Search

BACKGROUND: Multiple studies have described the effectiveness of ustekinumab (UST) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) failing anti- Tumor necrosis factors (TNFs); however, the effectiveness of VDZ or UST as a third-class biologic has not yet been described. AIMS AND METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of VDZ and UST as a third-class biologic in patients with CD. RESULTS: Two-hundred and four patients were included; 156/204 (76%) patients received VDZ as a second- and UST as a third-class therapy (group A); the remaining 48/204 (24%) patients received UST as a second- and VDZ as a third-class therapy (group B). At week 16-22, 87/156 (55.5%) patients and 27/48 (56.2%) in groups A and B, respectively, responded to treatment (p = 0.9); 41/156 (26.2%) and 15/48 (31.2%) were in clinical remission (p = 0.5). At week 52; 89/103 (86%) patients and 25/29 (86.2%) of the patients with available data had responded to third-class treatment in groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.9); 31/103 (30%) and 47/29 (24.1%) were in clinical remission (p = 0.5). CONCLUSION: Third-class biological therapy was effective in more than half of the patients with CD. No differences in effectiveness were detected between the use of VDZ and UST as a third-class agent.

Background: Multiple studies have described the effectiveness of ustekinumab (UST) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) failing anti- Tumor necrosis factors (TNFs); however, the effectiveness of VDZ or UST as a third-class biologic has not yet been described. Aims and Methods: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of VDZ and UST as a third-class biologic in patients with CD. Results: Two-hundred and four patients were included; 156/204 (76%) patients received VDZ as a second- and UST as a third-class therapy (group A); the remaining 48/204 (24%) patients received UST as a second- and VDZ as a third-class therapy (group B). At week 16–22, 87/156 (55.5%) patients and 27/48 (56.2%) in groups A and B, respectively, responded to treatment (p = 0.9); 41/156 (26.2%) and 15/48 (31.2%) were in clinical remission (p = 0.5). At week 52; 89/103 (86%) patients and 25/29 (86.2%) of the patients with available data had responded to third-class treatment in groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.9); 31/103 (30%) and 47/29 (24.1%) were in clinical remission (p = 0.5). Conclusion: Third-class biological therapy was effective in more than half of the patients with CD. No differences in effectiveness were detected between the use of VDZ and UST as a third-class agent.

Esophageal symptoms are common, and can arise from mucosal, motor, functional, and neoplastic processes, among others. Judicious use of diagnostic testing can help define the etiology of symptoms and can direct management. Endoscopy, esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM), ambulatory pH or pH-impedance manometry, and barium radiography are commonly used for esophageal function testing; functional lumen imaging probe is an emerging option. Recent consensus guidelines have provided direction in using test findings toward defining mechanisms of esophageal symptoms. The Chicago Classification describes hierarchical steps in diagnosing esophageal motility disorders. The Lyon Consensus characterizes conclusive evidence on esophageal testing for a diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and establishes a motor classification of GERD. Taking these recent advances into consideration, our discussion focuses primarily on the indications, technique, equipment, and interpretation of esophageal HRM and ambulatory reflux monitoring in the evaluation of esophageal symptoms, and describes indications for alternative esophageal tests.

Background and Purpose: Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) plays a key role in the induction of inflammatory responses both in peripheral organs and the CNS. Curcumin exerts anti-inflammatory functions by interfering with LPS-induced dimerization of TLR4–myeloid differentiation protein-2 (MD-2) complex and suppressing pro-inflammatory mediator release. However, the inhibitory mechanism of curcumin remains to be defined. Experimental Approach: Binding of bis-demethoxycurcumin (GG6) and its cyclized pyrazole analogue (GG9), lacking the 1,3-dicarbonyl function, to TLR4–MD-2 was determined using molecular docking simulations. The effects of these compounds on cytokine release and NF-κB activation were examined by ELISA and fluorescence staining in LPS-stimulated primary microglia. Interference with TLR4 dimerization was assessed by immunoprecipitation in Ba/F3 cells. Key Results: Both curcumin analogues bound to the hydrophobic region of the MD-2 pocket. However, only curcumin and GG6, both possessing the 1,3-diketone moiety, inhibited LPS-induced TLR4 dimerization, activation of NF-κB and secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines in primary microglia. Consistent with the ability of 1,3-diketones to coordinate divalent metal ions, LPS stimulation in a low magnesium environment decreased pro-inflammatory cytokine release and NF-κB p65 nuclear translocation in microglia and decreased TLR4–MD-2 dimerization in Ba/F3 cells. Curcumin and GG6 also significantly reduced cytokine output in contrast to the pyrazole analogue GG9. Conclusions and Implications: These results indicate that phenolic 1,3-diketones, with a structural motif able to coordinate magnesium ions, can modulate LPS-mediated TLR4–MD-2 signalling. Taken together, these studies identify a previously uncharacterized mechanism involving magnesium, underlying the inflammatory responses to LPS.