Endoscopic, Histologic, and Composite Endpoints in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis Treated with Etrasimod [106/120 characters, including spaces].

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Histologic remission, a potentially important treatment target in ulcerative colitis (UC), is associated with favorable long-term outcomes. Etrasimod is an oral, once-daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P)1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active UC. This post-hoc analysis of the ELEVATE UC program evaluated the efficacy of etrasimod according to histologic and composite (histologic/endoscopic/symptomatic) endpoints and examined their prognostic value. METHODS: Patients with moderately to severely active UC were randomized 2:1 to once-daily oral etrasimod 2 mg or placebo. Histologic and composite endpoints, including disease clearance (endoscopic/histologic/symptomatic remission), were assessed at Weeks 12 (ELEVATE UC 52; ELEVATE UC 12) and 52 (ELEVATE UC 52). Logistic regressions examined associations between baseline and Week 12 histologic/composite endpoints and Week 52 outcomes. RESULTS: At Weeks 12 and 52, significant improvements with etrasimod vs placebo were observed in histologic/composite outcomes, including endoscopic improvement-histologic remission (EIHR) and disease clearance. The proportion of patients treated with etrasimod achieving clinical remission (CR) at Week 52 was higher among those with disease clearance at Week 12 vs those without disease clearance (73.9% [17/23] vs 28.3% [71/251]). Histologic improvement and endoscopic improvement (EI) at Week 12 were moderately and strongly associated with CR at Week 52, odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval [CI]): 2.37 (1.27, 4.41) and 6.36 (3.47, 11.64), respectively. Histologic remission and EI at Week 12 were strongly associated with EIHR at Week 52, OR (95% CI): 3.21 (1.70, 6.06) and 5.47 (2.89, 10.36), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Etrasimod was superior to placebo for achievement of stringent histologic and composite endpoints; NCT03945188, NCT03996369.

Long-term safety and efficacy of filgotinib for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: Interim analysis from up to 4 years of follow-up in the SELECTION open-label long-term extension study.

BACKGROUND: Filgotinib, an oral, once-daily, Janus kinase 1 preferential inhibitor, is an approved treatment for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. AIMS: The aim of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of continued filgotinib therapy over ~4 years in the long-term extension of the phase 2b/3 SELECTION trial (SELECTIONLTE; NCT02914535). METHODS: In this interim analysis of SELECTIONLTE, SELECTION completers (week 10 responders to filgotinib who completed the maintenance study) continued their assigned treatment (double-blind filgotinib 200 mg [FIL200] or filgotinib 100 mg) and SELECTION week 10 non-responders received open-label FIL200. We assessed safety by adverse events (AEs), and efficacy by partial Mayo Clinic Score (pMCS), inflammatory biomarkers and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We compared safety and efficacy between achievers and non-achievers of a multi-component endpoint, comprehensive disease control (CDC), comprising symptomatic, endoscopic, inflammatory biomarker and HRQoL improvements. RESULTS: Data for completers (n = 250) and non-responders (n = 372) were reported for ≤202 weeks. AE occurrences were low and consistent with previous analyses. The as-observed proportion of FIL200-treated patients in pMCS, biomarker and HRQoL remission during SELECTIONLTE remained high among completers (week 144: 80.0%, 86.4% and 86.0%, respectively) and increased among non-responders (week 192: 62.1%, 76.7% and 59.3%, respectively). Significantly higher proportions of CDC achievers at SELECTION week 58 achieved pMCS, IBDQ and corticosteroid-free pMCS remission than non-achievers, up to LTE week 96. CONCLUSIONS: Filgotinib induced and maintained symptomatic remission and improved HRQoL over 4 years. Safety results showed a proven long-term benefit-risk profile. FIL200-treated CDC achievers had better long-term outcomes than non-achievers.

VAC-Stent in the Treatment of Post-Esophagectomy Anastomotic Leaks: A New "Kid on the Block" Who Marries the Best of Old Techniques-A Review.

Esophagectomy, while a pivotal treatment for esophageal cancer, is not without adverse events. Among these, anastomotic leak (AL) is the most feared complication, threatening patient lives and incurring significant healthcare costs. The management of AL is complex and lacks standardization. Given the high morbidity and mortality rates associated with redo-surgery, which poses risks for already fragile patients, various endoscopic treatments have been developed over time. Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) were the most widely used treatment until the early 2000s. The mechanism of action of SEMSs includes covering the wall defect, protecting it from secretions, and promoting healing. In 2010, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) emerged as a viable alternative for treating ALs, quickly gaining acceptance in clinical practice. EVT involves placing a dedicated sponge under negative pressure inside or adjacent to the wall defect, aiming to clear the leak and promote granulation tissue formation. More recently, the VAC-Stent entered the scenario of endoscopic treatment of post-esophagectomy ALs. This device combines a fully covered SEMS with an integrated EVT sponge, blending the ability of SEMSs to exclude defects and maintain the patency of the esophageal lumen with the capacity of EVT to aspirate secretions and promote the formation of granulation tissue. Although the literature on this new device is not extensive, early results from the application of VAC-Stent have shown promising outcomes. This review aims to synthesize the preliminary efficacy and safety data on the device, thoroughly analyze its advantages over traditional techniques and disadvantages, explore areas for improvement, and propose future directions.

Effect of mesenteric sparing or extended resection in primary ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease on postoperative endoscopic recurrence (SPICY): an international, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective research suggests that excision of the affected mesentery can improve outcomes after an ileocoecal resection in Crohn's disease. However, prospective data from randomised controlled trials are scarce. We aimed to compare rates of postoperative recurrence in patients with Crohn's disease who underwent extended mesenteric resection. METHODS: This international, randomised controlled trial was done in six hospitals and tertiary care centres in the Netherlands and Italy. Eligible patients were aged 16 years or older and had Crohn's disease that was previously confirmed by endoscopy in the terminal ileum or ileocolic region (L1 or L3 disease), with an imaging update in the past 3 months (ultrasound, MRI, or CT enterography). Eligible patients were scheduled to undergo primary ileocolic resection with ileocolic anastomosis. Enrolled patients were assigned by use of simple random allocation (1:1) to either extended mesenteric resection (intervention) or conventional mesenteric sparing resection (control). The primary endpoint was endoscopic recurrence 6 months after surgery. Analyses were done in all patients with primary endpoint data, excluding those who had no anastomosis, a postoperative diagnosis other than Crohn's disease, or withdrew consent. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04538638. FINDINGS: Between Feb 19, 2020, and April 24, 2023, we assessed 217 patients for eligibility. 78 patients were excluded due to failure to meet the inclusion criteria or refusal to participate. 139 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either extended mesenteric resection (n=71) or mesenteric sparing resection (n=68). All 139 patients underwent surgery. Six patients were excluded after random assignment due to withdrawal of consent (n=2), postoperative diagnosis other than Crohn's disease (n=2) and no anastomosis performed (in case of a stoma; n=2). Two patients were lost to follow-up, and two more patients deviated from the protocol by undergoing investigations other than endoscopy 6 months after. 133 patients were included in the baseline analysis (67 in the extended resection group and 66 in the sparing resection group) of whom 57 (43%) were male. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, and median patient age was 36 years (IQR 25-54). 131 patients were analysed for the primary outcome. There was no difference between groups in the rate of endoscopic recurrence at 6 months after surgery (28 [42%] of 66 patients in the extended mesenteric resection group vs 28 [43%] of 65 patients in the mesenteric sparing resection group, relative risk 0·985, 95% CI 0·663-1·464; p=1·0). Five (8%) of 66 patients in the extended mesenteric resection group had anastomotic leakage within the 30 days after surgery, as did one (2%) of 65 in the mesenteric sparing group. Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa or higher were reported in seven (11%) patients in the mesenteric resection group and five (8%) in the mesenteric sparing group. INTERPRETATION: Extended mesenteric resection was not superior to conventional resection with regard to endoscopic Crohn's disease recurrence. These data support the guideline-recommended mesenteric sparing approach. FUNDING: Topconsortia voor Kennis en Innovatie-Topsector Life Sciences & Health.

THE FUTURE OF CLINICAL TRIALS IN INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE.

The medical management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been transformed over the past few decades by both the approval of multiple classes of advanced therapies as well as the integration of more targeted treatment strategies for both Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). These changes have been driven by an increasing number of pivotal randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which have grown in both size and complexity over time. Several landmark studies that are anticipated to change current IBD management paradigms have recently been completed or are on-going, including the first head-to-head biologic trials, advanced combination treatment trials, therapeutic strategy and treatment target trials, and multiple phase 3 registrational programs of novel compounds. Despite these advances, the future of IBD trials also faces major challenges with respect to cost, feasibility, and recruitment. Accordingly, innovative methods for both early and late phase RCTs must be adopted. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of modern IBD trials, discuss methods for improving trial efficiency both in early and late phase development, and provide insights into the interpretation and implications of these data for clinical care.

Mucosal Healing With Vedolizumab in Patients with Chronic Pouchitis: EARNEST, a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Vedolizumab is indicated for the treatment of chronic pouchitis in the EU. We assessed whether vedolizumab induced mucosal healing (MH) and if MH was associated with clinical improvements. METHODS: EARNEST, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, evaluated vedolizumab efficacy and safety in adults with chronic pouchitis. Centrally read endoscopic and histological evaluation was performed at baseline, week (W)14, and W34. Ulcer count, adapted Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) in the pouch, and Pouchitis Disease Activity Index (PDAI) histological component were evaluated. PDAI and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) remission at W14 and W34 were compared by MH status at W14. RESULTS: Following treatment, mean (SD) number of ulcers in vedolizumab-treated patients reduced from 15.1 (16.4) to 5.0 (4.9) at W14 and 2.7 (3.2) at W34 vs placebo-treated patients with corresponding values of 11.8 (11.3), 13.4 (18.4), and 9.7 (13.8) (vedolizumab vs placebo difference [95% CI]: W14:-8.4 [-14.3,-2.6]; W34:-7.0 [-12.0,-2.0]). More patients receiving vedolizumab vs placebo achieved reduction in ulcerated pouch surface area (W14: 52.4% vs 20.0%; difference 32.4p.p [9.7, 51.4]; W34: 52.1% vs 12.9%; difference 40.2p.p [15.6, 60.3]), absence of ulceration (W14: 23.8% vs 7.5%; difference 16.3p.p [1.1, 31.6]; W34: 34.4% vs 15.6%; difference 18.8p.p [-2.0, 39.5]), SES-CD remission (W14: 23.8% vs 7.5%; difference 16.3p.p [1.1, 31.6]; W34: 34.4% vs 15.6%; difference 18.8p.p [-2.0, 39.5]) and MH (W14: 16.7% vs 2.5%; difference 14.2p.p [1.9, 26.4]). Patients with MH at W14 had higher rates of PDAI and IBDQ remission at W14 and W34 than those without. CONCLUSION: Vedolizumab induced endoscopic improvements in patients with chronic pouchitis, which was associated with improved outcomes at W34, particularly in patients achieving MH at W14. CLINICALTRIALS: gov number, NCT02790138.

A Comprehensive Multidisciplinary Approach to Diagnosing Chronic Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Integration of Clinical, Endoscopic, and Imaging Modalities.

Chronic inflammatory bowel diseases, such as Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, present diagnostic challenges due to their complex and heterogeneous nature. While histology remains fundamental for accurate diagnosis, a multidisciplinary approach incorporating clinical, endoscopic, and imaging modalities is increasingly recognized as essential for comprehensive evaluation. This article delves into the importance of integrating various diagnostic techniques in the assessment of IBD. Colonoscopy and histology, with its ability to directly visualize the intestinal mucosa, play a central role in the diagnostic process. However, histological analysis alone may not suffice, necessitating the inclusion of advanced imaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance enterography (MRE), computed tomography enterography (CTE), and intestinal ultrasound (IUS). These techniques provide valuable insights into the disease's extent, severity, and complications, and should be used in conjunction with biochemical parameters. These modalities complement traditional endoscopic and histological findings, offering a more holistic understanding of the disease process. A multidisciplinary approach that incorporates clinical, endoscopic, histological, serological, and imaging assessments enables clinicians to achieve a more accurate and timely diagnosis of IBD. Moreover, this integrated approach facilitates personalized treatment strategies tailored to individual patient needs, ultimately improving clinical outcomes and quality of life for those affected by chronic inflammatory bowel diseases.

Immunity in digestive diseases: new drugs for inflammatory bowel disease treatment-insights from Phase II and III trials.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), encompassing Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), continues to challenge treatment paradigms. Advancements in therapeutic options have been have been driven by Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials of new drug classes, particularly sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) modulators and interleukin-23 (IL-23) inhibitors. METHODS: This review synthesizes findings from Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials conducted up to early 2024, focusing on the impact of S1P modulators and IL-23 inhibitors on IBD management. Drugs such as ozanimod, etrasimod, risankizumab, mirikizumab, guselkumab, and brasikumab were evaluated for their efficacy and safety profiles. RESULTS: S1P modulators, such as ozanimod and etrasimod, effectively regulate immune cell trafficking to reduce inflammation and several trials highlight their clinical effectiveness in both inducing and maintaining remission in IBD, highlighting its long-term safety and sustained therapeutic effects. Additionally, IL-23 inhibitors including risankizumab, mirikizumab, and guselkumab, which disrupt key inflammatory cytokine pathways, have already shown significant effectiveness in inducing and maintaining remission in both CD and UC, with favorable safety profiles across multiple studies, suggesting their potential as critical components in managing IBD. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical trials indicate that both S1P modulators and IL-23 inhibitors offer promising therapeutic benefits and maintain strong safety profiles, positioning them as potential cornerstone treatments for IBD. Despite these advancements, further exploration into long-term safety and the development of personalized treatment strategies is essential for maximizing clinical outcomes.

Differences Between the 2016 and 2022 Food and Drug Administration Guidance-Implications for Design and Interpretation of Clinical Trials in Ulcerative Colitis.

Background: In 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) updated its draft guidance for drug development in ulcerative colitis, replacing the version from 2016. Several changes from the 2016 version merit further discussion as they impact clinical trial design and the interpretation of trial results. Methods: We compared both documents and critically appraised the changes and implications for future clinical trials. Results: The 2022 guidance recommends full colonoscopy, rather than flexible sigmoidoscopy, to document disease activity in all involved segments of the colon. The concordance between the findings of the 2 procedures is very high and there is little evidence to support colonoscopy over sigmoidoscopy. The use of colonoscopy, rather than sigmoidoscopy, is also associated with a higher burden to trial participants who must undergo full bowel preparation, cost, and a potential for more adverse events. The definition of the Mayo endoscopic score of 0 was changed from the original publication to "normal appearance of mucosa," which suggests that endoscopic signs of prior disease, such as pseudopolyps and scarring, are incompatible with a score 0, even though they are not associated with active disease. The term "mucosal healing" has been abolished and histologic outcomes defined as exploratory. A welcome change is that shorter washout periods than 5 half-lives will be considered to reduce patient exposure to corticosteroids as bridging therapy. Conclusions: The 2022 FDA draft guidance includes changes which for the most part are not informed by empirical evidence, which may ultimately complicate interpretation of future trials and preclude comparisons with past trials.

Mucosal and Transmural Healing and Long-term Outcomes in Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Healing in Crohn's disease is complex and difficult to measure due to incongruencies between clinical symptoms and disease states. Mucosal healing (MH) and transmural healing (TH) are increasingly used to measure clinical improvement in Crohn's disease, but definitions of MH and TH can vary across studies, and their relationship to long-term outcomes is not clear. To address this knowledge gap, we performed a systematic literature review (SLR) to examine studies measuring MH and TH in Crohn's disease. METHODS: Database records from 2012 to 2022 were searched for real-world evidence and interventional studies that reported the association of MH or TH with clinical, economic, or quality of life outcomes of adult patients with Crohn's disease. RESULTS: A total of 46 studies were identified in the systematic literature review, representing a combined patient population of 5530. Outcomes of patients with MH were reported by 39 studies; of these, 14 used validated scales for endoscopic assessment. Thirteen studies reported outcomes of patients with TH. Among studies that examined the outcomes of patients with and without MH or TH, patients with healing generally experienced improved clinical outcomes and reduced healthcare resource utilization, including fewer hospitalizations and surgeries and improved rates of clinical remission. This was especially true for patients with TH. CONCLUSIONS: Mucosal and transmural healing are associated with positive long-term outcomes for adult patients with Crohn's disease. The adoption of standardized measures and less invasive assessment tools will maximize the benefits of patient monitoring.

Inflammation of the bowel wall is a key component of Crohn's disease (CD). A systematic literature review (SLR) showed bowel wall healing was associated with positive long-term outcomes in CD, supporting healing as an indicator of disease control.

An international multicentre study of SwiTching from Intravenous to subcutaneous inflixiMab and vEdolizumab in inflammatory bowel diseases: The TIME study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subcutaneous (SC) formulations of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) are approved for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of switching from intravenous (IV) to SC formulations of IFX and VDZ in IBDs. METHODS: This multicentre, retrospective study collected data of adult patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) switched to SC IFX or VDZ. The primary endpoint was clinical remission at 12 months stratified based on timing of switch. A composite endpoint consisting of therapy discontinuation, reverse-switch, need for steroids, and drug optimization was evaluated. A multivariate analysis investigated the association between patients' characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-one patients (59% UC, 53% male, mean age 44 ± 15 years, 68% IFX) from 13 centres were included. The switch occurred at Week 6 in a third of cases (36%). Median time to switch was 13 months. Most patients switched to SC IFX and VDZ were in clinical remission at 3 (87% and 77%), 6 (86% and 83%) and 12 (63% and 60%) months. In the multivariate analysis, there was no difference in clinical remission rate at 12 months; however, patients switched at Week 6 had a higher rate of experiencing any therapeutic changes at 3 (false discovery rate (FDR) = .002), 6 (FDR <1 × 10-10) or 12 months (FDR = .08). Clinical disease activity at baseline (only in UC) (FDR = .07) and previous exposure to biologics (FDR = .001) were risk factors for composite endpoint at 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSION: SC IFX and VDZ are effective in daily clinical practice in IBD patients. Switching patients in remission reduces the risk of negative outcomes.

ARE WE READY FOR MULTIPLE SWITCHES BETWEEN REFERENCE PRODUCTS AND BIOSIMILARS?

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) currently impose an immense social and economic burden on society in terms of both direct and indirect healthcare costs. Their incurable and progressive nature results in an unavoidable lifetime expense. The introduction of infliximab more than two decades ago had revolutionized IBD treatment. Nowadays, while biologic drugs comprise various vital therapeutic options for patients, they can be associated to significant costs to healthcare systems. The most crucial benefit of biosimilars is that they bring more significant cost reduction and increase access to advanced therapies. They also allow the treatment of newly diagnosed patients and dose optimization for those who need it. There is an inverse relationship between price and demand for treatment with biologics. For a more significant reduction in cost to be possible, greater use of biosimilars is necessary. For this to occur, it is imperative not only to use biosimilars in naïve patients but also to switch to biosimilars in those patients who have started therapy with reference biologics. At present, randomized and observational studies have demonstrated effectiveness and safety results in recommending a single switch between a reference product and a biosimilar, and vice versa. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the literature and discuss whether scientific evidence is enough to support multiple switches of biologics and biosimilars in IBD patients.

Risankizumab versus Ustekinumab for Moderate-to-Severe Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of risankizumab as compared with ustekinumab in patients with Crohn's disease are unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3b, multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial with blinded assessment of end points, patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease who had had an inadequate response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy or unacceptable side effects with such therapy were randomly assigned to receive risankizumab or ustekinumab at standard doses for 48 weeks. The two primary end points, which were tested sequentially, were clinical remission at week 24 (defined as a Crohn's Disease Activity Index score of <150 [range, 0 to 600, with higher scores indicating more severe disease activity]), which was analyzed in the first 50% of patients to complete the week 24 visit, with a noninferiority margin of 10 percentage points; and endoscopic remission at week 48 (defined as a score of ≤4, a decrease of ≥2 points from baseline, and no subscore >1 in any individual variable on the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease [range, 0 to 56, with higher scores indicating more severe disease]), which was analyzed for superiority in 100% of the patients. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of risankizumab or ustekinumab. RESULTS: In the full intention-to-treat population for the efficacy analysis, 230 of 255 patients (90.2%) who received risankizumab and 193 of 265 patients (72.8%) who received ustekinumab completed all the assigned treatments. Both primary end points were met; risankizumab was noninferior to ustekinumab with respect to clinical remission at week 24 (58.6% vs. 39.5%; adjusted difference, 18.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.6 to 30.3) and superior to ustekinumab with respect to endoscopic remission at week 48 (31.8% vs. 16.2%; adjusted difference, 15.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 8.4 to 22.9; P<0.001). The incidence of adverse events appeared to be similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this head-to-head clinical trial of risankizumab and ustekinumab involving patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease who had had unacceptable side effects with anti-TNF therapy or an inadequate response to such therapy, risankizumab was noninferior to ustekinumab with respect to clinical remission at week 24 and superior with respect to endoscopic remission at week 48. (Funded by AbbVie; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04524611.).

Systematic review: Methotrexate-A poorly understood and underused medication in inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: Methotrexate, an immunosuppressant used for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) for over 30 years, remains underused compared to thiopurines. AIMS: To review the efficacy, safety, optimal dosing and delivery regimens of methotrexate in adults with IBD. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies involving patients with IBD treated with methotrexate from inception to August 2023. All studies were included from the MEDLINE database via PubMed. RESULTS: For Crohn's disease, we included eight randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 17 observational studies. Parenteral methotrexate effectively increased remission rates in steroid-dependent patients at 25 mg/week for 16 weeks and at 15 mg/week for maintenance. Methotrexate can be used in combination with anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents to reduce immunogenicity. Data comparing thiopurines and methotrexate remain scarce. For ulcerative colitis (UC), we included five RCTs and 10 observational studies were included; there was no evidence to support the use of methotrexate in (UC). We extracted safety data from 17 studies; mild-to-moderate adverse effects were common. The incidence of liver fibrosis or cirrhosis was low. CONCLUSION: Methotrexate is effective at inducing and maintaining remission in steroid-refractory Crohn's disease and can reduce anti-TNF-induced immunogenicity when used in combination therapy. Data regarding tolerance and safety are reassuring. These findings challenge preconceived ideas on methotrexate and suggest that it is a valid first-line conventional option for the treatment of mild-to-moderate Crohn's disease.

How Reliable Is Endoscopic Scoring of Postoperative Recurrence in Crohn Disease?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: Guidelines advise to perform endoscopic surveillance following ileocolic resection (ICR) in Crohn disease (CD) for timely diagnosis of recurrence. This study aims to assess the variation in endoscopic recurrence (ER) rates in patients after ICR for CD using the most commonly used classification systems, the Rutgeerts score (RS) and modified Rutgeerts score (mRS) classifications. Methods: A systematic literature search using MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies describing ER < 12 months after an ICR for CD were included. Animal studies, reviews, case reports (<30 included patients), pediatric studies, and letters were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale and Cochrane Collaboration's tool were used to assess risk of bias. Main outcome was the range of ER rates within 12 months postoperatively, defined as RS ≥ i2 and/or mRS ≥ i2b. A proportional meta-analysis was performed. The final search was performed on January 4, 2022. The study was registered at PROSPERO, CRD42022363208. Results: Seventy-six studies comprising 7751 patients were included. The weighted mean of ER rates in all included studies was 44.0% (95% confidence interval, 43.56-44.43). The overall range was 5.0% to 93.0% [interquartile range (IQR), 29.2-59.0]. The weighted means for RS and mRS were 44.0% and 41.1%, respectively. The variation in ER rates for RS and mRS were 5.0% to 93.0% (IQR, 29.0-59.5) and 19.8% to 62.9% (IQR, 37.3-46.5), respectively. Within studies reporting both RS and mRS, the weighted means for ER were 61.3% and 40.6%, respectively. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a major variation in ER rates after ICR for CD, suggesting a high likelihood of inadequate diagnosis of disease recurrence, with potentially impact on quality of life and health care consumption. Therefore, there is an important need to improve endoscopic scoring of recurrent disease.

Benefits of Biosimilars in the Management of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An International Survey.

Background/Objectives: The development of biosimilar drugs has revolutionized the management of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), significantly reducing healthcare costs. However, the impact of biosimilar availability on patient care is unknown. We conducted a survey to investigate the benefits of using biosimilars in patients with IBD. Methods: Physicians involved in the IBD care were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. The questionnaire consisted of 42 questions addressing availability, cost, recommendations, and positioning regarding the use of biosimilars. Results: A total of 233 physicians (88.4% gastroenterologists) from 63 countries worldwide participated in the survey. Most respondents had >10 years of practice (202/233, 85.9%). Biosimilars were available in almost all cases (221, 94.8%), and over two-thirds of respondents had more than one biosimilar of adalimumab or infliximab on hospital formulary. In most cases, adalimumab and infliximab biosimilars had a reduced cost of at least 30% compared to the originators. The savings resulting from the use of biosimilars allowed physicians to improve patient care (3/233, 1.3%) or to improve research (2/233, 0.8%) in only a few cases. Interestingly, for about 50% of respondents, the cost of biologics was a limitation for patient access to therapy. For the majority of participants, the availability of biosimilars did not influence treatment decisions in Crohn's disease (70/165, 42.4%) and ulcerative colitis (83/165, 50.3%). Conclusions: The reduced cost of biosimilars compared to reference products is the main driver of choice in IBD. The impact of biosimilars of ustekinumab and vedolizumab in improving access to therapies and changing the treatment algorithm remains to be defined.

Target Trial Emulation: Improving the Quality of Observational Studies in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Using the Principles of Randomized Trials.

The past decade has seen a substantial increase in the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard method for generating robust evidence of drug safety and efficacy but are expensive, time-consuming, and may have ethical implications. Observational studies in IBD are often used to fill the gaps in evidence but are typically hindered by significant bias. There are several approaches for making statistical inferences from observational data with some that focus on study design and others on statistical techniques. Target trial emulation is an emerging methodological process that aims to bridge this gap and improve the quality of observational studies by applying the principles of an ideal, or "target," randomized trial to routinely collected clinical data. There has been a rapid expansion of observational studies that have emulated trials over the past 5 years in other medical fields, but this has yet to be adopted in gastroenterology and IBD. The wealth of nonrandomized clinical data available through electronic health records, patient registries, and administrative health databases afford innumerable hypothesis-generating opportunities for IBD research. This review outlines the principles of target trial emulation, discusses the merits to IBD observational studies in reducing the most common biases and improving confidence in causality, and details the caveats of using this approach.

Target trial emulation uses observational data to mimic the principles of an ideal or "target" randomized trial. This framework offers several opportunities to strengthen the quality of observational research in inflammatory bowel disease by reducing common sources of bias.

Acute severe ulcerative colitis trials: the past, the present and the future.

Acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC), characterised by bloody diarrhoea and systemic inflammation, is associated with a significant risk of colectomy and a small risk of mortality. The landmark trial of cortisone in 1955 was pivotal for two reasons: first, for establishing the efficacy of a drug that remains a first-line therapy today and, second, for producing the first set of disease severity criteria and clinical trial endpoints that shaped the subsequent ASUC trial landscape. Trials in the 1990s and at the turn of the millennium established the efficacy of infliximab and ciclosporin, but since then, there has been little progress in drug development for this high-risk population. This systematic review evaluates all interventional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in patients hospitalised with severe UC. It provides an overview of the efficacy of treatments from past to present and assesses the evolution of trial characteristics with respect to study populations, eligibility criteria and study designs over time. This review details ongoing RCTs in this field and provides a perspective on the challenges for future clinical trial programmes and how these can be overcome to help deliver novel ASUC therapies.

Impact of Prior Biologic or Janus Kinase Inhibitor Therapy on Efficacy and Safety of Etrasimod in the ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 Trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Etrasimod is an oral, once daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate [S1P]1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis [UC]. This subgroup analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of etrasimod 2 mg once daily vs placebo by prior biologic/Janus kinase inhibitor [bio/JAKi] exposure in ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12. METHODS: Pre-defined efficacy endpoints were assessed at Weeks 12 and 52 in ELEVATE UC 52 and Week 12 in ELEVATE UC 12 in bio/JAKi-naïve and -experienced patients, and at Week 12 [pooled] based on prior advanced therapy exposure mechanism. RESULTS: In the ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 analysis populations, 80/274 [29.2%] and 74/222 [33.3%] patients receiving etrasimod and 42/135 [31.1%] and 38/112 [33.9%] patients receiving placebo, respectively, were bio/JAKi-experienced. In both bio/JAKi-naïve and -experienced patients, a significantly greater proportion receiving etrasimod vs placebo achieved clinical remission (p<0.05) in ELEVATE UC 52 at Weeks 12 [naïve: 30.9% vs 9.7%; experienced: 17.5% vs 2.4%] and 52 [naïve: 36.6% vs 7.5%; experienced: 21.3% vs 4.8%]; in ELEVATE UC 12, this was observed only for bio/JAKi-naïve patients [naïve: 27.7% vs 16.2%, p=0.033; experienced: 18.9% vs 13.2%, p=0.349]. Similar patterns were observed for most efficacy endpoints. Among patients with prior anti-integrin exposure [N=90], a significantly greater proportion achieved clinical response [54.1% vs 27.6%, p=0.030], but not clinical remission [9.8% vs 3.4%, p=0.248], with etrasimod vs placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Bio/JAKi-naïve and -experienced patients had clinically meaningful induction and maintenance treatment benefits with etrasimod vs placebo.

Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor is a T cell-negative costimulatory molecule.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) is a key regulator of glucose metabolism known to be expressed by pancreatic ß cells. We herein investigated the role of GLP-1R on T lymphocytes during immune response. Our data showed that a subset of T lymphocytes expresses GLP-1R, which is upregulated during alloimmune response, similarly to PD-1. When mice received islet or cardiac allotransplantation, an expansion of GLP-1Rpos T cells occurred in the spleen and was found to infiltrate the graft. Additional single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) analysis conducted on GLP-1Rpos and GLP-1Rneg CD3+ T cells unveiled the existence of molecular and functional dissimilarities between both subpopulations, as the GLP-1Rpos are mainly composed of exhausted CD8 T cells. GLP-1R acts as a T cell-negative costimulatory molecule, and GLP-1R signaling prolongs allograft survival, mitigates alloimmune response, and reduces T lymphocyte graft infiltration. Notably, GLP-1R antagonism triggered anti-tumor immunity when tested in a preclinical mouse model of colorectal cancer.