Emerging treatment options for extraintestinal manifestations in IBD.

Extraintestinal manifestations (EIMs) are frequently observed in IBDs and contribute considerably to morbidity and mortality. They have long been considered a difficult to treat entity due to limited therapy options, but the increasing use of anti-tumour necrosis factors has dramatically changed the therapeutic approach to EIM in recent years. Newly emerging therapies such as JAK inhibitors and anti-interleukin 12/23 will further shape the available armamentarium. Clinicians dealing with EIMs in everyday IBD practice may be puzzled by the numerous available biological agents and small molecules, their efficacy for EIMs and their potential off-label indications. Current guidelines on EIMs in IBD do not include treatment algorithms to help practitioners in the treatment decision-making process. Herein, we summarise knowledge on emerging biological treatment options and small molecules for EIMs, highlight current research gaps, provide therapeutic algorithms for EIM management and shed light on future strategies in the context of IBD-related EIMs.

Alicaforsen, an Antisense Inhibitor of Intercellular Adhesion Molecule-1, in the Treatment for Left-Sided Ulcerative Colitis and Ulcerative Proctitis.

BACKGROUND: Data on the efficacy of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 antisense oligonucleotide alicaforsen in ulcerative colitis (UC) is inconsistent. METHODS: All patients, who had received at least one dose of alicaforsen, were analyzed retrospectively. Alicaforsen's efficacy was assessed in patients treated for left-sided UC and proctitis by comparing clinical and (if applicable) endoscopic disease activity before/after treatment. RESULTS: Twelve patients were treated for left-sided UC or proctitis. Eleven patients received a 6-week course of a once-daily 240 mg alicaforsen enema formulation. In 1 patient, treatment was discontinued, because it was found to be inefficient. Disease activity measured by the partial Mayo score and 6-point symptom score was significantly reduced after treatment (6.0 vs. 2.4, p = 0.011 and 3.7 vs. 1.4, p = 0.008). Faecal calprotectin showed a trend towards reduction (484.4 vs. 179.5 µg/g, p = 0.063). Clinical improvement was achieved in 10 patients (83.3%). In 7 patients, a relapse occurred (70%). Median duration of clinical improvement was 18.0 weeks (range 1-112). Three patients showed an ongoing improvement of >9 months. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: A 6-week course of alicaforsen seemed to be safe and efficacious in inducing clinical improvement in patients with left-sided UC and proctitis. Prolonged clinical improvement was observed in many but not all patients.

The perspective of celiac disease patients on emerging treatment options and non-celiac gluten sensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) and emerging treatment options are hot topics in the celiac disease (CeD) scientific literature. However, very little is known about the perspective on these issues of CeD patients. METHODS: We performed a large patient survey among unselected CeD patients in Switzerland. RESULTS: A total of 1689 patients were analyzed. 57.5% have previously heard of NCGS. 64.5% believe in the existence of this entity. Regarding a potential influence of NCGS on CeD awareness, 31.7% show a positive and 27.5% a negative perception. Patients with prior use of alternative medicine and women more often have heard of and believe in the existence of NCGS vs. those never having used alternative methods and men, respectively (66.9 vs. 56.9%, p=0.001 and 78.5 vs. 69.0%, p=0.001; 60.7 vs. 44.2%, p<0.001 and 71.0 vs. 60.8%, p=0.002). Women and patients ≥30 years more often show a negative attitude towards NCGS (32.2% vs. 24.8%, p=0.024 and 32.2% vs. 24.2%, p=0.018). With regard to emerging treatment options for CeD, 43.3% have previously heard of novel agents, more women than men (46.0 vs. 38.0%, p=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Perception of and attitude towards NCGS differ depending on sex, age and prior use of alternative medicine. Knowledge of the progress towards emerging treatment options is currently limited.