Search

Summary: Background: There are a plethora of therapeutic options for the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Despite this, clinical outcomes with standard dosing often fall short of established targets. While efforts centre on developing novel therapies, there is an ongoing need to optimise the use of existing agents. Aims: To focus on strategies to optimise response to biologic (monoclonal antibody) therapies in IBD, including use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Methods: An extensive review of the published literature. Results: TDM is a strategy aimed at enhancing the effectiveness of drugs with variable exposure‐response relationships by measuring serum concentrations of biologic therapies and detecting neutralising antibodies. Reactive TDM is performed when therapeutic goals have not been achieved. Tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF) inhibitors are the treatment class most frequently associated with immunogenicity and loss of response. Immunogenicity can be reduced through avoidance of low serum drug concentrations by dose optimisation or use of concomitant immunomodulator therapy. Subtherapeutic dosing in the absence of antidrug antibodies is best managed by dose escalation or dose interval reduction. Persistent neutralising drug antibodies necessitate switching to an alternative therapy. Proactively ensuring adequate serum trough levels might help sustain treatment durability and prevent loss of response. Newer non‐TNF inhibitors demonstrate less robust exposure‐response relationships, and TDM may not prove as beneficial. Conclusions: In the treat‐to‐target paradigm of IBD treatment, optimising treatment effect with dose optimisation, which may involve strategies including TDM, increases the likelihood of achieving clinical remission and may accomplish deeper levels of remission beyond symptom control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Background Aims Methods Results Conclusions Given the introduction of new advanced therapies for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), expanded risk mitigation strategies are essential.To create a comprehensive set of statements on assessment procedures and vaccinations before starting monoclonal antibodies, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors or sphingosine‐1‐phosphate (S1P) modulators for IBD.We examined literature, guidelines and drug product information regarding vaccination and assessment recommendations for initiating advanced IBD therapies. Using a modified Delphi approach, delegates voted anonymously on the acceptability of these statements prior to and following consensus discussion.We developed eight statements on the domains of infectious diseases screening, vaccinations and assessments prior to commencing JAK inhibitors and S1P modulators. Six statements received agreement. Pre‐advanced therapy screening for infectious diseases was established, and the vaccination protocol was revised. Malignancy, cardiovascular and thromboembolic risk assessments are necessary before initiating JAK inhibitors. Those starting S1P modulators need cardiac and ophthalmic assessments.These consensus statements combine vaccination and assessments on the currently available advanced therapies for IBD as a single comprehensive document that may reduce IBD complications associated with use of advanced therapies. Knowledge gaps identified during the consensus process will provide further research opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Subcutaneous [SC] infliximab may provide multiple benefits over intravenous [IV] formulations. However, studies for efficacy and safety in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] have been constrained by small sizes that limit the interpretation of outcomes, particularly for subgroups potentially at high risk of disease relapse. Methods We conducted a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis up to January 2023, to evaluate the change in clinical remission after transitioning from IV to SC infliximab in patients with IBD in clinical remission. The primary outcome was measured using the relative risk for meta-analysis. Results We identified 15 studies of patients established ≥ 3 months on IV infliximab, consisting of 1371 patients and 840 patient-years of follow-up. There was no loss of clinical remission in the IBD cohort overall, Crohn's disease [CD], or perianal CD [ p  = 0.55 and p  = 0.11 at 9–12 months, and p  = 0.50 at 6 months, respectively]. Neither prior IV dose [≤ 10 mg/kg 6-weekly] [ p  = 0.48] nor IBD disease subtype was associated with an increased clinical relapse rate at 6 months (p  = 0.48 and p  = 0.45 [UC vs CD], respectively). Conclusion Changing patients established on IV infliximab to an SC formulation is associated with a high ongoing clinical remission and a low adverse event rate. Furthermore, there are no signals for adverse outcomes among different IBD disease subtypes, nor in those on escalated IV infliximab dosing schedules up to 10 mg/kg 6-weekly. These data should provide patients and clinicians alike with confidence in SC infliximab use in IBD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aimsInterferon-γ-inducible protein-10 [IP-10] mediates immune cell trafficking from the circulation to the inflamed colon and decreases gut epithelial cell survival. IP-10 expression is increased in patients with ulcerative colitis [UC]. We report efficacy and safety results from a dose-ranging induction study of eldelumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody to IP-10, in moderately to severely active UC.MethodsA total of 252 adults with UC [Mayo score ≥ 6 and endoscopic subscore ≥ 2] were randomised 1:1:1 to placebo or eldelumab 15 or 25 mg/kg administered intravenously on Days 1 and 8 and every other week thereafter. The primary endpoint was clinical remission [Mayo score ≤ 2; no individual subscale score > 1] at Week 11. Key secondary endpoints included Mayo score clinical response and mucosal healing at Week 11.ResultsNeither eldelumab 15 or 25 mg/kg resulted in significant increases vs placebo in the proportion of patients achieving Week 11 clinical remission. Remission and response rates were 17.6% and 47.1% with eldelumab 25mg/kg, 13.1% and 44.0% with eldelumab 15mg/kg, and 9.6% and 31.3% with placebo. Clinical remission and response rates were higher in anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF]-naïve patients treated with eldelumab compared with placebo. Eldelumab treatment was well tolerated and no immunogenicity was observed.ConclusionsThe primary endpoint was not achieved with induction treatment with eldelumab 15 or 25 mg/kg in patients with UC. Trends towards clinical remission and response were observed in the overall population and were more pronounced in anti-TNF naïve patients. Eldelumab safety signals were consistent with those reported previously [ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01294410].

Australasia, encompassing Australia, New Zealand, and Papua New Guinea, has some of the highest prevalence's of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in the world. The way IBD medicine is practiced varies between and within these countries. There are numerous shared issues of IBD care between Australia and New Zealand, whereas Papua New Guinea has its' own unique set of circumstances. This review looks to explore some of the barriers to IBD care across the continent from the perspective of local IBD healthcare professionals. Barriers to IBD care that are explored include access to IBD multidisciplinary teams, provision of nutritional-based therapies, the prevalence and engagement of IBD-associated mental health disorders, access to medicine, access to endoscopy, rural barriers to care, Indigenous IBD care and paediatric issues. We look to highlight areas where improvements to IBD care across Australasia could be made as well as address research needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]