factors influencing mucosal healing in Crohn's disease during infliximab treatment

Treat to target in Crohn's disease: A practical guide for clinicians

A treat-to-target (T2T) approach applies the principles of early intervention and tight disease control to optimise long-term outcomes in Crohn's disease. The Selecting Therapeutic Targets in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (STRIDE)-II guidelines specify short, intermediate, and long-term treatment goals, documenting specific treatment targets to be achieved at each of these timepoints. Scheduled appraisal of Crohn's disease activity against pre-defined treatment targets at these timepoints remains central to determining whether current therapy should be continued or modified. Consensus treatment targets in Crohn's disease comprise combination clinical and patient-reported outcome remission, in conjunction with biomarker normalisation and endoscopic healing. Although the STRIDE-II guidelines endorse the pursuit of endoscopic healing, clinicians must consider that this may not always be appropriate, acceptable, or achievable in all patients. This underscores the need to engage patients at the outset in an effort to personalise care and individualise treatment targets. The use of non-invasive biomarkers such as faecal calprotectin in conjunction with cross-sectional imaging techniques, particularly intestinal ultrasound, holds great promise; as do emerging treatment targets such as transmural healing. Two randomised clinical trials, namely, CALM and STARDUST, have evaluated the efficacy of a T2T approach in achieving endoscopic endpoints in patients with Crohn's disease. Findings from these studies reflect that patient subgroups and Crohn's disease characteristics likely to benefit most from a T2T approach, remain to be clarified. Moreover, outside of clinical trials, data pertaining to the real-world effectiveness of a T2T approach remains scare, highlighting the need for pragmatic real-world studies. Despite the obvious promise of a T2T approach, a lack of guidance to support its integration into real-world clinical practice has the potential to limit its uptake. This highlights the need to describe strategies, processes, and models of care capable of supporting the integration and execution of a T2T approach in real-world clinical practice. Hence, this review seeks to examine the current and emerging literature to provide clinicians with practical guidance on how to incorporate the principles of T2T into routine clinical practice for the management of Crohn's disease.

Time to clinical response and remission for therapeutics in inflammatory bowel diseases: What should the clinician expect, what should patients be told?

An awareness of the expected time for therapies to induce symptomatic improvement and remission is necessary for determining the timing of follow-up, disease (re)assessment, and the duration to persist with therapies, yet this is seldom reported as an outcome in clinical trials. In this review, we explore the time to clinical response and remission of current therapies for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) as well as medication, patient and disease related factors that may influence the time to clinical response. It appears that the time to therapeutic response varies depending on the indication for therapy (Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis). Agents with the most rapid time to clinical response included corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, exclusive enteral nutrition, aminosalicylates and anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy which will work in most patients within the first 2 mo. Vedolizumab, methotrexate and thiopurines had a longer time to clinical response and can take several months to achieve maximal efficacy. Factors affecting the time to clinical response of therapies included use of concomitant therapy, disease duration, smoking status, disease phenotype and advanced age. There appears to be marked variation in time to clinical response for therapies used in IBD which is further influenced by disease and patient related factors. Understanding the expected time to therapeutic response is integral to inform further decision making, maintain a patient-centered approach and ensure treatment is given an appropriate timeframe to achieve maximal benefit prior to cessation.

Mucosal healing and deep remission: What does it mean?

The use of specific terms under different meanings and varying definitions has always been a source of confusion in science. When we point our efforts towards an evidence based medicine for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) the same is true: Terms such as “mucosal healing” or “deep remission” as endpoints in clinical trials or treatment goals in daily patient care may contribute to misconceptions if meanings change over time or definitions are altered. It appears to be useful to first have a look at the development of terms and their definitions, to assess their intrinsic and context-independent problems and then to analyze the different relevance in present-day clinical studies and trials. The purpose of such an attempt would be to gain clearer insights into the true impact of the clinical findings behind the terms. It may also lead to a better defined use of those terms for future studies. The terms “mucosal healing” and “deep remission” have been introduced in recent years as new therapeutic targets in the treatment of IBD patients. Several clinical trials, cohort studies or inception cohorts provided data that the long term disease course is better, when mucosal healing is achieved. However, it is still unclear whether continued or increased therapeutic measures will aid or improve mucosal healing for patients in clinical remission. Clinical trials are under way to answer this question. Attention should be paid to clearly address what levels of IBD activity are looked at. In the present review article authors aim to summarize the current evidence available on mucosal healing and deep remission and try to highlight their value and position in the everyday decision making for gastroenterologists.