A Prediction Model for Successful Increase of Adalimumab Dose Intervals in Patients with Crohn's Disease: Secondary Analysis of the Pragmatic Open-Label Randomised Controlled Non-inferiority LADI Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the pragmatic open-label randomised controlled non-inferiority LADI trial we showed that increasing adalimumab (ADA) dose intervals was non-inferior to conventional dosing for persistent flares in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) in clinical and biochemical remission. AIMS: To develop a prediction model to identify patients who can successfully increase their ADA dose interval based on secondary analysis of trial data. METHODS: Patients in the intervention group of the LADI trial increased ADA intervals to 3 and then to 4 weeks. The dose interval increase was defined as successful when patients had no persistent flare (> 8 weeks), no intervention-related severe adverse events, no rescue medication use during the study, and were on an increased dose interval while in clinical and biochemical remission at week 48. Prediction models were based on logistic regression with relaxed LASSO. Models were internally validated using bootstrap optimism correction. RESULTS: We included 109 patients, of which 60.6% successfully increased their dose interval. Patients that were active smokers (odds ratio [OR] 0.90), had previous CD-related intra-abdominal surgeries (OR 0.85), proximal small bowel disease (OR 0.92), an increased Harvey-Bradshaw Index (OR 0.99) or increased faecal calprotectin (OR 0.997) were less likely to successfully increase their dose interval. The model had fair discriminative ability (AUC = 0.63) and net benefit analysis showed that the model could be used to select patients who could increase their dose interval. CONCLUSION: The final prediction model seems promising to select patients who could successfully increase their ADA dose interval. The model should be validated externally before it may be applied in clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03172377.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Increased Adalimumab Dose Intervals in Crohn's Disease Patients in Stable Remission: The Randomized Controlled LADI Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to assess cost-effectiveness of increasing adalimumab dose intervals compared to the conventional dosing interval in patients with Crohn's disease [CD] in stable clinical and biochemical remission. DESIGN: We conducted a pragmatic, open-label, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, comparing increased adalimumab intervals with the 2-weekly interval in adult CD patients in clinical remission. Quality of life was measured with the EQ-5D-5L. Costs were measured from a societal perspective. Results are shown as differences and incremental net monetary benefit [iNMB] at relevant willingness to accept [WTA] levels. RESULTS: We randomized 174 patients to the intervention [n = 113] and control [n = 61] groups. No difference was found in utility (difference: -0.017, 95% confidence interval [-0.044; 0.004]) and total costs (-€943, [-€2226; €1367]) over the 48-week study period between the two groups. Medication costs per patient were lower (-€2545, [-€2780; -€2192]) in the intervention group, but non-medication healthcare (+€474, [+€149; +€952]) and patient costs (+€365 [+€92; €1058]) were higher. Cost-utility analysis showed that the iNMB was €594 [-€2099; €2050], €69 [-€2908; €1965] and -€455 [-€4,096; €1984] at WTA levels of €20 000, €50 000 and €80 000, respectively. Increasing adalimumab dose intervals was more likely to be cost-effective at WTA levels below €53 960 per quality-adjusted life year. Above €53 960 continuing the conventional dose interval was more likely to be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: When the loss of a quality-adjusted life year is valued at less than €53 960, increasing the adalimumab dose interval is a cost-effective strategy in CD patients in stable clinical and biochemical remission. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03172377.

Increased versus conventional adalimumab dose interval for patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission (LADI): a pragmatic, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite its effectiveness in treating Crohn's disease, adalimumab is associated with an increased risk of infections and high health-care costs. We aimed to assess clinical outcomes of increased adalimumab dose intervals versus conventional dosing in patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission. METHODS: The LADI study was a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, parallel, randomised controlled trial, done in six academic hospitals and 14 general hospitals in the Netherlands. Adults (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with luminal Crohn's disease (with or without concomitant perianal disease) were eligible when in steroid-free clinical and biochemical remission (defined as Harvey-Bradshaw Index [HBI] score <5, faecal calprotectin <150 µg/g, and C-reactive protein <10 mg/L) for at least 9 months on a stable dose of 40 mg subcutaneous adalimumab every 2 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to the intervention group or control group by the coordinating investigator using a secure web-based system with variable block randomisation (block sizes of 6, 9, and 12). Randomisation was stratified on concomitant use of thiopurines and methotrexate. Patients and health-care providers were not masked to group assignment. Patients allocated to the intervention group increased adalimumab dose intervals to 40 mg every 3 weeks at baseline and further to every 4 weeks if they remained in clinical and biochemical remission at week 24. Patients in the control group continued their 2-weekly dose interval. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of persistent flares at week 48 defined as the presence of at least two of the following criteria: HBI score of 5 or more, C-reactive protein 10 mg/L or more, and faecal calprotectin more than 250 µg/g for more than 8 weeks and a concurrent decrease in the adalimumab dose interval or start of escape medication. The non-inferiority margin was 15% on a risk difference scale. All analyses were done in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03172377, and is not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between May 3, 2017, and July 6, 2020, 174 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=113) or the control group (n=61). Four patients from the intervention group and one patient from the control group were excluded from the analysis for not meeting inclusion criteria. 85 (50%) of 169 participants were female and 84 (50%) were male. At week 48, the cumulative incidence of persistent flares in the intervention group (three [3%] of 109) was non-inferior compared with the control group (zero; pooled adjusted risk difference 1·86% [90% CI -0·35 to 4·07). Seven serious adverse events occurred, all in the intervention group, of which two (both patients with intestinal obstruction) were possibly related to the intervention. Per 100 person-years, 168·35 total adverse events, 59·99 infection-related adverse events, and 42·57 gastrointestinal adverse events occurred in the intervention group versus 134·67, 75·03, and 5·77 in the control group, respectively. INTERPRETATION: The individual benefit of increasing adalimumab dose intervals versus the risk of disease recurrence is a trade-off that should take patient preferences regarding medication and the risk of a flare into account. FUNDING: Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

Overuse and Misuse of Antibiotics and the Clinical Consequence in Necrotizing Pancreatitis: An Observational Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The use and impact of antibiotics and the impact of causative pathogens on clinical outcomes in a large real-world cohort covering the entire clinical spectrum of necrotizing pancreatitis remain unknown. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: International guidelines recommend broad-spectrum antibiotics in patients with suspected infected necrotizing pancreatitis. This recommendation is not based on high-level evidence and clinical effects are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective cohort of 401 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis in 15 Dutch centers (2010-2019). Across the patient population from the time of admission to 6 months postadmission, multivariable regression analyses were used to analyze (1) microbiological cultures and (2) antibiotic use. RESULTS: Antibiotics were started in 321/401 patients (80%) administered at a median of 5 days (P25-P75: 1-13) after admission. The median duration of antibiotics was 27 days (P25-P75: 15-48). In 221/321 patients (69%) infection was not proven by cultures at the time of initiation of antibiotics. Empirical antibiotics for infected necrosis provided insufficient coverage in 64/128 patients (50%) with a pancreatic culture. Prolonged antibiotic therapy was associated with Enterococcus infection (OR 1.08 [95% CI 1.03-1.16], P =0.01). Enterococcus infection was associated with new/persistent organ failure (OR 3.08 [95% CI 1.35-7.29], P <0.01) and mortality (OR 5.78 [95% CI 1.46-38.73], P =0.03). Yeast was found in 30/147 cultures (20%). DISCUSSION: In this nationwide study of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, the vast majority received antibiotics, typically administered early in the disease course and without a proven infection. Empirical antibiotics were inappropriate based on pancreatic cultures in half the patients. Future clinical research and practice must consider antibiotic selective pressure due to prolonged therapy and coverage of Enterococcus and yeast. Improved guidelines on antimicrobial diagnostics and therapy could reduce inappropriate antibiotic use and improve clinical outcomes.

Patient selection for urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography by endoscopic ultrasound in predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis (APEC-2): a multicentre prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Routine urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (ES) does not improve outcome in patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis. Improved patient selection for ERCP by means of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) for stone/sludge detection may challenge these findings. DESIGN: A multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis. Patients underwent urgent EUS, followed by ERCP with ES in case of common bile duct stones/sludge, within 24 hours after hospital presentation and within 72 hours after symptom onset. The primary endpoint was a composite of major complications or mortality within 6 months after inclusion. The historical control group was the conservative treatment arm (n=113) of the randomised APEC trial (Acute biliary Pancreatitis: urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment, patient inclusion 2013-2017) applying the same study design. RESULTS: Overall, 83 patients underwent urgent EUS at a median of 21 hours (IQR 17-23) after hospital presentation and at a median of 29 hours (IQR 23-41) after start of symptoms. Gallstones/sludge in the bile ducts were detected by EUS in 48/83 patients (58%), all of whom underwent immediate ERCP with ES. The primary endpoint occurred in 34/83 patients (41%) in the urgent EUS-guided ERCP group. This was not different from the 44% rate (50/113 patients) in the historical conservative treatment group (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.29; p=0.65). Sensitivity analysis to correct for baseline differences using a logistic regression model also showed no significant beneficial effect of the intervention on the primary outcome (adjusted OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.90, p=0.92). CONCLUSION: In patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis, urgent EUS-guided ERCP with ES did not reduce the composite endpoint of major complications or mortality, as compared with conservative treatment in a historical control group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15545919.

Long-term effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in Crohn's disease: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data showed that ustekinumab is an effective treatment for Crohn's disease for up to 52 weeks. Yet, long-term effectiveness and safety outcomes beyond 52 weeks are limited. This study aimed to evaluate the corticosteroid-free clinical remission for up to 104 weeks. Secondary aims were focused on biochemical disease, dosing adjustments and safety outcomes. METHODS: This multicentre prospective cohort study enrolled Crohn's disease patients who started ustekinumab between May 2016 and September 2019. Participants had scheduled outpatient visits at week 0, 13, 26, 52 and 104. Data on clinical disease [Harvey Bradshaw Index (HBI) = 4 points = remission], biochemical disease (faecal calprotectin = 200 µg/g or C-reactive protein = 10 mg/l = remission), dose adjustments and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were recorded. RESULTS: We included 101 Crohn's disease patients. In all patients, the proportion of patients in corticosteroid-free clinical remission was 35 and 36% at week 52 and 104. Of patients achieving corticosteroid-free remission at week 52, more than half maintained corticosteroid-free remission throughout week 104. Biochemical remission rates were 25 and 30% at week 52 and 104, respectively. In the first year of treatment, 33% required their first dose escalation, and 15% in the second year. Overall, 7% of patients discontinued ustekinumab due to ADRs. Ustekinumab persistency rates were 68% at week 52 and 59% at week 104. CONCLUSION: Ustekinumab is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for Crohn's disease. More than half of all patients continued ustekinumab treatment after 104 weeks whereas one-third achieved corticosteroid-free remission.

Superior Effectiveness of Tofacitinib Compared to Vedolizumab in Anti-TNF-experienced Ulcerative Colitis Patients: A Nationwide Dutch Registry Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Clinicians face difficulty in when and in what order to position biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors in patients with anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF) refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab and tofacitinib in anti-TNF-exposed patients with UC in our prospective nationwide Initiative on Crohn and Colitis Registry. METHODS: Patients with UC who failed anti-TNF treatment and initiated vedolizumab or tofacitinib treatment were identified in the Initiative on Crohn and Colitis Registry in the Netherlands. We selected patients with both clinical as well as biochemical or endoscopic disease activity at initiation of therapy. Patients previously treated with vedolizumab or tofacitinib were excluded. Corticosteroid-free clinical remission (Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index ≤2), biochemical remission (C-reactive protein ≤5 mg/L or fecal calprotectin ≤250 µg/g), and safety outcomes were compared after 52 weeks of treatment. Inverse propensity score-weighted comparison was used to adjust for confounding and selection bias. RESULTS: Overall, 83 vedolizumab- and 65 tofacitinib-treated patients were included. Propensity score-weighted analysis showed that tofacitinib-treated patients were more likely to achieve corticosteroid-free clinical remission and biochemical remission at weeks 12, 24, and 52 compared with vedolizumab-treated patients (odds ratio [OR], 6.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.81-10.50; P < .01; OR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.89-4.84; P < .01; and OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.15-2.99; P = .01; and OR, 3.27; 95% CI, 1.96-5.45; P < .01; OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.14-3.07; P = .01; and OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.06-3.09; P = .03, respectively). There was no difference in infection rate or severe adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib was associated with superior effectiveness outcomes compared with vedolizumab in anti-TNF-experienced patients with UC along with comparable safety outcomes.

Complete Endoscopic Healing Is Associated With Lower Relapse Risk After Anti-TNF Withdrawal in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Discontinuation of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α treatment (anti-TNF) (infliximab and adalimumab) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with a high relapse risk that may be influenced by endoscopic activity at the time of stopping. We assessed the relapse rate after anti-TNF withdrawal in patients with endoscopic healing and studied predictors of relapse including the depth of endoscopic healing. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective study in adult patients with Crohn's disease (CD), ulcerative colitis (UC), or IBD-unclassified (IBDU), with ≥6 months of corticosteroid-free clinical remission (confirmed at baseline) and endoscopic healing (Mayo <2/SES-CD <5 without large ulcers), who discontinued anti-TNF between 2018 and 2020 in the Netherlands. We performed Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses to assess the relapse rate and evaluate potential predictors: partial (Mayo 1/SES-CD 3-4) versus complete (Mayo 0/SES-CD 0-2) endoscopic healing, anti-TNF trough levels, and immunomodulator and/or mesalamine use. RESULTS: Among 81 patients (CD: n = 41, 51%) with a median follow-up of 2.0 years (interquartile range, 1.6-2.1), 40 patients (49%) relapsed. Relapse rates in CD and UC/IBDU patients were comparable. At 12 months, 70% versus 35% of patients with partial versus complete endoscopic healing relapsed, respectively (adjusted hazard rate [aHR], 3.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-7.50). Mesalamine use was associated with fewer relapses in UC/IBDU patients (aHR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.67). Thirty patients restarted anti-TNF, and clinical remission was regained in 73% at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: The relapse risk was high after anti-TNF withdrawal in IBD patients with endoscopic healing, but remission was regained in most cases after anti-TNF reintroduction. Complete endoscopic healing and mesalamine treatment in UC/IBDU patients decreased the risk of relapse.

Endoscopic Versus Surgical Step-Up Approach for Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis (ExTENSION): Long-term Follow-up of a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Previous randomized trials, including the Transluminal Endoscopic Step-Up Approach Versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Step-Up Approach in Patients With Infected Pancreatic Necrosis (TENSION) trial, demonstrated that the endoscopic step-up approach might be preferred over the surgical step-up approach in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis based on favorable short-term outcomes. We compared long-term clinical outcomes of both step-up approaches after a period of at least 5 years. METHODS: In this long-term follow-up study, we reevaluated all clinical data on 83 patients (of the originally 98 included patients) from the TENSION trial who were still alive after the initial 6-month follow-up. The primary end point, similar to the TENSION trial, was a composite of death and major complications. Secondary end points included individual major complications, pancreaticocutaneous fistula, reinterventions, pancreatic insufficiency, and quality of life. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up period of 7 years, the primary end point occurred in 27 patients (53%) in the endoscopy group and in 27 patients (57%) in the surgery group (risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-1.32; P = .688). Fewer pancreaticocutaneous fistulas were identified in the endoscopy group (8% vs 34%; RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.08-0.83). After the initial 6-month follow-up, the endoscopy group needed fewer reinterventions than the surgery group (7% vs 24%; RR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.99). Pancreatic insufficiency and quality of life did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: At long-term follow-up, the endoscopic step-up approach was not superior to the surgical step-up approach in reducing death or major complications in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis. However, patients assigned to the endoscopic approach developed overall fewer pancreaticocutaneous fistulas and needed fewer reinterventions after the initial 6-month follow-up. Netherlands Trial Register no: NL8571.

Short-term anti-TNF therapy with surgical closure versus anti-TNF therapy in the treatment of perianal fistulas in Crohn's disease (PISA-II): a patient preference randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines on Crohn's perianal fistulas recommend anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) treatment and suggest considering surgical closure for patients with surgically amenable disease. However, long-term outcomes following these two strategies have not been directly compared. The aim of this study was to assess radiological healing in patients who received short-term anti-TNF treatment and surgical closure compared with those who received anti-TNF treatment alone. METHODS: The PISA-II trial was a multicentre, patient preference study done in nine hospitals in the Netherlands and one hospital in Italy. Adult patients with Crohn's disease and an active high perianal fistula with a single internal opening were eligible for inclusion. After counselling, patients with no treatment preference were randomly assigned (1:1) using random block randomisation (block sizes of six without statification), to 4-month anti-TNF therapy and surgical closure or anti-TNF therapy for 1 year, after seton insertion. Patients with a treatment preference received their preferred therapy. The primary outcome was radiological healing assessed by MRI at 18 months, defined as a complete fibrotic tract or a MAGNIFI-CD (Magnetic Resonance Index for Fistula Imaging in Crohn's Disease) score of 0, assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes included clinical closure, number of patients undergoing surgical reintervention and number of reinterventions, recurrences, and impact on quality of life measured by the Perianal Disease Activity Index (PDAI). Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis and additionally an as-treated analysis for radiological healing and clinical closure. This study was registered at the Dutch Trial Registry, NL7625, and with EudraCT, 2018-002064-15, and is closed to accrual due to completion. FINDINGS: Between Sept 14, 2013, and Dec 7, 2019, 94 patients were enrolled onto the trial, of whom 32 (34%) were randomly assigned and 62 (66%) chose a specific treatment. 38 (40%) patients were assigned to the surgical closure group and 56 (60%) patients to the anti-TNF group. At 18 months, radiological healing was significantly more common in the surgical closure group (12 [32%] patients) than in the anti-TNF group (five [9%] patients; p=0·005). By contrast, clinical closure was not significantly different between the two treatment groups (26 [68%] patients in the surgical closure group vs 29 [52%] patients in the anti-TNF group; p=0·076). Significantly fewer patients required a reintervention in the surgical closure group than in the anti-TNF therapy group (five [13%] patients in the surgical closure group, median one reintervention [IQR one to three] vs 24 [43%] patients in the anti-TNF group, median two reinterventions [one to two]; p=0·005). Among patients who reached clinical closure during follow-up, four (14%) of 29 in the surgical closure group and five (16%) of 31 in the anti-TNF therapy group had a recurrence, which occurred only in patients without radiological healing. PDAI was significantly lower in the surgical closure group than in the anti-TNF group after 18 months (p=0·031). Adverse events and serious adverse events were similar in both treatment groups and mostly entailed reinterventions. Ten (11%) patients had side-effects associated with anti-TNF treatment. Two serious adverse events unrelated to study treatment occurred (appendicitis and myocardial infarction). One patient died from a tongue base carcinoma, unrelated to study treatment. INTERPRETATION: Short-term anti-TNF treatment combined with surgical closure induces long-term MRI healing more frequently than anti-TNF therapy in patients with Crohn's perianal fistulas. These data suggest that patients with Crohn's perianal fistula amenable for surgical closure should be counselled for this therapeutic approach. FUNDING: Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development and Broad Medical Research Program.

Impact of Biological Therapies and Tofacitinib on Real-world Work Impairment in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: A Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: There are limited real-world data on the change in total work impairment (TWI) in biological-treated patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). This study aimed to evaluate the real-world effects of initiating biological therapy or tofacitinib on change in TWI in IBD patients. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study enrolled IBD patients who started treatment with biological therapy or tofacitinib. Subjects completed the work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) questionnaire and short inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire at therapy initiation and at week 26. Total work impairment comprises working hours missed due to sick leave and impact of disease during working hours (range 0%-100%). Clinical disease activity was assessed using the Harvey-Bradshaw Index and Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index (SCCAI). RESULTS: We included 137 IBD patients for analyses (median age 38 years, 58% Crohn's disease [CD]). The median baseline TWI was 50% and decreased by a median of 10%-points of points after 26 weeks. Patients with continued biological therapy or tofacitinib use, clinical disease activity at baseline, and clinical response or remission at week 26 showed a greater median TWI reduction (22%-points) than the remaining study patients (7%-points; P = .014). Ulcerative colitis (UC) and IBD-unclassified (IBD-U) patients showed a greater median TWI reduction (26%-points) than CD patients (6%-points); P = .041. Correlations were observed between decrease in TWI and decrease in SCCAI, decrease in fatigue and increase in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Work impairment in IBD patients decreased following biological therapy or tofacitinib initiation. Patients achieving clinical remission or response showed the greatest improvement, especially UC and IBD-U patients.

De-escalation of biological therapy in inflammatory bowel disease patients following prior dose escalation.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on biological therapy de-escalation after prior escalation in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. This study aimed to assess the frequency and success rate of de-escalation of biological therapy in IBD patients after prior dose escalation and to evaluate which measures are used to guide de-escalation. METHODS: This multicentre retrospective cohort study enrolled IBD patients treated with infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA) or vedolizumab (VEDO) in whom therapy was de-escalated after prior biological escalation. De-escalations were considered pharmacokinetic-driven if based on clinical symptoms combined with therapeutic or supratherapeutic trough levels, and disease activity-driven if based on faecal calprotectin less than or equal to 200 µg/g or resolution of perianal fistula drainage or closure or endoscopic remission. Successful de-escalation was defined as remaining on the same or lower biological dose for greater than or equal to 6 months after de-escalation without the need for corticosteroids. RESULTS: In total, 206 IFX users, 85 ADA users and 55 VEDO users underwent therapy escalation. Of these patients, 34 (17%) on IFX, 18 (21%) on ADA and 8 (15%) on VEDO underwent therapy de-escalation. De-escalation was successful in 88% of IFX patients, 89% of ADA and 100% of VEDO. The probability of remaining on the de-escalated regimen or further de-escalation after 1 year was 85% for IFX, 62% for ADA and 100% for VEDO. Disease activity-driven de-escalations were more often successful (97%) than pharmacokinetic- and no marker-driven de-escalations (76%); P = 0.017. CONCLUSION: De-escalation after biological dose escalation was successful in the majority of carefully selected IBD patients. Objective assessment of remission increased the likelihood of successful de-escalation.

Multiple Switches From the Originator Infliximab to Biosimilars Is Effective and Safe in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Though a single nonmedical switch from the originator infliximab (IFX) to a biosimilar is considered effective and safe for most patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), very limited data are available on multiple successive switches. METHODS: We performed a prospective multicenter cohort study of adult IBD patients who underwent 2 switches from the originator IFX to CT-P13 to SB2 (group 1), 1 switch from CT-P13 to SB2 (group 2), and 1 switch from the originator IFX to CT-P13 (group 3). Patients were assessed at 4 and 12 months since the most recent switch for remission using clinical (physician's assessment) and biochemical (C-reactive protein [CRP], and fecal calprotectin [FC]) measures. Patients discontinuing treatment for ineffectiveness or adverse events before month 12 were imputed as nonremitters. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-six patients (Crohn's disease 71%, ulcerative colitis 27.8%, IBD unclassified 1.2%; group 1, 69; group 2, 80; group 3, 27) were included. At 12 months after the most recent switch 76.9% (40 of 52, group 1), 65.7% (46 of 70, group 2) and 76.9% (20 of 26, group 3) of patients were in clinical remission. Treatment persistence at 12 months was 85.0%, 87.0%, and 70.1%, respectively. There were no significant differences in the rate of clinical, CRP, FC remission, or treatment persistence at 12 months between the 3 groups. Infusion reactions occurred in 1.7% of patients (3/176), all in patients with antidrug antibodies from group 2. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple successive switching and switching between biosimilars of IFX seemed to be effective and safe.

Immediate versus Postponed Intervention for Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Infected necrotizing pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease that is treated with the use of a step-up approach, with catheter drainage often delayed until the infected necrosis is encapsulated. Whether outcomes could be improved by earlier catheter drainage is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized superiority trial involving patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis, in which we compared immediate drainage within 24 hours after randomization once infected necrosis was diagnosed with drainage that was postponed until the stage of walled-off necrosis was reached. The primary end point was the score on the Comprehensive Complication Index, which incorporates all complications over the course of 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were randomly assigned to immediate drainage (55 patients) or postponed drainage (49 patients). The mean score on the Comprehensive Complication Index (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe complications) was 57 in the immediate-drainage group and 58 in the postponed-drainage group (mean difference, -1; 95% confidence interval [CI], -12 to 10; P = 0.90). Mortality was 13% in the immediate-drainage group and 10% in the postponed-drainage group (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.42 to 3.68). The mean number of interventions (catheter drainage and necrosectomy) was 4.4 in the immediate-drainage group and 2.6 in the postponed-drainage group (mean difference, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.6 to 3.0). In the postponed-drainage group, 19 patients (39%) were treated conservatively with antibiotics and did not require drainage; 17 of these patients survived. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This trial did not show the superiority of immediate drainage over postponed drainage with regard to complications in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis. Patients randomly assigned to the postponed-drainage strategy received fewer invasive interventions. (Funded by Fonds NutsOhra and Amsterdam UMC; POINTER ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN33682933.).

Discrepancy between patient- and healthcare provider-reported adverse drug reactions in inflammatory bowel disease patients on biological therapy.

BACKGROUND: Only limited data is available on the extent and burden of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to biological therapy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients in daily practice, especially from a patient's perspective. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically assess patient-reported ADRs during biological therapy in IBD patients and compare these with healthcare provider (HCP)-reported ADRs. METHODS: This multicentre, prospective, event monitoring study enrolled IBD patients on biological therapy. Patients completed bimonthly comprehensive web-based questionnaires regarding description of biological induced ADRs, follow-up of previous ADRs and experienced burden of the ADR using a five-point Likert scale. The relationship between patient-reported ADRs and biological therapy was assessed. HCP-reported ADRs were extracted from the electronic healthcare records. RESULTS: In total, 182 patients (female 51%, mean age 42.2 [standard deviation 14.2] years, Crohn's disease 77%) were included and completed 728 questionnaires. At baseline, 60% of patients used infliximab, 30% adalimumab, 9% vedolizumab and 1% ustekinumab. Fifty percent of participants reported at least one ADR with a total of 239 unique ADRs. Fatigue (n = 26) and headache (n = 20) resulted in the highest burden and a correlation in time with the administration of the biological was described in 56% and 85% respectively. Out of 239 ADRs, 115 were considered biological-related. HCPs reported 119 ADRs. Agreement between patient-reported ADRs and HCP-reported ADRs was only 13%. CONCLUSION: IBD patients often report ADRs during biological therapy. We observed an important significant difference between the type and frequency of patient-reported ADRs versus HCP-reported ADRs, leading to an underestimation of more subjective ADRs and patients' ADR-related burden.

Ustekinuma b for Crohn's Disease: Two-Year Results of the Initiative on Crohn and Colitis (ICC) Registry, a Nationwide Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

AIMS: Ustekinumab is a monoclonal antibody that selectively targets p40, a shared subunit of the cytokines interleukin [IL]-12 and IL-23. It is registered for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases. We assessed the 2-year effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in a real world, prospective cohort of patients with Crohn's disease [CD]. METHODS: Patients who started ustekinumab were prospectively enrolled in the nationwide Initiative on Crohn and Colitis [ICC] Registry. At weeks 0, 12, 24, 52 and 104, clinical remission Harvey Bradshaw Index≤ 4 points], biochemical remission (faecal calprotectin ≤ 200 µg/g and/or C-reactive protein ≤5 mg/L], perianal fistula remission, extra-intestinal manifestations, ustekinumab dosage and safety outcomes were determined. The primary outcome was corticosteroid-free clinical remission at week 104. RESULTS: In total, 252 CD patients with at least 2 years of follow-up were included. Of all included patients, the proportion of patients in corticosteroid-free clinical remission was 32.3% [81/251], 41.4% [104/251], 39% [97/249] and 34.0% [84/247] at weeks 12, 24, 52 and 104, respectively. In patients with combined clinical and biochemical disease activity at baseline [n = 122], the corticosteroid-free clinical remission rates were 23.8% [29/122], 35.2% [43/122], 40.0% [48/120] and 32.8% [39/119] at weeks 12, 24, 52 and 104, respectively. The probability of remaining on ustekinumab treatment after 52 and 104 weeks in all patients was 64.3% and 54.8%, respectively. The main reason for discontinuing treatment after 52 weeks was loss of response [66.7%]. No new safety issues were observed. CONCLUSION: After 104 weeks of ustekinumab treatment, one-third of CD patients were in corticosteroid-free clinical remission.

Adverse Drug Reactions from Real-World Data in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients in the IBDREAM Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) frequently requires chronic immunosuppressive treatment and active involvement from patients during treatment decision making. Information about the risk of developing adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to IBD therapies is required in this process. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the ADRs reported in IBD patients from real-world data, using the Dutch nationwide IBDREAM registry, and compare the occurrence and cumulative incidences with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) of the associated drugs. METHODS: In this retrospective multicentre study, ADRs related to IBD medication were assessed. Only reports associated with the use of drugs used for the maintenance treatment of IBD were included. All ADRs were verified by healthcare professionals and coded by trained pharmacovigilance assessors. RESULTS: In total, 3080 ADRs were reported in 1179 patients. Twenty-three new drug-ADR associations related to the use of azathioprine, mercaptopurine, infliximab, oral mesalamine and thioguanine were reported in the IBDREAM registry that were not mentioned in the corresponding SmPCs. The most frequently reported new association was pyrexia for azathioprine (3.1%) and mercaptopurine (4.9%). In addition, there were seven ADRs with a higher cumulative incidence in IBDREAM compared with the SmPC, and included, among others, arthralgia during mercaptopurine use (2.5%), and diarrhoea (1.4%), alopecia (1.2%) and infections (1.6%) during azathioprine use. CONCLUSIONS: Based on real-world data, ADR reporting demonstrated new ADRs and higher incidences of ADRs to IBD therapies. This information will contribute to drug safety by updating the SmPCs, allowing better risk assessment and communication towards patients.

Clinical Outcomes of Covid-19 in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The COVID-19 risk and disease course in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients remains uncertain. Therefore, we aimed to assess the clinical presentation, disease course, and outcomes of COVID-19 in IBD patients. Second, we determined COVID-19 incidences in IBD patients and compared this with the general population. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, nationwide IBD cohort study in The Netherlands and identified patients with COVID-19. First, we assessed the COVID-19 disease course and outcomes. Second, we compared COVID-19 incidences between our IBD study cohort and the general Dutch population. RESULTS: We established an IBD cohort of 34 763 patients. COVID-19 was diagnosed in 100/34 763 patients [0.29%]; 20/100 of these patients [20%] had severe COVID-19 defined as admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, and/or death. Hospitalisation occurred in 59/100 [59.0%] patients and 13/100 [13.0%] died. All patients who died had comorbidities and all but one were ≥65 years old. In line, we identified ≥1 comorbidity as an independent risk factor for hospitalisation (odds ratio [OR] 4.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-11.17,; p = 0.004). Incidences of COVID-19 between the IBD study cohort and the general population were comparable (287.6 [95% CI 236.6-349.7] versus 333.0 [95% CI 329.3-336.7] per 100000 patients, respectively; p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Of 100 cases with IBD and COVID-19, 20% developed severe COVID-19, 59% were hospitalised and 13% died. A comparable COVID-19 risk was found between the IBD cohort [100/34 763 = 0.29%] and the general Dutch population. The presence of ≥1 comorbidities was an independent risk factor for hospitalisation due to COVID-19.

Health outcomes of 1000 children born to mothers with inflammatory bowel disease in their first 5 years of life.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the long-term health outcomes of children born to mothers with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and to assess the impact of maternal IBD medication use on these outcomes. DESIGN: We performed a multicentre retrospective study in The Netherlands. Women with IBD who gave birth between 1999 and 2018 were enrolled from 20 participating hospitals. Information regarding disease characteristics, medication use, lifestyle, pregnancy outcomes and long-term health outcomes of children was retrieved from mothers and medical charts. After consent of both parents, outcomes until 5 years were also collected from general practitioners. Our primary aim was to assess infection rate and our secondary aims were to assess adverse reactions to vaccinations, growth, autoimmune diseases and malignancies. RESULTS: We included 1000 children born to 626 mothers (381 (61%) Crohn's disease, 225 (36%) ulcerative colitis and 20 (3%) IBD unclassified). In total, 196 (20%) had intrauterine exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) (60 with concomitant thiopurine) and 240 (24%) were exposed to thiopurine monotherapy. The 564 children (56%) not exposed to anti-TNF-α and/or thiopurine served as control group. There was no association between adverse long-term health outcomes and in utero exposure to IBD treatment. We did find an increased rate of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) in case thiopurine was used during the pregnancy without affecting birth outcomes and long-term health outcomes of children. All outcomes correspond with the general age-adjusted population. CONCLUSION: In our study, we found no association between in utero exposure to anti-TNF-α and/or thiopurine and the long-term outcomes antibiotic-treated infections, severe infections needing hospital admission, adverse reactions to vaccinations, growth failure, autoimmune diseases and malignancies.

Efficacy of dashboard driven dosing of infliximab in inflammatory bowel disease patients; a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Loss of response (LOR) to infliximab (IFX) remains a challenge in the management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Proactive dosing strategies to achieve and maintain predefined IFX trough levels (TL) may prevent LOR. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of dashboard driven IFX dosing compared to standard dosing in a prospective trial in IBD patients. METHODS: In this multicentre 1:1 'PRECISION' trial, we randomized IBD patients in clinical remission (Harvey Bradshaw Index ≤4 for Crohn's disease (CD) or a partial Mayo score ≤2 for ulcerative colitis (UC)) receiving IFX maintenance treatment. The precision group (PG) received IFX dosing guided by a Bayesian pharmacokinetic model, aiming to achieve and maintain a TL of 3 µg/ml by treatment (de)escalation as indicated by the dashboard. Patients in the control group (CG) continued treatment without dose adaptations. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in sustained clinical remission after 1 year. RESULTS: Eighty patients were enrolled (66 CD, 14 UC), and the median [interquartile range] age was 37 years [27-51]). After one year, 28/32 (88%) of patients in the PG were in sustained clinical remission versus 25/39 (64%) in the CG (p = .017). PG patients had lower median faecal calprotectin levels after 1 year (p = .031), whereas no significant differences in median CRP levels were found. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that the use of a Bayesian dashboard for IFX dosing in maintenance treatment for IBD reduced the incidence of LOR compared to standard dosing. Precision dosing also resulted in lower FCP levels. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV NUMBER: NCT02453776.