Search

Background: Upadacitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor, which has recently been approved for treating Crohn's disease. There are limited real-world studies on the outcomes of upadacitinib in Crohn's disease., Objective: Our aim was to evaluate the outcomes of upadacitinib in a real-world Crohn's disease cohort., Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multicentre, cohort study over a 2-year period across National Health Service (NHS) Lothian and Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust. The primary outcome was treatment persistence at week 24. Secondary endpoints were corticosteroid-free clinical remission (Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI)<5) and biomarker remission (C-reactive protein (CRP)≤5 mg/L and faecal calprotectin (FCAL)<250 µg/g) at 12, 24 and 52 weeks. We recorded adverse events., Results: 135 patients commenced upadacitinib as of the 1 January 2024, of which 93 patients with active Crohn's disease were included with a minimum of 12 weeks follow-up. The median follow-up time was 25 weeks (IQR 15-42 weeks). 82% of the cohort had exposure to at least two classes of advanced therapies, and 52% had exposure to at least three classes of advanced therapies. Treatment persistence was 87.1% at week 12, 81.7% at week 24 and 62.8% at week 52. Rates of clinical remission were 64% (42/66), 48% (22/46) and 38% (8/21) at weeks 12, 24 and 52, respectively. Significant reductions in HBI, CRP and FCAL were observed during follow-up. 14% (13/91) had a hospitalisation due to Crohn's disease. Adverse events occurred in 40% (37/93) of the cohort, of which 12% (11/93) were serious., Conclusion: Upadacitinib was effective in a real-world, highly refractory, Crohn's disease cohort with good persistence., Competing Interests: Competing interests: BG has served as consultant to Galapagos and Abbvie and as speaker for Abbvie, Janssen, Takeda, Pfizer and Galapagos. NP has served as a speaker for Janssen, Takeda and Pfizer. JG has received grants from F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG, grants from Biogen, grants from Celltrion Healthcare, grants from Galapagos NV, nonfinancial support from Immundiagnostik, outside the submitted work. NAK has acted as a consultant to Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Falk, Janssen, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Galapagos, Takeda and Tillotts, received speaking fees from Amgen, Celltrion, Falk, Janssen, Pharmacosmos, Galapagos, Takeda and Tillotts and travel support from AbbVie, Falk, Janssen and Pharmacosmos. His institution has received grants from AbbVie, Biogen, Celgene, Celltrion, Galapagos, MSD, Napp, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Roche and Takeda. TA reports grants and non-financial support from F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG, grants from Biogen, grants from Celltrion Healthcare, grants from Galapagos NV, non-financial support from Immundiagnostik, personal fees from Biogen, grants and personal fees from Celltrion Healthcare, personal fees and nonfinancial support from Immundiagnostik, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from ARENA, personal fees from Gilead, personal fees from Adcock Ingram Healthcare, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Genentech, nonfinancial support from Tillotts, outside the submitted work. CWL has acted as a consultant to Abbvie, Janssen, Takeda, Pfizer, Galapagos, Bristol Myers Squibb, B.I., Sandoz, Novartis, GSK, Gilead, ViforPharma, Dr Falk and Iterative Health; he has received speaking fees and travel support from Pfizer, Janssen, Abbvie, Galapagos, MSD, Takeda, Shire, Ferring, Hospira and Dr Falk., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Since publication of the top 10 research priorities in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) based on the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership, the question remains whether this has influenced the IBD-research landscape. This study aimed to create an overview of the current distribution of research interests of trials in the UK., Methods: The ClinicalTrials.gov database and European Union Clinical Trials Register were screened for clinical trials set up from 9 August 2016 to 16 November 2019 in the UK involving adult patients with IBD., Results: Of 20 non-industry-sponsored studies, a quarter investigated treatment strategies considering efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness (priority 1). Four evaluated the role of diet (priorities 3 and 7). Development/assessment of biomarkers for patient stratification (priority 2) and fatigue (priority 8) were subject of three studies. IBD-related pain and control of diarrhoea/incontinence were each subject of 2 studies (priorities 4 and 6). The effect of gut microbiota (priority 10) and optimal strategy for perianal Crohn's disease (priority 5) was the focus of 2 studies each. One study evaluated surgery for terminal ileal Crohn's disease (priority 9). Of 63 industry-sponsored studies, 59 focused on priority 1., Conclusions: This study presents an impression of the breadth of the IBD-research landscape in the UK, in light of the top 10 research priorities published in 2016. Optimal treatment strategy has been the most studied research priority by academic and industry-sponsored trials. Fewer studies focused on patient-reported outcomes. It remains debatable to what extent the current research landscape adequately represents all stakeholders' viewpoints on needs for expanded knowledge in IBD, particularly the patients' perspective., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JG, J-FL, LL: no competing interests. JS: was actively involved in the trial 'STOP-Colitis pilot trial protocol: a prospective, open-label, randomised pilot study to assess two possible routes of faecal microbiota transplant delivery in patients with ulcerative colitis. 'CWL: is actively involved in the following trial: 'The PRognostic Effect of Environmental Factors in Crohn’s and Colitis (PREdiCCt)'AL Hart: is actively involved in the following trials:· 'STOP-Colitis pilot trial protocol: a prospective, open-label, randomised pilot study to assess two possible routes of faecal microbiota transplant delivery in patients with ulcerative colitis'· 'A supported online self-management tool for symptoms of fatigue, pain and urgency/incontinence in people with inflammatory bowel disease: the IBD-BOOST trial'., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To determine the challenges in diagnosis, monitoring, support provision in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients and explore the adaptations of IBD services., Methods: Internet-based survey by invitation of IBD services across the UK from 8 to 14 April 2020., Results: Respondents from 125 IBD services completed the survey. The number of whole-time equivalent gastroenterologists and IBD nurses providing elective outpatient care decreased significantly between baseline (median 4, IQR 4-7.5 and median 3, IQR 2-4) to the point of survey (median 2, IQR 1-4.8 and median 2, IQR 1-3) in the 6-week period following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (p<0.001 for both comparisons). Almost all (94%; 112/119) services reported an increase in IBD helpline activity. Face-to-face clinics were substituted for telephone consultation by 86% and video consultation by 11% of services. A variation in the provision of laboratory faecal calprotectin testing was noted with 27% of services reporting no access to faecal calprotectin, and a further 32% reduced access. There was also significant curtailment of IBD-specific endoscopy and elective surgery., Conclusions: IBD services in the UK have implemented several adaptive strategies in order to continue to provide safe and high-quality care for patients. National Health Service organisations will need to consider the impact of these changes in current service delivery models and staffing levels when planning exit strategies for post-pandemic IBD care. Careful planning to manage the increased workload and to maintain IBD services is essential to ensure patient safety., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To establish the relationship between trough vedolizumab levels and outcomes during maintenance therapy., Design: Cross-sectional service evaluation was performed on patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving maintenance vedolizumab therapy (minimum of 12 weeks following induction). Prior to infusion, data on clinical activity (Harvey-Bradshaw Index or partial Mayo score), trough C-reactive protein (CRP)/vedolizumab levels and faecal calprotectin were collected. Endoscopic data (±8 weeks from vedolizumab level testing) were obtained by review of medical records. Vedolizumab levels were processed using the Immundiagnostik monitor ELISA., Setting: The Edinburgh IBD Unit, Western General Hospital (tertiary IBD referral centre)., Patients: Seventy-three patients (30 ulcerative colitis and 43 Crohn's disease) were identified who fulfilled inclusion criteria and had vedolizumab levels matched with clinical activity scores, CRP and faecal calprotectin. Of these, 40 patients also had matched endoscopic data., Main Outcome Measures: The association of trough vedolizumab levels with clinical remission (Harvey-Bradshaw Index <5 or partial Mayo <2), biologic remission (faecal calprotectin <250 µg/g+CRP <5 mg/L) and endoscopic remission (Mayo score 0/no inflammation and ulceration on colonoscopy)., Results: The median trough vedolizumab levels were similar between patients in and not in clinical remission (10.6 vs 9.9 µg/mL, p=0.54); biologic remission (10.6 vs 9.8 µg/mL, p=0.35) and endoscopic remission (8.1 vs 10.2 µg/mL, p=0.21). Quartile analysis revealed no significant increase in the proportion of patients in clinical remission, biologic remission or endoscopic remission with increasing trough vedolizumab levels (p<0.05)., Conclusions: In this cohort, trough vedolizumab levels were not associated with clinical, biological or endoscopic outcomes during maintenance therapy., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PWJ, CSC, ML, RJP and GRJ have no personal interests to declare. NP has received consultancy fees from Takeda, speaker fees and/or travel support from Abbvie, Takeda, Norgine. LMM has received travel support from Janssen. IDA has received consultancy fees from Vifor and travel support from Shire. CWL has received research support from Abbvie and Shire, consultancy fees from Abbvie, Pfizer, Dr Falk, Hospira, MSD, Pharmacosmos, Takeda and Vifor, speaker fees and/or travel support from Abbvie, Pfizer, Dr Falk, Ferring, Hospira, MSD, Shire, Takeda and Warner-Chilcott., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)