Low Rates of Breakthrough COVID-19 Infection After SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

We demonstrate low rates of breakthrough coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and mild course of illness following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination in a large cohort of inflammatory bowel disease patients. Residence in southern United States and lower median anti-receptor binding antibody level were associated with development of COVID-19.

Humoral Immune Response and Safety of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may respond differently to COVID-19 immunization as compared with healthy children or adults with IBD. Those younger than 12 years receive a lower vaccine dose than adults. We sought to describe the safety and humoral immune response to COVID-19 vaccine in children with IBD. METHODS: We recruited children with IBD, ages 5-17 years, who received ≥ 2 doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine by a direct-to-patient outreach and at select sites. Patient demographics, IBD characteristics, medication use, and vaccine adverse events were collected. A subset of participants had quantitative measurement of anti-receptor binding domain IgG antibodies after 2-part immunization. RESULTS: Our study population included 280 participants. Only 1 participant required an ED visit or hospitalization because of an adverse event. Of 99 participants who underwent anti-receptor binding domain IgG antibody measurement, 98 had a detectable antibody, with a mean antibody level of 43.0 µg/mL (SD 67) and a median of 22 µg/mL (interquartile range 12-38). In adjusted analyses, older age ( P = 0.028) and antitumor necrosis factor monotherapy compared with immunomodulators alone ( P = 0.005) were associated with a decreased antibody level. Antibody response in patients treated with antitumor necrosis factor combination vs monotherapy was numerically lower but not significant. DISCUSSION: Humoral immune response to COVID-19 immunization in children with IBD was robust, despite a high proportion of this pediatric cohort being treated with immunosuppressive agents. Severe vaccine-related AEs were rare. Overall, these findings provide a high level of reassurance that pediatric patients with IBD respond well and safely to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib Maintenance Therapy in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: Final Results From the Phase 3 U-ACHIEVE Maintenance Study

Introduction: Upadacitinib(UPA), has shown superior efficacy to placebo(PBO) in patients with moderate to severe active ulcerative colitis(UC) in two Phase 3 induction studies .1,2 Patients demonstrating clinical response per Adapted Mayo score with UPA 45mg once daily(QD) after 8 weeks(wks) induction were enrolled to U-ACHIEVE Maintenance. Methods: U-ACHIEVE Maintenance efficacy data from the intent-to-treat(ITT) population, defined as UPA 45mg QD 8wk induction responders enrolled per protocol for 52wk maintenance, and safety data from the safety population, defined as patients who received ≥1 dose of study therapy(ITT plus patients receiving up to 44wksmaintenanceper prior versions of protocol amendments). Non-responder imputation incorporating multiple imputations to handle missing data due to COVID-19 was used. a Based on adjusted Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test adjusted for strata (corticosteroid use at Week 0 (yes or no), clinical remission status at Week 0 (yes or no), biologic-IR status at baseline (biologic-IR or non-biologic-IR)). b Per Adapted Mayo score ≤2: stool frequency subscore ≤1 and not greater than induction baseline, RBS=0, and ES ≤1. c Maintenance of clinical response, defined as a decrease in Adapted Mayo score ≥2 and ≥30% from induction baseline, plus a decrease in RBS ≥1 or an absolute RBS ≤1, at Week 52 among patients who achieved clinical response at the end of the induction therapy. d ES ≤1. e Maintenance of CR at Week 52 among patients with CR at the end of the induction therapy. f CR at Week 52 and corticosteroid-free for ≥90 days prior to Week 52 among patients with CR at the end of the induction therapy. g Endoscopic improvement at Week 52 among patients with endoscopic improvement at the end of the induction therapy. h ES=0. i ES ≤1 and Geboes score ≤3.1. j ES=0 and Geboes score < 2.0.

Inflammatory bowel disease patient concerns and experiences on transition to home-based infusions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the CDC issued guidance advising patients and providers to adopt social distancing practices such as home-based infusions (H-BI). METHODS: We performed a mixed methods evaluation to summarize perceptions, concerns, and experiences with H-BI among all inflammatory bowel disease patients 18-90 years of age who transitioned to home-based infliximab or vedolizumab infusions between March to July 2020 at a tertiary care center. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analyzed using an iterative, inductive thematic approach. Baseline characteristics and outcome on safety, COVID-19 transmission, delays in infusions, and H-BI persistence were collected. RESULTS: Of the 57 participants who transitioned to H-BI, 20 (33%) responded. Four major categories and six major themes related to expectations, experience, perceived safety, and logistical factors were identified. Initial perceptions were mixed, however these resolved. One patient developed COVID-19, one patient experienced an adverse event, 12 (21%) patients experienced an infusion delay, and 6 (11%) patients transitioned from H-BI. DISCUSSION: Despite mixed initial perceptions, respondents had a positive experience with most respondents planning to continue H-BI after the pandemic resolves. Several real-world actionable barriers were identified related to scheduling, communication between stakeholders, and nursing quality. No major safety concerns were identified.

Upadacitinib as induction and maintenance therapy for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: results from three phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: There is a great unmet need for advanced therapies that provide rapid, robust, and sustained disease control for patients with ulcerative colitis. We assessed the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, as induction and maintenance therapy in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. METHODS: This phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical programme consisted of two replicate induction studies (U-ACHIEVE induction [UC1] and U-ACCOMPLISH [UC2]) and a single maintenance study (U-ACHIEVE maintenance [UC3]). The studies were conducted across Europe, North and South America, Australasia, Africa, and the Asia-Pacific region at 199 clinical centres in 39 countries (UC1), 204 clinical centres in 40 countries (UC2), and 195 clinical centres in 35 countries (UC3). Patients aged 16-75 years with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (Adapted Mayo score 5-9; endoscopic subscore 2 or 3) for at least 90 days were randomly assigned (2:1) to oral upadacitinib 45 mg once daily or placebo for 8 weeks (induction studies). Patients who achieved clinical response following 8-week upadacitinib induction were re-randomly assigned (1:1:1) to upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg, or placebo for 52 weeks (maintenance study). All patients were randomly assigned using web-based interactive response technology. The primary endpoints were clinical remission per Adapted Mayo score at week 8 (induction) and week 52 (maintenance). The efficacy analyses in the two induction studies were based on the intent-to-treat population, which included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of treatment. In the maintenance study, the primary efficacy analyses reported in this manuscript were based on the first 450 (planned) clinical responders to 8-week induction therapy with upadacitinib 45 mg once daily. The safety analysis population in the induction studies consisted of all randomised patients who received at least one dose of treatment; in the maintenance study, this population included all patients who received at least one dose of treatment as part of the primary analysis population. These studies are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819635 (U-ACHIEVE) and NCT03653026 (U-ACCOMPLISH). FINDINGS: Between Oct 23, 2018, and Sept 7, 2020, 474 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 45 mg once daily (n=319) or placebo (n=155) in UC1. Between Dec 6, 2018, and Jan 14, 2021, 522 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 45 mg once daily (n=345) or placebo (n=177) in UC2. In UC3, a total of 451 patients (21 from the phase 2b study, 278 from UC1, and 152 from UC2) who achieved a clinical response after 8 weeks of upadacitinib induction treatment were randomly assigned again to upadacitinib 15 mg (n=148), upadacitinib 30 mg (n=154), and placebo (n=149) in the primary analysis population. Statistically significantly more patients achieved clinical remission with upadacitinib 45 mg (83 [26%] of 319 patients in UC1 and 114 [34%] of 341 patients in UC2) than in the placebo group (seven [5%] of 154 patients in UC1 and seven [4%] of 174 patients; p<0·0001; adjusted treatment difference 21·6% [95% CI 15·8-27·4] for UC1 and 29·0% [23·2-34·7] for UC2). In the maintenance study, clinical remission was achieved by statistically significantly more patients receiving upadacitinib (15 mg 63 [42%] of 148; 30 mg 80 [52%] of 154) than those receiving placebo (18 [12%] of 149; p<0·0001; adjusted treatment difference 30·7% [21·7-39·8] for upadacitinib 15 mg vs placebo and 39·0% [29·7-48·2] for upadacitinib 30 mg vs placebo). The most commonly reported adverse events in UC1 were nasopharyngitis (15 [5%] of 319 in the upadacitinib 45 mg group vs six [4%] of 155 in the placebo group), creatine phosphokinase elevation (15 [4%] vs three [2%]), and acne (15 [5%] vs one [1%]). In UC2, the most frequently reported adverse event was acne (24 [7%] of 344 in the upadacitinib 45 mg group vs three [2%] of 177 in the placebo group). In both induction studies, serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation of treatment were less frequent in the upadacitinib 45 mg group than in the placebo group (serious adverse events eight [3%] vs nine (6%) in UC1 and 11 [3%] vs eight [5%] in UC2; adverse events leading to discontinuation six [2%] vs 14 [9%] in UC1 and six [2%] vs nine [5%] in UC2). In UC3, the most frequently reported adverse events (≥5%) were worsening of ulcerative colitis (19 [13%] of 148 in the upadacitinib 15 mg group vs 11 [7%] of 154 in the upadacitinib 30 mg group vs 45 [30%] of 149 in the placebo group), nasopharyngitis (18 [12%] vs 22 [14%] vs 15 [10%]), creatine phosphokinase elevation (nine [6%] vs 13 [8%] vs three [2%]), arthralgia (nine [6%] vs five [3%] vs 15 [10%]), and upper respiratory tract infection (seven [5%] vs nine [6%] vs six [4%]). The proportion of serious adverse events (ten [7%] vs nine [6%] vs 19 [13%]) and adverse events leading to discontinuation (six [4%] vs ten [6%] vs 17 [11%]) was lower in both upadacitinib groups than in the placebo group. Events of cancer, adjudicated major adverse cardiac events, or venous thromboembolism were reported infrequently. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Upadacitinib demonstrated a positive efficacy and safety profile and could be an effective treatment option for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Factors Affecting Initial Humoral Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines Among Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

INTRODUCTION: Although an additional coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine dose for immunocompromised persons has been recommended in some countries, further data to guide vaccination strategies for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are urgently needed. We sought to identify factors affecting initial humoral immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines among patients with IBD. METHODS: In this prospective cohort of SARS-CoV-2 immunized patients with IBD, we evaluated associations between participant age, sex, vaccine type, medication use, and the presence of a detectable antireceptor binding domain antibody and quantitative antibody level. RESULTS: In total, 1,909 participants were included (1,123, 692, and 94 received BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S, respectively) of whom 96% achieved a positive antibody response. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with lack of antibody response were older age (P = 0.043), BNT162b2 vs mRNA-1273 (odds ratio [OR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-3.9), and combination therapy with anti-TNF and 6MP, azathioprine, or methotrexate (OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.4-7.3). The use of 5-aminosalicylate or sulfasalazine (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8) and ustekinumab (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.05-0.8) was associated with decreased odds of lacking antibody response. DISCUSSION: Most patients with IBD mount an initial response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination; however, older patients and those treated with anti-TNF and immunomodulator have blunted responses and may benefit the most from an additional vaccine dose. Patients treated with other classes of immunosuppressive medications have more robust initial immune responses to vaccination. These data should inform key decisions about patient selection for additional coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine doses in patients with IBD.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Activity and Development of Vaccine-Related Adverse Events: Results From PREVENT-COVID.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination is recommended for all individuals with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including those on immunosuppressive therapies; however, little is known about vaccine safety and efficacy in these patients or the impact of vaccination on IBD disease course. METHODS: We evaluated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine-related adverse events (AEs) and the effect of vaccination on IBD disease course among participants in the PREVENT-COVID (Partnership to Report Effectiveness of Vaccination in populations Excluded from iNitial Trials of COVID) study, a prospective, observational cohort study. Localized and systemic reactions were assessed via questionnaire. Disease flare was defined by worsening IBD symptoms and change in IBD medications. Outcomes were stratified by vaccine type and IBD medication classes. RESULTS: A total of 3316 individuals with IBD received at least 1 COVID-19 vaccine. Injection site tenderness (68%) and fatigue (46% dose 1, 68% dose 2) were the most commonly reported localized and systemic AEs after vaccination. Severe localized and systemic vaccine-related AEs were rare. The mRNA-1273 vaccine was associated with significantly greater severe AEs at dose 2 (localized 4% vs 2%, systemic 15% vs 10%; P < .001 for both). Prior COVID-19 infection, female sex, and vaccine type were associated with severe systemic reactions to dose 1, while age <50 years, female sex, vaccine type, and antitumor necrosis factor and vedolizumab use were associated with severe systemic reactions to dose 2. Overall rates (2%) of IBD flare were low following vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide reassurance that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine is safe and well tolerated among individuals with IBD, which may help to combat vaccine hesitancy and increase vaccine confidence.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine is safe and well tolerated among individuals with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Severe localized and systemic vaccine-related adverse events were rare, and rates of IBD flare were low (2%) following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination in a cohort of 3316 participants with IBD.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Clinical Trial Oversight at a Major Academic Medical Center: Approach of Michigan Medicine.

Clinicians, eager to offer the best care in the absence of guiding data, have provided patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diverse clinical interventions. This usage has led to perceptions of efficacy of some interventions that, while receiving media coverage, lack robust evidence. Moving forward, randomized controlled clinical trials are necessary to ensure that clinicians can treat patients effectively during this outbreak and the next. To do so, academic medical centers must address 2 key research issues: (1) how to effectively and efficiently determine which trials have the best chance of benefiting current and future patients and (2) how to establish a transparent and ethical process for subject recruitment while maintaining research integrity and without overburdening patients or staff. We share here the current methods used by Michigan Medicine to address these issues.

The Risk of SARS-CoV-2 in Immunosuppressed IBD Patients.

This is a rapid review of the risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2, the risk of symptomatic cases of COVID-19, and the severity of these cases in IBD patients. Guidance on how to manage IBD patients at risk for infection, and IBD patients after infection is provided. The prevention of infection in both patients and health care providers by reducing elective visits and procedures, utilizing telemedicine, and social isolation is also emphasized to maintain health care services for IBD patients during a growing pandemic.