Search

Background: Interleukin-23 inhibition is effective in treating ulcerative colitis. Guselkumab is a dual-acting, human IgG1, interleukin-23p19 subunit inhibitor that potently neutralises interleukin-23 and can bind to CD64. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of guselkumab as induction and maintenance therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis., Methods: The primary populations of these two phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (QUASAR phase 3 induction and maintenance) included randomised and treated adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (induction baseline modified Mayo score from 5 to 9) with inadequate response or intolerance to conventional or advanced ulcerative colitis therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (3:2) to receive guselkumab 200 mg given intravenously or placebo at weeks 0, 4, and 8 (phase 3 induction study). All patients were randomly assigned using web-based interactive response technology. Patients in clinical response 12 weeks after guselkumab induction given intravenously (from QUASAR phase 2b and phase 3 induction studies) were randomly assigned (1:1:1) at maintenance week 0 to guselkumab 200 mg given subcutaneously every 4 weeks or 100 mg every 8 weeks or placebo for 44 weeks (maintenance). Primary endpoints were clinical remission at induction week 12 and maintenance week 44. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04033445., Findings: The induction study primary population included 701 patients (guselkumab 200 mg given intravenously 60% [421 patients]; placebo 40% [280 patients]). The maintenance study primary population included 568 guselkumab induction responders randomly assigned to receive guselkumab 200 mg given subcutaneously every 4 weeks (190 [33%] patients) or 100 mg every 8 weeks (188 [33%] patients) or placebo (guselkumab withdrawal 190 [33%] patients). A significantly greater proportion of patients treated with guselkumab given intravenously had clinical remission at induction week 12 (23% [95 of 421 patients]) than did placebo-treated patients (8% [22 of 280 patients]; adjusted treatment difference 15%, 95% CI 10-20; p<0·0001). Clinical remission at maintenance week 44 was achieved by a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with guselkumab 200 mg given subcutaneously every 4 weeks (50% [95 of 190 patients]; adjusted treatment difference 30%, 95% CI 21-38; p<0·0001) and 100 mg every 8 weeks (45% [85 of 188 patients]; adjusted treatment difference 25%, 16-34; p<0·0001) than with placebo (19% [36 of 190 patients]). The overall safety profile was favourable and consistent with that of guselkumab in approved indications. In the induction study, adverse events were reported by 49% of patients in both groups (208 of 421 guselkumab-treated patients and 138 of 280 placebo-treated patients), serious adverse events were reported by 3% (12 of 421) of guselkumab-treated patients and 7% (20 of 280) of placebo-treated patients, and adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation were reported by 2% (seven of 421) of guselkumab-treated patients and 4% (11 of 280) of placebo-treated patients. In the maintenance study, adverse event rates were similar among groups, and the most frequently reported adverse events in all groups were ulcerative colitis, COVID-19, and arthralgia. No active tuberculosis, anaphylaxis, serum sickness, or clinically important hepatic disorders were reported in either study., Interpretation: Guselkumab was effective and safe as induction and maintenance therapy in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis., Funding: Janssen Research and Development., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests DTR reports consulting, speaker fees, and advisory board participation for AbbVie, Altrubio, Apex, Avalo, Bristol Myers Squibb, Buhlmann Diagnostics, Celgene, Connect BioPharma, Iterative Health, Janssen (Johnson & Johnson), Lilly, Pfizer, Samsung Neurologica, and Takeda; Altrubio, Datos Health, and Iterative Health stock options; grants from Takeda; and is on the Board of Directors of Cornerstones Health and on the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation's Board of Trustees. JRA reports research support from Merck and Pfizer; consulting and speaker fees from AbbVie, Artugen Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ferring, Finch Therapeutics, Iterative Scopes, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, and Seres Therapeutics; and is a steering committee member and investigator for Janssen. JP reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Athos, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celsius, Ferring, Galapagos, Genentech (a subsidiary of Roche), GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Mirum, Nimbus, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus, Protagonis, Revolo, Sanofi, Sorriso, Surrozen, Takeda, and Wasserman; and fees for data safety monitoring board or advisory board participation from Alimentiv, Sanofi, Sorriso, and Surrozen. NS, SSY, K-HGH, MG, RW, HZ, and JJ are employees of Janssen Research & Development, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, and might own stock in Johnson & Johnson. BGF reports consulting and speaker fees from AbbVie, AbolerIS, AgomAB Therapeutics, Allianthera, Amgen, AnaptysBio, Applied Molecular Transport, Arena, Avoro Capital Advisors, Atomwise, BioJamp, Biora (Progenity), Boehringer-Ingelheim, Boxer, Business Intelligence Pharma, Celsius Therapeutics, Celgene (a subsidiary of Bristol-Myers Squibb), Connect BioPharma, Cytoki Pharma, Disc Medicine, Duality, EcoR1 Capital, Equillium, Ermium, First Wave, First Word Group, Galapagos, Galen Atlantica, Genentech (a subsidiary of Roche), Gilead, Gossamer Bio, GlaxoSmithKline, Hinge Bio, Hot Spot Therapeutics, Imhotex, Immunic Therapeutics, InDex Pharmaceuticals, JAKAcademy, Janssen, Japan Tobacco, Kaleido Biosciences, Landos Biopharma, Leadiant, L.E.K. Consulting, LifeSci Capital, Lilly, Lument AB, Millennium, MiroBio, Morphic Therapeutic, Mylan, OM Pharma, Origo BioPharma, Orphagen, Pandion Therapeutics, Pendopharm, Pfizer, PlayToKnow AG, Prometheus Therapeutics and Diagnostics, Protagonist, PTM Therapeutics, Q32 Bio, Rebiotix, REDX Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Seres Therapeutics, Silverback Therapeutics, Surrozen, Takeda, Teva, Thelium, Tigenix, Tillotts, Ventyx Biosciences, VHsquared, Viatris, Ysios, Ysopia, and Zealand Pharma; payment for expert testimony from Morgan Lewis and Lenczner Slaght; support for meeting attendance and travel from AbbVie, Business Intelligence Pharma, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda; data safety monitoring board or advisory board participation for AbbVie, Amgen, AMT Pharma, AnaptysBio, Axio Research, Biora (Progenity), Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, EcoR1 Capital, Genentech (a subsidiary of Roche), GlaxoSmithKline, InDex Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Lilly, MiroBio, Morphic Therapeutic, Origo BioPharma, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, REDX Pharma, Sanofi, Takeda, Teva, and Tillotts; and stock or stock option ownership in Gossamer Bio. TH reports research grants from AbbVie, Boston Scientific, Daiichi-Sankyo, EA Pharma Co, JIMRO Co, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, Kissei Pharmaceutical, Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co, Mochida Pharmaceutical Co, Nippon Kayaku Co, Pfizer, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co, Zeria Pharmaceutical Co; and consulting fees and honoraria from AbbVie GK, Bristol Myers Squibb, EA Pharma Co, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceutical, Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co, Lilly, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corp, Nichi-Iko Pharmaceutical Co, Pfizer, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co, and Zeria Pharmaceutical Co. GRL reports consulting fees, speaker fees, and meeting attendance or travel support from AbbVie, Allergan, American Gastroenterological Association, American Regent (Creative Educational Concepts), Amgen (continuing medical education sponsor), Boehringer Ingelheim (continuing medical education sponsor), Bristol Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Exact Sciences (continuing medical education sponsor), Ferring, Focus Medical Communications, Gilead, IBD Horizon, Ironwood, Janssen (continuing medical education sponsor), Janssen Biotech (continuing medical education sponsor), Janssen Orthobiotech, Janssen Scientific (continuing medical education sponsor), Lilly, MedEd Consultants, Pennsylvania Society of Gastroenterology, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Physician Education Resource, Prometheus Laboratories, Salix (continuing medical education sponsor), Sandoz, Sanofi (continuing medical education sponsor), Seres Pharmaceuticals (continuing medical education sponsor), Takeda, UCB, and Vindico; research support from Bristol Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen Orthobiotech, Pfizer, Takeda, and UCB; data safety monitoring board participation with Lilly; honoraria from Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Gastro-Hep Communications; editor), Springer Science and Business Media (editor), and Up-To-Date-Walters Kluwer (author); royalties from SLACK (book royalty) and Professional Communications (textbook royalty); and Chair, Professional Education Committee and Member of the National Scientific Advisory Committee for Crohn's Colitis Foundation. BB reports consulting and speaker fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Amgen, Bausch Health, BioJamp Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Eupraxia, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Gilead, Iterative Health, Janssen, Lifelabs, Lilly, Merck, Mylan, Novartis, Organon, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda, and Viatris; serves on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Eupraxia; and owns Qu Biologic stock. LP-B reports grants or contracts from Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Medac, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Takeda; consulting and payment or honoraria and data safety monitoring board or advisory board participation for AbbVie, Abivax, Adacyte, Alfasigma, Alimentiv, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, Arena, Banook, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Connect Biopharm, Cytoki Pharma, Enthera, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Gossamer Bio, GlaxoSmithKline, IAC Image Analysis, Index Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Janssen, Kern Pharma, Lilly, Medac, Mopac, Morphic, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Oncodesign Precision Medicine, ONO Pharma, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pandion Therapeutics, Par' Immune, Pfizer, Prometheus, Protagonist, Roche, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi, Satisfay, Takeda, Telavant, Theravance, Thermo Fischer, Tigenix, Tillots, Viatris, Vectivbio, Ventyx, and Ysopia; and meeting attendance and travel support from AbbVie, Alfasigma, Amgen, Celltrion, Connect Biopharm, Ferring, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Gossamer Bio, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Morphic, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda, Thermo Fischer, and Tillots. BES reports medical writing support from AbbVie, Abivax, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Janssen (a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Lilly, Merck, Pfizer, and Takeda; institutional grants or contracts from Bristol Myers Squibb and Janssen (a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson); consulting fees and payment or honoraria and data safety monitoring board or advisory board participation for AbbVie, Abivax, Adiso Therapeutics, Agomab, Alimentiv, Amgen, AnaptysBio, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Artugen Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Biolojic Design, Biora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Calibr, Celgene, Celltrion, ClostraBio, Equilium, Enthera, Enveda Biosciences, Evommune, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Genentech (Roche), Gilead Sciences, Glaxo SmithKline, Gossamer Bio, Imhotex, Immunyx Pharmaceuticals, Index Pharmaceuticals, Innovation Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Kaleido, Kallyope, Lilly, Merck, Microbiotics, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Mobius Care, Morphic Therapeutics, MRM Health, Nexus Therapeutics, Nimbus Discovery, Odyssey Therapeutics, Palisade Bio, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus Biosciences, Prometheus Laboratories, Protagonist Therapeutics, Q32 Bio, Rasayana Therapeutics, Recludix Therapeutics, Reistone Biopharma, Sanofi, Sorriso Therapeutics, Spyre Therapeutics, Sun Pharma, Surrozen, Takeda, Target RWE, Teva, Theravance Biopharma, TLL Pharmaceutical, Tr1X, Union Therapeutics, and Ventyx Bioscience; meeting attendance and travel support from Janssen, Lilly, Mitsubishi Tanabe, and Pfizer; and stock in Ventyx Bioscience. AD reports consulting and speaker fees from AbbVie, Abivax, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene (a subsidiary of Bristol Myers Squibb), Celltrion, Falk Foundation, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilead, High5MD, Janssen, Lilly, Materia Prima, MedToday, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Roche (a subsidiary of Genentech), Sandoz, Sandoz (a subsidiary of Hexal), Streamed-Up, Takeda, Tillotts, and Vifor and payment for manuscript preparation from Biogen, Falk Foundation, Janssen, Takeda, and Thieme., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Objectives: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is characterized by colonic inflammation, with neutrophils playing a key role in UC activity, prognosis, and response to therapies. Current UC therapeutics can have significant side effects and limited efficacy. ADS051 is a novel, oral, gut-restricted small molecule that modulates neutrophil migration and activation without in vitro suppression of T-cell activation. The primary objective of this Phase 1b multidose trial was to evaluate the safety of ADS051. Secondary objectives were clinical activity and pharmacokinetics assessment., Methods: This trial enrolled 24 patients with moderate to severe UC in 3 sequential ascending-dose cohorts with 3:1 randomization to ADS051 200 mg, 800 mg, or 3200 mg, or placebo, administered orally once daily for 28 days. Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics were assessed weekly, with clinical activity endpoints of clinical remission, endoscopic improvement, and histologic remission evaluated at Day 28., Results: ADS051 was well tolerated without severe or serious adverse events. High fecal concentrations were achieved with low systemic exposure, with < 1% of the daily dose of ADS051 excreted in urine. On Day 28 of the trial, clinical remission was achieved in 22.2% of the pooled ADS051 group versus 0% of the pooled placebo group. Endoscopic response was achieved in 50.0% of ADS051-dosed versus 16.7% of placebo, and endoscopic improvement was achieved in 33.3% of ADS051-dosed versus 0% of placebo., Conclusions: Phase 1b data in patients with UC indicate a favorable safety profile for ADS051 with encouraging signals of clinical activity, supporting the advancement to a Phase 2 trial., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background: Etrasimod is an oral, once daily (QD), selective sphingosine 1-phosphate1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). We assessed the benefit of etrasimod monotherapy and the impact of concomitant corticosteroids (CS) and/or 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) therapy., Methods: In ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12, patients with moderately to severely active UC were randomized 2:1 to etrasimod 2 mg QD or placebo for 52 and 12 weeks, respectively. Oral CS or 5-ASA were allowed at baseline. Patients in the monotherapy subgroup received etrasimod or placebo without concomitant CS and/or 5-ASA at baseline. Predefined primary (clinical remission) and key secondary efficacy endpoints aligned with those from both trials and were assessed at Week 12 and Week 52. Safety was assessed up to Week 52., Results: Clinical remission rates at Weeks 12 and 52 were significantly higher for etrasimod compared with placebo in patients receiving monotherapy (Week 12: 26.2% vs 4.8%; Week 52: 35.7% vs 4.0%). Differences vs placebo were statistically significant for all predefined endpoints at both time points in patients receiving monotherapy or etrasimod with concomitant 5-ASA only (all P < .05); numerical differences, due to small sample sizes, vs placebo were observed for all endpoints in the CS only and CS + 5-ASA subgroups. Safety was consistent with the overall population., Conclusions: Etrasimod monotherapy showed consistent efficacy and safety vs placebo; no apparent benefit was observed with concomitant CS and/or 5-ASA in patients receiving etrasimod., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03945188; NCT03996369., (© 2024 Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation.)

Introduction: A need for better treatment options for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) persists because of the efficacy and safety limitations of current therapies. Neutrophil epithelial transmigration is associated with the characteristic colonic mucosal inflammation in and very likely involved with the pathogenesis and clinical symptoms of UC. ADS051 is a small-molecule inhibiting neutrophil migration and activation, which are potentially important therapeutic targets in UC. The phase 1 single ascending dose study evaluated ADS051's safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics in healthy volunteers., Methods: Fifty healthy adults were randomized 4:1 into 5 ascending dose cohorts to receive a single oral dose of ADS051 100 mg, 300 mg, 700 mg, 1,500 mg, 3,500 mg, or placebo. Participants were followed until 30 days after dosing. Safety and pharmacokinetics of ADS051 in stool, blood, and urine were evaluated., Results: ADS051 was safe and well-tolerated. Adverse events (AEs) of constipation were reported by 2 participants (5.0%) in the ADS051 1,500 mg group vs none in the placebo group. No serious AEs reported and no discontinuations due to AEs. In all dose groups, a cumulative average of 10%-24% of the ADS051 dose was recovered in stool, mostly within 48 hours after dosing. ADS051 was quantifiable in only 2 of 440 blood samples (7.64 and 69.8 ng/mL). On average, <0.035% of the ADS051 dose was excreted in urine., Discussion: ADS051 was safe, well-tolerated, and achieved high stool concentrations with minimal systemic exposure. ADS051 could be a safe and effective, locally acting, neutrophil-targeting agent for the treatment of UC., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background: Tofacitinib is an oral JAK inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). We assessed outcomes through 78 weeks of tofacitinib therapy for UC in a real-world setting., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included adults initiating tofacitinib for UC from May 1, 2018, to April 1, 2021, at a large academic center in the United States. The primary outcome was steroid-free clinical remission at 78 (+/-4) weeks (SFCR 78; simple clinical colitis activity index ≤2 with no corticosteroid use within 30 days). The secondary outcome was tofacitinib discontinuation due to nonresponse (treatment persistence). Additional outcomes were endoscopic response/remission and adverse events (AEs)., Results: Seventy-three patients initiated tofacitinib, with a median follow-up of 88 weeks. Among patients with available data, 31 of 60 (51.7%) achieved SFCR 78, 21 of 47 (44.7%) achieved endoscopic remission during follow-up, and 25 of 73 (34.2%) discontinued tofacitinib during follow-up due to nonresponse (including 11 patients who required colectomy). Nineteen AEs were reported among 15 patients during follow-up: shingles (n = 4, all without documented vaccinations), deep venous thrombosis (n = 2), elevated liver enzymes (n = 2), skin abscess (n = 2), pneumonia (n = 2), possible miscarriage (n = 2), norovirus (n = 1), COVID-19 (n = 1), lymphopenia (n = 1), Clostridioides difficile infection (n = 1), and heart block (n = 1). One patient discontinued therapy due to an AE (elevated liver enzymes), and no deaths occurred., Conclusion: Tofacitinib treatment was effective in achieving SFCR for the majority of patients with UC through 78 weeks. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of tofacitinib, and AEs requiring discontinuation were rare. Due to limitations regarding sample size, larger studies are needed to confirm these findings., (© 2023 Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation.)

Background & Aims: Recurrent Clostridioides difficile infections (CDIs) remain common. While novel microbiome therapeutics gain approval, the efficacy of a full-spectrum, oral microbiome therapeutic is unknown. This study aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of CP101, an orally administered microbiome therapeutic, to restore a diverse microbiome and prevent recurrent CDI in a broad population., Methods: We conducted a multicenter, phase 2, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in adults with recurrent CDI. Participants with one or more CDI recurrences and diagnosis by polymerase chain reaction or toxin enzyme immunoassay for the qualifying episode were included. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive a single oral dose of either CP101 (∼6 × 10 11 colony-forming units of lyophilized microbial cells) or placebo after standard-of-care antibiotics. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants without CDI recurrence through week 8. Safety, efficacy, and microbiome endpoints were evaluated through weeks 8 and 24., Results: A total of 198 participants were analyzed: CP101 (n = 102) and placebo (n = 96). Overall, 27.5% had a first recurrence, and 62.7% were diagnosed by polymerase chain reaction-based testing. The proportion without CDI recurrence through week 8 was significantly higher in the CP101 group compared to the placebo group (74.5% [76 of 102] vs 61.5% [59 of 96], respectively; P = .0488), with durable efficacy observed through week 24 (73.5% [75 of 102] vs 59.4% [57 of 96], respectively; P = .0347). Similar efficacy was observed regardless of diagnostic modality or number of CDI recurrences. Rapid and durable increase in microbiome diversity was observed in the CP101 group compared to the placebo group. The incidence of adverse events was similar between the 2 groups., Conclusions: CP101 was superior to placebo in reducing recurrent CDI with a safety profile similar to placebo. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT03110133)., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

There has been an increased ability to investigate the human microbiota through next-generation sequencing and functional assessment. This advancement has rapidly expanded our ability to study and manipulate the gastrointestinal microbiome to mitigate disease. Fecal microbiota transplantation, a therapy that broadly transfers the entire intestinal ecosystem, has been explored as a potential therapeutic in a variety of gastrointestinal, hepatic, and extraintestinal conditions. The field, however, continues to evolve, with a movement toward precision microbiome therapeutics, individualizing care for various disorders. This review will describe the use of fecal microbiota transplantation, microbiota restoration, and precision microbiome therapeutics, focusing on gastrointestinal and hepatic diseases., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) comprises chronic and relapsing disorders of the gastrointestinal tract, characterized by dysregulated immune responses to the gut microbiome. The gut microbiome and diet are key environmental factors that influence the onset and progression of IBD and can be leveraged for treatment. In this review, we summarize the current evidence on the role of the gut microbiome and diet in IBD pathogenesis, and the potential of microbiome-directed therapies and dietary interventions to improve IBD outcomes. We discuss available data and the advantages and drawbacks of the different approaches to manipulate the gut microbiome, such as fecal microbiota transplantation, next-generation and conventional probiotics, and postbiotics. We also review the use of diet as a therapeutic tool in IBD, including the effects in induction and maintenance, special diets, and exclusive enteral nutrition. Finally, we highlight the challenges and opportunities for the translation of diet and microbiome interventions into clinical practice, such as the need for personalization, manufacturing and regulatory hurdles, and the specificity to take into account for clinical trial design., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Use of traditional opioids (TOs) for pain management has been associated with adverse outcomes among patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). It is unknown if similar associations exist for tramadol, a partial opioid agonist and serotonin and norephinephrine reuptake inhibitor. We sought to compare adverse outcomes associated with tramadol vs TOs in an IBD population., Methods: This nationwide cohort study included adults with IBD diagnosed from 1995 to 2021 in Denmark with subsequent prescriptions for tramadol or TOs. For each analgesic, 2 populations were assessed: initial users (first prescription) and persistent users (first 3 consecutive prescriptions within 365 days). Outcomes included infection, bowel obstruction/ileus, IBD surgery, and mortality within 90 days after the initial use index date (date of first prescription) and within 365 days after the persistent use index date (date of third prescription). Odds ratios adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and IBD severity were calculated using multivariable logistic regression., Results: We identified 37 377 initial users and 15 237 persistent users of tramadol or TOs. Initial users of tramadol had lower adjusted odds of infection (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.99), bowel obstruction/ileus (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53-1.03), and mortality (aOR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.35-0.55), and a higher adjusted odds of IBD-related surgery (aOR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.02-1.60) vs initial users of TOs. Similar results were found for persistent users., Conclusions: Tramadol was associated with lower odds of infection, bowel obstruction/ileus, and mortality vs TOs among patients with IBD. These associations may be impacted by residual confounding., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Abstract: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) prevents recurrent Clostridioides difficile infections (rCDI) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Bezlotoxumab is also indicated to prevent rCDI. We assess the impact of FMT in combination with bezlotoxumab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and rCDI. We conducted a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trial. All received a single colonoscopic FMT. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive bezlotoxumab or placebo. Sixty-one patients were enrolled (30 received treatment and 31 received placebo). Overall, 5 participants (8%) experienced a CDI recurrence; 4 in the treatment arm, 1 in the placebo arm (13% vs 3%, P = 0.15). There was no clear benefit to the combination approach compared with FMT alone., (Copyright © 2024 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background: Clostridioides difficile is the most common cause of healthcare-associated infection, and severe cases can result in significant complications. While anti-microbial therapy is central to infection management, adjunctive therapies may be utilised as preventative strategies., Aim: This article aims to review updates in the epidemiology, diagnosis, and management, including treatment and prevention, of C. difficile infections., Methods: A narrative review was performed to evaluate the current literature between 1986 and 2023., Results: The incidence of C. difficile infection remains significantly high in both hospital and community settings, though with an overall decline in recent years and similar surveillance estimates globally. Vancomycin and fidaxomicin remain the first line antibiotics for treatment of non-severe C. difficile infection, though due to lower recurrence rates, infectious disease society guidelines now favour use of fidaxomicin. Faecal microbiota transplantation should still be considered to prevent recurrent C. difficile infection. However, in the past year the field has had a significant advancement with the approval of the first two live biotherapeutic products-faecal microbiota spores-live brpk, an oral capsule preparation, and faecal microbiota live-jslm-both indicated for the prevention of recurrent C. difficile infection, with additional therapies on the horizon., Conclusion: Although the prevalence of C. difficile infection remains high, there have been significant advances in the development of novel therapeutics and preventative measures following changes in recent practice guidelines, and will continue to evolve in the future., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Pragmatic clinical research is 1 of the 5 focus areas of the Challenges in IBD Research 2024, a multidisciplinary effort by scientists, clinicians, patients, and funders to identify priorities for patient-centric research. This summary provides a comprehensive overview of current gaps in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) clinical research and actionable approaches to address them. This review is focused on identifying research that is needed to achieve the best outcomes for patients in clinical practice. Research gaps include understanding the needs of understudied patient groups and addressing barriers to care so all patients receive optimal care, validating and using biomarkers to enable early diagnosis and result in better outcomes for adults and children with IBD, and determining the optimal sequencing of treatments (medical, surgical, adjunct) in children and adults. Inclusive pragmatic research is needed to address these gaps and lead to improvements in patient care and outcomes for all populations of patients with IBD., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Adalimumab (ADL, Humira ® , reference product), an anti-TNF-α biologic, has transformed the treatment of chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. However, the high cost of ADL therapy has driven the development of more affordable ADL biosimilars, agents with no clinically meaningful differences from the reference product. This review summarizes the product attributes of reference ADL and the nine ADL biosimilars approved and available in the USA in relation to patient experience of injection-site pain (ISP). Product formulation, delivery volume and device features (e.g., type and needle gauge size) influence patient experience of ISP with potential clinical consequences. Citrate-free formulations generally cause less ISP; injection volumes of > 1.5 ml may be associated with increased ISP. Reference ADL and all ADL biosimilars offer a citrate-free formulation, and reference ADL and four ADL biosimilars offer a high-concentration solution that allows a smaller injection volume. All available ADL products are injected subcutaneously using either a pre-filled pen (PFP) or pre-filled syringe (PFS). Patients prefer the PFP, but the PFS permits better control over the speed and duration of injection. Smaller (29-gauge) needle outer diameter is associated with less ISP; reference ADL and seven ADL biosimilars offer a device with a 29-gauge needle. In the USA, an approved biosimilar can be designated "interchangeable," allowing pharmacy-level substitution, where state law permits. In the USA, two ADL biosimilars have received interchangeability designation; others are seeking interchangeability designation from the Food and Drug Administration (n = 2), are being evaluated in clinical studies to support interchangeability (n = 2), or do not have/are not seeking interchangeability designation (n = 3). Product-related attributes influence patient experience of ISP caused by subcutaneous ADL injection. Reference ADL and ADL biosimilar products differ in their attributes, so discussion with patients about treatment options is essential to optimize adherence and outcomes., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Repetitive exposure to antigen in chronic infection and cancer drives T cell exhaustion, limiting adaptive immunity. In contrast, aberrant, sustained T cell responses can persist over decades in human allergic disease. To understand these divergent outcomes, we employed bioinformatic, immunophenotyping and functional approaches with human diseased tissues, identifying an abundant population of type 2 helper T (T H 2) cells with co-expression of TCF7 and LEF1, and features of chronic activation. These cells, which we termed T H 2-multipotent progenitors (T H 2-MPP) could self-renew and differentiate into cytokine-producing effector cells, regulatory T (T reg ) cells and follicular helper T (T FH ) cells. Single-cell T-cell-receptor lineage tracing confirmed lineage relationships between T H 2-MPP, T H 2 effectors, T reg cells and T FH cells. T H 2-MPP persisted despite in vivo IL-4 receptor blockade, while thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) drove selective expansion of progenitor cells and rendered them insensitive to glucocorticoid-induced apoptosis in vitro. Together, our data identify T H 2-MPP as an aberrant T cell population with the potential to sustain type 2 inflammation and support the paradigm that chronic T cell responses can be coordinated over time by progenitor cells., (© 2024. Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Introduction: The comparative effectiveness of upadacitinib and tofacitinib for ulcerative colitis (UC) is poorly understood., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we compared steroid-free clinical remission (SFCR) and endoscopic response/remission at 52 weeks among adults initiating upadacitinib or tofacitinib for UC., Results: A total of 155 patients initiated upadacitinib (n = 81; 30% prior tofacitinib exposure) or tofacitinib (n = 74; 0% prior upadacitinib exposure). After inverse probability of treatment-weighted logistic regression, upadacitinib was associated with significantly higher odds of SFCR (odds ratio 3.01, 95% confidence interval 1.39-6.55) vs tofacitinib. There were no differences for endoscopic response/remission., Discussion: Upadacitinib was more effective at achieving SFCR in UC at 52 weeks vs tofacitinib., (Copyright © 2024 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). Real-world data comparing the effectiveness of tofacitinib to ustekinumab are limited. We compared 52-week outcomes of tofacitinib vs ustekinumab for UC after antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) failure., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, adults initiated tofacitinib or ustekinumab for UC after anti-TNF failure May 1, 2018 to April 1, 2021, at a US academic medical center. The primary outcome was steroid-free clinical remission (SFCR) at 12 and 52 weeks. The secondary outcome was drug survival (ie, time to drug discontinuation due to nonresponse). Adverse events (AEs) were also assessed., Results: Sixty-nine patients initiated tofacitinib, and 97 patients initiated ustekinumab with median follow-up of 88.0 and 62.0 weeks, respectively. After inverse probability of treatment-weighted logistic and Cox regression, there was no association of tofacitinib vs ustekinumab with SFCR at 12 weeks (odds ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 0.79-3.41), SFCR at 52 weeks (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.55-2.34), or drug survival (hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.78-2.37). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated no separation in drug survival curves. Regression results were similar after excluding patients with prior tofacitinib or ustekinumab exposure. During available follow-up, 17 AEs were reported for tofacitinib (most commonly shingles, n = 4), and 10 AEs were reported for ustekinumab (most commonly arthralgia and rash, each n = 2). Two patients discontinued treatment due to AEs (1 tofacitinib for elevated liver enzymes, 1 ustekinumab for arthralgia)., Conclusions: In a real-world UC cohort, tofacitinib and ustekinumab demonstrated similar effectiveness at 52 weeks. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profiles of these agents., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) commonly require analgesic medications to treat pain, which may be associated with complications. We examined trends of analgesic use according to age at IBD onset., Methods: This nationwide cohort study included adults diagnosed with IBD between 1996 and 2021 in Denmark. Patients were stratified according to their age at IBD onset: 18-39 years (young adult), 40-59 years (adult), and older than 60 years (older adult). We examined the proportion of patients who received prescriptions for analgesic medications within 1 year after IBD diagnosis: strong opioids, tramadol, codeine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and paracetamol. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the association between age at IBD onset and strong opioid prescriptions and the composite of strong opioid/tramadol/codeine prescriptions., Results: We identified 54,216 adults with IBD. Among them, 25,184 (46.5%) were young adults, 16,106 (29.7%) were adults, and 12,926 (23.8%) were older adults at IBD onset. Older adults most commonly received analgesic prescriptions of every class. Between 1996 and 2021, strong opioid, tramadol, and codeine prescriptions were stable, while paracetamol prescriptions increased and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug prescriptions decreased. After multivariable logistic regression analysis, older adults had higher adjusted odds of receiving strong opioid prescriptions (adjusted odds ratio 1.95, 95% confidence interval 1.77-2.15) and the composite of strong opioid/tramadol/codeine prescriptions (adjusted odds ratio 1.93, 95% confidence interval 1.81-2.06) within 1 year after IBD diagnosis compared with adults., Discussion: In this nationwide cohort, older adults most commonly received analgesic prescriptions within 1 year after IBD diagnosis. Additional research is needed to examine the etiology and sequelae of increased analgesic prescribing to this demographic., (Copyright © 2023 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background and Aim: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. These post hoc analyses evaluated early improvement in patient-reported outcomes with tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily (BID) in OCTAVE Open among patients with ulcerative colitis who experienced treatment failure with placebo (retreatment subpopulation) or tofacitinib 5 mg BID (dose escalation subpopulation) during maintenance., Methods: Endpoints based on Mayo subscores (rectal bleeding improvement, stool frequency improvement, and symptomatic [both rectal bleeding and stool frequency] improvement) were analyzed overall and by prior tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) failure status from month (M)1-M6 in OCTAVE Open. Changes from baseline in partial Mayo score, rectal bleeding subscore, and stool frequency subscore at M1 were also analyzed, by M2 clinical response status., Results: At M1 of OCTAVE Open, 83.2%, 70.3%, and 64.4% of patients in the retreatment subpopulation (n = 101) had rectal bleeding improvement, stool frequency improvement, and symptomatic improvement, respectively. Corresponding values in the dose escalation subpopulation (n = 57) were 59.6%, 50.9%, and 38.6%. For both subpopulations, results were generally consistent regardless of prior TNFi failure. In the dose escalation subpopulation, mean decrease from baseline in partial Mayo score and stool frequency subscore at M1 was greater in patients with versus without a clinical response at M2., Conclusions: Rectal bleeding improvement and stool frequency improvement were achieved by M1 in many patients receiving tofacitinib 10 mg BID in both subpopulations, with no apparent difference by prior TNFi failure. Analyses were limited by small sample sizes for some subgroups., (© 2023 Pfizer Inc and The Authors. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Introduction: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) causes symptoms of varying severity and negatively impacts patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL). Despite antibiotic treatment, recurrence of CDI (rCDI) is common and imposes clinical and economic burdens on patients. Fecal microbiota, live-jslm (REBYOTA [RBL]) is newly approved in the USA for prevention of rCDI following antibiotic treatments. We analyzed efficacy and HRQL impact of RBL vs. placebo in patients at first rCDI using data from the phase 3 randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial, PUNCH CD3., Methods: This post hoc analysis included patients at first rCDI fromPUNCH CD3. Treatment success (i.e., absence of diarrhea within 8 weeks post-treatment) was analyzed adjusting for baseline patient characteristics. HRQL was measured using the Clostridioides difficile Quality of Life Survey (Cdiff32); absolute scores and change from baseline in total and domain (physical, mental, and social) scores were summarized and compared between arms. Analyses were conducted for the trial's blinded phase only., Results: Among 86 eligible patients (32.8% of the overall trial population, RBL 53 [61.6%], placebo 33 [38.4%]), RBL-treated patients had significantly lower odds of recurrence (i.e., greater probability of treatment success) at week 8 vs. placebo (odds ratio 0.35 [95% confidence interval 0.13, 0.98]). Probability of treatment success at week 8 was 81% for RBL and 60% for placebo, representing 21% absolute and 35% relative increases for RBL (crude proportions 79.2% vs. 60.6%; relative risk 0.53, p = 0.06). Additionally, RBL was associated with significantly higher Cdiff32 total (change score difference 13.5 [standard deviation 5.7], p < 0.05) and mental domain (16.2 [6.0], p < 0.01) scores vs. placebo from baseline to week 8., Conclusion: Compared to placebo, RBL demonstrated a significantly higher treatment success in preventing further rCDI and enhanced HRQL among patients at first recurrence, establishing RBL as an effective treatment to prevent further recurrences in these patients., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03244644., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Research and innovation around Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has been a multidisciplinary endeavor since discovery of the organism in 1978. The field of gastroenterology has contributed to our understanding of CDI as a disease caused by disruptions in the gut microbiome and led to advances in therapeutic manipulation of gut microbiota, including fecal microbiota transplantation. The high incidence of CDI in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and treatment of the infection in this population have been of particular interest to gastroenterologists. The emergence of standardized, approved live biotherapeutic products for treatment of recurrent CDI is an inflection point in our management of this difficult clinical problem, and real-world performance of these therapies will inform optimal treatment algorithms., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. C. R. K. reports consulting fees from Sebela Pharmaceuticals; support for attending the 2023 International Scientific Association of Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISPAA) annual meeting as the invited cochair; serving on the clinical advisory board of OpenBiome; and serving as section chair of Basic and Clinical Intestinal Disorders with the American Gastroenterological Association. J. A. reports grant support from Merck, Janssen, Pfizer, and the National Institutes of Health (all unrelated to this work). J. A. reports receiving consultancy fees from Janssen, Pfizer, AbbvVie, Iterative Scopes, Finch Therapeutics, Seres Therapeutics, Ferring, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roivant, and Adiso; payments for speaking with Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVie, and Janssen; payments for testimony from Finch Therapeutics; and participation on a data and safety monitoring board for Merck. Both authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background & Aims: The QUASAR Phase 2b Induction Study evaluated the efficacy and safety of guselkumab, an interleukin-23p19 subunit antagonist, in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior inadequate response and/or intolerance to corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, and/or advanced therapy., Methods: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, induction study, patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive intravenous guselkumab 200 or 400 mg or placebo at weeks 0/4/8. The primary endpoint was clinical response (compared with baseline, modified Mayo score decrease ≥30% and ≥2 points, rectal bleeding subscore ≥1-point decrease or subscore of 0/1) at week 12. Guselkumab and placebo week-12 clinical nonresponders received subcutaneous or intravenous guselkumab 200 mg, respectively, at weeks 12/16/20 (uncontrolled study period)., Results: The primary analysis population included patients with baseline modified Mayo scores ≥5 and ≤9 (intravenous guselkumab 200 mg, n = 101; 400 mg, n = 107; placebo, n = 105). Week-12 clinical response percentage was greater with guselkumab 200 mg (61.4%) and 400 mg (60.7%) vs placebo (27.6%; both P < .001). Greater proportions of guselkumab-treated vs placebo-treated patients achieved all major secondary endpoints (clinical remission, symptomatic remission, endoscopic improvement, histo-endoscopic mucosal improvement, and endoscopic normalization) at week 12. Among guselkumab week-12 clinical nonresponders, 54.3% and 50.0% of patients in the 200- and 400-mg groups, respectively, achieved clinical response at week 24. Safety was similar among guselkumab and placebo groups., Conclusions: Guselkumab intravenous induction was effective vs placebo in patients with moderately to severely active UC. Guselkumab was safe, and efficacy and safety were similar between guselkumab dose groups., Clinicaltrials: gov number: NCT04033445., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The disease activity of axSpA after initiating anti-TNF agents for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) is poorly understood. We sought to examine the disease activity of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) after initiation of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents among patients with IBD. This retrospective cohort study included adults with IBD and axSpA who initiated anti-TNF agents between 1/1/2012-10/1/2021 at a large academic center. The primary outcome was symptom resolution (SR) of axSpA at 12 months ("0/10 pain" or "no pain" or "controlled pain" with no morning stiffness and no use of daily NSAIDs). The secondary outcome was clinical remission (CR) of IBD at 12 months (simple clinical colitis activity index <3, Harvey-Bradshaw Index <5, or provider assessment with no use of oral/IV steroids for 30 days). Associations between baseline characteristics and SR of axSpA were examined using logistic regression. 82 patients with axSpA and IBD initiated anti-TNF agents. At 12 months, 52% and 74% achieved SR of axSpA and CR of IBD, respectively. IBD duration <5 years (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.5) and adalimumab use (reference: all other anti-TNFs; OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.002-7.1) were associated with SR of axSpA at 12 months. 52% of patients with axSpA and IBD achieved SR of axSpA at 12 months after initiating anti-TNF therapy. Shorter disease duration and adalimumab use may be associated with higher odds of SR. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings, examine additional clinical predictors of SR, and identify more effective therapeutics for this population., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to International League of Associations for Rheumatology (ILAR).)

Goals: Characterize and compare the risk of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and cytomegalovirus colitis (CMVC) after initiation of vedolizumab or anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)α agents for ulcerative colitis (UC)., Background: Immunosuppression is a risk factor for gastrointestinal infections including CDI and CMVC among patients with UC; however, the risk according to the biological class is poorly understood., Study: A retrospective cohort study of adults with UC involving the initiation of vedolizumab or anti-TNFα agents during June 1, 2014 to December 31, 2020 was conducted at a large academic health system. The primary outcomes for both CDI and CMVC analyses were first CDI or CMVC after biological initiation. The secondary outcome for the CDI analysis was severe CDI (>10,000 white blood cells or serum creatinine >1.5 mg/dL). Independent variables included demographics and UC history/severity factors. Inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox regression was performed to assess the hazard of CDI by biological group. Due to few outcomes, CMVC was reported descriptively., Results: A total of 805 UC patients initiated vedolizumab (n=195) or anti-TNFα agents (n=610). There were 43 CDIs and 11 severe CDIs over 1436 patient-years. The inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox regression demonstrated no association between CDI and vedolizumab versus anti-TNFα (hazard ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.05-2.03), but identified a significantly lower hazard of severe CDI for vedolizumab versus anti-TNFα (hazard ratio 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.76). There were 5 cases of CMVC, all in the anti-TNFα group., Conclusions: There was a lower adjusted risk of severe CDI but not total CDI associated with vedolizumab. CMVC was not observed after initiating vedolizumab. These findings may provide reassurance regarding the use of vedolizumab when also considering the risk of gastrointestinal infections., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recurrent or chronic antibiotic therapy is a therapeutic hallmark of chronic antibiotic-dependent pouchitis (CADP) or Crohn's-like disease of the pouch. Antibiotics alter the gut microbiome, which may increase the risk of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of CDI in patients with CADP and Crohn's-like disease of the pouch., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with CADP or Crohn's-like disease of the pouch at a tertiary academic medical center. The primary outcome was prevalence of CDI. Secondary outcomes included antibiotic therapy at the time of CDI diagnosis, treatment regimens for CDI, and subsequent outcomes., Results: Overall, 18 of 198 (9.1%) included patients developed CDI. Treatment with antibiotics at the time of CDI diagnosis occurred in 7 of 18 (39%) patients. Preoperative history of CDI was significantly associated with increased risk of developing CDI following ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) compared with those with no prior history of CDI (12 of 18 [67%] vs 11 of 180 [6%]; P < .001). In 16 of 18 (89%) patients, CDI treatment was initiated with predominantly oral vancomycin (72%) or metronidazole (17%)., Conclusion: Although chronic inflammatory conditions of the pouch arise postoperatively, the prevalence of CDI in this population appears to be similar compared with the general population of patients with inflammatory bowel disease prior to and post IPAA. Preoperative CDI appears to be the greatest risk for postoperative CDI and may require extra vigilance in the assessment of CDI after IPAA., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background & Aims: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) emerged as rescue treatment for multiply recurrent Clostridioides difficile infections (rCDIs) nonresponsive to standard therapy. However, estimation of FMT efficacy varies among different protocols and formulations, while placebo-controlled clinical trials have excluded most rCDI patients because of medical comorbidities. This study aimed to determine the safety and effectiveness of capsule FMT (cap-FMT) and colonoscopy FMT (colo-FMT) for rCDI using standardized products in a large, multicenter, prospective, real-world cohort., Methods: Clinical outcomes and adverse events after FMT performed for rCDI at 6 sites were captured in a prospective registry. FMT was performed using 1 of 2 standardized formulations of microbiota manufactured by the University of Minnesota Microbiota Therapeutics Program, freeze-dried/encapsulated or frozen-thawed/liquid. The FMT administration route was determined by the treating physician. The rCDI cure rate was assessed at 1 and 2 months. Safety data were collected within the first 72 hours and at 1 and 2 months. Logistic regression was used to investigate factors associated with FMT failure., Results: A total of 301 FMTs were performed in 269 unique patients. Two-thirds were cap-FMT. CDI cure rates were 86% (95% CI, 82%-90%) at 1 month and 81% (95% CI, 75%-86%) at 2 months. There was no difference in the 1-month or 2-month cure rate between cap-FMT and colo-FMT. Cap-FMT recipients were older and less likely to be immunosuppressed or have inflammatory bowel disease. Patient factors of older age and hemodialysis were associated with FMT failure by 2 months on multivariate logistic regression. In addition, post-FMT antibiotic use was associated with FMT failure at 2 months. One serious adverse event was related to colonoscopy (aspiration pneumonia), otherwise no new safety signals were identified., Conclusions: Cap-FMT using freeze-dried capsules has a similar safety and effectiveness profile compared with colo-FMT, without the procedural risks of colonoscopy. Although highly effective overall, patient selection is a key factor to optimizing FMT success., (Copyright © 2023 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Previous research has demonstrated that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) gains cell entry through the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor, which is abundantly found throughout the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, resulting in a wide array of GI manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). By gaining entry into the intestinal epithelial and stromal cells, SARS-CoV-2 has been observed to cause intestinal inflammation and gut dysbiosis. Alterations in gut microbiota are known to be involved in the pathophysiology of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). During the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, rates of CDI were similar to historical data despite the increased use of antibiotics. This may be due to increased emphasis on hygiene and protective equipment and reduced C. difficile testing as diarrhea was presumed to be COVID-19 related. Studies also demonstrated additional risk factors for CDI in COVID-19 patients, including length of hospitalization and new abdominal pain during admission. Although not associated with increased mortality, CDI was associated with increased length of hospital stay among patients admitted with COVID-19. Due to fecal viral shedding and concern of oral-fecal transmission of SARS-CoV-2, increased safety regulations were introduced to fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) leading to reduced rates of this procedure during the COVID-19 pandemic. FMT for recurrent CDI during the COVID-19 pandemic remained highly effective without any reports of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. In addition, limited data show that FMT may be effective in treating COVID-19 and restoring healthy gut microbiota. The goal of this article is to review the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on hospital-acquired CDI and the utilization of FMT., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s), 2023.)

Background: Tofacitinib is an oral small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). The tofacitinib OCTAVE clinical program included phase III induction (OCTAVE Induction 1 and 2) and maintenance (OCTAVE Sustain) studies, and an open-label, long-term extension study (OCTAVE Open)., Objective: This post hoc analysis assessed selected long-term, disease-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) measurements in patients with UC receiving tofacitinib in the OCTAVE clinical program., Methods: Analyses included patients from OCTAVE Open assigned to tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (subpopulation in remission at Week 52 of OCTAVE Sustain). OCTAVE Open data from the final analyses are shown to Month 48. Endpoints included rectal bleeding subscore (RBS) = 0, stool frequency subscore (SFS) ≤ 1, and HRQoL measure, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) remission (IBDQ total score ≥ 170); with non-responder imputation for missing data at all visits, and last observation carried forward for visits after a patient advanced to the next study (NRI-LOCF). Observed cases were also assessed., Results: At Month 48, of 175 patients, 95 (54.3%) and 96 (54.9%) achieved/maintained RBS = 0 and SFS ≤ 1, respectively (NRI-LOCF). Additionally, 93 (53.1%) patients achieved/maintained IBDQ remission at Month 48 (NRI-LOCF)., Conclusions: Among patients who entered OCTAVE Open in remission, most maintained normalization of rectal bleeding and improvement in stool frequency for ≤ 4 years of follow-up in OCTAVE Open. IBDQ remission was also generally maintained in OCTAVE Open. These data show robust maintenance of key UC PROs and durability of response with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily., Trial Registration: http://www., Clinicaltrials: gov (NCT01465763 [21/10/2011]; NCT01458951 [21/10/2011]; NCT01458574 [21/10/2011]; NCT01470612 [21/10/2011])., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Tofacitinib is an oral small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. We evaluated tofacitinib efficacy and safety in the 52-week maintenance study, OCTAVE Sustain, by baseline Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES) following 8-week induction., Methods: The proportion of patients achieving efficacy endpoints at Week 24 or 52 of OCTAVE Sustain was evaluated by baseline MES following 8-week induction. Using logistic regression, the difference in treatment effect (tofacitinib vs. placebo) between baseline MES (0 vs. 1) for each endpoint was assessed. Adverse events were evaluated., Results: At Week 52 of OCTAVE Sustain, a numerically higher proportion of tofacitinib-treated patients achieved remission with OCTAVE Sustain baseline MES of 0 versus 1 (61.9% vs. 36.5% for tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily [BID] and 75.0% vs. 54.2% for tofacitinib 10 mg BID). Similar trends were observed for endoscopic remission and endoscopic improvement. Logistic regression analyses showed a larger treatment effect at Week 52 in patients with baseline MES of 0 versus 1 for clinical response (p = 0.0306) in the tofacitinib 5 mg BID group (other endpoints all p > 0.05); differences were not significant for any endpoint in the 10 mg BID group (all p > 0.05). Infection adverse events were less frequent among patients with baseline MES 0 versus 1., Conclusions: MES may be important in predicting long-term efficacy outcomes for tofacitinib maintenance treatment. Aiming for endoscopic remission during induction with tofacitinib 10 mg BID may allow successful maintenance with tofacitinib 5 mg BID. Safety was consistent with the known tofacitinib safety profile. Trial registration NCT01458574., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The comparative long-term survival of first-line biologics for UC and reasons for drug discontinuation are poorly understood. We sought to compare the long-term drug survival related to non-response (NR) and adverse effects (AEs) for vedolizumab, adalimumab, and infliximab among biologic-naïve patients with UC., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of adult biologic-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe UC initiating vedolizumab, adalimumab, or infliximab 6/1/14-12/31/20 at a large academic medical center. The primary outcome was time to biologic discontinuation for primary or secondary NR (including colectomy). The secondary outcome was time to biologic discontinuation due to AEs. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted (IPTW) Cox regression was used to perform three pair-wise comparisons of drug survival., Results: The cohort included 805 patients with UC who initiated vedolizumab (n = 195), adalimumab (n = 278), or infliximab (n = 332). The adjusted hazard of biologic discontinuation for NR was significantly lower for vedolizumab vs adalimumab (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34-0.75), similar for vedolizumab vs infliximab (HR 1.32, 95% CI 0.79-2.18), and greater for adalimumab vs infliximab (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.51-2.86). The adjusted hazard of discontinuation for AEs was significantly lower for vedolizumab vs adalimumab (HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09-0.64), lower for vedolizumab vs infliximab (HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.10-0.46), and similar for adalimumab vs infliximab (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.53-1.35)., Conclusions: There was greater survival of vedolizumab compared to adalimumab for clinical response and greater survival of vedolizumab compared to both adalimumab and infliximab for AEs. These long-term data support the use of vedolizumab as a first-line biologic over adalimumab for biologic-naïve patients with UC., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)