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.

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.

Transitioning from Intravenous to Subcutaneous Vedolizumab in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease [TRAVELESS].

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subcutaneous [SC] vedolizumab presents the opportunity for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients to manage their treatment at home. There are currently no data on the process of transitioning patients established on intravenous [IV] to SC vedolizumab as part of routine clinical care. The aim of this programme is to evaluate the clinical and biochemical outcomes of switching a cohort of IBD patients established on IV vedolizumab to SC, at 12 weeks following the transition. METHODS: In all, 178 adult patients were offered the opportunity to transition to SC vedolizumab. Patients who agreed were reviewed prior to switching and at Week 12 [W12] after their first SC dose. Evaluation outcomes included disease activity scores, the IBD-Control Patient-Reported Outcome Measures [PROMs], and faecal calprotectin [FCP]. Reasons for patients declining or accepting transitioning, pharmacokinetics, adverse drug reactions, and risk factors for a poor outcome in SARS-CoV-2 infection were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients agreed to transition, of whom 106 patients had been on IV vedolizumab for at least 4 months. There were no statistically significant differences in disease activity scores or IBD-Control PROMs between baseline and W12. A statistically significant increase in FCP was observed [31 µg/g vs. 47 µg/g; p = 0.008], although this was unlikely to be clinically relevant. The most common adverse drug reaction reported was injection site reactions [15%]. Based on this cohort of patients, an expected reduction of £572,000 per annum is likely to be achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Transitioning patients established on IV vedolizumab to SC appears to be safe and effective, with high patient satisfaction and multiple benefits for the health service.

Switch to subcutaneous infliximab during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: preliminary results.

A new subcutaneous formulation of the infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 has recently been developed for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), providing response rates similar to intravenous treatment. The use of this new formulation was requested, in an effort to limit patient attendance at intravenous infusion centers and to maintain biological treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this observational, retrospective and descriptive study was to assess CT-P13 efficacy and safety after switching from intravenous to a subcutaneous formulation in patients with IBD receiving maintenance therapy. This article shows preliminary results after six months of follow-up.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses are attenuated in patients with IBD treated with infliximab.

OBJECTIVE: Antitumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) drugs impair protective immunity following pneumococcal, influenza and viral hepatitis vaccination and increase the risk of serious respiratory infections. We sought to determine whether infliximab-treated patients with IBD have attenuated serological responses to SARS-CoV-2 infections. DESIGN: Antibody responses in participants treated with infliximab were compared with a reference cohort treated with vedolizumab, a gut-selective anti-integrin α4ß7 monoclonal antibody that is not associated with impaired vaccine responses or increased susceptibility to systemic infections. 6935 patients were recruited from 92 UK hospitals between 22 September and 23 December 2020. RESULTS: Rates of symptomatic and proven SARS-CoV-2 infection were similar between groups. Seroprevalence was lower in infliximab-treated than vedolizumab-treated patients (3.4% (161/4685) vs 6.0% (134/2250), p<0.0001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses confirmed that infliximab (vs vedolizumab; OR 0.66 (95% CI 0.51 to 0.87), p=0.0027) and immunomodulator use (OR 0.70 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.92), p=0.012) were independently associated with lower seropositivity. In patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, seroconversion was observed in fewer infliximab-treated than vedolizumab-treated patients (48% (39/81) vs 83% (30/36), p=0.00044) and the magnitude of anti-SARS-CoV-2 reactivity was lower (median 0.8 cut-off index (0.2-5.6) vs 37.0 (15.2-76.1), p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Infliximab is associated with attenuated serological responses to SARS-CoV-2 that were further blunted by immunomodulators used as concomitant therapy. Impaired serological responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection might have important implications for global public health policy and individual anti-TNF-treated patients. Serological testing and virus surveillance should be considered to detect suboptimal vaccine responses, persistent infection and viral evolution to inform public health policy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN45176516.

Paediatric Inflammatory Multisystem Syndrome Temporally Associated With SARS-CoV-2 [PIMS-TS] in a Patient Receiving Infliximab Therapy for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 [PIMS-TS] is a newly described condition. It has a spectrum of presentations proposed to occur as part of a post-infectious immune response. We report the first case of PIMS-TS in a child on established anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha [anti-TNFα] therapy; a 10 year-old girl with ulcerative colitis treated with infliximab. The patient had 6 weeks of daily fever with mucocutaneous, gastrointestinal, renal, and haematological involvement. Biomarkers of hyperinflammation were present including: hyperferritinaemia [up to 691 µ/L; normal 15-80 µg/L], C-reactive protein [CRP] [ >100mg/L for  >10 days, normal 0-5 mg/L], erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR] consistently  >100mm/h [normal 0-15 mm/h], raised white cell count with neutrophilia, elevated D-dimer and lactate dehydrogenase [LDH], anaemia and Mott cells on bone marrow analysis. Extensive investigations for alternative diagnoses for pyrexia of unknown origin [PUO] were negative. The condition was refractory to treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin [IVIG] but improved within 24 h of high-dose methylprednisolone. Infliximab treatment followed and the patient has remained well at follow-up. Polymerase chain reaction [PCR] and serology for SARS-CoV-2 were negative. Current series report such negative findings in up to half of cases. The patient experienced a milder clinical phenotype without cardiac involvement, shock, or organ failure. Accepting the wide spectrum of PIMS-TS presentations, it is possible that previous anti-TNFα therapy may have attenuated the disease course. Given the uncertainty around therapeutic strategies for PIMS-TS, this case supports the need for further investigation into continuing infliximab as a treatment option for the condition.

Drug therapies for reducing gastric acidity in people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Malabsorption of fat and protein contributes to poor nutritional status in people with cystic fibrosis. Impaired pancreatic function may also result in increased gastric acidity, leading in turn to heartburn, peptic ulcers and the impairment of oral pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. The administration of gastric acid-reducing agents has been used as an adjunct to pancreatic enzyme therapy to improve absorption of fat and gastro-intestinal symptoms in people with cystic fibrosis. It is important to establish the evidence regarding potential benefits of drugs that reduce gastric acidity in people with cystic fibrosis. This is an update of a previously published review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of drug therapies for reducing gastric acidity for: nutritional status; symptoms associated with increased gastric acidity; fat absorption; lung function; quality of life and survival; and to determine if any adverse effects are associated with their use. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic and non-electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals,  abstract books and conference proceedings. Both authors double checked the reference lists of the searches Most recent search of the Group's Trials Register: 26 April 2021. On the 26 April 2021 further searches were conducted on the clinicaltrials.gov register to identify any ongoing trials that may be of relevance. The WHO ICTRP database was last searched in 2020 and is not currently available for searching due to the Covid-19 pandemic. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised trials involving agents that reduce gastric acidity compared to placebo or a comparator treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 40 trials; 17 of these, with 273 participants, were suitable for inclusion, but the number of trials assessing each of the different agents was small. Seven trials were limited to children and four trials enrolled only adults. Meta-analysis was not performed, 14 trials were of a cross-over design and we did not have the appropriate information to conduct comprehensive meta-analyses. All the trials were run in single centres and duration ranged from five days to six months. The included trials were generally not reported adequately enough to allow judgements on risk of bias. However, one trial found that drug therapies that reduce gastric acidity improved gastro-intestinal symptoms such as abdominal pain; seven trials reported significant improvement in measures of fat malabsorption; and two trials reported no significant improvement in nutritional status. Only one trial reported measures of respiratory function and one trial reported an adverse effect with prostaglandin E2 analogue misoprostol. No trials have been identified assessing the effectiveness of these agents in improving quality of life, the complications of increased gastric acidity, or survival. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Trials have shown limited evidence that agents that reduce gastric acidity are associated with improvement in gastro-intestinal symptoms and fat absorption. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to indicate whether there is an improvement in nutritional status, lung function, quality of life, or survival. Furthermore, due to the unclear risks of bias in the included trials, we are unable to make firm conclusions based on the evidence reported therein. We therefore recommend that large, multicentre, randomised controlled clinical trials are undertaken to evaluate these interventions.

The Impact of Vedolizumab on COVID-19 Outcomes Among Adult IBD Patients in the SECURE-IBD Registry.

BACKGROUND: The impact of immune-modifying therapies on outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] is variable. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of vedolizumab [VDZ], a gut-selective anti-integrin, on COVID-19 outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients. METHODS: Using data from the Surveillance of Coronavirus Under Research Exclusion for IBD [SECURE-IBD], an international registry of IBD patients with confirmed COVID-19, we studied the impact of VDZ on COVID-19 hospitalization and severe COVID-19 [intensive care unit stay, mechanical ventilation and/or death]. RESULTS: Of 3647 adult patients on any IBD medication in the registry, 457 [12.5%] patients were on VDZ. On multivariable analyses using backward selection of covariates, VDZ use was not associated with hospitalization or severe COVID-19 when compared with patients on all other medications (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71, 1.1 and aOR 0.95; 95% CI 0.53, 1.73, respectively). On comparing VDZ monotherapy to anti-tumour necrosis factor [anti-TNF] monotherapy, the odds for hospitalization, but not severe COVID-19, were higher [aOR CI 1.39; 95% CI 1.001, 1.90 and aOR 2.92; 95% CI 0.98, 8.71, respectively]. In an exploratory analysis, VDZ monotherapy, compared to anti-TNF monotherapy, was associated with new-onset gastrointestinal symptoms at the time of COVID-19, especially among patients whose IBD was in remission. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 outcomes among IBD patients on VDZ are comparable to those on all other therapies. Hospitalization, but not severe COVID-19, is more likely with VDZ monotherapy than with anti-TNF monotherapy. Overall, VDZ appears to be safe in IBD patients with COVID-19.

Impact of the COVID-19 outbreak and the serum prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with biologic drugs.

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving biologic therapies are at risk for viral infections. This study investigated the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 infection and the serum prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with biologic drugs. METHODS: Information on demography, co-morbidities, clinical data regarding IBD, symptoms suggestive of the SARS-CoV-2 infection, close contacts with SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, hospitalization, and therapies administered for COVID-19 was collected for all patients who were being treated with biologic drugs. All patients underwent SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-nine patients (27 children) with a mean age of 42.2 ±â€¯16.7 years (range 9 - 88) and a mean duration of disease of 13.4 ±â€¯10 years (range 0.2 - 49) were enrolled. One hundred four patients (40.2%) had ulcerative colitis, and 155 (59.8%) had Crohn's disease. About the therapy: 62 patients were receiving infliximab, 89 adalimumab, 20 golimumab, 57 vedolizumab, 27 ustekinumab, 1 thalidomide, and 3 an experimental compound. The mean Charlson Comorbidity Index was 2. Thirty-two patients (12.3%) reported respiratory symptoms, and 2 of them were hospitalized (0.77%). Two patients resulted positive for IgG against SARS-CoV-2 (0.77%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with IBD, treatment with biologic drug does not represent a risk factor for the SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Predicting Outcome in Acute Severe Colitis-Controversies in Clinical Practice in 2021.

Acute severe ulcerative colitis [ASUC] remains a common medical emergency, with 25% of patients with ulcerative colitis experiencing at least one event in their disease course. Despite advances in medical therapy, ASUC continues to be associated with considerable morbidity and mortality, with up to 30% of patients requiring colectomy during initial admission. Our aim was to review the current controversies and recent progress in risk stratification, prediction of outcome, and personalisation of care in ASUC. We re-assess the use of Truelove and Witts' criteria, serum biomarkers, and the use of composite clinical indices in current clinical practice. We explore the potential for endoscopic prediction using defined validated indices for accurate and early prognostication, and the need to define outcome. We also consider the impact of the current COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, we discuss the current research agenda, including the application of new and emerging biomarkers coupled with multi-omics and the implications in management and optimisation of outcome. Research priorities for the prediction of outcome in acute severe colitis include the following. 1. Development of an accurate admission score to guide early medical rescue therapy or colectomy. 2. Utility of point-of-care faecal calprotectin, with determination of optimal cut-off values. 3. Role of serum and faecal infliximab levels to both predict outcome and guide accelerated infliximab dosing. 4. Role of novel biomarkers, including serum calprotectin, in predicting response to corticosteroids or rescue therapy. 5. Specific predictors of response to ciclosporin and infliximab to allow rationalisation of drug use. 6. Utility of validated endoscopic scores. 7. Utility of radiological assessment beyond use of plain abdominal X-ray. 8. The use of multiomics and machine learning to predict risk of Acute Severe Colitis in patients with Ulcerative Colitis.

COVID-19 in IBD: The experience of a single tertiary IBD center.

BACKGROUND: Italy has been one of the most affected countries in the world by COVID-19. There has been increasing concern regarding the impact of COVID-19 on patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), particularly in patients treated with immunosuppressants or biologics. The aim of our study is to understand the incidence of COVID-19 in a large cohort of patients with IBD. Furthermore, we analyzed possible risk factors for infection and severity of COVID-19. METHODS: This was an observational study evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on IBD patients in a single tertiary center. A 23 multiple-choice-question anonymous survey was administered to 1200 patients with IBD between March 10th and June 10th 2020. RESULTS: 1158 questionnaires were analyzed. The majority of patients had Crohn's disease (CD) (60%) and most of them were in clinical remission. Among the 26 patients (2.2%) who tested positive for COVID-19, only 5 (3CD) were on biological treatment and none required hospitalization. Two patients died and were on treatment with mesalazine only. Of the 1158 patients, 521 were on biological therapy, which was discontinued in 85 (16.3%) and delayed in 195 patients (37.4%). A worsening of IBD symptoms was observed in 200 patients on biological therapy (38.4%). Most of these patients, 189 (94.5%), had stopped or delayed biological treatment, while 11 (5.5%) had continued their therapy regularly (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our data are in line with the current literature and confirm a higher incidence compared to the general population. Biological therapy for IBD seems to not be a risk factor for infection and should not be discontinued in order to avoid IBD relapse.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the management of paediatric inflammatory bowel disease: An Italian multicentre study on behalf of the SIGENP IBD Group.

BACKGROUND: IBD management has been significantly affected during the COVID-19 lockdown with potential clinical issues. AIMS: The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the Italian paediatric IBD cohort. METHODS: This was a multicentre, retrospective, cohort investigation including 21 different Italian IBD referral centres. An electronic data collection was performed among the participating centres including: clinical characteristics of IBD patients, number of COVID-19 cases and clinical outcomes, disease management during the lockdown and the previous 9 weeks. RESULTS: 2291 children affected by IBD were enrolled. We experienced a significant reduction of the hospital admissions [604/2291 (26.3%) vs 1281/2291 (55.9%); p < 0.001]. More specifically, we observed a reduction of hospitalizations for new diagnosis (from n = 44 to n = 27) and endoscopic re-evaluations (from n = 46 to n = 8). Hospitalization for relapses and surgical procedures remained substantially unchanged. Biologic infusions did not significantly vary [393/2291 (17.1%) vs 368/2291 (16%); p = 0.3]. Telemedicine services for children with IBD were activated in 52.3% of the centres. In 42/2291(1.8%) children immunosuppressive therapies were adapted due to the concurrent COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Due to the several limitations of the lockdown, cares for children with IBD have been kept to minimal standards, giving priorities to the urgencies and to biologics' infusions and implementing telemedicine services.

Best Practice Guidance for Adult Infusion Centres during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Report from the COVID-19 International Organization for the Study of IBD [IOIBD] Task Force.

Infusion centres are a central part in the management of patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] and could be a source of transmission of SARS-COV-2. Here we aimed to develop global guidance for best practices of infusion centres for IBD patients and to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on these centres. Under the auspices of the International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease [IOIBD], a task force [TF] was formed, an online survey was developed to query infusion centre protocols during COVID-19, and recommendations were made, based on TF experience and opinion. Recommendations focus mainly on patients screening, infusion centres re-organization, personnel protection, and protocol modifications such as shortening infusion duration or replacing it with subcutaneous alternatives. Implementing these recommendations will hopefully reduce exposure of both IBD patients and care givers to SARS-COV-2 and improve the function and safety of infusion centres during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as potential future threats.