Longitudinal Changes in Fecal Calprotectin Levels Among Pregnant Women With and Without Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Their Babies.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The effect of pregnancy on inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains poorly understood. We aimed to monitor intestinal inflammation using fecal calprotectin (FC) in pregnant women and their babies during early life. METHODS: Pregnant women with or without IBD and their infants were prospectively enrolled. FC levels were measured at each trimester of pregnancy and in babies throughout the first 3 years of life. Repeated-measures analysis was applied to investigate changes in FC levels while adjusting for confounders. The FC levels were correlated with the bacterial abundance in both mothers and babies. RESULTS: Six hundred and fourteen fecal samples from 358 mothers (98 with IBD) and 1005 fecal samples from 289 infants (76 born to IBD mothers) were analyzed. Pregnant Patients with IBD maintained higher FC levels through pregnancy compared with controls (P = 7.5 × 10-54). FC gradually increased in controls and declined in Patients with IBD throughout pregnancy (P for interaction = 5.8 × 10-7). Babies born to mothers with IBD presented with significantly higher FC levels than those born to controls up to 3 years of age, after adjusting for sex, delivery mode, feeding behavior, and antibiotics exposure (2 weeks to 3 months of age, P = .015; 12-36 months of age, P = .00003). Subdoligranulum, Roseburia, Fusicatenibacter, and Alistipes negatively correlated, and Streptococcus, Prevotella, Escherichia-Shigella, and Bifidobacterium positively correlated with maternal FC levels at T3. Faecalibacterium, Bifidobacterium, and Alistipes showed negative correlations, and Streptococcus were positively correlated with FC levels within 3 months of birth. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy is associated with decreased inflammatory activity in mothers with IBD. Higher FC levels in babies born to mothers with IBD suggest subclinical inflammation in early life, the long-term consequences of which are uncertain.

Infants born to mothers with IBD present with altered gut microbiome that transfers abnormalities of the adaptive immune system to germ-free mice.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Prenatal and early life bacterial colonisation is thought to play a major role in shaping the immune system. Furthermore, accumulating evidence links early life exposures to the risk of developing IBD later in life. We aimed to assess the effect of maternal IBD on the composition of the microbiome during pregnancy and on the offspring's microbiome. METHODS: We prospectively examined the diversity and taxonomy of the microbiome of pregnant women with and without IBD and their babies at multiple time points. We evaluated the role of maternal IBD diagnosis, the mode of delivery, antibiotic use and feeding behaviour on the microbiome composition during early life. To assess the effects of IBD-associated maternal and infant microbiota on the enteric immune system, we inoculated germ-free mice (GFM) with the respective stool and profiled adaptive and innate immune cell populations in the murine intestines. RESULTS: Pregnant women with IBD and their offspring presented with lower bacterial diversity and altered bacterial composition compared with control women and their babies. Maternal IBD was the main predictor of the microbiota diversity in the infant gut at 7, 14, 30, 60 and 90 days of life. Babies born to mothers with IBD demonstrated enrichment in Gammaproteobacteria and depletion in Bifidobacteria. Finally, GFM inoculated with third trimester IBD mother and 90-day infant stools showed significantly reduced microbial diversity and fewer class-switched memory B cells and regulatory T cells in the colon. CONCLUSION: Aberrant gut microbiota composition persists during pregnancy with IBD and alters the bacterial diversity and abundance in the infant stool. The dysbiotic microbiota triggered abnormal imprinting of the intestinal immune system in GFM.

Yes, We Are Still Talking about Cylosporin vs. Infliximab in Steroid Resistant Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis.

The Spanish IBD Registry (ENEIDA) is reporting in this issue of the Journal on a retrospective assessment of outcomes of cyclosporine use and infliximab use to treat steroid refractory acute severe ulcerative colitis (SR-ASUC) between 1989 and 2013. Overall, they found similar outcomes in terms of 3 month and 1 year colectomy rates. Serious adverse events were lower in cyclosporine users. While this study does not meet the standard of a prospective randomized controlled trial, it does remind us that cyclosporine can be effective in (SR-ASUC) and should be considered in those who have already failed antibody to tumor necrosis factor therapy or as a bridge to immunomodulators that have a slower onset of action.

Factors associated with short- and long-term outcomes of therapy for Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Our post hoc analysis assessed the association of early (at weeks 26-30) clinical, endoscopic, biologic, and pharmacokinetic outcomes with corticosteroid-free remission at week 50 (CSFR50); CSFR50 was observed in 55.2% and 65.4% of patients treated with infliximab, alone or in combination with azathioprine, respectively. METHODS: We analyzed data from 203 patients: 96 received infliximab monotherapy and 107 received combination therapy. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to set cut-off points for the week 30 trough serum infliximab concentration (SIC30) and percentage change, from baseline, in the C-reactive protein (CRP) level at week 26, to predict CSFR50. Univariate and multivariate procedures analyzed predictive parameters of CSFR50 (odds ratio [OR] and 95% confidence interval [CI]). Mucosal healing (MH, zero ulcers) and CRP normalization (<8.0 mg/L) also were assessed. RESULTS: Trough SIC30 was higher in patients with than without CSFR50. Patients given combination therapy had higher trough SIC30s than those given monotherapy. Median trough SIC30 was significantly higher in patients with than without CSFR50 among those on infliximab monotherapy (2.14 vs 0.80 µg/mL; P = .006), but not for those on combination therapy (3.56 vs 3.54 µg/mL; P=.31). In patients with increased baseline levels of CRP (n = 120), corticosteroid-free remission at week 26 (CSFR26) (OR, 4.09; 95% CI, 1.65-10.11), and trough SIC30s of 3.0 µg/mL or greater (OR, 3.20; 95% CI, 1.38-7.42) were associated significantly with CSFR50. In patients evaluable for MH (n = 123), trough SIC30s of 3.0 µg/mL or greater (OR, 3.34; 95% CI, 1.53-7.28) and CRP normalization (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.10-6.54) were associated significantly with MH at week 26 (MH26). Furthermore, CSFR26 (OR, 4.43; 95% CI, 1.81-10.82) and MH26 (OR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.33-6.81) were associated significantly with CSFR50. CONCLUSIONS: Trough SIC30 is associated positively with MH26; CSFR26 and MH26 are independent predictors of CSFR50. Trough SIC30 of 3.0 µg/mL or greater early during maintenance treatment is an important determinant of clinical and endoscopic Crohn's disease outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00094458.

Positioning Therapy for Ulcerative Colitis.

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory condition of the colon, characterized by diffuse mucosal inflammation, bloody diarrhea, and urgency. The mainstay of treatment has been mesalamine agents, steroids, thiopurines, and anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) antibodies. Over the past several years, new therapies have emerged which have provided clinicians new treatment options as well as new challenges in deciding which treatment is best for their patient at given points in their disease course. These agents include budesonide-Multi-Matrix System (MMX), adalimumab, golimumab, and vedolizumab. In addition, randomized controlled trials have investigated a combination therapy of infliximab and azathioprine and a controlled trial of infliximab versus cyclosporine for intravenous steroid refractory UC. This review will focus on where these agents may be optimally positioned in treatment algorithms for UC.

Clinical disease activity, C-reactive protein normalisation and mucosal healing in Crohn's disease in the SONIC trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) has been criticised due to heavy weighting on subjective clinical symptoms. C-reactive protein (CRP) and endoscopic lesions are objective measures of inflammation. We investigated the relationships between clinical disease activity, CRP normalisation and mucosal healing in Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: The Study of Biologic and Immunomodulator Naive Patients in CD trial compared infliximab to azathioprine and to infliximab plus azathioprine in 508 CD patients. Mucosal healing was defined as the absence of mucosal ulceration at the week 26 ileocolonoscopy in a patient who had evidence of ulceration at the baseline ileocolonoscopy. RESULTS: 188 patients who had evaluable ileocolonoscopy with evidence of mucosal ulceration at baseline, CDAI scores and CRP values at baseline and week 26 were analysed. Seventy-two of 136 patients (53%) who had a CDAI<150 at week 26 achieved mucosal healing, and 38 of 90 patients (42%) achieved both CRP normalisation (CRP<0.8 mg/dL) and mucosal healing while in clinical remission. The positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of CDAI to detect mucosal healing using 150 as a cut-off for CDAI were 65% and 53%, respectively. The PPV and NPV of CDAI to detect mucosal healing and CRP normalisation using 150 as a cut-off for CDAI were 79% and 42%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Half the patients under azathioprine and/or infliximab in clinical remission have endoscopic and/or CRP evidence of residual active CD, whereas other patients with endoscopic and CRP normalisation have persistent clinical symptoms. Clinical symptoms as scored by CDAI are not a reliable measure of the underlying inflammation.

Validation of endoscopic activity scores in patients with Crohn's disease based on a post hoc analysis of data from SONIC.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Mucosal healing might alter midterm and long-term outcomes of patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and has become an important end point in clinical trials. However, the minimal degree of mucosal improvement (endoscopic response) required to alter midterm outcomes is not known. We aimed to determine the best definition of endoscopic response by evaluating data on the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) and the Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) from the Study of Biologic and Immunomodulator Naive Patients in Crohn's Disease (SONIC trial). METHODS: We analyzed data from 172 patients who participated in the SONIC trial, were found to have endoscopic lesions at baseline, and underwent a second endoscopic examination at week 26 of treatment with infliximab, azathioprine, or both. Mucosal healing was defined as absence of ulcers. A central reader calculated SES-CD and CDEIS results. Different cutoff values were set for endoscopic response based on the SES-CD or CDEIS. The diagnostic ability of these different cutoff values was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, positive likelihood ratios (PLR), and negative likelihood ratios (NLR). Corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CFREM) at week 50 was used as a binary classifier. RESULTS: Based on analyses of ROC curves, PLR, and NLR, endoscopic response was defined as a decrease from baseline in SES-CD of at least 50%. At week 26, mucosal healing and endoscopic response were achieved in 48% and 65% of patients, respectively. Mucosal healing at week 26 was associated with CFREM at week 50, with 56% sensitivity, 65% specificity, a PLR of 1.60, and an NLR of 0.67. Endoscopic response at week 26 was associated with CFREM at week 50, with 74% sensitivity, 48% specificity, a PLR of 1.42, and an NLR of 0.54. Endoscopic response, defined as a decrease from baseline in CDEIS of at least 50%, yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CD, mucosal healing and endoscopic response (defined as a decrease from baseline in SES-CD or CDEIS of at least 50%) at week 26 of treatment identified those most likely to be in CFREM at week 50. The ability of the proposed endoscopic response cutoff value to predict midterm CFREM should be validated in an independent, prospective cohort. Its correlation with changes in long-term disease progression still needs to be demonstration. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT00094458.

Infliximab, azathioprine, or combination therapy for Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: The comparative efficacy and safety of infliximab and azathioprine therapy alone or in combination for Crohn's disease are unknown. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we evaluated the efficacy of infliximab monotherapy, azathioprine monotherapy, and the two drugs combined in 508 adults with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease who had not undergone previous immunosuppressive or biologic therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive an intravenous infusion of 5 mg of infliximab per kilogram of body weight at weeks 0, 2, and 6 and then every 8 weeks plus daily oral placebo capsules; 2.5 mg of oral azathioprine per kilogram daily plus a placebo infusion on the standard schedule; or combination therapy with the two drugs. Patients received study medication through week 30 and could continue in a blinded study extension through week 50. RESULTS: Of the 169 patients receiving combination therapy, 96 (56.8%) were in corticosteroid-free clinical remission at week 26 (the primary end point), as compared with 75 of 169 patients (44.4%) receiving infliximab alone (P=0.02) and 51 of 170 patients (30.0%) receiving azathioprine alone (P<0.001 for the comparison with combination therapy and P=0.006 for the comparison with infliximab). Similar numerical trends were found at week 50. At week 26, mucosal healing had occurred in 47 of 107 patients (43.9%) receiving combination therapy, as compared with 28 of 93 patients (30.1%) receiving infliximab (P=0.06) and 18 of 109 patients (16.5%) receiving azathioprine (P<0.001 for the comparison with combination therapy and P=0.02 for the comparison with infliximab). Serious infections developed in 3.9% of patients in the combination-therapy group, 4.9% of those in the infliximab group, and 5.6% of those in the azathioprine group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease who were treated with infliximab plus azathioprine or infliximab monotherapy were more likely to have a corticosteroid-free clinical remission than those receiving azathioprine monotherapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00094458.)

Clinical presentation and outcomes of inflammatory bowel disease patients admitted to the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Disease severity, immunosuppression, and malnutrition may impact morbidity and mortality of the critically ill patient with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of this study was to identify potential predictive factors for mortality among IBD patients requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: All patients with an admitting diagnosis of ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease presenting to the ICU at the Mount Sinai Medical Center from 2003 to 2008 were retrospectively analyzed. Data regarding IBD-specific features, medications, and surgical outcomes were collected as well as ICU-related morbidity and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients were admitted to the ICU out of a total of 6663 IBD-related hospital admissions with an overall 30-day mortality rate of 18.9%. The annual number of ICU admissions of all hospitalized IBD patients increased from 0.1% in 2003 to 2.6% of admissions in 2008. ICU-related variables associated with increased mortality included mechanical ventilation (P=0.0002), vasopressor requirement (P=0.0002), severe sepsis (P=0.0005), acute kidney injury (P=0.001), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores (P ≤ 0.0001), hypoalbuminemia (P=0.036), and thromboembolism (P=0.046). On multivariate analysis, elevated Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores were the only independent predictor of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Although the overall number of ICU admissions among IBD patients was low, the annual incidence rates of admissions are increasing. This patient subgroup had significant in-hospital morbidity and 30-day mortality. Earlier identification of potential risk factors leading to poorer outcome, particularly within the first 24 hours of ICU admission, may impact the triage and subsequent management of these critically ill patients.

Patients enrolled in randomized controlled trials do not represent the inflammatory bowel disease patient population.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted to determine therapeutic efficacy of the biological agents for the inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). However, the external validity of findings from RCTs might be compromised by their stringent selection criteria. We investigated the proportion of patients encountered during routine clinical practice who would qualify for enrollment into a pivotal RCT of biological agents for IBD. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with moderate-severe IBD who presented to a tertiary referral center. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were extracted from published RCTs of biologics approved by the Food and Drug Administration and applied to the study population. RESULTS: Only 31.1% of 206 patients with IBD (34% with Crohn's disease [CD], 26% with ulcerative colitis) would have been eligible to participate in any of the selected RCTs. Patients would have been excluded because they had stricturing or penetrating CD, took high doses of steroids, had comorbidities or prior exposure to biologics, or received topical therapies. Of the trial-ineligible patients with ulcerative colitis, 23.3% had colectomies, and 31.7% received infliximab, with a 63.2% response rate. Approximately half (49.4%) of the 82 trial-ineligible patients with CD received biological therapies, with lower response rates (60%) than trial-eligible patients (89%; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with moderate-severe IBD evaluated in an outpatient practice would not qualify for enrollment in a pivotal RCT of biological reagents; this finding raises important questions about their therapeutic efficacy beyond the clinical trial populations. Additional evaluation of the transparency of RCT design and selection criteria is needed to determine whether trial results can be generalized to the population.

The effect of intravenous cyclosporine on rates of colonic surgery in hospitalized patients with severe Crohn's colitis.

BACKGROUND: The role of intravenous (IV) cyclosporine in severe Crohn's colitis (CC) is poorly studied. AIM: Our primary aim was to determine the in-hospital colonic resection rate in patients with severe CC who received IV cyclosporine, and the potential predictors of resection among these patients. METHODS: An inpatient pharmacy query of all patients who received IV cyclosporine at Mount Sinai Medical Center for 12.5 years after January 1, 1996 was reviewed. Patients with CC or indeterminate colitis favoring Crohn's were included and their medical records were reviewed. Subsequent need for colonic surgery was assessed. A Kaplan-Meier plot with log-rank testing was performed to determine the rate of colonic surgery avoidance. Forward stepwise logistic regression was performed to determine independent predictors of surgery. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients met our inclusion criteria. Prior thiopurine and anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) use was 85% and 69%, respectively. The median follow-up time was 12 months (range, 1 to 60 mo). 12.5% of patients required colonic resection during their admission for IV cyclosporine. Anti-TNF use in the 4 weeks preceding IV cyclosporine was the only predictor of surgery in this setting (P=0.05). The cumulative colonic surgery avoidance rate was 72±13% at 6 months and 59±15% at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The use of IV cyclosporine resulted in a low rate of in-hospitalization colonic surgery among CC patients with severe disease, the majority of whom previously failed anti-TNFs and thiopurines.

Effectiveness and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are important for protection from COVID-19; however, patients with immune-mediated conditions and patients taking immunosuppressive medications, including patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), were excluded from studies demonstrating the safety and efficacy of these vaccines. This article provides an overview of the research and recommendations currently published on vaccines against COVID-19 in adult populations with IBD, including studies evaluating effects of commonly used medications. COVID-19 vaccines are strongly recommended for patients with IBD. Messenger RNA (mRNA) and adenovirus vector vaccines are safe in patients with IBD, and reports of severe reactions or IBD flares are rare. Studies assessing antibody response, T-cell immunity, and real-world experience demonstrate positive outcomes for mRNA and adenovirus vector vaccines in patients with IBD, although mRNA vaccines may have a slight advantage. Studies assessing inactive COVID-19 vaccines are still needed. Immunosuppressive therapies used in IBD, especially tumor necrosis factor antagonists, combination therapy, and corticosteroids, may reduce antibody responses and durability, but the impact on infection, hospitalizations, and death requires further evaluation. Educating patients with this evidence-based information will likely help to reduce concerns and vaccine hesitancy.

A randomised placebo-controlled multicentre trial of intravenous semapimod HCl for moderate to severe Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVE: Semapimod, a small molecule known to inhibit proinflammatory cytokine activity, was studied to determine the optimal dose necessary to achieve a response in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (CD04) was carried out followed by an open-label extension study (CD05). The trial was conducted in international multicentre outpatient clinics and included patients with moderate to severe CD (Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) 250-400). Placebo was administered for 3 days; 60 mg semapimod intravenously for 1 day with placebo for 2 days; or 60 mg semapimod intravenously for 3 days. Participants who completed CD04 could participate in the open-label extension study, CD05, to receive up to five additional semapimod HCl 60 mg daily doses three times every 6-8 weeks. The main outcome measures were CDAI, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Inflammation Score (CDEIS) and serum C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration. RESULTS: 152 patients were randomised in CD04. Responses for 1 and 3 day regimens were similar to placebo for CDAI (p=0.82), IBDQ (p=0.85), CDEIS (p=0.57) and CRP (p=0.40). The only noteworthy treatment-related safety finding was infusion reaction (phlebitis): 7.3, 34.8 and 62.7% for the placebo and 1 and 3 day semapimod treatment groups, respectively (p<0.001). In the open-label CD05 study (included=119 patients) a posthoc analysis showed that the mean CDAI improved in patients receiving 6 compared with < or = 3 cumulative doses (204.1+/-83 vs 251.4+/-103.05, p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Single and 3 day dosing of semapimod (< or = 180 mg) was ineffective for the treatment of moderate to severe CD. However, cumulative dosing > or = 360 mg was associated with decreased CDAI in a limited number of patients.

Ulcerative colitis practice guidelines in adults: American College Of Gastroenterology, Practice Parameters Committee.

Guidelines for clinical practice are aimed to indicate preferred approaches to medical problems as established by scientifically valid research. Double-blind placebo controlled studies are preferable, but compassionate-use reports and expert review articles are used in a thorough review of the literature conducted through Medline with the National Library of Medicine. When only data that will not withstand objective scrutiny are available, a recommendation is identified as a consensus of experts. Guidelines are applicable to all physicians who address the subject regardless of specialty training or interests and are aimed to indicate the preferable but not necessarily the only acceptable approach to a specific problem. Guidelines are intended to be flexible and must be distinguished from standards of care, which are inflexible and rarely violated. Given the wide range of specifics in any health-care problem, the physician must always choose the course best suited to the individual patient and the variables in existence at the moment of decision. Guidelines are developed under the auspices of the American College of Gastroenterology and its Practice Parameters Committee and approved by the board of trustees. Each has been intensely reviewed and revised by the Committee, other experts in the field, physicians who will use them, and specialists in the science of decision analysis. The recommendations of each guideline are therefore considered valid at the time of composition based on the data available. New developments in medical research and practice pertinent to each guideline will be reviewed at a time established and indicated at publication to assure continued validity. The recommendations made are based on the level of evidence found. Grade A recommendations imply that there is consistent level 1 evidence (randomized controlled trials), grade B indicates that the evidence would be level 2 or 3, which are cohort studies or case-control studies. Grade C recommendations are based on level 4 studies, meaning case series or poor-quality cohort studies, and grade D recommendations are based on level 5 evidence, meaning expert opinion.

Mucosal healing in inflammatory bowel disease: where do we stand?

The definition of remission in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis has evolved to include mucosal healing as a measure of treatment efficacy. Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated mucosal healing is attainable with the current arsenal of therapies available to treat inflammatory bowel disease. Mucosal healing has been shown to reduce the likelihood of clinical relapse, reduce the risk of future surgeries, and reduce hospitalizations. This review focuses on the latest studies addressing clinical outcomes of mucosal healing in the clinical trial and practice setting.

Guidance for Restarting Inflammatory Bowel Disease Therapy in Patients Who Withheld Immunosuppressant Medications During COVID-19.

Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] are frequently treated with immunosuppressant medications. During the coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] pandemic, recommendations for IBD management have included that patients should stay on their immunosuppressant medications if they are not infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2], but to temporarily hold these medications if symptomatic with COVID-19 or asymptomatic but have tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. As more IBD patients are infected globally, it is important to also understand how to manage IBD medications during convalescence while an individual with IBD is recovering from COVID-19. In this review, we address the differences between a test-based versus a symptoms-based strategy as related to COVID-19, and offer recommendations on when it is appropriate to consider restarting IBD therapy in patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 or with clinical symptoms consistent with COVID-19. In general, we recommend a symptoms-based approach, due to the current lack of confidence in the accuracy of available testing and the clinical significance of prolonged detection of virus via molecular testing.

Progression to colorectal neoplasia in ulcerative colitis: effect of mesalamine.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Some studies have suggested that mesalamine can prevent the development of colorectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). The aim of this study was to compare rates of progression with advanced neoplasia in patient cohorts with UC taking low and high doses of mesalamine and to determine where in the process of neoplastic progression mesalamine might act. METHODS: Three cohorts of UC patients were identified from an institutional database: 311 patients with no dysplasia (NoD), 56 with indefinite dysplasia (IND), and 26 with flat low-grade dysplasia (fLGD). The impact of mesalamine exposure on the subsequent development of advanced neoplasia (high-grade dysplasia or colorectal cancer) was assessed using life-table methods. RESULTS: Seventeen of 311 patients with NoD progressed to advanced neoplasia (5-year rate, 1.1%). This rate was lower than the 5-year rate for the IND (9%; P = .02 vs NoD) and fLGD (45%; P < .001 vs NoD and P = .001 vs IND) cohorts. Among the NoD cohort, the hazard ratio for mesalamine users versus nonusers was 0.70 (95% confidence interval, 0.20-2.44), and for each 1 g/d increase in dose, the hazard ratio was 0.92 (95% confidence interval, 0.58-1.47). For patients with IND, no patients on greater than 2 g/d progressed versus 13.8% on low-dose mesalamine (P = .11). For fLGD, 62.5% on high dose progressed, versus 27.8% on low dose (P = .054). CONCLUSIONS: In long-standing UC, patients with fLGD have a higher rate of progression to advanced neoplasia than those with NoD or IND. However, at none of these stages of disease did mesalamine use show definitive chemopreventive activity.

Cyclosporine and infliximab as rescue therapy for each other in patients with steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In patients with severe corticosteroid-refractory ulcerative colitis, cyclosporine or infliximab may be added in an effort to induce remission. If the patient then fails either of these drugs, it is unknown whether success can be achieved by using the other agent. The aim of this study was to assess outcomes of using cyclosporine after failure of infliximab, and vice versa. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 19 patients with corticosteroid-refractory ulcerative colitis who received either infliximab after failed cyclosporine or cyclosporine after failed infliximab. Acute salvage therapy was defined as having received the alternate drug within 4 weeks of discontinuing the first agent. RESULTS: Ten patients received infliximab after failing cyclosporine; 9 patients received cyclosporine after failing infliximab. Four patients (40%) in the infliximab-salvage group achieved remission, as did 3 (33%) in the cyclosporine-salvage group. Remission lasted a mean of 10.4 months (range, 4.4-17.03 mo) and 28.5 months (range, 5.0-41.5 mo), respectively. Severe adverse events included one patient who developed sepsis and died after receiving infliximab salvage. One patient who received cyclosporine salvage developed herpetic esophagitis, and another patient who received cyclosporine salvage developed pancreatitis and bacteremia. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe corticosteroid-refractory ulcerative colitis who fail treatment with either cyclosporine or infliximab, remission rates using acute salvage therapy by crossing over to the other drug occur in approximately one third of patients and have limited duration. Serious adverse events occurred in 16%, including 1 death, suggesting that the risks of acute salvage therapy may outweigh the benefits.

Adverse events associated with the use of cyclosporine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous cyclosporine (i.v. CsA) is an effective therapy for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, data regarding its adverse events in these patients are limited. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of the initial 111 consecutive patients with IBD treated with i.v. CsA followed by a predetermined duration of oral therapy. RESULTS: One hundred eleven patients (64 UC, 47 CD; mean age 33 yr, range 16-68) received i.v. CsA at 4 mg/kg/day, then oral CsA at 8 mg/kg/day, with dose adjustment based on serum creatinine. The mean treatment duration was 9.3 months (range 1 wk to 34 months). Major adverse events occurred in 17 (15.3%) patients. Nephrotoxicity (serum creatinine > or = 1.4 mg/dL [123 micromol/L] or a rise by at least 33% over baseline not responding to dose adjustment) sufficiently severe to warrant discontinuation of therapy occurred in 6 (5.4%) patients. Serious infection occurred in 7 (6.3%) patients, seizures in 4 (3.6%) patients, anaphylaxis in 1 (0.9%) patient, and death in 2 (1.8%) patients. Minor adverse events (transient effects with complete resolution either spontaneously or with dose adjustment) comprised: paresthesias (51%), hypomagnesemia (42%), hypertension (39%), hypertrichosis (27%), headache (23%), minor nephrotoxicity (defined as above but with restoration of normal serum creatinine with dose adjustment; 19% of patients), abnormal liver function tests (19%), minor infections (15%), hyperkalemia (13%), and gingival swelling (4%). CONCLUSIONS: In our initial experience, limited duration CsA therapy was frequently associated with adverse events although the majority of these were minor and responded to dose adjustment. Although not all severe adverse events can be clearly attributed to CsA use alone, its high incidence suggests that vigorous monitoring by experienced clinicians at tertiary care centers may be required.