Implementation of 'IBD-Specific Cognitive Behavioural Therapy' for Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases with Poor Mental Quality of Life, Anxiety and Depression

This paper describes the implementation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-specific cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for IBD patients with poor quality of life (QoL), anxiety and depression, in four hospitals in the Netherlands. Treatment outcomes were compared with those of a previously published randomized control trial (RCT) of 'IBD-specific CBT', following a benchmark strategy. Primary outcome was IBD-specific QoL (IBDQ) completed before and after CBT, secondary outcomes were anxiety and depressive symptoms (HADS, CES-D). Semi-structured interviews were conducted among a pilot of gastroenterologists, nurse specialists and psychologists to evaluate 'IBD-specific CBT'. 94 patients started treatment (280 screened). At follow-up, 63 participants (67% compared to 81% in the RCT benchmark) completed the IBDQ. Treatment effect sizes of the implementation study were comparable and slightly larger than those of RCT benchmark. Gastroenterologists, IBD nurses and psychologists found CBT necessary for IBD patients with poor QoL, depression and/or anxiety disorders. 'IBD-specific CBT' can be successfully implemented. Regular supervision of psychologists performing 'IBD-specific CBT' treatment is needed.

Complete Endoscopic Healing Is Associated With Lower Relapse Risk After Anti-TNF Withdrawal in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Discontinuation of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α treatment (anti-TNF) (infliximab and adalimumab) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with a high relapse risk that may be influenced by endoscopic activity at the time of stopping. We assessed the relapse rate after anti-TNF withdrawal in patients with endoscopic healing and studied predictors of relapse including the depth of endoscopic healing.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective study in adult patients with Crohn's disease (CD), ulcerative colitis (UC), or IBD-unclassified (IBDU), with ≥6 months of corticosteroid-free clinical remission (confirmed at baseline) and endoscopic healing (Mayo <2/SES-CD <5 without large ulcers), who discontinued anti-TNF between 2018 and 2020 in the Netherlands. We performed Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses to assess the relapse rate and evaluate potential predictors: partial (Mayo 1/SES-CD 3-4) versus complete (Mayo 0/SES-CD 0-2) endoscopic healing, anti-TNF trough levels, and immunomodulator and/or mesalamine use.

RESULTS

Among 81 patients (CD: n = 41, 51%) with a median follow-up of 2.0 years (interquartile range, 1.6-2.1), 40 patients (49%) relapsed. Relapse rates in CD and UC/IBDU patients were comparable. At 12 months, 70% versus 35% of patients with partial versus complete endoscopic healing relapsed, respectively (adjusted hazard rate [aHR], 3.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-7.50). Mesalamine use was associated with fewer relapses in UC/IBDU patients (aHR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.67). Thirty patients restarted anti-TNF, and clinical remission was regained in 73% at 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The relapse risk was high after anti-TNF withdrawal in IBD patients with endoscopic healing, but remission was regained in most cases after anti-TNF reintroduction. Complete endoscopic healing and mesalamine treatment in UC/IBDU patients decreased the risk of relapse.

Superior Effectiveness of Tofacitinib Compared to Vedolizumab in Anti-TNF-experienced Ulcerative Colitis Patients: A Nationwide Dutch Registry Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Clinicians face difficulty in when and in what order to position biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors in patients with anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF) refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab and tofacitinib in anti-TNF-exposed patients with UC in our prospective nationwide Initiative on Crohn and Colitis Registry.

METHODS

Patients with UC who failed anti-TNF treatment and initiated vedolizumab or tofacitinib treatment were identified in the Initiative on Crohn and Colitis Registry in the Netherlands. We selected patients with both clinical as well as biochemical or endoscopic disease activity at initiation of therapy. Patients previously treated with vedolizumab or tofacitinib were excluded. Corticosteroid-free clinical remission (Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index ≤2), biochemical remission (C-reactive protein ≤5 mg/L or fecal calprotectin ≤250 μg/g), and safety outcomes were compared after 52 weeks of treatment. Inverse propensity score-weighted comparison was used to adjust for confounding and selection bias.

RESULTS

Overall, 83 vedolizumab- and 65 tofacitinib-treated patients were included. Propensity score-weighted analysis showed that tofacitinib-treated patients were more likely to achieve corticosteroid-free clinical remission and biochemical remission at weeks 12, 24, and 52 compared with vedolizumab-treated patients (odds ratio [OR], 6.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.81-10.50; P < .01; OR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.89-4.84; P < .01; and OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.15-2.99; P = .01; and OR, 3.27; 95% CI, 1.96-5.45; P < .01; OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.14-3.07; P = .01; and OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.06-3.09; P = .03, respectively). There was no difference in infection rate or severe adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Tofacitinib was associated with superior effectiveness outcomes compared with vedolizumab in anti-TNF-experienced patients with UC along with comparable safety outcomes.

Identification of Patients With Variants in TPMT and Dose Reduction Reduces Hematologic Events During Thiopurine Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

More than 20% of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) discontinue thiopurine therapy because of severe adverse drug reactions (ADRs); leukopenia is one of the most serious ADRs. Variants in the gene encoding thiopurine S-methyltransferase (TPMT) alter its enzymatic activity, resulting in higher levels of thiopurine metabolites, which can cause leukopenia. We performed a prospective study to determine whether genotype analysis of TPMT before thiopurine treatment, and dose selection based on the results, affects the outcomes of patients with IBD.

METHODS

In a study performed at 30 Dutch hospitals, patients were assigned randomly to groups that received standard treatment (control) or pretreatment screening (intervention) for 3 common variants of TPMT (TPMT*2, TPMT*3A, and TPMT*3C). Patients in the intervention group found to be heterozygous carriers of a variant received 50% of the standard dose of thiopurine (azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine), and patients homozygous for a variant received 0%-10% of the standard dose. We compared, in an intention-to-treat analysis, outcomes of the intervention (n = 405) and control groups (n = 378) after 20 weeks of treatment. Primary outcomes were the occurrence of hematologic ADRs (leukocyte count < 3.0*10(9)/L or reduced platelet count < 100*10(9)/L) and disease activity (based on the Harvey-Bradshaw Index for Crohn's disease [n = 356] or the partial Mayo score for ulcerative colitis [n = 253]).

RESULTS

Similar proportions of patients in the intervention and control groups developed a hematologic ADR (7.4% vs 7.9%; relative risk, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-1.52) in the 20 weeks of follow-up evaluation; the groups also had similar mean levels of disease activity (P = .18 for Crohn's disease and P = .14 for ulcerative colitis). However, a significantly smaller proportion of carriers of the TPMT variants in the intervention group (2.6%) developed hematologic ADRs compared with patients in the control group (22.9%) (relative risk, 0.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for variants in TPMT did not reduce the proportions of patients with hematologic ADRs during thiopurine treatment for IBD. However, there was a 10-fold reduction in hematologic ADRs among variant carriers who were identified and received a dose reduction, compared with variant carriers who did not, without differences in treatment efficacy. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00521950.