Serum antibodies in first-degree relatives of patients with IBD: A marker of disease susceptibility? A follow-up pilot-study after 7 years

Introduction: Various disease-specific serum antibodies were described in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and their yet healthy first-degree relatives. In the latter, serum antibodies are commonly regarded as potential markers of disease susceptibility. The present long-term follow-up study evaluated the fate of antibody-positive first-degree relatives. Patients and Methods: 25 patients with Crohn's disease, 19 patients with ulcerative colitis and 102 first-degree relatives in whom presence of ASCA, pANCA, pancreatic- and goblet-cell antibodies had been assessed were enrolled. The number of incident cases with inflammatory bowel disease was compared between antibody-positive and antibody-negative first-degree relatives 7 years after storage of serum samples. Results: 34 of 102 (33%) first-degree relatives were positive for at least one of the studied serum antibodies. In the group of first-degree relatives, one case of Crohn's disease and one case of ulcerative colitis were diagnosed during the follow-up period. However, both relatives did not display any of the investigated serum antibodies (p = 1). Discussion: The findings of our pilot study argue against a role of serum antibodies as a marker of disease susceptibility in first-degree relatives of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. However, these data have to await confirmation in larger ideally prospective multicenter studies before definite conclusions can be drawn

Serum antibodies in first-degree relatives of patients with IBD: A marker of disease susceptibility? A follow-up pilot-study after 7 years

Introduction: Various disease-specific serum antibodies were described in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and their yet healthy first-degree relatives. In the latter, serum antibodies are commonly regarded as potential markers of disease susceptibility. The present long-term follow-up study evaluated the fate of antibody-positive first-degree relatives. Patients and Methods: 25 patients with Crohn's disease, 19 patients with ulcerative colitis and 102 first-degree relatives in whom presence of ASCA, pANCA, pancreatic- and goblet-cell antibodies had been assessed were enrolled. The number of incident cases with inflammatory bowel disease was compared between antibody-positive and antibody-negative first-degree relatives 7 years after storage of serum samples. Results: 34 of 102 (33%) first-degree relatives were positive for at least one of the studied serum antibodies. In the group of first-degree relatives, one case of Crohn's disease and one case of ulcerative colitis were diagnosed during the follow-up period. However, both relatives did not display any of the investigated serum antibodies (p = 1). Discussion: The findings of our pilot study argue against a role of serum antibodies as a marker of disease susceptibility in first-degree relatives of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. However, these data have to await confirmation in larger ideally prospective multicenter studies before definite conclusions can be drawn

Vedolizumab for the Treatment of Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Active Ulcerative Colitis: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal.

As part of its single technology appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of vedolizumab (Takeda UK) to submit evidence of the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of vedolizumab for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe active ulcerative colitis (UC). The Evidence Review Group (ERG) produced a critical review of the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the technology, based upon the company's submission to NICE. The evidence was derived mainly from GEMINI 1, a Phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study of the induction and maintenance of clinical response and remission by vedolizumab (MLN0002) in patients with moderate-to-severe active UC with an inadequate response to, loss of response to or intolerance of conventional therapy or anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α. The clinical evidence showed that vedolizumab performed significantly better than placebo in both the induction and maintenance phases. In the post hoc subgroup analyses in patients with or without prior anti-TNF-α therapy, vedolizumab performed better then placebo (p value not reported). In addition, a greater improvement in health-related quality of life was observed in patients treated with vedolizumab, and the frequency and types of adverse events were similar in the vedolizumab and placebo groups, but the evidence was limited to short-term follow-up. There were a number of limitations and uncertainties in the clinical evidence base, which warrants caution in its interpretation-in particular, the post hoc subgroup analyses and high dropout rates in the maintenance phase of GEMINI 1. The company also presented a network meta-analysis of vedolizumab versus other biologic therapies indicated for moderate-to-severe UC. However, the ERG considered that the results presented may have underestimated the uncertainty in treatment effects, since fixed-effects models were used, despite clear evidence of heterogeneity among the trials included in the network. Results from the company's economic evaluation (which included price reductions to reflect the proposed patient access scheme for vedolizumab) suggested that vedolizumab is the most effective option compared with surgery and conventional therapy in the following three populations: (1) a mixed intention-to-treat population, including patients who have previously received anti-TNF-α therapy and those who are anti-TNF-α naïve; (2) patients who are anti-TNF-α naïve only; and (3) patients who have previously failed anti-TNF-α therapy only. The ERG concluded that the results of the company's economic evaluation could not be considered robust, because of errors in model implementation, omission of relevant comparators, deviations from the NICE reference case and questionable model assumptions. The ERG amended the company's model and demonstrated that vedolizumab is expected to be dominated by surgery in all three populations

Vedolizumab for Treating Moderately to Severely Active Crohn’s Disease After Prior Therapy: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of its single technology appraisal process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of vedolizumab (Takeda UK) to submit evidence of the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of vedolizumab for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe, active Crohn’s disease. The School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR) at the University of Sheffield was commissioned as the Evidence Review Group (ERG) and produced a critical review of the evidence of the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the technology, based upon the company’s submission to NICE. The GEMINI II and III trials formed the main supporting evidence for the intervention. Both studies were phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trials designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vedolizumab. They included patients who were naïve to tumour necrosis factor alpha antagonist (anti-TNF-α) therapy and patients who had an inadequate response to, loss of response to or intolerance of immunomodulators or anti-TNF-α agents. GEMINI II was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vedolizumab as an induction treatment (dosing at weeks 0 and 2, with assessment at week 6) and maintenance treatment (during weeks 6–52). In contrast, GEMINI III was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vedolizumab as an induction treatment only, with doses at weeks 0, 2 and 6, and assessment at weeks 6 and 10. In the absence of any direct head-to-head, randomised, controlled trials comparing vedolizumab with other relevant biologic therapies (adalimumab and infliximab) for the treatment of moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease, the company conducted a network meta-analysis, which compared vedolizumab, adalimumab, infliximab and placebo for the outcomes of clinical response, enhanced clinical response, clinical remission and discontinuation due to adverse events. The company model estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for vedolizumab compared with the standard of care (consisting of 5-aminosalicylic acids, corticosteroids and immunosuppressants) to be £21,620 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained within the anti-TNF-α-failure population (which included a confidential patient access scheme for vedolizumab). The ICERs were above £30,000 per QALY gained for the mixed intention-to-treat population (including both anti-TNF-α-naïve and anti-TNF-α-failure populations) and in patients who were anti-TNF-α naïve only. The ERG identified a number of limitations that were believed to limit the robustness of the results presented by the company. These limitations could not be addressed by the ERG without major restructuring of the economic model. Therefore, the ERG concluded that the results from the company’s model needed to be interpreted with caution and that it was unclear whether the ICERs would increase or decrease following amendment of the identified structural issues

Mucosal Healing in Ulcerative Colitis: A Comprehensive Review

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease characterized by periods of remission and periods of relapse. Patients often present with symptoms such as rectal bleeding, diarrhea and weight loss, and may require hospitalization and even colectomy. Long-term complications of UC include decreased quality of life and productivity and an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Mucosal healing (MH) has gained progressive importance in the management of UC patients. In this article, we review the endoscopic findings that define both mucosal injury and MH, and the strengths and limitations of the scoring systems currently available in clinical practice. The basic mechanisms behind colonic injury and MH are covered, highlighting the pathways through which different drugs exert their effect towards reducing inflammation and promoting epithelial repair. A comprehensive review of the evidence for approved drugs for UC to achieve and maintain MH is provided, including a section on the pharmacokinetics of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha drugs. Currently approved drugs with proven efficacy in achieving MH in UC include salicylates, corticosteroids (induction only), calcineurin inhibitors (induction only), thiopurines, vedolizumab and anti-TNF alpha drugs (infliximab, adalimumab, and golimumab). MH is of crucial relevance in the outcomes of UC, resulting in lower incidences of clinical relapse, the need for hospitalization and surgery, as well as reduced rates of dysplasia and colorectal cancer. Finally, we present recent evidence towards the need for a more strict definition of complete MH as the preferred endpoint for UC patients, using a combination of both endoscopic and histological findings.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Ustekinumab as Induction and Maintenance Therapy for Crohn’s Disease

BACKGROUND Ustekinumab, a monoclonal antibody to the p40 subunit of interleukin-12 and inter-leukin-23, was evaluated as an intravenous induction therapy in two populations with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease. Ustekinumab was also evaluated as subcutaneous maintenance therapy. METHODS We randomly assigned patients to receive a single intravenous dose of ustekinumab (either 130 mg or approximately 6 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo in two induction trials. The UNITI-1 trial included 741 patients who met the criteria for primary or secondary nonresponse to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists or had unacceptable side effects. The UNITI-2 trial included 628 patients in whom conventional therapy failed or unacceptable side effects occurred. Patients who completed these induction trials then participated in IM-UNITI, in which the 397 patients who had a response to ustekinumab were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous maintenance injections of 90 mg of ustekinumab (either every 8 weeks or every 12 weeks) or placebo. The primary end point for the induction trials was a clinical response at week 6 (defined as a decrease from baseline in the Crohn’s Disease Activity Index [CDAI] score of ≥100 points or a CDAI score <150). The primary end point for the maintenance trial was remission at week 44 (CDAI score <150). RESULTS The rates of response at week 6 among patients receiving intravenous ustekinumab at a dose of either 130 mg or approximately 6 mg per kilogram were significantly higher than the rates among patients receiving placebo (in UNITI-1, 34.3%, 33.7%, and 21.5%, respectively, with P≤0.003 for both comparisons with placebo; in UNITI-2, 51.7%, 55.5%, and 28.7%, respectively, with P<0.001 for both doses). In the groups receiving maintenance doses of ustekinumab every 8 weeks or every 12 weeks, 53.1% and 48.8%, respectively, were in remission at week 44, as compared with 35.9% of those receiving placebo (P = 0.005 and P = 0.04, respectively). Within each trial, adverse-event rates were similar among treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease, those receiving intravenous ustekinumab had a significantly higher rate of response than did those receiving placebo. Subcutaneous ustekinumab maintained remission in patients who had a clinical response to induction therapy. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01369329, NCT01369342, and NCT01369355.

The Impact of Clinical Information on the Assessment of Endoscopic Activity: Characteristics of the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index Of Severity [UCEIS].

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To determine whether clinical information influences endoscopic scoring by central readers using the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity [UCEIS; comprising 'vascular pattern', 'bleeding', 'erosions and ulcers']. METHODS: Forty central readers performed 28 evaluations, including 2 repeats, from a library of 44 video sigmoidoscopies stratified by Mayo Clinic Score. Following training, readers were randomised to scoring with ['unblinded', n = 20, including 4 control videos with misleading information] or without ['blinded', n 20] clinical information. A total of 21 virtual Central Reader Groups [CRGs], of three blinded readers, were created. Agreement criteria were pre-specified. Kappa [κ] statistics quantified intra- and inter-reader variability. RESULTS: Mean UCEIS scores did not differ between blinded and unblinded readers for any of the 40 main videos. UCEIS standard deviations [SD] were similar [median blinded 0.94, unblinded 0.93; p = 0.97]. Correlation between UCEIS and visual analogue scale [VAS] assessment of overall severity was high [r blinded = 0.90, unblinded = 0.93; p = 0.02]. Scores for control videos were similar [UCEIS: p ≥ 0.55; VAS: p ≥ 0.07]. Intra- [κ 0.47-0.74] and inter-reader [κ 0.40-0.53] variability for items and full UCEIS was 'moderate'-to-'substantial', with no significant differences except for intra-reader variability for erosions and ulcers [κ blinded: 0.47 vs unblinded: 0.74; p 0.047]. The SD of CRGs was lower than for individual central readers [0.54 vs 0.95; p < 0.001]. Correlation between blinded UCEIS and patient-reported symptoms was high [stool frequency: 0.76; rectal bleeding: 0.82; both: 0.81]. CONCLUSIONS: The UCEIS is minimally affected by knowledge of clinical details, strongly correlates with patient-reported symptoms, and is a suitable instrument for trials. CRGs performed better than individuals

Combination therapy: the next opportunity and challenge of medicine

From an historical point of view, combination therapy was the basis for the care of important diseases like infection diseases or cancer. Today the "cocktail drug" of the Highly Active Anti Retroviral Therapy (HAART) has reduced the death for HIV infection changing the outcome of such disease. Moreover, the combination of different strategies changed the course of transplants (both in haematology and surgical transplant). Different diseases with high social impact including cardiovascular, metabolic (obesity, hypercholesterolaemia and diabetes) and autoimmune diseases, have better results with combinations of different drug classes of drugs. After recent successes in the immunotherapy field (Sepuleucel-T, ipilimumab) and the new promising small molecule therapies, cancer should be the next challenge for combination strategies