ECCO Topical Review on Biological Treatment Cycles in Crohn’s Disease

There are now a growing number of licensed biological therapies for patients with Crohn’s disease. However, there can be significant costs associated with long-term maintenance treatment, as well as some concerns about potential side-effects. As a result, there has been increasing interest in elective biological treatment discontinuation in selected patients, after a sustained period of remission. Following discontinuation, in cases of relapse, evidence to date has suggested that remission may often be regained by re-treatment with the same biological agent. Therefore, a concept has emerged in which cycles of biological therapy might be used. If this treatment strategy were to be applied in a subgroup of patients at low risk of relapse, cycling might allow a substantial number of patients to have a lower, overall therapeutic burden—ensuring decreased exposure to biological therapy but still enabling appropriate disease control.Currently, there remains uncertainty about the benefit–risk balance for using cycles of biological treatment for patients with Crohn’s disease. Accordingly, an expert panel was convened by the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] to review the published literature and agree a series of consensus practice points. The panel aimed to provide evidence-based guidance on multiple aspects of biological treatment discontinuation and cycling, including the risk of relapse after elective treatment discontinuation, predictors of probable relapse or remission, safety, patient preferences, and pharmacoeconomic aspects. Crucially, discussions about biological treatment discontinuation and cycling should be individualized, to enable shared decision-making by patients with their clinicians

The PROPER Study; A 48-week, pan-European, real-world study of biosimilar SB5 following transition from reference adalimumab in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease

Background: The non-interventional PROPER study generated real-world evidence on clinical outcomes following transition in routine practice from reference adalimumab to the EMA-approved SB5 biosimilar adalimumab in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease. Methods: Adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), Crohn’s disease (CD), or ulcerative colitis (UC) were enrolled at 63 sites across Europe. Eligible patients received ≥ 16 weeks of routine treatment with reference adalimumab before transitioning to SB5, and were followed for 48 weeks post-transition. The primary objective was to evaluate candidate predictors (clinically relevant baseline variables with incidence ≥ 15% by indication cohort) associated with persistence on SB5 at 48 weeks post-initiation. Key primary outcome measures were persistence on SB5 (estimated by Kaplan–Meier methodology) and clinical characteristics and disease activity scores at the time of transition to SB5 treatment (baseline). Results: A total of 955 eligible patients were enrolled (RA, n = 207; axSpA, n = 127; PsA, n = 162; CD, n = 447; UC, n = 12), of whom 932 (97.6%) completed follow-up and 722 (75.6%) were still receiving SB5 at week 48. Kaplan–Meier estimates (95% confidence interval, CI) of persistence on SB5 at week 48 for RA, axSpA, PsA, and CD were 0.86 (0.80–0.90), 0.80 (0.71–0.86), 0.81 (0.74–0.86), and 0.72 (0.67–0.76), respectively. The single candidate predictor associated with probability of SB5 discontinuation before week 48 was female sex [RA, axSpA, and CD cohorts; HR (95% CI): 3.53 (1.07–11.67), 2.38 (1.11–5.14), and 2.21 (1.54–3.18), respectively]. Disease activity scores remained largely unchanged throughout the study, with proportions by cohort in remission at baseline versus week 48 being 59.2% versus 57.2%, 81.0% versus 78.0%, 94.7% versus 93.7%, and 84.0% versus 85.1% for patients with RA, axSpA, PsA, and CD, respectively. Similarly, the SB5 dosing regimen remained unchanged for the majority of patients from baseline to week 48, the most common regimen being 40 mg every 2 weeks. In total, 232 patients (24.3%) reported at least one adverse drug reaction, and most events were mild; eight patients (3.9%) in the RA cohort experienced nine serious adverse events (SAEs; two possibly related to SB5); eight patients (4.9%) in the PsA cohort experienced nine SAEs (one possibly related to SB5); 22 patients (4.9%) in the CD cohort experienced 27 SAEs (four possibly related to SB5); and no SAEs were observed in the UC cohort. Conclusions: With the exception of female sex in RA, axSpA, and CD, none of the candidate predictors were associated with SB5 discontinuation. Persistence on SB5 was high, treatment effectiveness was maintained, and no safety signals were detected. Trial Registration: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04089514

Effectiveness of third-class biologic treatment in crohn’s disease : A multi-center retrospective cohort study

Publisher Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.Background: Multiple studies have described the effectiveness of ustekinumab (UST) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) failing anti-Tumor necrosis factors (TNFs); however, the effectiveness of VDZ or UST as a third-class biologic has not yet been described. Aims and Methods: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of VDZ and UST as a third-class biologic in patients with CD. Results: Two-hundred and four patients were included; 156/204 (76%) patients received VDZ as a second-and UST as a third-class therapy (group A); the remaining 48/204 (24%) patients received UST as a second-and VDZ as a third-class therapy (group B). At week 16–22, 87/156 (55.5%) patients and 27/48 (56.2%) in groups A and B, respectively, responded to treatment (p = 0.9); 41/156 (26.2%) and 15/48 (31.2%) were in clinical remission (p = 0.5). At week 52; 89/103 (86%) patients and 25/29 (86.2%) of the patients with available data had responded to third-class treatment in groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.9); 31/103 (30%) and 47/29 (24.1%) were in clinical remission (p = 0.5). Conclusion: Third-class biological therapy was effective in more than half of the patients with CD. No differences in effectiveness were detected between the use of VDZ and UST as a third-class agent.Peer reviewe

Introduction of Subcutaneous Infliximab CT-P13 and Vedolizumab in Clinical Practice: A Multi-Stakeholder Position Statement Highlighting the Need for Post-Marketing Studies

Abstract Background and Aims Although subcutaneous formulations of infliximab CT-P13 and vedolizumab are registered for treating moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease [IBD], many questions on their use remain unanswered. We set up a multi-stakeholder initiative resulting in a position statement. Methods Based on publicly available data, statements on subcutaneous infliximab and vedolizumab were developed and reviewed by 45 Belgian IBD physicians in a three-round modified Delphi process. During a consensus meeting, input from 16 IBD patients, nine IBD nurses and two clinical pharmacologists was provided and statements were further discussed, modified and scored. Statements achieving agreement by at least 70% of the IBD physicians were accepted. Results The Delphi process resulted in 79 agreed statements. In patients initiating intravenous therapy, IBD physicians would only consider switching to subcutaneous formulations in patients achieving both clinical and biological response [for Crohn’s disease] or both clinical and endoscopic response [for ulcerative colitis]. For patients under maintenance therapy, switching to subcutaneous formulations was only considered in those achieving both clinical and endoscopic response while receiving standard dosing of infliximab or vedolizumab. While awaiting more scientific data, IBD physicians should consider weekly subcutaneous injections or switching back to an intravenous formulation in case of loss of response. Finally, switching to a subcutaneous formulation should always be a shared decision. Conclusions All stakeholders welcomed subcutaneous infliximab and vedolizumab. However, more scientific data are needed to select the right patients and timing for switching to these newer formulations, and to explore the optimal strategy in case of loss of response.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Prognostic value of histological activity in patients with ulcerative colitis in deep remission: A prospective multicenter study

Background: Histological remission has been proposed as a new treatment goal in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) although no universal definition for microscopic activity exists. Aim: We evaluated the accuracy of histological activity to predict clinical relapse in UC patients with both clinical and endoscopic remission. Methods: Asymptomatic UC patients in endoscopic remission (Mayo endoscopic sub-score 0 or 1) undergoing surveillance colonoscopy in two referral hospitals were prospectively recruited. All colonic biopsies were analyzed according to the Geboes' score (GS) and the presence of basal plasmacytosis (BP). Results: Ninety-six patients were included (38% women, median (interquartile range) age 50.0 (39.0-58.5) years, median disease duration 12.0 (6.5-19.5) years). Histological activity defined as GS ≥ 2B.1, GS ≥ 3.1, or BP was present in, respectively, 26%, 23% and 12%. Within 12 months from index endoscopy, 23% of the patients presented with clinical relapse. In multivariate analysis, active histological disease was the only risk factor predicting clinical relapse (odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 4.29 (1.55-11.87); p = 0.005 for GS ≥ 2B.1 and 4.31 (1.52-12.21); p = 0.006 for GS ≥ 3.1). Conclusions: In patients with UC in clinical and endoscopic remission, histological activity is an independent risk factor for clinical relapse. Further prospective studies need to clarify whether treatment optimization is justified in this context.status: publishe

The PROPER Study: A 48-Week, Pan-European, Real-World Study of Biosimilar SB5 Following Transition from Reference Adalimumab in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease.

Acknowledgements: The authors are grateful to all patients who took part in this study. Statistical services were provided by FGK Clinical Research GmbH (Munich, Germany) and data management services were provided by Worldwide Clinical Trial (Research Triangle Park, NC, USA). The authors acknowledge Teju Chaugule, of Biogen Netherlands BV, who provided technical input and critically reviewed draft versions of this manuscript. Medical writing assistance was provided by Jacqueline Kolston, PhD and Simon Rhead, PhD, Parexel International, and was funded by Biogen International GmbH. Deepak Jadon acknowledges that his research was supported by Cambridge Arthritis Research Endeavour (CARE) and the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014).Funder: Biogen International GmbHFunder: Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen (3114)BACKGROUND: The non-interventional PROPER study generated real-world evidence on clinical outcomes following transition in routine practice from reference adalimumab to the EMA-approved SB5 biosimilar adalimumab in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease. METHODS: Adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), Crohn's disease (CD), or ulcerative colitis (UC) were enrolled at 63 sites across Europe. Eligible patients received ≥ 16 weeks of routine treatment with reference adalimumab before transitioning to SB5, and were followed for 48 weeks post-transition. The primary objective was to evaluate candidate predictors (clinically relevant baseline variables with incidence ≥ 15% by indication cohort) associated with persistence on SB5 at 48 weeks post-initiation. Key primary outcome measures were persistence on SB5 (estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology) and clinical characteristics and disease activity scores at the time of transition to SB5 treatment (baseline). RESULTS: A total of 955 eligible patients were enrolled (RA, n = 207; axSpA, n = 127; PsA, n = 162; CD, n = 447; UC, n = 12), of whom 932 (97.6%) completed follow-up and 722 (75.6%) were still receiving SB5 at week 48. Kaplan-Meier estimates (95% confidence interval, CI) of persistence on SB5 at week 48 for RA, axSpA, PsA, and CD were 0.86 (0.80-0.90), 0.80 (0.71-0.86), 0.81 (0.74-0.86), and 0.72 (0.67-0.76), respectively. The single candidate predictor associated with probability of SB5 discontinuation before week 48 was female sex [RA, axSpA, and CD cohorts; HR (95% CI): 3.53 (1.07-11.67), 2.38 (1.11-5.14), and 2.21 (1.54-3.18), respectively]. Disease activity scores remained largely unchanged throughout the study, with proportions by cohort in remission at baseline versus week 48 being 59.2% versus 57.2%, 81.0% versus 78.0%, 94.7% versus 93.7%, and 84.0% versus 85.1% for patients with RA, axSpA, PsA, and CD, respectively. Similarly, the SB5 dosing regimen remained unchanged for the majority of patients from baseline to week 48, the most common regimen being 40 mg every 2 weeks. In total, 232 patients (24.3%) reported at least one adverse drug reaction, and most events were mild; eight patients (3.9%) in the RA cohort experienced nine serious adverse events (SAEs; two possibly related to SB5); eight patients (4.9%) in the PsA cohort experienced nine SAEs (one possibly related to SB5); 22 patients (4.9%) in the CD cohort experienced 27 SAEs (four possibly related to SB5); and no SAEs were observed in the UC cohort. CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of female sex in RA, axSpA, and CD, none of the candidate predictors were associated with SB5 discontinuation. Persistence on SB5 was high, treatment effectiveness was maintained, and no safety signals were detected. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04089514

The impact of vedolizumab and ustekinumab on articular extra-intestinal manifestations in inflammatory bowel disease patients : a real-life multicentre cohort study

Background and aims: Extra-intestinal manifestations are frequently reported in inflammatory bowel diseases. However, data comparing the effect of vedolizumab and ustekinumab on articular extra-intestinal manifestations are limited. The aim was to evaluate differences in new onset and evolution of pre-existing joint extra-intestinal manifestations during both treatments. Methods: An international multicentric retrospective study was performed on inflammatory bowel disease patients who started vedolizumab or ustekinumab between May 2010 and December 2020. Extra-intestinal manifestations were assessed at baseline and joint extraintestinal manifestations were evaluated throughout the 2-year follow-up. Arthropathy was defined by joint inflammation (arthritis/sacroiliitis), diagnosed by a rheumatologist, and arthralgia as articular pain without confirmed inflammation. Additionally, skin, ocular and hepatic extra-intestinal manifestations were assessed at baseline. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: In total 911 patients (vedolizumab:584; ustekinumab:327) were included. Deterioration of pre-existing arthropathy and rate of new onset arthropathy were not significantly associated with vedolizumab over ustekinumab. Arthropathy was reason to stop treatment in 6 vedolizumab and 2 ustekinumab patients. The odds of developing new arthralgia within 6 months was higher in patients who took vedolizumab compared to ustekinumab (aOR: 2.28 [1.01-5.15], p=0.047). However, this effect was not sustained during the 2-year follow-up (aOR: 1.35 [0.80-2.29], p=0.259). Deterioration of pre-existing arthralgia was comparable between ustekinumab and vedolizumab treated patients. In 2 vedolizumab-treated patients arthralgia was reason to stop treatment. Conclusions: Vedolizumab and ustekinumab can be used safely in patients with articular extra-intestinal manifestations. Only a temporary increased risk for developing arthralgia has been observed under vedolizumab. Keywords: biologicals; inflammatory bowel disease; spondyloarthropathy