Mechanisms and management of loss of response to anti-TNF therapy for patients with Crohn's disease: 3-year data from the prospective, multicentre PANTS cohort study.

BACKGROUND: We sought to report the effectiveness of infliximab and adalimumab over the first 3 years of treatment and to define the factors that predict anti-TNF treatment failure and the strategies that prevent or mitigate loss of response. METHODS: Personalised Anti-TNF therapy in Crohn's disease (PANTS) is a UK-wide, multicentre, prospective observational cohort study reporting the rates of effectiveness of infliximab and adalimumab in anti-TNF-naive patients with active luminal Crohn's disease aged 6 years and older. At the end of the first year, sites were invited to enrol participants still receiving study drug into the 2-year PANTS-extension study. We estimated rates of remission across the whole cohort at the end of years 1, 2, and 3 of the study using a modified survival technique with permutation testing. Multivariable regression and survival analyses were used to identify factors associated with loss of response in patients who had initially responded to anti-TNF therapy and with immunogenicity. Loss of response was defined in patients who initially responded to anti-TNF therapy at the end of induction and who subsequently developed symptomatic activity that warranted an escalation of steroid, immunomodulatory, or anti-TNF therapy, resectional surgery, or exit from study due to treatment failure. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088449, and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between March 19, 2014, and Sept 21, 2017, 389 (41%) of 955 patients treated with infliximab and 209 (32%) of 655 treated with adalimumab in the PANTS study entered the PANTS-extension study (median age 32·5 years [IQR 22·1-46·8], 307 [51%] of 598 were female, and 291 [49%] were male). The estimated proportion of patients in remission at the end of years 1, 2, and 3 were, for infliximab 40·2% (95% CI 36·7-43·7), 34·4% (29·9-39·0), and 34·7% (29·8-39·5), and for adalimumab 35·9% (95% CI 31·2-40·5), 32·9% (26·8-39·2), and 28·9% (21·9-36·3), respectively. Optimal drug concentrations at week 14 to predict remission at any later timepoints were 6·1-10·0 mg/L for infliximab and 10·1-12·0 mg/L for adalimumab. After excluding patients who had primary non-response, the estimated proportions of patients who had loss of response by years 1, 2, and 3 were, for infliximab 34·4% (95% CI 30·4-38·2), 54·5% (49·4-59·0), and 60·0% (54·1-65·2), and for adalimumab 32·1% (26·7-37·1), 47·2% (40·2-53·4), and 68·4% (50·9-79·7), respectively. In multivariable analysis, loss of response at year 2 and 3 for patients treated with infliximab and adalimumab was predicted by low anti-TNF drug concentrations at week 14 (infliximab: hazard ratio [HR] for each ten-fold increase in drug concentration 0·45 [95% CI 0·30-0·67], adalimumab: 0·39 [0·22-0·70]). For patients treated with infliximab, loss of response was also associated with female sex (vs male sex; HR 1·47 [95% CI 1·11-1·95]), obesity (vs not obese 1·62 [1·08-2·42]), baseline white cell count (1·06 [1·02-1·11) per 1 × 109 increase in cells per L), and thiopurine dose quartile. Among patients treated with adalimumab, carriage of the HLA-DQA1*05 risk variant was associated with loss of response (HR 1·95 [95% CI 1·17-3·25]). By the end of year 3, the estimated proportion of patients who developed anti-drug antibodies associated with undetectable drug concentrations was 44·0% (95% CI 38·1-49·4) among patients treated with infliximab and 20·3% (13·8-26·2) among those treated with adalimumab. The development of anti-drug antibodies associated with undetectable drug concentrations was significantly associated with treatment without concomitant immunomodulator use for both groups (HR for immunomodulator use: infliximab 0·40 [95% CI 0·31-0·52], adalimumab 0·42 [95% CI 0·24-0·75]), and with carriage of HLA-DQA1*05 risk variant for infliximab (HR for carriage of risk variant: infliximab 1·46 [1·13-1·88]) but not for adalimumab (HR 1·60 [0·92-2·77]). Concomitant use of an immunomodulator before or on the day of starting infliximab was associated with increased time without the development of anti-drug antibodies associated with undetectable drug concentrations compared with use of infliximab alone (HR 2·87 [95% CI 2·20-3·74]) or introduction of an immunomodulator after anti-TNF initiation (1·70 [1·11-2·59]). In years 2 and 3, 16 (4%) of 389 patients treated with infliximab and 11 (5%) of 209 treated with adalimumab had adverse events leading to treatment withdrawal. Nine (2%) patients treated with infliximab and two (1%) of those treated with adalimumab had serious infections in years 2 and 3. INTERPRETATION: Only around a third of patients with active luminal Crohn's disease treated with an anti-TNF drug were in remission at the end of 3 years of treatment. Low drug concentrations at the end of the induction period predict loss of response by year 3 of treatment, suggesting higher drug concentrations during the first year of treatment, particularly during induction, might lead to better long-term outcomes. Anti-drug antibodies associated with undetectable drug concentrations of infliximab, but not adalimumab, can be predicted by carriage of HLA-DQA1*05 and mitigated by concomitant immunomodulator use for both drugs. FUNDING: Guts UK, Crohn's and Colitis UK, Cure Crohn's Colitis, AbbVie, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Napp Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, and Celltrion Healthcare.

TOpCLASS Expert Consensus Classification of Perianal Fistulizing Crohn's Disease: A Real-World Application in a Serial Fistula MRI Cohort.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Perianal fistulizing Crohn's disease (PFCD) is an aggressive phenotype of Crohn's disease defined by frequent relapses and disabling symptoms. A novel consensus classification system was recently outlined by the TOpCLASS consortium that seeks to unify disease severity with patient-centered goals but has not yet been validated. We aimed to apply this to a real-world cohort and identify factors that predict transition between classes over time. METHODS: We identified all patients with PFCD and at least one baseline and one follow-up pelvic (pMRI). TOpCLASS classification, disease characteristics, and imaging indices were collected retrospectively at time periods corresponding with respective MRIs. RESULTS: We identified 100 patients with PFCD of which 96 were assigned TOpCLASS Classes 1 - 2c at baseline. Most patients (78.1%) started in Class 2b, but changes in classification were observed in 52.1% of all patients. Male sex (72.0%, 46.6%, 40.0%, p = 0.03) and prior perianal surgery (52.0% vs 44.6% vs 40.0%, p = 0.02) were more frequently observed in those with improved class. Baseline pMRI indices were not associated with changes in classification, however, greater improvements in mVAI, MODIFI-CD, and PEMPAC were seen among those who improved. Linear mixed effect modeling identified only male sex (-0.31, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.02) with improvement in class. CONCLUSION: The TOpCLASS classification highlights the dynamic nature of PFCD over time, however, our ability to predict transitions between classes remains limited and requires prospective assessment. Improvement in MRI index scores over time was associated with a transition to lower TOpCLASS classification.

Geldof Expert Consensus Classification of Perianal Fistulizing Crohn's Disease: A Real-World Application in a Serial Fistula MRI Cohort.

Background and Aims: Perianal fistulizing Crohn's disease (CD-PAF) is an aggressive phenotype of Crohn's disease (CD) defined by frequent relapses and disabling symptoms. A novel consensus classification system was recently outlined by Geldof et al. that seeks to unify disease severity with patient-centered goals but has not yet been validated. We aimed to apply this to a real-world cohort and identify factors that predict transition between classes over time. Methods: We identified all patients with CD-PAF and at least one baseline and one follow-up pelvic (pMRI). Geldof Classification, disease characteristics, and imaging indices were collected retrospectively at time periods corresponding with respective MRIs. Results: We identified 100 patients with CD-PAF of which 96 were assigned Geldof Classes 1 - 2c at baseline. Most patients (78.1%) started in Class 2b, but changes in classification were observed in 52.1% of all patients. Male sex (72.0%, 46.6%, 40.0%, p = 0.03) and prior perianal surgery (52.0% vs 44.6% vs 40.0%, p = 0.02) were more frequently observed in those with improved. Baseline pMRI indices were not associated with changes in classification, however, greater improvements in mVAI, MODIFI-CD, and PEMPAC were seen among those who improved. Linear mixed effect modeling identified only male sex (-0.31, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.02) with improvement in class. Conclusion: Geldof classification highlights the dynamic nature of CD-PAF over time, however, our ability to predict transitions between classes remains limited and requires prospective assessment. Improvement in MRI index scores over time was associated with a transition to lower Geldof classification.

Determining the optimal treatment target in patients with ulcerative colitis: rationale, design, protocol and interim analysis for the randomised controlled VERDICT trial.

INTRODUCTION: Symptoms, endoscopy and histology have been proposed as therapeutic targets in ulcerative colitis (UC). Observational studies suggest that the achievement of histologic remission may be associated with a lower risk of complications, compared with the achievement of endoscopic remission alone. The actiVE ulcerative colitis, a RanDomIsed Controlled Trial (VERDICT) aims to determine the optimal treatment target in patients with UC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this multicentre, prospective randomised study, 660 patients with moderate to severe UC (Mayo rectal bleeding subscore [RBS] ≥1; Mayo endoscopic score [MES] ≥2) are randomly assigned to three treatment targets: corticosteroid-free symptomatic remission (Mayo RBS=0) (group 1); corticosteroid-free endoscopic remission (MES ≤1) and symptomatic remission (group 2); or corticosteroid-free histologic remission (Geboes score <2B.0), endoscopic remission and symptomatic remission (group 3). Treatment is escalated using vedolizumab according to a treatment algorithm that is dependent on the patient's baseline UC therapy until the target is achieved at weeks 16, 32 or 48. The primary outcome, the time from target achievement to a UC-related complication, will be compared between groups 1 and 3 using a Cox proportional hazards model. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by ethics committees at the country level or at individual sites as per individual country requirements. A full list of ethics committees is available on request. Study results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT: 2019-002485-12; NCT04259138.

Artificial intelligence for discrimination of Crohn's disease and gastrointestinal tuberculosis: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Discrimination of gastrointestinal tuberculosis (GITB) and Crohn's disease (CD) is difficult. Use of artificial intelligence (AI)-based technologies may help in discriminating these two entities. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review on the use of AI for discrimination of GITB and CD. Electronic databases (PubMed and Embase) were searched on June 6, 2022, to identify relevant studies. We included any study reporting the use of clinical, endoscopic, and radiological information (textual or images) to discriminate GITB and CD using any AI technique. Quality of studies was assessed with MI-CLAIM checklist. RESULTS: Out of 27 identified results, a total of 9 studies were included. All studies used retrospective databases. There were five studies of only endoscopy-based AI, one of radiology-based AI, and three of multiparameter-based AI. The AI models performed fairly well with high accuracy ranging from 69.6-100%. Text-based convolutional neural network was used in three studies and Classification and regression tree analysis used in two studies. Interestingly, irrespective of the AI method used, the performance of discriminating GITB and CD did not match in discriminating from other diseases (in studies where a third disease was also considered). CONCLUSION: The use of AI in differentiating GITB and CD seem to have acceptable accuracy but there were no direct comparisons with traditional multiparameter models. The use of multiple parameter-based AI models have the potential for further exploration in search of an ideal tool and improve on the accuracy of traditional models.

Neutralising antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.4/5 and wild-type virus in patients with inflammatory bowel disease following three doses of COVID-19 vaccine (VIP): a prospective, multicentre, cohort study.

Background: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving anti-TNF and JAK-inhibitor therapy have attenuated responses to COVID-19 vaccination. We aimed to determine how IBD treatments affect neutralising antibody responses against the Omicron BA.4/5 variant. Methods: In this multicentre cohort study, we prospectively recruited 340 adults (69 healthy controls and 271 IBD) at nine UK hospitals between May 28, 2021 and March 29, 2022. The IBD study population was established (>12 weeks therapy) on either thiopurine (n = 63), infliximab (n = 45), thiopurine and infliximab combination therapy (n = 48), ustekinumab (n = 45), vedolizumab (n = 46) or tofacitinib (n = 24). Patients were excluded if they were being treated with any other immunosuppressive therapies. Participants had two doses of either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 vaccines, followed by a third dose of either BNT162b2 or mRNA1273. Pseudo-neutralisation assays against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and BA.4/5 were performed. The half maximal inhibitory concentration (NT50) of participant sera was calculated. The primary outcome was anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralising response against wild-type virus and Omicron BA.4/5 variant after the second and third doses of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, stratified by immunosuppressive therapy, adjusting for prior infection, vaccine type, age, and interval between vaccination and blood collection. This study is registered with ISRCTN (No. 13495664). Findings: Both heterologous (first two doses adenovirus vaccine, third dose mRNA vaccine) and homologous (three doses mRNA vaccine) vaccination strategies significantly increased neutralising titres against both wild-type SARS-CoV-2 virus and the Omicron BA.4/5 variant in healthy participants and patients with IBD. Antibody titres against BA.4/5 were significantly lower than antibodies against wild-type virus in both healthy participants and patients with IBD (p < 0.0001). Multivariable models demonstrated that neutralising antibodies against BA.4/5 after three doses of vaccine were significantly lower in patients with IBD on infliximab (Geometric Mean Ratio (GMR) 0.19 [0.10, 0.36], p < 0.0001), infliximab and thiopurine combination (GMR 0.25 [0.13, 0.49], p < 0.0001) or tofacitinib (GMR 0.43 [0.20, 0.91], p = 0.028), but not in patients on thiopurine monotherapy, ustekinumab, or vedolizumab. Breakthrough infection was associated with lower neutralising antibodies against wild-type (p = 0.037) and BA.4/5 (p = 0.045). Interpretation: A third dose of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine based on the wild-type spike glycoprotein significantly boosts neutralising antibody titres in patients with IBD. However, responses are lower against the Omicron variant BA.4/5, particularly in patients taking anti-TNF and JAK-inhibitor therapy. Breakthrough infections are associated with lower neutralising antibodies and immunosuppressed patients with IBD may receive additional benefit from bivalent vaccine boosters which target Omicron variants. Funding: Pfizer.

DECIDE: Delphi Expert Consensus Statement on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Dysplasia Shared Management Decision-Making.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Inflammatory bowel disease colitis-associated dysplasia is managed with either enhanced surveillance and endoscopic resection or prophylactic surgery. The rate of progression to cancer after a dysplasia diagnosis remains uncertain in many cases and patients have high thresholds for accepting proctocolectomy. Individualised discussion of management options is encouraged to take place between patients and their multidisciplinary teams for best outcomes. We aimed to develop a toolkit to support a structured, multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to discussions about dysplasia management options between clinicians and their patients. METHODS: Evidence from systematic literature reviews, mixed-methods studies conducted with key stakeholders, and decision-making expert recommendations were consolidated to draft consensus statements by the DECIDE steering group. These were then subjected to an international, multidisciplinary modified electronic Delphi process until an a priori threshold of 80% agreement was achieved to establish consensus for each statement. RESULTS: In all, 31 members [15 gastroenterologists, 14 colorectal surgeons and two nurse specialists] from nine countries formed the Delphi panel. We present the 18 consensus statements generated after two iterative rounds of anonymous voting. CONCLUSIONS: By consolidating evidence for best practice using literature review and key stakeholder and decision-making expert consultation, we have developed international consensus recommendations to support health care professionals counselling patients on the management of high cancer risk colitis-associated dysplasia. The final toolkit includes clinician and patient decision aids to facilitate shared decision-making.

The gut microbiota and metabolome are associated with diminished COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses in immunosuppressed inflammatory bowel disease patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with anti-TNF therapy exhibit attenuated humoral immune responses to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. The gut microbiota and its functional metabolic output, which are perturbed in IBD, play an important role in shaping host immune responses. We explored whether the gut microbiota and metabolome could explain variation in anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination responses in immunosuppressed IBD patients. METHODS: Faecal and serum samples were prospectively collected from infliximab-treated patients with IBD in the CLARITY-IBD study undergoing vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Antibody responses were measured following two doses of either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 vaccine. Patients were classified as having responses above or below the geometric mean of the wider CLARITY-IBD cohort. 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy and bile acid profiling with ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS) were performed on faecal samples. Univariate, multivariable and correlation analyses were performed to determine gut microbial and metabolomic predictors of response to vaccination. FINDINGS: Forty-three infliximab-treated patients with IBD were recruited (30 Crohn's disease, 12 ulcerative colitis, 1 IBD-unclassified; 26 with concomitant thiopurine therapy). Eight patients had evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Seventeen patients (39.5%) had a serological response below the geometric mean. Gut microbiota diversity was lower in below average responders (p = 0.037). Bilophila abundance was associated with better serological response, while Streptococcus was associated with poorer response. The faecal metabolome was distinct between above and below average responders (OPLS-DA R2X 0.25, R2Y 0.26, Q2 0.15; CV-ANOVA p = 0.038). Trimethylamine, isobutyrate and omega-muricholic acid were associated with better response, while succinate, phenylalanine, taurolithocholate and taurodeoxycholate were associated with poorer response. INTERPRETATION: Our data suggest that there is an association between the gut microbiota and variable serological response to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in immunocompromised patients. Microbial metabolites including trimethylamine may be important in mitigating anti-TNF-induced attenuation of the immune response. FUNDING: JLA is the recipient of an NIHR Academic Clinical Lectureship (CL-2019-21-502), funded by Imperial College London and The Joyce and Norman Freed Charitable Trust. BHM is the recipient of an NIHR Academic Clinical Lectureship (CL-2019-21-002). The Division of Digestive Diseases at Imperial College London receives financial and infrastructure support from the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) based at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust and Imperial College London. Metabolomics studies were performed at the MRC-NIHR National Phenome Centre at Imperial College London; this work was supported by the Medical Research Council (MRC), the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) (grant number MC_PC_12025) and infrastructure support was provided by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). The NIHR Exeter Clinical Research Facility is a partnership between the University of Exeter Medical School College of Medicine and Health, and Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust. This project is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Exeter Clinical Research Facility. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the UK Department of Health and Social Care.

Post-inflammatory Polyp Burden as a Prognostic Marker of Disease-outcome in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Post-inflammatory polyps [PIPs] are considered as indicators of previous episodes of severe inflammation and mucosal ulceration. Inflammatory bowel disease [IBD], namely Crohn's disease [CD] and ulcerative colitis [UC], exhibit a perpetuating, relapsing and remitting pattern, and PIPs are a frequent sequela of chronicity. The aim of this study was to determine whether a high PIP burden is associated with a more severe disease course in patients with IBD. METHODS: This was a multinational, multicentre, retrospective study. IBD patients previously diagnosed with PIPs were retrieved from the endoscopic database of each centre. PIP burden was evaluated and associated with demographic and clinical data as well as factors indicating a more unfavourable disease course. RESULTS: A total of 504 IBD patients with PIPs were recruited [male: 61.9%]. The mean age at IBD diagnosis was 36.9 [±16.8] years. Most patients [74.8%] were diagnosed with UC. A high PIP burden was present in 53.4% of patients. On multivariable Cox regression analysis, a high PIP burden was independently associated with treatment escalation (hazard ratio [HR] 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.75; p = 0.024), hospitalization [HR 1.90; 95% CI 1.24-2.90; p = 0.003], need for surgery [HR 2.28; 95% CI 1.17-4.44, p = 0.02] and younger age at diagnosis [HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98-0.99; p = 0.003]. CONCLUSION: PIP burden was associated with a more severe outcome. Future prospective studies should focus on the characterization of PIP burden as to further risk stratify this patient cohort.

Neutralising antibody potency against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and omicron BA.1 and BA.4/5 variants in patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with infliximab and vedolizumab after three doses of COVID-19 vaccine (CLARITY IBD): an analysis of a prospective multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Anti-TNF drugs, such as infliximab, are associated with attenuated antibody responses after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. We aimed to determine how the anti-TNF drug infliximab and the anti-integrin drug vedolizumab affect vaccine-induced neutralising antibodies against highly transmissible omicron (B.1.1.529) BA.1, and BA.4 and BA.5 (hereafter BA.4/5) SARS-CoV-2 variants, which possess the ability to evade host immunity and, together with emerging sublineages, are now the dominating variants causing current waves of infection. METHODS: CLARITY IBD is a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study investigating the effect of infliximab and vedolizumab on SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Patients aged 5 years and older with a diagnosis of IBD and being treated with infliximab or vedolizumab for 6 weeks or longer were recruited from infusion units at 92 hospitals in the UK. In this analysis, we included participants who had received uninterrupted biological therapy since recruitment and without a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was neutralising antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.4/5 after three doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. We constructed Cox proportional hazards models to investigate the risk of breakthrough infection in relation to neutralising antibody titres. The study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN45176516, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Sept 22 and Dec 23, 2020, 7224 patients with IBD were recruited to the CLARITY IBD study, of whom 1288 had no previous SARS-CoV-2 infection after three doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and were established on either infliximab (n=871) or vedolizumab (n=417) and included in this study (median age was 46·1 years [IQR 33·6-58·2], 610 [47·4%] were female, 671 [52·1%] were male, 1209 [93·9%] were White, and 46 [3·6%] were Asian). After three doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, 50% neutralising titres (NT50s) were significantly lower in patients treated with infliximab than in those treated with vedolizumab, against wild-type (geometric mean 2062 [95% CI 1720-2473] vs 3440 [2939-4026]; p<0·0001), BA.1 (107·3 [86·40-133·2] vs 648·9 [523·5-804·5]; p<0·0001), and BA.4/5 (40·63 [31·99-51·60] vs 223·0 [183·1-271·4]; p<0·0001) variants. Breakthrough infection was significantly more frequent in patients treated with infliximab (119 [13·7%; 95% CI 11·5-16·2] of 871) than in those treated with vedolizumab (29 [7·0% [4·8-10·0] of 417; p=0·00040). Cox proportional hazards models of time to breakthrough infection after the third dose of vaccine showed infliximab treatment to be associated with a higher hazard risk than treatment with vedolizumab (hazard ratio [HR] 1·71 [95% CI 1·08-2·71]; p=0·022). Among participants who had a breakthrough infection, we found that higher neutralising antibody titres against BA.4/5 were associated with a lower hazard risk and, hence, a longer time to breakthrough infection (HR 0·87 [0·79-0·95]; p=0·0028). INTERPRETATION: Our findings underline the importance of continued SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programmes, including second-generation bivalent vaccines, especially in patient subgroups where vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy might be reduced, such as those on anti-TNF therapies. FUNDING: Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust; Hull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust; NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre; Crohn's and Colitis UK; Guts UK; National Core Studies Immunity Programme, UK Research and Innovation; and unrestricted educational grants from F Hoffmann-La Roche, Biogen, Celltrion Healthcare, Takeda, and Galapagos.

Green endoscopy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), Joint Accreditation Group (JAG) and Centre for Sustainable Health (CSH) joint consensus on practical measures for environmental sustainability in endoscopy.

GI endoscopy is highly resource-intensive with a significant contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and waste generation. Sustainable endoscopy in the context of climate change is now the focus of mainstream discussions between endoscopy providers, units and professional societies. In addition to broader global challenges, there are some specific measures relevant to endoscopy units and their practices, which could significantly reduce environmental impact. Awareness of these issues and guidance on practical interventions to mitigate the carbon footprint of GI endoscopy are lacking. In this consensus, we discuss practical measures to reduce the impact of endoscopy on the environment applicable to endoscopy units and practitioners. Adoption of these measures will facilitate and promote new practices and the evolution of a more sustainable specialty.

Vaccine escape, increased breakthrough and reinfection in infliximab-treated patients with IBD during the Omicron wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Antitumour necrosis factor (TNF) drugs impair serological responses following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. We sought to assess if a third dose of a messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccine substantially boosted anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses and protective immunity in infliximab-treated patients with IBD. DESIGN: Third dose vaccine induced anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (anti-S) receptor-binding domain (RBD) antibody responses, breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection, reinfection and persistent oropharyngeal carriage in patients with IBD treated with infliximab were compared with a reference cohort treated with vedolizumab from the impaCt of bioLogic therApy on saRs-cov-2 Infection and immuniTY (CLARITY) IBD study. RESULTS: Geometric mean (SD) anti-S RBD antibody concentrations increased in both groups following a third dose of an mRNA-based vaccine. However, concentrations were lower in patients treated with infliximab than vedolizumab, irrespective of whether their first two primary vaccine doses were ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (1856 U/mL (5.2) vs 10 728 U/mL (3.1), p<0.0001) or BNT162b2 vaccines (2164 U/mL (4.1) vs 15 116 U/mL (3.4), p<0.0001). However, no differences in anti-S RBD antibody concentrations were seen following third and fourth doses of an mRNA-based vaccine, irrespective of the combination of primary vaccinations received. Post-third dose, anti-S RBD antibody half-life estimates were shorter in infliximab-treated than vedolizumab-treated patients (37.0 days (95% CI 35.6 to 38.6) vs 52.0 days (95% CI 49.0 to 55.4), p<0.0001).Compared with vedolizumab-treated, infliximab-treated patients were more likely to experience SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection (HR 2.23 (95% CI 1.46 to 3.38), p=0.00018) and reinfection (HR 2.10 (95% CI 1.31 to 3.35), p=0.0019), but this effect was uncoupled from third vaccine dose anti-S RBD antibody concentrations. Reinfection occurred predominantly during the Omicron wave and was predicted by SARS-CoV-2 antinucleocapsid concentrations after the initial infection. We did not observe persistent oropharyngeal carriage of SARS-CoV-2. Hospitalisations and deaths were uncommon in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Following a third dose of an mRNA-based vaccine, infliximab was associated with attenuated serological responses and more SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection and reinfection which were not predicted by the magnitude of anti-S RBD responses, indicative of vaccine escape by the Omicron variant. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN45176516.

ECCO Topical Review: Roadmap to Optimal Peri-Operative Care in IBD.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite the advances in medical therapies, a significant proportion of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] require surgical intervention. This Topical Review aims to offer expert consensus practice recommendations for peri-operative care to optimize outcomes of IBD patients who undergo surgery. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of IBD healthcare providers systematically reviewed aspects relevant to peri-operative care in IBD. Consensus statements were developed using Delphi methodology. RESULTS: A total of 20 current practice positions were developed following systematic review of the current literature covering use of medication in the peri-operative period, nutritional assessment and intervention, physical and psychological rehabilitation and prehabilitation, and immediate postoperative care. CONCLUSION: Peri-operative planning and optimization of the patient are imperative to ensure favourable outcomes and reduced morbidity. This Topical Review provides practice recommendations applicable in the peri-operative period in IBD patients undergoing surgery.

Quality of Life in Patients with Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis: Long-Term Follow-Up Results from the CONSTRUCT Trial.

BACKGROUND: there is currently limited research examining the QoL of patients with Ulcerative colitis (UC) following treatment of acute severe colitis (ASUC). OBJECTIVE: to examine the long-term QoL of ASUC patients enrolled in the CONSTRUCT trial following treatment of UC with infliximab or ciclosporin and to compare the differences in the QoL between the two drug treatments over time. METHODS: The CONSTRUCT trial examined the cost and clinical effectiveness of infliximab and ciclosporin treatments for acute severe UC. We collected QoL questionnaire data from patients during the active trial period up to 36 months. Following trial completion, we contacted patients postannually for up to a maximum of 84 months. We collected QoL data using a disease-specific (CUCQ, or CUCQ+ for patients who had colectomy surgery) or generic (EQ5D-3L) questionnaire. We analysed QoL scores to determine if there was any difference over time and between treatments in generic or disease-specific QoL. RESULTS: Following initial treatment with infliximab and ciclosporin, patients experienced a statistically significant improvement in both the generic and disease-specific QoL at three months. Generic scores remained fairly static for the whole follow-up period, reducing only slightly up to 84 months. Disease-specific scores showed a much sharper improvement up to 2 years with a gradual reduction in QoL up to 84 months. Generic and disease-specific QoL remained higher than baseline values. There was no significant difference between treatments in any of the QoL scores. CONCLUSIONS: Both infliximab and ciclosporin improve QoL following initial treatment for ASUC. QoL scores remain higher than at admission up to 84 months post-treatment.

Treatment adaptations and outcomes of patients experiencing inflammatory bowel disease flares during the early COVID-19 pandemic: the PREPARE-IBD multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic offered a unique opportunity to understand inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management during unexpected disruption. This could help to guide practice overall. AIMS: To compare prescribing behaviour for IBD flares and outcomes during the early pandemic with pre-pandemic findings METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study comprising patients who contacted IBD teams for symptomatic flares between March and June 2020 in 60 National Health Service trusts in the United Kingdom. Data were compared with a pre-pandemic cohort after propensity-matching for age and physician global assessment of disease activity. RESULTS: We included 1864 patients in each of the pandemic and pre-pandemic cohorts. The principal findings were reduced systemic corticosteroid prescription during the pandemic in Crohn's disease (prednisolone: pandemic 26.5% vs. 37.1%; p < 0.001) and ulcerative colitis (UC) (prednisolone: pandemic 33.5% vs. 40.7%, p < 0.001), with increases in poorly bioavailable oral corticosteroids in Crohn's (pandemic 15.6% vs. 6.8%; p < 0.001) and UC (pandemic 11.8% vs. 5.2%; p < 0.001). Ustekinumab (Crohn's and UC) and vedolizumab (UC) treatment also significantly increased. Three-month steroid-free remission in each period was similar in Crohn's (pandemic 28.4% vs. 32.1%; p = 0.17) and UC (pandemic 36.4% vs. 40.2%; p = 0.095). Patients experiencing a flare and suspected COVID-19 were more likely to have moderately-to-severely active disease at 3 months than those with a flare alone. CONCLUSIONS: Despite treatment adaptations during the pandemic, steroid-free outcomes were comparable with pre-pandemic levels, although concurrent flare and suspected COVID-19 caused worse outcomes. These findings have implications for IBD management during future pandemics and for standard practice.

Patient preferences and current practice for adults with steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis: POPSTER mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are a mainstay of the treatment of moderately severe relapses of ulcerative colitis, yet almost 50% of patients do not respond fully to these and risk prolonged steroid use and side effects. There is a lack of clarity about the definitions of steroid resistance, the optimum choice of treatment, and patient and health-care professional treatment preferences. OBJECTIVES: The overall aim of this research was to understand how steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis is managed in adult secondary care and how current practice compares with patient and health-care professional preferences. DESIGN: A mixed-methods study, including an online survey, qualitative interviews and discrete choice experiments. SETTING: NHS inflammatory bowel disease services in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with ulcerative colitis and health-care professionals treating inflammatory bowel disease. RESULTS: We carried out a survey of health-care professionals (n = 168), qualitative interviews with health-care professionals (n = 20) and patients (n = 33), discrete choice experiments with health-care professionals (n = 116) and patients (n = 115), and a multistakeholder workshop (n = 9). The interviews with and survey of health-care professionals showed that most health-care professionals define steroid resistance as an incomplete response to 40 mg per day of prednisolone after 2 weeks. The survey also found that anti-tumour necrosis factor drugs (particularly infliximab) are the most frequently offered drugs across most steroid-resistant (and steroid-dependent) patient scenarios, but they are less frequently offered to thiopurine-naive patients. Patient interviews identified several factors influencing their treatment choices, including effectiveness of treatment, recommendations from health-care professionals, route of administration and side effects. Over time, depending on the severity and duration of symptoms and, crucially, as medical treatment options become exhausted, patients are willing to try alternative treatments and, eventually, to undergo surgery. The discrete choice experiments found that the probability of remission and of side effects strongly influences the treatment choices of both patients and health-care professionals. Patients are less likely to choose a treatment that takes longer to improve symptoms. Health-care professionals are willing to make difficult compromises by tolerating greater safety risks in exchange for therapeutic benefits. The treatments ranked most positively by patients were infliximab and tofacitinib (each preferred by 38% of patients), and the predicted probability of uptake by health-care professionals was greatest for infliximab (62%). LIMITATIONS: The survey and the discrete choice experiments with patients and health-care professionals are limited by their relatively small sample sizes. The qualitative studies are subject to selection bias. The timing of the different substudies, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, is a potential limitation. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified factors influencing treatment decisions for steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis and the characteristics to consider when choosing treatments to evaluate in future randomised controlled trials. The findings may be used to improve discussions between patients and health-care professionals when they review treatment options for steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis. FUTURE WORK: This research highlights the need for consensus work to establish an agreed definition of steroid resistance in ulcerative colitis and a greater understanding of the optimal use of tofacitinib and surgery for this patient group. A randomised controlled trial comparing infliximab with tofacitinib is also recommended. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 41. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Steroids are one of the main treatments for ulcerative colitis; however, steroids work well for only about 50% of people who take them. There are many other treatments that can be given when steroids do not work, but evidence is limited about how these treatments are best used. To carry out better research about the best treatment options and to improve clinical practice in the future, this study aimed to find out how adults with steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis are managed in hospital and why patients and health-care professionals prefer different treatments. The study combined various methods of research, including an online survey of health-care professionals (n = 168), interviews with health-care professionals (n = 20) and patients (n = 33), a survey of health-care professionals (n = 116) and patients (n = 115) to ask them about treatment preferences, and a multistakeholder workshop (n = 9). The interviews with and survey of health-care professionals found that most health-care professionals define steroid resistance as an incomplete response to 40 mg per day of prednisolone after 2 weeks. The survey also found that the most frequently offered drugs are anti-tumour necrosis factor drugs (particularly infliximab). Patient interviews found that several factors influenced treatment choices, including effectiveness of treament, guidance from health-care professionals, route of administration and side effects. Patients were willing to try alternative treatments and surgery over time. The survey found that a higher level of remission and a lower chance of side effects strongly influenced treatment choices. Patients are less likely to choose a treatment that takes longer to improve symptoms. Health-care professionals are willing to make difficult compromises by tolerating greater safety risks in exchange for therapeutic benefits. Infliximab and tofacitinib were ranked most positively by patients, and the predicted uptake by health-care professionals was greatest for infliximab. The results of this study help improve understanding of why people choose certain treatments, improve decision-making in partnership and inform the design of future research.

COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody and T-cell responses in immunosuppressed patients with inflammatory bowel disease after the third vaccine dose (VIP): a multicentre, prospective, case-control study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses are reduced in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) taking anti-TNF or tofacitinib after two vaccine doses. We sought to assess whether immunosuppressive treatments were associated with reduced antibody and T-cell responses in patients with IBD after a third vaccine dose. METHODS: VIP was a multicentre, prospective, case-control study done in nine centres in the UK. We recruited immunosuppressed patients with IBD and non-immunosuppressed healthy individuals. All participants were aged 18 years or older. The healthy control group had no diagnosis of IBD and no current treatment with systemic immunosuppressive therapy for any other indication. The immunosuppressed patients with IBD had an established diagnosis of Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, or unclassified IBD using standard definitions of IBD, and were receiving established treatment with one of six immunosuppressive regimens for at least 12 weeks at the time of first dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. All participants had to have received three doses of an approved COVID-19 vaccine. SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody binding and T-cell responses were measured in all participant groups. The primary outcome was anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S1 receptor binding domain [RBD]) antibody concentration 28-49 days after the third vaccine dose, adjusted by age, homologous versus heterologous vaccine schedule, and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was assessed in all participants with available data. FINDINGS: Between Oct 18, 2021, and March 29, 2022, 352 participants were included in the study (thiopurine n=65, infliximab n=46, thiopurine plus infliximab combination therapy n=49, ustekinumab n=44, vedolizumab n=50, tofacitinib n=26, and healthy controls n=72). Geometric mean anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations increased in all groups following a third vaccine dose, but were significantly lower in patients treated with infliximab (2736·8 U/mL [geometric SD 4·3]; p<0·0001), infliximab plus thiopurine (1818·3 U/mL [6·7]; p<0·0001), and tofacitinib (8071·5 U/mL [3·1]; p=0·0018) compared with the healthy control group (16 774·2 U/mL [2·6]). There were no significant differences in anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations between the healthy control group and patients treated with thiopurine (12 019·7 U/mL [2·2]; p=0·099), ustekinumab (11 089·3 U/mL [2·8]; p=0·060), or vedolizumab (13 564·9 U/mL [2·4]; p=0·27). In multivariable modelling, lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations were independently associated with infliximab (geometric mean ratio 0·15 [95% CI 0·11-0·21]; p<0·0001), tofacitinib (0·52 [CI 0·31-0·87]; p=0·012), and thiopurine (0·69 [0·51-0·95]; p=0·021), but not with ustekinumab (0·64 [0·39-1·06]; p=0·083), or vedolizumab (0·84 [0·54-1·30]; p=0·43). Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (1·58 [1·22-2·05]; p=0·0006) was independently associated with higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations and older age (0·88 [0·80-0·97]; p=0·0073) was independently associated with lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations. Antigen-specific T-cell responses were similar in all groups, except for recipients of tofacitinib without evidence of previous infection, where T-cell responses were significantly reduced relative to healthy controls (p=0·021). INTERPRETATION: A third dose of COVID-19 vaccine induced a boost in antibody binding in immunosuppressed patients with IBD, but these responses were reduced in patients taking infliximab, infliximab plus thiopurine, and tofacitinib. Tofacitinib was also associated with reduced T-cell responses. These findings support continued prioritisation of immunosuppressed groups for further vaccine booster dosing, particularly patients on anti-TNF and JAK inhibitors. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Implications for sequencing of biologic therapy and choice of second anti-TNF in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: results from the IMmunogenicity to Second Anti-TNF therapy (IMSAT) therapeutic drug monitoring study.

BACKGROUND: Anti-drug antibodies are associated with treatment failure to anti-TNF agents in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). AIM: To assess whether immunogenicity to a patient's first anti-TNF agent would be associated with immunogenicity to the second, irrespective of drug sequence METHODS: We conducted a UK-wide, multicentre, retrospective cohort study to report rates of immunogenicity and treatment failure of second anti-TNF therapies in 1058 patients with IBD who underwent therapeutic drug monitoring for both infliximab and adalimumab. The primary outcome was immunogenicity to the second anti-TNF agent, defined at any timepoint as an anti-TNF antibody concentration ≥9 AU/ml for infliximab and ≥6 AU/ml for adalimumab. RESULTS: In patients treated with infliximab and then adalimumab, those who developed antibodies to infliximab were more likely to develop antibodies to adalimumab, than patients who did not develop antibodies to infliximab (OR 1.99, 95%CI 1.27-3.20, p = 0.002). Similarly, in patients treated with adalimumab and then infliximab, immunogenicity to adalimumab was associated with subsequent immunogenicity to infliximab (OR 2.63, 95%CI 1.46-4.80, p < 0.001). For each 10-fold increase in anti-infliximab and anti-adalimumab antibody concentration, the odds of subsequently developing antibodies to adalimumab and infliximab increased by 1.73 (95% CI 1.38-2.17, p < 0.001) and 1.99 (95%CI 1.34-2.99, p < 0.001), respectively. Patients who developed immunogenicity with undetectable drug levels to infliximab were more likely to develop immunogenicity with undetectable drug levels to adalimumab (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.39-4.19, p < 0.001). Commencing an immunomodulator at the time of switching to the second anti-TNF was associated with improved drug persistence in patients with immunogenic, but not pharmacodynamic failure. CONCLUSION: Irrespective of drug sequence, immunogenicity to the first anti-TNF agent was associated with immunogenicity to the second, which was mitigated by the introduction of an immunomodulator in patients with immunogenic, but not pharmacodynamic treatment failure.

Management of Non-response and Loss of Response to Anti-tumor Necrosis Factor Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy has been successfully used as first-line biologic treatment for moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), in both "step-up" and "top-down" approaches, and has become a cornerstone of IBD management. However, in a proportion of patients the effectiveness of anti-TNF therapy is sub-optimal. Either patients do not achieve adequate initial response (primary non-response) or they lose response after initial success (loss of response). Therapeutic drug monitoring determines drug serum concentrations and the presence of anti-drug antibodies (ADAbs) and can help guide treatment optimization to improve patient outcomes. For patients with low drug concentrations who are ADAb-negative or display low levels of ADAbs, dose escalation is recommended. Should response remain unchanged following dose optimization the question whether to switch within class (anti-TNF) or out of class (different mechanism of action) arises. If ADAb levels are high and the patient has previously benefited from anti-TNF therapy, then switching within class is a viable option as ADAbs are molecule specific. Addition of an immunomodulator may lead to a decrease in ADAbs and a regaining of response in a proportion of patients. If a patient does not achieve a robust therapeutic response with an initial anti-TNF despite adequate drug levels, then switching out of class is appropriate. In conjunction with the guidance above, other factors including patient preference, age, comorbidities, disease phenotype, extra-intestinal manifestations, and treatment costs need to be factored into the treatment decision. In this review we discuss current evidence in this field and provide guidance on therapeutic decision-making in clinical situations.

Safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Risk of adverse effects and flare of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are frequently cited reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched to identify studies reporting the use of COVID-19 vaccine in IBD. We selected studies reporting the incidence of various adverse effects (local or systemic) and flares of IBD after COVID-19 vaccination. The pooled incidence rates for various adverse effects, stratified for the dose and the type of vaccine (adenoviral or mRNA) were estimated. RESULTS: Nine studies (16 vaccination cohorts) were included. The pooled incidence rate of overall adverse events was 0.55 (95%CI, 0.45-0.64, I2= 95%). The pooled incidence rate of local adverse events was 0.64 (0.47-0.78, I2= 100%). The pooled incidence rates of fatigue, headache, myalgia, fever and chills were 0.30 (0.21-0.40, I2= 99%), 0.23 (0.17-0.30, I2= 99%), 0.18 (0.13-0.24, I2= 99%), 0.10 (0.06-0.17, I2= 98%) and 0.15 (0.06-0.3, I2= 86%), respectively. The pooled incidence rates of severe adverse events, adverse events requiring hospitalization and flares of IBD following COVID-19 vaccination were 0.02 (0.00-0.12, I2= 97%), 0.00 (0.00-0.01, I2= 27%) and 0.01 (0.01-0.03, I2= 45%), respectively. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IBD appears to be safe with only mild adverse events. Flares of IBD and severe adverse events requiring hospitalization were infrequent.