Search

Background and Aims Integrated IBD care is effective but not routinely implemented. Validated methods that simultaneously address mind and body targets such as resilience may improve access and outcomes. We describe the development and implementation of the GRITTTM Method and its impact on resilience, health care resource utilization (HCRU) and opioid use in IBD. Methods Consecutive patients from an academic IBD center were evaluated for low resilience based on provider referral. Low resilience patients were invited to participate in the GRITTTM program. Primary outcome was % reduction in HCU. Secondary outcomes were change in resilience, corticosteroid and opioid use. Patients were allocated into 2 groups for analysis: GRITT Participants (GP) and Non-Participants (NP). Clinical data and HCU in the year prior to enrollment were collected at baseline and 12 months. One-way repeated measures MANCOVA evaluated group X time interactions for the primary outcome. Effect size was calculated for changes in resilience over time. Results Of 456 screened IBD patients 394 were eligible; 184 GP and 210 NP. GP had greater reduction in HCU than NP: 71% reduction in ED visits; 94% reduction in unplanned hospitalizations. There was a 49% reduction in opioid use and 73% reduction in corticosteroid use in GP. Resilience increased by 27.3 points (59%), yielding a large effect size (d=2.4). Conclusion Mind-body care that focuses on building resilience in the context of IBD care may be a novel approach to reduce unplanned health care utilization and opioid use but large, multi-center, randomized, controlled trials are needed.

BACKGROUND: Disability in patients with medically refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) after total proctocolectomy (TPC) with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) is not well understood. The aim of this study was to compare disability in patients with IPAA vs medically managed UC, and identify predictors of disability. METHODS: This was a multi-center cross-sectional study performed at five academic institutions in New York City. Patients with medically or surgically treated UC were recruited. Clinical and socioeconomic data were collected and the inflammatory bowel disease disability index (IBD-DI) was administered to eligible patients. Predictors of moderate-severe disability (IBD-DI≥35) were assessed in univariable and multivariable models. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients with IPAA and 128 patients with medically managed UC completed the IBD-DI. Among patients with IPAA and UC, 35 (37.2%) and 30 (23.4%) had moderate-severe disability, respectively. Patients with IPAA had significantly greater IBD-DI scores compared to patients with medically managed UC (29.8 vs 17.9, p

Background & Aims We aimed to compare safety and effectiveness of vedolizumab to tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-antagonist therapy in ulcerative colitis in routine practice. Methods A multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study (May 2014 to December 2017) of ulcerative colitis patients treated with vedolizumab or TNF-antagonist therapy. Propensity score weighted comparisons for development of serious adverse events and achievement of clinical remission, steroid-free clinical remission, and steroid-free deep remission. A priori determined subgroup comparisons in TNF-antagonist–naive and –exposed patients, and for vedolizumab against infliximab and subcutaneous TNF-antagonists separately. Results A total of 722 (454 vedolizumab, 268 TNF antagonist) patients were included. Vedolizumab-treated patients were more likely to achieve clinical remission (hazard ratio [HR], 1.651; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.229-2.217), steroid-free clinical remission (HR, 1.828; 95% CI, 1.135-2.944), and steroid-free deep remission (HR, 2.819; 95% CI, 1.496-5.310) than those treated with TNF antagonists. Results were consistent across subgroup analyses in TNF-antagonist–naive and −exposed patients, and for vedolizumab vs infliximab and vs subcutaneous TNF-antagonist agents separately. Overall, there were no statistically significant differences in the risk of serious adverse events (HR, 0.899; 95% CI, 0.502-1.612) or serious infections (HR, 1.235; 95% CI, 0.608-2.511) between vedolizumab-treated and TNF-antagonist−treated patients. However, in TNF-antagonist−naive patients, vedolizumab was less likely to be associated with serious adverse events than TNF antagonists (HR, 0.192; 95% CI, 0.049-0.754). Conclusions Treatment of ulcerative colitis with vedolizumab is associated with higher rates of remission than treatment with TNF-antagonist therapy in routine practice, and lower rates of serious adverse events in TNF-antagonist−naive patients.

Approximately 20% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who undergo total proctocolectomy (TPC) with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) develop chronic pouch inflammation (CPI).

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected more than 29 million people and led to more than 542,000 deaths in the United States.1 Older age, comorbidities, and racial and ethnic minority status are associated with severe COVID-19.2 Among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), racial and ethnic minorities have worse outcomes, mediated in part by inequitable health care access.3 Racial and ethnic minority patients with IBD and COVID-19 may be an especially vulnerable population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 outcomes among IBD patients and the impact of non-IBD comorbidities on observed disparities.

Despite improvements in medical management, 10%-15% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) require total proctocolectomy (TPC) with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) for refractory disease.1 Acute pouchitis is the most common post-IPAA inflammatory condition, with cumulative incidence of 45% at 5 years.2 Up to 20%-30% of patients develop chronic pouch inflammation (CPI), categorized as antibiotic responsive, antibiotic refractory, or Crohn's disease-like (CDL).3.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the highly infectious severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents most often with mild clinical symptoms, but the severe forms are of major concern.1 SARS-CoV-2 enters human cells via the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor, expressed on epithelial and endothelial cells.2 Because the highest angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 expression is in the terminal ileum and colon, and up-regulated further during inflammation, and many COVID-19 patients experience gastrointestinal symptoms, longitudinal data are necessary to determine whether inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients are at risk for severe or complicated COVID-19. A recent analysis in IBD patients from the Surveillance Epidemiology of Coronavirus Under Research Exclusion for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SECURE-IBD) registry showed older age, steroid medication, and comorbidities as risk factors for severe evolution, and the same study showed that the 29 IBD patients younger than age 20 had only mild disease courses.3 This report describes the disease course of COVID-19 in an expanded sample of pediatric IBD patients from 2 international databases.

Background & aimsWe created and validated a clinical decision support tool (CDST) to predict outcomes of vedolizumab therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC).MethodsWe performed logistic regression analyses of data from the GEMINI 1 trial, from 620 patients with UC who received vedolizumab induction and maintenance therapy (derivation cohort), to identify factors associated with corticosteroid-free remission (full Mayo score of 2 or less, no subscore above 1). We used these factors to develop a model to predict outcomes of treatment, which we called the vedolizumab CDST. We evaluated the correlation between exposure and efficacy. We validated the CDST in using data from 199 patients treated with vedolizumab in routine practice in the United States from May 2014 through December2017.ResultsAbsence of exposure to a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonist (+3 points), disease duration of 2 y or more (+3 points), baseline endoscopic activity (moderate vs severe) (+2 points), and baseline albumin concentration (+0.65 points per 1 g/L) were independently associated with corticosteroid-free remission during vedolizumab therapy. Patients in the derivation and validation cohorts were assigned to groups of low (CDST score, 26 points or less), intermediate (CDST score, 27-32 points), or high (CDST score, 33 points or more) probability of vedolizumab response. We observed a statistically significant linear relationship between probability group and efficacy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.65), as well as drug exposure (P < .001) in the derivation cohort. In the validation cohort, a cutoff value of 26 points identified patients who did not respond to vedolizumab with high sensitivity (93%); only the low and intermediate probability groups benefited from reducing intervals of vedolizumab administration due to lack of response (P = .02). The vedolizumab CDST did not identify patients with corticosteroid-free remission during TNF antagonist therapy.ConclusionsWe used data from a trial of patients with UC to develop a scoring system, called the CDST, which identified patients most likely to enter corticosteroid-free remission during vedolizumab therapy, but not anti-TNF therapy. We validated the vedolizumab CDST in a separate cohort of patients in clinical practice. The CDST identified patients most likely to benefited from reducing intervals of vedolizumab administration due to lack of initial response. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT00783718.

Background & Aims Little is known about the effects of discontinuing mesalamine therapy for patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) who initiate therapy with an anti–tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent. We analyzed data from 2 national population cohorts to compare outcomes of patients with CD already on mesalamine therapy who started treatment with an anti-TNF agent and then either stopped or continued mesalamine. Methods The primary outcome was any adverse clinical event, defined as a composite of new corticosteroid use or CD-related hospitalization or surgery. We collected data from the Truven MarketScan (IBM, Armonk, NY) health claims database in the United States and the Danish health registers. Our analysis included patients with CD who started anti-TNF therapy after at least 90 days of oral mesalamine therapy. Patients were classified as stopping mesalamine if therapy was discontinued within 90 days of starting anti-TNF. We performed multivariable Cox regression models controlling for demographics, clinical factors, and health care utilization. Adjusted hazard ratios with 95% CIs were calculated, comparing stopping mesalamine with continuing mesalamine. Results A total of 3178 patients with CD were included in our final analysis (2960 in the United States and 218 in Denmark). Stopping mesalamine after initiating anti-TNF therapy was not associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical events in the US cohort (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77–1.03; P = .13) or in the Danish cohort (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.68–1.87; P = .63). Similar results were obtained from sensitivity analyses of concomitant immunomodulator use and duration of mesalamine treatment before initiation of anti-TNF therapy. Conclusions In a retrospective analysis of 2 national databases, we found that stopping mesalamine therapy for patients with CD who were starting anti-TNF therapy did not increase their risk of adverse clinical events. These results should be validated in a prospective study.