RESUMEN
Background: Bowel urgency is a highly disruptive and bothersome symptom experienced by patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), (ulcerative colitis [UC], and Crohn's disease [CD]). However, the burden of bowel urgency among patients with varying experiences in targeted treatment has not been consistently assessed. This real-world study explored the clinical and health-related quality of life burden of bowel urgency among patients with IBD with differing treatment experiences. Methods: This cross-sectional survey included gastroenterologists and their patients with IBD across France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States treated for over 3 months. Physicians provided patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment history. Patients reported their health-related quality of life and work productivity. Patients with UC and CD were analyzed separately and stratified into 3 groups: Targeted therapy naïve, those receiving their first-line targeted therapy, and targeted therapy experienced. Results: This study found that 17%-26% of UC and 13%-17% of CD patients experienced persistent bowel urgency, irrespective of receiving conventional or targeted therapy. Moreover, patients with bowel urgency experienced an increased clinical and health-related quality of life burden compared to patients without bowel urgency, which physicians most commonly regarded as one of the most difficult symptoms to treat, with the burden remaining substantial irrespective of their treatment experience. Conclusions: Despite several current treatment options, new therapeutic strategies are necessary to provide relief from bowel urgency, one of the most challenging symptoms for people living with IBD.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Although dosing regimens of targeted therapies (TT) for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) are guided by market authorizations and clinical guidelines, little is known about clinical guideline adherence or outcomes in patients receiving escalated doses of TT due to lack of response. This real-world study explored the prevalence of dose escalation and compared outcomes between patients receiving standard and escalated TT doses. METHODS: Data were from the 2020-2021 Adelphi Disease Specific Programme for inflammatory bowel disease, a cross-sectional survey of gastroenterologists and their UC and CD patients across five European countries and the US. Physicians provided retrospective data collection of patient demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment history, and satisfaction; patients reported quality-of-life and work productivity. Patients were grouped by TT maintenance dose; standard and escalated dose groups were compared. Outcomes were adjusted for time on current TT and severity at current TT initiation using regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 1,241 UC and 1,477 CD patients, 19.1% and 24.1%, respectively, received escalated TT doses. Despite escalation, a substantial proportion of patients had not achieved remission, had moderate or severe disease activity, or were flaring. Most physicians were not fully satisfied with treatment in the escalated dose group and were more likely to switch patients to another treatment regimen than patients on standard dose. CONCLUSION: Dose escalation is not always an effective approach to resolve inadequate or loss of response in UC and CD, highlighting a need for more therapeutic options or alternative treatment strategies in patients unresponsive to TT.