Second-Line Biologic Therapy Following Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonist Failure: A Real-World Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis.

BACKGROUND& AIMS: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists often are used as first-line medications to treat moderate to severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but many patients do not achieve or maintain response. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of second-line treatments (ustekinumab, vedolizumab, or a second TNF antagonist) after TNF antagonist exposure in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) from 2 electronic health records-based cohorts. METHODS: We identified patients with prior TNF antagonist exposure who switched to a different biologic in the Mount Sinai Health System (MSHS) electronic health records (CD, n = 527; UC, n = 165) and the Study of a Prospective Adult Research Cohort (SPARC) from the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Plexus Program of the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation (CD, n = 412; UC, n = 129). Treatment failure was defined as the composite of any IBD-related surgery, IBD-related hospitalization, new prescription of oral/intravenous corticosteroids, or need to switch to a third biologic agent. Time-to-event analysis was conducted with inverse probability of treatment-weighted data. RESULTS: Overall, treatment failure occurred in 85% of MSHS and 72% of SPARC CD patients. In SPARC, the likelihood of treatment failure was significantly lower with ustekinumab compared with vedolizumab as second-line treatment (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.82; P < .001), a trend confirmed in MSHS (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.04; P = .15). In both cohorts, the superiority of ustekinumab compared with vedolizumab was shown when considering treatment failure as prescription of steroids or a third biologic agent. In UC, no differences between second-line treatment groups were identified. CONCLUSIONS: In 2 independent real-world cohort settings, second-line therapy in CD with ustekinumab after TNF antagonist treatment failure was associated with a lower likelihood of treatment failure than second-line vedolizumab.

Mild Crohn's Disease: Definition and Management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Crohn's Disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory disease that can lead to progressive damage to the gastrointestinal tract and significant disability. Early, "top-down" biologic therapy is recommended in moderate-to-severe CD to induce remission and to prevent hospitalization and complications. However, an estimated 20-30% of patients with CD have a mild disease course and may not garner sufficient benefit from expensive, immunosuppressing agents to justify their risks. Herein, we review characteristics of patients with mild CD, the available options for disease treatment and monitoring, and future directions of research. RECENT FINDINGS: For ambulatory outpatients with low-risk, mild, ileal or ileocolonic CD, induction of remission with budesonide is recommended. For colonic CD, sulfasalazine is a reasonable choice, although other aminosalicylates have no role in the treatment of CD. No large, randomized trial has supported the use of antibiotics or antimycobacterials in the treatment of CD. Partial Enteral Nutrition and Crohn's Disease Exclusion Diets may be appropriate for inducing remission in some adult patients, with trials ongoing. Select patients with mild-to-moderate CD may benefit from maintenance therapy with azathioprines or gut specific biologics, such as vedolizumab. The role of complementary and alternative medicine is not well defined. The identification, risk stratification, and monitoring of patients with mild CD can be a challenging clinical scenario. Some patients with low risk of disease progression may be appropriate for initial induction of remission with budesonide or sulfasalazine, followed by close clinical monitoring. Future research should focus on pre-clinical biomarkers to stratify disease, novel therapies with minimal systemic immune suppression, and validation of rigorous clinical monitoring algorithms.

Approach to the Management of Recently Diagnosed Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: A User's Guide for Adult and Pediatric Gastroenterologists.

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), including Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, are chronic, progressive, immune-mediated diseases of adults and children that have no cure. IBD can cause significant morbidity and lead to complications such as strictures, fistulas, infections, and cancer. In children, IBD can also result in growth impairment and pubertal delays. IBD is highly heterogenous, with severity ranging from mild to severe and symptoms ranging from mild to debilitating. Delay in IBD diagnosis, especially in Crohn's disease, is common and associated with adverse outcomes. Early diagnosis and prompt institution of treatment are the cornerstones for improving outcomes and maximizing health. Early diagnosis requires a low threshold of suspicion and red flags to guide early specialist referral at the primary provider level. Although the armamentarium of IBD medications is growing, many patients will not respond to treatment, and the selection of first-line therapy is critical. Risk stratification of disease severity, based on clinical, demographic, and serologic markers, can help guide selection of first-line therapy. Clinical decision support tools, genomics, and other biomarkers of response to therapy and risk of adverse events are the future of personalized medicine. After starting appropriate therapy, it is important to confirm remission using objective end points (treat to target) with continued control of inflammation with adjustment of therapy using surrogate biomarkers (tight control). Lastly, IBD therapy extends far beyond medications, and other aspects of the overall health and wellbeing of the patient are critical. These include preventive health, nutrition, and psychobehavioral support addressing patients' concerns around complementary therapy and medication adherence, prevention of disability, and ensuring open communication.

Stopping Mesalamine Therapy in Patients With Crohn's Disease Starting Biologic Therapy Does Not Increase Risk of Adverse Outcomes.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Little is known about the effects of discontinuing mesalamine therapy for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) who initiate therapy with an anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent. We analyzed data from 2 national population cohorts to compare outcomes of patients with CD already on mesalamine therapy who started treatment with an anti-TNF agent and then either stopped or continued mesalamine. METHODS: The primary outcome was any adverse clinical event, defined as a composite of new corticosteroid use or CD-related hospitalization or surgery. We collected data from the Truven MarketScan (IBM, Armonk, NY) health claims database in the United States and the Danish health registers. Our analysis included patients with CD who started anti-TNF therapy after at least 90 days of oral mesalamine therapy. Patients were classified as stopping mesalamine if therapy was discontinued within 90 days of starting anti-TNF. We performed multivariable Cox regression models controlling for demographics, clinical factors, and health care utilization. Adjusted hazard ratios with 95% CIs were calculated, comparing stopping mesalamine with continuing mesalamine. RESULTS: A total of 3178 patients with CD were included in our final analysis (2960 in the United States and 218 in Denmark). Stopping mesalamine after initiating anti-TNF therapy was not associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical events in the US cohort (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.03; P = .13) or in the Danish cohort (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.68-1.87; P = .63). Similar results were obtained from sensitivity analyses of concomitant immunomodulator use and duration of mesalamine treatment before initiation of anti-TNF therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In a retrospective analysis of 2 national databases, we found that stopping mesalamine therapy for patients with CD who were starting anti-TNF therapy did not increase their risk of adverse clinical events. These results should be validated in a prospective study.

Stopping 5-aminosalicylates in patients with ulcerative colitis starting biologic therapy does not increase the risk of adverse clinical outcomes: analysis of two nationwide population-based cohorts.

OBJECTIVE: The benefit of continuing 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who initiate anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF) biologics is unknown. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes in patients with UC already on 5-ASA who started anti-TNF and then either stopped or continued 5-ASA. DESIGN: Our primary outcome was any adverse clinical event defined as a composite of new corticosteroid use, UC-related hospitalisation or surgery. We used two national databases: the United States (US) Truven MarketScan health claims database and the Danish health registers. Patients with UC who started anti-TNF after having been on oral 5-ASA for at least 90 days were included. Patients were classified as stopping 5-ASA if therapy was discontinued within 90 days of starting anti-TNF. We performed multivariable Cox regression models controlling for demographics, clinical factors and healthcare utilisation. Adjusted HRs (aHR) with 95% CI are reported comparing stopping 5-ASA with continuing 5-ASA. RESULTS: A total of 3589 patients with UC were included (2890 US and 699 Denmark). Stopping 5-ASA after initiating anti-TNF was not associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical events in the U.S. cohort (aHR 1.04; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.21, p=0.57) nor in the Danish cohort (aHR 1.09; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.49, p=0.60). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses investigating concomitant immunomodulator use and duration of 5-ASA treatment before initiating anti-TNF. CONCLUSION: In two national databases, stopping 5-ASA in patients with UC starting anti-TNF therapy did not increase the risk of adverse clinical events. These results should be validated in a prospective clinical trial.