND

Anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF) antagonists have been the mainstay in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) for over 20 years.

SUMMARY

This review article aimed to provide an update on recent advances in TNF antagonist therapy for IBDs. Key Messages: Their position in the treatment algorithm has evolved to "rapid step-up therapy" or "top-down therapy" according to disease severity and patients' characteristics. Limitations of anti-TNF antagonists include loss of response in up to 30-50% of patients with or without the development of antibodies. Therapeutic drug monitoring should provide a tailored, personalized approach to this scenario. Recently, biosimilar agents have been approved for IBDs and are considered equivalent in efficacy to the originator.

Premedication Does Not Influence the Incidence of Infliximab Infusion Reactions in Pediatric Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease-A Single Center Case-Control Study

Background: Infusion reactions (IRs) are the most common adverse events (AEs) of infliximab (IFX) treatment in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Prophylactic premedication (PM) with corticosteroids or antihistamines prior to IFX infusions has been used in clinical practice, but its efficacy is not known. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of steroid PM on IR incidence in pediatric patients with IBD receiving IFX. Methods: We performed a case–control study that included pediatric patients with IBD receiving IFX. Patients were divided into four subgroups according to the agent and PM they received: Remicade (original drug) + PM, and two biosimilars—Reshma +/− PM, and Flixabi—PM. At our site, until 2018, PM with steroids was used as a part of standard IFX infusion (PM+); however, since then, this method has no longer been administered (PM−). IRs were divided into mild/severe reactions. Differences between subgroups were assessed with the appropriate chi-square test. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess associations between PM and IR incidence, correcting for co-medication usage. Results: There were 105 children (55 PM+, 44 male, mean age 15 years) included in the study who received 1276 infusions. There was no difference between the PM+ and PM− subgroups, either in incidence of IR (18.2% vs. 16.0% of patients, p > 0.05) or in percentage of infusions followed by IR (2.02% vs. 1.02% of infusions, p > 0.5). The OR of developing IR when using PM was 0.34, and the difference in IRs ratio in PM+ and PM− patients was not statistically significant (95% CI, 0.034–1.9). There were 11/18 (61.1%) severe IRs (anaphylactic shock) reported in all patients (both PM+ and PM−). Conclusion: At our site, the incidence of IR was low, and PM did not decrease the incidence of IR in pediatric patients with IBD receiving IFX. These results indicate that PM with steroids should not be a standard part of IFX infusion to prevent IR.

Safety of Rapid Infliximab Biosimilar Infusions in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

The biosimilar landscape for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) continues to grow, with several biosimilar products for originator infliximab now available. The rapid infusion of originator infliximab and infliximab-dyyb has been shown to be well tolerated; however, the tolerability of rapid infusion in patients receiving infliximab-abda, another infliximab biosimilar, or in those who have switched among originator infliximab and biosimilars remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the safety of rapid infusion in patients with IBD who received infliximab-abda or underwent switches with infliximab products.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study of all infliximab-related infusion encounters for patients ≥18 years with IBD who received their infusion over 30 to 90 minutes at our institution between March 1, 2020, and September 30, 2020. Patient, disease, and treatment characteristics were collected. The primary outcome was infusion reactions.

RESULTS

A total of 377 infusion encounters for 96 unique patients were evaluated. Within the study cohort, 16% of patients were treated with originator infliximab, 42% with infliximab-dyyb, and 2% with infliximab-abda. The remaining 41% of patients received at least 2 infliximab products during the study period, primarily infliximab-dyyb and infliximab-abda. Approximately 54% and 42% of infusions encounters included premedication and immunomodulator use. Within the 377 infusion encounters, no infusion reactions were noted.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Rapid infusion of infliximab biosimilars (including infliximab-abda) and in patients who have switched among originator infliximab and biosimilars is well tolerated. Future studies should assess clinical impact and outcomes of rapid infusion with biosimilars.

Safety of Hydrocortisone Premedication Discontinuation in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Maintenance Therapy with Infliximab: a Prospective Clinical and Pharmacological Study

BACKGROUND

Hydrocortisone premedication reduces the risk of antibodies to infliximab [ATIs] formation in patients receiving infliximab [IFX] therapy for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD].

AIM

We aimed to determine the safety of hydrocortisone premedication withdrawal in IBD patients with sustained clinical response on maintenance therapy with IFX.

METHODS

We performed an observational prospective pharmacoclinical study in a tertiary referral centre, including all consecutive IBD outpatients with no previous IFX infusion reaction and in clinical remission on maintenance IFX [alone or in combination therapy] for at least 6 months. This cohort was followed for 1 year after discontinuation of hydrocortisone premedication.

RESULTS

Among the 268 IBD outpatients, 95 patients met the inclusion criteria [mean age 38 years; 64% male; 80% Crohn's disease; 45% combination therapy]. The median IFX duration was 5 years [0.54-14] with a mean infused dose of 533 mg [200-1000] and a mean interval duration of 7.9 weeks [4-10]. None of the patients developed permanent ATIs or infusion-related reaction at 1 year. Four patients developed transient ATIs without loss of clinical response. There was no significant variation of infliximab serum trough levels [5.5 µg/mL vs 5.9 µg/mL] measured at the time of the three IFX infusions before and after hydrocortisone withdrawal. Loss of response rate to IFX was 18% at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrocortisone discontinuation is safe in IBD patients with sustained clinical remission on maintenance therapy with IFX. Our data suggest that routine premedication with hydrocortisone is unnecessary in patients in prolonged remission under IFX maintenance therapy.

Infliximab in inflammatory bowel disease. Is premedication necessary?

BACKGROUND

The use of infliximab (IFX) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been associated with a 1-6% risk of infusion reactions. The usefulness of premedication with corticosteroids, paracetamol and /or antihistamines is controversial.

AIM

The aim of this study is to assess, in IBD patients on IFX, whether there are differences in secondary reactions to the infusion between those who use premedication or not.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed identifying patients with a diagnosis of IBD who received IFX at our institution between January 2009 and July 2019. Acute reactions were defined as those that occurred in the first 24 hours postinfusion and late reactions for more than 24 hours. Infusion reactions were classified as mild, moderate and severe. Descriptive and association statistics were used (χ2; p < 0.05).

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were included with 1,263 infusions in total, 52% men. Median infusions per patient was 22 (2-66). All induction infusions were administered with premedication, and in maintenance in 57% of them. Premedication was given with hydrocortisone, chlorphenamine and paracetamol. Most of reactions were acute, mild or moderate in severity and no patient needed to discontinue IFX. In the maintenance group, there were 9/718 (1.2%) infusion reactions with premedication and 4/358 (1.1%) without it (p = 0.606). In the induction group, there were 8/187 (4.3%) infusion reactions, significantly higher when compared with both maintenance groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this group, premedication use during maintenance was not effective at reducing the rate of infusion reactions. These results suggest that premedication would not be necessary.

Comparison of Two Corticosteroid Pre-Infusion Regimens for Pegloticase in the United States: A Retrospective Analysis in Community Rheumatology Practices

BACKGROUND

Pegloticase is a recombinant porcine-like uricase enzyme that is FDA-approved for the treatment of chronic refractory gout in adults. Some patients receiving pegloticase develop anti-drug antibodies, which leads to both loss of pegloticase efficacy and an increased risk for infusion reactions. In the pivotal trials, all patients received pre-infusion medications before each pegloticase dose, including intravenous (IV) hydrocortisone. In clinical practice, many clinicians use methylprednisolone for pre-infusion therapy with pegloticase; however, the efficacy of methylprednisolone compared with hydrocortisone as a pre-infusion medication for pegloticase has not been established.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of methylprednisolone versus hydrocortisone as a pre-infusion medication for pegloticase.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected from 92 qualifying patients treated with pegloticase and administered pre-infusion prophylaxis with either intravenous hydrocortisone or methylprednisolone. Patient demographics, steroid type and dose, duration of pegloticase therapy, overall number of infusions, and number of infusion reactions were assessed.

RESULTS

Patients treated with methylprednisolone as a pre-infusion medication received on average 8.5 pegloticase infusions versus 4.9 infusions for patients who were treated with hydrocortisone (p < 0.001). In addition, a significantly lower proportion of patients receiving methylprednisolone had their course of therapy terminated early due to infusion reactions (8.2%) versus patients receiving hydrocortisone (41.9%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective chart-review project, patients were able to have a longer duration of pegloticase therapy, received a significantly greater number of infusions, and experienced fewer infusion reactions when methylprednisolone was used as the corticosteroid for pre-infusion prophylaxis compared with hydrocortisone.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound in Detecting Intestinal Inflammation in Paediatric IBD Patients-a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Currently used non-invasive tools for monitoring children with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD], such as faecal calprotectin, do not accurately reflect the degree of intestinal inflammation and do not provide information on disease location. Ultrasound [US] might be of added value. This systematic review aimed to assess the diagnostic test accuracy of transabdominal US in detecting intestinal inflammation in children with IBD in both diagnostic and follow-up settings.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase [Ovid], Cochrane Library, and CINAHL [EBSCO] databases for studies assessing diagnostic accuracy of transabdominal US for detection of intestinal inflammation in patients diagnosed or suspected of IBD, aged 0-18 years, with ileo-colonoscopy and/or magnetic resonance enterography [MRE] as reference standards. Studies using US contrast were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2.

RESULTS

The search yielded 276 records of which 14 were included. No meta-analysis was performed, because of heterogeneity in study design and methodological quality. Only four studies gave a clear description of their definition for an abnormal US result. The sensitivity and specificity of US ranged from 39-93% and 90-100% for diagnosing de novo IBD, and 48-93% and 83-93% for detecting active disease during follow-up, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic accuracy of US in detecting intestinal inflammation as seen on MRE and/or ileo-colonoscopy in paediatric IBD patients remains inconclusive, and there is currently no consensus on defining an US result as abnormal. Prospective studies with adequate sample size and methodology are needed before US can be used in the diagnostics and monitoring of paediatric IBD.

Premedication as primary prophylaxis does not influence the risk of acute infliximab infusion reactions in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Up to 25% of patients treated with infliximab experience hypersensitivity reactions. Prophylactic premedication prior to infliximab infusion, comprising corticosteroids and/or antihistamines, is widely used in clinical practice but its efficacy has recently been called into question due to the lack of pathophysiological rationale and validation by controlled trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search of multiple electronic databases from inception to June 2017 to identify studies reporting the impact of corticosteroid and/or antihistamine premedication on the risk of acute (<24 h) hypersensitivity reaction to infliximab in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). Random-effects meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Ten studies, eight observational studies and two randomized control trials, were identified including a total of 3892 patients with IMIDs, and 1,385 patients with IBD. Corticosteroid premedication was not associated with a decreased risk of hypersensitivity reaction in either IMIDs (7 studies; OR, 1.07, 95%CI, 0.64-1.78; I² = 57.5%) or IBD (3 studies; OR, 1.04, 95% CI, 0.52-2.07; I² = 57%). Antihistamine premedication was not associated with a decreased risk of hypersensitivity reaction in IMIDs (3 studies: OR, 1.39, 95% CI, 0.70-2.73; I² = 85%). The combination of corticosteroids and antihistamines did not decrease the risk of acute infliximab infusion reaction in IMIDs (6 studies; OR, 2.12, 95% CI, 0.61-7.35; I² = 94%), but was associated with an increased risk in IBD (4 studies, OR, 4.17, 95% CI, 1.61-10.78; I² = 77%).

CONCLUSION

Corticosteroid and/or antihistamine premedication is not associated with a decreased risk of acute hypersensitivity reactions to infliximab in patients with IMIDs. We believe that these premedications should no longer be part of standard protocols.

Risk Factors Associated with Infusion Reactions to Infliximab in Chinese Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Large Single-Center Study

BACKGROUND This study investigated the risk factors of infliximab (IFX)-related infusion reactions (IR) in Chinese patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). MATERIAL AND METHODS The medical records of 330 consecutive IBD patients treated with IFX between 2009 and 2017 were reviewed. The incidence of IR and adverse effects were recorded in detail, and the potential risk factors related to IR were analyzed by univariate and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS The 330 patients received a total of 2108 IFX infusions, with a median follow-up of 29 months. Eighteen patients (5.5%) experienced IR: 15 were immediate (2 severe) and 3 were late (0 severe). The patients who were treated with episodic IFX without concomitant IM therapy and at the 2nd IFX series (all P<0.001) had higher incidence of IR. Logistic regression revealed the 2nd IFX treatment series (OR=0.017, P<0.001) and episodic use of IFX (OR=0.113, P<0.001) as the significant predictors. Antibodies against infliximab (ATI) were highly positive in 10 of 14 patients (71%) with IR. Sixty-seven percent of patients finished infusions after IR through appropriate management. CONCLUSIONS IFX infusions were accompanied by IR in about 5% of Chinese IBD patients. Severe IR was rare. The patients with the 2nd series or episodic use of IFX should be monitored closely during infusion.

Adverse events in IBD therapy: the 2018 update

Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis affect an increasing number of patients, and utilization of immune suppressant and biologic therapies is also increasing. These agents are linked to adverse events ranging from mild nuisance symptoms to potentially life-threatening complications including infections and malignancies. Areas covered: This review provides an updated discussion on adverse events associated with immunomodulator, anti-TNF-α, anti-integrin, and anti-IL 12/IL-23 antibody therapies. In addition, we review the risk profile of the currently widely available infliximab biosimilar medication. Expert commentary: Providers should engage in risk-benefit discussion with information specific to each medication discussed, and consider individualized risk factors when selecting therapeutic agents. Drug monitoring and shared decision-making results in more personalized medical management of inflammatory bowel disease.

Assuring Quality for Non-hospital-based Biologic Infusions in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Clinical Report From the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition

The primary aim of this Clinical Report by the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition is to provide formal guidance to pediatric gastroenterologists and clinicians, health systems, and insurance payers regarding home- and office-based infusions for biologic therapies in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease. Patients in North America are increasingly denied coverage by payers based on "place of service" codes at hospital-based infusion units where the treating clinicians primarily provide care. A task force with topic expertise generated 8 best practice recommendations to ensure quality of care for pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease receiving non-hospital-based biologic infusions. Pragmatic considerations discussed in this report include patient safety, pediatric-trained nurse availability, care coordination, patient-centeredness, shared liability, administrative support, clinical governance, and costs of care.

Rapid Infliximab Infusion in Children with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Multicenter North American Experience

BACKGROUND

Infliximab (IFX) infusion may lead to development of anti-IFX antibodies, and subsequent infusion reactions (IRs). The safety of rapid IFX infusion administered over 60 minutes has been under-investigated in children with inflammatory bowel disease. In a multicenter study, the frequency and nature of rapid infusion-associated IRs were examined.

METHODS

The medical records of all consecutive children with inflammatory bowel disease receiving rapid IFX infusions between January 2014 and December 2016 were reviewed. Poisson regression analysis was used to identify possible associated factors with IRs.

RESULTS

A total of 4120 rapid infusions for 453 children (median age 16 yrs [interquartile range 13.8-17.8], 289 males, 374 with Crohn's disease) were included. One hundred thirty-five participants (29.8%) received rapid IFX infusion for induction and maintenance while the rest received rapid IFX infusion after a median of 5 (interquartile range 4-9) standard infusions. The median dose of IFX using rapid protocol was 8 mg/kg/infusion (interquartile range 6-10). Two hundred sixty-seven (59%) patients received 1 or more premedications and 161 (35.5%) participants received concomitant immunosuppression. Twenty-one participants (4.6%) had IRs with rapid infusions and 2 participants discontinued IFX because of IRs (0.4%). Antihistamine premedications were associated with less frequent IR (adjusted relative risk = 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.64; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

In children with inflammatory bowel disease, rapid IFX infusion administered over 60 minutes is safe and well-tolerated. Antihistamine premedications may reduce frequency of IRs (see Video Abstract, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/IBD/B632).

Premedication Use in Preventing Acute Infliximab Infusion Reactions in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Single Center Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Infliximab (IFX) is commonly used in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. One common side effect of IFX is an acute infusion reaction. Despite the lack of evidence supporting their use, clinicians use various premedications to prevent acute reactions. We evaluated the effectiveness of premedications in the prevention of acute IFX infusion reactions.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed identifying patients with a diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease who received IFX at our institution. Information about each IFX infusion was recorded, including the dose, infusion rate, use of premedications, and any reactions. Infusions were stratified into low and high risk. In the high- and low-risk groups, the relative risk was calculated for each premedication combination used in our institution.

RESULTS

Seven hundred seventy-three patients were identified; 578 patients (7090 infusions) met inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. Nine hundred eighty-six high-risk infusions were isolated; 620 (62.8%) of these infusions were administered with premedications (diphenhydramine and/or hydrocortisone) and 53 (5.4%) reactions occurred. Six thousand one hundred four low-risk infusions were identified; 2253 (36.9%) of these infusions had premedications and 61 (1.0%) reactions occurred. In both groups, none of the premedications used resulted in a significantly lower reaction rate compared with no premedication use.

CONCLUSIONS

In both the high- and low-risk cohorts in this study, premedication use was not effective in reducing the rate of acute IFX reactions. Given this, routine premedication use is not recommended without future randomized control trials to demonstrate efficacy.

Frequency of Severe Infusion Reactions Associated With Outpatient Infusion of Infliximab Without Premedications

In this report, we describe incremental changes, during a 2-year period at a single center with the administration of maintenance infliximab infusions. Given practice-driven changes consisting of 1-hour infusions and omission of premedications, we aimed to investigate if these changes contributed to severe infusion reactions. We reviewed approximately 900 infliximab infusions in a pediatric ambulatory infusion center from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2015, for severe adverse reactions requiring either rescue epinephrine or a code blue or "rapid response" activation. In 2015, these practice changes resulted in a 51% decrease in total infusion hours (1281 to 630 infusion hours), despite a 9% increase in total number of infusions. No increase in severe adverse events associated with either rapid 1-hour infusion or omission of premedications. Our findings highlight a quality-improvement opportunity to standardize infliximab infusions to streamline care in an ambulatory setting.