Prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease among coeliac disease patients in a Hungarian coeliac centre

BACKGROUND: Celiac disease, Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis are inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal tract with some common genetic, immunological and environmental factors involved in their pathogenesis. Several research shown that patients with celiac disease have increased risk of developing inflammatory bowel disease when compared with that of the general population. The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease in our celiac patient cohort over a 15-year-long study period. METHODS: To diagnose celiac disease, serological tests were used, and duodenal biopsy samples were taken to determine the degree of mucosal injury. To set up the diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease, clinical parameters, imaging techniques, colonoscopy histology were applied. DEXA for measuring bone mineral density was performed on every patient. RESULTS: In our material, 8/245 (3,2 %) coeliac disease patients presented inflammatory bowel disease (four males, mean age 37, range 22-67), 6/8 Crohn's disease, and 2/8 ulcerative colitis. In 7/8 patients the diagnosis of coeliac disease was made first and inflammatory bowel disease was identified during follow-up. The average time period during the set-up of the two diagnosis was 10,7 years. Coeliac disease serology was positive in all cases. The distribution of histology results according to Marsh classification: 1/8 M1, 2/8 M2, 3/8 M3a, 2/8 M3b. The distribution according to the Montreal classification: 4/6 Crohn's disease patients are B1, 2/6 Crohn's disease patients are B2, 2/2 ulcerative colitis patients are S2. Normal bone mineral density was detected in 2/8 case, osteopenia in 4/8 and osteoporosis in 2/8 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Within our cohort of patients with coeliac disease, inflammatory bowel disease was significantly more common (3,2 %) than in the general population

Physician perspectives on unresolved issues in the use of conventional therapy in Crohn's disease: results from an international survey and discussion programme.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data on the optimal use of conventional therapies in Crohn's disease are lacking in guidelines. An educational programme was established to explore questions raised in clinical practice and to provide practical answers. METHODS: Telephone interviews with 96 gastroenterologists and a web survey of 1370 gastroenterologists identified 26 key questions. Ten questions were taken forward to the next stage based on the opinion of an International Steering Committee. Draft answers to the questions were prepared from available evidence following a literature search. The draft answers were debated in national meetings of participating countries (n=36) and voted on using a standard scoring system. Revised answers went forward to an international meeting and were debated and voted on using the same methodology. Final answers were developed, based on evidence and clinical experience of the participants. RESULTS: Evidence on corticosteroid and immunomodulator use such as dosage, timing and duration, choice of drug or regimen, and safety is scarce. Key points of the answers included the importance of: identifying patients with poor prognosis; early intervention with optimal doses of immunomodulators; avoiding prolonged or repetitive corticosteroid therapy; achieving corticosteroid-free remission; achieving a balance between clinical benefit and safety when intensifying or prolonging therapy or combining different agents; re-evaluating therapy at appropriate time points; and considering the role of biomarkers and mucosal healing. CONCLUSIONS: The answers to 10 key questions were based on available evidence and clinical experience of programme participants. It is hoped they will be of practical use in everyday gastroenterology practice

Vitamin D in health and disease: Current perspectives

Despite the numerous reports of the association of vitamin D with a spectrum of development, disease treatment and health maintenance, vitamin D deficiency is common. Originating in part from the diet but with a key source resulting from transformation by exposure to sunshine, a great deal of the population suffers from vitamin D deficiency especially during winter months. It is linked to the treatment and pathogenesis and/or progression of several disorders including cancer, hypertension, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, muscle weakness and diabetes. This widespread deficiency of Vitamin D merits consideration of widespread policies including increasing awareness among the public and healthcare professionals

Efficacy of Upadacitinib in a Randomized Trial of Patients With Active Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS We evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, an oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase 1, as induction therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS We performed a multicenter, double-blind, phase 2b study of 250 adults with moderately to severely active UC and an inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to corticosteroids, immunosuppressive agents, and/or biologic therapies. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that received placebo or induction therapy with upadacitinib (7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg, or 45 mg, extended release), once daily for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects who achieve clinical remission according to the Adapted Mayo score at week 8. No multiplicity adjustments were applied. RESULTS At week 8, 8.5%, 14.3%, 13.5%, and 19.6% of patients receiving 7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg, or 45 mg upadacitinib, respectively, achieved clinical remission compared with none of the patients receiving placebo (P = .052, P = .013, P = .011, and P = .002, compared with placebo, respectively). Endoscopic improvement at week 8, defined as endoscopic subscore ≤ 1, was achieved in 14.9%, 30.6%, 26.9%, and 35.7% of patients receiving upadacitinib 7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg, or 45 mg, respectively compared with 2.2% receiving placebo (P = .033, P < .001, P < .001, P < .001, compared with placebo, respectively). One event of herpes zoster and 1 subject with pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis (diagnosed 26 days after treatment discontinuation) were reported in the group that received upadacitinib 45 mg once daily. Increases in serum lipid levels and creatine phosphokinase with upadacitinib were observed. CONCLUSION In a phase 2b trial, 8 weeks treatment with upadacitinib was more effective than placebo for inducing remission in patients with moderately to severely active UC. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02819635

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