Continuous clinical remission with biologics in ulcerative colitis: the 'AURORA' comparison study

OBJECTIVES

Comparative trials among biological drugs for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) provided conflicting results. After patent expire of infliximab originator, adalimumab, infliximab biosimilar, golimumab and vedolizumab have been approved in Italy.We compared the efficacy of these four biologics in UC according to the concept of continuous clinical remission (CCR).

METHODS

In a retrospective, multicentre study, all UC patients treated with adalimumab, infliximab biosimilar, golimumab or vedolizumab between 2014 and 2019 were included. All drugs were compared to each other according to the 1-year CCR rate, defined as Mayo partial score ≤2, with bleeding subscore = 0, without any relapse or optimization with dose escalation, topical treatments or steroid use after first clinical remission.

RESULTS

Four-hundred sixteen patients (adalimumab = 90, infliximab biosimilar = 105, golimumab = 79, vedolizumab = 142) were included. CCR was achieved in similar percentages among the groups (33%, 37%, 28%, 37%, respectively). All drugs were equivalent in biologic-naive patients, while vedolizumab was better than a second anti-TNFα in prior anti-TNFα agent failures. No differences were found according to type of adverse events or severe adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a strict definition of clinical remission, all biologics appear equally effective at 1 year. Changing to vedolizumab is more effective than switching to another anti-TNFα in TNFα failures.

Evidence-based efficacy of methotrexate in adult Crohn's disease in different intestinal and extraintestinal indications

INTRODUCTION

Methotrexate (MTX) is included in the therapeutic armamentarium of Crohn's disease (CD), although its positioning is currently uncertain in an era in which many effective biological drugs are available. No systematic reviews or meta-analysis have stratified the clinical outcomes of MTX according to the specific clinical scenarios of its use.

METHODS

Medline, PubMed and Scopus were used to extract eligible studies, from database inception to May 2021. A total of 163 studies were included. A systematic review was performed by stratifying the outcomes of MTX according to formulation, clinical indication and criteria of efficacy.

RESULTS

The use of MTX is supported by randomized clinical trials only in steroid-dependent CD, with similar outcomes to thiopurines. The use of MTX in patients with steroid-refractoriness, failure of thiopurines or in combination with biologics is not supported by high levels of evidence. Combination therapy with biologics can optimize the immunogenic profile of the biological drug, but the impact on long-term clinical outcomes is described only in small series with anti-TNFα. Other off-label uses, such as fistulizing disease, mucosal healing, postoperative prevention and extraintestinal manifestations, are described in small uncontrolled series. The best performance in most indications was shown by parenteral MTX, favouring higher doses (25 mg/week) in the induction phase.

DISCUSSION

Evidence from high-quality studies in favour of MTX is scarce and limited to the steroid-dependent disease, in which other drugs are the leading players today. Many limitations on study design have been found, such as the prevalence of retrospective underpowered studies and the lack of stratification of outcomes according to specific types of patients and formulations of MTX.

CONCLUSION

MTX is a valid option as steroid-sparing agent in steroid-dependent CD. Numerous other clinical scenarios require well-designed clinical studies in terms of patient profile, drug formulation and dosage, and criteria of efficacy.

Lower incidence of COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with non-gut selective biologic therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, concerns have been raised as to whether inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients under biologic therapy may be more susceptible to the disease. This study aimed to determine the incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 in a large cohort of IBD patients on biologic therapy.

METHODS

This observational retrospective multicenter study collected data about COVID-19 in IBD patients on biologic therapy in Italy, between February and May 2020. The main end-points were (i) to assess both the cumulative incidence and clinical outcome of COVID-19, according to different biologic agents and (ii) to compare them with the general population and a cohort IBD patients undergoing non-biologic therapies.

RESULTS

Among 1816 IBD patients, the cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was 3.9 per 1000 (7/1816) with a 57% hospitalization rate and a 29% case-fatality rate. The class of biologic agents was the only risk factor of developing COVID-19 (P = 0.01). Non-gut selective agents were associated with a lower incidence of COVID-19 cases, related symptoms, and hospitalization (P < 0.05). Compared with the general population of Lombardy, an overall lower incidence of COVID-19 was observed (3.9 vs 8.5 per 1000, P = 0.03). Compared with 565 IBD patients on non-biologic therapies, a lower rate of COVID-19 symptoms was observed in our cohort (7.5% vs 18%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the general population, IBD patients on biologic therapy are not exposed to a higher risk of COVID-19. Non-gut selective agents are associated with a lower incidence of symptomatic disease, supporting the decision of maintaining the ongoing treatment.

Activities related to inflammatory bowel disease management during and after the coronavirus disease 2019 lockdown in Italy: How to maintain standards of care

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Restructuring activities have been necessary during the lockdown phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Few data are available on the post-lockdown phase in terms of health-care procedures in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care, and no data are available specifically from IBD units. We aimed to investigate how IBD management was restructured during the lockdown phase, the impact of the restructuring on standards of care and how Italian IBD units have managed post-lockdown activities.

METHODS

A web-based online survey was conducted in two phases (April and June 2020) among the Italian Group for IBD affiliated units within the entire country. We investigated preventive measures, the possibility of continuing scheduled visits/procedures/therapies because of COVID-19 and how units resumed activities in the post-lockdown phase.

RESULTS

Forty-two referral centres participated from all over Italy. During the COVID-19 lockdown, 36% of first visits and 7% of follow-up visits were regularly done, while >70% of follow-up scheduled visits and 5% of first visits were done virtually. About 25% of scheduled endoscopies and bowel ultrasound scans were done. More than 80% of biological therapies were done as scheduled. Compared to the pre-lockdown situation, 95% of centres modified management of outpatient activity, 93% of endoscopies, 59% of gastrointestinal ultrasounds and 33% of biological therapies. Resumption of activities after the lockdown phase may take three to six months to normalize. Virtual clinics, implementation of IBD pathways and facilities seem to be the main factors to improve care in the future.

CONCLUSION

Italian IBD unit restructuring allowed quality standards of care during the COVID-19 pandemic to be maintained. A return to normal appears to be feasible and achievable relatively quickly. Some approaches, such as virtual clinics and identified IBD pathways, represent a valid starting point to improve IBD care in the post-COVID-19 era.

Use of biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease: a position update of the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IG-IBD)

The first infliximab biosimilar for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was introduced in 2013, and today eight anti-TNF alpha biosimilars (three for infliximab and five for adalimumab) have been approved and licensed by the European Medicines Agency. Biosimilars present great potential in terms of cost saving and possible consequential reinvestment in the health care system. The increasing knowledge about the process of biosimilar development and use in IBD and the publication of many prospective clinical studies and real-life clinical experiences have progressively changed the point of view of IBD physicians. In the present position paper, the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease present and discuss their updated statements and positions on this topic, with emphasis on the concepts of biosimilarity and extrapolation across indications, safety and immunogenicity, interchangeability and switching, automatic substitution, and, finally, patient education about biosimilars.

Poorly Differentiated Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of the Sigmoid Tract in Long-Standing Ulcerative Colitis: Report of a Case and Review of the Literature

A 37-year-old male with long-standing and extensive ulcerative pancolitis developed a rapidly lethal poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) in the sigmoid colon. Prior biopsies obtained from multiple sites of the colon during endoscopic surveillance showed minimal inflammatory changes and no sign of dysplasia. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of colorectal malignancies, and adenocarcinoma is the most common type of colorectal neoplasm associated with ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, but other types of epithelial and nonepithelial tumors have also been described in IBD. NECs arising in the setting of ulcerative colitis are very rare and are reported as anecdotic findings. We describe the clinicopathological features of an IBD-related NEC and review the previously reported cases.

Patient and physician views on the quality of care for inflammatory bowel disease after one-year follow-up: Results from SOLUTION-2, a prospective IG-IBD study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Perception of quality of care is important in the management of patients with chronic diseases, particularly inflammatory bowel disease.

AIMS AND METHODS

This longitudinal study aimed to investigate variations of the Quality of Care through the Patients' Eyes (QUOTE-IBD) questionnaire scores one year after the basal evaluation in the Studio Osservazionale quaLità cUre malatTIe crOniche intestiNali (SOLUTION-1) study.

RESULTS

Of the cohort of 992 patients, 936 were evaluable. The QUOTE-IBD score overcame satisfactory levels of more than the 80%, overall and in all subdomains except for the "Continuity of Care" sub-dimension (mean, 8.3; standard deviation, 1.49), scored satisfactory only by 34% of the patients. No significant changes in satisfaction were recorded overall, or considering patients subgroups. Significant differences were found at the end of the follow-up between physicians' and patients' perceptions of quality of care, with the former over-rating their performance in "Continuity of Cares" and under-rating "Costs", "Competence", and "Accessibility" sub-domains of the score (p<0.05 for all).

CONCLUSION

Perceived quality of care in a large cohort of Italian patients with inflammatory bowel disease remains unchanged after one-year follow-up and was not significantly affected by disease activity or therapeutic interventions. Differences between physicians' and patients' perceptions of quality of care should be taken into account.

Can we improve the detection rate and interobserver agreement in capsule endoscopy?

BACKGROUND

Data about strategies for improving the diagnostic ability of capsule endoscopy readers are lacking.

AIM

(1) To evaluate the detection rate and the interobserver agreement among readers with different experience; (2) to verify the impact of a specific training (hands-on training plus expert tutorial) on these parameters.

METHODS

17 readers reviewed 12 videos twice; between the two readings they underwent the training. The identified small bowel findings were described by a simplified version of Structured Terminology and classifies as clinically significant/non-significant. Findings identified by the readers were compared with those identified by three experts (Reference Standard).

RESULTS

The Reference Standard identified 26 clinically significant findings. The mean detection rate of overall readers for significant findings was low (about 50%) and did not change after the training (46.2% and 46.4%, respectively). There was no difference in the detection rate among readers with different experience. The interobserver agreement with the Reference Standard in describing significant findings was moderate (k = 0.44; CI95%: 0.39-0.50) and did not change after the training (k = 0.44; CI95%: 0.38-0.49) or stratifying readers according to their experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the interobserver agreement and the detection rate of significant findings are low, regardless of the readers' experience. Our training did not significantly increase the performance of readers with different experience.