Dose de-escalation to adalimumab 40 mg every 3 weeks in patients with Crohn's disease - a nested case-control study

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.

De-escalation of Biologic Treatment in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Comprehensive Review

INTRODUCTION

Biologic therapy is an effective treatment for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. However due to cost and safety concerns, dose de-escalation strategies after achieving remission have been suggested.

AIM

To critically review available data on dose de-escalation of biologics [or other advanced therapies] in IBD. We will focus on studies evaluating de-escalation to standard dosing in patients initially optimised, and also on studies assessing de-escalation from standard dosing.

METHODS

A systematic bibliographic search was performed.

RESULTS

The mean frequency of de-escalation after previous dose intensification [12 studies, 1,474 patients] was 34%. The corresponding frequency of de-escalation from standard dosing [five studies, 3,842 patients] was 4.2%. The relapse rate of IBD following anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] de-escalation to standard dosing in patients initially dose-escalated [10 studies, 301 patients] was 30%. The corresponding relapse rate following anti-TNF de-escalation from standard dosing [nine studies, 494 patients] was 38%. The risk of relapse was lower for patients in clinical, biologic, and endoscopic/radiological remission at the time of de-escalation. A role of anti-TNF therapeutic drug monitoring in the decision to dose de-escalate has been demonstrated. In patients relapsing after de-escalation, re-escalation is generally effective. De-escalation is not consistently associated with a better safety profile. The cost-effectiveness of the de-escalation strategy remains uncertain. Finally, there is not enough evidence to recommend dose de-escalation of biologics different from anti-TNFs or small molecules.

CONCLUSIONS

Any consideration for de-escalation of biologic therapy in IBD must be tailored, taking into account the risks and consequences of a flare and patients' preferences.

Increased versus conventional adalimumab dose interval for patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission (LADI): a pragmatic, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite its effectiveness in treating Crohn's disease, adalimumab is associated with an increased risk of infections and high health-care costs. We aimed to assess clinical outcomes of increased adalimumab dose intervals versus conventional dosing in patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission.

METHODS

The LADI study was a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, parallel, randomised controlled trial, done in six academic hospitals and 14 general hospitals in the Netherlands. Adults (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with luminal Crohn's disease (with or without concomitant perianal disease) were eligible when in steroid-free clinical and biochemical remission (defined as Harvey-Bradshaw Index [HBI] score <5, faecal calprotectin <150 μg/g, and C-reactive protein <10 mg/L) for at least 9 months on a stable dose of 40 mg subcutaneous adalimumab every 2 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to the intervention group or control group by the coordinating investigator using a secure web-based system with variable block randomisation (block sizes of 6, 9, and 12). Randomisation was stratified on concomitant use of thiopurines and methotrexate. Patients and health-care providers were not masked to group assignment. Patients allocated to the intervention group increased adalimumab dose intervals to 40 mg every 3 weeks at baseline and further to every 4 weeks if they remained in clinical and biochemical remission at week 24. Patients in the control group continued their 2-weekly dose interval. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of persistent flares at week 48 defined as the presence of at least two of the following criteria: HBI score of 5 or more, C-reactive protein 10 mg/L or more, and faecal calprotectin more than 250 μg/g for more than 8 weeks and a concurrent decrease in the adalimumab dose interval or start of escape medication. The non-inferiority margin was 15% on a risk difference scale. All analyses were done in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03172377, and is not recruiting.

FINDINGS

Between May 3, 2017, and July 6, 2020, 174 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=113) or the control group (n=61). Four patients from the intervention group and one patient from the control group were excluded from the analysis for not meeting inclusion criteria. 85 (50%) of 169 participants were female and 84 (50%) were male. At week 48, the cumulative incidence of persistent flares in the intervention group (three [3%] of 109) was non-inferior compared with the control group (zero; pooled adjusted risk difference 1·86% [90% CI -0·35 to 4·07). Seven serious adverse events occurred, all in the intervention group, of which two (both patients with intestinal obstruction) were possibly related to the intervention. Per 100 person-years, 168·35 total adverse events, 59·99 infection-related adverse events, and 42·57 gastrointestinal adverse events occurred in the intervention group versus 134·67, 75·03, and 5·77 in the control group, respectively.

INTERPRETATION

The individual benefit of increasing adalimumab dose intervals versus the risk of disease recurrence is a trade-off that should take patient preferences regarding medication and the risk of a flare into account.

FUNDING

Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

De-escalation of Anti-tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Agents and Reduction in Adverse Effects: A Systematic Review

Background: The long-term use of anti-TNF-α agents can lead to adverse effects, such as infections and immune-mediated cutaneous reactions. Whether de-escalation by dose reduction or interval lengthening reduces these adverse effects is uncertain. This systematic review aims to compare the incidence of infections and skin manifestations after anti-TNF-α dose de-escalation with standard dosing. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to 14 January 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing anti-TNF-α de-escalation strategies with standard dosing among patients with inflammatory conditions, that report on infections, skin manifestations, or both, were included. The risk of bias was assessed with the revised Cochrane risk-of bias tool (RCTs) or the Newcastle–Ottawa scale (non-RCTs). Results: Fourteen RCTs and six observational studies (or 2706 patients) were included. Eight RCTs had low risk of bias or some concerns. Four non-RCTs were of good methodological quality. The studies described patients with axial spondyloarthritis (8 studies, 780 patients), rheumatoid arthritis (7 studies, 1458 patients), psoriasis (3 studies, 332 patients), or inflammatory bowel disease (2 studies, 136 patients). De-escalation strategies included interval lengthening (12 studies, 1317 patients), dose reduction (6 studies, 1130 patients), or both (2 studies, 259 patients). Overall, the occurrence of infections and skin manifestations did not differ between standard treatment and de-escalation. The disappearance of infections or skin manifestations after de-escalation was only reported in two studies. The majority of studies focused on etanercept and adalimumab. Heterogeneity in reporting of infections and skin manifestations precluded meta-analysis. Conclusion: We found that anti-TNF-α de-escalation does not reduce infections or skin reactions. A de-escalation strategy should not be recommended for the sole purpose of reducing drug-related adverse effects. The meticulous documentation of adverse effects is recommended to further address this question. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42021252977.

Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in inflammatory bowel disease: the story continues

In the 1990s, tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor therapy ushered in the biologic therapy era for inflammatory bowel disease, leading to marked improvements in treatment options and patient outcomes. There are currently four tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors approved as treatments for ulcerative colitis and/or Crohn's disease: infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab and certolizumab pegol. Despite the clear benefits of tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors, a subset of patients with inflammatory bowel disease either do not respond, experience a loss of response after initial clinical improvement or report intolerance to anti-tumour necrosis factor-α therapy. Optimizing outcomes of these agents may be achieved through earlier intervention, the use of therapeutic drug monitoring and thoughtful switching within class. To complement these approaches, evolving predictive biomarkers may help inform and optimize clinical decision making by identifying patients who might potentially benefit from an alternative treatment strategy. This review will focus on the current use of tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors in inflammatory bowel disease and the application of personalized medicine to improve future outcomes for all patients.

Efficacy of anti-TNF dosing interval lengthening in adolescents and young adults with inflammatory bowel disease in sustained remission (FREE-study): protocol for a partially randomised patient preference trial

INTRODUCTION

Anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy has greatly improved treatment outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but long-term use is associated with cutaneous reactions, susceptibility to infections and frequent injections or hospital visits. Several non-controlled studies have demonstrated that dose reduction is feasible for a subset of patients, provided that early detection of a disease flare is possible. Here, we aim to compare the effectiveness of interval lengthening with standard dosing in maintaining remission in young patients with IBD.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this international, prospective, non-inferiority, partially randomised patient preference trial, we aim to recruit 148 patients aged 12-25 years with luminal Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis in sustained remission (ie, three consecutive in-range faecal calprotectin (FC) results or recently confirmed endoscopic remission). In the interventional arm, the dosing interval will be lengthened from 8 to 12 weeks for infliximab users and from 2 to 3 weeks for adalimumab users. In the control group, standard dosing will be continued. Rapid tests will be performed for FC every 4 weeks and for anti-TNF trough levels every 12 weeks. The primary outcome is the cumulative incidence of out-of-range FC results at 48-week follow-up. Secondary endpoints include time to get out-of-range FC results, cumulative incidence of adverse effects, proportion of patients progressing to loss of response and identification of predictors of successful interval lengthening.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol has been approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee of the University Medical Centre Groningen and is pending at the other participating centres. Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT number: 2020-001811-26; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04646187. Protocol version 4, date 17 September 2021.

Effectiveness of Dose De-escalation of Biologic Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

De-escalation of biologic therapy is a commonly encountered clinical scenario. Although biologic discontinuation has been associated with high rates of relapse, the effectiveness of dose de-escalation is unclear. This review was performed to determine the effectiveness of dose de-escalation of biologic therapy in inflammatory bowel disease.

METHODS

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to October 2019. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies involving dose de-escalation of biologic therapy in adults with inflammatory bowel disease in remission were included. Studies involving biologic discontinuation only and those lacking outcomes after dose de-escalation were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

We identified 1,537 unique citations with 20 eligible studies after full-text review. A total of 995 patients were included from 18 observational studies (4 prospective and 14 retrospective), 1 nonrandomized controlled trial, and 1 subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial. Seven studies included patients with Crohn's disease, 1 included patients with ulcerative colitis, and 12 included both. Overall, clinical relapse occurred in 0%-54% of patients who dose de-escalated biologic therapy (17 studies). The 1-year rate of clinical relapse ranged from 7% to 50% (6 studies). Eighteen studies were considered at high risk of bias, mostly because of the lack of a control group.

DISCUSSION

Dose de-escalation seems to be associated with high rates of clinical relapse; however, the quality of the evidence was very low. Additional controlled prospective studies are needed to clarify the effectiveness of biologic de-escalation and identify predictors of success.

Spacing the Administration Interval of Anti-TNF Agents: A Valid Strategy for Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease?

BACKGROUND

Increasing the interval of administration of anti-TNF agents over the duration specified in the data sheet is not common in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

AIM

To evaluate the outcomes of IBD patients treated with this strategy.

METHODS

Patients with IBD who were treated with infliximab or adalimumab at intervals > 8 weeks or > 2 weeks, respectively, because of persistent clinical remission, were identified at local databases of the ENEIDA registry (a nationwide registry promoted by the Spanish Working Group in Crohn's disease and Ulcerative Colitis-GETECCU) of two referral centers. Treatment success was considered if patients remained in clinical remission with the same schedule or without biological therapy at the end of follow-up, and if no return to the conventional schedule, dose-escalation, change in biological agent, or a course of systemic corticosteroids or surgery were required.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients were included, 60 treated with infliximab and 25 with adalimumab. The spaced schedule was initiated after a median of 25 months on anti-TNF treatment (IQR 14-49). Throughout a median follow-up of 34 months (IQR 21-47), fifty patients (59%) fulfilled the success criteria of the spaced strategy. No differences were found regarding type of IBD or anti-TNF agent. Baseline C-reactive protein levels and disease duration at the time of starting anti-TNF treatment were the only factors associated with treatment success.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-TNF administration at longer intervals than those provided in the data sheet may be an efficacious, convenient, and cheaper treatment option, particularly in patients in whom anti-TNF treatment was initiated early.

Lengthening adalimumab dosing interval in quiescent Crohn's disease patients: protocol for the pragmatic randomised non-inferiority LADI study

INTRODUCTION

Adalimumab is effective for maintenance of remission in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) at a dose of 40 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks. However, adalimumab is associated with (long-term) adverse events and is costly. The aim of this study is to demonstrate non-inferiority and cost-effectiveness of disease activity guided adalimumab interval lengthening compared to standard dosing of every other week (EOW).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Lengthening Adalimumab Dosing Interval (LADI) study is a pragmatic, multicentre, open label, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Non-inferiority is reached if the difference in cumulative incidence of persistent (>8 weeks) flares does not exceed the non-inferiority margin of 15%. 174 CD patients on adalimumab maintenance therapy in long-term (>9 months) clinical and biochemical remission will be included (C-reactive protein (CRP) <10 mg/L, faecal calprotectin (FC) <150 µg/g, Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) <5). Patients will be randomised 2:1 into the intervention (adalimumab interval lengthening) or control group (adalimumab EOW). The intervention group will lengthen the adalimumab administration interval to every 3 weeks, and after 24 weeks to every 4 weeks. Clinical and biochemical disease activity will be monitored every 12 weeks by physician global assessment, HBI, CRP and FC. In case of disease flare, dosing will be increased. A flare is defined as two of three of the following criteria; FC>250 µg/g, CRP≥10 mg/l, HBI≥5. Secondary outcomes include cumulative incidence of transient flares, adverse events, predictors for successful dose reduction and cost-effectiveness.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is approved by the Medical Ethics Committee Arnhem-Nijmegen, the Netherlands (registration number NL58948.091.16). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

EudraCT registry (2016-003321-42); Clinicaltrials.gov registry (NCT03172377); Dutch trial registry (NTRID6417).

Best practices on immunomodulators and biologic agents for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in Asia

The Asia-Pacific Working Group on Inflammatory Bowel Disease was established in Cebu, Philippines, under the auspices of the Asia-Pacific Association of Gastroenterology with the goal of improving inflammatory bowel disease care in Asia. This consensus is carried out in collaboration with Asian Organization for Crohn's and Colitis. With biologic agents and biosimilars becoming more established, it is necessary to conduct a review on existing literature and establish a consensus on when and how to introduce biologic agents and biosimilars in conjunction with conventional treatments for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in Asia. These statements also address how pharmacogenetics influences the treatments of ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease and provides guidance on response monitoring and strategies to restore loss of response. Finally, the review includes statements on how to manage treatment alongside possible hepatitis B and tuberculosis infections, both common in Asia. These statements have been prepared and voted upon by members of inflammatory bowel disease workgroup employing the modified Delphi process. These statements do not intend to be all-encompassing, and future revisions are likely as new data continue to emerge.

Model-Informed Drug Development Approach Supporting Approval of Adalimumab (HUMIRA) in Adolescent Patients with Hidradenitis Suppurativa: a Regulatory Perspective

On October 16, 2018, FDA expanded the adalimumab dosing regimen to adolescent hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) patients 12 years and older, weighing at least 30 kg without new clinical data. This approval was mainly supported by the model-informed drug development approach. Population pharmacokinetic simulations suggest body weight-tiered dosing regimens in adolescent patients will achieve similar exposure to adult patients across all weight range. Adalimumab has a well-established, 16-year long-term safety profile in various diseases in adult and pediatric populations. Current data of adalimumab in the pediatric population demonstrate no exposure-response relationship for adverse events. The effectiveness in adolescent patients was extrapolated from two adequate and well-controlled phase 3 studies in adult patients, assuming similar positive exposure-efficacy relationships in adults and adolescents. This article provides the insight of the application of MIDD on the adalimumab approval in adolescent HS patients and its implication on drug development and regulatory decision especially for pediatrics or rare diseases.

Best practices on immunomodulators and biologic agents for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in Asia

The Asia-Pacific Working Group on inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was established in Cebu, Philippines, under the auspices of the Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology with the goal of improving IBD care in Asia. This consensus is carried out in collaboration with Asian Organization for Crohn's and Colitis. With biologic agents and biosimilars becoming more established, it is necessary to conduct a review on existing literature and establish a consensus on when and how to introduce biologic agents and biosimilars in the conjunction with conventional treatments for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) in Asia. These statements also address how pharmacogenetics influence the treatments of UC and CD and provide guidance on response monitoring and strategies to restore loss of response. Finally, the review includes statements on how to manage treatment alongside possible hepatitis B and tuberculosis infections, both common in Asia. These statements have been prepared and voted upon by members of IBD workgroup employing the modified Delphi process. These statements do not intend to be all-encompassing and future revisions are likely as new data continue to emerge.

Dose de-escalation to adalimumab 40 mg every three weeks in patients with inflammatory bowel disease-A multicenter, retrospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

Data about the outcomes after adalimumab dose de-escalation in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are scarce.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the outcomes after adalimumab dose de-escalation, and to identify potential factors associated with failure.

METHODS

Retrospective, observational study including all IBD patients who had undergone adalimumab dose de-escalation to 40 mg every three weeks across seven GETAID centers, between June 2011 and September 2017. Failure of adalimumab dose de-escalation was defined as the need for treatment re-escalation, discontinuation of adalimumab, or clinical, biochemical and/or morphologic disease relapse.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were identified (n = 46 Crohn's disease, n = 10 ulcerative colitis). Median (IQR) duration of follow-up after adalimumab dose de-escalation was 15.9 (7.9-30.6) months. Adalimumab dose de-escalation was a failure in 21/56 (37.5%) patients and successful in 35/56 (62.5%) patients. Median (IQR) time until failure was 8.9 (4.6-15.6) months. At multivariate analysis, inactive disease at magnetic resonance imaging and/or endoscopy in the year before adalimumab dose de-escalation decreased the risk of failure with a factor five (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Adalimumab dose de-escalation to 40 mg every three weeks is possible in almost two thirds of IBD patients. Objective morphologic signs of active disease should be ruled out before considering a de-escalation strategy with adalimumab.

Evaluation of de-escalation of anti-TNF-α therapy in inflammatory bowel disease

Anti-tumour necrosis factor α therapy in inflammatory bowel disease has been shown to be effective in clinical practice. After more than a decade using these therapies the question arises about whether there is an appropriate time to suspend these therapies, and how this should be done. This review aims to evaluate the current evidence on these topics concerning anti-tumour necrosis factor α therapies, and eventually identify conditions and subgroups of patients that could potentially be candidates for withdrawal.

Success and safety of high infliximab trough levels in inflammatory bowel disease

OBJECTIVE

A prospective trial suggests target infliximab trough levels of 3-7 μg/mL, yet data on additional therapeutic benefits and safety of higher trough levels are scarce.

AIM

To explore whether high infliximab trough levels (≥7 μg/mL) are more effective and still safe.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this cohort study of 183 patients (109 Crohn's disease and 74 ulcerative colitis) on infliximab maintenance treatment at a tertiary referral center we correlated fecal calprotectin and C-reactive protein to trough levels (426 samples) at different time points during treatment. Rates of infections were compared in quadrimesters (four-month periods) with high trough levels to quadrimesters with trough levels <7 μg/mL during 420 patient-years.

RESULTS

Fecal calprotectin and C-reactive protein (median [interquartile range]) were lower in patients with high trough levels (fecal calprotectin 66 mg/kg [30-257]; C-reactive protein 3 mg/L [3-3]) compared to trough levels below 7 μg/mL (fecal calprotectin 155 mg/kg [72-474]; C-reactive protein 3 mg/L [3-14.5]) (p < .001). High trough levels were superior also after excluding samples with trough levels <3 μg/mL from analysis. No differences in rates of infections were observed in quadrimesters with high trough levels (16/129 [12.4%]) compared to quadrimesters with trough levels <7 μg/mL (32/344 [9.3%]) (p = .32). Maintaining high trough levels resulted in 32% (interquartile range: 2-54%) increase of infliximab consumption.

CONCLUSION

High infliximab trough levels provide better control of inflammation in inflammatory bowel disease without increasing the risk of infection.

De-escalation of Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Currently, inflammatory bowel disease treatment is based on immunomodulators (IM) and/or biologic as this strategy may prevent the development of irreversible damage. Nevertheless, long-term treatment may be associated with non-negligible side effects and with high costs, and therefore the question on whether therapy can be de-escalated is often posed in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have shown a predictable rate of relapse after stop biologic or IM therapy withdrawal. Overall, around 40-50% of patients will eventually relapse over the following year after drug withdrawal, and the rates will increase over time. Stratification of patients and therapeutic drug monitoring could be promising alternatives to guide therapeutic management. We reviewed the current evidence on de-escalation strategy and summarised the recent results on discontinuation and dose reduction. Nowadays, de-escalation strategy is still a case-by-case decision in highly selected patients.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in the management of chronic inflammatory diseases

Tumour necrosis factor inhibitor therapy has drastically changed the management of chronic inflammatory diseases. Some important drawbacks that can cause loss of response during treatment with these drugs are related to their large individual variability, the disease burden and the formation of antidrug antibodies that increase its clearance. Therapeutic drug monitoring of these drugs is not yet recommended by all scientific societies, and if so, only in patients with inflammatory symptoms. Proactive therapeutic drug monitoring represents a new strategy with many potential clinical benefits, including the prevention of immunogenicity, a reduction in the need for rescue therapy and greater durability of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor treatment. The review is based on a systematic search of the literature for controlled trials, systematic reviews, experimental studies, guideline papers and cohort studies addressing the best practice in tumour necrosis factor inhibitor therapeutic drug monitoring. Although there is ample evidence supporting the use of therapeutic drug monitoring in clinical practice to achieve better outcomes, some challenges have been detected. Many studies are focused on finding solutions for the lack of standardization of analytical methods to measure tumour necrosis factor inhibitor and antidrug antibodies concentrations. Other challenges are development of effective cost-saving proactive algorithms to identify optimal drug concentrations and the research on the role of antidrug antibodies, especially in the management and prevention of loss of response. Therapeutic drug monitoring of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor offers a rational approach to the optimization of the treatment of chronic inflammatory disease. Although prospective controlled trials yield little conclusive evidence of its benefits, there is growing acceptance of its value in clinical practice.

Incidence and Predictors of Success of Adalimumab Dose Escalation and De-escalation in Ulcerative Colitis: a Real-World Belgian Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab (ADM) has been shown efficacious in ulcerative colitis (UC). In randomized controlled trials, dose escalation from 40 mg ADM every other week to 40 mg every week was required in 20%-25% of patients within 1 year. Real-life data suggest higher escalation rates. Attempts for dose de-escalation have not been studied yet. We assessed the need for, outcome of, and predictors of dose escalation and de-escalation in a large retrospective cohort of UC patients treated with ADM.

METHODS

We included 231 consecutive patients from 10 Belgian centers initiating ADM treatment for active UC before September 1, 2015 (follow-up ≥1 year in each patient). We performed detailed chart review to identify variables associated with short-term clinical benefit (based on physician global assessment and absence of rectal bleeding at week 10), success of dose escalation, and dose de-escalation. Backward Cox regression and Wald Logistic regression were used to identify predictive variables.

RESULTS

Short-term clinical benefit was achieved in 101 patients (44%) and was less frequent in infliximab failures [37% vs 50%, Odds ratio 0.57 (95% CI 0.34-0.97), P = 0.038]. After a median of 2.8 (1.7-5.1) months, 164 patients (71%) needed ADM discontinuation (n = 35, 15%) or dose escalation (n = 129, 56%). Dose escalation was successful in 77/129 (60%). Dose de-escalation was attempted in 71% (55/77) after a median of 4.3 (2.9-7.2) months and was successful in 80% (43/54).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, 56% of patients with UC required ADM dose escalation with a 60% success rate. Of note, most patients could be successfully de-escalated later on.

Editorial: therapeutic de-escalation of anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy - is less enough?

Linked Content

This article is linked to Pariente and Laharie paper. To view this article visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.12838.