Search

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has a direct impact on the gastrointestinal system, as up to 50% of fecal samples from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients contain detectable viral RNA despite a negative rhino-pharyngeal swab. This finding, together with an intestinal expression of angiotensin conversion enzyme 2 protein, suggests a possible fecal-oral transmission for SARSCoV-2. Furthermore, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are common in COVID-19 patients including watery diarrhea, vomiting particularly in children nausea, and abdominal pain. Pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infection presents significant similarities to those of some immune-mediated diseases, such as inflammatory bowel diseases or rheumatoid arthritis, leading to the hypothesis that targeted therapies used for the treatment of immune-mediated disease could be effective to treat (and possibly prevent) the main complications of COVID-19. In this review, we synthesize the present and future impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on the gastrointestinal system and on gastroenterology practice, hypothesizing a potential role of the "gut-lung axis" and perhaps of the gut and lung microbiota into the interindividual differential susceptibility to COVID-19 19 disease. Finally, we speculate on the reorganization of outpatient gastroenterology services, which need to consider, among other factors, the major psychological impact of strict lockdown measures on the whole population.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most prevalent and deadly forms of cancer in Western countries. Inflammation is a well-known driver of colonic carcinogenesis; however, its role in CRC extends beyond colitis-associated cancer. Over the last decades, numerous associations between intestinal dysbiosis and CRC have been identified, with more recent studies providing mechanistic evidence of a causative relationship. Nonetheless, much remains to be discovered regarding the precise implications of microbiome alterations in the pathogenesis of CRC. Research confirms the importance of a bidirectional crosstalk between the gut microbiome and the mucosal immune system in which inflammasomes, multiprotein complexes that can sense “danger signals,” serve as conduits by detecting microbial signals and activating innate immune responses, including the induction of microbicidal activities that can alter microbiome composition. Current evidence strongly supports an active role for this “inflammasome–microbiome axis” in the initiation and development of CRC. Furthermore, the gasdermin (GSDM) family of proteins, which are downstream effectors of the inflammasome that are primarily known for their role in pyroptosis, have been recently linked to CRC pathogenesis. These findings, however, do not come without controversy, as pyroptosis is reported to exert both anti- and protumorigenic functions. Furthermore, the multi-faceted interactions between GSDMs and the gut microbiome, as well as their importance in CRC, have only been superficially investigated. In this review, we summarize the existing literature supporting the importance of the inflammasome–microbiota axis, as well as the activation and function of GSDMs, to gain a better mechanistic understanding of CRC pathogenesis.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) centres had to reorganise their work, and multidisciplinary teams, including IBD nurses, have had to try to deliver services to patients as safely as possible. Aims: This survey aimed to assess the thoughts, opinions and feelings of IBD patients on biologics regarding the efforts of IBD nurses to organise care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: An evaluation survey based on an anonymous questionnaire was distributed to IBD nurses in five Italian IBD centres, in parallel. Findings: Of 306 participants, 55.6% had Crohn’s disease and 44.4% had ulcerative colitis. Most (79.1%) were aware of the specialist IBD nurse role, and 75.8% could distinguish it from generalist nurses. Of patients, 99.7% felt IBD nurses were competent to care for their condition and 91.2% felt that IBD nurses could provide valid scientific information. Meanwhile, 81.4% had a good or excellent relationship with their IBD nurse. Patients reported that most nurses wore personal protective equipment (94.4%), promoted self-care (91.8%), asked about presence of fever or cough (84.3%), asked about patient health status (83.7%) and covered pandemic safety and social distancing rules (69.3%), but fewer spoke about patient mood (44.4%) or relevant benefits, rules and exemptions (26.8%). Most participants (77.8%) faced pandemic-related issues for infusions. Nearly all (97.4%) knew immunosuppressed people were vulnerable to COVID-19, but only 42.8% spoke to their nurse about it. Some 61.8% of patients were concerned about COVID-19, but only 39.2% raised this with the IBD nurse. However, many more patients spoke to a nurse about concerns regarding biologics (41.8%) and worsening IBD symptoms (46.4%) in the pandemic than the actual number experiencing these issues (13.7% and 4.3%, respectively). Conclusion: The results show that IBD patients appreciate the role of the specialist nurse in their care.

Background: Data from trials of vedolizumab for inflammatory bowel disease and from real-world studies suggest an exposure-response relationship, such that vedolizumab trough levels may predict clinical and endoscopic outcomes. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate in a prospective observational study the utility of an early vedolizumab trough level assay for predicting the first-year vedolizumab therapy outcome. Methods: This prospective observational study included consecutive inflammatory bowel disease patients. We measured vedolizumab trough levels and anti-vedolizumab antibodies at weeks 6 and 14. Clinical outcome was assessed at weeks 6, 14, 22 and 54. The primary endpoint was the correlation between early vedolizumab trough levels and vedolizumab persistence over the first year of treatment, defined as the maintenance of vedolizumab therapy due to sustained clinical benefit. Results: We included 101 patients initiating vedolizumab. A cut-off vedolizumab trough level of 16.55 µg/ml at week 14 predicted vedolizumab persistence within the first year of therapy, with 73.3% sensitivity and 59.4% specificity (p = 0.0009). Week 14 vedolizumab trough level was significantly higher in patients with clinical remission at weeks 14, 22 and 54; and in patients achieving mucosal healing within 54 weeks. Conclusion: High vedolizumab trough level at week 14 was associated with a higher probability of maintaining vedolizumab therapy over the first year due to sustained clinical benefit.

Background: Switching from IFX originator to CT-P13 is safe; however, little data on immunogenicity exists. Research design and methods: Consecutive IBD patients on IFX originator were switched to CT-P13 and followed-up for 12 months. Clinical activity, infliximab trough levels (ITLs), anti-drug antibodies (ATIs), and adverse events were recorded at predefined timepoints (baseline, second CT-P13 infusion, 6 and 12 months). The outcomes investigated were immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, effectiveness and safety. Results: 119 patients were switched to CT-P13 after a median time with IFX of 5.8 years. No changes in mean ITLs were observed. ATIs were detected in 30 patients (25.2%): 14 before and 16 after switch. Mean persistent ATIs were significantly higher compared to mean transient ones (109.74 ng/mL ±84.70 vs 18.22 ng/mL ±11.37, p < 0.001), with significantly lower ITLs associated (mean 0.32 µg/mL ±0.6 vs 3.08 µg/mL ±3.22, p < 0.001). A significant decrease of patients in steroid-fee clinical remission was observed after the switch (p = 0.004), with subsequent improvement at 6 months (p = 0.005). Eighteen patients (15.1%) discontinued IFX, only 6 (5%) for loss of response. Conclusions: Switching from infliximab originator to CT-P13 seems safe and effective, without differences in immunogenicity. A temporary reduction of clinical benefit after switching could be potentially explained by a ‘nocebo-effect response’.

OBJECTIVE: The role of nurses has great educational-scientific potential in COVID-19 vaccination. The aim of this work is to clarify whether the educational role of IBD nurses in vaccination is perceived by IBD patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out, through a questionnaire, to evaluate how many IBD patients received health education about vaccinations from the dedicated nurses (IBD nurses). RESULTS: There were four hundred questionnaires, 310 patients (77.5%) answered all questions. The nurse does not appear to help educate patients on influenza vaccination (66.1%) or pneumococcal vaccination (81.6%). Disclosed patients have many doubts about the new COVID-19 vaccination (74.4%) and many seek information (74.8%) and think that the nurse can provide the necessary information (70%). CONCLUSIONS: IBD nurses do not seem very active in the vaccination education role, and they do not meet patients’ expectations, which are conversely very high.

N/A

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are chronic conditions that primarily affect the gas-trointestinal tract, with a complex pathogenesis; they are characterized by a significant heterogene-ity of clinical presentations and of inflammatory pathways that sustain intestinal damage. After the introduction of the first biological therapies, the pipeline of therapies for IBD has been constantly expanding, and a significant number of new molecules is expected in the next few years. Evidence from clinical trials and real-life experiences has taught us that up to 40% of patients do not respond to a specific drug. Unfortunately, to date, clinicians lack a valid tool that can predict each patient’s response to therapies and that could help them in choosing what drug to administer. Several candidate biomarkers have been investigated so far, with conflicting results: clinical, genetic, immuno-logical, pharmacokinetic and microbial markers have been tested, but no ideal marker has been identified so far. Based on recent evidence, multiparametric models seemingly hold the greatest potential for predicting response to therapy. In this narrative review, we aim to summarize the current knowledge on predictors and early markers of response to biological therapies in IBD.