Search

Introduction Real-world data on tofacitinib’s effectiveness is limited and mainly retrospective or registry-based. We elected to conduct a pragmatic prospective study to assess the efficacy of tofacitinib for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC), aiming to evaluate the ability of intestinal ultrasound (IUS) to discriminate responders vs. non-responders in real-time.Methods This pragmatic prospective clinical study included consecutive adult patients starting tofacitinib treatment for active moderate to severe UC. Patients were evaluated at baseline and after 8 weeks of tofacitinib (clinical, biomarker, endoscopy, and IUS). The primary outcome was clinical response defined by a decrease in the full Mayo score (fMS) of ≥3 at week 8. Next, we explored ultrasonographic parameters in the sigmoid colon as potential real-time classifiers to differentiate between responders and non-responders at week 8.Results Overall, 30 adult patients started tofacitinib; the median age was 26.3 years (IQR 22.5–39.8), and 50% were female. Most patients (86.6%) had left-sided or extensive colitis, 96.7% had previously failed biologic therapy, and 60% (18/30) were on oral corticosteroids at the start of tofacitinib. At week 8, clinical response (a decrease in the fMS ≥ 3) and remission (fMS ≤ 2) rates were 40% (12/30) and 20% (6/30), respectively. Biomarker response (FC < 250µg/g) and biomarker normalization (FC ≤ 100µg/g) were achieved in 47.6% (10/21) and 38.1% (8/21) of patients, respectively. Endoscopic healing (endoscopic Mayo sub-score [EMS] ≤ 1) was achieved in 33.3% (10/30) of patients. Sigmoid bowel wall normalization as assessed by IUS (sBWT ≤ 3) was achieved in 18.2% (4/22). The best sBWT cut-off at week 8 to accurately classify endoscopic healing vs. no healing was a sBWT of 3.6 mm (AUC of 0.952 [95% CI: 0.868–1.036], p

Vaccines are pivotal for control of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) treated with antitumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α have lower serologic response after two COVID-19 vaccine doses. Data regarding a third vaccine dose are scarce. An Israeli multicenter prospective observational study recruited 319 subjects: 220 with IBD (79 treated with anti-TNFα) and 99 healthy control (HC) participants. All patients received two mRNA-BNT162b2 vaccines (Pfizer/BioNTech), 80% of whom received a third vaccine dose. Evaluation included disease activity, anti-spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N) antibody levels, anti-TNFα drug levels, and adverse events (AEs). All participants showed significant serologic response one month after receiving a third dose. However, three months later, the anti-S levels decreased significantly in patients treated with anti-TNFα compared with the non-anti-TNFα and HC groups. A correlation between serologic response to the third vaccine dose and anti-TNF drug levels was not found. No significant AE or IBD exacerbation was observed. Importantly, lower serologic response after the third vaccine dose predicted infection. A third dose of BNT162b2 is effective and safe in patients with IBD. Lower serologic response predicted infection, even in seropositive subjects. Lower serologic responses and their rapid decline suggest a fourth vaccine dose in this patient population.

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with anti-tumor-necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) exhibited lower serologic responses one-month following the second dose of the COVID-19 BNT162b2 vaccine compared to those not treated with anti-TNFα (non-anti-TNFα) or to healthy controls (HCs). We comprehensively analyzed long-term humoral responses, including anti-spike (S) antibodies, serum inhibition, neutralization, cross-reactivity and circulating B cell six months post BNT162b2, in patients with IBD stratified by therapy compared to HCs. Subjects enrolled in a prospective, controlled, multi-center Israeli study received two BNT162b2 doses. Anti-S levels, functional activity, specific B cells, antigen cross-reactivity, anti-nucleocapsid levels, adverse events and IBD disease score were detected longitudinally. In total, 240 subjects, 151 with IBD (94 not treated with anti-TNFα and 57 treated with anti-TNFα) and 89 HCs participated. Six months after vaccination, patients with IBD treated with anti-TNFα had significantly impaired BNT162b2 responses, specifically, more seronegativity, decreased specific circulating B cells and cross-reactivity compared to patients untreated with anti-TNFα. Importantly, all seronegative subjects were patients with IBD; of those, >90% were treated with anti-TNFα. Finally, IBD activity was unaffected by BNT162b2. Altogether these data support the earlier booster dose administration in these patients.