Switch to adalimumab in patients with Crohn's disease controlled by maintenance infliximab: prospective randomised SWITCH trial

Fragility index analysis for randomized controlled trials of approved biologicals and small molecule drugs in inflammatory bowel diseases

INTRODUCTION

Biologics and small molecules have been increasingly applied in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). But the robustness of their trials has not been evaluated.

METHODS

We initially collected all the approved biologics or small molecules for CD or UC up to December 1, 2022. Databases were then queried by keywords in chemical name and CD or UC. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the two-arm, 1:1 design were included. Fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ) were subsequently calculated.

RESULTS

We included twenty-eight RCTs, including nine pivotal trials listed in approval labels, nineteen non-pivotal trials not included in the labels. The median sample size was 99 [IQR, 60-262] and the median number of loss-of-follow-up (LFU) was 14 [IQR, 8-43]. Pivotal trials in the labels had the median FI of 8 [IQR, 4-14, n = 6] that was marginally higher than non-pivotal trials (3 [IQR, 2-4], p = 0.08). The median FQ was 0.0330 [IQR, 0.1220-0.0466] and 0.0310 [IQR, 0.0129-0.0540] for pivotal and non-pivotal trials, respectively (p = 1.0). The sample size and FI were significantly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient [r] = 0.56, 95 %CI 0.21-0.78, p = 0.003). The number of total events was also significantly correlated with FI (r = 0.53, 95 %CI 0.17-0.77, p = 0.006). Study p-values were significantly associated with FI (p = 0.01): trials with p-values < 0.001 had the highest median FI of 10 [IQR, 6-17]. No factor was found strongly correlated with FQ.

CONCLUSION

Results from trials assessing administration-approved biologics or small molecules for treating CD or UC were vulnerable to small changes by measuring FI or FQ. Pivotal studies contributing to regulatory approvals exhibited a relatively higher degree of resilience compared to non-pivotal trials.

Infliximab for maintenance of medically-induced remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Infliximab is a monoclonal antibody that binds and neutralises tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) which is present in high levels in the blood serum, mucosa and stool of patients with Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of infliximab for maintaining remission in patients with Crohn's disease.

SEARCH METHODS

On 31 August, 2021 and 23 June, 2023, we searched CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which infliximab was compared to placebo or another active comparator for maintenance, remission, or response in patients with Crohn's disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently selected studies and conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment. We expressed outcomes as risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Our primary outcome was clinical relapse. Secondary outcomes were loss of clinical response, endoscopic relapse, and withdrawal due to serious and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine RCTs with 1257 participants were included. They were conducted between 1999 and 2022; seven RCTs included biologically-naive patients, and the remaining two included a mix of naive/not naive patients. Three studies included patients in clinical remission, five included patients with a mix of activity scores, and one study included biologic responders with active disease at baseline. All studies allowed some form of concomitant medication during their duration. One study exclusively included patients with fistulating disease. The age of the participants ranged from 18 to 69 years old. All but one single-centre RCT were multicentre RCTs. Four studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies, two had a mix of commercial and public funding, and two had public funding. Infliximab is probably superior to placebo in preventing clinical relapse in patients who have mixed levels of clinical disease activity at baseline, and are not naive to biologics (56% vs 75%, RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.84, NNTB = 5, moderate-certainty evidence). We cannot draw any conclusions on loss of clinical response (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.96), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.19), or serious adverse events (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.00) because the evidence is very low certainty. Infliximab combined with purine analogues is probably superior to purine analogues for clinical relapse (12% vs 59%, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.42, NNTB = 2, moderate-certainty evidence), for patients in remission, and who are not naive to biologics. We cannot draw any conclusions on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.49), and serious adverse events (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.64) because the evidence is very low certainty. We cannot draw any conclusions about the effects of infliximab on serious adverse events compared to purine analogues (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.68) for a population in remission at baseline because the evidence is very low certainty. There was no evidence available for the outcomes of clinical relapse, loss of clinical response, and withdrawal due to adverse events. Infliximab may be equivalent to biosimilar for clinical relapse (47% vs 40% RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.69), and it may be slightly less effective in averting loss of clinical response (49% vs 32%, RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.23, low-certainty evidence), for a population with mixed/low disease activity at baseline. Infliximab may be less effective than biosimilar in averting withdrawals due to adverse events (27% vs 0%, RR 20.73, 95% CI 2.86 to 150.33, low-certainty evidence). Infliximab may be equivalent to biosimilar for serious adverse events (10% vs 10%, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.39 to 2.50, low-certainty evidence). We cannot draw any conclusions on the effects of subcutaneous biosimilar compared with intravenous biosimilar on clinical relapse (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.57), loss of clinical response (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.25), and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.97) for an active disease population with clinical response at baseline because the evidence is of very low certainty. We cannot draw any conclusions on the effects of infliximab compared to adalimumab on loss of clinical response (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.59), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.72), serious adverse events (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.54) for an active disease population with clinical response at baseline because the evidence is of very low certainty. There was no evidence available for the outcome of clinical relapse.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Infliximab is probably more effective in preventing clinical relapse than placebo (moderate-certainty evidence). Infliximab in combination with purine analogues is probably more effective in preventing clinical and endoscopic relapse than purine analogues alone (moderate-certainty evidence). No conclusions can be drawn regarding prevention of loss of clinical response, occurrence of withdrawals due to adverse events, or total adverse events due to very low-certainty evidence for both of these comparisons. There may be little or no difference in prevention of clinical relapse, withdrawal due to adverse events or total adverse events between infliximab and a biosimilar (low-certainty evidence). Infliximab may lead to more loss of clinical response than a biosimilar (low-certainty evidence). We were unable to draw meaningful conclusions about other comparisons and outcomes related to missing data or very low-certainty evidence due to serious concerns about imprecision and risk of bias. Further research should focus on comparisons with other active therapies for maintaining remission, as well as ensuring adequate power calculations and reporting of methods.

Personalized Treatment for Crohn's Disease: Current Approaches and Future Directions

Crohn's disease is a complex, relapsing and remitting inflammatory disorder of the gastrointestinal tract with a variable disease course. While the treatment options for Crohn's disease have dramatically increased over the past two decades, predicting individual patient response to treatment remains a challenge. As a result, patients often cycle through multiple different therapies before finding an effective treatment which can lead to disease complications, increased costs, and decreased quality of life. Recently, there has been increased emphasis on personalized medicine in Crohn's disease to identify individual patients who require early advanced therapy to prevent complications of their disease. In this review, we summarize our current approach to management of Crohn's disease by identifying risk factors for severe or disabling disease and tailoring individual treatments to patient-specific goals. Lastly, we outline our knowledge gaps in implementing personalized Crohn's disease treatment and describe the future directions in precision medicine.

Therapeutic effects of biological treatments on AA amyloidosis associated with inflammatory bowel disease: a case report and literature review

AA amyloidosis is a rare and significant complication of long-term inflammation that can be caused by a variety of disorders, including inflammatory bowel disease, and is linked to an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. To date, there has been no effective direct treatment, and treatment aims at treating the underlying condition with potent immunosuppression to limit inflammatory activity and, as a result, switch off amyloidogenesis. Theoretically, biological treatment can control AA amyloidosis by inducing and maintaining inflammatory bowel disease remission and inhibiting the synthesis of Serum Amyloid A, which is an acute phase reactant and precursor protein of AA amyloidosis that accumulates in the organs. We report the first case of ustekinumab's therapeutic effect after infliximab's loss of response in AA amyloidosis associated with Crohn's disease. We also conducted a literature review of the therapeutic effect of biological treatment on AA amyloidosis.

Efficacy and Safety of Adalimumab Biosimilar GP2017 in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

(1) Background: GP2017 is one of the biosimilar drugs of adalimumab, one of the anti-TNF agents used for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). To date, there is little real-world data about the use of GP2017 in IBD patients. The aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of this biosimilar in an IBD population. (2) Methods: This is an observational retrospective study including patients that were all treated with GP2017 as a first step or as a switch from the originator or other biosimilars. The clinical activity was evaluated at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of therapy. The therapy discontinuation and side effects were also evaluated. (3) Results: a total of 72 patients were included (65 with Crohn's disease and 7 with ulcerative colitis). Of the 29 patients starting GP2017 as a first adalimumab therapy, clinical remission was achieved in 58.6%. Of the patients starting GP2017 as a switch from the originator (33 patients) or other biosimilars (10 patients), clinical remission was maintained in 78.8% and in 70%, respectively. Regarding the safety, only 11 patients experienced non-serious side effects. During the follow-up, nine patients suspended treatment mainly due to side effects or secondary failure. (4) Conclusions: GP2017 is an effective and safe therapy for IBD patients.

A Systematic Review on Long-Term Efficacy Outcome Measures in Crohn's Disease Patients

BACKGROUND

The traditional long-term treatment goal of Crohn's disease [CD] is maintenance of corticosteroid-free clinical remission. Additional treatment targets, such as biochemical, endoscopic and patient-reported remission, are advocated. The relapsing-remitting nature of CD provides a challenge to the timing of target assessment. Cross-sectional assessment at predetermined moments disregards the health state in between measurements. In this systematic review, we provide an overview of outcomes used to assess long-term efficacy in clinical trials in CD.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed and EMBASE databases was performed to identify clinical trials in luminal CD reporting on maintenance treatment [strategies] since 1995. Two independent reviewers selected eligible articles for full text retrieval, and assessed if long-term corticosteroid-free clinical, biochemical, endoscopic or patient-reported efficacy outcomes were used.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 2452 hits and 82 articles were included. Clinical activity was used in 80 studies [98%] as the long-term efficacy outcome, and in 21 [26%] of these concomitant corticosteroid use was taken into account. C-reactive protein was used in 32 studies [41%], faecal calprotectin in 15 studies [18%], endoscopic activity in 34 studies [41%] and patient-reported outcome in 32 studies [39%]. In seven studies, clinical, biochemical, endoscopic activity and the patient's perspective were measured. In most studies cross-sectional measures or multiple measurements over time were used.

CONCLUSION

In none of the published clinical trials in CD was sustained remission on all treatment targets reported. Cross-sectional outcomes at predetermined times were widely applied, leading to lack of information regarding sustained corticosteroid-free remission for this relapsing-remitting chronic disease.

Long-term persistence and other treatment patterns among bio-naïve patients with Crohn's disease treated with ustekinumab or adalimumab

OBJECTIVE

To estimate long-term persistence among bio-naïve patients with CD initiated on ustekinumab or adalimumab.

METHODS

Adults with CD initiating ustekinumab or adalimumab (index date, between September 23, 2016 and August 1, 2019) were sampled from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database. Patients without CD-indicated biologics (bio-naïve) and with no diagnoses for other autoimmune diseases 12 months pre-index date (baseline) were included. Cohorts were balanced on baseline characteristics with inverse probability of treatment weighting. Persistence was defined as the absence of therapy exposure gaps >120 days (ustekinumab) or >60 (adalimumab) between days of supply. Composite endpoints were persistence and being corticosteroid-free (no corticosteroids >14 days of supply after day 90 post-index) and persistence while on monotherapy (no immunomodulators/non-index biologics). Persistence was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox's models.

RESULTS

Ustekinumab and adalimumab cohorts included 671 and 2,975 patients. At 12 months post-index, ustekinumab patients were significantly more persistent (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.33-1.93), persistent while on monotherapy (HR = 1.43; 95% CI = 1.24-1.65), and trended toward being more persistent and corticosteroid-free (HR = 1.14; 95% CI = 0.99-1.30) vs adalimumab. At 24 months post-index, ustekinumab patients were significantly more persistent (HR = 1.66; 95% CI = 1.40-1.97), persistent while on monotherapy (HR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.26-1.64), and persistent and corticosteroid-free (HR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.01-1.31) vs adalimumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Bio-naïve patients with CD initiated on ustekinumab demonstrated significantly more persistence than patients initiated on adalimumab at 12 and 24 months of treatment. Long-term persistence is a measure of a drug's real-world performance and findings may aid clinical decision-making.

An update on efficacy and safety comparison of biologics in treatment of inflammatory bowel disease targeting TNF-α, interleukins, leukocyte trafficking, Janus-kinase, and sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor

INTRODUCTION

Along with the rising prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) [Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)], biological therapies need an update/insight.

AREA COVERED

This review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from PubMed database (2000-October 2022) of approved biologics and small molecules with primary outcome analysis on efficacy (clinical response/remission/mucosal healing) and/or adverse events (AEs). Considered for this review under biologics classes are TNF-α inhibitors, leukocyte trafficking inhibitors, and anti IL-12/IL-23; and under small molecules are Janus-kinase inhibitors, and sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators.

EXPERT OPINION

In CD, clinical response and remission were better with tofacitinib (61.23%) and infliximab (44.86%), respectively, in the induction phase, and these were better with ustekinumab in the maintenance phase. In UC, the maximum rate of response, remission, and mucosal healing were obtained with infliximab during the induction phase (67.49%, 35.99%, and 60.25%, respectively). During the maintenance phase, response rate was better with ustekinumab, but remission and mucosal healing were better with vedolizumab. The combined percentage of AEs was highest with infliximab (174.45%) and least with ozanimod (23.04%), and most commonly belonged to the 'infection and infestation system organ class (SOC).' These efficacy and safety analyses will help in the optimization of biologic treatment in IBD.

Switching from intravenous to subcutaneous vedolizumab maintenance treatment in patients with inflammatory bowel disease followed by therapeutic drug monitoring

OBJECTIVE

Vedolizumab (VDZ) for subcutaneous (SC) administration has recently become available. We aimed to assess feasibility, safety and clinical outcome when switching from intravenous (IV) to SC VDZ maintenance treatment in a real world cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) followed by therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM).

METHODS

Eligible IBD patients were switched from IV to SC treatment and assessed six months prior to switch, at baseline and six, twelve and twenty-six weeks after switch. Primary outcome was proportion of patients on SC treatment after 26 weeks. Secondary outcomes included adverse events (AEs), clinical disease activity, biochemical markers, treatment interval, serum-VDZ (s-VDZ), preferred route of administration and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

In total, 108 patients were switched. After 26 weeks, 100 patients (92.6%) were still on SC treatment and median s-VDZ was 47.6 mg/L (IQR 41.3 - 54.6). The most frequent AE was injection site reaction (ISR), reported by 20 patients (18.5%). There were no clinically significant changes in disease activity, biochemical markers and quality of life. The proportion of patients preferring SC administration increased from 28.0% before switch to 59.4% after 26 weeks (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Nine out of ten patients still received SC treatment after 26 weeks. No change in disease activity occurred, and levels of serum VDZ increased. Although almost one fifth of patients experienced ISRs, a higher proportion favored SC administration at 26 weeks. This study demonstrates that SC maintenance treatment is a safe and feasible alternative to IV treatment.

Uptake of a Switching Program for Patients Receiving Intravenous Infliximab and Vedolizumab to Subcutaneous Preparations

Background: Recent trials support the clinical efficacy and safety of subcutaneous infliximab (IFX) or vedolizumab (VDZ) for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). We evaluated the uptake and rationale for choosing to switch from intravenous infusions to subcutaneous injections. Methods: Retrospective analysis of all adult patients receiving standard dosing IFX or VDZ maintenance therapy to investigate uptake of subcutaneous injections and the rationale for switching to subcutaneous injections. Results: Of 232 eligible patients (total = 258: IFX = 190, VDZ = 68, and no longer eligible = 26), 58% of patients on IFX and 59% of patients on VDZ chose to switch to subcutaneous treatment. Age, sex, diagnosis, drug, line of treatment, and duration of treatment were not predictors for willingness to switch. Questionnaire responses (n = 51) demonstrate that the decision to switch was not influenced by COVID-19 exposure risk, impact on wider IBD service provision, impact on patient mental health, financial savings, seeking support following a switch, or a sense of independence managing IBD. Switchers (68%) were more motivated by time savings than non-switchers (25%; p = 0.0042). Conclusions: Switch uptake rates were 58%, with 90% of patients eligible to switch. Switch decision was influenced by time savings for patients but not by other patient-related factors.

Recent advances in clinical practice: management of inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised considerable concerns that patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), particularly those treated with immunosuppressive therapies, may have an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition, develop worse outcomes following COVID-19, and have suboptimal vaccine response compared with the general population. In this review, we summarise data on the risk of COVID-19 and associated outcomes, and latest guidance on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with IBD. Emerging evidence suggests that commonly used medications for IBD, such as corticosteroids but not biologicals, were associated with adverse outcomes to COVID-19. There has been no increased risk of de novo, or delayed, IBD diagnoses, however, an overall decrease in endoscopy procedures has led to a rise in the number of missed endoscopic-detected cancers during the pandemic. The impact of IBD medication on vaccine response has been a research priority recently. Data suggest that patients with IBD treated with antitumour necrosis factor (TNF) medications had attenuated humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and more rapid antibody decay, compared with non-anti-TNF-treated patients. Reassuringly, rates of breakthrough infections and hospitalisations in all patients who received vaccines, irrespective of IBD treatment, remained low. International guidelines recommend that all patients with IBD treated with immunosuppressive therapies should receive, at any point during their treatment cycle, three primary doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines with a further booster dose as soon as possible. Future research should focus on our understanding of the rate of antibody decay in biological-treated patients, which patients require additional doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, the long-term risks of COVID-19 on IBD disease course and activity, and the potential risk of long COVID-19 in patients with IBD.

Conventional Therapies for Crohn's Disease

Crohn's disease is a chronic and progressive immune-mediated disease with increasing incidence worldwide. There are no curative therapies. The primary agents used in the treatment of Crohn's disease are aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, immunomodulators, and biologics. Each agent has different roles in the induction and maintenance of remission of disease. The biologics available include anti-TNF agents, anti-integrins, and anti-interleukins. The choice of initial biologic therapy should be determined through shared decision-making between the patient and provider.

Perspectives on Subcutaneous Infliximab for Rheumatic Diseases and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Era

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted significant changes in patient care in rheumatology and gastroenterology, with clinical guidance issued to manage ongoing therapy while minimising the risk of nosocomial infection for patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Subcutaneous (SC) formulations of biologics enable patients to self-administer treatments at home; however, switching between agents may be undesirable. CT-P13 SC is the first SC formulation of infliximab that received regulatory approval and may be termed a biobetter as it offers significant clinical advantages over intravenous (IV) infliximab, including improved pharmacokinetics and a convenient mode of delivery. Potential benefits in terms of reduced immunogenicity have also been suggested. With a new SC formulation, infliximab provides an additional option for dual formulation, which enables patients to transition from IV to SC administration route without changing agent. Before COVID-19, clinical trials supported the efficacy and safety of switching from IV to SC infliximab for patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and SC infliximab may have been selected on the basis of patient and HCP preferences for SC agents. During the pandemic, patients with rheumatic diseases and IBD have successfully switched from IV to SC infliximab, with some clinical benefits and high levels of patient satisfaction. As patients switched to SC therapeutics, the reduction in resource requirements for IV infusion services may have been particularly welcome given the pandemic, facilitating reorganisation and redeployment in overstretched healthcare systems, alongside pharmacoeconomic benefits and a reduction in exposure to nosocomial infection. Telemedicine and contactless healthcare have been pushed to the forefront during the pandemic, and a lasting shift towards remote patient management and community/home-based drug administration is anticipated. SC infliximab supports the implementation of this paradigm for future improvements of healthcare value delivered. The accumulation of real-world data during the pandemic supports the high level of confidence, with patients, physicians, and healthcare systems benefitting from its uptake.

The safe use of inflammatory bowel disease therapies during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) often require the use of immunosuppressant medications that increase infection risk, leading to concerns over the safe use of IBD medications during the Coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Objectives

To summarize available evidence on the safety and appropriate use of IBD medications during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in regard to risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalization, respiratory failure, or death for patients on IBD therapeutics.

Conclusions

The majority of IBD medications are safe to continue during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a few notable exceptions. Patients with IBD who do not have COVID-19 should continue their prescribed IBD therapies, although steroids are associated with severe COVID-19 outcomes and should be weaned when possible. Corticosteroids should be tapered and discontinued when possible in patients with IBD who test positive for COVID-19 as well. Patients with IBD who test positive for COVID-19 should hold biologics, thiopurines, methotrexate, and tofacitinib for at least 2 weeks, and those who have symptoms should not restart these medications until symptom resolution. During the COVID-19 pandemic, all patients with IBD should continue to follow public health guidance including social distancing, masking, and COVID-19 vaccination recommendations.

Efficacy and Safety of Elective Switching from Intravenous to Subcutaneous Infliximab [CT-P13]: A Multicentre Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Intravenous [IV] infliximab is a well-established therapy for inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] patients. A subcutaneous [SC] formulation of infliximab [CT-P13] has recently been shown to be as effective as IV infliximab after two doses of IV induction in a randomised trial, but there are no data to support elective switching of patients on maintenance IV infliximab therapy. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of an elective switching programme to SC CT-P13 in patients treated with IV infliximab.

METHODS

Patients on established maintenance IV infliximab, who switched to SC CT-P13, were included in this retrospective multicentre cohort study. Disease activity was monitored serially with the Harvey-Bradshaw Index [HBI] for Crohn's disease [CD] and the Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index [SCCAI] for ulcerative colitis (UC) for up to 12 months at months 3, 6, and 12. Faecal calprotectin [FC] and C-reactive protein [CRP] were recorded at baseline and follow-up, if available. Infliximab trough levels were measured prior to switch and at months 3, 6, and 12 following switch. The primary outcome measure was treatment persistence at latest follow-up. Secondary outcome measures included infliximab pharmacokinetics [PK], safety, need for corticosteroid rescue therapy, and need for surgery.

RESULTS

We included 181 patients, of whom 115 [63.5%] had CD. The majority [72.4%] were on 8-weekly dosing of intravenous infliximab prior to switching, and more than half [59.1%] were on concomitant immunomodulatory therapy. The majority of patients (CD: 106, 92.2%; UC: 46, 76.7%; and IBD unclassified [IBD-U]: 5, 83.3%) were in clinical remission. Treatment persistence rate was high [n = 167, 92.3%] and only 14 patients [7.7%] stopped treatment during the follow-up period. There was no significant difference between baseline and repeat measurements at 3, 6, or 12 months for HBI, SCCAI, CRP, or FC. Of the total cohort, 25 patients (13.8%) had perianal CD. Of these, only two patients [8%] had worsening of perianal CD and required antibiotic therapy and further examination under anaesthesia [EUA]. Both these patients also switched back to intravenous infliximab. Median infliximab level increased from a baseline of 8.9 µg/dl [range 0.4-16] to 16.0 µg/dl [range 2.3-16, p <0.001] at 3 months. Serum levels stayed stable at 6 months [median 16 µg/dl, range 0.3-17.2] and 12 months [median 16 µg/dl, range 0.3-19.1, both p <0.001 compared with baseline]. Among the variables examined, only antibodies to infliximab [ATI] was associated with infliximab levels (odds ratio [OR] -13.369, 95% CI -15.405, -11.333, p <0.001]. A total of 14 patients [7.7%] developed ATI; of these, nine [64.3%] were on concomitant immunomodulatory therapy. Immunomodulatory therapy was not significantly associated with development of ATI [p = 0.15]. In a subset of patients receiving escalated IV infliximab dosing frequency prior to switching, no difference in treatment persistence was observed in patients receiving weekly versus alternate weekly SC CT-P13. Patient acceptance and satisfaction rates with SC CT-P13 were very high.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients on IV infliximab maintenance therapy switched to SC CT-P13, we observed high treatment persistence rates and low rates of immunogenicity, with no change in clinical disease activity indices or biomarkers. Infliximab levels increased after switch to SC CT-P13, and only ATI was associated with serum infliximab levels. Patient acceptance and satisfaction rates were high with SC CT-P13.

Model-Based Meta-Analysis on the Efficacy of Biologics and Small Targeted Molecules for Crohn’s Disease

Information on comparative drug efficacy is of great importance for drug development as well as clinical practice. Up to now, the relative efficacy of biologics and small targeted molecules for Crohn’s disease (CD) remains unclear. The objective of this study was to quantify the relative efficacy of investigational and approved biological treatments for CD measured in Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), and C-reactive protein (CRP). The analysis dataset was composed of summary-level data from 46 trials, containing 12,846 patients, with treatment of 24 drugs. Six mathematical models with non-parametric placebo estimations were developed to describe the time course and dose–response of six efficacy measures. The effects of covariate were further evaluated. Time–response relationships were found in outcomes measured in CDAI. The patients’ age, disease duration, baseline CDAI, and CRP showed an impact on the efficacy. Model simulations were performed to compare the efficacies across different drugs. The most achievement in clinical remission (defined as CDAI less than 150) and clinical response (defined as the reduction in CDAI for 100 or 70) was observed in the simulation for PF-04236921 and infliximab, respectively. The most improvement in IBDQ was shown in tofacitinib. In general, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors were the most effective biologics, and the highest efficacy of small targeted molecules was observed in janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. These findings have important implications for clinical practice in CD.

A review of the therapeutic management of Crohn's disease

Crohn's disease is a chronic inflammatory, relapsing-remitting, and progressive gastrointestinal disorder with an often-negative impact on the physical, emotional, and psychological well-being. Over the past two decades, the medical compendium for the treatment of Crohn's disease has increased significantly, enabling treatment beyond symptoms. Indeed, early and timely use of effective medical therapy has been reflected by improved outcomes with reduction in surgery and ability to achieve clinical and endoscopic remission, reduce corticosteroid dependance, and prevent long-term complications in more patients. In this review, we discuss the key milestones in the medical management of Crohn's disease.

CT-P13 SC for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) has improved following the implementation of early intensive treat to target recommendations and the availability of different biologicals. Most experience is with TNF blockers, but challenges remain in the efficacy/safety balance, immunogenicity, and long-term drug survival as well as availability and affordability despite the introduction of biosimilars.

AREA COVERED

We provide an overview of the development of CT-P13 SC based on infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 IV. The one-year pivotal phase I/III trial in RA showed CT-P13 120 mg SC fixed dose to have favorable pharmacokinetics compared to CT-P13 IV classical weight adapted dosing, similar to lower anti-drug antibodies, similar safety and non-inferiority for efficacy at 6 months.

EXPERT OPINION

CT-P13 SC is an additional option in RA treatment and by extension for other inflammatory diseases as Inflammatory Bowel Disease. This new way of administration has the potential to improve long-term drug survival of infliximab, improve patient outcomes, and patient comfort.

Impact of COVID-19 on inflammatory bowel disease practice and perspectives for the future

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2); since its first description in December 2019, it has rapidly spread to a global pandemic. Specific concerns have been raised concerning patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), which are chronic autoimmune inflammatory disorders of the gut that frequently require immunosuppressive and biological therapies to control their activity. Accumulating evidence has so far demonstrated that patients with IBD are not at increased risk of contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. As for the general population, the identified risk factors for severe COVID-19 course among IBD patients have been established to be advanced age and the presence of comorbidities. Treatment with high-dose corticosteroids has also been associated with an increased risk of death in IBD patients with COVID-19. Information on COVID-19 is constantly evolving, with data growing at a rapid pace. This will guarantee better knowledge and stronger evidence to help physicians in the choice of the best therapeutic approach for each patient, concurrently controlling for the risk of IBD disease under treatment and the risk of COVID-19 adverse outcomes and balancing the two. Moreover, the impact of the enormous number of severe respiratory patients on healthcare systems and facilities has led to an unprecedented redeployment of healthcare resources, significantly impacting the care of patients with chronic diseases. In this newly changed environment, the primary aim is to avoid harm whilst still providing adequate management. Telemedicine has been applied and is strongly encouraged for patients without the necessity of infusion therapy and whose conditions are stable. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has already revolutionized the management of patients with chronic immune-mediated diseases such as IBD. Direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic will be present for some time. This is the reason why continuous research, rapid solutions and constantly updated guidelines are of utmost importance. The aim of the present review is, therefore, to point out what has been learned so far as well as to pinpoint the unanswered questions and perspectives for the future.

[KASID Guidance for Clinical Practice Management of Adult Inflammatory Bowel Disease during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Expert Consensus Statement]

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has reduced the ability to prevent or control chronic disease due to the concerns about safety in accessing health care. Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic condition requiring long- term sustained treatment, which is difficult in the current panedemic situation. The Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases (KASID) has developed an expert consensus statement on the clinical practice management of adult inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic. This expert consensus statement is based on guidelines and clinical reports from several countries around the world. It provides recommendations to deal with the risk of COVID-19 and medication use in IBD patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and emphasizes the importance of right treatment approach to avoid worsening of the disease condition in IBD patients.

Switching from one reference biological to another in stable patients for non-medical reasons: a literature search and brief review

Background: The practice of non-medical switch (NMS) from a reference biological (originator) to a biosimilar is widely accepted in some countries. However, there is little documentation on the impact of NMS from one originator to another originator. Objectives: To assess the consequences for patients of NMS from one biological originator to another, based on existing literature. The focus was on efficacy and cost of treatment with TNF-α-inhibitors in three disease areas. Methods: A literature search was conducted in Ovid (PubMed, EMBASE) and abstracts from meetings in key therapeutic areas, to identify studies reporting efficacy, safety or costs by switching between originator biologics. Results: 167 references were identified and abstracts screened; 36 papers reviewed in full text, and 6 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Three clinical studies of NMS had very small sample sizes, but suggested that NMS is beneficial. The remaining three studies used administrative data with little clinical information, indicating that NMS was disadvantageous and associated with increased health care utilization and costs. Conclusions: There is very limited documentation on NMS from one originator biological to another, and the literature suffers from methodological limitations. The results are mixed and preclude drawing an overriding conclusion. Future studies, are warranted.

Optimal inflammatory bowel disease management during the global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to summarize the current evidence regarding the risks and implications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and discuss optimal management of IBD during this pandemic.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with IBD are not at increased risk of COVID-19 but several risk factors for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 infection) have been identified, such as active IBD, obesity, and corticosteroid use. COVID-19 outcomes are similar among patients with IBD and the overall population. Although biologics have not been shown to increase the risk of severe COVID-19 complications, several risk factors have been associated with negative COVID-19 outcomes in patients with IBD, including older age, obesity, the presence of comorbidities, active disease, and corticosteroid use. IBD therapy should, therefore, be continued with the aim of attaining or maintaining remission, except for corticosteroids, which should be held or reduced to the minimal effective dose. Although it has been recommended that immunosuppressive therapy be held during a case of COVID-19, the half-lives of these drugs and data on the timing of restarting therapy limit the strength of these recommendations. We recommend COVID-19 vaccination for IBD patients whenever available, as benefits to the individual and to society outweigh the risks.

SUMMARY

As our understanding of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 continues to evolve, we are learning more about its impact in patients with IBD and how to better manage patients in this setting. Managing IBD during this pandemic has also highlighted the importance of restructuring services in order to adapt to current and potential future outbreaks. The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed IBD care through the expansion of telemedicine and development of novel approaches to remote monitoring.

Efficacy of switching from infliximab to golimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis in deep remission

BACKGROUND-AIM

Intravenously administered biologicals are associated with a huge pressure to Infusion Units and increased cost. We aimed to assess the impact of switching infliximab to golimumab in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients in deep remission. Patients and method: In a prospective, single-centre pilot study UC patients on infliximab mono-therapy for = 2 years, whowere in deep remission, consented to switch to golimumab and were followed for 1 year with clinical assessment, serum and faecal biomarkers, work productivity, satisfaction with treatment and quality of life parameters. Endoscopic remission was assessed by colonoscopy at 1 year. Patients fulfilling the same inclusion criteria, who did not consent to switch to golimumab and continued to receive infliximab mono-therapy, for the same period, served as controls.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a prospective, single-centre pilot study UC patients on infliximab mono-therapy for ≥ 2 years, who were in deep remission, consented to switch to golimumab and were followed for 1 year with clinical assessment, serum and faecal biomarkers, work productivity, satisfaction with treatment and quality of life parameters. Endoscopic remission was assessed by colonoscopy at 1 year. Patients fulfilling the same inclusion criteria, who did not consent to switch to golimumab and continued to receive infliximab mono-therapy, for the same period, served as controls.

RESULTS

Between October 2015 and October 2017, 20 patients were recruited; however one patient stopped therapy because of pregnancy. All 19 patients who were switched to golimumab were still in clinical, biomarker and endoscopic remission at 1 year and maintained excellent quality of life without any complications. In the control group, 18 of 19 patients were also in deep remission, since only one patient had a flare which was managed with IFX dose intensification. During a median 3 years extension treatment with golimumab only 2 patients experienced a flare of colitis.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study indicates that switching from in-fliximab to golimumab in UC patients in deep remission does not compromise treatment effectiveness or the course of disease; golimumab offers a valid alternative to intravenous infliximab infusions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Frequency and Effectiveness of Empirical Anti-TNF Dose Intensification in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Loss of response to antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies in inflammatory bowel disease occurs in a high proportion of patients. Our aim was to evaluate the loss of response to anti-TNF therapy, considered as the need for dose intensification (DI), DI effectiveness and the possible variables influencing its requirements. Bibliographical searches were performed.

SELECTION

prospective and retrospective studies assessing DI in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis patients treated for at least 12 weeks with an anti-TNF drug.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

studies using anti-TNF as a prophylaxis for the postoperative recurrence in Crohn's disease or those where DI was based on therapeutic drug monitoring.

DATA SYNTHESIS

effectiveness by intention-to-treat (random effects model). Data were stratified by medical condition (ulcerative colitis vs. Crohn's disease), anti-TNF drug and follow-up.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-three studies (33,241 patients) were included. Overall rate of the DI requirement after 12 months was 28% (95% CI 24-32, I2 = 96%, 41 studies) in naïve patients and 39% (95% CI 31-47, I2 = 86%, 18 studies) in non-naïve patients. The DI requirement rate was higher both in those with prior anti-TNF exposure (p = 0.01) and with ulcerative colitis (p = 0.02). The DI requirement rate in naïve patients after 36 months was 35% (95% CI 28-43%; I2 = 98%; 18 studies). The overall short-term response and remission rates of empirical DI in naïve patients were 63% (95% CI 48-78%; I2 = 99%; 32 studies) and 48% (95% CI: 39-58%; I2 = 92%; 25 studies), respectively. The loss of response to anti-TNF agents-and, consequently, DI-occurred frequently in inflammatory bowel disease (approximately in one-fourth at one year and in one-third at 3 years). Empirical DI was a relatively effective therapeutic option.

The Automatic Substitution of Biosimilars: Definitions of Interchangeability are not Interchangeable

In the USA, an interchangeability designation provides biosimilar sponsors with a pathway for achieving what is standard for small-molecule generics: pharmacy-level auto-substitution for an innovator. No other major health authority links interchangeability to automatic substitution, as all require the involvement of the prescriber or patient in a medication change. This editorial considers the clinical impact and practicality of auto-substitution. First, interchangeability is linked to non-medical switching (NMS), the practice of switching treatment in patients with stable disease for non-clinical reasons. NMS may generate negative sentiment in those unwilling or reluctant to switch, which can adversely impact treatment outcomes (i.e., nocebo effect). Indeed, in real-world studies of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, discontinuation rates have been shown to be higher in patients switched to biosimilars for non-medical reasons than in historical cohorts maintained on innovators. Second, interchangeability may impede pharmacovigilance and traceability, as not all jurisdictions require innovators and biosimilars to have distinct biologic names. Third, an interchangeability designation from the US Food and Drug Administration only permits a biosimilar to be automatically substituted for its innovator, not other biosimilars (if available). Pharmacist education would be needed to avoid off-label, automatic substitution among biosimilars of a single innovator. Last, once granted, an interchangeability designation exists in perpetuity under current US federal law. However, the supply chains of innovators and biosimilars are maintained independently, with no requirement for reconfirmation of biosimilarity or interchangeability. We feel that additional guidance is needed for the auto-substitution of biosimilars and innovators to become a reality.

Novel trends with biologics in inflammatory bowel disease: sequential and combined approaches

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management has changed dramatically over the past 20 years, after the introduction of targeted biological therapies. However, the impact of these new drugs in changing the natural history of disease is still under debate. Recent evidence seems to suggest that the extent of their efficacy might be, at least partially, dependent on the timing of their introduction and on the subsequent management strategy. In this complex landscape, the potential role for a more dynamic approach with treatments based on sequencing and combining targeted therapies has been explored only minimally so far. In this review, we aim to explore the potential biological rationale behind the use of sequential and combination therapies in IBD, to summarise the current knowledge on this topic and to propose a management algorithm that combines these notions.

Management of paediatric IBD after the peak of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy: A position paper on behalf of the SIGENP IBD working group

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, spreading in Italy during the first months of 2020, abruptly changed the way of practicing medicine in this country. As a consequence of the lockdown, the diagnostic and therapeutic management of paediatric chronic conditions, such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been affected. During the peak of COVID-19 pandemic, elective visits, endoscopies and infusions have been postponed, with potential clinical and psychological impact on disease course and a high likelihood of increasing waiting lists. While slowly moving back towards normality, clinicians need to recognize the best ways to care for patients with IBD, carefully avoiding risk factors for new potential epidemic outbreaks. In this uncertain scenario until the development and spread of COVID-19 vaccine, it is necessary to continue to operate with caution. Hereby we provide useful indications for a safer and gradual restarting of routine clinical activities after COVID-19 peak in Italy.

Switching biologics used in inflammatory bowel diseases: how to deal with in practice?

Inflammatory bowel disease patients do not all respond to biological treatment since several patients will initially respond but will lose response or develop side effects over time. In such cases, a switch from one biologic to another offers a valuable clinical solution. This requires to evaluate both patient and drug profiles in combination with the reason(s) for switching in order to adequately select the second-line biologic. Therapeutic drug monitoring is obviously a useful tool but is currently limited to the use of anti-TNFα. In this review paper, we provide overview and guidance on switching biologics in clinical practice, with the emphasis on the motivations for switching, the selection of the second-line biologic, as well as explanations on how and when to switch.

Potential impact of COVID-19 on colorectal disease management

The current recommendations for management of colorectal diseases are still evolving, due to the limited experience on this issue. As the new coronavirus can be transmitted through breath droplets, by contact and orofecally, there is no consensus of how this fact may affect the investigation and treatment of anorectal diseases. Thus, high-quality multicenter studies are urgently needed to provide better information to both patients and the multiprofessional team, in order to build an effective pandemic response plan in our specialty. As a greater operative risk for infected patients has already been demonstrated, the next step lies on the identification of new therapeutic strategies that could minimize this effect on an individual basis. There is a present understanding that the COVID-19 pandemic should change some traditional practices. Therefore, the surgical treatment of suspected or known COVID-19 case demands specific insights. This article analyses potential influences regarding the treatment of patients with Colorectal Cancer (CRC) and Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD). At present, elective surgery must be avoided, and the colorectal surgeon must carefully evaluate the risks and benefits of such decision. Within this context, a change toward nonsurgical and less aggressive modalities of CRC treatment may help to postpone definitive treatment. We also discuss the concerns regarding the viral infection among the population, the influence on clinical symptoms and the proposed modifications on therapeutic schemes.

Inflammatory Bowel Disease Management During the COVID-19 Outbreak: The Ten Do's and Don'ts from the ECCO-COVID Taskforce

Our knowledge of COVID-19 is changing and evolving rapidly, with novel insights and recommendations, almost on a daily basis. It behooves the medical community to provide updated information on a regular basis, on best practice to facilitate optimal care of infected patients and on appropriate advice for the general population. This is particularly important in the case of patients with chronic conditions, such as inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. In this review, we have compiled existing evidence on the impact of COVID-19 in IBD patients and provide guidance on the most appropriate care to adopt during the pandemic. Our review highlights that IBD, per se, is not a risk factor for COVID-19. However, all IBD patients with symptoms should be tested for SARS-CoV-2 and the procedures for disease management should be carefully adapted: [i] in SARS-CoV-2-positive IBD patients, medical treatments should be re-evaluated [with a particular focus on corticosteroids] always with the purpose of treating active disease and maintaining remission; [ii] non-urgent surgeries and endoscopic procedures should be postponed for all patients; [iii] online consultancy should be implemented; and [iv] hospitalization and surgery should be limited to life-threatening situations.

Donning a New Approach to the Practice of Gastroenterology: Perspectives From the COVID-19 Pandemic Epicenter

The COVID-19 pandemic seemingly is peaking now in New York City and has triggered significant changes to the standard management of gastrointestinal diseases. Priorities such as minimizing viral transmission, preserving personal protective equipment, and freeing hospital beds have driven unconventional approaches to managing gastroenterology (GI) patients. Conversion of endoscopy units to COVID units and redeployment of GI fellows and faculty has profoundly changed the profile of most GI services. Meanwhile, consult and procedural volumes have been reduced drastically. In this review, we share our collective experiences regarding how we have changed our practice of medicine in response to the COVID surge. Although we review our management of specific consults and conditions, the overarching theme focuses primarily on noninvasive measures and maximizing medical therapies. Endoscopic procedures have been reserved for those timely interventions that are most likely to be therapeutic. The role of multidisciplinary discussion, although always important, now has become critical. The support of our faculty and trainees remains essential. Local leadership can encourage well-being by frequent team check-ins and by fostering trainee development through remote learning. Advancing a clear vision and a transparent process for how to organize and triage care in the recovery phase will allow for a smooth transition to our new normal.

Review article: prevention, diagnosis and management of COVID-19 in the IBD patient

BACKGROUND

The current COVID-19 pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has emerged as a public health emergency. All nations are seriously challenged as the virus spreads rapidly across the globe with no regard for borders. The primary management of IBD involves treating uncontrolled inflammation with most patients requiring immune-based therapies. However, these therapies may weaken the immune system and potentially place IBD patients at increased risk of infections and infectious complications including those from COVID-19.

AIM

To summarise the scale of the COVID-19 pandemic, review unique concerns regarding IBD management and infection risk during the pandemic and assess COVID-19 management options and drug interactions in the IBD population.

METHODS

A literature review on IBD, SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 was undertaken and relevant literature was summarised and critically examined.

RESULTS

IBD patients do not appear to be more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and there is no evidence of an association between IBD therapies and increased risk of COVID-19. IBD medication adherence should be encouraged to prevent disease flare but where possible high-dose systemic corticosteroids should be avoided. Patients should exercise social distancing, optimise co-morbidities and be up to date with influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. If a patient develops COVID-19, immune suppressing medications should be withheld until infection resolution and if trial medications for COVID-19 are being considered, potential drug interactions should be checked.

CONCLUSIONS

IBD patient management presents a challenge in the current COVID-19 pandemic. The primary focus should remain on keeping bowel inflammation controlled and encouraging medication adherence.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Expert Commentary

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update was to rapidly review the emerging evidence and provide timely expert recommendations regarding the management of patients with inflammatory bowel disease during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. This expert commentary was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely perspective on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology.

Practical advice for management of inflammatory bowel diseases patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: World Endoscopy Organization Statement

COVID-19 is rapidly spreading worldwide and specific literature how to deal with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) patients is limited so far. Here, the World Endoscopy Organisation is providing practical advice for the management of IBD patients during the pandemic covering the diagnostic and therapeutic spectrum.

Resumption of activity in gastroenterology departments. Recommendations by SEPD, AEEH, GETECCU and AEG

The set of measures proposed by SEPD, AEEH, GETECCU and AEG are aimed to help departments in their resumption of usual activity. We have prepared a number of practical recommendations regarding patient management and the stepwise resumption of healthcare activity. These recommendations are based on the sparse, changing evidence available, and will be updated in the future according to daily needs and the availability of expendable materials to suit them; in each department they will be implemented depending upon the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in each region, and the burden the pandemic has represented for each hospital. The general objectives of these recommendations include: (a)To protect our patients against the risks of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and to provide them with high-quality care. (b)To protect all healthcare professionals against the risks of infection with SARS-CoV-2. (c)To resume normal functioning of our departments in a setting of ongoing risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Resumption of activity in gastroenterology departments. Recommendations by SEPD, AEEH, GETECCU and AEG

The set of measures proposed by SEPD, AEEH, GETECCU and AEG are aimed to help departments in their resumption of usual activity. We have prepared a number of practical recommendations regarding patient management and the stepwise resumption of healthcare activity. These recommendations are based on the sparse, changing evidence available, and will be updated in the future according to daily needs and the availability of expendable materials to suit them; in each department they will be implemented depending upon the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in each region, and the burden the pandemic has represented for each hospital. The general objectives of these recommendations include:

• To protect our patients against the risks of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and to provide them with high-quality care.

• To protect all healthcare professionals against the risks of infection with SARS-CoV-2.

• To resume normal functioning of our departments in a setting of ongoing risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2.

The daily impact of COVID-19 in gastroenterology

A new strain of coronavirus, called SARS-CoV-2, emerged in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, probably originating from a wild-animal contamination. Since then, the situation rapidly evolved from a cluster of patients with pneumonia, to a regional epidemic and now to a pandemic called COrona VIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). This evolution is related to the peculiar modes of transmission of the disease and to the globalization and lifestyle of the 21st century that created the perfect scenario for virus spread. Even though research has not evidenced particular susceptibility of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients to SARS-CoV-2 infection, immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory treatments were considered potential risk factors. In this context, initiating treatments with these agents should be cautiously weighted and regular ongoing treatments shall be continued, while the dose of corticosteroids should be reduced whenever possible. Due to the increased risk of contamination, elective endoscopic procedures and surgeries should be postponed and IBD online appointments shall be considered. IBD patients shall also follow the recommendations provided to the general population, such as minimization of contact with infected or suspected patients and to wash hands frequently. In the absence of effective treatments and vaccines, this pandemic can only be controlled through prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission with the main objectives of providing patients the best healthcare possible and reduce mortality.

Interventions for fatigue in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an umbrella term used to describe a group of chronic, progressive inflammatory disorders of the digestive tract. Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis are the two main types. Fatigue is a common, debilitating and burdensome symptom experienced by individuals with IBD. The subjective, complex nature of fatigue can often hamper its management. The efficacy and safety of pharmacological or non-pharmacological treatments for fatigue in IBD is not yet established through systematic review of studies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for managing fatigue in IBD compared to no treatment, placebo or active comparator.

SEARCH METHODS

A systematic search of the databases Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO was undertaken from inception to July 2018. A top-up search was run in October 2019. We also searched the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ongoing trials and research registers, conference abstracts and reference lists for potentially eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions in children or adults with IBD, where fatigue was assessed as a primary or secondary outcome using a generic or disease-specific fatigue measure, a subscale of a larger quality of life scale or as a single-item measure, were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened search results and four authors extracted and assessed bias independently using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. The primary outcome was fatigue and the secondary outcomes included quality of life, adverse events (AEs), serious AEs and withdrawal due to AEs. Standard methodological procedures were used.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 studies (3741 participants): nine trials of pharmacological interventions and five trials of non-pharmacological interventions. Thirty ongoing studies were identified, and five studies are awaiting classification. Data on fatigue were available from nine trials (1344 participants). In only four trials was managing fatigue the primary intention of the intervention (electroacupuncture, physical activity advice, cognitive behavioural therapy and solution-focused therapy). Electroacupuncture Fatigue was measured with Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) (scores range from 0 to 52). The FACIT-F score at week eight was 8.00 points higher (better) in participants receiving electroacupuncture compared with no treatment (mean difference (MD) 8.00, 95% CI 6.45 to 9.55; 1 RCT; 27 participants; low-certainty evidence). Results at week 16 could not be calculated. FACIT-F scores were also higher with electroacupuncture compared to sham electroacupuncture at week eight (MD 5.10, 95% CI 3.49 to 6.71; 1 RCT; 30 participants; low-certainty evidence) but not at week 16 (MD 2.60, 95% CI 0.74 to 4.46; 1 RCT; 30 participants; low-certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported, except for one adverse event in the sham electroacupuncture group. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and solution-focused therapy Compared with a fatigue information leaflet, the effects of CBT on fatigue are very uncertain (Inflammatory Bowel Disease-Fatigue (IBD-F) section I: MD -2.16, 95% CI -6.13 to 1.81; IBD-F section II: MD -21.62, 95% CI -45.02 to 1.78; 1 RCT, 18 participants, very low-certainty evidence). The efficacy of solution-focused therapy on fatigue is also very uncertain, because standard summary data were not reported (1 RCT, 98 participants). Physical activity advice One 2 x 2 factorial trial (45 participants) found physical activity advice may reduce fatigue but the evidence is very uncertain. At week 12, compared to a control group receiving no physical activity advice plus omega 3 capsules, FACIT-F scores were higher (better) in the physical activity advice plus omega 3 group (FACIT-F MD 6.40, 95% CI -1.80 to 14.60, very low-certainty evidence) and the physical activity advice plus placebo group (FACIT-F MD 9.00, 95% CI 1.64 to 16.36, very low-certainty evidence). Adverse events were predominantly gastrointestinal and similar across physical activity groups, although more adverse events were reported in the no physical activity advice plus omega 3 group. Pharmacological interventions Compared with placebo, adalimumab 40 mg, administered every other week ('eow') (only for those known to respond to adalimumab induction therapy), may reduce fatigue in patients with moderately-to-severely active Crohn's disease, but the evidence is very uncertain (FACIT-F MD 4.30, 95% CI 1.75 to 6.85; very low-certainty evidence). The adalimumab 40 mg eow group was less likely to experience serious adverse events (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.96; 521 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and withdrawal due to adverse events (OR 0.48, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.87; 521 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Ferric maltol may result in a slight increase in fatigue, with better SF-36 vitality scores reported in the placebo group compared to the treatment group following 12 weeks of treatment (MD -9.31, 95% CI -17.15 to -1.47; 118 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in adverse events (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.18; 120 participants; low-certainty evidence) AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The effects of interventions for the management of fatigue in IBD are uncertain. No firm conclusions regarding the efficacy and safety of interventions can be drawn. Further high-quality studies, with a larger number of participants, are required to assess the potential benefits and harms of therapies. Future studies should assess interventions specifically designed for fatigue management, targeted at selected IBD populations, and measure fatigue as the primary outcome.

Outcome of elective switching to vedolizumab in inflammatory bowel disease patients under tumor necrosis factor antagonist-maintained clinical remission

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Vedolizumab (VDZ) has been used in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients who failed anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy. This study was to examine long-term outcome of IBD patients switching to VDZ from anti-TNF agents for reasons other than failure of therapy.

METHODS

Inflammatory bowel disease patients at the University of Chicago IBD center who were in clinical remission with anti-TNF therapy and then electively changed to VDZ due to reasons other than loss of response were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcome was the durability of clinical remission maintained by VDZ as assessed by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. The proportion of patients in clinical and endoscopic remission at 6-12 months after switching to VDZ therapy was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients (36 with Crohn's disease and 5 with ulcerative colitis) met the inclusion criteria and were in clinical remission at the time of switch. The majority of patients switched therapy due to adverse effects (56.1%) or infections (14.6%). During a median duration of 30 months (range 7-52) of VDZ therapy, 34 (82.9%) were in VDZ-maintained clinical remission. One (2.4%) and four (9.8%) patients discontinued VDZ due to flare and adverse effects, respectively. Endoscopic remission was present in 25 of 30 patients (83.3%) who had a follow-up colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Vedolizumab was effective and safe in maintaining remission in IBD patients who switched from anti-TNF agents due to reasons other than failure of therapy. Our results suggest that switching anti-TNF remitters to VDZ treatment is a safe practice in specific patient populations.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

Elevated Pretreatment Plasma Oncostatin M Is Associated With Poor Biochemical Response to Infliximab

Background

We hypothesized that elevations of plasma Oncostatin M (OSM) would be associated with infliximab nonresponse.

Methods

Plasma OSM was measured in Crohn disease patients pre-infliximab with biochemical response (>50% reduction in fecal calprotectin) as the primary outcome.

Results

The median OSM in biochemical responders was 86 (69-148) pg/mL compared with 166 (74-1766) pg/mL in nonresponders (P = 0.03). Plasma OSM > 143.5 pg/mL was 71% sensitive and 78% specific for biochemical nonresponse (area under the curve 0.71). Early biochemical nonremission was also associated with an elevated neutrophil CD64 expression (odds ratio 8.9, P = 0.011).

Conclusions

Elevated preinfliximab plasma OSM and nCD64 surface expression were both associated with poor biochemical outcomes.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Luminal Crohn's Disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Crohn's disease (CD) is a lifelong illness with substantial morbidity, although new therapies and treatment paradigms have been developed. We provide guidance for treatment of ambulatory patients with mild to severe active luminal CD.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review to identify published studies of the management of CD. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Statements were developed through an iterative online platform and then finalized and voted on by a group of specialists.

RESULTS

The consensus includes 41 statements focused on 6 main drug classes: antibiotics, 5-aminosalicylate, corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, biologic therapies, and other therapies. The group suggested against the use of antibiotics or 5-aminosalicylate as induction or maintenance therapies. Corticosteroid therapies (including budesonide) can be used as induction, but not maintenance therapies. Among immunosuppressants, thiopurines should not be used for induction, but can be used for maintenance therapy for selected low-risk patients. Parenteral methotrexate was proposed for induction and maintenance therapy in patients with corticosteroid-dependent CD. Biologic agents, including tumor necrosis factor antagonists, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab, were recommended for patients failed by conventional induction therapies and as maintenance therapy. The consensus group was unable to clearly define the role of concomitant immunosuppressant therapies in initiation of treatment with a biologic agent.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal management of CD requires careful patient assessment, acknowledgement of patient preferences, evidence-based use of existing therapies, and thorough assessment to define treatment success.

Prevalence, Safety and Long-Term Retention Rates of Biologics in Hong Kong from 2001 to 2015

BACKGROUND

Biologic agents were initially introduced as treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) but have since been used for other medical conditions. As new biologics become increasingly widespread in treatment regimens, it is important to understand their safety and utilization in the post-marketing context.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate long-term prescribing patterns and the safety of biologics in real clinical settings in Hong Kong.

METHODS

This was a population-based drug utilization study in Hong Kong using a territory-wide electronic medical database Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System (CDARS). Patients who received biologic treatments from 2001 to 2015 were identified and their corresponding demographic and clinical details retrieved from CDARS. The annual prevalence of biologic prescriptions, the long-term retention rates and incidence rates of infections associated with biologic treatments were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 30,298 patients (male: 44%) prescribed biologic treatments were identified from CDARS from 2001 to 2015. The annual prevalence of biologic prescriptions increased from 0.1 to 16.1 per 100 persons for both sexes. Infliximab had the highest first-year retention rate of 95.6% among all biologics and continuously attained the highest retention rate from second to fifth year. The overall incidence rate of serious infections was less than five per 100 person-years. Specifically, the incidence rates of tuberculosis, upper and lower respiratory infections and herpes zoster were 0.52, 3.24, 4.99 and 1.01 per 100 person-years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This population-based study revealed an increasing prevalence of biologic prescribing. Results from the study described the long-term retention rates and incidence rates of serious infections of biologic treatments for all indications, and confirmed the safety of biologic treatments. Since this study provides an overview of all biologic utilization, further studies on cost effectiveness, safety and compliance of treatment in different patient groups are still warranted.

Patients beliefs on intravenous and subcutaneous routes of administration of biologics for severe asthma treatment: A cross-sectional observational survey study

Background

Understanding how patients generate preferences for administration route alternatives may improve health-care delivery and clinical outcomes. Recently, novel biological therapies with subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous (IV) administration routes have been approved for severe uncontrolled asthma. The aim of our study was to assess the preferred route of biologic therapy administration and related beliefs among patients with severe uncontrolled asthma.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional observational survey study. Patients answered an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire after an outpatient visit in pulmonary disease clinics located throughout Italy. Socio-demographic and clinical information together with the 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12), Work Productivity Impairment Scale and the medical resources utilization module of the Health & Work Survey were collected. Patients beliefs and preference towards SC and IV administration were investigated by means of an ad hoc 13 item questionnaire.

Results: the main findings

150 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and completed the questionnaire (47.3% males). Preference for IV and SC administration was 18.7% and 81.3%, respectively. Compared with patients preferring SC formulation, patients that favored IV were older (p ​= ​0.04), less likely to escalate corticosteroid dose (p ​= ​0.03) and had emergency room (ER) access (p ​= ​0.009) during asthma exacerbations. Patients felt that SC was more convenient than IV, but this belief was not associated with higher likelihood of preferring SC administration. IV formulations were more likely associated with quicker and more effective drug action (p ​= ​0.0001), procedural safety and medical oversight (p ​= ​0.0002) and social support (p ​= ​0.007). Predictors of IV preference were represented by the association of worse asthma control and increased use of ER services, and by beliefs toward formulation effectiveness/efficiency in reducing symptoms (p ​= ​0.04 and p ​< ​0.0001, respectively). The model achieved excellent discrimination of administration route preference (area under the curve ​= ​0.87).

Conclusions

Preference is guided by partially misleading beliefs, which may generate wrong expectations that in turn can affect treatment satisfaction and adherence. Convenience and efficacy beliefs for drugs with different routes of administration always should be discussed with patients to achieve informed shared-decision making.

Trial registration

Not applicable.

A Surface Plasmon Resonance-based assay to measure serum concentrations of therapeutic antibodies and anti-drug antibodies

Therapeutic drug and immunogenicity monitoring (TDIM) is increasingly proposed to guide therapy with biologics, characterised by high inter-individual variability of their blood levels, to permit objective decisions for the management of non-responders and reduce unnecessary interventions with these expensive treatments. However, TDIM has not yet entered clinical practice partly because of uncertainties regarding the accuracy and precision of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA). Here we report the characterisation of a novel surface plasmon resonance (SPR)-based TDIM, applied to the measurement of serum concentrations of infliximab, an antibody against tumour necrosis factor α (anti-TNFα), and anti-infliximab antibodies. SPR has the obvious advantages of directly detecting and measuring serum antibodies in minutes, avoiding the long incubation/separation/washing/detection steps of the methods proposed so far, reducing complexity and variability. Moreover, drug and anti-drug antibodies can be measured simultaneously. This new method was validated for sensitivity and reproducibility, and showed cost-effectiveness over commercial ELISA kits. This method may be applied to other biotherapeutics. These data pave the way for the development of SPR-based point-of-care devices for rapid on-site analysis.

Loss of response to scheduled infliximab therapy for Crohn's disease in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the potential predictors of loss of response (LOR) to infliximab (IFX) maintenance therapy for adult patients with Crohn's disease (CD).

METHODS

We searched for English-language articles published between 1990 and March 2017 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. After identifying eligible studies, data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers. The potential prognostic variables were identified and dichotomized for meta-analysis. Based on the heterogeneity among study variables, random-effects models was used in our meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies met our eligibility criteria and consolidated drug response data were obtained from 3212 patients. The pooled rate of LOR to IFX maintenance therapy with a median follow-up of 1.1 years was 34%. The incidence of LOR to IFX therapy was increased in CD patients with perianal lesions (odds ratio [OR] 1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-2.75, P = 0.03), colon involvement (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.20-5.50, P = 0.02) and younger age at CD onset (standardized mean difference -0.79, 95% CI -1.41 to -0.18, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis estimates the incidence of LOR among adult CD patients undergoing IFX therapy is 34%. The presence of perianal lesions, younger age at CD onset, and involvement of the colon are relative risk factors of LOR in CD patients received scheduled IFX maintenance therapy.