Real-world efficacy and safety of vedolizumab in managing ulcerative colitis versus Crohn's disease: results from an Italian multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Vedolizumab (VDZ) can be used to treat refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). We assessed whether there are differences in treating UC vs CD with VDZ. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Mayo score in UC and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) in CD scored the clinical activity. Achievement and maintenance of clinical remission during the follow-up, and safety were the primary endpoints. RESULTS: 729 patients (475 with UC and 254 with CD), median follow-up of 18 (IQR 6-36) months, were enrolled. Clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment was achieved in 488 (66.9%) patients (74.4% in CD vs 62.9% in UC, p<0.002) while, during the follow-up, no difference was found (81.5% in the UC group and 81.5% pts in the CD group; p=0.537). The clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment (p=0.001) and being naïve to biologics (p<0.0001) were significantly associated with prolonged clinical remission. The clinical response was significantly higher in UC (90.1%) vs CD (84.3%) (p=0.023), and surgery occurred more frequently in CD (1.9% in UC vs 5.1% in CD, p=0.016). CONCLUSION: We found differences when using VDZ in UC vs CD in real life. These parameters can help the physician predict this drug's longterm efficacy.

Etrasimod as induction and maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis (ELEVATE): two randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies.

BACKGROUND: Etrasimod, a once-daily, oral, sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulator that selectively activates S1P receptor subtypes 1, 4, and 5, with no detectable activity on S1P2,3, is in development for the treatment of immune-mediated diseases, including ulcerative colitis. In these two phase 3 trials, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of etrasimod in adult patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. METHODS: In two independent randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials, ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12, adults with active moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis and an inadequate or loss of response or intolerance to at least one approved ulcerative colitis therapy were randomly assigned (2:1) to once-daily oral etrasimod 2 mg or placebo. Patients in ELEVATE UC 52 were enrolled from 315 centres in 40 countries. Patients in ELEVATE UC 12 were enrolled from 407 centres in 37 countries. Randomisation was stratified by previous exposure to biologicals or Janus kinase inhibitor therapy (yes vs no), baseline corticosteroid use (yes vs no), and baseline disease activity (modified Mayo score [MMS]; 4-6 vs 7-9). ELEVATE UC 52 comprised a 12-week induction period followed by a 40-week maintenance period with a treat-through design. ELEVATE UC 12 independently assessed induction at week 12. The primary efficacy endpoints were the proportion of patients with clinical remission at weeks 12 and 52 in ELEVATE UC 52 and week 12 in ELEVATE UC 12. Safety was evaluated in both trials. ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03945188 and NCT03996369, respectively. FINDINGS: Patients in ELEVATE UC 52 were enrolled between June 13, 2019, and Jan 28, 2021. Patients in ELEVATE UC 12 were enrolled between Sept 15, 2020, and Aug 12, 2021. ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 screened 821 patients and 606 patients, respectively, with 433 and 354 subsequently undergoing random assignment. The full analysis set of ELEVATE UC 52 comprised 289 patients assigned to etrasimod and 144 to placebo. In ELEVATE UC 12, 238 patients were assigned to etrasimod and 116 to placebo. In ELEVATE UC 52, a significantly greater proportion of patients in the etrasimod group achieved clinical remission compared with patients in the placebo group at completion of the 12-week induction period (74 [27%] of 274 patients vs ten [7%] of 135 patients; p<0·0001) and at week 52 (88 [32%] of 274 patients vs nine [7%] of 135 patients; p<0·0001). In ELEVATE UC 12, 55 (25%) of 222 patients in the etrasimod group had clinical remission compared with 17 (15%) of 112 patients in the placebo group at the end of the 12-week induction period (p=0·026). Adverse events were reported in 206 (71%) of 289 patients in the etrasimod group and 81 (56%) of 144 patients in the placebo group in ELEVATE UC 52 and 112 (47%) of 238 patients in the etrasimod group and 54 (47%) of 116 patients in the placebo group in ELEVATE UC 12. No deaths or malignancies were reported. INTERPRETATION: Etrasimod was effective and well tolerated as an induction and maintenance therapy in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. Etrasimod is a treatment option with a unique combination of attributes that might address the persistent unmet needs of patients with ulcerative colitis. FUNDING: Arena Pharmaceuticals.

COVID-19 induced mesenteric ischemia in a patient with ulcerative colitis and paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria despite thromboprophylaxis.

Inflammatory bowel disease and paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) are both well-known prothrombotic states. However, ongoing thromboprophylaxis is usually effective in such conditions. We report an imbalance that was triggered by COVID-19 infection. There is evidence that COVID-19 infection leads to thrombosis of vessels. The thrombosis of mesenteric vessels can be multifocal and without respiratory symptoms and leads to devastating consequences like resection of large segments of the bowel and lifelong requirement of parenteral nutritional support. We report about a case of ulcerative colitis (in remission) and PNH where COVID-19 resulted in mesenteric ischemia.

90K/Mac-2 BP Is a New Predictive Biomarker of Response to Infliximab Therapy in IBD Patients.

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), comprising Crohn's disease (CD) and Ulcerative Colitis (UC), are multifactorial disorders characterized by a chronic inflammatory status with the secretion of cytokines and immune mediators. Biologic drugs targeting pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as infliximab, are broadly used in the treatment of IBD patients, but some patients lose responsiveness after an initial success. The research into new biomarkers is crucial for advancing personalized therapies and monitoring the response to biologics. The aim of this single center, observational study is to analyze the relationship between serum levels of 90K/Mac-2 BP and the response to infliximab, in a cohort of 48 IBD patients (30 CD and 18 UC), enrolled from February 2017 to December 2018. In our IBD cohort, high 90K serum levels were found at baseline in patients who then developed anti-infliximab antibodies at the fifth infusion (22 weeks after the first), becoming non-responders (9.76 ± 4.65 µg/mL compared to 6.53 ± 3.29 µg/mL in responder patients, p = 0.005). This difference was significant in the total cohort and in CD, but not significant in UC. We then analyzed the relationship between serum levels of 90K, C-reactive protein (CRP), and Fecal calprotectin. A significant positive correlation was found at baseline between 90K and CRP, the most common serum inflammation marker (R = 0.42, p = 0.0032). We concluded that circulating 90K could be considered a new non-invasive biomarker for monitoring the response to infliximab. Furthermore, 90K serum level determination, before the first infliximab infusion, in association with other inflammatory markers such as CRP, could assist in the choice of biologics for the treatment of IBD patients, thereby obviating the need for a drug switch due to loss of response, and so improving clinical practice and patient care.

Recommendations of the Spanish Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis on the importance, screening and vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease patients. / Recomendaciones del Grupo Español de Trabajo en Enfermedad de Crohn y Colitis Ulcerosa sobre la importancia, el cribado y la vacunación en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may require different immunosuppressive treatments throughout their illness. It is essential to assess the immunization status of patients at diagnosis or, if this is not possible, at least before the beginning of immunosuppressive therapy and, subsequently, administering the appropriate vaccines. Therefore, the aim of this work is to establish clear and concise recommendations on vaccination in patients with IBD in the different settings of our clinical practice including vaccination in children, during pregnancy, breastfeeding or on trips. This consensus document emphasises the differences between inactivated and attenuated vaccines and the different degrees of immunosuppression and correlates them with the administration of both mandatory and optional vaccines recommended to our patients with IBD. Finally, as a summary, 17 recommendations are established based on the available scientific evidence and expert opinion. A multidisciplinary team with extensive experience in IBD and vaccination, made up of specialists in gastroenterology, paediatrics, nursing and pharmacy, has participated in the preparation of these recommendations of the Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis.

Positioning of tofacitinib in treatment of ulcerative colitis: a global perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Tofacitinib has emerged as a useful drug for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). AREAS COVERED: There is an unmet need for cost-effective, non-immunogenic drugs with a safe adverse effect profile to treat patients with ulcerative colitis. In the present review, we evaluate the available literature to inform the appropriate positioning of tofacitinib in the current drug landscape and identify subsets where its use should be done with caution. EXPERT OPINION: Tofacitinib is helpful in the treatment of patients where the standard conventional or biological therapies have failed or were not tolerated. With lower costs of the generic drug than the biologicals (or biosimilars), it could be an important therapy in low- to middle-income countries. The risk of infections, especially Herpes Zoster and tuberculosis, needs to be addressed before initiation. Tofacitinib should be avoided in patients with venous thromboembolism and cardiovascular disease risk factors. Due to limited evidence, the use is not recommended in pregnancy, while it should be used with caution in elderly citizens. Future trials should look into the head-to-head comparison of tofacitinib with biologicals. The role of tofacitinib in acute severe colitis needs evaluation with comparative trials with current standards of care.

Effects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (Vero cells) on disease activity in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in China: a multicenter study.

AIMS: To evaluate the impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on IBD activity. METHODS: Adult IBD patients from five large IBD centers in China were enrolled and followed up for 6 months. Patients were divided into vaccinated and unvaccinated groups according to vaccination status. Demographic and clinical data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 280 individuals (213 UC and 67 CD patients) were enrolled in the study. The unvaccinated and vaccinated groups of UC patients were comparable for basic characteristics, including age (t = - 0.8, p = 0.425), sex (χ2 = 0.980, p = 0.322), course of disease (z = - 0.513, p = 0.608), surgical conditions (χ2 = 1.042, p = 0.838), disease extent (χ2 = 4.853, p = 0.088), or baseline drug therapy (χ2 = 7.784, p = 0.064). In the subgroup of UC patients, there was no association between vaccination and disease activities, according to the medium disease activity scores for two groups: unvaccinated patients having scores (IQR) 1(2.75), 1(2), 1(2), and 1(2) at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively, whereas vaccinated patients having scores (IQR) 1(2), 1(2), 1(2), and 1(2). Similar conclusions were also derived in the subgroup of CD patients. There were also no statistically significant differences in age (t = - 1.48, p = 0.144), sex (χ2 = 0.003, p = 0.957), course of disease (z = - 0.074, p = 0.941), surgical conditions (χ2 = 0.613, p = 0.594), localization (χ2 = 6.261, p = 0.199), or baseline drug therapy (χ2 = 5.881, p = 0.114) between 2 groups of CD patients. The medium disease activity scores (IQR) of the unvaccinated group at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months were 1(4), 1(3), 1(3), and 1(3), respectively, whereas those of vaccinated group were 2.5(3.75), 2.5(3.75), 3(2), and 2(2), respectively. Overall, very few participants in this study described worsening IBD disease activity requiring a change or addition of medication. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has no adverse effect on disease activity in IBD population. IBD patients should be recommended to receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in time.

Patient preferences and current practice for adults with steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis: POPSTER mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are a mainstay of the treatment of moderately severe relapses of ulcerative colitis, yet almost 50% of patients do not respond fully to these and risk prolonged steroid use and side effects. There is a lack of clarity about the definitions of steroid resistance, the optimum choice of treatment, and patient and health-care professional treatment preferences. OBJECTIVES: The overall aim of this research was to understand how steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis is managed in adult secondary care and how current practice compares with patient and health-care professional preferences. DESIGN: A mixed-methods study, including an online survey, qualitative interviews and discrete choice experiments. SETTING: NHS inflammatory bowel disease services in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with ulcerative colitis and health-care professionals treating inflammatory bowel disease. RESULTS: We carried out a survey of health-care professionals (n = 168), qualitative interviews with health-care professionals (n = 20) and patients (n = 33), discrete choice experiments with health-care professionals (n = 116) and patients (n = 115), and a multistakeholder workshop (n = 9). The interviews with and survey of health-care professionals showed that most health-care professionals define steroid resistance as an incomplete response to 40 mg per day of prednisolone after 2 weeks. The survey also found that anti-tumour necrosis factor drugs (particularly infliximab) are the most frequently offered drugs across most steroid-resistant (and steroid-dependent) patient scenarios, but they are less frequently offered to thiopurine-naive patients. Patient interviews identified several factors influencing their treatment choices, including effectiveness of treatment, recommendations from health-care professionals, route of administration and side effects. Over time, depending on the severity and duration of symptoms and, crucially, as medical treatment options become exhausted, patients are willing to try alternative treatments and, eventually, to undergo surgery. The discrete choice experiments found that the probability of remission and of side effects strongly influences the treatment choices of both patients and health-care professionals. Patients are less likely to choose a treatment that takes longer to improve symptoms. Health-care professionals are willing to make difficult compromises by tolerating greater safety risks in exchange for therapeutic benefits. The treatments ranked most positively by patients were infliximab and tofacitinib (each preferred by 38% of patients), and the predicted probability of uptake by health-care professionals was greatest for infliximab (62%). LIMITATIONS: The survey and the discrete choice experiments with patients and health-care professionals are limited by their relatively small sample sizes. The qualitative studies are subject to selection bias. The timing of the different substudies, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, is a potential limitation. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified factors influencing treatment decisions for steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis and the characteristics to consider when choosing treatments to evaluate in future randomised controlled trials. The findings may be used to improve discussions between patients and health-care professionals when they review treatment options for steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis. FUTURE WORK: This research highlights the need for consensus work to establish an agreed definition of steroid resistance in ulcerative colitis and a greater understanding of the optimal use of tofacitinib and surgery for this patient group. A randomised controlled trial comparing infliximab with tofacitinib is also recommended. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 41. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Steroids are one of the main treatments for ulcerative colitis; however, steroids work well for only about 50% of people who take them. There are many other treatments that can be given when steroids do not work, but evidence is limited about how these treatments are best used. To carry out better research about the best treatment options and to improve clinical practice in the future, this study aimed to find out how adults with steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis are managed in hospital and why patients and health-care professionals prefer different treatments. The study combined various methods of research, including an online survey of health-care professionals (n = 168), interviews with health-care professionals (n = 20) and patients (n = 33), a survey of health-care professionals (n = 116) and patients (n = 115) to ask them about treatment preferences, and a multistakeholder workshop (n = 9). The interviews with and survey of health-care professionals found that most health-care professionals define steroid resistance as an incomplete response to 40 mg per day of prednisolone after 2 weeks. The survey also found that the most frequently offered drugs are anti-tumour necrosis factor drugs (particularly infliximab). Patient interviews found that several factors influenced treatment choices, including effectiveness of treament, guidance from health-care professionals, route of administration and side effects. Patients were willing to try alternative treatments and surgery over time. The survey found that a higher level of remission and a lower chance of side effects strongly influenced treatment choices. Patients are less likely to choose a treatment that takes longer to improve symptoms. Health-care professionals are willing to make difficult compromises by tolerating greater safety risks in exchange for therapeutic benefits. Infliximab and tofacitinib were ranked most positively by patients, and the predicted uptake by health-care professionals was greatest for infliximab. The results of this study help improve understanding of why people choose certain treatments, improve decision-making in partnership and inform the design of future research.

Review article: randomised controlled trials in inflammatory bowel disease-common challenges and potential solutions.

BACKGROUND: Recruitment rates for Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis clinical trials continue to decrease annually. The inability to reach recruitment targets and complete trials has serious implications for stakeholders in the inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) community. Action is required to ensure patients with an unmet medical need have access to new therapies to improve the management of their IBD. AIMS: Identify challenges contributing to recruitment decline in IBD clinical trials and propose potential solutions. METHODS: PubMed and Google were used to identify literature, regulatory guidelines and conference proceedings related to IBD clinical trials and related concepts. Data on IBD clinical trials conducted between 1989 and 2020 were extracted from the Trialtrove database. RESULTS: Key aspects that may improve recruitment rates were identified. An increasingly patient-centric approach should be taken to study design including improvements to the readability of key trial documentation and inclusion of patient representatives in trial planning. Placebo is unappealing to patients; approaches including platform trials should be explored to minimise placebo exposure. Non-invasive imaging, biomarkers and novel digital endpoints should continue to be examined to reduce the burden on patients. Reducing the administrative burden associated with trials via the use of electronic signatures, for example, may benefit study sites and investigators. Changes implemented to IBD trials during the COVID-19 pandemic provided examples of how trial conduct can be rapidly and constructively adapted. CONCLUSIONS: To improve recruitment in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis trials, the IBD community should address a broad range of issues related to clinical trial conduct.

Guselkumab plus golimumab combination therapy versus guselkumab or golimumab monotherapy in patients with ulcerative colitis (VEGA): a randomised, double-blind, controlled, phase 2, proof-of-concept trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the introduction of new monoclonal antibodies and oral therapies for the treatment of ulcerative colitis, clinical remission rates remain low, underscoring the need for innovative treatment approaches. We assessed whether guselkumab plus golimumab combination therapy was more effective for ulcerative colitis than either monotherapy. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, controlled, proof-of-concept trial at 54 hospitals, academic medical centres, or private practices in nine countries. Eligible adults (aged ≥18 to 65 years) had a confirmed diagnosis of ulcerative colitis at least 3 months before screening and moderately-to-severely active ulcerative colitis (Mayo score 6-12) with a centrally-read baseline endoscopy subscore of 2 or higher. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using a computer-generated randomisation schedule to combination therapy (subcutaneous golimumab 200 mg at week 0, subcutaneous golimumab 100 mg at weeks 2, 6, and 10, and intravenous guselkumab 200 mg at weeks 0, 4, and 8, followed by subcutaneous guselkumab monotherapy 100 mg every 8 weeks for 32 weeks), golimumab monotherapy (subcutaneous golimumab 200 mg at week 0 followed by subcutaneous golimumab 100 mg at week 2 and every 4 weeks thereafter for 34 weeks), or guselkumab monotherapy (intravenous guselkumab 200 mg at weeks 0, 4, and 8, followed by subcutaneous guselkumab 100 mg every 8 weeks thereafter for 32 weeks). The primary endpoint was clinical response at week 12 (defined as a ≥30% decrease from baseline in the full Mayo score and a ≥3 points absolute reduction with either a decrease in rectal bleeding score of ≥1 point or a rectal bleeding score of 0 or 1). Efficacy was analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population up to week 38, which included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one (partial or complete) study intervention dose. Safety was analysed up to week 50, according to study intervention received among all patients who received at least one (partial or complete) dose of study intervention. This trial is complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03662542. FINDINGS: Between Nov 20, 2018, and Nov 15, 2021, 358 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 214 patients were randomly assigned to combination therapy (n=71), golimumab monotherapy (n=72), or guselkumab monotherapy (n=71). Of the 214 patients included, 98 (46%) were women and 116 (54%) were men and the mean age was 38·4 years (SD 12·0). At week 12, 59 (83%) of 71 patients in the combination therapy group had achieved clinical response compared with 44 (61%) of 72 patients in the golimumab monotherapy group (adjusted treatment difference 22·1% [80% CI 12·9 to 31·3]; nominal p=0·0032) and 53 (75%) of 71 patients in the guselkumab monotherapy group (adjusted treatment difference 8·5% [-0·2 to 17·1; nominal p=0·2155). At week 50, 45 (63%) of 71 patients in the combination therapy group, 55 (76%) of 72 patients in the golimumab monotherapy group, and 46 (65%) of 71 patients in the guselkumab monotherapy group had reported at least one adverse event. The most common adverse events were ulcerative colitis, upper respiratory tract infection, headache, anaemia, nasopharyngitis, neutropenia, and pyrexia. No deaths, malignancies, or cases of tuberculosis were reported during the combination induction period. One case of tuberculosis was reported in the combination therapy group and one case of colon adenocarcinoma was reported in the guselkumab monotherapy group; both occurred after week 12. Two deaths were reported after the final dose of study intervention (poisoning in the combination therapy group and COVID-19 in the guselkumab monotherapy group). INTERPRETATION: Data from this proof-of-concept study suggest that combination therapy with guselkumab and golimumab might be more effective for ulcerative colitis than therapy with either drug alone. These findings require confirmation in larger trials. FUNDING: Janssen Research and Development.

Risk of adverse outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease patients infected with SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Between people with and without inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), there was no statistically significant difference in the probability of contracting the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, the risk of adverse outcomes in IBD patients after virus infection remains unclear. METHODS: Eligible studies conducted from January 1, 2020 to March 17, 2022 were obtained by searching PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Information was collected in tables from the included studies. Random-effects and fixed-effects models were used as measures for the pooled estimates. All data were estimated by R version 4.1.3. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included. The risk ratio (RR) of adverse outcomes in COVID-19 patients with IBD increased by 32% (RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.06-1.66) relative to COVID-19 patients without IBD. The RR of mortality was higher in COVID-19 patients with IBD from Europe (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.11-2.67) than in those that were not from Europe (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.79-1.26; χ2 = 4.67; P = 0.03). Patients with ulcerative colitis were at higher risk of adverse outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection than patients with Crohn's disease patients (RR1.38; 95% CI 1.27-1.50). The IBD drugs treatment was associated with the risk of adverse outcomes, the pooled odds ratio (OR) of mesalazine (1.79; 95% CI 1.59-2.02), immunomodulators (1.30; 95% CI 1.10-1.53), and anti-TNF (0.47; 95% CI 0.41-0.53) were assessed. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients with IBD had an increased risk of adverse outcomes than those without IBD, whereas anti-TNF treatment might reduce the risk.

Treatment adaptations and outcomes of patients experiencing inflammatory bowel disease flares during the early COVID-19 pandemic: the PREPARE-IBD multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic offered a unique opportunity to understand inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management during unexpected disruption. This could help to guide practice overall. AIMS: To compare prescribing behaviour for IBD flares and outcomes during the early pandemic with pre-pandemic findings METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study comprising patients who contacted IBD teams for symptomatic flares between March and June 2020 in 60 National Health Service trusts in the United Kingdom. Data were compared with a pre-pandemic cohort after propensity-matching for age and physician global assessment of disease activity. RESULTS: We included 1864 patients in each of the pandemic and pre-pandemic cohorts. The principal findings were reduced systemic corticosteroid prescription during the pandemic in Crohn's disease (prednisolone: pandemic 26.5% vs. 37.1%; p < 0.001) and ulcerative colitis (UC) (prednisolone: pandemic 33.5% vs. 40.7%, p < 0.001), with increases in poorly bioavailable oral corticosteroids in Crohn's (pandemic 15.6% vs. 6.8%; p < 0.001) and UC (pandemic 11.8% vs. 5.2%; p < 0.001). Ustekinumab (Crohn's and UC) and vedolizumab (UC) treatment also significantly increased. Three-month steroid-free remission in each period was similar in Crohn's (pandemic 28.4% vs. 32.1%; p = 0.17) and UC (pandemic 36.4% vs. 40.2%; p = 0.095). Patients experiencing a flare and suspected COVID-19 were more likely to have moderately-to-severely active disease at 3 months than those with a flare alone. CONCLUSIONS: Despite treatment adaptations during the pandemic, steroid-free outcomes were comparable with pre-pandemic levels, although concurrent flare and suspected COVID-19 caused worse outcomes. These findings have implications for IBD management during future pandemics and for standard practice.

Clinical Features and Outcomes of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Spondyloarthropathies.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the clinical features, predictive factors associated with severe disease, and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and report data on the comparison of coronavirus disease 2019 between patients with inflammatory bowel disease and spondyloarthropathies. METHODS: A total of 101 patients with inflammatory bowel disease and spondyloarthropathies who had confirmed diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Demographics, comorbidities, immunosuppressive treatments, and the impact of immunosuppression on negative outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 47 (38-57) years. The most common rheumatologic diagnosis was ankylosing spondylitis (n = 24), psoriatic arthritis (n = 17), and reactive arthritis (n = 1). In the inflammatory bowel disease group, 47 patients had ulcerative colitis, 11 Crohn's disease, and 1 unclassified. The most commonly used treatments were biologics (55%) in the spondyloarthropathies group and aminosalicylates (66.1%) in the inflammatory bowel disease group. Overall, 18.8% of the patients required hospitalization, 5% developed severe complications, and 2% died. There were no significant differences in coronavirus disease 2019-related negative outcomes between spondyloarthropathies and inflammatory bowel disease patients. The median age was higher in the patients who required hospitalization [57 (46-66) vs 47 (38-57) years, P=.008]. Bilateral opacities on chest radiographs were more common in the patients who required hospitalization in the spondyloarthropathies group [88.9% vs 14.3%, P=.016]. Comorbidity was significantly associated with hospitalization in the inflammatory bowel disease group (P ≤ .05). Baseline therapy with biologics or immunosuppressives was not associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 outcomes. CONCLUSION: Older age, comorbidities, and bilateral ground-glass opacities were associated with adverse outcomes, whereas specific immune-mediated inflammatory disease diagnoses or immunosuppressive treatments were not.

Real-world experience of switching from intravenous to subcutaneous vedolizumab maintenance treatment for inflammatory bowel diseases.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous (SC) vedolizumab is effective in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) when administered after induction with two infusions. AIM: To assess the effectiveness, safety and pharmacokinetics of a switch from intravenous (IV) to SC maintenance vedolizumab in patients with IBD METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, patients with IBD who had ≥4 months IV vedolizumab were switched to SC vedolizumab. We studied the time to discontinuation of SC vedolizumab, adverse events (AEs), changes in clinical and biochemical outcomes and vedolizumab concentrations at baseline, and weeks 12 and 24. RESULTS: We included 82 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and 53 with ulcerative colitis (UC). Eleven (13.4%) patients with CD and five (9.4%) with UC discontinued SC vedolizumab after a median of 18 (IQR 8-22) and 6 weeks (IQR 5-10), respectively. Four patients with CD switched to a different drug due to loss of response, nine switched back to IV vedolizumab due to adverse events, and three due to needle fear. Common AEs were injection site reactions (n = 15) and headache (n = 6). Median clinical and biochemical disease activity remained stable after the switch. Median serum vedolizumab concentrations increased from 19 µg/ml at the time of the switch to 31 µg/ml 12 weeks after the switch (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Switching from IV to SC vedolizumab maintenance treatment is effective in patients with CD or UC. However, 9% of patients were switched back to IV vedolizumab due to adverse events or fear of needles.

Ulcerative Colitis in Adulthood and in Older Patients: Same Disease, Same Outcome, Same Risks?

The number of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) approaching an older age, together with the number of over-60-year-old patients newly diagnosed with IBD, is steadily increasing, reaching 25% of all patients. The present review focuses on late-onset ulcerative colitis (UC) and its initial disease course in comparison with that observed in younger adults in terms of extension at onset and the risk of proximal disease progression, medical treatment, surgery and hospitalization in the first years after diagnosis. We summarize the clues pointing to a milder disease course in a population which frequently presents major frailty due to comorbidities. With increasing age and thus increasing comorbidities, medical and surgical therapies frequently represent a challenge for treating physicians. The response, persistence, and risks of adverse events of conventional therapies indicated for late onset/older UC patients are examined, emphasizing the risks in this particular population, who are still being treated with prolonged corticosteroid therapy. Finally, we concentrate on data on biotechnological agents for which older patients were mostly excluded from pivotal trials. Real-life data from newer agents such as vedolizumab and ustekinumab show encouraging efficacy and safety profiles in the population of older UC patients.

Lactobacillus rhamnosus sepsis, endocarditis and septic emboli in a patient with ulcerative colitis taking probiotics.

A man in his 60s presented to the emergency room with fever and fatigue after a 2.5-month course of corticosteroids. His medical history was significant for bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement and moderately severe ulcerative colitis treated with balsalazide and daily lactobacillus-containing probiotics. Initial investigations revealed Lactobacillus rhamnosus bacteraemia without complication. Four days after hospital discharge, the patient experienced acute-onset right-sided paraesthesia and lower-limb paresis. On return to the emergency room, MRI of the brain demonstrated innumerable ring-enhancing lesions with haemorrhagic transformation. Transoesophageal echocardiogram revealed a small mobile density on the bioprosthetic aortic valve, raising the suspicion for L. rhamnosus infective endocarditis with secondary septic emboli to the brain. The patient was subsequently treated with intravenous gentamycin and ampicillin, with transition to indefinite oral amoxicillin suppressive therapy. The current case highlights the potential risk of lactobacilli translocation in an immunosuppressed patient with ulcerative colitis taking probiotics.

Xuanfei Baidu decoction attenuates intestinal disorders by modulating NF-κB pathway, regulating T cell immunity and improving intestinal flora.

BACKGROUND: A number of studies have shown that gastrointestinal manifestations co-exist with respiratory symptoms in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Xuanfei Baidu decoction (XFBD) was recommended by the National Health Commission to treat mild and moderate COVID-19 patients and proved to effectively alleviate intestinal symptoms. However, the exact mechanisms remain elusive. PURPOSE: This study aimed at exploring potential mechanisms of XFBD by utilizing a mouse model of dextran sulfate sodium (DSS)-induced acute experimental colitis, mimicking the disease conditions of intestinal microecological disorders. METHODS: The network pharmacology approach was employed to identify the potential targets and pathways of XFBD on the intestinal disorders. Mice with DSS-induced intestinal disorders were utilized to evaluate the protective effect of XFBD in vivo, including body weight, disease activity index (DAI) score, colon length, spleen weight, and serum tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) level. Colon tissues were used to perform hematoxylin-eosin (H&E) staining, western blot analysis, and transcriptome sequencing. Macrophages, neutrophils and the proportions of T helper cell (Th) 1 and Th2 cells were measured by flow cytometry. Intestinal contents were collected for 16S rRNA gene sequencing. RESULTS: Network pharmacology analysis indicated that XFBD inhibited the progression of COVID-19-related intestinal diseases by repressing inflammation. In mice with DSS-induced intestinal inflammation, XFBD treatment significantly reduced weight loss, the spleen index, the disease activity index, TNF-α levels, and colonic tissue damage, and prevented colon shortening. Transcriptomics and flow cytometry results suggested that XFBD remodeled intestinal immunity by downregulating the Th1/Th2 ratio. Western blot analysis showed that XFBD exerted its anti-inflammatory effects by blocking the nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) signaling pathway. Indicator analysis of microbiota showed that 75 operational taxonomic units (OTUs) were affected after XFBD administration. Among them, Akkermansia, Muribaculaceae, Lachnospiraceae, and Enterorhabdus were simultaneously negatively correlated with intestinal disorders' parameters, and Bacteroides, Escherichia-Shigella, Eubacterium nodatum,Turicibacter, and Clostridium sensu stricto 1, showed positive correlations with intestinal disorders' parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that XFBD treatment attenuated intestinal disorders associated with inhibiting inflammation, remodeling of intestinal immunity, and improving intestinal flora. These findings provide a scientific basis for the clinical use of XFBD and offer a potential therapeutic approach for the treatment of COVID-19 patients with intestinal symptoms.

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.

Crohn's Disease of the Elderly: Unique Biology and Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety.

The incidence and prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is increasing in the elderly population. Compared with patients with onset during younger years, patients with elderly-onset IBD have a distinct clinical presentation, disease phenotype, and natural history. Genetics contribute less to pathogenesis of disease, whereas aging-related biological changes, such as immunosenescence and dysbiosis, are associated with elderly-onset IBD. Frailty is an increasingly recognized predictor of adverse outcomes. As an increasingly wider array of biologic and small molecule therapeutic options becomes available, data regarding efficacy and safety of these agents in patients are paramount given the unique characteristics of this population.