HLA-DQA1-HLA-DRB1 polymorphism is a major predictor of azathioprine-induced pancreatitis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Background: Azathioprine (AZA)-induced pancreatitis is an unpredictable and dose-independent adverse event affecting 2%-7% of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients treated with AZA. There are no tools in clinical practice to identify at-risk individuals; however, a genome wide association study (GWAS) identified a strong association between the Class II HLA gene region polymorphism (rs2647087) and thiopurine-induced pancreatitis. Aim: To independently confirm the findings of the GWAS in an IBD cohort, to evaluate its utility in clinical practice and to offer a novel AZA treatment algorithm for IBD based on pharmacogenomic principles. Methods: A retrospective cohort study evaluated 373 AZA-exposed IBD patients from a tertiary care academic centre in London, Canada. Due to the limited number of patients taking mercaptopurine (MP), such patients were not included this cohort. All subjects underwent screening for the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs2647087 mapped to the HLA-DQA1*02:01-HLA-DRB1*07:01 haplotype and were sub-divided based on the presence (n = 13) or absence (n = 360) of an AZA-induced pancreatitis diagnosis. The risk of AZA-induced pancreatitis was assessed based on rs2647087 genotype. Results: The risk of pancreatitis during AZA-therapy was highly predictable and genotype dependent: 0.53% for wild type (A/A), 4.25% (OR = 4.19, 95% CI 1.02-36.45, P = 0.044) for heterozygous (A/C), and 14.63% (OR = 15.83, 95% CI 3.80-145.26, P = 0.0001) for homozygous variant (C/C) patients. Conclusions: The class II HLA region (at rs2647087) is an important marker of AZA-induced pancreatitis risk. We propose a simple and clinically implementable algorithm based on rs2647087 and TPMT genotypes for AZA selection and dosing for patients with IBD

Pharmacokinetic profiles for oral and subcutaneous methotrexate in patients with Crohn\u27s disease

Background Methotrexate (MTX) is administered subcutaneously to Crohn\u27s Disease (CD) patients. There are very few studies evaluating the use of oral (PO) MTX in CD. A drug and its pharmaceutical alternative are equivalent (bioequivalence) when the bioavailability of the alternative falls within 80-125% of the bioavailability of the standard (US Food and Drug Administration - FDA). Aim To compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of PO and subcutaneous (SC) MTX in CD patients to determine the bioequivalence of these two routes. Methods Eleven patients received a PO and an SC MTX dose (25 mg) separated by one week over a two-week interval. Blood samples were collected at specified times over a 24-h period for each patient on two separate days. MTX plasma levels were obtained using sensitive mass spectrometry. Areas under the curve (AUC) were compared between the two routes. Results The mean AUC values were 3375 ng/mL × h (PO MTX) and 3985 ng/mL × h (SC MTX). The mean AUC ratio (PO/SC) was 0.86 (0.62-1.08). This correlates with a relative PO bioavailability of 86% in comparison to SC. The 90% confidence interval for the mean AUC (PO/SC) ratio is (0.785, 0.929). There were no adverse events. Conclusions The mean MTX AUC (PO/SC) in these patients falls outside the 90% confidence interval for the bioequivalence limit. SC MTX is more bioavailable than PO MTX; however, the mean relative MTX bioavailability (PO/SC) nearly met the FDA bioequivalence standard and PO MTX could be proposed in responders who would prefer this route. © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Pretreatment HLADQA1-HLADRB1 Testing for the Prevention of Azathioprine-Induced Pancreatitis in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Prospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION:Azathioprine-induced pancreatitis is an idiosyncratic and unpredictable response, occurring in up to 7% of azathioprine-exposed patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The haplotype HLADQA1-HLADRB1*07:01A\u3eC is strongly associated with azathioprine-induced pancreatitis in IBD. We aimed to evaluate whether pretreatment HLADQA1-HLADRB1*07:01A\u3eC screening will reduce the risk of azathioprine-induced pancreatitis.METHODS:Participants with IBD were screened for HLADQA1-HLADRB1*07:01A\u3eC, and participants with a variant genotype were excluded from azathioprine treatment. Wild-type participants were started on azathioprine and followed for 3 months. The incidence of pancreatitis was compared with unscreened historical controls.RESULTS:HLADQA1-HLADRB1*07:01A\u3eC screening resulted in an 11-fold reduction in the incidence of azathioprine-induced pancreatitis (n = 1/328 or 0.30% vs n = 13/373 or 3.4%). In propensity score-matched cohorts (age and sex), HLA DQA1-HLADRB1*07:01A\u3eC screening was significantly associated with a reduction in the incidence of AZA-induced pancreatitis independent of weight, glucocorticoid exposure, and smoking status (adjusted odds ratio = 0.075, 95% confidence interval = 0.01-0.58, P = 0.01). Up to 45% (n = 271/599) of participants were excluded from azathioprine therapy based on the haplotype in the HLADQA1-HLADRB1*07:01A\u3eC-screened cohort.DISCUSSION:HLADQA1-HLADRB1*07:01A\u3eC screening reduced the risk of azathioprine-induced pancreatitis; however, using this strategy to guide the use of azathioprine therapy in IBD may eliminate a large proportion of patients from being eligible for treatment with azathioprine. In regions where there is access to other IBD therapies, and given the short-term and long-term toxicities associated with azathioprine, HLADQA1-HLADRB1*07:01A\u3eC-screening may be a clinically relevant strategy for enhancing the safe use of azathioprine in IBD. In addition, cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to further solidify the utility of HLADQA1-HLADRB1*07:01A\u3eC screening in IBD populations

Efficacy of argon plasma coagulation compared with topical formalin application for chronic radiation proctopathy

BACKGROUND: Chronic radiation proctopathy (CRP) is a troublesome complication of radiotherapy to the pelvis for which current treatment modalities are suboptimal. Currently, the application of formalin to the rectal mucosa (AFR) and thermal ablation with argon plasma coagulation (APC) are the most promising options

Etrolizumab versus infliximab for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (GARDENIA): a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3 study

Background: Etrolizumab is a gut-targeted anti-β7 integrin monoclonal antibody. In a previous phase 2 induction study, etrolizumab significantly improved clinical remission versus placebo in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of etrolizumab with infliximab in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. Methods: We conducted a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, phase 3 study (GARDENIA) across 114 treatment centres worldwide. We included adults (age 18–80 years) with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (Mayo Clinic total score [MCS] of 6–12 with an endoscopic subscore of ≥2, a rectal bleeding subscore of ≥1, and a stool frequency subscore of ≥1) who were naive to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Patients were required to have had an established diagnosis of ulcerative colitis for at least 3 months, corroborated by both clinical and endoscopic evidence, and evidence of disease extending at least 20 cm from the anal verge. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive subcutaneous etrolizumab 105 mg once every 4 weeks or intravenous infliximab 5 mg/kg at 0, 2, and 6 weeks and every 8 weeks thereafter for 52 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by baseline concomitant treatment with corticosteroids, concomitant treatment with immunosuppressants, and baseline disease activity. All participants and study site personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who had both clinical response at week 10 (MCS ≥3-point decrease and ≥30% reduction from baseline, plus ≥1-point decrease in rectal bleeding subscore or absolute rectal bleeding score of 0 or 1) and clinical remission at week 54 (MCS ≤2, with individual subscores ≤1); efficacy was analysed using a modified intention-to-treat population (all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug). GARDENIA was designed to show superiority of etrolizumab over infliximab for the primary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02136069, and is now closed to recruitment. Findings: Between Dec 24, 2014, and June 23, 2020, 730 patients were screened for eligibility and 397 were enrolled and randomly assigned to etrolizumab (n=199) or infliximab (n=198). 95 (48%) patients in the etrolizumab group and 103 (52%) in the infliximab group completed the study through week 54. At week 54, 37 (18·6%) of 199 patients in the etrolizumab group and 39 (19·7%) of 198 in the infliximab group met the primary endpoint (adjusted treatment difference –0·9% [95% CI –8·7 to 6·8]; p=0·81). The number of patients reporting one or more adverse events was similar between treatment groups (154 [77%] of 199 in the etrolizumab group and 151 [76%] of 198 in the infliximab group); the most common adverse event in both groups was ulcerative colitis (55 [28%] patients in the etrolizumab group and 43 [22%] in the infliximab group). More patients in the etrolizumab group reported serious adverse events (including serious infections) than did those in the infliximab group (32 [16%] vs 20 [10%]); the most common serious adverse event was ulcerative colitis (12 [6%] and 11 [6%]). There was one death during follow-up, in the infliximab group due to a pulmonary embolism, which was not considered to be related to study treatment. Interpretation: To our knowledge, this trial is the first phase 3 maintenance study in moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis to use infliximab as an active comparator. Although the study did not show statistical superiority for the primary endpoint, etrolizumab performed similarly to infliximab from a clinical viewpoint. Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche