Early Versus Late Use of Vedolizumab in Ulcerative Colitis: Clinical, Endoscopic, and Histological Outcomes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We explored the potential for differential efficacy of vedolizumab between early and late ulcerative colitis [UC] with evaluation of clinical, endoscopic, and histological endpoints.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, multinational, open-label study in patients with moderately-to-severely active UC, defining early UC by a disease duration <4 years and bio-naïve and late UC by a disease duration > 4 years and additional exposure to tumour necrosis factor antagonists. Patients received standard treatment with intravenous vedolizumab for 52 weeks [300 mg Weeks 0, 2, 6, every 8 weeks thereafter without escalation]. The primary endpoint was corticosteroid-free clinical remission with endoscopic improvement [total Mayo score ≤2 with no subscore >1] at both Weeks 26 and 52.

RESULTS

A total of 121 patients were included: in the "early" group, 25/59 [42.4%] achieved the primary endpoint versus 19/62 [30.6%] in the "late" group [p = 0.18]. There were no significant differences between the two groups in endoscopic improvement [Week 26: "early" 32/59 [54.2%] versus "late" 29/62 [46.8%]; p = 0.412; Week 52: 27/59 [45.8%] versus 25/62 [40.3%]; p = 0.546] or in histological remission [Robarts Histopathology Index <3 without neutrophils in the epithelium and lamina propria] [Week 26: 24/59 [40.7%] versus 21/62 [33.9%]; p = 0.439; Week 52: 22/59 [37.3%] versus 22/62 [35.5%]; p = 0.837].

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in clinical, endoscopic, and histological outcomes were observed between "early" and "late" disease.

Exploring the views of infection consultants in England on a novel delinked funding model for antimicrobials: the SMASH study

Objectives

A novel 'subscription-type' funding model was launched in England in July 2022 for ceftazidime/avibactam and cefiderocol. We explored the views of infection consultants on important aspects of the delinked antimicrobial funding model.

Methods

An online survey was sent to all infection consultants in NHS acute hospitals in England.

Results

The response rate was 31.2% (235/753). Most consultants agreed the model is a welcome development (69.8%, 164/235), will improve treatment of drug-resistant infections (68.5%, 161/235) and will stimulate research and development of new antimicrobials (57.9%, 136/235). Consultants disagreed that the model would lead to reduced carbapenem use and reported increased use of cefiderocol post-implementation. The presence of an antimicrobial pharmacy team, requirement for preauthorization by infection specialists, antimicrobial stewardship ward rounds and education of infection specialists were considered the most effective antimicrobial stewardship interventions. Under the new model, 42.1% (99/235) of consultants would use these antimicrobials empirically, if risk factors for antimicrobial resistance were present (previous infection, colonization, treatment failure with carbapenems, ward outbreak, recent admission to a high-prevalence setting).Significantly higher insurance and diversity values were given to model antimicrobials compared with established treatments for carbapenem-resistant infections, while meropenem recorded the highest enablement value. Use of both 'subscription-type' model drugs for a wide range of infection sites was reported. Respondents prioritized ceftazidime/avibactam for infections by bacteria producing OXA-48 and KPC and cefiderocol for those producing MBLs and infections with Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Acinetobacter spp. and Burkholderia cepacia.

Conclusions

The 'subscription-type' model was viewed favourably by infection consultants in England.