Pharmacist-Driven Therapeutic Infliximab Monitoring at the Point of Care Using Rapidly Assessed Drug Levels in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic monitoring of infliximab is limited by the time lag between drug-level measurement and dose adjustment, along with the cost of dose escalation. Strategies for dose reduction in stable patients on maintenance infliximab at supratherapeutic levels are uncertain. This study determined the feasibility of a pharmacist-driven strategy for immediate dose adjustment using a sliding scale at the point of care in stable patients with inflammatory bowel disease on maintenance therapy. METHODS: Adult patients with stable disease undergoing maintenance therapy with infliximab infusions, 5 mg/kg every 8 weeks, were prospectively studied. Trough drug levels were assessed by a rapid assay (and later by ELISA) at all infusions for up to 12 months with immediate but quantitatively small dose adjustment according to a sliding scale targeting a therapeutic range of 3-7 mcg/mL. Disease activity was assessed both clinically and biochemically. RESULTS: The rapid assay and ELISA detected similar infliximab levels, and the strategy added approximately 30 minutes to the duration of infusion events. Only 20% of 48 patients (77% with Crohn disease) had baseline trough infliximab concentrations within the therapeutic range. This value increased 3-fold after 24 and 48 weeks of interventions. One in 2 patients had baseline supratherapeutic levels, and most were brought into the therapeutic range without a discernible impact on disease activity by 1 dose adjustment, but 2 or 3 adjustments were generally needed for 29% of patients with subtherapeutic levels. Overall, drug costs were reduced by 4%. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate dose adjustment after infliximab rapid assay performed by a pharmacist using a sliding scale is a feasible strategy. Supratherapeutic infliximab levels can be safely and quickly brought into the therapeutic range using small dose adjustments without affecting disease activity, offsetting (at least partly) costs associated with dose escalation.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: The current COVID-19 pandemic, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has drastically impacted societies worldwide. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is expected to play a key role in the management of this pandemic. Inflammatory conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) often require chronic immunosuppression, which can influence vaccination decisions. AIM: This review article aims to describe the most commonly available SARS-CoV-2 vaccination vectors globally, assess the potential benefits and concerns of vaccination in the setting of immunosuppression and provide medical practitioners with guidance regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with IBD. METHODS: All published Phase 1/2 and/or Phase 3 and 4 studies of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations were reviewed. IBD international society position papers, safety registry data and media releases from pharmaceutical companies as well as administrative and medicines regulatory bodies were included. General vaccine evidence and recommendations in immunosuppressed patients were reviewed for context. Society position papers regarding special populations, including immunosuppressed, pregnant and breast-feeding individuals were also evaluated. Literature was critically analysed and summarised. RESULTS: Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is supported in all adult, non-pregnant individuals with IBD without contraindication. There is the potential that vaccine efficacy may be reduced in those who are immunosuppressed; however, medical therapies should not be withheld in order to undertake vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are safe, but data specific to immunosuppressed patients remain limited. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is essential from both an individual patient and community perspective and should be encouraged in patients with IBD. Recommendations must be continually updated as real-world and trial-based evidence emerges.

Practical management of inflammatory bowel disease patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: expert commentary from the Gastroenterological Society of Australia Inflammatory Bowel Disease faculty.

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has emerged as a public health emergency and challenged healthcare systems globally. In a minority of patients, SARS-CoV-2 manifests with a severe acute respiratory illness and currently there is insufficient data regarding the virulence of COVID-19 in inflammatory bowel disease patients taking immunosuppressive therapy. This review aims to summarise the current literature and provide guidance on the management of inflammatory bowel disease patients in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Australasian setting.

Review article: prevention, diagnosis and management of COVID-19 in the IBD patient.

BACKGROUND: The current COVID-19 pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has emerged as a public health emergency. All nations are seriously challenged as the virus spreads rapidly across the globe with no regard for borders. The primary management of IBD involves treating uncontrolled inflammation with most patients requiring immune-based therapies. However, these therapies may weaken the immune system and potentially place IBD patients at increased risk of infections and infectious complications including those from COVID-19. AIM: To summarise the scale of the COVID-19 pandemic, review unique concerns regarding IBD management and infection risk during the pandemic and assess COVID-19 management options and drug interactions in the IBD population. METHODS: A literature review on IBD, SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 was undertaken and relevant literature was summarised and critically examined. RESULTS: IBD patients do not appear to be more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and there is no evidence of an association between IBD therapies and increased risk of COVID-19. IBD medication adherence should be encouraged to prevent disease flare but where possible high-dose systemic corticosteroids should be avoided. Patients should exercise social distancing, optimise co-morbidities and be up to date with influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. If a patient develops COVID-19, immune suppressing medications should be withheld until infection resolution and if trial medications for COVID-19 are being considered, potential drug interactions should be checked. CONCLUSIONS: IBD patient management presents a challenge in the current COVID-19 pandemic. The primary focus should remain on keeping bowel inflammation controlled and encouraging medication adherence.

Review article: determination of the therapeutic range for therapeutic drug monitoring of adalimumab and infliximab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: Clinical application of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to optimise anti-TNF therapies in patients with IBD depends upon target ranges. AIMS: To review methodology used to determine therapeutic ranges and critically compare and contrast its application to infliximab and adalimumab. METHODS: A systematic review was performed, and relevant literature was summarised and critically examined. RESULTS: Upper limits of the therapeutic range are determined by toxicity, a plateau response and cost. Lower limits are determined by optimal concentration on the target of action in vitro and/or in vivo, or by correlation of drug levels with clinical efficacy using area-under-receiver-operator-curve (AUROC) analysis. In 43 studies, there were huge variations in time at which infliximab and adalimumab levels were measured, the end-points used (clinical remission to mucosal healing), the clinical setting (active disease vs maintenance phase) and the reason for TDM (proactive vs reactive). In the maintenance phase for infliximab, lower trough limits 2.8-5.7 µg/mL are reported depending upon end-points used, with consistent AUROC 0.68-0.77. Adalimumab TDM targets are even less consistent with a lower limit 5.9-11.8 µg/mL (AUROC 0.66-0.83) in some studies, but no cut-off can be identified that is significantly associated with outcome in others, related to inherent pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences, and heterogeneity of study design. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence for exposure-response relationship is stronger for infliximab than adalimumab. Due to heterogeneity in settings for drug level measurements, therapeutic ranges vary. These factors need to be taken into account when interpreting the evidence and extending this to therapeutic strategies for IBD patients.

Turmeric Induced Liver Injury: A Report of Two Cases.

Turmeric is a commonly used oral herbal supplement with purported anti-inflammatory and antineoplastic properties. It is promoted as safe, with limited reports of severe adverse effects directly related to oral turmeric thus far in the literature. Herein we report two cases of turmeric supplement induced severe hepatitis. These cases highlight the need for physicians to be aware of patients taking this common supplement and the potential risks that exist.