Maintenance of Remission Among Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease After Vedolizumab Discontinuation: A Multicentre Cohort Study

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AIM

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

METHODS

A systematic bibliographic search was performed.

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Discontinuation of therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: Current views

The timely introduction and adjustment of the appropriate drug in accordance with previously well-defined treatment goals is the foundation of the approach in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The therapeutic approach is still evolving in terms of the mechanism of action but also in terms of the possibility of maintaining remission. In patients with achieved long-term remission, the question of de-escalation or discontinuation of therapy arises, considering the possible side effects and economic burden of long-term therapy. For each of the drugs used in IBD (5-aminosalycaltes, immunomodulators, biological drugs, small molecules) there is a risk of relapse. Furthermore, studies show that more than 50% of patients who discontinue therapy will relapse. Based on the findings of large studies and meta-analysis, relapse of disease can be expected in about half of the patients after therapy withdrawal, in case of monotherapy with aminosalicylates, immunomodulators or biological therapy. However, longer relapse-free periods are recorded with withdrawal of medication in patients who had previously been on combination therapies immunomodulators and anti-tumor necrosis factor. It needs to be stressed that randomised clinical trials regarding withdrawal from medications are still lacking. Before making a decision on discontinuation of therapy, it is important to distinguish potential candidates and predictive factors for the possibility of disease relapse. Fecal calprotectin level has currently been identified as the strongest predictive factor for relapse. Several other predictive factors have also been identified, such as: High Crohn's disease activity index or Harvey Bradshaw index, younger age (< 40 years), longer disease duration (> 40 years), smoking, young age of disease onset, steroid use 6-12 months before cessation. An important factor in the decision to withdraw medication is the success of re-treatment with the same or other drugs. The decision to discontinue therapy must be based on individual approach, taking into account the severity, extension, and duration of the disease, the possibility of side adverse effects, the risk of relapse, and patient's preferences.

Biological therapy for inflammatory bowel disease: cyclical rather than lifelong treatment?

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatment was revolutionised with the arrival of biological therapy two decades ago. There are now multiple biologics and increasingly novel small molecules licensed for the treatment of IBD. Treatment guidelines highlight the need for effective control of inflammation and early escalation to advanced therapies to avoid long-term complications. Consequently, a large proportion of patients with IBD receive advanced therapies for a long time. Despite their beneficial risk-benefit profile, these treatments are not without risk of side effects, are costly to healthcare providers and pose a burden to the patient. It is, therefore, paramount to examine in which circumstances a temporary cessation of therapy can be attempted without undue clinical risk. Some patients may benefit from cyclical rather than continuous treatment. This review examines the risk of relapse after discontinuation of advanced therapies, how to identify patients at the lowest risk of relapse and the chance of recapturing response when flaring after discontinuation.

Real-World Evidence of Effectiveness and Safety of Vedolizumab for Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Taiwan: A Prospective Nationwide Registry (VIOLET) Study

BACKGROUND

This nationwide prospective registry study investigated the real-world effectiveness, safety, and persistence of vedolizumab (VDZ) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients in Taiwan. Disease relapse rates after VDZ discontinuation due to reimbursement restriction were assessed.

METHODS

Data were collected prospectively (January 2018 to May 2020) from the Taiwan Society of IBD registry.

RESULTS

Overall, 274 patients (147 ulcerative colitis [UC] patients, 127 Crohn's disease [CD] patients) were included. Among them, 70.7% with UC and 50.4% with CD were biologic-naïve. At 1 year, 76.0%, 58.0%, 35.0%, and 62.2% of UC patients and 57.1%, 71.4%, 33.3%, and 30.0% of CD patients achieved clinical response, clinical remission, steroid-free remission, and mucosal healing, respectively. All patients underwent hepatitis B and tuberculosis screening before initiating biologics, and prophylaxis was recommended when necessary. One hepatitis B carrier, without antiviral prophylaxis due to economic barriers, had hepatitis B reactivation during steroid tapering and increasing azathioprine dosage, which was controlled with an antiviral agent. No tuberculosis reactivation was noted. At 12 months, non-reimbursement-related treatment persistence rates were 94.0% and 82.5% in UC and CD patients, respectively. Moreover, 75.3% of IBD patients discontinued VDZ due to mandatory drug holiday. Relapse rates after VDZ discontinuation at 6 and 12 months were 36.7% and 64.3% in CD patients and 42.9% and 52.4% in UC patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings demonstrated VDZ effectiveness in IBD patients in Taiwan, with high treatment persistence rates and favorable safety profiles. A substantial IBD relapse rate was observed in patients who had mandatory drug holiday.

Questions to consider when caring for patients with ulcerative colitis

Although the management of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) is well defined by national and international guidelines, there are many debates and open questions related to daily care of UC patients. Here, we aimed to review topics with high clinical relevance including therapy algorithms, potential biomarkers for disease prognosis and response to therapy, the role of interventions targeting the gut microbiota, insights from head-to-head trials, novel UC medications, exit strategies, the impact of COVID19 on UC, care of patients with acute severe disease, cancer screening, and the role of surgery.

Exit strategies in inflammatory bowel disease: Looking beyond anti-tumor necrosis factors

The long-term management of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is still a matter of debate, and no clear guidelines have been issued. In clinical practice, gastroenterologists often have to deal with patients in prolonged remission after immunomodulatory or immunosuppressive therapies. When planning an exit strategy for drug withdrawal, the risk of disease relapse must be balanced against the risk of drug-related adverse events and healthcare costs. Furthermore, there is still a dearth of data on the withdrawal of novel biologics, such as the anti-α4β7 integrin antibody (vedolizumab) and anti-IL12/23 antibody (ustekinumab), as well as the small molecule tofacitinib. Models for estimating the risk of disease relapse and the efficacy of retreatment should be evaluated according to the patient's age and IBD phenotype. These models should guide clinicians in programming a temporary drug withdrawal after discussing realistic outcomes with the patient. This would shift the paradigm from an exit strategy to a holiday strategy.

Real-world outcomes of 54-week vedolizumab therapy and response durability after treatment discontinuation in ulcerative colitis: results from a multicenter prospective POLONEZ study

Background

Vedolizumab is a gut-selective anti-lymphocyte trafficking agent used to treat ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease.

Objectives

We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and durability of the therapeutic effect of vedolizumab after treatment discontinuation in a real-world cohort of patients with UC treated in Poland.

Design

This was a multicenter, prospective study involving patients with moderate to severely active UC from 12 centers in Poland who qualified for reimbursed treatment with vedolizumab between February and November 2019.

Methods

The primary endpoints were clinical response (⩾2-point improvement from baseline on partial Mayo score) and clinical remission (partial Mayo score 0-1), including steroid-free remission, at week 54. Other outcomes included response durability at 26 weeks after treatment discontinuation, identification of predictors of response and remission, and safety assessment.

Results

In all, 100 patients with UC were enrolled (55 biologic naïve and 45 biologic exposed). At baseline, 68% of patients were on corticosteroids and 45% on immunomodulators. Clinical response was observed in 62% of patients, clinical remission in 50%, and steroid-free remission in 42.6% at week 54. Within 26 weeks after treatment discontinuation, 37% of patients who maintained response by week 54 relapsed. The decreased number of liquid stools and rectal bleeding and endoscopic response at week 14 were predictive factors for response at week 54. Time from diagnosis ranging 2-5 years, decreased stool frequency, and non-concomitant use of corticosteroids at baseline and at week 14 were predictive factors for remission at week 54. Partial Mayo score < 3 with no subscale score > 1 at week 54 was a predictive factor for durable response after treatment discontinuation. The rate of serious adverse events related to treatment was 3.63 per 100 patient-years.

Conclusion

Vedolizumab is effective and safe in UC treatment in Polish patients. However, the relapse rate after the treatment cessation was high.

Registration

ENCePP (EUPAS34119).

The effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab induction for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis for Asia patient: A real practice observational study

BACKGROUND

The use of biologic agents has become the cornerstone of therapy for moderate to severe IBD. Few studies have investigated the efficacy of vedolizumab (VDZ) induction for ulcerative colitis (UC) in Asian patients in a real practice setting.

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of VDZ induction therapy for moderate to severe UC in Taiwan.

METHODS

This was a retrospective and observational study. Selected moderate to severe UC patients received VZD 300 mg i.v. at weeks 0, 2, and 6 as induction therapy. Mayo scores were calculated to evaluate the efficacy.

RESULTS

A total of 37 patients with UC who received VDZ and completed the induction therapy at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (2017/10-2021/5) were included. The mean age was 46.5 year-old and the male to female ratio was 1:1 (19/18). 81.8% of the patients were biologic-naive. At weeks 8-10, a clinical response, clinical remission and endoscopic remission with VDZ induction therapy were achieved in 56.8% (21/37), 32.4% (12/37) and 58.3% (7/12) of the patients, respectively. 54.1% (20/37) were able to taper off at week 8. Overall, only 10.8% (4/37) of the patients were primary non-responders during induction therapy. No obvious VDZ-related severe adverse events were noted. Overall, 58.9% (11/19) of the patients relapsed after stopping VDZ, and the relapse rate after VDZ discontinuation was 42.1% (8/19) within first 6 months and 52.6% (10/19) within the first year.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world experience, induction therapy with VDZ showed promising clinical benefits and safety profile for patients with UC.

A review on medical management of inflammatory bowel disease during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has engulfed the world and is the highlight of medical community at this time. As humanity fights the battle against this virus, questions are arising regarding the appropriate management of at risk patient populations. The immunocompromised cohort is particularly susceptible to this infection, and we have tried to explore the medical management of one such group, which is composed of individuals with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). There is limited data on the management of IBD during the ongoing pandemic. Several medical societies have put forth suggestions on how to manage immunocompromised patients in order to minimize risk of developing coronavirus disease 2019. This review aims to present available recommendations from experts and provides an insight on preventive and therapeutic strategies that can be implemented for the medical management of patients with IBD. We anticipate that as more information arises, new guidelines will emerge.

De-escalation of medical therapy in inflammatory bowel disease

Treatment strategies for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) now increasingly target deep remission, yet the resultant more aggressive use of medical therapy is associated with potentially serious adverse events and significant costs. It is, therefore, of vital importance to consider when, how and in whom medical therapy may be safely de-escalated. This issue is of great potential relevance in the current SARS-Cov-2 pandemic. In this review, we first discuss the rationale for drug withdrawal in IBD, before considering the available data on withdrawal of 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA), immunomodulators (IM) and biological therapy in both ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's Disease (CD). We consider how to identify patients most appropriate for drug withdrawal and outline a potential monitoring strategy for the early detection of relapse following drug withdrawal. We conclude with important future perspectives in this challenging field, and highlight ongoing trials that are likely to shape practice in the years to come.