Search

Disease-modifying therapies for relapsing multiple sclerosis reduce relapse rates by suppressing peripheral immune cells but have limited efficacy in progressive forms of the disease where cells in the central nervous system play a critical role. To our knowledge, alemtuzumab, fumarates (dimethyl, diroximel, and monomethyl), glatiramer acetates, interferons, mitoxantrone, natalizumab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, and teriflunomide are either limited to the periphery or insufficiently studied to confirm direct central nervous system effects in participants with multiple sclerosis. In contrast, cladribine and sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulators (fingolimod, ozanimod, ponesimod, and siponimod) are central nervous system-penetrant and could have beneficial direct central nervous system properties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cardiovascular and thromboembolic risks are increasing in the population as a whole and therefore also in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Obesity is a worldwide challenge also affecting the IBD population, and a causal association with Crohn's disease may exist. IBD itself, particularly when active, is also associated with a significant risk of thromboembolic and cardiovascular events such as myocardial infarction and stroke. Cardiovascular risk is also a significant consideration when using Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and sphingosine 1 phosphate (S1P) receptor modulators to treat IBD. JAK inhibitors – such as tofacitinib – are associated with several cardiovascular and venous thromboembolic risks, including hypertension and alterations in lipid profiles – specifically, increased LDL cholesterol and triglycerides – which may contribute to atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. S1P receptor modulators pose a slightly different set of cardiovascular risks. Initially, these drugs can cause transient bradycardia and atrioventricular (AV) block, leading to bradycardia. Moreover, they may induce QT interval prolongation, which increases the risk of life‐threatening arrhythmias such as torsades de pointes. Some patients may also experience hypertension as a side effect. In this context, IBD healthcare providers need to be alert to the assessment of cardiovascular risk – particularly as cardiovascular events appear to be confined to specific patient groups with pre‐existing risk factors. In addition, the potential for S1P modulator drug interactions requires a higher level of vigilance in patients with polypharmacy compared to biologics. Cardiovascular risk is not static, and updated assessment will need to become part of the routine in many IBD units. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Wiener Klinisches Magazin is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Die Gastroenterologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)