Sex-Related Differences in the Phenotype and Course of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: SEXEII Study of ENEIDA.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The impact of patient sex on the presentation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been poorly evaluated. Our aims were to assess potential disparities in IBD phenotype and progression between sexes. METHODS: We performed an observational multicenter study that included patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis from the Spanish ENEIDA registry. Data extraction was conducted in July 2021. RESULTS: A total of 51,595 patients with IBD were included, 52% were males and 25,947 had CD. The median follow-up period after diagnosis was 9 years in males and 10 years in females. In CD, female sex was an independent risk factor for medium disease onset (age, 17-40 y) (relative risk ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.31-1.62), later disease onset (age, >40 y) (relative risk ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.38-1.73), exclusive colonic involvement (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.14-1.34), inflammatory behavior (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.07-1.21), and extraintestinal manifestations (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.38-1.59). However, female sex was a protective factor for upper gastrointestinal involvement (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.90), penetrating behavior (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70-0.82), perianal disease (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.82), and complications (odds ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.80). In ulcerative colitis, female sex was an independent risk factor for extraintestinal manifestations (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.26-1.61). However, female sex was an independent protective factor for disease onset from age 40 onward (relative risk ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87), left-sided colonic involvement (relative risk ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.78), extensive colonic involvement (relative risk ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.55-0.64), and abdominal surgery (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.69-0.88). CONCLUSIONS: There is sexual dimorphism in IBD. The patient's sex should be taken into account in the clinical management of the disease.

HIV infection is associated with a less aggressive phenotype of inflammatory bowel disease. A multicenter study of the ENEIDA registry.

BACKGROUND: The coexistence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is uncommon. Data on the impact of HIV on IBD course and its management is scarce. AIM: To describe the IBD phenotype, therapeutic requirements and prevalence of opportunistic infections (OI) in IBD patients with a coexistent HIV infection. METHODS: Case-control, retrospective study including all HIV positive patients diagnosed with IBD in the ENEIDA registry. Patients with positive HIV serology (HIV-IBD) were compared to controls (HIV seronegative), matched 1:3 by year of IBD diagnosis, age, gender and type of IBD. RESULTS: A total of 364 patients (91 HIV-IBD and 273 IBD controls) were included. In the whole cohort, 58% had ulcerative colitis (UC), 35% had Crohn's disease (CD) and 7% were IBD unclassified. The HIV-IBD group presented a significantly higher proportion of proctitis in UC and colonic location in CD but fewer extraintestinal manifestations than controls. Regarding treatments, non-biological therapies (37.4% vs. 57.9%; P=0.001) and biologicals (26.4% vs. 42.1%; P=0.007), were used less frequently among patients in the HIV-IBD group. Conversely, HIV-IBD patients developed more OI than controls regardless of non-biological therapies use. In the multivariate analysis, HIV infection (OR 4.765, 95%CI 2.48-9.14; P<0.001) and having ≥1 comorbidity (OR 2.445, 95%CI 1.23-4.85; P=0.010) were risk factors for developing OI, while CD was protective (OR 0.372, 95%CI 0.18-0.78;P=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: HIV infection appears to be associated with a less aggressive phenotype of IBD and a lesser use of non-biological therapies and biologicals but entails a greater risk of developing OI.

An international multicentre study of SwiTching from Intravenous to subcutaneous inflixiMab and vEdolizumab in inflammatory bowel diseases: The TIME study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subcutaneous (SC) formulations of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) are approved for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of switching from intravenous (IV) to SC formulations of IFX and VDZ in IBDs. METHODS: This multicentre, retrospective study collected data of adult patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) switched to SC IFX or VDZ. The primary endpoint was clinical remission at 12 months stratified based on timing of switch. A composite endpoint consisting of therapy discontinuation, reverse-switch, need for steroids, and drug optimization was evaluated. A multivariate analysis investigated the association between patients' characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-one patients (59% UC, 53% male, mean age 44 ± 15 years, 68% IFX) from 13 centres were included. The switch occurred at Week 6 in a third of cases (36%). Median time to switch was 13 months. Most patients switched to SC IFX and VDZ were in clinical remission at 3 (87% and 77%), 6 (86% and 83%) and 12 (63% and 60%) months. In the multivariate analysis, there was no difference in clinical remission rate at 12 months; however, patients switched at Week 6 had a higher rate of experiencing any therapeutic changes at 3 (false discovery rate (FDR) = .002), 6 (FDR <1 × 10-10) or 12 months (FDR = .08). Clinical disease activity at baseline (only in UC) (FDR = .07) and previous exposure to biologics (FDR = .001) were risk factors for composite endpoint at 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSION: SC IFX and VDZ are effective in daily clinical practice in IBD patients. Switching patients in remission reduces the risk of negative outcomes.

Genetic biomarkers of methotrexate response and safety in Crohn's disease: Data from the Spanish ENEIDA registry.

AIMS: Methotrexate (MTX) is used to induce and maintain remission in patients with steroid-dependent Crohn's disease (CD). Despite its proven efficacy, its use is limited due to associated adverse events. Polymorphisms involving folate pathway genes might influence MTX efficacy and toxicity. We aimed to assess the impact of certain polymorphisms on the therapeutic outcomes of MTX in CD. METHODS: Patients with CD who exclusively followed MTX monotherapy and fulfilled inclusion criteria were identified from the GETECCU ENEIDA registry. Variants of ATIC, DHFR, MTHFR, SLC19A1, ABCB1 and ABCC3 genes were analysed and their association with efficacy and toxicity was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients were included in the analysis. MTX was used at a median weekly dose of 25 mg (interquartile range, 15-25 mg) and a median time of 14 months (interquartile range, 4-52 months). Thirty-seven percent of the patients achieved disease remission with MTX monotherapy, while 34% were nonresponders (MTX failure). MTX-related toxicity occurred in 40 patients (30%), leading to MTX discontinuation in 19%. DHFR rs408626 (odds ratio [OR] 3.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-7.69; P = .017) and MTHFR rs1801133 (OR 2.86, 95% CI 1.23-6.68; P = .015) variants, and smoking (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.12-6.05; P = .026) were associated with a higher risk of MTX failure. Additionally, the MTHFR rs1801131 variant was associated with a higher risk of MTX-related adverse effects (OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.26-6.13, P = .011). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that variants of MTHFR and DHFR genes may be associated with MTX efficacy and adverse events in patients with CD.

Indications of Helicobacter pylori Eradication Treatment and Its Influence on Prescriptions and Effectiveness (Hp-EuReg).

BACKGROUND: The influence of indications for Helicobacter pylori investigation on prescriptions and effectiveness is unknown. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of indications for H. pylori investigation on prescriptions, effectiveness, compliance, and tolerance. METHODS: International, prospective, non-interventional registry of the management of H. pylori infection by European gastroenterologists (Hp-EuReg). Treatment-näive patients registered from 2013 to 2023 at e-CRF AEG-REDCap were analyzed. The effectiveness was assessed by modified intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 53,636 treatment-naïve cases from 34 countries were included. Most frequent indications were: dyspepsia with normal endoscopy (49%), non-investigated dyspepsia (20%), duodenal ulcer (11%), gastric ulcer (7.7%), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (2.6%). Therapy effectiveness varied by indication: duodenal ulcer (91%), gastric ulcer (90%), preneoplastic lesions (90%), dyspepsia with normal endoscopy (89%), GERD (88%), and non-investigated dyspepsia (87%). Bismuth-metronidazole-tetracycline and clarithromycin-amoxicillin-bismuth quadruple therapies achieved 90% effectiveness in all indications except GERD. Concomitant clarithromycin-amoxicillin-tinidazole/metronidazole reached 90% cure rates except in patients with non-investigated dyspepsia; whereas sequential clarithromycin-amoxicillin-tinidazole/metronidazole proved optimal (≥90%) in patients with gastric ulcer only. Adverse events were higher in patients treated for dyspepsia with normal endoscopy and duodenal ulcer compared with the remaining indications (23% and 28%, p < 0.001). Therapeutic compliance was higher in patients with duodenal ulcer and preneoplastic lesions (98% and 99%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In Europe, patients with gastric or duodenal ulcers and preneoplastic lesions showed higher H. pylori treatment effectiveness. Bismuth and non-bismuth quadruple therapies achieved optimal results in almost all indications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02328131.

Influence of familial forms of inflammatory bowel disease on the use of immunosuppressants, biological agents, and surgery in the era of biological therapies. Results from the ENEIDA project.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Familial inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) history is a controversial prognostic factor in IBD. We aimed to evaluate the impact of a familial history of IBD on the use of medical and surgical treatments in the biological era. METHODS: Patients included in the prospectively maintained ENEIDA database and diagnosed with IBD after 2005 were included. Familial forms were defined as those cases with at least one first-degree relative diagnosed with IBD. Disease phenotype, the use of biological agents, or surgical treatments were the main outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 5263 patients [2627 Crohn's disease (CD); 2636 ulcerative colitis (UC)] were included, with a median follow-up of 31 months. Of these, 507 (10%) corresponded to familial forms. No clinical differences were observed between familial and sporadic IBD forms except a lower age at IBD diagnosis and a higher rate of males in familial forms of UC. In CD, the proportions of patients treated with thiopurines (54.4% vs 46.7%; P = .015) and survival time free of thiopurines (P = .009) were lower in familial forms. No differences were found regarding the use of biological agents. Concerning surgery, a higher rate of intestinal resections was observed in sporadic CD (14.8% vs 9.9%, P = .027). No differences were observed in UC. CONCLUSIONS: In the era of biological therapies, familial and sporadic forms of IBD show similar phenotypes and are managed medically in a similar way; whether these is due to lack of phenotypical differences or an effect of biological therapies is uncertain. What is already known on this topic: IBD's etiopathogenesis points to an interaction between environmental and genetic factors, being familial history a controversial prognostic factor. Biological agents use and need for surgery regarding familial or sporadic forms of IBDs present conflicting results. What this study adds: Familial and sporadic forms of IBD have similar phenotypes and are managed medically and surgically in a similar way. How this study might affect research, practice or policy: Familial aggregation should not be considered a factor associated with more aggressive disease.

Impact of mesalazine on the response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: Results of a prospective multicentre study of GETECCU (VACOVEII study). / Impacto de la mesalazina en la respuesta a la vacunación contra la COVID-19 en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal. Resultados de un estudio prospectivo multicéntrico de GETECCU (VACOVEII).

OBJECTIVE: The recommendations of the Spanish Ministry of Health on vaccination in risk groups include mesalazine among the treatments with a possible negative effect on its effectiveness. However, this is not the recommendation of most experts. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of mesalazine on the humoral response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: VACOVEII is a Spanish, prospective, multicenter study promoted by GETECCU, which evaluates the effectiveness of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with IBD. This study includes IBD patients who have recieved the full vaccination schedule and without previous COVID-19 infection. Seroconversion was set at 260BAU/mL (centralized determination) and was assessed 6 months after full vaccination. In this subanalysis of the study, we compare the effectiveness of the vaccine between patients treated with mesalazine and patients without treatment. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients without immunosuppressive therapy were included, of which 32 did not receive any treatment and 92 received only mesalazine. Six months after full vaccination, no significant differences are observed in the mean concentrations of IgG anti-S between both groups. In the multivariate analysis, antibody titers were independently associated with the use of mRNA vaccines and with SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSION: Mesalazine does not have a negative effect on the response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in IBD patients.

Helicobacter pylori Eradication Treatment in Older Patients.

Helicobacter pylori is the main etiopathogenetic factor of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancer. The world's population is shifting towards older people, who have the highest prevalence of H. pylori. Aging-related peculiarities could have an impact on the treatment of H. pylori and there is still a lack of research data in the older population. The aim of this review was to summarize the findings of the most recent information, publications and studies on the issues relating to H. pylori infection in older patients. H. pylori eradication offers gastrointestinal and extra gastrointestinal benefits in older patients. Based on the main guidelines, H. pylori should be eradicated independent of the patient's age, only reconsidering cases with terminal illness and low life expectancy. Proton pump inhibitors are generally safe and well tolerated. Some antibiotics require dose adjustment only in advanced renal insufficiency and the risk of hepatotoxicity is very low. Special precautions should be taken in patients with polypharmacy and those taking aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In older patients, H. pylori eradication treatment frequently causes only mild and short-term adverse events; however, treatment compliance is usually still very good. H. pylori treatment in older patients does not increase the risk of Clostridium difficile infection. Optimal eradication effectiveness (> 90%) is mostly achieved with bismuth- and non-bismuth-based quadruple therapies. Susceptibility-guided treatment of H. pylori can contribute to increasing the effectiveness of eradication regimens in older adults. To achieve optimal H. pylori eradication effectiveness in older patients, the same guidelines, which are applied to adults, also apply to this population: avoiding repetitive treatment prescriptions, choosing quadruple therapies, prescribing longer treatment duration and administering high-dose proton pump inhibitors twice daily.

Safety profile of Helicobacter pylori eradication treatments: literature review and updated data of the European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management (Hp-EuReg).

INTRODUCTION: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), the most prevalent chronic infection globally, is the major cause of relevant diseases such as gastric cancer, leading to high morbidity and mortality worldwide. Several studies have focused on optimize H. pylori eradication treatment through combination therapies and antibiotic resistance. However, the adverse events profile and its impact, as a primary outcome, remains underexplored.The aim of this review was to summarize the available data on the safety of the most common regimens for H. pylori eradication and its impact on the compliance. AREAS COVERED: This review encompassed the published evidence from the years 2008 to 2023 regarding both the safety and compliance for most common H. pylori eradication regimens. The main sources for this review comprised MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane electronic databases. Furthermore, it included a safety analysis of unpublished data from the European Registry on H. pylori management (Hp-EuReg). EXPERT OPINION: Poor compliance is correlated with significantly lower cure rates, and this is a unique modifiable source of H. pylori treatment failure. Eradication treatments have become complex, involving multiple drugs and dosing intervals. Thus, patient education is crucial; doctors must explain to the patient about potential temporary and most often harmless side effects.

Sequential versus Standard Triple Therapy for First-Line Helicobacter pylori Eradication: An Update.

BACKGROUND: non-bismuth sequential therapy (SEQ) was suggested as a first-line anti-Helicobacter pylori treatment alternative to standard triple therapy (STT). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review with a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of 10-day SEQ vs. STT (of at least 7 days) using bibliographical searches up to July 2021, including treatment-naïve adult or children. The intention-to-treat (ITT) eradication rate and the risk difference (RD) were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 69 RCTs were evaluated, including 19,657 patients (9486 in SEQ; 10,171 in STT). Overall, SEQ was significantly more effective than STT (82% vs. 75%; RD 0.08; p < 0.001). The results were highly heterogeneous (I2 = 68%), and 38 studies did not demonstrate differences between therapies. Subgroup analyses suggested that patients with clarithromycin resistance only and all geographical areas but South America could benefit more from SEQ. Both therapies have evolved over the years, showing similar results when STT lasted 14 days; however, a tendency toward lower SEQ efficacy was noted from 2010 onwards. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to 2010, SEQ was significantly more effective than STT, notably when 7-day STT was prescribed. A tendency toward lower differences between SEQ and STT has been noted, especially when using 10-day STT. None of the therapies achieved an optimal efficacy and therefore cannot be recommended as a valid first-line H. pylori treatment.

Comparative maintenance performance of all biologic agents and small molecules in ulcerative colitis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Βiologic agents and small molecules have expanded the therapeutic armamentarium of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC). However, their comparative efficacy and safety performance as maintenance treatments have not been sufficiently explored. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NWM) to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of all approved and emerging treatments for maintenance in moderate to severe UC. METHODS: We searched Pubmed/Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for relevant RCTs through April 2023. The primary endpoint was clinical remission at the end of the maintenance therapy. Data were analyzed by means of a Bayesian NWM. The ranking probability concerning efficacy and safety was evaluated by means of surfaces under cumulative ranking (SUCRA) values. RESULTS: There were 20 eligible RCTs with 7660 patients randomized to 20 treatments. RCTs were grouped into two study designs, that is, re-randomization of patients after an induction period and treat-through patients. Concerning efficacy, in re-randomized patients, upadacitinib 30 mg/day was ranked first (SUCRA 94.9%) whereas in treat-through patients etrasimod 2 mg/day was ranked first (SUCRA 91.1%). The integrated efficacy-safety hierarchical analysis, showed that tofacitinib 10 mg had the best efficacy-safety therapeutic profile in re-randomized patients, whereas in treat-through patients infliximab 3.5 mg/Kg Q8W showed the best efficacy-safety profile. CONCLUSION: For maintenance treatment, in moderate to severe UC, this NWM showed that upadacitinib 30 mg/day and etrasimod 2 mg/day were ranked best for efficacy in re-randomized and treat-through patients respectively. Tofacitinib 10 mg/day and infliximab 3.5 mg/Kg Q8W showed the best efficacy-safety therapeutic profile in re-randomized and treat-through patients respectively.

Benefit-Risk Trade-offs and Patient Preferences for Therapy Selection in Ulcerative Colitis: a Multicountry Preference Study.

BACKGROUND: To help navigate the complex treatment landscape of ulcerative colitis (UC), we quantified the benefit-risk trade-offs that patients were willing to make when choosing treatment. METHODS: Patients completed an online discrete choice experiment. Eligible patients had a UC diagnosis for ≥6 months, were aged ≥18 years, and resided in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, or the UK. Patients chose between 2 hypothetical treatments set up to ensure trade-offs were made. Clinical trial data, literature review, and patient interviews identified treatment attributes. Relative attribute importance (RAI) scores and maximum acceptable risks were generated. A patient-centric benefit-risk assessment of 200 mg of filgotinib was conducted as an example to show how measured trade-offs can be used. RESULTS: Overall, 631 patients participated; patients had a mean age of 42.2 years and were predominantly male (75.3%). Achieving and maintaining clinical remission was the most important factor for patients (RAI 32.4%); to achieve this, patients were willing to accept slightly higher risks of blood clots, serious infections, and malignancies compared with lower risk treatment profiles. Patients also valued the convenience of oral treatments, avoiding steroids, and the ability to attend school/work. The patient-centric benefit-risk assessment suggested patients are significantly more likely to prefer Janus kinase 1 preferential inhibitor filgotinib over placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Achieving clinical remission was the highest treatment priority for patients. To attain this, patients were willing to accept some slightly higher risk treatment profiles. Patient choices in the benefit-risk assessment suggested patients were significantly more likely to prefer filgotinib over placebo.

Patients were willing to accept slightly higher risk treatment profiles over lower risk treatment profiles for an increased chance of achieving and maintaining remission. A patient-centric benefit-risk assessment suggested 200 mg of filgotinib had an acceptable benefit-risk profile.

Corrigendum: Poor prognostic factors of pharmacokinetic origin predict outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor-α.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1342477.].

Poor prognostic factors of pharmacokinetic origin predict outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor-α.

Introduction: We evaluated baseline Clearance of anti-tumor necrosis factors and human leukocyte antigen variant (HLA DQA1*05) in combination as poor prognostic factors (PPF) of pharmacokinetic (PK) origin impacting immune response (formation of antidrug antibodies) and disease control of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients treated with infliximab or adalimumab. Methods: Baseline Clearance was estimated in IBD patients before starting treatment using weight and serum albumin concentrations. HLA DQA1*05 carrier status (rs2097432 A/G or G/G variant) was measured using real time polymerase chain reaction. The outcomes consisted of immune response, clinical and biochemical remission (C-reactive protein<3 mg/L in the absence of symptoms), and endoscopic remission (SES-CD<3). Statistical analysis consisted of logistic regression and nonlinear mixed effect models. Results and discussion: In 415 patients enrolled from 4 different cohorts (median age 27 [IQR: 15-43] years, 46% females), Clearance>0.326 L/day and HLA DQA1*05 carrier status were 2-fold more likely to have antidrug antibodies (OR=2.3, 95%CI: 1.7-3.4; p<0.001, and OR=1.9, 95%CI: 1.4-2.8; p<0.001, respectively). Overall, each incremental PPF of PK origin resulted in a 2-fold (OR=2.16, 95%CI: 1.7-2.7; p<0.11) [corrected] higher likelihood of antidrug antibody formation. The presence of both PPF of PK origin resulted in higher rates of antidrug antibodies (p<0.01) and lower clinical and biochemical remission (p<0.01). Each incremental increase in PPF of PK origin associated with lower likelihood of endoscopic remission (OR=0.4, 95%CI: 0.2-0.7; p<0.001). Prior biologic experience heightened the negative impact of PPF of PK origin on clinical and biochemical remission (p<0.01). Implementation of proactive therapeutic drug monitoring reduced it, particularly during maintenance and in the presence of higher drug concentrations (p<0.001). We conclude that PPF of PK origin, including both higher Clearance and carriage of HLA DQA1*05, impact outcomes in patients with IBD.

Pragmatic Trial Design to Compare Real-world Effectiveness of Different Treatments for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: The PRACTICE-IBD European Consensus.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pragmatic studies designed to test interventions in everyday clinical settings can successfully complement the evidence from registration and explanatory clinical trials. The European consensus project PRACTICE-IBD was developed to identify essential criteria and address key methodological issues needed to design valid, comparative, pragmatic studies in inflammatory bowel diseases [BDs]. METHODS: Statements were issued by a panel of 11 European experts in IBD management and trial methodology, on four main topics: [I] study design; [II] eligibility, recruitment and organisation, flexibility; [III] outcomes; [IV] analysis. The consensus process followed a modified Delphi approach, involving two rounds of assessment and rating of the level of agreement [1 to 9; cut-off ≥7 for approval] with the statements by 18 additional European experts in IBD. RESULTS: At the first voting round, 25 out of the 26 statements reached a mean score ≥7. Following the discussion that preceded the second round of voting, it was decided to eliminate two statements and to split one into two. At the second voting round, 25 final statements were approved: seven for study design; six for eligibility, recruitment and organisation, flexibility; eight for outcomes; and four for analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Pragmatic, randomised, clinical trials can address important questions in IBD clinical practice, and may provide complementary, high-level evidence, as long as they follow a methodologically rigorous approach. These 25 statements intend to offer practical guidance in the design of high-quality, pragmatic, clinical trials that can aid decision making in choosing a management strategy for IBDs.

Effectiveness and safety of a third-line rescue treatment for acute severe ulcerative colitis refractory to infliximab or ciclosporin (REASUC study).

BACKGROUND: The advent of new therapeutic agents and the improvement of supporting care might change the management of acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) and avoid colectomy. AIMS: To evaluate the colectomy-free survival and safety of a third-line treatment in patients with ASUC refractory to intravenous steroids and who failed either infliximab or ciclosporin. METHODS: Multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients with ASUC refractory to intravenous steroids who had failed infliximab or ciclosporin and received a third-line treatment during the same hospitalisation. Patients who stopped second-line treatment due to disease activity or adverse events (AEs) were eligible. We assessed short-term colectomy-free survival by logistic regression analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models were used for long-term assessment. RESULTS: Among 78 patients, 32 received infliximab and 46 ciclosporin as second-line rescue treatment. Third-line treatment was infliximab in 45 (58%), ciclosporin in 17 (22%), tofacitinib in 13 (17%) and ustekinumab in 3 (3.8%). Colectomy was performed in 29 patients (37%) during follow-up (median 21 weeks). Of the 78 patients, 32 and 18 were in clinical remission at, respectively, 12 and 52 weeks. At the last visit, 25 patients were still on third-line rescue treatment, while 12 had stopped it due to clinical remission. AEs were reported in 26 (33%) patients. Two patients died (2.6%), including one following colectomy. CONCLUSION: Third-line rescue treatment avoided colectomy in over half of the patients with ASUC and may be considered a therapeutic strategy.

Quadruple therapies show a higher eradication rate compared to standard triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection within the LEGACy consortium. A multicenter observational study in European and Latin American countries.

INTRODUCTION: Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most lethal malignancies worldwide. Helicobacter pylori is the primary cause of GC; therefore, its eradication reduces the risk of developing this neoplasia. There is extensive evidence regarding quadruple therapy with relevance to the European population. However, in Latin America, data are scarce. Furthermore, there is limited information about the eradication rates achieved by antibiotic schemes in European and Latin American populations. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of standard triple therapy (STT), quadruple concomitant therapy (QCT), and bismuth quadruple therapy (QBT) in six centers in Europe and Latin America. METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out based on the LEGACy registry from 2017 to 2022. Data from adult patients recruited in Portugal, Spain, Chile, Mexico, and Paraguay with confirmed H. pylori infection who received eradication therapy and confirmatory tests at least 1 month apart were included. Treatment success by each scheme was compared using a mixed multilevel Poisson regression, adjusting for patient sex and age, together with country-specific variables, including prevalence of H. pylori antibiotic resistance (clarithromycin, metronidazole, and amoxicillin), and CYP2C19 polymorphisms. RESULTS: 772 patients were incorporated (64.64% females; mean age of 52.93 years). The total H. pylori eradication rates were 75.20% (255/339) with STT, 88.70% (159/178) with QCT, and 91.30% (191/209) with QBT. Both quadruple therapies (QCT-QBT) showed significantly higher eradication rates compared with STT, with an adjusted incidence risk ratio (IRR) of 1.25 (p: <0.05); and 1.24 (p: <0.05), respectively. The antibiotic-resistance prevalence by country, but not the prevalence of CYP2C19 polymorphism, showed a statistically significant impact on eradication success. CONCLUSIONS: Both QCT and QBT are superior to STT for H. pylori eradication when adjusted for country-specific antibiotic resistance and CYP2C19 polymorphism in a sample of individuals residing in five countries within two continents.

Comparison between tofacitinib and ustekinumab as a third-line therapy in refractory ulcerative colitis: A multicenter international study.

BACKGROUND: Ustekinumab and tofacitinib have recently been approved for the management of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC). However, there is no evidence on how they should be positioned in the therapeutic algorithm. The aim of this study was to compare tofacitinib and ustekinumab as third-line therapies in UC patients in whom anti-TNF and vedolizumab had failed. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective observational study. The primary outcome was disease progression, defined as the need for steroids, therapy escalation, UC-related hospitalization and/or surgery. Secondary outcomes were clinical remission, normalization of C-reactive protein, endoscopic remission, treatment withdrawal, and adverse events. RESULTS: One-hundred seventeen UC patients were included in the study and followed for a median time of 11.6 months (q1-q3, 5.5-18.7). Overall, 65% of patients were treated with tofacitinib and 35% with ustekinumab. In the entire study cohort, 63 patients (54%) had disease progression during the follow-up period. Treatment with ustekinumab predicted increased risk of disease progression compared to treatment with tofacitinib in Cox regression analysis (HR: 1.93 [95% CI: 1.06-3.50] p = 0.030). Twenty-eight (68%) patients in the ustekinumab group and 35 (46%) in the tofacitinib group had disease progression over the follow-up period (log-rank test, p < 0.054). No significant differences were observed for the secondary outcomes. Six and 22 adverse events occurred in the ustekinumab and tofacitinib groups, respectively (15% vs. 31%, p = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib was more efficacious in reducing disease progression than ustekinumab in this cohort of refractory UC patients. However, prospective head-to-head clinical trials are needed as to confirm these data.

Clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with two consecutive anti-TNF agents: data from the ENEIDA registry.

Background: Infliximab seems to be the most efficacious of the three available anti-TNF agents for ulcerative colitis (UC) but little is known when it is used as the second anti-TNF. Objectives: To compare the clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in UC patients. Design: Retrospective observational study. Methods: Patients from the ENEIDA registry treated consecutively with infliximab and a subcutaneous anti-TNF (or vice versa), naïve to other biological agents, were identified and grouped according to the administration route of the first anti-TNF into IVi (intravenous initially) or SCi (subcutaneous initially). Results: Overall, 473 UC patients were included (330 IVi and 143 SCi). Clinical response at week 14 was 42.7% and 48.3% in the IVi and SCi groups (non-statistically significant), respectively. Clinical remission rates at week 52 were 32.8% and 31.4% in the IVi and SCi groups (nonsignificant differences), respectively. A propensity-matched score analysis showed a higher clinical response rate at week 14 in the SCi group and higher treatment persistence in the IVi group. Regarding long-term outcomes, dose escalation and discontinuation due to the primary failure of the first anti-TNF and more severe disease activity at the beginning of the second anti-TNF were inversely associated with clinical remission. Conclusion: The use of a second anti-TNF for UC seems to be reasonable in terms of efficacy, although it is particularly reduced in the case of the primary failure of the first anti-TNF. Whether the second anti-TNF is infliximab or subcutaneous does not seem to affect efficacy.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in UC patients. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. METHODS: Patients from the ENEIDA registry treated consecutively with infliximab and a subcutaneous anti-TNF (or vice versa), naïve to other biological agents, were identified and grouped according to the administration route of the first anti-TNF into IVi (intravenous initially) or SCi (subcutaneous initially). RESULTS: Overall, 473 UC patients were included (330 IVi, 143 SCi). Clinical response at week 14 was 42.7% and 48.3% in the IVi and SCi groups (non-statistically significant), respectively. Clinical remission rates at week 52 were 32.8% and 31.4%, in the IVi and SCi groups (nonsignificant differences), respectively. A propensity-matched score analysis showed a higher clinical response rate at week 14 in the SCi group and higher treatment persistence in the IVi group. Regarding long-term outcomes, dose escalation and discontinuation due to the primary failure of the first anti-TNF and more severe disease activity at the beginning of the second anti-TNF were inversely associated with clinical remission. CONCLUSION: The use of a second anti-TNF for UC seems to be reasonable in terms of efficacy, although it is particularly reduced in the case of the primary failure of the first anti-TNF. Whether the second anti-TNF is infliximab or subcutaneous does not seem to affect efficacy.

Clinical and treatment outcomes of a second subcutaneous or intravenous anti-TNF in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with two consecutive anti-TNF agents. Data from the ENEIDA registry Background: Infliximab seems to be the most efficacious of the three available anti-TNF agents for ulcerative colitis (UC), but little is known when it is used as the second anti-TNF.

Trends in Targeted Therapy Usage in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: TRENDY Study of ENEIDA.

Markers that allow for the selection of tailored treatments for individual patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are yet to be identified. Our aim was to describe trends in real-life treatment usage. For this purpose, patients from the ENEIDA registry who received their first targeted IBD treatment (biologics or tofacitinib) between 2015 and 2021 were included. A subsequent analysis with Machine Learning models was performed. The study included 10,009 patients [71% with Crohn's disease (CD) and 29% with ulcerative colitis (UC)]. In CD, anti-TNF (predominantly adalimumab) were the main agents in the 1st line of treatment (LoT), although their use declined over time. In UC, anti-TNF (mainly infliximab) use was predominant in 1st LoT, remaining stable over time. Ustekinumab and vedolizumab were the most prescribed drugs in 2nd and 3rd LoT in CD and UC, respectively. Overall, the use of biosimilars increased over time. Machine Learning failed to identify a model capable of predicting treatment patterns. In conclusion, drug positioning is different in CD and UC. Anti-TNF were the most used drugs in IBD 1st LoT, being adalimumab predominant in CD and infliximab in UC. Ustekinumab and vedolizumab have gained importance in CD and UC, respectively. The approval of biosimilars had a significant impact on treatment.