A Prediction Model for Successful Increase of Adalimumab Dose Intervals in Patients with Crohn's Disease: Secondary Analysis of the Pragmatic Open-Label Randomised Controlled Non-inferiority LADI Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the pragmatic open-label randomised controlled non-inferiority LADI trial we showed that increasing adalimumab (ADA) dose intervals was non-inferior to conventional dosing for persistent flares in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) in clinical and biochemical remission. AIMS: To develop a prediction model to identify patients who can successfully increase their ADA dose interval based on secondary analysis of trial data. METHODS: Patients in the intervention group of the LADI trial increased ADA intervals to 3 and then to 4 weeks. The dose interval increase was defined as successful when patients had no persistent flare (> 8 weeks), no intervention-related severe adverse events, no rescue medication use during the study, and were on an increased dose interval while in clinical and biochemical remission at week 48. Prediction models were based on logistic regression with relaxed LASSO. Models were internally validated using bootstrap optimism correction. RESULTS: We included 109 patients, of which 60.6% successfully increased their dose interval. Patients that were active smokers (odds ratio [OR] 0.90), had previous CD-related intra-abdominal surgeries (OR 0.85), proximal small bowel disease (OR 0.92), an increased Harvey-Bradshaw Index (OR 0.99) or increased faecal calprotectin (OR 0.997) were less likely to successfully increase their dose interval. The model had fair discriminative ability (AUC = 0.63) and net benefit analysis showed that the model could be used to select patients who could increase their dose interval. CONCLUSION: The final prediction model seems promising to select patients who could successfully increase their ADA dose interval. The model should be validated externally before it may be applied in clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03172377.

Feasibility of Reduced Clinical Monitoring in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Treated with Thiopurine Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient visits and laboratory assessments are routinely scheduled every 3 to 4 months in thiopurine-treated patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) to timely detect thiopurine-related adverse events (AEs). AEs that require therapy adjustment beyond 12 months of treatment are rare. AIM AND METHODS: This single-center prospective cohort study evaluated the safety of a reduced 6-monthly monitoring strategy in steroid-free patients with quiescent IBD on stable dose of azathioprine, mercaptopurine, or thioguanine monotherapy. The primary outcome was thiopurine-related AEs requiring therapy adjustments during a follow-up period of 24 months. Secondary outcomes included all AEs including laboratory toxicity, disease flares until 12 months, and the net monetary benefit from this strategy concerning IBD-related health care use. RESULTS: We enrolled 85 patients with IBD (median age 42 years, 61% Crohn's disease, 62% female), with a median disease duration of 12.5 years and median thiopurine treatment duration of 6.7 years. During follow-up, 3 patients (4%) ceased thiopurines due to AEs: recurrent infections, non-melanoma skin cancer, and gastrointestinal complaints (nausea, vomiting). At 12 months, 25 laboratory toxicities were observed (including 13% myelotoxicity, 17% hepatotoxicity); none required therapy adjustments and all were transient. A reduced monitoring strategy had a net benefit of €136 per patient. CONCLUSION: Three patients (4%) ceased thiopurine therapy due to thiopurine-related AEs, while no laboratory toxicity required therapy adjustments. Monitoring frequency of every 6 months seems feasible in patients with stable IBD on long-term (median duration > 6 years) maintenance thiopurine therapy and may contribute to reduced patient-burden and health care costs.

TNF-α-induced protein 3 (TNFAIP3)/A20 acts as a master switch in TNF-α blockade-driven IL-17A expression.

BACKGROUND: Anti-TNF inhibitors successfully improve the quality of life of patients with inflammatory disease. Unfortunately, not all patients respond to anti-TNF therapy, and some patients show paradoxical immune side effects, which are poorly understood. Surprisingly, anti-TNF agents were shown to promote IL-17A production with as yet unknown clinical implications. OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate the molecular mechanism underlying anti-TNF-driven IL-17A expression and the clinical implications of this phenomenon. METHODS: Fluorescence-activated cell sorting, RNA sequencing, quantitative real-time PCR, Western blotting, small interfering RNA interference, and kinase inhibitors were used to study the molecular mechanisms in isolated human CD4+ T cells from healthy donors. The clinical implication was studied in blood samples of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving anti-TNF therapy. RESULTS: Here we show that anti-TNF treatment results in inhibition of the anti-inflammatory molecule TNF-α-induced protein 3 (TNFAIP3)/A20 in memory CD4+ T cells. We found an inverse relationship between TNFAIP3/A20 expression levels and IL-17A production. Inhibition of TNFAIP3/A20 promotes kinase activity of p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase and protein kinase C, which drives IL-17A expression. Regulation of TNFAIP3/A20 expression and cognate IL-17A production in T cells are specifically mediated through TNF receptor 2 signaling. Ex vivo, in patients with IBD treated with anti-TNF, we found further evidence for an inverse relationship between TNFAIP3/A20 expression levels and IL-17A-producing T cells. CONCLUSION: Anti-TNF treatment interferes in the TNFAIP3/A20-mediated anti-inflammatory feedback loop in CD4+ T cells and promotes kinase activity. This puts TNFAIP3/A20, combined with IL-17A expression, on the map as a potential tool for predicting therapy responsiveness or side effects of anti-TNF therapy. Moreover, it provides novel targets related to TNFAIP3/A20 activity for superior therapeutic regimens in patients with IBD.

Colorectal Cancer Risk in Patients With Lynch Syndrome and Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Lynch syndrome and inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, it is not clear whether the risk of CRC is even higher for patients with a combination of Lynch syndrome and IBD. We investigated the risk for CRC in this subgroup by establishing a Lynch syndrome cohort from the Radboud University Medical Center (Nijmegen, The Netherlands) and the Academic Medical Center (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). Patients with heterozygous germline mutations in MLH1, MSH2 (and EPCAM deletion-mediated MSH2 methylation), MSH6, or PMS2 who were tested and/or treated from 1998 through 2014 were included. Patients who developed IBD were identified by linkage of this cohort to the Dutch nationwide Pathology Registry (PALGA). Subsequently, we compared the risk of CRC between Lynch syndrome patients with IBD and without IBD. Of 1046 patients with Lynch syndrome, 15 developed IBD (1.4%). Patients with Lynch syndrome and IBD were significantly younger (median age, 38.0 y) than patients with Lynch syndrome without IBD (median age, 52.0 y; P = .001). Nevertheless, a similar proportion of patients in each group developed CRC: 4 of the 15 patients (26.7%) with Lynch syndrome and IBD compared with 311 of the 1031 patients (30.2%) with Lynch syndrome without IBD. Patients with Lynch syndrome and IBD developed CRC at a younger age (median age, 36.0 y) than patients with Lynch syndrome without IBD (median age, 46.0 y; P = .045). However, the cumulative incidence of CRC was similar between groups (P = .121). All patients with Lynch syndrome and IBD who developed CRC had ulcerative colitis, producing a higher cumulative incidence of CRC for this IBD subgroup (P < .001). In conclusion, patients with Lynch syndrome and IBD develop CRC risk at a younger age than patients without IBD; patients with ulcerative colitis are at especially high risk.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes After Switching from Remicade® to Biosimilar CT-P13 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on long-term clinical outcomes regarding the switch from Remicade® to the infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. AIMS: To investigate long-term efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetic profile, and immunogenicity. METHODS: We performed a single-center prospective observational cohort study following an elective switch from Remicade® to CT-P13 in IBD patients. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were included (57 Crohn's disease, 24 ulcerative colitis, and 2 IBD unclassified), and 68 patients completed one-year follow-up. Disease activity (Harvey-Bradshaw Index and Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index) as well as inflammatory markers (CRP, fecal calprotectin) did not change significantly during the 1-year follow-up. In total, 7 out of 83 patients (8%) demonstrated detectable antidrug antibodies during follow-up, and 5 out of 7 antidrug antibody titers were already detectable at baseline prior to switching. Six patients (7%) discontinued CT-P13 due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Following a switch from Remicade® to CT-P13, 82% of IBD patients continued treatment through 1 year. Disease activity scores and inflammatory markers remained unchanged during follow-up, and no CT-P13-related serious adverse events occurred. These 1-year data suggest that switching to CT-P13 in Remicade®-treated IBD patients is safe and feasible.

Risk of Neoplasia After Colectomy in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal neoplasia can still develop after colectomy for inflammatory bowel disease. However, data on this risk are scare, and there have been few conclusive findings, so no evidence-based recommendations have been made for postoperative surveillance. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prevalence and incidence of and risk factors for neoplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease who have undergone colectomy, including the permanent-end ileostomy and rectal stump, ileorectal anastomosis (IRA), and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) procedures. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library through May 2014 to identify studies that reported prevalence or incidence of colorectal neoplasia after colectomy or specifically assessed risk factors for neoplasia development. Studies were selected, quality was assessed, and data were extracted by 2 independent researchers. RESULTS: We calculated colorectal cancer (CRC) prevalence values from 13 studies of patients who underwent rectal stump surgery, 35 studies of IRA, and 33 studies of IPAA. Significantly higher proportions of patients in the rectal stump group (2.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3%-3.0%) and in the IRA group (2.4%; 95% CI, 1.7%-3.0%) developed CRC than in the IPAA group (0.5%; 95% CI, 0.3%-0.6%); the odds ratio (OR) for CRC in the rectal stump or IRA groups compared with the IPAA group was 6.4 (95% CI, 4.3-9.5). A history of CRC was the most important risk factor for development of CRC after colectomy (OR for patients receiving IRA, 12.8; 95% CI, 3.31-49.2 and OR for patients receiving IPAA, 15.0; 95% CI, 6.6-34.5). CONCLUSIONS: In a meta-analysis of published studies, we found the prevalence and incidence of CRC after colectomy to be less than 3%; in patients receiving IPAA it was less than 1%. Factors that increased risk of cancer development after colectomy included the presence of a residual rectum and a history of CRC. These findings could aid in development of individualized strategies for post-surgery surveillance.

Increased versus conventional adalimumab dose interval for patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission (LADI): a pragmatic, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite its effectiveness in treating Crohn's disease, adalimumab is associated with an increased risk of infections and high health-care costs. We aimed to assess clinical outcomes of increased adalimumab dose intervals versus conventional dosing in patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission. METHODS: The LADI study was a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, parallel, randomised controlled trial, done in six academic hospitals and 14 general hospitals in the Netherlands. Adults (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with luminal Crohn's disease (with or without concomitant perianal disease) were eligible when in steroid-free clinical and biochemical remission (defined as Harvey-Bradshaw Index [HBI] score <5, faecal calprotectin <150 µg/g, and C-reactive protein <10 mg/L) for at least 9 months on a stable dose of 40 mg subcutaneous adalimumab every 2 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to the intervention group or control group by the coordinating investigator using a secure web-based system with variable block randomisation (block sizes of 6, 9, and 12). Randomisation was stratified on concomitant use of thiopurines and methotrexate. Patients and health-care providers were not masked to group assignment. Patients allocated to the intervention group increased adalimumab dose intervals to 40 mg every 3 weeks at baseline and further to every 4 weeks if they remained in clinical and biochemical remission at week 24. Patients in the control group continued their 2-weekly dose interval. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of persistent flares at week 48 defined as the presence of at least two of the following criteria: HBI score of 5 or more, C-reactive protein 10 mg/L or more, and faecal calprotectin more than 250 µg/g for more than 8 weeks and a concurrent decrease in the adalimumab dose interval or start of escape medication. The non-inferiority margin was 15% on a risk difference scale. All analyses were done in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03172377, and is not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between May 3, 2017, and July 6, 2020, 174 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=113) or the control group (n=61). Four patients from the intervention group and one patient from the control group were excluded from the analysis for not meeting inclusion criteria. 85 (50%) of 169 participants were female and 84 (50%) were male. At week 48, the cumulative incidence of persistent flares in the intervention group (three [3%] of 109) was non-inferior compared with the control group (zero; pooled adjusted risk difference 1·86% [90% CI -0·35 to 4·07). Seven serious adverse events occurred, all in the intervention group, of which two (both patients with intestinal obstruction) were possibly related to the intervention. Per 100 person-years, 168·35 total adverse events, 59·99 infection-related adverse events, and 42·57 gastrointestinal adverse events occurred in the intervention group versus 134·67, 75·03, and 5·77 in the control group, respectively. INTERPRETATION: The individual benefit of increasing adalimumab dose intervals versus the risk of disease recurrence is a trade-off that should take patient preferences regarding medication and the risk of a flare into account. FUNDING: Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Increased Adalimumab Dose Intervals in Crohn's Disease Patients in Stable Remission: The Randomized Controlled LADI Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to assess cost-effectiveness of increasing adalimumab dose intervals compared to the conventional dosing interval in patients with Crohn's disease [CD] in stable clinical and biochemical remission. DESIGN: We conducted a pragmatic, open-label, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, comparing increased adalimumab intervals with the 2-weekly interval in adult CD patients in clinical remission. Quality of life was measured with the EQ-5D-5L. Costs were measured from a societal perspective. Results are shown as differences and incremental net monetary benefit [iNMB] at relevant willingness to accept [WTA] levels. RESULTS: We randomized 174 patients to the intervention [n = 113] and control [n = 61] groups. No difference was found in utility (difference: -0.017, 95% confidence interval [-0.044; 0.004]) and total costs (-€943, [-€2226; €1367]) over the 48-week study period between the two groups. Medication costs per patient were lower (-€2545, [-€2780; -€2192]) in the intervention group, but non-medication healthcare (+€474, [+€149; +€952]) and patient costs (+€365 [+€92; €1058]) were higher. Cost-utility analysis showed that the iNMB was €594 [-€2099; €2050], €69 [-€2908; €1965] and -€455 [-€4,096; €1984] at WTA levels of €20 000, €50 000 and €80 000, respectively. Increasing adalimumab dose intervals was more likely to be cost-effective at WTA levels below €53 960 per quality-adjusted life year. Above €53 960 continuing the conventional dose interval was more likely to be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: When the loss of a quality-adjusted life year is valued at less than €53 960, increasing the adalimumab dose interval is a cost-effective strategy in CD patients in stable clinical and biochemical remission. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03172377.

De-escalation of biological therapy in inflammatory bowel disease patients following prior dose escalation.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on biological therapy de-escalation after prior escalation in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. This study aimed to assess the frequency and success rate of de-escalation of biological therapy in IBD patients after prior dose escalation and to evaluate which measures are used to guide de-escalation. METHODS: This multicentre retrospective cohort study enrolled IBD patients treated with infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA) or vedolizumab (VEDO) in whom therapy was de-escalated after prior biological escalation. De-escalations were considered pharmacokinetic-driven if based on clinical symptoms combined with therapeutic or supratherapeutic trough levels, and disease activity-driven if based on faecal calprotectin less than or equal to 200 µg/g or resolution of perianal fistula drainage or closure or endoscopic remission. Successful de-escalation was defined as remaining on the same or lower biological dose for greater than or equal to 6 months after de-escalation without the need for corticosteroids. RESULTS: In total, 206 IFX users, 85 ADA users and 55 VEDO users underwent therapy escalation. Of these patients, 34 (17%) on IFX, 18 (21%) on ADA and 8 (15%) on VEDO underwent therapy de-escalation. De-escalation was successful in 88% of IFX patients, 89% of ADA and 100% of VEDO. The probability of remaining on the de-escalated regimen or further de-escalation after 1 year was 85% for IFX, 62% for ADA and 100% for VEDO. Disease activity-driven de-escalations were more often successful (97%) than pharmacokinetic- and no marker-driven de-escalations (76%); P = 0.017. CONCLUSION: De-escalation after biological dose escalation was successful in the majority of carefully selected IBD patients. Objective assessment of remission increased the likelihood of successful de-escalation.

Outcome of Reverse Switching From CT-P13 to Originator Infliximab in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients suffering from inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and treated with originator infliximab are increasingly being switched to biosimilars. Some patients, however, are "reverse switched" to treatment with the originator. Here we assess the prevalence of reverse switching, including its indication and outcomes. METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, data on patients with IBD from 9 hospitals in the Netherlands were collected. All adult patients with IBD were included if they previously had been switched from originator infliximab to the biosimilar CT-P13 and had a follow-up time of at least 52 weeks after the initial switch. The reasons for reverse switching were categorized into worsening gastrointestinal symptoms, adverse effects, or loss of response to CT-P13. Drug persistence was analyzed through survival analyses. RESULTS: A total of 758 patients with IBD were identified. Reverse switching was observed in 75 patients (9.9%). Patients with reverse switching were predominantly female (70.7%). Gastrointestinal symptoms (25.5%) and dermatological symptoms (21.8%) were the most commonly reported reasons for reverse switching. In 9 patients (12.0%), loss of response to CT-P13 was the reason for reverse switching. Improvement of reported symptoms was seen in 73.3% of patients after reverse switching and 7 out of 9 patients (77.8%) with loss of response regained response. Infliximab persistence was equal between patients who were reverse-switched and those who were maintained on CT-P13. CONCLUSIONS: Reverse switching occurred in 9.9% of patients, predominantly for biosimilar-attributed adverse effects. Switching back to originator infliximab seems effective in patients who experience adverse effects, worsening gastrointestinal symptoms, or loss of response after switching from originator infliximab to CT-P13.

Drug Survival and Immunogenicity After Switching From Remicade to Biosimilar CT-P13 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: Two-year Follow-up of a Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

Background: The infliximab biosimilar has entered daily inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) practice. However, real-life outcomes beyond 1 year after switching are scarce. We aimed to investigate the long-term drug survival, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetics 2 years after switching to CT-P13 in IBD patients. Methods: We performed a single-center prospective observational cohort study in all Remicade-treated IBD patients who previously switched to CT-P13. We systematically documented reasons for discontinuation, trough levels, and antidrug antibodies to infliximab (ADAs) at baseline, week 16, week 52, and week 104. Clinical and biochemical disease activity (HBI, SCCAI, CRP) and adverse events were registered. Results: Eighty-three patients were enrolled, 57 had Crohn's disease, 24 had ulcerative colitis, and 2 were IBD-unclassified. At week 104, 55 of 83 (66%) patients remained on CT-P13, and 3 were lost to follow-up. Reasons for discontinuation were loss of response (n = 10), adverse events (n = 8), and disease remission (n = 7). ADAs were present in 5/83 patients at baseline (before switching), in 2 patients before week 52, and no subsequent ADAs were detected until week 104. Median trough levels and clinical and biochemical disease activity at baseline, week 16, week 52 and week 104 did not significantly change. Conclusion: In a prospective cohort with >2-year follow-up, 66% of IBD patients continued CT-P13 after switching from Remicade. Two new cases with ADAs were observed in year 1, but subsequently no immunogenicity was detected. These results are reassuring and suggest that switching to CT-P13 does not impact long-term clinical outcomes. 10.1093/ibd/izy227_video1izy227.video15802479819001.

Clinical Outcomes Following a Switch from Remicade® to the Biosimilar CT-P13 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The biosimilar of Remicade®, CT-P13, recently entered the European market. Clinical data on switching from Remicade® to CT-P13 in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] are scarce. We aimed to prospectively investigate efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetic profile, and immunogenicity following a switch from Remicade® to CT-P13 in IBD patients. METHODS: Remicade®-treated IBD patients at the Radboud university medical centre who switched to CT-P13 were included in this prospective observational cohort study. Primary endpoint was change in Harvey-Bradshaw Index for Crohn's disease [CD] and Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index for ulcerative colitis [UC] at week 16. We measured C-reactive protein [CRP], faecal calprotectin [FCP], infliximab trough level [TL] and anti-drug antibodies [ADAs] and documented adverse events. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 83 patients (28 males, 57 CD, 24 UC, 2 IBD-unclassified [IBD-U]). The median age was 36 years, range 18-79. Median change in disease activity was 0 [range -23 to +7] for CD and 0 [range -3 to +6] for UC/IBD-U. Median CRP and FCP levels did not change significantly during follow-up. Median TL increased from 3.5 µg/ml [range 0-18] to 4.2 µg/ml [range 0-21] at week 16 [p = 0.010]. Two patients developed a new detectable ADA response during follow-up and five patients discontinued CT-P13. No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that switching from Remicade® to CT-P13 in a real-life cohort of IBD patients did not have a significant impact on short-term clinical outcomes. These results suggest that switching from Remicade® to CT-P13 for the treatment of IBD is feasible.