Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 30
Filter
1.
J Med Econ ; 25(1): 741-749, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1864882

ABSTRACT

AIMS: To compare long-term healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients who initiated ixekizumab (IXE) or adalimumab (ADA) for treatment of psoriasis in the United States. METHODS: Adult patients with psoriasis who had ≥1 claim for IXE or ADA were identified from IBM MarketScan claims databases prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (1 March 2016-31 October 2019). The index date was the date of first claim for the index drug of interest. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was employed to balance treatment cohorts. All-cause and psoriasis-related HCRU and costs were examined for 24 months of follow-up. Costs were reported as per patient per month. Costs of psoriasis-related biologics were adjusted using published Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) discount factors. Index drug costs were adjusted for adherence and ICER discount rates. RESULTS: The analyses included 407 IXE and 2,702 ADA users. IXE users had significantly higher inpatient admission rate (all-cause HCRU: 14.9% vs. 11.0%; p =0.012) and greater mean length of stay per admission (days, 6.6 vs. 4.1; p =0.004) than ADA users. ICER-adjusted costs were significantly higher in IXE than ADA users (all-cause costs: $4,132 vs. $3,610; p <0.001; psoriasis-related costs $3,077 vs. $2,700; p <0.001). After adjusting for ICER and adherence, IXE and ADA drug costs were comparable ($3,636 vs. $3,677; p =0.714). LIMITATIONS: Study relied on administrative claims data, subjected to data coding limitations and data entry errors. Rebates, patient assistance programs, and commission to wholesalers are not always captured in claims. Adjustment made by ICER discount factors may lead to double-discounting if the discounts have been applied in claim payments. CONCLUSIONS: All-cause HCRU was higher in IXE than ADA users. Healthcare costs were also higher in IXE than ADA users after ICER adjustment, over 24 months. Cost differences were largely driven by higher treatment adherence associated with IXE. Index drug costs were comparable after ICER and adherence adjustments.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , COVID-19 , Psoriasis , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Costs , Follow-Up Studies , Health Care Costs , Humans , Pandemics , Psoriasis/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies , United States
4.
BioDrugs ; 35(6): 735-748, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1536382

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: AVT02 (adalimumab) is a proposed biosimilar to Humira®. AVT02 is produced at a 100 mg/mL concentration with a citrate-free formulation. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of AVT02 versus Humira® in subjects with moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, parallel group, active control study of adult subjects compared (at a 1:1 ratio) AVT02 with originator adalimumab 80 mg subcutaneously in Week 1, then 40 mg every other week. At Week 16, subjects who had received originator adalimumab were re-randomised at a 1:1 ratio to continue receiving originator adalimumab, or to switch to AVT02, every other week until Week 48, with final efficacy endpoint at Week 50. Subjects who initially received AVT02 continued to receive AVT02 from Week 16 to Week 48. The primary endpoint was percentage improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score at Week 16. Secondary efficacy endpoints included percentage improvement in PASI score at additional timepoints, change from baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score and number and percentage of subjects achieving static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) responses of 'clear' or 'almost clear'. Additional secondary endpoints included comparison of adverse event profiles, anti-drug antibodies and neutralising antibodies, and serum trough levels of adalimumab at steady state. RESULTS: A total of 413 subjects were randomised (205 to AVT02 and 208 to originator). The percentage improvement in PASI score at Week 16 was 91.6% for AVT02-treated subjects and 89.6% for originator adalimumab. The 90% confidence intervals for the primary endpoint were within the pre-defined equivalence margin of ±10% (90% CI - 0.76 to 5.29; 95% CI - 1.34 to 5.88), and a comparable pattern for DLQI score (11.4-point and 10.6-point improvement in AVT02-treated and originator adalimumab-treated groups, respectively) and sPGA (90.5% in both groups achieving 'clear' or 'almost clear') at Week 16 supported the assessment. Efficacy persisted through Week 50 of the study in all treatment groups, including those who switched from originator adalimumab to AVT02, for percent improvement in PASI score, quality-of-life assessment and sPGA. The safety, tolerability and immunogenicity profiles between AVT02 and originator adalimumab were similar at Week 16, and this persisted in the switched and continued groups through Week 50. CONCLUSION: Objective and subjective measures of efficacy supported the evaluation of biosimilarity between AVT02 and originator adalimumab at Week 16 and until Week 50, in switched and continued treatment groups. AVT02 was safe and well tolerated, with a safety and immunogenicity profile similar to that observed in originator adalimumab with no clinically meaningful difference between the two. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT: 2017-003367-35; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03849404.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Psoriasis , Adalimumab/adverse effects , Adult , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Psoriasis/drug therapy , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
5.
BMJ Case Rep ; 14(5)2021 May 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1457886

ABSTRACT

Although prednisolone, granulocyte/monocyte apheresis, calcineurin inhibitor and anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy are generally used, no treatment strategy for inflammatory bowel disease complicated with pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) has been established yet. Herein, we present the case of a 29-year-old man with ulcerative colitis (UC) complicated with primary sclerosing cholangitis. When UC relapsed and PG developed, prednisolone and granulocyte/monocyte apheresis were used; however, their therapeutic effects were deemed insufficient. After 2 weeks, adalimumab (ADA) induced remission; however, his UC and PG relapsed 20 weeks later. As a result of switching to infliximab, since a loss of response to ADA was deemed to have occurred, remission was reintroduced and subsequently maintained for 40 weeks. We conclude that anti-TNF-α antibodies might be selected as the first choice when PG and UC are refractory to treatment, and a switch to anti-TNFs should be considered when the effect is still insufficient.


Subject(s)
Biological Products , Cholangitis, Sclerosing , Colitis, Ulcerative , Pyoderma Gangrenosum , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Adult , Cholangitis, Sclerosing/complications , Cholangitis, Sclerosing/drug therapy , Colitis, Ulcerative/complications , Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , Humans , Infliximab/therapeutic use , Male , Pyoderma Gangrenosum/complications , Pyoderma Gangrenosum/drug therapy , Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
6.
Acta Gastroenterol Belg ; 84(3): 423-428, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1436614

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND-AIM: Intravenously administered biologicals are associated with a huge pressure to Infusion Units and increased cost. We aimed to assess the impact of switching infliximab to golimumab in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients in deep remission. Patients and method: In a prospective, single-centre pilot study UC patients on infliximab mono-therapy for = 2 years, whowere in deep remission, consented to switch to golimumab and were followed for 1 year with clinical assessment, serum and faecal biomarkers, work productivity, satisfaction with treatment and quality of life parameters. Endoscopic remission was assessed by colonoscopy at 1 year. Patients fulfilling the same inclusion criteria, who did not consent to switch to golimumab and continued to receive infliximab mono-therapy, for the same period, served as controls. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective, single-centre pilot study UC patients on infliximab mono-therapy for ≥ 2 years, who were in deep remission, consented to switch to golimumab and were followed for 1 year with clinical assessment, serum and faecal biomarkers, work productivity, satisfaction with treatment and quality of life parameters. Endoscopic remission was assessed by colonoscopy at 1 year. Patients fulfilling the same inclusion criteria, who did not consent to switch to golimumab and continued to receive infliximab mono-therapy, for the same period, served as controls. RESULTS: Between October 2015 and October 2017, 20 patients were recruited; however one patient stopped therapy because of pregnancy. All 19 patients who were switched to golimumab were still in clinical, biomarker and endoscopic remission at 1 year and maintained excellent quality of life without any complications. In the control group, 18 of 19 patients were also in deep remission, since only one patient had a flare which was managed with IFX dose intensification. During a median 3 years extension treatment with golimumab only 2 patients experienced a flare of colitis. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study indicates that switching from in-fliximab to golimumab in UC patients in deep remission does not compromise treatment effectiveness or the course of disease; golimumab offers a valid alternative to intravenous infliximab infusions during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Colitis, Ulcerative , Adalimumab , Antibodies, Monoclonal , Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , Humans , Infliximab , Pandemics , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Dermatol Ther ; 34(5): e15088, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1398389

ABSTRACT

During this pandemic, dermatological infusion centers were partially unavailable, suspended or even reconverted to guest COVID-19 patients, consequently infliximab (IFX) infusions became challenging for their both logistic arrangement and also for patients' COVID-19 phobia. This 48 weeks follow-up retrospective observational study included 37 PsO patients that underwent IFX SB2 during pandemic in two primary dermatological referral centers. In 23 (62.1%) we had to switch from IFX to other biologics, not motivated by adverse reactions, contraindication or even loss of response but only to pandemic related conditions. Nine patients underwent interclass switching and 15 underwent intraclass switching; interestingly 2 patients that underwent adalimumab SB-5 switched back to IFX. Interclass switching was privileged in elder patients and smokers. All patients at week 48 achieved PASI 100. Intra- and interclass switchings are both safe and effective strategies in psoriatic patients with COVID-19 phobia and/or difficulties to undergo infliximab infusions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adalimumab , Aged , Humans , Infliximab/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
8.
J Crohns Colitis ; 16(3): 389-397, 2022 Mar 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1393233

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Infliximab attenuates serological responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Whether this is a class effect, or if anti-tumour necrosis factor [anti-TNF] level influences serological responses, remains unknown. METHODS: Seroprevalence and the magnitude of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody responses were measured in surplus serum from 11 422 (53.3% [6084] male; median age 36.8 years) patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, stored at six therapeutic drug monitoring laboratories between January 29 and September 30, 2020. Data were linked to nationally held SARS-CoV-2 PCR results to July 11, 2021. RESULTS: Rates of PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were similar across treatment groups. Seroprevalence rates were lower in infliximab- and adalimumab- than vedolizumab-treated patients (infliximab: 3.0% [178/5893], adalimumab: 3.0% [152/5074], vedolizumab: 6.7% [25/375], p = 0.003). The magnitude of SARS-CoV-2 reactivity was similar in infliximab- vs adalimumab-treated patients (median 4.30 cut-off index [COI] [1.94-9.96] vs 5.02 [2.18-18.70], p = 0.164), but higher in vedolizumab-treated patients (median 21.60 COI [4.39-68.10, p < 0.004). Compared to patients with detectable infliximab and adalimumab drug levels, patients with undetectable drug levels [<0.8 mg/L] were more likely to be seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. One-third of patients who had PCR testing prior to antibody testing failed to seroconvert, all were treated with anti-TNF. Subsequent positive PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was seen in 7.9% [12/152] of patients after a median time of 183.5 days [129.8-235.3], without differences between drugs. CONCLUSION: Anti-TNF treatment is associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid seroprevalence and antibody reactivity when compared to vedolizumab-treated patients. Higher seropositivity rates in patients with undetectable anti-TNF levels support a causal relationship, although confounding factors, such as combination therapy with a immunomodulator, may have influenced the results.


Subject(s)
Biological Products , COVID-19 , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Adalimumab , Adult , Antibody Formation , Biological Products/therapeutic use , Drug Monitoring , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Infliximab , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/therapeutic use
9.
Cornea ; 40(9): 1204-1206, 2021 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1343730

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report 2 patients with anterior scleritis manifesting after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: The patients with confirmed COVID-19 developed anterior scleritis after their systemic symptoms were markedly improved. A thorough systemic workup identified no underlying autoimmune diseases. Ocular characteristics and safety and efficacy of systemic immunosuppressive therapy were evaluated. RESULTS: Case 1 was a 67-year-old woman who presented with necrotizing anterior scleritis in both eyes 3 weeks after the onset of COVID-19. One-week treatment with topical betamethasone and oral prednisolone (65 mg daily) did not result in improvement, so she was started on intravenous cyclophosphamide and subcutaneous adalimumab in addition to oral prednisolone. Necrotizing scleritis was gradually improved over 3 months. Case 2 was a 33-year-old man who presented with sectoral anterior scleritis in his right eye 2 weeks after the onset of COVID-19. He was started on topical betamethasone and oral prednisolone (85 mg daily). One week later, all signs and symptoms disappeared, and topical and oral corticosteroids were gradually tapered off over 2 weeks. There was no recurrence of respiratory symptoms or active scleritis in any cases after discontinuation of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These cases suggest that COVID-19 can be associated with anterior scleritis, which responds to immunosuppressive and biologic agents. Ophthalmologists should consider anterior scleritis in patients with COVID-19 who present with ocular pain and redness during the convalescent phase of the illness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Eye Infections, Viral/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Scleritis/diagnosis , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Cyclophosphamide/therapeutic use , Eye Infections, Viral/drug therapy , Eye Infections, Viral/virology , Female , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Infusions, Intravenous , Infusions, Subcutaneous , Male , Prednisolone/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Scleritis/drug therapy , Scleritis/virology
10.
J Crohns Colitis ; 16(2): 190-198, 2022 Feb 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1319160

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Because of COVID-19 public health restrictions, telemedicine has replaced conventional outpatient follow up for most patients with chronic immune-mediated inflammatory disorders treated with biologic drugs. Innovative solutions to facilitate remote therapeutic drug monitoring are therefore required. Low-volume intracapillary blood sampling can be undertaken by patients at home and samples returned by post to central laboratories. We sought to report the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on requests for therapeutic drug monitoring and the equivalence, acceptability and effectiveness of low volume Patient-led Remote IntraCapillary pharmacoKinetic Sampling [fingerPRICKS] compared to conventional venepuncture. METHODS: We undertook a cross-sectional blood sampling methods comparison study and compared sample types using linear regression models. Drug and antidrug antibody levels were measured using standard ELISAs. Acceptability was assessed using a purpose-designed questionnaire. RESULTS: Therapeutic drug monitoring requests for adalimumab (96.5 [70.5-106] per week to 52 [33.5-57.0], p < 0.001) but not infliximab (184.5 [161.2-214.2] to 161 [135-197.5], p = 0.34) reduced during the first UK stay-at-home lockdown compared with the preceding 6 months. Fingerprick sampling was equivalent to conventional venepuncture for adalimumab, infliximab, vedolizumab and ustekinumab drug, and anti-adalimumab and anti-infliximab antibody levels. The median [interquartile range] volume of serum obtained using intracapillary sampling was 195 µL [130-210]. More than 87% [90/103] of patients agreed that intracapillary testing was easy and 69% [71/103] preferred it to conventional venepuncture. In routine care, 75.3% [58/77] of patients returned two blood samples within 14 days to permit remote assessment of biologic therapeutic drug monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic drug monitoring can be undertaken using patient-led remote intracapillary blood sampling and has the potential to be a key adjunct to telemedicine in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.


Subject(s)
Drug Monitoring , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Self-Testing , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Drug Monitoring/methods , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Infliximab/therapeutic use , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom
12.
Int Immunopharmacol ; 99: 107961, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1300823

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19, which is a disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has spread around the world since late 2019. Studies have found associations between the rising levels of TNF-α and severe COVID-19 cases. Hence, TNF-α blocking can possibly be a favorable intervention in modifying COVID-19. To this end, in order to manage pneumonia caused by COVID-19, adalimumab may potentially be considered as a potential therapeutic agent. The present study aimed to investigate the potential therapeutic role of adalimumab in treating COVID-19 cases in combination therapy with remdesivir and dexamethasone. METHODS: Among the 68 patients who were included in the current randomized controlled trial, 34 were assigned to the adalimumab group and the remaining 34 were assigned to the control group. Adalimumab at a dose of 40 mg, subcutaneous for once, was used for the intervention group. Both the intervention and control groups received remdesivir, dexamethasone, and supportive care. The data gathered to make comparisons of the groups included demographic information, the rate of mortality, mechanical ventilation requirement, length of stay in hospital and Intensive Care Unit (ICU), and imaging findings. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups in the terms of mortality rate (P-value = 1) and mechanical ventilation requirement (P-value = 1). The length of hospital and ICU stay as well as radiologic changes were not affected either (P-value = 1, 0.27, and 0.53, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings did not support the use of adalimumab in combination with remdesivir and dexamethasone in the treatment of severe COVID-19 cases.


Subject(s)
Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/therapeutic use , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Respiration, Artificial
14.
Exp Dermatol ; 30 Suppl 1: 18-22, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1258931

ABSTRACT

The reported incidence of COVID-19 among cohorts of patients with inflammatory bowel and skin diseases under treatment with biologicals is low. Treatment may further modify disease severity as some biological modifiers, such as anakinra, are also proposed for the management of COVID-19 patients potentially providing HS patients with an advantage. The above preliminary evidence suggests that hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) does probably not provide an increased susceptibility for COVID-19 and that any susceptibility is unlikely to be modified negatively by treatment with biologicals. On the occasion of its 10th International Conference, experts of the European Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundation e.V. have prepared a consensus statement regarding anti-COVID-19 measurements for HS patients. Based on the available knowledge, patients with HS may be vaccinated against SARS-CoV2 and patients affected by metabolic syndrome constitute a high-risk group for COVID-19 and should be vaccinated at the earliest convenient point in time. HS patients on treatment with adalimumab can be vaccinated with non-living virus anti-SARS-CoV2 vaccines. A possible suboptimal effect of the vaccine may be suspected but might not be expected universally. The management of the biological treatment in HS patients is at the discretion of the dermatologist / responsible physician.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Hidradenitis Suppurativa/complications , Hidradenitis Suppurativa/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19 Vaccines/pharmacology , Cohort Studies , Disease Susceptibility , Europe , Foundations , Hidradenitis Suppurativa/immunology , Humans , Incidence , Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein/therapeutic use , Metabolic Syndrome/complications , Metabolic Syndrome/immunology , Pandemics , Severity of Illness Index
17.
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr ; 72(5): 736-741, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1015411

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Retrospective, observational, single-center, cohort study investigating the safety profile of biological therapy in children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: Retrospective, observational, cohort study of pediatric patients with IBD, receiving infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, or ustekinumab for at least 2 months. Data related to the immediate and delayed adverse events (AEs) were collected, focusing on the reaction type and severity, the time of onset, the outcome and the temporary or definitive therapy discontinuation secondary to the AE. Number of suspected and confirmed coronavirus disease-209 (COVID-19) cases and their outcomes, as well as flu vaccination coverage were collected. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-five children were included (101 [55%] CD, 82 [44%] UC, and 2 [1%] IBDU): 149 received infliximab (IFX) (81%), 88 (48%) adalimumab (ADA), 18 (21%) vedolizumab, and 4 (2%) ustekinumab. The overall AE rates were 49%, 67% of whom likely medication-related. Eleven (6%) patients experienced more than 1 AE, 18 patients (10%) presented an immediate reaction, and 82 (45%) a delayed AE. Among the 90 patients experiencing at least 1 AE, 97% had mild-to-moderate AEs. Only 4 SAEs were reported (4%). Treatment discontinuation because of AE occurred in 25 patients (14%). Four COVID-19 cases were reported, all with a mild course. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm a good safety profile of biologics. Infusion reactions to IFX administration remain one of the main issues, significantly linked to its immunogenicity and consequently with an impact on its efficacy and durability.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Adalimumab/adverse effects , Biological Therapy/adverse effects , Child , Cohort Studies , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Infliximab/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
18.
Dig Liver Dis ; 53(3): 277-282, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1009433

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Biological Products/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Agents/therapeutic use , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/epidemiology , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Serological Testing , Child , Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , Colitis, Ulcerative/epidemiology , Crohn Disease/drug therapy , Crohn Disease/epidemiology , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Infliximab/therapeutic use , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Thalidomide/therapeutic use , Ustekinumab/therapeutic use , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL