Search

Data regarding double switching from originator infliximab (IFX) to IFX biosimilars in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are lacking. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of switching from originator IFX to CT-P13 and subsequently to SB2 (double switch) in patients with IBD. Patients undergoing IFX-double switch in eight Centers in Lombardy (Italy) from November 2018 to May 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The IFX discontinuation rate, incidence and type of adverse events (AEs), and clinical remission rate were recorded. A comparison with a control group of patients with IBD single-switched from originator IFX to CT-P13 was performed, before and after an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-based propensity score analysis. Fifty-two double-switched patients with IBD were enrolled. The 24- and 52-week proportions of patients continuing on IFX therapy following the second switch (CTP13→SB2) were 98% (95% confidence interval [CI] 94%–100%) and 90% (95% CI 81%–99%), respectively. Four patients experienced a total of five AEs, all graded 1–3 according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). No infusion reactions were observed. The 24-week and follow-up end clinical remission rates following the second switch were 94% and 88%, respectively. No differences were observed in the safety and efficacy outcomes by comparing the double-switch group with a single-switch group of 66 patients with IBD; all these results were confirmed by IPTW-adjusted analysis. The study suggests both the safety and efficacy of the double switch from originator IFX to CT-P13 and SB2 in patients with IBD is maintained. This strategy may be associated with potential cost implications.

ObjectivesCOVID-19 has rapidly become a major health emergency worldwide. Patients with IBD are at increased risk of infection, especially when they have active disease and are taking immunosuppressive therapy. The characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with IBD remain unclear.DesignThis Italian prospective observational cohort study enrolled consecutive patients with an established IBD diagnosis and confirmed COVID-19. Data regarding age, sex, IBD (type, treatments and clinical activity), other comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI)), signs and symptoms of COVID-19 and therapies were compared with COVID-19 outcomes (pneumonia, hospitalisation, respiratory therapy and death).ResultsBetween 11 and 29 March 2020, 79 patients with IBD with COVID-19 were enrolled at 24 IBD referral units. Thirty-six patients had COVID-19-related pneumonia (46%), 22 (28%) were hospitalised, 7 (9%) required non-mechanical ventilation, 9 (11%) required continuous positive airway pressure therapy, 2 (3%) had endotracheal intubation and 6 (8%) died. Four patients (6%) were diagnosed with COVID-19 while they were being hospitalised for a severe flare of IBD. Age over 65 years (p=0.03), UC diagnosis (p=0.03), IBD activity (p=0.003) and a CCI score >1 (p=0.04) were significantly associated with COVID-19 pneumonia, whereas concomitant IBD treatments were not. Age over 65 years (p=0.002), active IBD (p=0.02) and higher CCI score were significantly associated with COVID-19-related death.ConclusionsActive IBD, old age and comorbidities were associated with a negative COVID-19 outcome, whereas IBD treatments were not. Preventing acute IBD flares may avoid fatal COVID-19 in patients with IBD. Further research is needed.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Restructuring activities have been necessary during the lockdown phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Few data are available on the post-lockdown phase in terms of health-care procedures in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care, and no data are available specifically from IBD units. We aimed to investigate how IBD management was restructured during the lockdown phase, the impact of the restructuring on standards of care and how Italian IBD units have managed post-lockdown activities. METHODS: A web-based online survey was conducted in two phases (April and June 2020) among the Italian Group for IBD affiliated units within the entire country. We investigated preventive measures, the possibility of continuing scheduled visits/procedures/therapies because of COVID-19 and how units resumed activities in the post-lockdown phase. RESULTS: Forty-two referral centres participated from all over Italy. During the COVID-19 lockdown, 36% of first visits and 7% of follow-up visits were regularly done, while >70% of follow-up scheduled visits and 5% of first visits were done virtually. About 25% of scheduled endoscopies and bowel ultrasound scans were done. More than 80% of biological therapies were done as scheduled. Compared to the pre-lockdown situation, 95% of centres modified management of outpatient activity, 93% of endoscopies, 59% of gastrointestinal ultrasounds and 33% of biological therapies. Resumption of activities after the lockdown phase may take three to six months to normalize. Virtual clinics, implementation of IBD pathways and facilities seem to be the main factors to improve care in the future. CONCLUSION: Italian IBD unit restructuring allowed quality standards of care during the COVID-19 pandemic to be maintained. A return to normal appears to be feasible and achievable relatively quickly. Some approaches, such as virtual clinics and identified IBD pathways, represent a valid starting point to improve IBD care in the post-COVID-19 era.

Endoscopy has a key role in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). It is helpful in the diagnosis, in case of relapse, refractoriness, before therapeutic changes, after surgery as well as in the assessment of mucosal healing and in the surveillance of colo-rectal cancer. IBD patients are intended to undergo several times the examination during their lifespan. Bowel preparation and sedation highly contribute to high-quality colonoscopy. Areas covered: Few studies addressed preparation and sedation in the field of IBD. In this review, we focused our attention on the available evidences about bowel preparation and sedation in patients with IBD. Expert commentary: In recent years, the goal of medical treatment in IBD is shifting from clinical improvement in symptoms towards mucosal healing. High-quality endoscopy will gain even more importance in the management of IBD. It is important to locate the most effective preparation and the best sedation in patient with IBD to perform a high-quality endoscopy.

Background Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the most common endoscopic procedure used to provide nutritional support. Aim To prospectively evaluate the mortality and complication incidences after PEG insertion or replacement. Methods All patients who underwent PEG insertion or replacement were included. Details on patient characteristics, ongoing therapies, comorbidities, and indication for PEG placement/replacement were collected, along with informed consent form signatures. Early and late (30-day) complications and mortality were assessed. Results 950 patients (47.1% male) were enrolled in 25 centers in Lombardy, a region of Northern Italy. Patient mean age was 73 years. 69.5% of patients had ASA status 3 or 4. First PEG placement was performed in 594 patients. Complication and mortality incidences were 4.8% and 5.2%, respectively. The most frequent complication was infection (50%), followed by bleeding (32.1%), tube dislodgment (14.3%), and buried bumper syndrome (3.6%). At multivariable analysis, age (OR 1.08 per 1-year increase, 95% CI, 1.0–1.16, p = 0.010) and BMI (OR 0.86 per 1-point increase, 95% CI, 0.77−0.96, p = 0.014) were factors associated with mortality. PEG replacement was carried out in 356 patients. Thirty-day mortality was 1.8%, while complications occurred in 1.7% of patients. Conclusions Our data confirm that PEG placement is a safe procedure. Mortality was not related to the procedure itself, confirming that careful patient selection is warranted.

SUMMARY Background: H. pylori and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are major causes of gastroduodenal injury in man. We assessed the effect of daily NSAID ingestion on gastric histology and the interaction of H. pylori infection and NSAID ingestion on gross and histological injury and prostaglandin production. Methods: Fifty-two healthy volunteers with normal baseline endoscopy were randomly assigned to receive identical-appearing naproxen 500 mg b.d., etodolac 400 mg b.d., or placebo b.d. for 4 weeks. The number and size of all erosions and ulcers were recorded by endoscopy at weeks 1 and 4. Biopsies taken at baseline, week 1 and week 4 were assessed for H. pylori, histology and gastric prostaglandin E2 production. Results: No significant changes occurred with treatment in any histological feature in the three study groups or in H. pylori positive or negative subsets. Antral inflammation scores (scale, 0–6) for the NSAID group were: week 0-1.2 ± 0.3; week 1—1.1 ± 0.3; week 4—1.3 ± 0.3; findings of ‘chemical gastritis’ were not seen. No significant difference in gross gastroduodenal injury (number or total surface area of ulcers or erosions) was seen between H. pylori positive and negative subjects in the three groups at week 1 or 4. Baseline prostaglandin E2 production was significantly higher in H. pylori positive subjects (2398±400 vs. 1064±255 pg/mg protein) and decreased significantly with 1 week of naproxen in H. pylori positive and negative subjects. Conclusions: NSAID ingestion does not cause diffuse histological injury. Any diffuse histological injury in the gastric mucosa is related to the presence of H. pylori, and this H. pylori-associated gastritis is not altered by NSAID ingestion. Furthermore, the development of gross gastroduodenal damage with 4 weeks of NSAID use is not influenced by underlying H. pylori infection.