Comparison of performances of infliximab biosimilars CT-P13 versus SB2 in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases: a real-life multicenter, observational study in Italy.

BACKGROUND: To compare the performances of Infliximab (IFX) biosimilar CT-P13 and SB2 in the treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) outpatients in Italy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Three hundred and eighty IBD outpatients were retrospectively evaluated. The primary endpoint was to compare the two IFX biosimilars in terms of reaching and maintenance of remission at any timepoint. RESULTS: 197 patients with Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and 183 patients with Crohn's Disease (CD) treated with CT-P13 or SB2 and having a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-36) months were compared: 230 (60.5%) were naïve to anti-TNFα, 20 (5.26%) were switched from IFX originator or from IFX CT-P13 to IFX SB2. Clinical remission was achieved in 133 (67.5%) UC patients and in 164 (89.6%) CD patients (p < 0.000), with no differences between CT-P13 and SB2 in the rate of remission in UC (p = 0.667) and CD (p = 0.286). Clinical response, steroid-free remission, rate of surgery, mucosal healing (MH) in UC, switching from IFX originator or from other biosimilar, and safety were similar. Higher MH rate was obtained in CD patients treated with CT-P13 (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: This first comparative study found that both IFX biosimilars CT-P13 and SB2 are effective and safe in managing IBD outpatients.

Long-term real-life efficacy and safety of infliximab and adalimumab in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab and adalimumab are widely used for the treatment of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. AIM: To compare the long-term efficacy and safety of infliximab and adalimumab in a large cohort of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis patients reflecting real-life clinical practice. METHODS: Seven hundred twelve patients were retrospectively reviewed, 410 with Crohn's disease (268 treated with adalimumab and 142 with infliximab; median follow-up 60 months, range, 36-72) and 302 with ulcerative colitis (118 treated with adalimumab and 184 with infliximab; median follow-up 48 months, range, 36-84). RESULTS: In Crohn's disease, clinical remission was maintained in 75.0% of adalimumab vs. in 72.5% of infliximab patients (P = 0.699); mucosal healing and steroid-free remission were maintained in 49.5% of adalimumab vs. 63.9% of infliximab patients (P = 0.077) and in 77.7% of adalimumab vs. 77.3% in infliximab group (P = 0.957), respectively. In ulcerative colitis, clinical remission was maintained in 50.0% of adalimumab vs. 65.8% of infliximab patients (P < 0.000); mucosal healing and steroid-free remission were maintained in 80.6% of adalimumab vs. 77.0% of infliximab patients (P = 0.494) and in 90.2% of adalimumab vs. 87.5% of infliximab patients (P = 0.662), respectively. At the multivariate analysis, ileocolonic location and simple endoscopic score for Crohn's disease >10 were predictors of failure in Crohn's disease; treatment with adalimumab, BMI ≥30 and Mayo score >10 were predictors of failure in ulcerative colitis. infliximab was more likely to cause adverse events than adalimumab (16.6 vs. 6.2%, P < 0.000). CONCLUSION: Both adalimumab and infliximab are effective in long-term outpatients management of inflammatory bowel diseases. Adalimumab had a lower rate of adverse events.

Predictive value of the Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) endoscopic classification on the outcome of diverticular disease of the colon: An international study.

BACKGROUND: Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) endoscopic classification has been recently developed for patients suffering from diverticulosis and diverticular disease. AIMS: We assessed retrospectively the predictive value of DICA in patients for whom endoscopic data and clinical follow-up were available. METHODS: For each patient, we recorded: age, severity of DICA, presence of abdominal pain, C-reactive protein and faecal calprotectin test (if available) at the time of diagnosis; months of follow-up; therapy taken during the follow-up to maintain remission (if any); occurrence/recurrence of diverticulitis; need of surgery. RESULTS: We enrolled 1651 patients (793 M, 858 F, mean age 66.6 ± 11.1 years): 939 (56.9%) patients were classified as DICA 1, 501 (30.3%) patients as DICA 2 and 211 (12.8%) patients as DICA 3. The median follow-up was 24 (9-38) months. Acute diverticulitis (AD) occurred/recurred in 263 (15.9%) patients; surgery was necessary in 57 (21.7%) cases. DICA was the only factor significantly associated to the occurrence/recurrence of diverticulitis and surgery either at univariate (χ(2 )= 405.029; p < 0.0001) or multivariate analysis (hazard ratio = 4.319, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.639-5.126; p < 0.0001). Only in DICA 2 patients was therapy effective for prevention of AD occurrence/recurrence with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.598 (0.391-0.914) (p = 0.006, log rank test). Mesalazine-based therapies reduced the risk of AD occurrence/recurrence and needs of surgery with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.2103 (0.122-0.364) and 0.459 (0.258-0.818), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DICA classification is a valid parameter to predict the risk of diverticulitis occurrence/recurrence in patients suffering from diverticular disease of the colon.

Continuous infusion versus bolus administration of steroids in severe attacks of ulcerative colitis: a randomized, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with severe attacks of ulcerative colitis (UC), IV steroids represent the first-line treatment, leading to clinical improvement in approximately 50-60% of patients. AIM: The aim of this study was to prospectively compare the efficacy and safety of different modalities of steroid administration, and to evaluate predictors of failure to therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a single-center, double-blind trial, consecutive patients with a severe attack of UC received 1 mg/kg/day of 6-methyl-prednisolone administered randomly by either a bolus injection (group A) or continuous infusion (group B). RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were enrolled (35 men, mean age 38 +/- 15, range 18-75 yr), 15 of them at their first attack of UC; in the remaining cases, the mean duration of disease was 4.5 +/- 5 yr. At inclusion, forty patients (60%) had pancolitis and the remainder had left-sided colitis. Overall, thirty-three patients (50%) underwent clinical remission after 7 days of treatment: 16 of 32 in group A and 17 of 34 in group B. Thirty-one patients eventually underwent total colectomy (12 in group A and 9 in group B), which was carried out by the first month in 10 patients (5 in each group). Twenty-eight patients (15 in group A and 13 in group B) experienced steroid-related adverse reactions. All differences between groups were not statistically significant. Previous use of steroids (OR 13.6, CI 2-86) and active smoking (OR 11.6, CI 1.4-107) were independent predictors of nonresponse. CONCLUSIONS: In severe attacks of UC, methyl-prednisolone given as a continuous infusion was no better than bolus administration in terms of efficacy and safety.