Search

We evaluated the real-world effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab (UST) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD).This study used a retrospective, multicenter, multinational consortium of UST-treated CD patients. Data included patient demographics, disease phenotype, disease activity, treatment history, and concomitant medications. Cumulative rates of clinical, steroid-free, endoscopic, and radiographic remissions were assessed using time-to-event analysis, and clinical predictors were assessed by using multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses. Serious infections and adverse events were defined as those requiring hospitalization or treatment discontinuation.A total of 1,113 patients (51.8% female, 90% prior antitumor necrosis factor exposure) were included, with a median follow-up of 386 days. Cumulative rates of clinical, steroid-free, endoscopic, and radiographic remissions at 12 months were 40%, 32%, 39%, and 30%, respectively. Biologic-naive patients achieved significantly higher rates of clinical and endoscopic remissions at 63% and 55%, respectively. On multivariable analyses, prior antitumor necrosis factor (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.99) and vedolizumab exposure (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.88) were independently associated with lower likelihoods of achieving endoscopic remission. In patients who experienced loss of remission, 77 of 102 (75%) underwent dose optimization, and 44 of 77 (57%) achieved clinical response. An additional 152 of 681 patients (22.3%) were dose-optimized because of primary nonresponse incomplete response to UST, of whom 40.1% (61 of 152) responded. Serious infections occurred in 3.4% of patients while other noninfectious adverse events (lymphoma [n = 1], arthralgia [n = 6], rash [n = 6], headache [n = 3], hepatitis [n = 3], hair loss [n = 3], neuropathy [n = 1], and vasculitis [n = 1]) occurred in 2.4% of patients.UST represents a safe and effective treatment option for CD, with 40% of patients from a highly refractory cohort achieving clinical remission by 12 months. The greatest treatment effect of UST was seen in biologic-naive patients, and dose escalation may recapture clinical response.

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.

Background & aims Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is widely available for biologic therapies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We reviewed current data and provided expert opinion regarding the clinical utility of TDM for biologic therapies in IBD. Methods We used a modified Delphi method to establish consensus. A comprehensive literature review was performed regarding the use of TDM of biologic therapy in IBD and presented to international IBD specialists. Subsequently, 28 statements on the application of TDM in clinical practice were rated on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 = strongly disagree and 10 = strongly agree) by each of the panellists. Statements were accepted if 80% or more of the participants agreed with a score ≥7. The remaining statements were discussed and revised based on the available evidence followed by a second round of voting. Results The panel agreed on 24 (86%) statements. For anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies, proactive TDM was found to be appropriate after induction and at least once during maintenance therapy, but this was not the case for the other biologics. Reactive TDM was appropriate for all agents both for primary non-response and secondary loss of response. The panellists also agreed on several statements regarding TDM and appropriate drug and anti-drug antibody (ADA) concentration thresholds for biologics in specific clinical scenarios. Conclusion Consensus was achieved towards the utility of TDM of biologics in IBD, particularly anti-TNF therapies. More data are needed especially on non-anti-TNF biologics to further define optimal drug concentration and ADA thresholds as these can vary depending on the therapeutic outcomes assessed.