Long-term outcome of adalimumab therapy for ulcerative colitis with intolerance or lost response to infliximab: a single-centre experience

Selection strategy of second-line biologic therapies in adult patients with ulcerative colitis following prior biologic treatment failure: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Optimizing second-line biologic therapies for adult ulcerative colitis (UC) post first-line failure is essential.

OBJECTIVE

Compare second-line biologic therapy efficacy in adult UC patients with prior treatment failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of electronic databases up to May 2023 was conducted to assess second-line biologic therapy efficacy using a random effects model. Parameters analyzed included clinical remission rate, clinical response rate, mucosal healing rate, annual discontinuation rate, and colectomy rates.

RESULTS

Forty-three research papers were analyzed. Clinical remission rates for second-line biologics were ranked at 6-14 weeks: Infliximab (30%) was followed by Vedolizumab (29%), Ustekinumab (27%), and Adalimumab (19%). At 52-54 weeks, the order shifted, with Vedolizumab (35%) followed by Infliximab (32%), Ustekinumab (31%), and Adalimumab (26%). The mucosal healing rate was 21%, ranked as: Infliximab (31%), Vedolizumab (21%), Adalimumab (21%), and Ustekinumab (14%). The annual discontinuation rate stood at 20%, with Adalimumab (25%), Vedolizumab (18%), Infliximab (17%), and Ustekinumab (16%). Discontinuation rates due to primary failure (PF), secondary failure (SF), and adverse events (AE) were 6%, 12%, and 3%, respectively. The annual colectomy rate was 9%, with Adalimumab (15%) followed by Vedolizumab (10%), Ustekinumab (9%), and Infliximab (5%), and colectomy rates of 10% due to PF, 12% due to SF, and 4% due to AE.

CONCLUSION

For UC patients with first-line treatment failure, it is recommended to prioritize infliximab or vedolizumab as second-line biologic therapies, while avoiding adalimumab as the primary choice. Further clinical trials are necessary to assess ustekinumab efficacy accurately.

Images indexing and matched assessment of semantics and visuals similarities applied to a medical learning X-ray image base

BACKGROUND

Medical diagnostic support systems are important tools in the field of radiology. However, the precision obtained, during the exploitation of high homogeneity image datasets, needs to be improved.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a new learning system dedicated to public health practitioners. This study presents an upgraded version dedicated to radiology experts for better clinical decision-making when diagnosing and treating the patient (CAD approach).

METHODS

Our system is a hybrid approach based on a matching of semantic and visual attributes of images. It is a combination of two complementary subsystems to form the intermodal system. The first one named α based on semantic attributes. Indexing and image retrieval based on specific keywords. The second system named β based on low-level attributes. Vectors characterizing the digital content of the image (color, texture and shape) represent images. Our image database consists of 930 X-ray images including 320 mammograms acquired from the mini-MIAS database of mammograms and 610 X-rays acquired from the Public Hospital Establishment (EPH-Rouiba Algeria). The combination of two subsystems gives rise to the intermodal system: α-subsystem offers an overall result (based on visual descriptors), then β-subsystem (low level descriptors) refines the result and increases relevance.

RESULTS

Our system can perform a specific image search (in a database of images with very high homogeneity) with an accuracy of around 90% for a recall of 25%. The average (overall) accuracy of the system exceeds 70%.

CONCLUSION

The results obtained are very encouraging, and demonstrate efficiency of our approach, particularly for the intermodal system.

Efficacies of first and second tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in refractory ulcerative colitis patients in real-world practice

BACKGROUND

Switching tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors is an important treatment option for refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) patients who fail the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy, although many questions about this option remain unanswered.

METHODS

The efficacy of the second anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy in refractory UC patients who failed the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy was examined using the Mayo score as a measure of disease activity at week 8. The efficacy of the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy before treatment and at weeks 8 and 52 was also evaluated in real-world practice.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in remission induction and maintenance between infliximab and adalimumab as the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy in UC patients. Of 123 UC patients, 21 (17.1%) switched tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors. Eight (38.1%), 4 (19.0%), 7 (33.3%), and 2 (9.5%) patients switched from infliximab to adalimumab, infliximab to golimumab, adalimumab to infliximab, and adalimumab to golimumab, respectively. Three (100%) with intolerance to the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy, 5 (41.7%) with loss of response to the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy, and 1 (20.0%) with no improvement with the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy had clinical remission at week 8.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors is more effective for refractory UC patients who are intolerant and lose response to the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy rather than for those showing no improvement with the first anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy. Patients with primary failure of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy should be switched to another class of drug.

Patient's profiling for therapeutic management of inflammatory bowel disease: a tailored approach

Introduction: Several biological drugs and a new small molecule are available for the treatment of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. However, to date, no reliable predictors of response to treatment have yet been identified. Areas covered: We focused on studies evaluating the therapeutic management of patients with chronic inflammatory bowel diseases in order to identify any predictive factors of response to drugs and to guide therapeutic decisions based on patient and disease characteristics. Expert opinion: The heterogeneity of literature data, the main retrospective nature of the scientific evidence, and the lack of comparative head-to-head trials are the most relevant limitations for identifying factors predicting drug response. In the near future, a personalized approach to patients with chronic inflammatory diseases will be based on patient's profile to define not only the best drug to use, but also the appropriate follow-up, and the possibility of home care.

Global Prevalence and Bidirectional Association Between Psoriasis and Inflammatory Bowel Disease-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Epidemiological studies have established an association between psoriasis and inflammatory bowel disease [IBD], i.e. ulcerative colitis [UC] and Crohn's disease [CD], but results are inconsistent. The aim of this study was therefore to quantify the prevalences and association between IBD and psoriasis.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched from database inception through April 2018 for studies reporting data on psoriasis among patients with IBD and vice versa. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate, respectively, the prevalences and association between IBD and psoriasis. Data extraction was according to the PRISMA guideline, and quality assessment was made using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The main outcomes were the proportion of psoriasis patients with IBD and vice versa, as well as the association (odds ratio [OR]) of IBD in psoriasis and psoriasis in IBD, respectively.

RESULTS

Based on quantitative analysis of 93 studies, the prevalence of psoriasis in CD and in UC was 3.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.1%-4.6%) and 2.8% [95% CI 2.0%-3.8%] respectively. The prevalence of CD and UC was 0.7% [95% CI 0.2%-1.3%] and 0.5% [95% CI 0.3%-0.8%], respectively, among patients with psoriasis. Presence of CD or UC was significantly associated with psoriasis, with OR 2.0 [95% CI 1.4-2.9] and OR 1.5 [95% CI 1.2-2.0], respectively. Presence of psoriasis was significantly associated with CD: OR 2.2 [95% CI 1.6-3.1] and with UC: OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.3-2.0].

CONCLUSIONS

We found significant bidirectional associations between psoriasis and IBD, warranting increased awareness among clinicians in the diagnostic process, especially in children and adolescents with IBD. Last, this study showed an increased frequency of paradoxical psoriasis in patients treated with biologics.

Effectiveness and Safety of the Sequential Use of a Second and Third Anti-TNF Agent in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Results From the Eneida Registry

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of the switch to another anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent is not known. The aim of this study was to analyze the effectiveness and safety of treatment with a second and third anti-TNF drug after intolerance to or failure of a previous anti-TNF agent in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients.

METHODS

We included patients diagnosed with IBD from the ENEIDA registry who received another anti-TNF after intolerance to or failure of a prior anti-TNF agent.

RESULTS

A total of 1122 patients were included. In the short term, remission was achieved in 55% of the patients with the second anti-TNF. The incidence of loss of response was 19% per patient-year with the second anti-TNF. Combination therapy (hazard ratio [HR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-3; P < 0.0001) and ulcerative colitis vs Crohn's disease (HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1; P = 0.005) were associated with a higher probability of loss of response. Fifteen percent of the patients had adverse events, and 10% had to discontinue the second anti-TNF. Of the 71 patients who received a third anti-TNF, 55% achieved remission. The incidence of loss of response was 22% per patient-year with a third anti-TNF. Adverse events occurred in 7 patients (11%), but only 1 stopped the drug.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately half of the patients who received a second anti-TNF achieved remission; nevertheless, a significant proportion of them subsequently lost response. Combination therapy and type of IBD were associated with loss of response. Remission was achieved in almost 50% of patients who received a third anti-TNF; nevertheless, a significant proportion of them subsequently lost response.

Comparative Efficacy of Vedolizumab and Adalimumab in Ulcerative Colitis Patients Previously Treated With Infliximab

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab (ADA) and vedolizumab (VDZ) have shown efficacy in moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) patients who failed infliximab (IFX). Although, a comparative efficacy evaluation of ADA and VDZ in this clinical setting is currently missing.

AIM

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of ADA and VDZ in patients affected by UC who failed IFX.

METHODS

Clinical records of UC patients from 8 Italian IBD referral centers who failed IFX and were candidates to receive either ADA or VDZ were retrospectively reviewed. The primary end point was therapeutic failure at week 52. Secondary end points included therapy discontinuation at weeks 8, 24 and 52, the discontinuation-free survival, and safety.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-one UC patients, 15 (9.2%) primary, 83 (51.6%) secondary IFX failures, and 63 (39.2%) IFX intolerants were included. Sixty-four (40%) patients received ADA and 97 (60%) VDZ as second line therapy. At week 52, 37.5% and 28.9% of patients on ADA and VDZ, respectively, had therapeutic failure (P = 0.302). However, the failure rate was significantly higher in the ADA group as compared with VDZ group among IFX secondary failures (48.0% ADA vs 22.4%VDZ, P = 0.035). The therapy discontinuation-free survival was significantly higher in the group of IFX secondary failures who received VDZ as compared with ADA at both the univariate (P = 0.007) and multivariate survival analysis (OR 2.79; 95% CI, 1.23-6.34; P = 0.014). No difference in the failure and biologic discontinuation-free survival was observed in the IFX primary failure and intolerant subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Vedolizumab might be the therapy of choice in those UC patients who showed secondary failure to IFX.

Outcome in ulcerative colitis after switch from adalimumab/golimumab to infliximab: A multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Anti-TNF therapies infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA), and golimumab (GOL) are approved for treating moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC). In UC, only the switch from IFX to ADA has been investigated, reaching no more than 10-43% remission rates at 12 months.

AIM

Of the present study was to investigate disease outcome after a switch from subcutaneous (SC) agents to the intravenous (IV) agent (IFX).

METHODS

In this retrospective multicentre study, we analysed the charts of UC patients unresponsive/intolerant or with secondary loss of response (LOR) to ADA or GOL who were switched to IFX. We evaluated clinical response and remission together with adverse events at 3, 6, and 12 months follow-up.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients were included; 38 patients started ADA and 38 started GOL for a mean therapy duration of 6 ± 6 months. Indications for switch were adverse events in 3%, primary failure in 79%, and LOR in 18% of patients. Clinical remission was reached by 47%, 50%, and 77% of patients, respectively. Patients that switched for LOR did numerically, but not statistically, better than patients who switched for primary failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show a superior remission rate in SC to IV anti-TNF switch in UC compared to the IV to SC switch reported in literature.

Costs of dose escalation among ulcerative colitis patients treated with adalimumab in Germany

AIMS

We determined adalimumab utilisation and associated drug costs in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), focusing on patients requiring dose escalation.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study analysed the de-identified prescription data of the Arvato Health Analytics (Munich, Germany) database (2010-2015) in adult UC patients undergoing adalimumab therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 154 patients were newly treated with adalimumab (average 39.6 years, 53% females), with a mean dose of 2.93 mg/day. Within 12 months, 69 patients (45%) received a dose increase of > 50% (doubled dose in 48 patients; 32%), with the escalation reported at 169.3 ± 99.3 days. A subsequent dose de-escalation to the standard dose occurred in 50 (32%) of patients that initially had a dose increase of > 50% (after 94.7 ± 49.6 days). Direct drug costs were 28,846 € in the overall study population, 24,934 € in patients on standard dose, 36,094 € in patients with dose increase, and 32,742 € in patients with increase and subsequent decrease.

CONCLUSION

Dose escalation occurred frequently, and in one third of patients the dose was at least doubled. Dose escalations were associated with substantial increases in direct drug costs. Dose escalation of adalimumab can severely affect both the health care system and the drug budget of the physician. It needs to be considered that other biologic medications may constitute a more cost-effective alternative.

Efficacy and Safety of Adalimumab in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis: A Real-life Experience from the SIGENP-IBD Registry

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of adalimumab (ADA) in children with ulcerative colitis (UC) previously treated with infliximab (IFX).

METHODS

Retrospective study including children with UC from a national registry who received ADA therapy. The primary endpoint was the rate of corticosteroid-free remission at week 52. Secondary outcomes were the rate of sustained clinical remission, primary nonresponse, and loss of response at weeks 12, 30, and 52 and rate of mucosal healing and side effects at week 52.

RESULTS

Thirty-two children received ADA (median age 10 ± 4 years). Median disease duration before ADA therapy was 27 months. All patients received previous IFX (43% intolerant, 50% nonresponders [37.5% primary, 42.5% secondary nonresponders], 6.7% positive anti-IFX antibodies). Fifty-two weeks after ADA initiation, 13 patients (41%) were in corticosteroid-free remission. Mucosal healing occurred in 9 patients (28%) at 52 weeks. The cumulative probability of a clinical relapse-free course was 69%, 59%, and 53% at 12, 30, and 52 weeks, respectively. Ten patients (31%) had a primary failure and 5 (15%) a loss of response to ADA. No significant differences in efficacy were reported between not-responders and intolerant to IFX (P = 1.0). Overall, 19 patient (59%) maintained ADA during 52-week follow-up. Seven patients (22%) experienced an adverse event, no serious side effects were observed and none resulted in ADA discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our data, ADA seems to be effective in children with UC, allowing to recover a significant percentage of patients intolerant or not-responding to IFX. The safety profile was good.

Infliximab, adalimumab and golimumab for treating moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis after the failure of conventional therapy (including a review of TA140 and TA262): clinical effectiveness systematic review and economic model

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is the most common form of inflammatory bowel disease in the UK. UC can have a considerable impact on patients' quality of life. The burden for the NHS is substantial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of interventions, to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of all interventions and comparators (including medical and surgical options), to estimate the expected net budget impact of each intervention, and to identify key research priorities.

DATA SOURCES

Peer-reviewed publications, European Public Assessment Reports and manufacturers' submissions. The following databases were searched from inception to December 2013 for clinical effectiveness searches and from inception to January 2014 for cost-effectiveness searches for published and unpublished research evidence: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, The Cochrane Library including the Cochrane Systematic Reviews Database, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the Health Technology Assessment database and NHS Economic Evaluation Database; ISI Web of Science, including Science Citation Index, and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science and Bioscience Information Service Previews. The US Food and Drug Administration website and the European Medicines Agency website were also searched, as were research registers, conference proceedings and key journals.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review [including network meta-analysis (NMA)] was conducted to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of named interventions. The health economic analysis included a review of published economic evaluations and the development of a de novo model.

RESULTS

Ten randomised controlled trials were included in the systematic review. The trials suggest that adult patients receiving infliximab (IFX) [Remicade(®), Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd (MSD)], adalimumab (ADA) (Humira(®), AbbVie) or golimumab (GOL) (Simponi(®), MSD) were more likely to achieve clinical response and remission than those receiving placebo (PBO). Hospitalisation data were limited, but suggested more favourable outcomes for ADA- and IFX-treated patients. Data on the use of surgical intervention were sparse, with a potential benefit for intervention-treated patients. Data were available from one trial to support the use of IFX in paediatric patients. Safety issues identified included serious infections, malignancies and administration site reactions. Based on the NMA, in the induction phase, all biological treatments were associated with statistically significant beneficial effects relative to PBO, with the greatest effect associated with IFX. For patients in response following induction, all treatments except ADA and GOL 100 mg at 32-52 weeks were associated with beneficial effects when compared with PBO, although these were not significant. The greatest effects at 8-32 and 32-52 weeks were associated with 100 mg of GOL and 5 mg/kg of IFX, respectively. For patients in remission following induction, all treatments except ADA at 8-32 weeks and GOL 50 mg at 32-52 weeks were associated with beneficial effects when compared with PBO, although only the effect of ADA at 32-52 weeks was significant. The greatest effects were associated with GOL (at 8-32 weeks) and ADA (at 32-52 weeks). The economic analysis suggests that colectomy is expected to dominate drug therapies, but for some patients, colectomy may not be considered acceptable. In circumstances in which only drug options are considered, IFX and GOL are expected to be ruled out because of dominance, while the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for ADA versus conventional treatment is approximately £50,300 per QALY gained.

LIMITATIONS

The health economic model is subject to several limitations: uncertainty associated with extrapolating trial data over a lifetime horizon, the model does not consider explicit sequential pathways of non-biological treatments, and evidence relating to complications of colectomy was identified through consideration of approaches used within previous models rather than a full systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

Adult patients receiving IFX, ADA or GOL were more likely to achieve clinical response and remission than those receiving PBO. Further data are required to conclusively demonstrate the effect of interventions on hospitalisation and surgical outcomes. The economic analysis indicates that colectomy is expected to dominate medical treatments for moderate to severe UC.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013006883.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Efficacy and safety of the adalimumab biosimilar Exemptia as induction therapy in moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Data on the efficacy and safety of the adalimumab biosimilar Exemptia are limited.

METHODS

Patients with moderate-to-severe active steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) treated at Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, India were offered cyclosporine A, biologicals or biosimilars, or surgery. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who were treated with the adalimumab biosimilar, Exemptia. These patients were administered an induction dosing schedule of 160 mg Exemptia at week 0, 80 mg at week 2, and then 40 mg every other week from week 4 to 8. The clinical response and remission were assessed at week 8 using Mayo score.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients (62.1% male; mean age, 34.9 ± 9.7 years) with moderate-to-severe steroid-refractory active UC (mean disease duration, 6.3±5.1 years; pancolitis in 9 patients [31.1%]; left-sided colitis in 20 patients [68.9%]) were treated with the Exemptia induction dosing schedule. The mean Mayo score at presentation was 8.2±1.4. At week 8, clinical response was observed in 7 patients (24.1%), whereas clinical remission was observed only in 1 patient (3.5%). Among the non-responders (n=21), 4 patients required colectomy, 1 died, 1 was lost to follow-up, 10 were offered fecal microbiota transplant, 3 were administered infliximab, and 2 patients were administered cyclosporine and tacrolimus, respectively. Four patients (13.8%) developed extrapulmonary tuberculosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The adalimumab biosimilar Exemptia has limited efficacy for the attainment of clinical response and remission in moderate-to-severe steroid-refractory UC, with a significant risk of acquisition or reactivation of tuberculosis in developing countries such as India.

ADALIMUMAB FOR ULCERATIVE COLITIS: RESULTS OF A BRAZILIAN MULTICENTER OBSERVATIONAL STUDY

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab is a monoclonal antibody, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) inhibitor that has efficacy for inducing and maintaining remission in moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. Real world studies with adalimumab in Latin American ulcerative colitis patients are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical remission rates in induction and maintenance with adalimumab therapy in ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

Observational, multicenter and retrospective study on a case series of patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis under adalimumab therapy. The variables analyzed were: demographic data, previous infliximab status, concomitant drugs, the Montreal Classification, disease activity (Mayo score) at weeks 0, 8, 26 and 52, or until the last follow-up. Clinical remission was defined as a partial Mayo score ≤2 and Last observation carried forward (LOCF) and Non responder imputation (NRI) analysis were used.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were included in the study. With LOCF analysis, remission rates at weeks 8, 26 e 52 were of 41.7%, 47.2% and 47.2%, respectively. With NRI analysis, remission rates at weeks 8, 26 and 52 were of 41.7%, 41.7% and 27.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab was effective in the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. Clinical remission was observed in approximately 40% of the patients at weeks 8 and 26, and in almost a quarter of the patients after 1 year of follow up.

Safety Considerations with the Use of Corticosteroids and Biologic Therapies in Mild-to-Moderate Ulcerative Colitis

BACKGROUND

The risk of corticosteroid-associated adverse events can limit the use of systemic corticosteroids. Oral, topically acting, second-generation corticosteroids that deliver drug to the site of inflammation, and biologic therapies, are effective treatment alternatives. The aim of this review was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of topically acting corticosteroids and biologic therapies versus oral systemic corticosteroids for ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for clinical and observational trials, systematic reviews, and case reports/series published between January 1950 and September 30, 2016. Search terms used included "corticosteroids," "beclomethasone dipropionate," "budesonide," "infliximab," "adalimumab," "golimumab," and "vedolizumab" in combination with "ulcerative colitis" or "inflammatory bowel disease."

RESULTS

A total of 582 studies were identified from PubMed searches. Only 1 direct comparative trial for oral topically acting corticosteroids and systemic corticosteroids was available, and no comparative trials versus biologic therapies were identified. In patients with mild-to-moderate UC, short-term (4-8 wk) oral beclomethasone dipropionate or oral budesonide multimatrix system demonstrated safety profiles comparable with placebo with few corticosteroid-related adverse events reported. Based on long-term data in patients with moderate-to-severe UC, biologics have a generally tolerable adverse event profile, although infections, infusion reactions, and autoimmune disorders were frequently reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Second-generation corticosteroids, beclomethasone dipropionate and budesonide multimatrix system, exhibited a favorable safety profile in patients with mild-to-moderate UC. For biologics, which are only indicated in moderate-to-severe UC, additional studies are needed to further ascertain the benefit to risk profile of these agents in patients with mild-to-moderate disease (see Video Abstract, Supplemental Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/IBD/B653).

Effectiveness of adalimumab for the treatment of ulcerative colitis in clinical practice: comparison between anti-tumour necrosis factor-naïve and non-naïve patients

BACKGROUND

Ulcerative colitis (UC) treatment is focused to achieve mucosal healing, avoiding disease progression. The study aimed to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of adalimumab (ADA) in UC and to identify predictors of remission to ADA.

METHODS

This cohort study used data from the ENEIDA registry. Clinical response, clinical remission, endoscopic remission, adverse events (AE), colectomy, and hospitalisations were evaluated; baseline characteristics and biological parameters were compared to determine predictors of response.

RESULTS

We included 263 patients (87 naïve and 176 previously exposed to anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha, TNF). After 12 weeks, clinical response, clinical remission, and endoscopic remission rates were 51, 26, and 14 %, respectively. The naïve group demonstrated better response to treatment than the anti-TNF-exposed group at short-term. Clinical and endoscopic remission within 1 year of treatment was better in the naïve group (65 vs. 49 and 50 vs. 35 %, respectively). The rates of AE, dose-escalation, hospitalisations, and colectomy during the first year were higher in anti-TNF-exposed patients (40, 43, and 27 % vs. 26, 21, and 11 %, respectively). Patients with primary failure and intolerance to the first anti-TNF and severe disease were associated with worse clinical response. Primary non-response to prior anti-TNF treatment and severe disease were predictive of poorer clinical remission. Low levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and faecal calprotectin (FC) at baseline were predictors of clinical remission.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical practice, ADA was effective in UC, especially in anti-TNF naïve patients. FC and CRP could be predictors of treatment effectiveness.

Adalimumab in ulcerative colitis - efficacy, safety and optimization in the era of treat-to target

INTRODUCTION

Active ulcerative colitis is associated with significant morbidity and impairment to quality of life. Adalimumab is a welcome addition to the therapeutic armamentarium for clinicians treating patients with moderate-severe ulcerative colitis refractory to conventional therapies, an indication with few prior treatment options. It offers the convenience of self-injection and is most appropriate for outpatients with moderate disease activity. Areas covered: This review briefly summarizes data from well-designed clinical trials and observational real-life studies that demonstrate the safety and efficacy of adalimumab in UC. Particular attention is paid to newer studies, including those with objective treatment endpoints and pharmacokinetic outcomes that incorporate a treat to target approach in inflammatory bowel disease. Expert opinion: Adalimumab is effective for the induction and maintenance of remission in patients with moderate-severe ulcerative colitis refractory to conventional therapies. At currently approved doses, it is most suitable for use in outpatients with moderate disease activity; higher doses may be required for patients with more severe disease. The convenience of self-injection will make it popular for remote patients and it may be an appropriate option in patients in whom monotherapy, rather than combination therapy with an immunomodulator, is preferred.

Efficacy and Safety of Adalimumab in Moderately to Severely Active Cases of Ulcerative Colitis: A Meta-Analysis of Published Placebo-Controlled Trials

Background/Aims

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab (ADA) in moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) patients who are unresponsive to traditional therapy.

Methods

Electronic databases, including the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases, were searched to April 20, 2014. UC-related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ADA with placebo were eligible. Review Manager 5.1 was used for data analysis.

Results

This meta-analysis included three RCTs. ADA was considerably more effective compared with a placebo, and it increased the ratio of patients with clinical remission, clinical responses, mucosal healing and inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire responses in the induction and maintenance phases (p<0.05), as well as patients with steroid-free remission (p<0.05) during the maintenance phase. Clinical remission was achieved in a greater number of UC cases in the ADA 160/80/40 mg groups (0/2/4 week, every other week) compared with the placebo group at week 8 (p=0.006) and week 52 (p=0.0002), whereas the week 8 clinical remission rate was equivalent between the ADA 80/40 mg groups and the placebo group. Among the patients who received immunomodulators (IMM) at baseline, ADA was superior to the placebo in terms of inducing clinical remission (p=0.01). Between-group differences were not observed in terms of serious adverse events (p=0.61).

Conclusions

ADA, particularly at doses of 160/80/40 mg (0/2/4 week, every other week), is effective and safe in patients with moderate-to-severe UC who are unresponsive to traditional treatment. Concomitant IMM therapy may improve the short-term therapeutic efficacy of ADA.

Optimizing Treatment with TNF Inhibitors in Inflammatory Bowel Disease by Monitoring Drug Levels and Antidrug Antibodies

BACKGROUND

Biological tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease and redefined treatment goals to include mucosal healing. Clinicians are faced with challenges such as inadequate responses, treatment failures, side effects, and high drug costs. The objective is to review optimization of anti-TNF therapy by use of personalized treatment strategies based on circulating drug levels and antidrug antibodies (Abs), i.e. therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Furthermore, to outline TDM-related pitfalls and their prevention.

METHODS

Literature review.

RESULTS

Circulating anti-TNF drug trough level is a marker for the pharmacokinetics (PK) of TNF inhibitors. Because of a number of factors, including antidrug antibodies, PK varies between and within patients across time leading to variable clinical outcomes. Differences in intestinal inflammatory phenotype influencing the pharmacodynamic (PD) responses to TNF inhibitors also affect treatment outcomes. As an alternative to handling anti-TNF-treated patients by empiric strategies, TDM identifies underlying PK and PD-related reasons for treatment failure and aids decision making to secure optimal clinical and economic outcomes. Although promising, evidence does not the support use of TDM to counteract treatment failure in quiescent disease. Use of TDM is challenged by methodological biases, difficulties related to differentiation between PK and PD problems, and temporal biases due to lack of chronology between changes in PK versus symptomatic and objective disease activity manifestations. Biases can be accommodated by knowledgeable interpretation of results obtained by validated assays with clinically established thresholds, and by repeated assessments over time using complimentary techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

TDM-guided anti-TNF therapy at treatment failure has been brought from bench to bedside.

Long-term assessment of clinical response to adalimumab therapy in refractory ulcerative colitis

INTRODUCTION

The role of antitumour necrosis factor agents, in particular infliximab in ulcerative colitis (UC) has been well established. More recently adalimumab, a fully humanized antitumour necrosis factor α monoclonal antibody, was licensed for refractory moderately active UC in 2012. Available outcome data for adalimumab from routine clinical practice is limited.

AIMS

To evaluate the clinical response and remission to adalimumab in a cohort of UC patients.

METHODS

Patients with UC treated with adalimumab were identified from our inflammatory bowel disease database from 2007. A retrospective chart review was undertaken. Demographic and clinical data were recorded including a Mayo score and C-reactive protein (CRP) where available. All patients received standard induction subcutaneous therapy (160/80/40 mg) followed by a maintenance dose of 40 mg fortnightly. Clinical and biochemical response was assessed at 6 and 12 months. Clinical response was defined by a reduction in Mayo score more than or equal to 3, whereas clinical remission was defined by a total score of 2 or less. Dose adjustments and adverse events were also noted.

RESULTS

In all, 52 patients were identified. Of these, 65% (n=34) were male and the mean age was 45 years (range 23-72 years). A total of 65% (n=34) had left sided disease, 31% (n=16) pancolitis and 4% (n=2) proctitis. The majority commenced adalimumab due to a loss of response to immunomodulator therapy (n=45, 87%), whereas the remaining 13% (n=7) had loss of response or been intolerant to infliximab. The mean disease duration was 8 years (1-29 years). At baseline 85% (n=44) had moderate disease and 15% (n=8) had mild disease. The baseline mean CRP was 13.5 mg/l (range 1-82 mg/l) and the mean Mayo score was 6 (range 4-10). The mean duration of treatment was 18.5 months (range 4-95 months). Follow-up data was available in 46 (88%) and 37 (71%) patients at 6 and 12 months. Overall there was a statistically significant improvement in mean partial Mayo score on follow-up; 6 months=2 [P=0.0001, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.99-4.55], 12 months=2 (P=0.0001, 95% CI 2.74-4.46). While 65% (n=34) and 52% (n=27) had a clinical response at 6 and 12 months, respectively, 52% (n=27) and 42% (n=22) were in remission. Overall mean CRP normalized at 6 months (P=0.002, 95% CI 3.31-15.1). Of note 25% (n=13) required dose escalation during follow-up, while treatment was discontinued by seven patients, five (71%) due to a loss of response, the remaining two (29%) due to an adverse event.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows adalimumab is an effective and safe long-term therapy for moderately active UC refractory to other treatments. While this data is encouraging, further work is required on patient selection and to determine the impact of treatment on both natural history and quality of life.

Efficacy and Safety of Adalimumab in Ulcerative Colitis Refractory to Conventional Therapy in Routine Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Adalimumab [ADA] was approved for the treatment of ulcerative colitis [UC] refractory to conventional therapy in 2012 in Europe. Due to the observed discrepancies between clinical trials and practice, data on the outcome of ADA therapy are really needed from the real life. The aim of this study was to estimate the short- and long-term efficacy and safety of ADA in UC patients from each Hungarian biological centre.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective study consisted of UC patients treated with ADA in 10 Hungarian inflammatory bowel disease centres. The primary endpoints of the study were rates of continuous clinical response, remission, non-response and loss of response at Weeks 12, 30, and 52.The secondary endpoints included mucosal healing at Week 52 and the comparison of the efficacy of ADA between biological naive and infliximab [IFX]-treated groups. Colonoscopy was performed before starting the therapy and at Week 52.

RESULTS

In all, 73 active UC patients were enrolled in the study: 67.1% of the patients received previous IFX therapy; 75.3% of the patients showed short-term clinical response at Week 12. The probability of maintaining ADA was 48.6% at Week 52 with a continuous clinical response in 92% of these remaining patients. Mucosal healing was achieved in 48.1% of the patients at Week 52. Escalation of ADA was performed in 17.6%, and minor side effects developed in 4% of the patients; 5.4% of the patients underwent colectomy during the 1-year treatment period.

CONCLUSION

UC is a progressive disease that may need early aggressive therapy to prevent structural and functional complications. The results of our study demonstrated the favourable efficacy of short- and long-term ADA treatment for patients with UC.

Real-Life Treatment Paradigms Show Adalimumab Is Cost-Effective for the Management of Ulcerative Colitis

Background. Adalimumab is effective for the maintenance of remission in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC). Currently, biologic therapies are used in cases where patients fail conventional medical therapies. If biologic therapies are not available, patients often choose to remain in an unwell state rather than undergo colectomy. Objective. The aim of the study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab in patients with UC where adalimumab was readily available compared to not available. Methods. A previously validated Markov model was used to simulate disease progression of patients with UC who are corticosteroid-dependent and/or did not respond to thiopurine therapy. Utility scores and transition probabilities between health states were determined by using data from randomized controlled trials and real-life observational studies. Costs were obtained from the Ontario Case Costing Initiative and the Alberta Health Schedule of Medical Benefits. Results. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for readily available adalimumab treatment of UC were $40,000 and $59,000 per quality-adjusted life year, compared with ongoing medical therapy in an unwell state, at 5-year and 10-year treatment time horizons, respectively. Conclusion. Considering real-life patient preferences to avoid colectomy, adalimumab is cost-effective according to a willingness-to-pay threshold of $80,000 for treatment of UC.

Adalimumab as a second-line biological therapy in children with refractory ulcerative colitis

AIM

The role of adalimumab in medically refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) in children remains to be defined. The aim of this study was to describe 11 cases of paediatric patients who received adalimumab as a second-line anti-TNF-α treatment for paediatric UC.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients with UC who received adalimumab between April 2008 and October 2013 at our hospital was conducted. Clinical efficacy and safety were assessed.

RESULTS

Eleven patients (three boys, eight girls) with a median age of 13.8 years (5.7-16.6 years) were included. All patients had been previously treated with infliximab. Six patients achieved and maintained clinical remission, with a median duration of treatment of 25 months. One patient was successfully weaned off adalimumab after 26 months of therapy. Treatment was unsuccessful in four out of 11 patients (36%) who underwent colectomy 4-13 months (median 7 months) from the first adalimumab dose. The remaining patient developed extensive rash and was switched to alternative therapy.

CONCLUSION

In this case series, our experience shows that there is a role for adalimumab as a combination therapy in a subgroup of children with refractory UC.

Optimal management of steroid-dependent ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory condition that is variable in both extent and severity of disease as well as response to therapy. Corticosteroids (CSs) were the first drugs used in the management of UC and are still used for induction of remission. However, because of their extensive side-effect profile, they are not utilized for maintenance of remission. In view of this, CS-free remission has become an important end point while evaluating therapeutic agents used in the management of UC. This review highlights the results of various studies conducted to evaluate the efficacy of different medications to attain CS-free remission in the setting of active UC. The drugs reviewed include established agents such as thiopurines, methotrexate, infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, golimumab, and newer experimental agents, and if all else fails, colectomy will be performed. The efficacy of these drugs is evaluated individually. Our aim is to provide a synopsis of the work done in this field to date.

Clinical outcome of adalimumab therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis previously treated with infliximab: a Danish single-center cohort study

OBJECTIVE

TNF inhibitors are effective in the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Adalimumab (ADL), a fully human TNF inhibitor, is increasingly used both as primary anti-TNF agent and in patients switching from another TNF inhibitor due to treatment failure or side effects. This study investigated clinical outcomes of ADL therapy in a clinical setting where infliximab (IFX) had been used as first choice of anti-TNF agent, and followed by ADL as second line agent.

METHODS

Retrospective, observational single-center cohort study including all ulcerative colitis patients treated with ADL at a tertiary Danish inflammatory bowel disease center until 2014. Clinical outcomes were assessed after 12 and 52 weeks and classified according to physician's global evaluation.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 33 patients. Main reasons for switching from IFX to ADL were infusion reactions to IFX (45%) or IFX treatment failure (33%). Short-term efficacy of ADL after 12 weeks revealed 15 patients (45%) with clinical response, and 6 (18%) in clinical remission. Twenty-three patients continued ADL for more than 12 weeks, and at long-term follow-up after 1 year of ADL treatment, eight of these (34%) had clinical response (24% of the entire cohort) and six (26%) were in clinical remission (18% of the entire cohort). A total of five patients (15%) were colectomized mainly due to primary ADL failure (four of five patients).

CONCLUSION

Efficacy of ADL therapy in ulcerative colitis patients previously treated with IFX appears to be modest in clinical practice, and with higher colectomy rates than reported for anti-TNF-naive patients in the registration trials.

Characterizing unmet medical need and the potential role of new biologic treatment options in patients with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease: a systematic review and clinician surveys

OBJECTIVES

Comparative outcomes of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) prescribed a biologic therapy are inconclusive. The aim of this research was to characterize the degree of unmet medical need in patients with UC or CD and to identify the potential role for new therapies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was undertaken of studies reporting outcomes associated with the use of existing biologic therapies in patients with UC or CD, focusing on the nature and rate of treatment failure. To complement the systematic review, contemporaneous data were obtained from a survey of practising gastroenterologists in the UK and France. Data were qualitatively combined in a narrative framework to evaluate the degree of unmet medical need among patients with UC or CD.

RESULTS

Studies identified in the systematic review (n = 120) were heterogeneous, particularly with respect to the definitions of treatment failure; estimates of treatment failure were high but uncertain. On the basis of standardized definitions, estimates of treatment failure provided by clinicians (n = 102) were high, and they were higher for second-line treatment failure (primary: ≤ 37%; secondary: ≤ 41%) compared with first-line treatment failure (primary: ≤ 26%; secondary: ≤ 28%). The majority of the systematic review and survey data were reflective of outcomes with infliximab and adalimumab.

CONCLUSION

High treatment failure rates associated with existing biologics, identified by the review and clinician surveys, indicate a need for other biologic treatment options to improve the management and outcomes for people with UC and CD. Outcomes associated with existing and new biologic treatments should be investigated in head-to-head randomized trials in the context of their likely uses in clinical practice.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: the efficacy of a second anti-TNF in patients with inflammatory bowel disease whose previous anti-TNF treatment has failed

BACKGROUND

One-third of patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) receiving anti-TNFs do not respond to treatment, and a relevant proportion experience loss of response or intolerance.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy and safety of a second anti-TNF agent after primary/secondary failure or intolerance to a first drug.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

studies evaluating the efficacy of infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA) and certolizumab-pegol (CZP) as the second anti-TNF in CD or UC.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Bibliographical searches (PubMed/Embase).

DATA SYNTHESIS

percentage of response/remission; the meta-analysis was performed using the inverse variance method.

RESULTS

We included 46 studies (37 CD, 8 UC, 1 pouchitis). The CD studies comprised 32 switching IFX→ADA, 4 IFX→CZP and 1 ADA→IFX. Overall, the second anti-TNF after the failure of IFX in CD induced remission in 43% and response in 63% of patients. The remission rate was higher when the reason to withdraw the first anti-TNF was intolerance (61%) than after secondary (45%) or primary failure (30%); response rates were, respectively, 72%, 62% and 53%. All UC studies switched IFX→ADA, six of them reporting remission rates ranging from 0% to 50%. Adverse events rate ranged from 0% to 81% in CD, most of them mild (serious adverse event 0-21%, discontinuation rate <20%).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of a second anti-TNF in CD patients largely depends on the cause for switching. The remission rate is higher when the reason to withdraw the first anti-TNF is intolerance (61%), compared with secondary (45%) or primary failure (30%). Further studies of switch ADA→IFX are needed to evaluate this strategy. PROSPERO-registry-number: CRD42014012943.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: infliximab and immunosuppressant therapy vs. infliximab alone for active ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of the combination of infliximab (IFX) and immunosuppressant (IS) therapy is debated in ulcerative colitis (UC).

AIMS

To determine whether the combination of IFX and IS therapy is more effective than infliximab alone for active UC regardless of prior IS use.

METHODS

We identified all controlled trials including patients with moderate-to-severe active UC, treated by either IFX or combined IFX-IS therapy. The main outcome was clinical remission at 4-6 months. Two statistical methods were used, Mantel-Haenszel and Der-Simonian and Laird. Inter-trial heterogeneity was taken into account and publication bias was assessed.

RESULTS

Four controlled trials were analysed and included in the meta-analysis. These four trials included 765 patients, 389 treated with IFX alone and 376 treated with IFX and IS. At 4-6 months' therapy, the clinical remission rate was significantly lower for the IFX monotherapy group OR 0.50, 95% CI [0.34-0.73], P < 0.01 (P-heterogeneity = 0.49). The Harbord test did not show evidence of publication bias (P = 0.29). Calculation of an adjusted OR using the Duval and Tweedie method did not significantly modify results [OR 0.63, 95% CI (0.47-0.85)]. According to Orwin's formula, four additional medium-sized nonsignificant studies would be necessary to reduce the effect size to a nonsignificant value. At 12 months of therapy, there was no significant difference between the two groups: OR 0.60, 95% CI [0.17-2.06], P = 0.41 (P-heterogeneity = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Combination therapy with IFX-IS is more effective than IFX alone for achieving and maintaining clinical remission at 4-6 months for patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis, regardless of prior IS use.

The economics of adalimumab for ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis is a chronic inflammatory disease, characterized by diffuse mucosal inflammation in the colon. Adalimumab, as a TNF-α blocker, offers a safe and efficacious treatment option for patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis and refractory or intolerant to conventional medications; however, its cost-effectiveness profile has not yet been well established. Future economic evaluations should choose appropriate comparators in the context of target-reimbursement decision making and focus on cost-effectiveness over a long time horizon.

Real-life outcome of anti-tumor necrosis factor α in the ambulatory treatment of ulcerative colitis

AIM: To evaluate the outcome of anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (anti-TNFα) therapy in outpatients with ulcerative colitis at a tertiary referral center.

METHODS: All patients with a confirmed diagnosis of ulcerative colitis undergoing therapy with infliximab and/or adalimumab at the outpatient clinic for inflammatory bowel diseases at the University Hospital Heidelberg between January 2011 and February 2014 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients with a follow-up period of less than 6 mo from start of anti-TNFα therapy were excluded. Medical records of all eligible individuals were carefully reviewed. Steroid-free clinical remission of a duration of at least 3 mo, colectomy rate, duration of anti-TNFα therapy, need for anti-TNFα dose escalation, and the occurrence of adverse events were evaluated as the main outcome parameters.

RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were included (35 treated with infliximab, 17 with adalimumab, 20 with both consecutively). Median follow-up was 27 mo (range: 6-87 mo). Steroid-free clinical remission was achieved by 22.2% of the patients (median duration: 21 mo until end of follow-up; range: 3-66 mo). Patients attaining steroid-free clinical remission displayed lower hemoglobin and albumin blood levels at the start of treatment than those who did not achieve remission. The overall colectomy rate was 20.8%. Nearly 50% of the patients underwent anti-TNFα dose escalation during the follow-up period. For both the infliximab and the adalimumab treated patients, non-response to anti-TNFα therapy was the major reason for treatment discontinuation. 18.2% of the infliximab-treated patients and 13.5% of the adalimumab-treated patients had to discontinue their therapy due to adverse events.

CONCLUSION: Real-life remission rates of ulcerative colitis under anti-TNFα are overall low, but some patients have a clear long-term benefit.

Biological therapy for ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a major form of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) worldwide. Better understanding of the pathogenesis of UC has led to the development of novel therapeutic agents that target specific mediators of the inflammatory cascade. A number of biological agents have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of UC and several more are currently in various phases of drug development. The commonly used agents include TNFα antagonists (e.g. infliximab, adalimumab, and golimumab) and anti-integrin agents (vedolizumab). These biological agents have profoundly influenced the management of UC patients, especially those with refractory disease. This paper reviews the currently available knowledge and evidence for the use of various biological agents in the treatment of UC.

Optimization of the treatment with immunosuppressants and biologics in inflammatory bowel disease

Many placebo controlled trials and meta-analyses evaluated the efficacy of different drugs for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including immunosuppressants and biologics. Their use is indicated in moderate to severe disease in non responders to corticosteroids and in steroid-dependent patients, as induction and maintainance treatment. Infliximab, as well as cyclosporine, is considered a second line therapy in the case of severe ulcerative colitis, or non-responders to intravenous corticosteroids. An adequate dosage and duration of therapy with thiopurines should be reached before evaluating their efficacy. Methotrexate is a valid option in patients with Crohn's disease but its use is confined to patients who are intolerant or non-responders to thiopurines. Evidence for the use of methotrexate in ulcerative colitis is insufficient. The use of thalidomide and mycophenolate mofetil is not recommended in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, these treatments could be considered in case of failure of all other therapeutic options. In patients with moderately active ulcerative colitis, refractory to thiopurines, the use of tacrolimus is considered an alternative to biologics. An increase of the dose or a decrease in the interval of administration of biological treatment could be useful in the presence of an incomplete clinical response. In the case of primary failure of an anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha a switch to another one should be considered. Data on the efficacy of combination therapy are up to now insufficient to consider this strategy in all IBD patients. The final outcome of the treatment should be considered the clinical remission, with mucosa healing, and not the clinical response. The evaluation of serum concentration of thiopurine methyl transferase activity, thiopurine metabolites, biologic serum levels and antibiologic antibodies could be useful for the management of the treatment but it has not been routinely applied in clinical practice. The evidence of high risk development of lymphoma and cutaneous malignancies should be considered in patients treated with immunosuppressants and biologics for a long period.

Utilization trends of anti-TNF agents and health outcomes in adults and children with inflammatory bowel diseases: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Utilization trends and health effects of infliximab and adalimumab in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are incompletely understood. We aimed to describe utilization trends of these 2 anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents, determine the correlation between utilization with rates of hospitalization and surgery and describe differences in use between adults and children.

METHODS

Longitudinal data were analyzed for drug utilization, hospitalization, and abdominal surgery. Descriptive statistics were used to show trends, and utilization quotients were compared for standardization. Multivariate logistic regression analysis assessed the association between drug use and rates of hospitalization and surgery.

RESULTS

Four hundred thirty-eight pediatric and 2514 adult patients with IBD generated a total of 51,882 inpatient and outpatient encounters, representing 1185 Crohn's disease, 1531 ulcerative colitis, and 236 indeterminate colitis patients. From 2007 through 2012, utilization quotients declined for hospitalization but remained unchanged for surgery; adalimumab saw a 3-fold increase, despite continued dominance of infliximab. Median band and mean fitted plots showed downward hospitalization trends from 2006 to 2012. Utilization of infliximab peaked in 2008, Q4 with gradual decline to 2012, Q2; and adalimumab showed moderate increased utilization since 2007, Q1. Use of infliximab (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.83) and adalimumab (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.72-0.87) was associated with decreased hospitalization risk but not associated with reduced abdominal surgery risk. Children had increased hospitalization (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 2.49-2.88) but decreased risk for abdominal surgery (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.46-0.70).

CONCLUSIONS

Current infliximab use remains substantially greater than adalimumab use, despite recent increased use of adalimumab. Although trends for hospitalization for IBD are decreasing, it is not reflected in abdominal surgery rates in a tertiary IBD referral center.

Adalimumab versus infliximab for the treatment of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis in adult patients naïve to anti-TNF therapy: an indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of adalimumab and infliximab for the treatment of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis using indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic review and Bayesian indirect treatment comparison meta-analyses were performed for seven patient-important clinical outcomes at 8 weeks and 52 weeks. Odds ratio (OR) estimates and associated 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were produced.

RESULTS

Five eligible RCTs informed clinical remission, response, mucosal healing, quality of life, colectomy, serious adverse events, and discontinuation due to adverse events at 8 weeks and 52 weeks. At 8 weeks of induction therapy, clinical remission (OR=0.42, 95% CrI 0.17-0.97), clinical response (OR=0.45, 95% CrI 0.23-0.89) and mucosal healing (OR=0.46, 95% CrI 0.25-0.86) statistically favored infliximab. However, after 52 weeks of maintenance therapy OR estimates showed no significant difference between infliximab and adalimumab. For serious adverse events and discontinuations due to adverse events, adalimumab and infliximab were similar to placebo. Further, the indirect treatment comparison of adalimumab and infliximab yielded odds ratios close to 1.00 with wide credible intervals.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis suggest that both infliximab and adalimumab are superior to placebo in the treatment of moderate to moderately severe ulcerative colitis. While infliximab is statistically more effective than adalimumab in the induction of remission, response and mucosal healing at 8 weeks, infliximab and adalimumab are comparable in efficacy at 52 weeks of maintenance treatment.

Implementable strategies and exploratory considerations to reduce costs associated with anti-TNF therapy in inflammatory bowel disease

A health care system is needed where care is based on the best available evidence and is delivered reliably, efficiently, and less expensively (best care at lower cost). In gastroenterology, anti-tumor necrosis factor agents represent the most effective medical therapeutic option for patients with moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but are very expensive and account for nearly a quarter of the cost of IBD care, representing a major area of present and future impact in direct health care costs. The ImproveCareNow Network, consisting of over 55 pediatric IBD centers, seeks ways to improve the value of care in IBD, curtailing unnecessary costs and promoting better health outcomes through systematic and incremental quality improvement initiatives. This report summarizes the key evidence to facilitate the cost-effective use of anti-tumor necrosis factor agents for patients with IBD. Our review outlines the scientific rationale for initiating cost-reducing measures in anti-tumor necrosis factor use and focuses on 3 implementable strategies and 4 exploratory considerations through practical clinical guidelines, as supported by existing evidence. Implementable strategies can be readily integrated into today's daily practice, whereas exploratory considerations can guide research to support future implementation.

Adalimumab in active ulcerative colitis: a "real-life" observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The effectiveness of adalimumab in the treatment of ulcerative colitis is under debate. Although controlled trials have shown that adalimumab is significantly better than placebo, the absolute clinical benefit is modest. We report data on the effectiveness of adalimumab in a cohort of ulcerative colitis patients treated in 22 Italian centres.

METHODS

All patients with active disease treated with adalimumab were retrospectively reviewed. Co-primary endpoints were clinical remission at weeks 4, 12, 24 and 54. Secondary endpoints were sustained clinical remission, steroid discontinuation, endoscopic remission and need for colectomy.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients were included. Most patients had received previous infliximab treatment. Clinical remission rates were 17%, 28.4%, 36.4% and 43.2% at 4, 12, 24 and 54 weeks respectively. Twenty-two patients required colectomy. Clinical remission and low C-reactive protein at week 12 predicted clinical remission at week 54 (OR 4.17, 95% CI 2.36-19.44; OR 2.63, 95% CI 2.32-14.94, respectively). Previous immunosuppressant use was associated with a lower probability of clinical remission at week 54 (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.08-0.66) and with a higher rate of colectomy (HR 9.7, 95% CI 1.46-9.07).

CONCLUSION

In this large "real-life" experience adalimumab appears effective in patients with otherwise medically refractory ulcerative colitis. Patients achieving early remission can expect a better long-term outcome.

Management of difficult-to-treat patients with ulcerative colitis: focus on adalimumab

The treatment of ulcerative colitis has changed over the last decade, with the introduction of biological drugs. This article reviews the currently available therapies for ulcerative colitis and the specific use of these therapies in the management of patients in different settings, particularly the difficult-to-treat patients. The focus of this review is on adalimumab, which has recently obtained approval by the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration, for use in treating adult patients with moderate-to-severe, active ulcerative colitis, who are refractory, intolerant, or who have contraindications to conventional therapy, including corticosteroids and thiopurines. Since the results emerging from the pivotal trials have been subject to some debate, the aim of this review was to summarize all available data on the use of adalimumab in ulcerative colitis, focusing also on a retrospective series of real-life experiences. Taken together, the current evidence indicates that adalimumab is effective for the treatment of patients with different types of ulcerative colitis, including biologically naïve and difficult-to-treat patients.

Efficacy of Adalimumab as a long term maintenance therapy in ulcerative colitis

INTRODUCTION

Adalimumab is a recombinant human IgG1 monoclonal antibody to TNF-alpha. There are limited data with regard to its efficacy in ulcerative colitis. We report experience of adalimumab in ulcerative colitis in a single centre with a focus on the ability of this agent to maintain response and avoid colectomy in the medium to long-term.

METHODS

Twenty-three ulcerative colitis patients (mean age 32 years; 7 female) who received adalimumab were identified from a prospectively maintained database of over 2700 IBD patients. The primary study endpoint was treatment failure defined as discontinuation of adalimumab due to lack of efficacy, as defined by requiring an alternative maintenance therapy or colectomy, or intolerance. Colectomy rate was recorded as a secondary endpoint.

RESULTS

Most patients (96%) had received immunosuppressants prior to adalimumab therapy (infliximab 20/23 87%). Sixteen of 23 patients (70%) discontinued adalimumab. Six primary failures, 8 secondary loss of response, one had unacceptable side effects and one discontinued treatment after 6 months but remains in remission. Overall estimated cumulative treatment failure rates at 6, 12 and 24 months were 50%, 65% and 72% respectively. Median follow-up in patients continuing adalimumab is 23 months (IQR 17-31 months). Treatment failure was unrelated to patient age, gender, disease extent, smoking status or CRP. Colectomy free survival was 59% at 2 years. No patient experienced a major adverse event.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab shows some efficacy as a maintenance strategy in Ulcerative Colitis, but only a limited proportion of patients remain well on continued treatment at 2 years.

Adalimumab in ulcerative colitis: ready for prime time

Ulcerative colitis is one of the two main types of inflammatory bowel disease and is a chronic condition with a significant impact on health-related quality of life. For many patients, currently available treatment options do not provide adequate efficacy or are poorly tolerated. Efforts to identify new agents for the treatment of ulcerative colitis have focused mainly on targeting tumour necrosis factor α, a pro-inflammatory cytokine believed to play a pivotal role in the initiation and progression of the disease. Until recently, there was only one anti-tumour necrosis factor α agent approved for treatment of ulcerative colitis, infliximab, although there were several other such agents approved for the related condition, Crohn's disease, including adalimumab. This year (2012), adalimumab has been approved by the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Here, the current evidence regarding use of adalimumab in the treatment of ulcerative colitis is reviewed, with results indicating that adalimumab has compelling efficacy in the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis.

Use of the tumor necrosis factor-blockers for Crohn's disease

The use of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy for inflammatory bowel disease represents the most important advance in the care of these patients since the publication of the National Co-operative Crohn's disease study thirty years ago. The recommendations of numerous consensus groups worldwide are now supported by a wealth of clinical trials and several meta-analyses. In general, it is suggested that tumor necrosis factor-α blockers (TNFBs) are indicated (1) for persons with moderately-severe Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis (UC) who have failed two or more causes of glucocorticosteroids and an acceptably long cause (8 wk to 12 wk) of an immune modulator such as azathioprine or methotrexate; (2) non-responsive perianal disease; and (3) severe UC not responding to a 3-d to 5-d course of steroids. Once TNFBs have been introduced and the patient is responsive, therapy given by the IV and SC rate must be continued. It remains open to definitive evidence if concomitant immune modulators are required with TNFB maintenance therapy, and when or if TNFB may be weaned and discontinued. The supportive evidence from a single study on the role of early versus later introduction of TNFB in the course of a patient's illness needs to be confirmed. The risk/benefit profile of TNFB appears to be acceptable as long as the patient is immunized and tested for tuberculosis and viral hepatitis before the initiation of TNFB, and as long as the long-term adverse effects on the development of lymphoma and other tumors do not prone to be problematic. Because the rates of benefits to TNFB are modest from a population perspective and the cost of therapy is very high, the ultimate application of use of TNFBs will likely be established by cost/benefit studies.

Immunotherapy in inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease affects an increasing number of patients worldwide and is associated with significant morbidity. The dysregulation of the immune system with increased expression of proinflammatory cytokines and increased mucosal expression of vascular adhesion molecules play an important role in its pathogenesis. Strategies targeting TNF-alpha and alpha4-integrin have led to the development of novel therapies for treatment of patients with IBD. This article discusses the efficacy of immunologic agents currently approved for treating Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis and reviews the risks and challenges associated with their use.

Recent advances in understanding ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis, one of the two main forms of inflammatory bowel disease, is characterized by inflammation of the large bowel with constant involvement of the rectum, and a possible continuous retrograde distribution up to the cecum. Typical macroscopic lesions are mucosal ulcerations, with immune cell infiltration and cryptic abscesses at histology. Ulcerative colitis usually manifests with bloody diarrhea, is associated with a number of extra-intestinal manifestations, and may be acutely complicated by toxic megacolon. Longstanding disease may predispose to the development of colorectal cancer. Therapeutic options include mesalazine, corticosteroids, immunomodulators and biologic agents; however, if these treatments fail, the only available therapeutic choice remaining is the surgical removal of the colon. This review emphasizes novel concepts in the basic aspects of ulcerative colitis, and, in addition to the current clinical and diagnostic knowledge, it also describes new treatment options for this condition.

Update on the management of inflammatory bowel disease: specific role of adalimumab

Anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) medications are a class of biologics employed in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Adalimumab is the first fully human monoclonal immunoglobulin directed against TNF-α, which binds with high affinity and specificity to membrane and soluble TNF. Adalimumab administered subcutaneously has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, and severe chronic psoriasis. Studies have shown that adalimumab is effective for inducing and maintaining remission of moderate-to-severe active Crohn's disease (CD) patients at an induction dose of 160/80 mg (week 0 and 2) and at a maintenance dose of 40 mg every other week. The efficacy of adalimumab as a second-line therapy has also been documented for patients with loss of response or intolerance to infliximab. Adalimumab is also superior to placebo for inducing and maintaining complete perianal fistula closure. It also seems effective for reducing extraintestinal manifestations. The safety profile is similar to that of other anti-TNF therapy in CD patients, with lower immunogenicity and rate of adverse injection reactions than infliximab. Adalimumab is not approved for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). Recently, however, the results of the first randomized, controlled trial on adalimumab for UC showed that adalimumab at 160/80 mg induction dose was safe and effective for inducing remission and clinical response after 8 weeks in patients with moderately-to-severely active UC failing treatment with corticosteroids and/or immunosuppressants. More data are necessary to clarify the therapeutic role of adalimumab in UC. This review of the literature summarizes available data on the efficacy and safety profile adalimumab in patients with IBD.

Adalimumab in ulcerative colitis: hypes and hopes

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

The advent of anti-TNF-α monoclonal antibodies has dramatically changed the management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Unlike Crohn's disease (CD), only one anti-TNF-α agent, infliximab, is currently approved for active moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC). Adalimumab is a fully human anti-TNF-α antibody that is effective and safe for the treatment of luminal and fistulising CD.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

This review of the literature summarizes available data on of efficacy and safety profile adalimumab in patients with UC.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Adalimumab may be effective in inducing and maintaining clinical remission in patients with moderate-to-severe UC. It may also induce mucosal healing and reduce the need for colectomy in patients with severe disease. The safety profile of the drug in UC is consistent with previous experience with this drug in CD.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Adalimumab may be effective and well tolerated in UC. Its efficacy in maintaining clinical remission needs to be confirmed in a randomized controlled trial.

Adalimumab induction and maintenance therapy for patients with ulcerative colitis previously treated with infliximab

BACKGROUND

The long-term efficacy of adalimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis is not well known.

AIM

To evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of adalimumab in ulcerative colitis patients previously treated with infliximab.

METHODS

Patients with active ulcerative colitis were treated with adalimumab after failure of other therapies including infliximab. Short-term clinical response and remission were assessed at weeks 4 and 12. The proportion of patients who continued on adalimumab and the proportion of patients who remained colectomy free were assessed over the long term.

RESULTS

Clinical response at weeks 4 and 12 was achieved in 16 (53%) and 18 (60%) patients, respectively, and clinical remission was obtained in 3 (10%) and 8 (27%) patients, respectively. After a mean 48 weeks' follow-up, 15 patients (50%) continued on adalimumab. Six patients (20%) required colectomy. All patients who achieved clinical response at week 12 were colectomy free at long term.

CONCLUSIONS

Adalimumab was well tolerated and induced durable clinical response in many patients with otherwise medically refractory ulcerative colitis. Patients achieving clinical response at week 12 avoided colectomy over the long term.

Treatment of ulcerative colitis with adalimumab or infliximab: long-term follow-up of a single-centre cohort

Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010; 32: 522-528 Summary Background Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated that anti-TNF agents are efficacious in inducing remission in cases of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. However, response rates for anti-TNF agents in 'real life' clinical practice are less well-defined. Aims To examine the response rates and long-term outcomes of infliximab and adalimumab treatment for out-patients with ulcerative colitis and to study the variables associated with response rates. Methods In a prospective study, a single-centre out-patient cohort was treated and followed up according to a structured protocol of clinical care. Response to treatment was assessed using a physician's global assessment that focused on normalization of bowel frequency, absence of blood with defecation and tapering of corticosteroids to zero. Results Fifty-three ulcerative colitis patients were included in the study. Responses to induction therapy were 96.4% (27/28) for infliximab and 80% (20/25) for adalimumab (P = 0.0889). Responses to maintenance therapy were similar: infliximab 77.8% (14/18) and adalimumab 70.0% (14/20) (P = 0.7190). Multivariate analyses of the induction and maintenance responses did not reveal confounding elements. No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions This long-term follow-up of a single-centre cohort of ulcerative colitis patients demonstrates that 'real-life' out-patient treatment with infliximab and adalimumab is effective in induction and maintenance of response.

Current status of monoclonal antibody therapy for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis are complex diseases that have required the use of multiple modalities to aid in treatment. With an increasing understanding of the underlying pathogenetic mechanisms and identification of specific therapeutic targets, monoclonal antibody treatment has been an ideal strategy for inducing and maintaining remission in these patients. This article addresses approved agents and the supporting data justifying their use in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, the safety of and immunologic reactions to these agents, as well as newer agents for treatment.