Search

Background: Current management of ulcerative colitis (UC) is aimed to treat active disease and to maintain remission. For patients in whom conventional treatment is no longer effective, biological or small molecule therapy may be an option. The aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of induction and maintenance treatment up to 1 year of UC with infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA), golimumab, vedolizumab (VDZ) and tofacitinib (TFB) compared with standard of care (SoC) in Poland. Methods: A hybrid decision tree/Markov model was used to estimate the expected costs and effects of four biologics, TFB and placebo in patients with the diagnosis of moderate to severe UC who had an inadequate response, lost response, or were intolerant to a conventional therapy. Prior exposure to anti-TNF was considered. At the beginning of the maintenance phase, the decision to continue biological therapy was determined by the achievement of response at the end of induction. Efficacy data were obtained from a network meta-analysis using placebo as the common comparator. Costs were presented in 2018 Polish zloty (PLN) and outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The analysis was performed from the Polish public payer’s perspective and lifetime horizon was set. Results: In anti-TNF naïve, IFX and VDZ were characterized by the most favourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICURs) compared with SoC, PLN211,250.78 and PLN361,694.61/QALY (€49,589.38 and €84,904.84/QALY), respectively. In anti-TNF-exposed population the most effective treatment was TFB. Both ADA and VDZ were more effective than SoC; however, ICUR values were much above the cost-effectiveness threshold. The incorporation of biosimilars reversed the ranking of treatments in relation to the growing ICUR. Conclusion: Although ICUR values for all biological therapies exceeded the acceptability threshold in Poland, for anti-TNF-naïve UC patients IFX and for anti-TNF-exposed UC patients VDZ are currently the most cost-effective alternatives.

P-glycoprotein encoded by the ABCB1 gene constitutes a molecular barrier in the small and large bowel epithelium, and its different expression may influence susceptibility to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We aimed to assess the contribution of the C3435T polymorphism to disease risk in the Polish population. A total of 100 patients (50 Crohn's disease (CD), 50 ulcerative colitis (UC)) and 100 healthy controls were genotyped for the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) C3435T by using the PCR-RFLP method. Patients were classified on the basis of disease phenotype and the specific treatment used. A meta-analysis was carried out of our results and those from previously published Polish studies. There was no significant difference in allele and genotype frequencies in IBD patients compared with controls. For CD patients, a lower frequency of TT genotype in those with colonic disease, a lower frequency of T allele, and a higher frequency of C allele in those with luminal disease were observed, whereas for UC patients, a lower frequency of CT genotype was observed in those with left-sided colitis. A meta-analysis showed a tendency towards higher prevalence of CC genotype in UC cases. These results indicate that the C3435T variants may confer a risk for UC and influence disease behaviour.

Background: Current management of ulcerative colitis (UC) is aimed to treat active disease and to maintain remission. For patients in whom conventional treatment is no longer effective, biological or small molecule therapy may be an option. The aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of induction and maintenance treatment up to 1 year of UC with infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA), golimumab, vedolizumab (VDZ) and tofacitinib (TFB) compared with standard of care (SoC) in Poland., Methods: A hybrid decision tree/Markov model was used to estimate the expected costs and effects of four biologics, TFB and placebo in patients with the diagnosis of moderate to severe UC who had an inadequate response, lost response, or were intolerant to a conventional therapy. Prior exposure to anti-TNF was considered. At the beginning of the maintenance phase, the decision to continue biological therapy was determined by the achievement of response at the end of induction. Efficacy data were obtained from a network meta-analysis using placebo as the common comparator. Costs were presented in 2018 Polish zloty (PLN) and outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The analysis was performed from the Polish public payer's perspective and lifetime horizon was set., Results: In anti-TNF naïve, IFX and VDZ were characterized by the most favourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICURs) compared with SoC, PLN211,250.78 and PLN361,694.61/QALY (€49,589.38 and €84,904.84/QALY), respectively. In anti-TNF-exposed population the most effective treatment was TFB. Both ADA and VDZ were more effective than SoC; however, ICUR values were much above the cost-effectiveness threshold. The incorporation of biosimilars reversed the ranking of treatments in relation to the growing ICUR., Conclusion: Although ICUR values for all biological therapies exceeded the acceptability threshold in Poland, for anti-TNF-naïve UC patients IFX and for anti-TNF-exposed UC patients VDZ are currently the most cost-effective alternatives., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s), 2020.)

Colonoscopy is the standard medical procedure to identify inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in patients with gastrointestinal symptoms. Noninvasive measurement of faecal calprotectin concentration may replace colonoscopy in this indication. The study aimed to assess efficacy of faecal calprotectin as a diagnostic marker of IBD in patients with symptoms suggestive of such diagnosis. Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies was performed. Cochrane, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched until December 2018. Inclusion criteria comprised experimental and observational studies, adults with gastrointestinal symptoms, calprotectin as index and colonoscopy as reference test, presence of data on/enabling the calculation of diagnostic accuracy parameters. For each study, sensitivity and specificity of faecal calprotectin were analysed as bivariate data. Nineteen studies were identified. The total number of patients was 5032. Calculated pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.882 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.827-0.921] and 0.799 (95% CI, 0.693-0.875), respectively. Following faecal calprotectin incorporation in the diagnostic work-up of 100 people with suspected IBD, 18 non-IBD patients will have a colonoscopy performed and one patient with the disease will not be referred for this examination. Faecal calprotectin concentration measurement is a useful screening test to rule out IBD, at the same time reducing the need for colonoscopy by 66.7%.