Impact of vedolizumab therapy on extra-intestinal manifestations in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a multicentre cohort study nested in the OBSERV-IBD cohort.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of vedolizumab as a treatment for extraintestinal manifestations (EIM) is questionable due to its gut-specificity. AIM: To assess effectiveness of vedolizumab for EIM in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in a large real-life experience cohort. METHODS: Between June and December 2014, 173 patients with Crohn's disease and 121 with ulcerative colitis were treated with vedolizumab. Patients were followed until week 54. EIM activity was assessed at weeks 0, 6, 14, 22, 30 and 54 by using a 3-step scale: complete remission, partial response and no response. RESULTS: At baseline, 49 (16.7%) patients had EIMs of which 47 had inflammatory arthralgia/arthritis, four had cutaneous lesions and two had both rheumatologic and skin EIM. At week 54, 21 (44.7%) patients had complete remission for inflammatory arthralgia/arthritis and three (75%) for cutaneous EIM. In multivariate analysis, complete remission of inflammatory arthralgia/arthritis was associated with clinical remission of IBD (OR = 1.89, IC95% [1.05-3.41], P = .03) and recent onset of inflammatory arthralgia/arthritis (OR = 1.99, IC95% [1.12-3.52], P = .02). During the follow-up period, 34 (13.8%) patients without any EIM at baseline, developed incident cases of inflammatory arthralgia/arthritis consisting mostly of peripheral arthralgia without evidence of arthritis and 14 (4.8%) incident cases of paradoxical skin manifestation. CONCLUSION: Vedolizumab therapy is commonly associated with improvement in EIM. This was associated with quiescent IBD and recent EIM. However, paradoxical skin manifestation and inflammatory arthralgia/arthritis may occur upon vedolizumab therapy.

One-year effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab therapy for inflammatory bowel disease: a prospective multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: We recently showed that vedolizumab is effective in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior anti-TNF failure in a multicentre compassionate early-access programme before marketing authorisation was granted to vedolizumab. AIMS: To assess effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab at week 54 in patients UC and CD. METHODS: Between June and December 2014, 173 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and 121 with ulcerative colitis (UC) were treated with vedolizumab induction therapy. Among those 294 patients, 272 completed the induction period and were evaluated at the week 14 visit (161 patients with CD and 111 with UC). Disease activity was assessed using the Harvey-Bradshaw Index for CD and the partial Mayo Clinic score for UC. The primary outcome was steroid-free clinical remission at week 54. RESULTS: At week 54, steroid-free clinical remission rates at week 54 were 27.2% and 40.5% in patients with CD and UC respectively. In addition, the sustained steroid-free clinical remission (from week 14 to week 54) rates were 8.1% and 19.0% respectively. No deaths were observed. Severe adverse events occurred in 17 (7.2%) patients, including six (2.5%) leading to vedolizumab discontinuation. CONCLUSION: Vedolizumab is able to maintain steroid-free clinical remission in up to one-third of patients with UC and CD at week 54 with a reasonable safety profile. A significant number of patients experienced loss of response during the first year of treatment, particularly in patients with CD.

The outcome of infliximab dose doubling in 157 patients with ulcerative colitis after loss of response to infliximab.

BACKGROUND: Optimising infliximab therapy is recommended in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients who lose response to infliximab; however, there are no data on the outcome of ulcerative colitis (UC) patients after doubling the dose. AIM: To determine the efficacy and safety of infliximab dose doubling in UC patients with a loss of response to infliximab. METHODS: From January 2006 to May 2013, we retrospectively reviewed the outcome of the consecutive UC patients who were treated with infliximab dose doubling (10 mg/kg) for loss of response in four French academic centres. The clinical response and remission were assessed. A composite event-free survival analysis was performed using the log-rank test and the Cox model. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-seven patients [84 males; median age 37. 6 (IQR 28.2-49.4) years] were included. The median follow-up after infliximab dose doubling was 1.8 (1.0-3.1) years. At weeks 8 and 24, 55% and 43% of the patients achieved a clinical response respectively. The probabilities of the event-free survival were 71%, 61% and 55% at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years respectively. In the multivariate analysis, the predictors of infliximab dose doubling failure were the absence of the introduction of an immunomodulator concomitantly to dose doubling, a partial Ulcerative Colitis Disease Activity Index >6, a C-reactive protein level >10 mg/L, a leucocyte count >8000/mm(3) and a haemoglobin level <12.5 g/dL. Adverse events were reported in 12 patients (8%). CONCLUSIONS: Infliximab dose doubling led to short- and long-term event-free survival in UC patients, who had a loss of response to infliximab, in greater than 50% of the cases. The benefits of such a strategy were significantly improved by adding a concomitant immunomodulator.

Benefit of infliximab reintroduction after successive failure of infliximab and adalimumab in Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab [IFX] and adalimumab [ADA] are effective in Crohn's disease [CD] for induction and maintenance therapy. However, high annual rate of discontinuation for loss of response or intolerance may lead to a switch to another anti-tumor necrosis factor agent. Patients with successive failure to IFX and ADA are becoming more frequent. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and the tolerance of re-treatment with IFX in CD patients who successively failed IFX and ADA. METHODS: A total of 61 patients with CD who received and discontinued successively IFX and ADA, and who were re-exposed to IFX, were identified in four French tertiary centers and retrospectively analyzed. Clinical data, follow-up and outcome were abstracted from medical records. RESULTS: Median treatment duration after reintroduction was 16 months, and probability of remaining under IFX was 60% and 51%, respectively, at 12 and 24 months. In all 29 patients discontinued the second IFX treatment due to intolerance [13], primary non-response [8], loss of response [7] or patient's wish [1]. Remission was achieved in 42% at week 6-8 after IFX re-induction, and was predictive of better long-term response [p = 0.006]. In multivariate analysis, receiving co-immunosuppression in both first and second IFX treatments [p = 0.04] and shorter interval between first and second IFX treatments [p = 0.017] were independently associated with longer duration of second IFX treatment. CONCLUSION: For CD patients who successively failed IFX and ADA, reintroducing IFX is feasible and often clinically efficient, particularly in patients who received co-immunosuppression during both first and second IFX treatments.