Effectiveness of Tofacitinib in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis: A Nationwide Veterans Administration Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: There is paucity of data on the effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib among elderly patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: Through a retrospective cohort study among the US National Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, we evaluated effectiveness among the elderly (≥65) and young (<65) patients with UC initiated on tofacitinib. RESULTS: Among 158 patients (53 elderly, 105 young), effectiveness at 12 months was 50.94% in the elderly and 33.33% in the young ( P = 0.032). DISCUSSION: In a nationwide cohort of patients with UC initiating tofacitinib, effectiveness was seen in half of the elderly patients.

Incidence of Pneumonia, Related Hospitalization, and Mortality Among Younger Unvaccinated IBD Patients in a Nationwide Cohort.

BACKGROUND AND GOALS: Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) is among the most common infections among Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) patients. Our aim was to determine the absolute and relative risk of CAP, related hospitalization, and death among younger (age < 65) unvaccinated IBD patients exposed and unexposed to immunosuppressive medications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among a nationwide cohort of younger IBD unvaccinated patients in the VAHS. Exposure was administration of any immunosuppressive medication. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of pneumonia; secondary outcomes being pneumonia related hospitalization and mortality. We reported event rate per 1000 person-years, hazard ratio, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome. RESULTS: Among a total of 26,707 patients, 513 patients developed pneumonia. Mean age in years (SD) was 51.67 (11.34) for the exposed and 45.91 (12.34) for the unexposed group. The overall crude incidence rate was 3.2 per 1000 patient-years (PYs) [4.04/1000 PYs in the exposed versus 1.45/1000 PYs in the unexposed]. The overall crude incidence rates for pneumonia-related-hospitalization and mortality 1.12 and 0.09 per 1000 PYs, respectively. In Cox regression, the exposed group was associated with an increased risk of pneumonia (AHR 2.85; 95% CI: 2.21 to 3.66, P < 0.001) and pneumonia-related-hospitalization (AHR 3.46; 95% CI: 2.20 to 5.43, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall incidence of CAP among younger unvaccinated IBD patients was 3.2 per 1000 PYs. The overall associated hospitalization rates were low, however, higher amongst those exposed to immunosuppressive medications. This data will help patients and physicians make informed decisions regarding pneumococcal vaccine recommendations.

Influence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease on inflammatory bowel disease hospitalizations in the United States.

Background: The reported prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is 32%. We assessed the influence of NAFLD on IBD hospitalizations in the United States (US). Methods: We utilized the National Inpatient Sample database, from 2016-2019, to identify the total IBD hospitalizations in the US and we further subdivided them according to the presence or absence of NAFLD. Hospitalization characteristics, comorbidities and outcomes were compared. Statistical significance was set at P<0.05. Results: There were 1,272,260 IBD hospitalizations in the US, of which 5.04% involved NAFLD. For IBD hospitalizations with NAFLD, the mean age was 50-64 years, and the proportion of males was 46.97%. IBD hospitalizations with NAFLD had a lower proportion of African Americans (8.7% vs. 11.38%, P<0.001). Comorbidities such as hypertension (50.34% vs. 44.04%, P<0.001) and obesity (18.77% vs. 11.81%, P<0.001) were significantly higher in the NAFLD cohort. Overall, based on the Charlson Comorbidity Index, patients with NAFLD had a higher number of comorbidities (52.77% vs. 20.66%, P<0.001). Mortality was higher in the NAFLD compared to the non-NAFLD cohort (3.14% vs. 1.44%, P<0.001). Patients with NAFLD also incurred significantly higher hospital charges ($69,536 vs. $55,467, p<0.001) and had a longer mean length of stay (6.10 vs. 5.27 days, P<0.001) compared to the cohort without NAFLD. Complications and inpatient procedure requirements were also higher in the NAFLD cohort. Conclusion: Our study revealed greater mortality, morbidity, and healthcare resource utilization in patients with IBD who were hospitalized with a concomitant diagnosis of NAFLD.

Nephrotic syndrome following COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection has caused significant morbidity and mortality. Vaccines produced against this virus have proven highly effective. However, adverse events following vaccination have also been reported. One of them is nephrotic syndrome, that can be associated with different pathologic pictures. This review aims to provide a wider understanding of incidence, etiopathogenesis, and management of nephrotic syndrome following vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS AND RESULTS: A literature search was undertaken using appropriate keywords in various databases like PubMed, Google Scholar, Europe PMC, and Science Direct. Twenty-one articles were included following qualitative assessment. Data of 74 patients from these articles were included. DISCUSSION: The pathogenesis of nephrotic syndrome following COVID vaccination has been widely attributed to the activation of angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 receptors, leading to podocyte effacement. Relapses have also been reported in patients with prior history of nephrotic syndrome following COVID-19 vaccination. A renal biopsy is necessary to identify the histopathological picture. Management of COVID-19 vaccine-induced nephrotic syndrome was mainly reported as successfully attainable with corticosteroids and supportive management. CONCLUSION: Further investigations will help in establishing an early diagnosis and salvaging kidney function.

Risk of severe and opportunistic infections and the impact of SARS-COV-2 on this risk in a nationwide cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: The Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) patients have adopted lifestyle modifications to prevent infection via SARS COV-2. AIMS: This study aims to examine rate of serious infections and opportunistic infections in the pre-pandemic and pandemic period, and to analyse if the risk associated with medications used to treat IBD were potentially modified by associated change in lifestyle. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients from the US national Veteran Affairs Healthcare System (VAHS). Patients were stratified into two groups: pre-pandemic (prior to SARS COV-2 pandemic) and pandemic (during SARS COV-2 pandemic) and outcomes were measured in these groups. Primary outcome was occurrence of any serious infection. Secondary outcome was occurrence of any opportunistic infection. RESULTS: There were 17,202 IBD patients in the pre-pandemic era and 15,903 patients in the pandemic era. The pre-pandemic era had a significantly higher proportion of serious infections relative to the pandemic era (5.1% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.002). The proportion of opportunistic infections were similar between pre-pandemic and pandemic eras (0.3% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.82). Relative to 5-ASA, patients taking anti-TNF (HR = 1.50 (1.31-1.72)), anti-TNF+TP (HR = 1.56 (1.24-1.95)) or vedolizumab (HR = 1.81 (1.49-2.20)) had an increased hazard of serious infection (p > 0.001). CONCLUSION: In a nationwide cohort of IBD patients, we found that risk of serious infections could possibly be affected by behavioural modifications due to SARS-COV-2 pandemic.

Adverse Events Related to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in a Nationwide Cohort of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

INTRODUCTION: There are limited data on the safety profile of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 vaccine among patients taking immunosuppressive medications. Our aim was to evaluate the adverse events related to the vaccines in a nationwide cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease on diverse immunosuppressive medications. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using data from the Veterans Health Administration. The primary outcome was any adverse event of special interest (cerebrovascular accident, venous thromboembolism, acute myocardial infarction, Bell palsy) within 90 days of vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 17,201 patients were included, and 12,351 patients (71.8%) received at least 1 vaccine dose. The most common adverse events were acute myocardial infarction and venous thromboembolism. In inverse probability treatment weighting-adjusted logistic regression, full vaccination was not significantly associated with increased adverse events through 90 days, relative to unvaccinated patients. DISCUSSION: Full severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 vaccination was not associated with an increased rate of key adverse events relative to unvaccinated individuals among patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Impact of Biologics on SARS-COV-2 Disease Course When Infused Within 2 Weeks of Acquiring the Infection Among IBD Patients.

SARS-CoV-2 was first identified in Wuhan in December 2019 and since then it has progressed into a pandemic that evolves continuously.1 As of May 5, 2022, there have been more than 81 million cases and 994,187 deaths in the United States.2 Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the gastrointestinal tract consisting of ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease treated with immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory agents. Over the course of the pandemic different aspects of the interaction between SARS-COV-2 and IBD medications have been studied.3,4 At the onset of the pandemic there was decreased use of infusible biologics.5 Despite the passage of time an area that has not been explored is the impact of biologics on the clinical course of SARS-COV-2 when given soon after the detection of infection. Our aim was to determine the impact of biologics on the clinical course of SARS-COV-2 among patients with IBD, when given 1-2 weeks postinfection among stable patients. This is of critical importance because patients may delay getting their scheduled treatment, which in turn could adversely affect their clinical condition.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Using St. John's Wort as a Treatment for Depression.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: St. John's wort (SJW) extracts are currently being used to treat depression of various degrees of severity. While many studies have shown it to be superior to placebo, data regarding the effectiveness of using SJW as a stand-alone treatment compared with standard antidepressants has yet to be proven conclusively. This study aims to understand the advantages and disadvantages of SJW as a treatment modality for depression. METHODS:  The authors searched PubMed, JAMA network, Springer Link, Elsevier, Google Scholar, and Scientific Progress databases, from 2011 through August 2021, using the following keywords: St John's wort, Hypericum perforatum, depression, antidepressant, complementary alternative medicine, economic evaluation depression St. wort, St John's wort and depression, antidepressant interactions. This yielded a total of 27 papers following a thorough removal of irrelevant content and dissemination in languages other than English. RESULTS:  In patients with mild and moderate depression, SJW proved superior to placebo. Certain studies comparing the efficacy of SJW versus selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), especially fluoxetine, reported SJW to be more efficacious, while the majority reported no significant difference. Tricyclic antidepressants were also found to have similar efficacy as SJW. Moreover, treatment with SJW was also found to reduce postmenopausal depression. Regarding the safety profile, although SJW is better tolerated with fewer adverse effects when compared to standardized antidepressants, its predisposition to causing fatal serotonin syndrome, when used in conjunction with other serotonergic agents and drug interactions noted with CYP 450 drugs, raises a question in the safety profile. CONCLUSION:  It is essential to acknowledge that SJW has been used as a treatment measure in Germany. Despite being only listed as a dietary supplement by the FDA and not a drug, SJW has shown to be comparable, if not more efficacious, than most standard treatment options for depression. SJW does prove to be an exciting piece of pharmacotherapy in the realm of mental health and post-menopausal treatment. More prospective studies will help us better understand its efficacy in mild and moderate depression and its ability to serve as a long-term agent. Considering its mechanism of action, its role in relieving patients suffering from an anxiety disorder is also worth considering.

Bowel ischemia in COVID-19: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal complications of COVID-19 have been reported over the last year. One such manifestation is bowel ischaemia. This study thus aims to provide a more holistic review of our current understanding of COVID-19-induced bowel ischaemia. METHOD AND RESULTS: A meticulous search was performed using different keywords in PubMed and Google Scholar. Fifty-two articles were included in our study after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria and performing the qualitative assessment of the studies. A total of 25 702 patients were included in our study after the completion of the qualitative assessment. DISCUSSION: The common symptoms of GIT in COVID-19 patients are as diarrhoea, vomiting, nausea and abdominal pain. The mechanism of bowel ischaemia is associated with the formation of emboli which is related to COVID-19's high affinity for angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 on enterocytes, affecting the superior mesenteric vessels. Clinically, patients present with abdominal pain and vomiting. CT angiography of the abdomen and pelvis showed acute intestinal ischaemia (mesenteric). Management is usually initiated with gastric decompression, fluid resuscitation, and haemodynamic support. Surgical intervention is also sought. CONCLUSION: Intestinal ischaemia presenting in patients with COVID-19 has to be considered when symptoms of severe abdominal pain are present. More research and guidelines are required to triage patients with COVID-19 to suspect intestinal ischaemia and to help in diagnosis and management.