Cardiovascular risk profiles in patients with inflammatory bowel disease differ from matched controls from the general population

AIMS: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). We compared cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors and 10-year risk in IBD patients to the general population. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this cross-sectional study, consecutive IBD patients ≥45 years were included. History of ASCVD and CVD risk factors (smoking, hypertension, overweight, hypercholesterolaemia, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome) were assessed. The Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE2) algorithm was used to estimate 10-year CVD risk. One to four age/sex-matched controls were derived from the prospective population-based Rotterdam Study cohort. In total, 235 IBD patients were included {56% women, median age 59 years [interquartile range (IQR) 51-66]} and matched to 829 controls [56% women, median age 61 years (IQR 56-67)]. Inflammatory bowel disease patients experienced ASCVD events more often compared with matched controls [odds ratio (OR) 2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-3.27], specifically heart failure (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.02-4.01) and coronary heart disease (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.7-3.13). Inflammatory bowel disease patients showed lower odds of overweight (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.35-0.66) and hypercholesterolaemia (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31-0.65) and higher odds of hypertension (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.19-2.32), as well as higher waist circumference (+4 cm, P = 0.006) and triglyceride levels (+0.6 mmol/L, P &lt; 0.001) as compared with controls. Mean 10-year CVD risk was 4.0% [standard deviation (SD) ±2.6] in 135 IBD patients vs. 6.0% (SD ±1.6) in 506 controls. CONCLUSION: The increased CVD risk in IBD is discrepant with the 10-year CVD risk estimate. Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation may underestimate CVD risk in IBD patients due to differing CVD risk profiles compared with the general population, including a lower prevalence of hypercholesterolaemia and overweight and a higher prevalence of hypertension, abdominal obesity, and hypertriglyceridaemia.</p

Lipid Changes After Induction Therapy in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Effect of Different Drug Classes and Inflammation

BACKGROUND: Dyslipidemia may be an important modifiable risk factor contributing to the increased cardiovascular risk in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The lipid metabolism is subject to both systemic inflammation and drug therapy; however, it is unclear if this effect is drug-class dependent. Our aim was to assess lipid changes after IBD induction therapy and evaluate associated factors with a particular focus on drug class and disease activity. METHODS: In this prospective study, consecutive IBD patients starting systemic therapy (eg, corticosteroids, thiopurines, methotrexate, anti-TNF-α agents, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib) were included. Primary outcomes were changes in total cholesterol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c), and triglycerides at week 10. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-eight IBD patients (107 women [54%], median age 36 years; interquartile range [IQR], 27-47) were included: 137 Crohn's disease (67%), 61 ulcerative colitis (29%), and 8 IBD-unclassified (4%). Median C-reactive protein and fecal calprotectin at baseline were 5.1 mg/L (IQR, 1.6-12.0) and 1040 ug/g (IQR, 383-1800), respectively. Relative increases in total cholesterol, HDL-c, and LDL-c were significant after prednisone (+26%, +31%, +12%) and tofacitinib therapy (+20%, +25%, +26%), respectively. Results remained after adjusting for concomitant corticosteroids, cholestyramine, and PSC diagnosis. Changes in clinical scores were inversely correlated with total cholesterol changes (R -186, P = .014), as was CRP with total cholesterol and LDL-c (R -0.292 and R -0.259, P < .001). No correlation was found with FCP. Lipid changes remained after adjusting for age and CRP. CONCLUSIONS: Prednisone and tofacitinib induction therapy significantly increase serum lipid levels, whereas no changes were observed in other drug classes. The observations seem drug-specific inasmuch as adjustment for systemic inflammation did not alter the results