The Risk of Serious Infections Before and After Anti-TNF Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Serious infections have been observed in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on anti-TNF use-but to what extent these infections are due to anti-TNF or the disease activity per se is hard to disentangle. We aimed to describe how the rates of serious infections change over time both before and after starting anti-TNF in IBD. METHODS: Inflammatory bowel disease patients naïve to anti-TNF treatment were identified at 5 centers participating in the Swedish IBD Quality Register, and their medical records examined in detail. Serious infections, defined as infections requiring in-patient care, the year before and after the start of anti-TNF treatment were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 980 patients who started their first anti-TNF therapy between 1999 and 2016, the incidence rate of serious infections was 2.19 (95% CI,1.43-3.36) per 100 person years the year before and 2.11 (95% CI, 1.33-3.34) per 100 person years 1 year after treatment start. This corresponded to an incidence rate ratio 1 year after anti-TNF treatment of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.51-1.84). Compared with before anti-TNF therapy, the incidence of serious infection was significantly decreased more than 1 year after treatment (incidence rate ratio 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33-0.95; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: In routine clinical practice in Sweden, the incidence rate of serious infection among IBD patients did not increase with anti-TNF therapy. Instead, serious infections seemed to decrease more than 1 year after initiation of anti-TNF treatment.

The incidence rate of serious infection among inflammatory bowel disease patients did not increase with anti-TNF therapy compared with 1 year before treatment start. A decrease in incidence rate could be seen more than 1 year after initiation of anti-TNF.

Clinical effectiveness of golimumab in ulcerative colitis: a prospective multicentre study based on the Swedish IBD Quality Register, SWIBREG.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical trials demonstrated that golimumab is effective in anti-TNF naïve patients with ulcerative colitis. We aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness of golimumab in a real-world setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study, conducted at 16 Swedish hospitals. Data were collected using an electronic case report form. Patients with active ulcerative colitis, defined as Mayo endoscopic subscore ≥2 were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcomes were clinical effectiveness at 12 weeks and 52 weeks, i.e. response (defined as a decrease in Mayo score by ≥3 points or 30% from baseline) and remission (defined as a Mayo score of ≤2 with no individual subscores >1). RESULTS: Fifty patients were included. At study entry, 70% were previously exposed to anti-TNF, 16% to vedolizumab, and 96% to immunomodulators. The 12 and 52-week drug continuation rates were 37/50 (74%) and 23/50 (46%), respectively. The 12-week response rate was 14/50 (28%), the remission rate, 8/50 (16%) and the corresponding figures at week 52 were 13/50 (26%) and 10/50 (20%). Among patients who continued golimumab, the median Mayo score decreased from 7 (6-9) at baseline to 1 (0-5) at 52 weeks (p < .01) and the faecal calprotectin decreased from 862 (335-1759) µg/g to 90 (34-169) µg/g (p < .01). Clinical response at week 12 was highly predictive of clinical remission at week 52 (adjusted OR: 73.1; 95% CI: 4.5‒1188.9). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of golimumab treated patients represented a treatment refractory patient-group. Despite this, our results confirm that golimumab is an effective therapy in ulcerative colitis.

Predictors of drug survival: A cohort study comparing anti-tumour necrosis factor agents using the Swedish inflammatory bowel disease quality register.

BACKGROUND: Whether long-term effectiveness differs between anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents is unknown. AIMS: To examine drug survival of first-line anti-TNF agents and identify predictors of discontinuation. To reduce channelling bias, we also compared drug survival of the second anti-TNF. METHODS: Biologic-naïve patients (N = 955) recorded in the Swedish IBD Quality Register (SWIBREG) were examined. We used propensity score matching, comparing drug survival over up to three years of follow-up. Cox regression estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: In Crohn's disease, discontinuation because of lack/loss of response was 32% [95%CI = 26%-38%] for infliximab versus 16% [95%CI = 11%-21%] for adalimumab. Infliximab [vs adalimumab; aHR = 1.96; 95%CI = 1.20-3.21] and colonic disease (L2) [vs no L2; aHR = 2.17; 95% CI = 1.26-3.75] were associated with higher discontinuation rates, whereas normalised CRP at three months [aHR = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.19-0.81] with a lower rate. Consistently, patients who switched from adalimumab to infliximab (vs infliximab to adalimumab) had earlier discontinuation (P = 0.04). Concomitant use of immunomodulators was associated with a lower adverse drug reaction-mediated discontinuation rate [aHR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.28-0.77], in part explained by fewer infusion reactions [aHR = 0.27; 95% CI = 0.08-0.89]. In ulcerative colitis, the probability of discontinuation because of lack/loss of response was 40% [95% CI = 33%-47%] for infliximab versus 37% [95% CI = 21%-53%] for adalimumab. Disease duration ≥10 years [aHR = 0.25; 95% CI = 0.10-0.58] and normalised CRP after three months [aHR = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.18-0.84] were associated with lower discontinuation rates. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical characterisation of patients may aid decision-making on anti-TNF treatment. The consistently shorter drug survival for infliximab (vs adalimumab) in Crohn's disease, suggests a potential difference between the two drugs.