Defining Endoscopic Remission in Crohn's Disease: MM-SES-CD and SES-CD Thresholds Associated With Low Risk of Disease Progression.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We assessed Modified Multiplier Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (MM-SES-CD) and Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) thresholds that are best associated with low likelihood of long-term disease progression. METHODS: Data from 61 patients with early Crohn's disease (CD) who participated in the CALM long-term extension study were used as the derivation cohort and validated using the McMaster inflammatory bowel disease database (n = 99). The primary outcome was disease progression (new internal fistula/abscess, stricture, perianal fistula or abscess, CD-related hospitalization or surgery) since the end of the CALM trial. Optimal MM-SES-CD and SES-CD thresholds were determined using the maximum Youden index. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses compared threshold scores of remission definitions on disease progression. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, based on the maximum Youden index, the optimal thresholds associated with a low likelihood of disease progression were MM-SES-CD <22.5 and SES-CD <4. A significantly greater proportion of patients with a MM-SES-CD ≥22.5 had disease progression as compared with patients in the derivation cohort with MM-SES-CD <22.5 (10/17 [58.8%] vs 3/44 [6.8%]; P < .001). Similarly, a significantly greater number of patients with SES-CD ≥ 4 had disease progression compared with those with a SES-CD <4 (11/25 [44.0%] vs 2/36 [5.6%]; P < .001). Compared with other clinical or endoscopic remission definitions, which demonstrated poor to fair accuracy, MM-SES-CD <22.5 performed the best for predicting disease progression (area under the curve = 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.94; P < .001). These thresholds were confirmed in the validation cohort. CONCLUSION: Achievement of MM-SES-CD <22.5 or SES-CD <4 in patients with ileocolonic or colonic CD is associated with low risk of disease progression and may be suitable targets in clinical trials and practice for endoscopic healing.

Delayed Ustekinumab and Adalimumab Responders Have Similar Outcomes as Early Responders in Biologic-Naïve Crohn's Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Differences in 1-year outcomes among early and delayed responders have been demonstrated with some therapies in ulcerative colitis. However, it is unclear whether similar differences exist in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) treated with biologic therapies. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of patient-level data from the SEAVUE clinical trial program. Ustekinumab-treated and adalimumab-treated patients with clinical response at week 8, defined as a reduction in Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of at least 100 points from baseline or CDAI score <150, were deemed early responders and their outcomes were compared with delayed responders (week 8 nonresponders who subsequently responded at week 16) and nonresponders (no response at week 8 or 16). The primary outcome assessed was clinical remission at week 56, defined as CDAI <150. RESULTS: A total of 373 participants (187 treated with ustekinumab and 186 treated with adalimumab) were included in this analysis. The overall rate of delayed clinical response was low in the SEAVUE clinical trial program (13.1%). No differences were observed for week 56 clinical remission among early vs delayed responders to ustekinumab or adalimumab nor were there significant differences for secondary outcomes assessed. Delayed responders to ustekinumab and adalimumab had a significant decline in C-reactive protein by week 8 when compared with nonresponders. DISCUSSION: Among patients with moderate-to-severe CD, early and delayed responders to adalimumab and ustekinumab have similar 1-year clinical outcomes. Biomarker decline can be observed through the initial 8 weeks of therapy in patients who will eventually be delayed responders, which may help differentiate from nonresponders.

Delayed Ustekinumab Responders in Ulcerative Colitis Have Greater Inflammatory Burden but Similar Outcomes as Early Responders.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Differences in 1-year outcomes among early compared with delayed responders to vedolizumab have been shown in ulcerative colitis. However, it is unclear whether similar differences exist with ustekinumab, and what factors differentiate delayed responders from nonresponders. METHODS: This study was a post hoc analysis of patient-level data from the UNIFI clinical trial. Ustekinumab-treated patients with clinical response, defined as a reduction in total Mayo score of 30% or more and 3 or more points from baseline with a reduction in their rectal bleeding subscore of 1 or more or a rectal bleeding subscore of 1 or less, at week 8 were deemed early responders and their outcomes were compared with delayed responders (week 8 nonresponders who subsequently responded at week 16). The primary outcome assessed was 1-year clinical remission, defined as a total Mayo score of 2 or less and no subscore greater than 1. RESULTS: We included 642 ustekinumab-treated patients, including 321 (50%) early responders, 115 (17.9%) delayed responders, and 205 (32.1%) nonresponders. No differences were observed for 1-year clinical remission among early vs delayed responders (132 of 321 [41.1%] vs 40 of 115 [34.8%]; P = .233), or for other outcomes assessed regardless of induction dose. Compared with early responders, delayed responders had more severe baseline Mayo endoscopic disease (88 of 115 [76.5%] vs 206 of 321 [64.2%]; P = .015) and abnormal baseline C-reactive protein level greater than 3 mg/L (83 of 115 [72.2%] vs 183 of 321 [57%]; P = .004). Compared with nonresponders, delayed responders had a significant decrease in C-reactive protein level (F-value [degrees of freedom, mean squares] [4, 844]; P < .0001) and fecal calprotectin level (F[4, 818]; P < .0001) through week 16. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with early ustekinumab responders, delayed responders had a greater inflammatory burden at baseline. Early and delayed responders had similar 1-year outcomes. Biomarker decline observed in delayed responders can help differentiate them from nonresponders.

Predictors of Placebo Induction Response and Remission in Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: High placebo response rates in clinical trials of ulcerative colitis (UC) have been reported previously. However, data from patient-level analyses are lacking. We assessed factors associated with clinical and endoscopic placebo response among placebo-treated patients in clinical trials of UC. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of pooled clinical trial data from GEMINI-1, ACT-1, ACT-2, PURSUIT, ULTRA-2, OCTAVE-1, and OCTAVE-2. Predictors were assessed in placebo-treated patients for their association with end of induction (week 6 of 8) clinical response (reduction in total Mayo score of ≥3 and ≥30% from baseline with ≥1 point decrease in rectal bleeding subscore [RBS] or absolute RBS ≤1); clinical remission (total Mayo score ≤2 and no subscore >1); endoscopic healing (Mayo endoscopic subscore ≤1); partial Mayo score of 0; patient-reported outcome 2-item remission (RBS of 0 and stool frequency ≤1), resolution of rectal bleeding, and stool frequency normalization. Predictors on univariate analyses with P < .05 were included in multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Placebo-treated patients with normal serum C-reactive protein and albumin levels were more likely to attain clinical response (71 of 437 [16.3%] vs 49 of 660 [7.4%]; adjusted odds ratio, 2.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-5.41; P = .018). Compared with patients with a Mayo endoscopic score of 2, patients with a Mayo endoscopic score of 3 were less likely to attain clinical response (105 of 556 [18.8%] vs 179 of 675 [25.9%]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.68; P = .003). Similar findings were observed for clinical remission and resolution of rectal bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Biomarkers such as normal serum C-reactive protein and albumin and baseline endoscopic severity were found to affect placebo response rates in clinical trials of UC. These findings have implications for clinical trial design in UC.

Food Processing and Risk of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several studies have been published on the association between food processing and risks of Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), with some variability in results. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to study this association. METHODS: From PubMed, Medline, and Embase until October 2022, we identified cohort studies that studied the association between food processing and the risk of CD or UC. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We computed pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effects meta-analysis based on estimates and standard errors. RESULTS: A total of 1,068,425 participants were included (13,594,422 person-years) among 5 cohort studies published between 2020 and 2022. Four of the 5 included studies were scored as high quality. The average age of participants ranged from 43 to 56 years; 55%-83% were female. During follow-up, 916 participants developed CD, and 1934 developed UC. There was an increased risk for development of CD for participants with higher consumption of ultra-processed foods compared with those with lower consumption (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.37-2.14; I2 = 0%) and a lower risk of CD for participants with higher consumption of unprocessed/minimally processed foods compared with those with lower consumption (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.94; I2 = 11%). There was no association between risk of UC and ultra-processed foods (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.86-1.61; I2 = 74%) or unprocessed/minimally processed foods (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68-1.02; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Higher ultra-processed food and lower unprocessed/minimally processed food intakes are associated with higher risk of CD but not UC.

Associations of Antibiotics, Hormonal Therapies, Oral Contraceptives, and Long-Term NSAIDS With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Results From the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several medications have been suspected to contribute to the etiology of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). This study assessed the association between medication use and the risk of developing IBD using the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology cohort. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of 133,137 individuals between the ages of 20 and 80 from 24 countries. Country-specific validated questionnaires documented baseline and follow-up medication use. Participants were followed up prospectively at least every 3 years. The main outcome was the development of IBD, including Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Short-term (baseline but not follow-up use) and long-term use (baseline and subsequent follow-up use) were evaluated. Results are presented as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: During a median follow-up period of 11.0 years (interquartile range, 9.2-12.2 y), there were 571 incident IBD cases (143 CD and 428 UC). Incident IBD was associated significantly with baseline antibiotic (aOR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.67-4.73; P = .0001) and hormonal medication use (aOR, 4.43; 95% CI, 1.78-11.01; P = .001). Among females, previous or current oral contraceptive use also was associated with IBD development (aOR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.70-2.77; P < .001). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug users also were observed to have increased odds of IBD (aOR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.23-2.64; P = .002), which was driven by long-term use (aOR, 5.58; 95% CI, 2.26-13.80; P < .001). All significant results were consistent in direction for CD and UC with low heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotics, hormonal medications, oral contraceptives, and long-term nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use were associated with increased odds of incident IBD after adjustment for covariates.

Long-Term Outcomes of Early vs Delayed Responders to Vedolizumab and Adalimumab: A Post Hoc Analysis of the VARSITY Study.

INTRODUCTION: It is uncertain whether patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and delayed symptomatic response to therapy have as robust and durable a response as earlier responders to therapy. We compared clinical outcomes of early and delayed responders to vedolizumab and adalimumab for patients with moderate-severe UC. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the VARSITY study. Patients with early partial Mayo score (PMS) remission (PMS ≤1 at week 4/6 of therapy) were compared with those with delayed PMS remission (PMS ≤1 at week 14 and not week 4/6). Differences in proportions of patients achieving week 52 clinical remission (CR) (PMS = 0), endoscopic improvement (EI) (Mayo endoscopic subscore ≤1), and histoendoscopic mucosal improvement (HEMI) (Mayo endoscopic subscore ≤1 and Geboes score highest grade <3.2) were assessed. Confounders were adjusted for using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 147 vedolizumab-treated and 110 adalimumab-treated patients attained early or late PMS remission. Those who attained early PMS remission with vedolizumab were more likely to attain week 52 CR than participants with delayed PMS remission with vedolizumab (69.1% [67/97] vs 50.0% [25/50], aOR 2.43 [95% CI 1.11-5.33], P = 0.027). Week 52 HEMI was more likely among early vedolizumab PMS remitters (63.9% [62/97] vs 40.0% [20/50], aOR 2.60 [95% CI 1.20-5.62], P = 0.015). Week 52 EI was similar between early and delayed PMS remitters to vedolizumab. No differences were observed in week 52 CR, EI, or HEMI between early and delayed PMS remitters to adalimumab. DISCUSSION: Patients with UC who achieve early PMS remission with vedolizumab have greater odds of week 52 remission compared with delayed responders.

REMIT-UC: Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Tofacitinib for Moderate-to-Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: A Canadian IBD Research Consortium Multicenter National Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to evaluate the real-world effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: REMIT-UC is a Canadian multicenter cohort study. Standardized data collection was performed on 334 consecutive adult outpatients with UC treated with tofacitinib. The primary outcomes were achievement of clinical and endoscopic remission. Safety outcomes were reported using incidence rates (events/100 patient-years of exposure). A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate predictors of loss of response after tofacitinib dose de-escalation to 5 mg twice daily (BID). RESULTS: Clinical remission was achieved by 35.3% (106/300), 36.0% (104/289), and 35.2% (93/264) of patients at weeks 12, 24, and 52, respectively. Endoscopic remission was achieved by 18.5% (15/81), 23.0% (28/122), and 25.7% (35/136) of patients at weeks 12, 24, and 52, respectively. Incidence of serious infections, herpes zoster, and venous thromboembolism were 2.1 [0.9-4.2], 0.5 [0.1-1.9], and 1.1 [0.3-2.7], respectively. Among responders, 44.5% (109/245) lost response during follow-up, which was recaptured in 54.9% (39/71) of patients who re-escalated to 10 mg BID. Patients with a baseline Mayo endoscopic score of 3 (adjusted hazard ratio 3.60 [95% confidence interval: 1.70-7.62]) and prior biologic failure (adjusted hazard ratio 3.89 [95% confidence interval: 1.28-11.86]) were at a higher risk for losing response after dose reduction. DISCUSSION: One-third of patients with UC treated with tofacitinib achieved clinical remission with few serious adverse events. However, half of patients lost response with de-escalation, which was only partially recaptured with increasing the maintenance dose. Those with negative prognostic factors should be counselled about the risks and benefits of continuing high doses of tofacitinib.

Baseline Patient-reported Symptoms Less Predictive Than MM-SES-CD for Endoscopic Remission in Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: This analysis evaluates the association between baseline patient-reported symptom (PRS) severity in Crohn's disease (CD), including abdominal pain, stool frequency, general well-being, and achievement of clinical and endoscopic outcomes. We compared baseline PRS to baseline endoscopic scores for the prediction of endoscopic remission (ER). METHODS: This post hoc analysis of 2 clinical trials of infliximab in CD included 601 patients and evaluated baseline PRS variables (abdominal pain, stool frequency, and general well-being) as measured by the Crohn's disease activity index and their association with 6-month clinical remission (CR) (Crohn's Disease Activity Index<150), corticosteroid-free CR, and week 26/54 ER (absence of mucosal ulceration). Logistic regression models assessed the relationships between PRS and outcomes of interest. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses compared the sensitivity and specificity of the different baseline PRS compared with baseline endoscopic scores for achievement of ER at weeks 26 and 54. RESULTS: No difference was found comparing patients with higher baseline PRS to those with lower PRS in achieving 6-month CR, 6-month corticosteroid-free CR, or week 26/54 ER. Modified multiplier of the SES-CD (MM-SES-CD) at baseline demonstrated a significant ability to predict week 54 ER (area under the curve, 0.71; 95% CI 0.65-0.78; P =0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline PRS in CD is not prognostic of clinical or endoscopic response. In contrast, active endoscopic disease as measured by the MM-SES-CD, more accurately predicts endoscopic outcomes. Endoscopic scores such as the MM-SES-CD may be considered for selection criteria and as a primary outcome of interest in CD trials, with PRS as a co-primary or secondary endpoint.

Vedolizumab and Adalimumab in Biologic-Naïve Ulcerative Colitis: Comparison of Patient-Level Clinical Trial Data and VARSITY for Week 6 Clinical Remission.

BACKGROUND: Indirect treatment comparisons using patient-level data are increasing in popularity within inflammatory bowel disease research. We compared the efficacy of adalimumab and vedolizumab for biologic-naïve moderate-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) using indirect comparisons of phase 3 clinical trials and compared the results to the RCT VARSITY. DESIGN: Pooled analysis of patient-level data from 518 biologic-naïve patients with UC was performed using GEMINI-1 and ULTRA-1. Proportions of patients achieving week 6 clinical remission and clinical response were compared, and propensity score matching and multivariate logistic regression were used to account for potential confounders. These results were compared to those derived from VARSITY. RESULTS: A numerically greater proportion of vedolizumab-treated patients from GEMINI-1 achieved week 6 clinical remission compared to those treated with adalimumab [136/388 (35.1%) vs. 38/130 (29.2%)]. Similar findings were observed among the propensity score matched cohort [33/110 (30.0%) vs. 25/110 (22.7%), adjusted OR (aOR) 1.56 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-3.02), p = 0.187]. A similar magnitude for absolute difference in the proportions of patients achieving week 6 clinical remission was observed from VARSITY in vedolizumab compared to adalimumab [131/305 (43.0%) vs. 114/307 (37.1%), OR 1.27 (95% CI 0.92-1.76), p = 0.142]. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis, a similar magnitude in the absolute difference of efficacy at week 6 among biologic-naïve patients was observed using indirect comparisons of phase 3 clinical trial data as was observed in VARSITY. Indirect comparisons using patient-level clinical trial data could be used to inform drug choices for future head-to-head trials and guide positioning of drugs in the absence of head-to-head trials.

Comparative Efficacy of Infliximab Versus Tofacitinib for Inducing Remission in Biologic Naive Ulcerative Colitis: A Propensity Matched Study.

OBJECTIVE: In the absence of head-to-head clinical trials, indirect comparative studies are needed to help position therapies in ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to compare the efficacy of infliximab vs. tofacitinib for moderate-severe UC among biologic-naïve participants at post-induction. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of patient-level data from four clinical trials including 659 biologic-naïve UC participants. We compared proportions of patients achieving week 8 clinical remission (CR), endoscopic improvement, and endoscopic remission. Clinical response at week 2 was also assessed. Multiple logistic regression models were adjusted for potential confounders identified as having an association with the outcome of interest on univariate analysis. Propensity scores were calculated to create a cohort of participants with similar distribution of baseline co-variates. RESULTS: Patients treated with infliximab had significantly greater odds of CR at week 8 compared to tofacitinib [88/242 (36.4%) vs. 100/417 (24.0%), aOR: 1.65 (95% CI 1.11-2.44), p = 0.013]. Endoscopic improvement at week 8 was also significantly greater among infliximab-treated patients [149/242 (61.6%) vs. 159/417 (38.1%), aOR: 2.12 (95% CI 1.45-3.10), p < 0.001]. Similar findings were observed with week 8 endoscopic remission [61/242 (25.2%) vs. 43/417 (10.3%); aOR: 2.72 (95% CI 1.66-4.46), p < 0.001]. A similar proportion of participants attained clinical response at week 2 [205/242 (84.7%) vs. 334/417 (80.1%), aOR: 1.48 (95% CI 0.93-2.37), p = 0.101]. Similar results were observed among the propensity score matched cohort. CONCLUSION: Based on the efficacy observed in this post-hoc analysis, consideration should be given to use of infliximab over tofacitinib for treatment of moderate to severe biologic-naïve UC. However, baseline characteristic mismatches persisted despite propensity score matching, and further studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Predicting endoscopic remission in Crohn's disease by the modified multiplier SES-CD (MM-SES-CD).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease (SES-CD) is the primary tool for measurement of mucosal inflammation in clinical trials but lacks prognostic potential. We set to develop and validate a modified multiplier of the SES-CD (MM-SES-CD), which takes into consideration each individual parameter's prognostic value for achieving endoscopic remission (ER) while on active therapy. METHODS: In this posthoc analysis of three CD clinical trial programmes (n=350 patients, baseline SES-CD ≥ 3 with confirmed ulceration), data were pooled and randomly split into a 70% training and 30% testing cohort. The MM-SES-CD was designed using weights for individual parameters as determined by logistic regression modelling, with 1-year ER (SES-CD < 3) being the dependent variable. A cut point score for low and high probability of ER was determined by using the maximum Youden Index and validated in the testing cohort. RESULTS: Baseline ulcer size, extent of ulceration and presence of non-passable strictures had the strongest association with 1-year ER as compared with affected surface area, with differential weighting of individual parameters across disease segments being observed during logistic regression. The MM-SES-CD was generated using this weighted regression model and demonstrated strong discrimination for ER in the training dataset (area under the receiver operator curve (AUC) 0.83, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94) and in the testing dataset (AUC 0.82, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92). In comparison to the MM-SES-CD scoring model, the original SES-CD score lacks accuracy (AUC 0.60, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.65) for predicting the achievement of ER. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and internally validated the MM-SES-CD as an endoscopic severity assessment tool to predict one-year ER in patients with CD on active therapy.

Clinical Decision Support Tool for Infliximab in Crohn's Disease.

Biologic treatment options for Crohn's disease (CD) are increasing and providers will need enhanced support in integrating these therapies into routine practice. Using phase 3 clinical trial programs in CD, we have previously built and validated clinical decision support tools for achieving clinical remission (CREM) with vedolizumab and ustekinumab in CD.1-4 We now aim to develop a clinical decision support tool for infliximab in CD.

Comparative Efficacy for Infliximab Vs Vedolizumab in Biologic Naive Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Comparative effectiveness studies are needed to help position therapies for ulcerative colitis (UC). We compared the efficacy of infliximab vs vedolizumab for moderate to severe biologic-naïve UC using patient-level data from clinical trial program data sets. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of 3 UC clinical trial programs that included data on 795 biologic-naïve UC patients. Differences in proportions of patients achieving week 6 clinical remission (CR) and response, and 1-year CR, corticosteroid-free CR, and endoscopic remission (ER), are reported. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for potential confounders. As a sensitivity analysis, propensity scores were calculated and a cohort of matched participants with similar distribution of baseline covariates was created. All analyses were intention-to-treat. RESULTS: At week 6, comparable proportions of patients achieved clinical response and CR with infliximab vs vedolizumab (clinical response, 60.5% [138 of 228] vs 60.0% [340 of 567]; P = .884; and CR, 39.9% [91 of 228] vs 38.6% [219 of 567]; P = .736). Similar proportions of patients achieved 1-year CR with infliximab vs vedolizumab (39.9% [91 of 228] vs 38.6% [219 of 567]; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.02; 95% CI, 0.74-1.40). Infliximab-treated patients had significantly higher rates of 1-year ER (36.0% [82 of 228] vs 25.6% [145 of 567]; aOR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.12-2.28) and corticosteroid-free CR (29.5% [23 of 78] vs 15.0% [38 of 254]; aOR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.27-4.39). Similar results were observed in the propensity score matched cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Although infliximab and vedolizumab have similar efficacy in clinical symptom improvement, infliximab had higher rates of 1-year corticosteroid-free CR and ER in treatment of biologic-naïve UC.

Comparative Efficacy and Rapidity of Action for Infliximab vs Ustekinumab in Biologic Naïve Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Comparative effectiveness has become increasingly important to help position therapies for inflammatory bowel disease. We compared the efficacy and rapidity of onset of action of infliximab vs ustekinumab induction therapy for moderate to severe biologic-naïve Crohn's disease (CD) using patient-level data from randomized controlled trials. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of 2 large CD clinical trial programs that included data on 420 biologic-naïve CD patients. Differences in proportions of patients achieving week 6 clinical remission, clinical response, and normalization of calprotectin were compared. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for confounders. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using propensity scores to create a cohort of matched participants with similar distribution of baseline covariates. RESULTS: At week 6, a comparable number of patients achieved clinical remission with infliximab compared with patients treated with ustekinumab (44.9% vs 37.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.22; 95% CI, 0.79-1.89). Similarly, at week 6 the clinical response rates were not significantly different (58.4% infliximab vs 54.9% ustekinumab; aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.82-1.90). No significant difference was observed between treatment groups for achieving a week 6 fecal calprotectin level less than 250 mcg/L in those with increased values at baseline (42.3% infliximab vs 34.7% ustekinumab; aOR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.79-2.28). Similar results were seen for all analyses performed within the propensity matched cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this post hoc analysis, infliximab and ustekinumab appear to have similar efficacy and speed of onset in patients with CD who are biologic-naïve.

Early Change in Epithelial Neutrophilic Infiltrate Predicts Long-Term Response to Biologics in Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The prognostic value of histologic scores, grades, and individual histologic subcomponents, alone or in combination with endoscopy, for predicting endoscopic improvement (EI) and histoendoscopic mucosal improvement (HEMI) during maintenance therapy in ulcerative colitis remains uncertain. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of participants from the VARSITY trial (n = 734 with histology). Receiver operating characteristic and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to assess whether baseline and/or week 14 assessments for the Robarts Histopathology Index, Geboes score, individual histologic subcomponents, and baseline disease characteristics, including endoscopic severity and biomarkers, could predict the achievement of EI and HEMI at week 52. RESULTS: Changes in epithelial neutrophil involvement from baseline to week 14 had the best performance for predicting week 52 EI (area under the curve, 0.83; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.91) and HEMI (area under the curve, 0.85; 95 % CI, 0.76-0.94). On multivariate analyses, improvement of neutrophils in the epithelium was the only histologic parameter associated with increased odds of week 52 EI (odds ratio, 3.63; 95 % CI, 1.45-9.08; P = .0059) and HEMI (odds ratio, 6.88; 95 % CI, 3.29-14.36; P < .0001). Patients with more than 50 % of crypts involved with neutrophils at week 14 were significantly less likely to achieve week 52 HEMI irrespective of week 14 Mayo endoscopic scores (week 14 Mayo endoscopic score of 2-3: 9.9 % vs 22.4 %; P = .001; week 14 Mayo endoscopic score of 0-1: 33 % vs 62.4 %; P = .044). CONCLUSIONS: Our results on epithelial neutrophilic infiltrate after induction therapy as the only independent predictor for achievement of maintenance EI or HEMI helps clarify the clinical relevance of measuring histologic disease activity in ulcerative colitis. Epithelial neutrophilic infiltrate poses a means to stratify patients according to their likelihood of response to biologic treatment.

Comparative Effectiveness of Biologics for Endoscopic Healing of the Ileum and Colon in Crohn's Disease.

INTRODUCTION: We compared the efficacy of adalimumab, infliximab, ustekinumab, and vedolizumab on the ability to achieve endoscopic healing (EH) after 1 year of therapy in moderate-severe Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: This was a pooled analysis of patient-level data from 299 patients with CD from 4 clinical trials. Proportions of patients treated with each biologic were compared for achieving 1-year complete EH (Simple Endoscopic Score for CD [SES-CD] <3) and ileal and colonic EH separately (SES-CD = 0). Multivariate logistic regression was used to model the relationship between biologics and 1-year outcomes and adjusted for disease duration, concomitant corticosteroid use, and prior antitumor necrosis factor failure. RESULTS: Compared with vedolizumab (4/56 [7.1%]), adalimumab (17/61 [27.9%], adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 5.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.77-18.95, P = 0.004) and infliximab (39/141 [27.7%], aOR: 4.59, 95% CI: 1.48-14.22, P = 0.008) had superior rates of 1-year EH. No significant difference was observed between vedolizumab and ustekinumab. Similar results were observed among biologic-naive patients. Among patients with baseline ileal SES-CD ≥3, no significant differences were observed between biologics for 1-year ileal EH. However, for large (>0.5 cm) ileal ulcers, infliximab (20/49 [40.8%]) had superior rates of no ileal ulcers compared with vedolizumab (2/23 [8.7%], aOR: 5.39, 95% CI: 1.03-28.05, P = 0.045). No other differences were observed. For colonic disease, compared with ustekinumab (9/31 [29.0%]), adalimumab (30/48 [62.5%], aOR: 3.97, 95% CI: 1.45-10.90, P = 0.007) had superior rates of 1-year EH in the colon, with similar trends observed for infliximab (55/105 [52.4%], aOR: 2.08, 95% CI: 0.82-5.27, P = 0.121). No other differences were observed. DISCUSSION: In this post hoc analysis, TNF-α antagonists were overall superior to vedolizumab and ustekinumab for achieving 1-year EH in moderate-severe CD patients.

Comparative effectiveness of higher adalimumab maintenance therapy versus standard dose in anti-tumor necrosis factor experienced Crohn's disease patients: A propensity-score matched cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Crohn's disease (CD) patients who previously failed anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy are at higher risk of treatment failure with subsequent biologics. This study aims to determine the effectiveness and safety of higher maintenance dose regimens of adalimumab compared with standard doses in CD patients who failed anti-TNF. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, CD patients who failed anti-TNF and received adalimumab were categorized according to their post-induction maintenance regimen; 40 mg subcutaneous (sc) weekly or 80 mg sc every other week were defined as a high-dose (HD) maintenance regimen, and 40 mg sc every other week was defined as a standard-dose (SD) maintenance regimen. The primary outcome was time to treatment failure. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to adjust for confounders. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using propensity scores to create a cohort of matched participants with similar distribution of baseline covariates. RESULTS: Forty patients started on HD regimens following induction, and 77 patients received the SD regimen. The median time to failure in the HD group was 6.6 years (interquartile range [IQR] 4.0-9.6) and 3.0 years (IQR 0.9-9.4) in the SD group (log-rank test P = 0.006). Patients on HD adalimumab had a lower hazard rate of treatment failure (hazard ratio: 0.27; 95% confidence interval [0.12, 0.62]; P = 0.002) compared with SD patients. No difference in adverse events was identified between groups (30% vs 31.2%, P = 1.0). Results were similar in the propensity score-matched cohort. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose maintenance regimens were associated with longer time-to-failure as compared with SD regimens in CD patient who failed anti-TNF.

Ileal and Rectal Ulcer Size Affects the Ability to Achieve Endoscopic Remission: A Post hoc Analysis of the SONIC Trial.

INTRODUCTION: It is unclear how baseline endoscopic characteristics in Crohn's disease (CD) affect the ability to achieve endoscopic remission (ER). We aimed to determine the endoscopic prognostic factors that influence achieving ER in CD. DESIGN: This post hoc analysis of SONIC (NCT00094458; YODA #2019-3980) evaluated baseline and week 26 endoscopy indices in 172 patients using the CD Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) and the Simple Endoscopic Score for CD. The impact of baseline ulcer depth and size on achieving week 26 ER was assessed using multivariate logistic regression models adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: The ER rate of ileal ulcers was significantly lower than ER rates throughout the colon (P < 0.0001). Ileal ulcers >2 cm were less likely to achieve ER compared with smaller ulcers {odds ratio (OR) 0.31 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.11-0.89), P = 0.03}. Similarly, rectal ulcers >2 cm were associated with reduced odds of week 26 ER (OR 0.26 [95% CI 0.08-0.80], P = 0.02). Ulcer size in other colonic segments did not affect the achievement of week 26 ER. Deep ileal and rectal ulcers >2 cm compared with smaller or superficial ulcers were even less likely to achieve week 26 ER (ileum: OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.68, P = 0.02; rectum: OR 0.12, 0.02-0.82, P = 0.03). High baseline Simple Endoscopic Score for CD (≥16) or CDEIS scores (≥12) did not affect achieving week 26 ER. DISCUSSION: Patients with larger and deep ulcers in the ileum or rectum may have difficulty achieving ER. Overall degree of endoscopic inflammation as measured numerically by endoscopic scores does not affect the likelihood of achieving week 26 ER.

Assessing preferences for receiving supportive care resources among patients seen at a Breast Care Center.

BACKGROUND: Patients with breast cancer or at high risk for breast cancer have supportive care needs. Although cancer centers offer social, psychological, and other support to these patients, these services are not always utilized, and patients continue to report unmet supportive care needs. Reasons for non-utilization of these services have not been well documented. In this analysis, we examine patient reasons for service non-utilization and evaluate patients' interest in receiving information about and paying for other supportive care services. METHODS: Study participants were contacted by email 7-14 months following appointments at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Breast Care Center (BCC) and were invited to complete a 26-question survey about supportive care utilization at UCSF. RESULTS: In total, 195 patients (45%) completed surveys. Of these, 68% had breast cancer. Among patients with breast cancer, fewer than half completed appointments with psychological services. Lack of self-perceived need was the primary reason patients did not pursue psychological services. Overall, 61% of participants were interested in learning more about psychological services, 27% in nutrition counseling, and 20% in exercise counseling. Participants were more interested in individual counseling than in group counseling but were less interested in paying for services. CONCLUSION: Patients often feel that they do not need supportive services. Breast cancer patients are interested in learning more about psychological services, exercise counseling, and nutrition counseling. Although many cancer centers offer group coaching and counseling sessions on these topics, patients may be more willing to engage in individual counseling.