Search

IBD treatment is undergoing a transformation with an expanding repertoire of drugs targeting different aspects of the immune response. Three novel classes of drugs have emerged in the past decade that target leukocyte trafficking to the gut (vedolizumab), neutralize key cytokines with antibodies (ustekinumab) and inhibit cytokine signalling pathways (tofacitinib). In advanced development are other drugs for IBD, including therapies targeting other cytokines such as IL-23 and IL-6. However, all agents tested so far are hampered by primary and secondary loss of response, so it is desirable to develop personalized strategies to identify which patients should be treated with which drugs. Stratification of patients with IBD by clinical parameters alone lacks sensitivity, and alternative modalities are now needed to deliver precision medicine in IBD. High-resolution profiling of immune response networks in individual patients is a promising approach and different technical platforms, including in vivo real-time molecular endoscopy, tissue transcriptomics and germline genetics, are promising tools to help predict responses to specific therapies. However, important challenges remain regarding the clinical utility of these technologies, including their scalability and accessibility. This Review focuses on unravelling some of the complexity of mucosal immune responses in IBD pathogenesis and how current and emerging analytical platforms might be harnessed to effectively stratify and individualise IBD therapy. IBD treatment has an expanding repertoire of drugs targeting different aspects of the immune response. This Review focuses on unravelling the complexity of mucosal immune responses in IBD pathogenesis and how analytical assays might be harnessed to effectively stratify and individualise IBD therapy.

Performing well-designed and ethical trials in pediatric inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) is a priority to support optimal therapy and reduce the unacceptable long lag between adult and pediatric drug approval. Recently, clinical trials in children have been incorporating placebo arms into their protocols under conditions that created controversy. Therefore, 4 organizations (the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition; European Crohn's and Colitis Organization; the Canadian Children IBD Network; and the Global Pediatric IBD Network) jointly provide a statement on the role of placebo in pediatric IBD trials. Consensus was achieved by 94 of 100 (94%) voting committees' members that placebo should only be used if there is genuine equipoise between the active treatment and placebo; for example, this may be considered in trials of drugs with new mechanisms of action without existing adult data, especially when proven effective alternatives do not exist outside the trial. Placebo may also be used in situations where it is an add-on to an effective therapy or to evaluate exit-strategies of maintenance therapy after long-term deep remission. It has been, however, agreed that no child enrolled in a trial should receive a known inferior treatment both within and outside the trial. This also includes withholding therapy in children who show clinical response after a short induction therapy. Given the similarity between pediatric and adult IBD regarding pathophysiology and response to treatments, drugs generally cannot be considered being in genuine equipoise with placebo if it has proven efficacy in adults. Continued collaboration of all stakeholders is needed to facilitate drug development and evaluation in pediatric IBD.

Background: Growth failure is well-recognised in pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease (PIBD; =2 years and duration of IFX >=12 months were associated with improved linear growth for IFX; for ADA only improvement was seen in Tanner 1-3. For IFX, Tanner 1-3 median [DELTA] ht SDS -0.3 (-0.7,0.2) at T0 changed to 0.04 (-0.5, 0.7) at T+12 (p < 0.001) vs -0.01 (-0.5, 0.9) at T0 in T4-5 changed to -0.01 (-0.4, 0.2) at T+12 (p > 0.05). For IFX disease duration >=2 year, median [DELTA] ht SDS was -0.13 (-0.6, 0.3) at T0 then 0.07 (-0.3, 0.6) at T+12 (p < 0.001). Remission improved [DELTA] ht SDS (median [DELTA] ht SDS -0.14 (-0.6, 0.3) at T0 to 0.17 (-0.2, 0.7) at T+12 (p > 0.001)). Multiple regression analysis demonstrated corticosteroid usage at T0 predicted improved [DELTA] ht SDS at T+12 for IFX and ADA. Conclusions: Anti-TNF therapy is more likely to be associated with growth improvement when used at earlier stages of puberty with remission a key growth-promoting strategy in Paediatric Crohn's disease.

BackgroundBiologics are used for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases, Crohn´s disease and ulcerative colitis refractory to conventional treatment. In order to allocate healthcare spending efficiently, costly biologics for inflammatory bowel diseases are an important target for cost-effectiveness analyses. The aim of this study was to systemically review all published literature on the cost-effectiveness of biologics for inflammatory bowel diseases and to evaluate the methodological quality of cost-effectiveness analyses.MethodsA literature search was performed using Medline (Ovid), Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS. All cost-utility analyses comparing biologics with conventional medical treatment, another biologic treatment, placebo, or surgery for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases in adults were included in this review. All costs were converted to the 2014 euro. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by Drummond's, Philips', and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist.ResultsAltogether, 25 studies were included in the review. Among the patients refractory to conventional medical treatment, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranged from dominance to 549,335 €/Quality-Adjusted Life Year compared to the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with conventional medical treatment. When comparing biologics with another biologic treatment, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranged from dominance to 24,012,483 €/Quality-Adjusted Life Year. A study including both direct and indirect costs produced more favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios than those produced by studies including only direct costs.ConclusionsWith a threshold of 35,000 €/Quality-Adjusted Life Year, biologics seem to be cost-effective for the induction treatment of active and severe inflammatory bowel disease. Between biologics, the cost-effectiveness remains unclear.

The idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) constitute a heterogeneous group of chronic disorders that include dermatomyositis (DM), polymyositis (PM), sporadic inclusion body myositis (IBM) and necrotizing autoimmune myopathy (NAM). They represent distinct pathological entities that, most often, share predominant inflammation in muscle tissue. Many of the immunopathogenic processes behind the IIM remain poorly understood, but the crucial role of cytokines as essential regulators of the intramuscular build-up of inflammation is undisputed. This review describes the extensive cytokine network within IIM muscle, characterized by strong expression of Tumor Necrosis Factors (TNFα, LTβ, BAFF), Interferons (IFNα/β/γ), Interleukins (IL-1/6/12/15/18/23) and Chemokines (CXCL9/10/11/13, CCL2/3/4/8/19/21). Current therapeutic strategies and the exploration of potential disease modifying agents based on manipulation of the cytokine network are provided. Reported responses to anti-TNFα treatment in IIM are conflicting and new onset DM/PM has been described after administration of anti-TNFα agents to treat other diseases, pointing to the complex effects of TNFα neutralization. Treatment with anti-IFNα has been shown to suppress the IFN type 1 gene signature in DM/PM patients and improve muscle strength. Beneficial effects of anti-IL-1 and anti-IL-6 therapy have also been reported. Cytokine profiling in IIM aids the development of therapeutic strategies and provides approaches to subtype patients for treatment outcome prediction. peerReviewed