Trends in Targeted Therapy Usage in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: TRENDY Study of ENEIDA.

Markers that allow for the selection of tailored treatments for individual patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are yet to be identified. Our aim was to describe trends in real-life treatment usage. For this purpose, patients from the ENEIDA registry who received their first targeted IBD treatment (biologics or tofacitinib) between 2015 and 2021 were included. A subsequent analysis with Machine Learning models was performed. The study included 10,009 patients [71% with Crohn's disease (CD) and 29% with ulcerative colitis (UC)]. In CD, anti-TNF (predominantly adalimumab) were the main agents in the 1st line of treatment (LoT), although their use declined over time. In UC, anti-TNF (mainly infliximab) use was predominant in 1st LoT, remaining stable over time. Ustekinumab and vedolizumab were the most prescribed drugs in 2nd and 3rd LoT in CD and UC, respectively. Overall, the use of biosimilars increased over time. Machine Learning failed to identify a model capable of predicting treatment patterns. In conclusion, drug positioning is different in CD and UC. Anti-TNF were the most used drugs in IBD 1st LoT, being adalimumab predominant in CD and infliximab in UC. Ustekinumab and vedolizumab have gained importance in CD and UC, respectively. The approval of biosimilars had a significant impact on treatment.

Clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with two consecutive anti-TNF agents: data from the ENEIDA registry.

Background: Infliximab seems to be the most efficacious of the three available anti-TNF agents for ulcerative colitis (UC) but little is known when it is used as the second anti-TNF. Objectives: To compare the clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in UC patients. Design: Retrospective observational study. Methods: Patients from the ENEIDA registry treated consecutively with infliximab and a subcutaneous anti-TNF (or vice versa), naïve to other biological agents, were identified and grouped according to the administration route of the first anti-TNF into IVi (intravenous initially) or SCi (subcutaneous initially). Results: Overall, 473 UC patients were included (330 IVi and 143 SCi). Clinical response at week 14 was 42.7% and 48.3% in the IVi and SCi groups (non-statistically significant), respectively. Clinical remission rates at week 52 were 32.8% and 31.4% in the IVi and SCi groups (nonsignificant differences), respectively. A propensity-matched score analysis showed a higher clinical response rate at week 14 in the SCi group and higher treatment persistence in the IVi group. Regarding long-term outcomes, dose escalation and discontinuation due to the primary failure of the first anti-TNF and more severe disease activity at the beginning of the second anti-TNF were inversely associated with clinical remission. Conclusion: The use of a second anti-TNF for UC seems to be reasonable in terms of efficacy, although it is particularly reduced in the case of the primary failure of the first anti-TNF. Whether the second anti-TNF is infliximab or subcutaneous does not seem to affect efficacy.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in UC patients. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. METHODS: Patients from the ENEIDA registry treated consecutively with infliximab and a subcutaneous anti-TNF (or vice versa), naïve to other biological agents, were identified and grouped according to the administration route of the first anti-TNF into IVi (intravenous initially) or SCi (subcutaneous initially). RESULTS: Overall, 473 UC patients were included (330 IVi, 143 SCi). Clinical response at week 14 was 42.7% and 48.3% in the IVi and SCi groups (non-statistically significant), respectively. Clinical remission rates at week 52 were 32.8% and 31.4%, in the IVi and SCi groups (nonsignificant differences), respectively. A propensity-matched score analysis showed a higher clinical response rate at week 14 in the SCi group and higher treatment persistence in the IVi group. Regarding long-term outcomes, dose escalation and discontinuation due to the primary failure of the first anti-TNF and more severe disease activity at the beginning of the second anti-TNF were inversely associated with clinical remission. CONCLUSION: The use of a second anti-TNF for UC seems to be reasonable in terms of efficacy, although it is particularly reduced in the case of the primary failure of the first anti-TNF. Whether the second anti-TNF is infliximab or subcutaneous does not seem to affect efficacy.

Clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with two consecutive anti-TNF agents. Data from the ENEIDA registry Background: Infliximab seems to be the most efficacious of the three available anti-TNF agents for ulcerative colitis (UC), but little is known when it is used as the second anti-TNF.

Comparative Study of the Effectiveness of Vedolizumab Versus Ustekinumab After Anti-TNF Failure in Crohn's Disease (Versus-CD): Data from the ENEIDA Registry.

BACKGROUND: Both vedolizumab and ustekinumab are approved for the management of Crohn's disease [CD]. Data on which one would be the most beneficial option when anti-tumour necrosis factor [anti-TNF] agents fail are limited. AIMS: To compare the durability, effectiveness, and safety of vedolizumab and ustekinumab after anti-TNF failure or intolerance in CD. METHODS: CD patients from the ENEIDA registry who received vedolizumab or ustekinumab after anti-TNF failure or intolerance were included. Durability and effectiveness were evaluated in both the short and the long term. Effectiveness was defined according to the Harvey-Bradshaw index [HBI]. The safety profile was compared between the two treatments. The propensity score was calculated by the inverse probability weighting method to balance confounder factors. RESULTS: A total of 835 patients from 30 centres were included, 207 treated with vedolizumab and 628 with ustekinumab. Dose intensification was performed in 295 patients. Vedolizumab [vs ustekinumab] was associated with a higher risk of treatment discontinuation (hazard ratio [HR] 2.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.02-3.21), adjusted by corticosteroids at baseline [HR 1.27; 95% CI: 1.00-1.62], moderate-severe activity in HBI [HR 1.79; 95% CI: 1.20-2.48], and high levels of C-reactive protein at baseline [HR 1.06; 95% CI: 1.02-1.10]. The inverse probability weighting method confirmed these results. Clinical response, remission, and corticosteroid-free clinical remission were higher with ustekinumab than with vedolizumab. Both drugs had a low risk of adverse events with no differences between them. CONCLUSION: In CD patients who have failed anti-TNF agents, ustekinumab seems to be superior to vedolizumab in terms of durability and effectiveness in clinical practice. The safety profile is good and similar for both treatments.

Low risk of new dysplastic lesions in an inflammatory bowel disease population study with dye chromoendoscopy.

Background and study aims Rates of new dysplastic lesions or cancer progression after first dye chromoendoscopy in the era of high-definition endoscopy have yet to be determined. Patients and methods A multicenter, population-based, retrospective cohort study was performed in seven hospitals in Spain. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease and fully resected (R0) dysplastic colon lesions under surveillance with high-definition dye-based chromoendoscopy were sequentially enrolled between February 2011 and June 2017, with a minimum endoscopic follow-up of 36 months. The aim was to assess the incidence of developing more advanced metachronous neoplasia by analyzing possible associated risk factors. Results The study sample included 99 patients and 148 index lesions (145 low-grade dysplasia lesions and three high-grade dysplasia [HGD] lesions with a mean follow-up of 48.76 months [IQR: 36.34-67.15]). The overall incidence of new dysplastic lesions was 0.23 per 100 patient-years, 1.15 per 100 patients at 5 years and 2.29 per 100 patients at 10 years. A history of dysplasia was associated with a higher risk of developing any grade of dysplasia during follow-up ( P  = 0.025), whereas left colon lesions were associated with a lower risk ( P  = 0.043). The incidence of more advanced lesions at 1 year and 10 years was 1 % and 14 % respectively, with lesion size > 1 cm being a risk factor ( P  = 0.041). One of the eight patients (13 %) with HGD lesions developed colorectal cancer during follow-up. Conclusions The risk of dysplasia progressing to advanced neoplasia and, specifically, the risk of new neoplastic lesions after endoscopic resection of colitis-associated dysplasia, are both very low.

Effectiveness and Safety of Ustekinumab in Elderly Patients with Crohn's Disease: Real World Evidence From the ENEIDA Registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Clinical trials and real-life studies with ustekinumab in Crohn's disease [CD] have revealed a good efficacy and safety profile. However, these data are scarcely available in elderly patients. Therefore, we aim to assess the effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in elderly patients with CD. METHODS: Elderly patients [>60 years old] from the prospectively maintained ENEIDA registry treated with ustekinumab due to CD were included. Every patient was matched with two controls under 60 years of age, according to anti-tumour necrosis factor use and smoking habit. Values for the Harvey-Bradshaw Index [HBI], endoscopic activity, C-reactive protein [CRP] and faecal calprotectin [FC] were recorded at baseline and at weeks 16, 32 and 54. RESULTS: In total, 648 patients were included, 212 of whom were elderly. Effectiveness was similar between young and elderly patients during the follow-up. Steroid-free remission was similar at week 16 [54.6 vs 51.4%, p = 0.20], 32 [53.0% vs 54.5%, p = 0.26] and 54 [57.8% vs 51.1%, p = 0.21]. Persistence of ustekinumab as maintenance therapy was similar in both age groups [log-rank test; p = 0.91]. There was no difference in the rate of adverse effects [14.2% vs 11.2%, p = 0.350], including severe infections [7.1% vs 7.3%, p = 1.00], except for the occurrence of de novo neoplasms, which was higher in older patients [0.7% vs 4.3%, p = 0.003]. CONCLUSIONS: Ustekinumab is as effective in elderly patients with CD as it is in non-elderly patients. The safety profile also seems to be similar except for a higher rate of de novo neoplasms, probably related to the age of the elderly patients.

Eficacia de lanreótido en pacientes con angiodisplasias gastrointestinales refractarias al tratamiento con octreótido / Efficacy of lanreotide in patients with gastrointestinal angiodysplasia refractory to octreotide therapy

No disponible