Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists are the cornerstone of therapy for moderately to severely active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Although our understanding of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and treatment optimization for these agents has evolved considerably over the past decade, a substantial majority of individuals fail to respond or lose response to TNF-antagonists over time. A need therefore remains for efficacious treatment options in these patients. Alternative immunological targets have now been identified, and several novel therapeutic agents are in development for IBD. In this review article, we discuss these novel therapeutic agents, with a particular focus on those demonstrated to be efficacious in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials. We further discuss considerations to be made when integrating these agents into routine practice over the next decade.

Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis are chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) characterized by recurrent episodes of mucosal inflammation. This chronic mucosal inflammation has several potential consequences, one of which is the occurrence of colitis-associated colorectal cancer. Over the past decade, our understanding of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and overall approach to diagnosing and managing colitis-associated colorectal cancer has grown considerably. In the current review article, we outline these advancements and highlight areas in need of further research. Cancer Prev Res; 9(12); 887-94. ©2016 AACR.

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) represents one of the most common causes of chronic liver disease, and its prevalence is rising worldwide. The occurrence of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is associated with a substantial increase in disease related morbidity and mortality. Accordingly, there has been a surge of innovation surrounding drug development in an effort to off-set the natural progression and long-term risks of this disease. Disease assessment within clinical trials and clinical practice for NAFLD is currently done with liver biopsies. Liver biopsy-based assessments, however, remain imprecise and are not without cost or risk. This carries significant implications for the feasibility and costs of bringing therapeutic interventions to market. A need therefore arises for reliable and highly accurate surrogate end-points that can be used in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials to reduce trial size requirements and costs, while improving feasibility and ease of implementation in clinical practice. Significant advances have now been made in magnetic resonance technology, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and elastrography (MRE) have been demonstrated to be highly accurate diagnostic tools for the detection of hepatic steatosis and fibrosis. In this review article, we will summarize the currently available evidence regarding the use of MRI and MRE among NAFLD patients, and the evolving role these surrogate biomarkers will play in the rapidly advancing arena of clinical trials in NASH and hepatic fibrosis. Furthermore, we will highlight how these tools can be readily applied to routine clinical practice, where the growing burden of NAFLD will need to be met with enhanced monitoring algorithms.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Treatment pathways for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) are shifting to a more individualized, risk-stratified approach. The perception is that insurance policies may not have implemented this paradigm shift, particularly regarding access to newer agents. We evaluated patient access to advanced therapies by analyzing policy information from the Managed Markets Insight and Technology database. METHODS:Coverage status as of December 2018 for all US lives was queried for adalimumab, infliximab, infliximab-dyyb, tofacitinib, ustekinumab, and vedolizumab by indication (UC and/or CD) and medical or pharmacy coverage benefit. Coverage status was classified by the number of biologic steps before access to specified drug as "No Biologic," "1 Prior Biologic," "2+ Prior Biologics," "Not Covered." Unknown lives were excluded from the analyses. RESULTS:Coverage analysis was available for approximately 302 million lives under each medical and pharmacy benefit. Our analysis indicates that approximately half of covered lives had access to all agents (except tofacitinib) as first-line therapy; two-thirds had access after one biologic exposure. Among newer agents, vedolizumab had the widest coverage. For indications of UC and CD, 81% of known lives had access to vedolizumab with no prior biologic exposure required ("No Biologic"), 95% after "No Biologic" + "1 prior Biologic." Geographic variations were identified for coverage patterns. CONCLUSIONS:This US-based healthcare policy analysis points to an increased access to advanced therapies for UC and CD. An individualized, risk-stratified treatment approach integrating advanced therapies, including those recently approved, into treatment pathways for UC and CD is feasible.

Background & aims

We compared the efficacy and safety of different first-line (biologic-naïve) and second-line (prior exposure to tumor necrosis factor [TNF] antagonists) agents for treatment of moderate to severely active ulcerative colitis in a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Methods

We searched publication databases through September 30, 2019, for randomized trials of adults with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis treated with TNF antagonists, vedolizumab, tofacitinib, or ustekinumab, as first-line or second-line agents, compared with placebo or another active agent. Efficacy outcomes were induction and maintenance of remission and endoscopic improvement; safety outcomes were serious adverse events and infections. We performed a fixed-effects network meta-analysis using the frequentist approach, and calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI values. Agents were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Overall quality of evidence was rated using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation).

Results

In biologic-naïve patients, infliximab was ranked highest for induction of clinical remission (OR vs placebo, 4.07; 95% CI, 2.67-6.21; SUCRA, 0.95) and endoscopic improvement (SUCRA, 0.95) (moderate confidence in estimates [CE]). In patients with prior exposure to TNF antagonists, ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.87) and tofacitinib (SUCRA, 0.87) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission and were superior to vedolizumab (ustekinumab vs vedolizumab: OR, 5.99; 95% CI, 1.13-31.76 and tofacitinib vs vedolizumab: OR, 6.18; 95% CI, 1.003-8.00; moderate CE) and adalimumab (ustekinumab vs adalimumab: OR, 10.71; 95% CI, 2.01-57.20 and tofacitinib vs adalimumab: OR, 11.05; 95% CI, 1.79-68.41; moderate CE). Vedolizumab had the lowest risk of infections (SUCRA, 0.81), followed by ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.63) in maintenance trials.

Conclusions

In a systematic review and network meta-analysis, we found infliximab to be ranked highest in biologic-naïve patients, and ustekinumab and tofacitinib were ranked highest in patients with prior exposure to TNF antagonists, for induction of remission and endoscopic improvement in patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. More trials of direct comparisons are needed to inform clinical decision making with greater confidence.

Background & aims

Patients with Crohn's disease (CD) treated with ustekinumab who experience inadequate response, or loss of response after standard induction and/or maintenance dosing may benefit from dose escalation. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effectiveness of reinduction and/or dose interval shortening of ustekinumab in patients with active CD despite standard induction and maintenance.

Methods

Through a systematic literature search through March 31, 2021, we identified 15 cohort studies in 925 adults with CD with inadequate response or loss of response to standard dose ustekinumab, underwent dose escalation (reinduction and/or dose interval shortening to <8 weeks), and reported rates of achieving clinical response, corticosteroid-free clinical remission, endoscopic response, and/or remission. We calculated pooled rates (with 95% confidence intervals) using random effects meta-analysis and examined factors associated with response to dose escalation through qualitative synthesis of individual studies.

Results

On meta-analysis, 55% of patients (95% confidence interval, 52%-58%) with inadequate response or loss of response who underwent ustekinumab dose escalation achieved clinical response, with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 57%). Approximately 61% of patients were able to achieve endoscopic response, including 29% who achieved endoscopic remission. Dose interval shortening alone recaptured response in 57% patients. No consistent factors associated with response to dose escalation were identified on qualitative synthesis.

Conclusion

In real word settings, ustekinumab dose escalation was effective in achieving response in patients with CD with inadequate response, or loss of response to standard dose induction and/or maintenance therapy.

Background & aims

Little is known about outcomes of patients with ulcerative colitis with low-grade dysplasia (UC-LGD). We estimated the incidence of and risk factors for progression to colorectal cancer (CRC) in cohorts of patients with UC-LGD who underwent surveillance (surveillance cohort), and the prevalence of dysplasia-related findings among patients who underwent colectomy for UC-LGD (surgical cohort).

Methods

We performed a systematic literature review through June 1, 2016, to identify cohort studies of adults with UC-LGD. We estimated pooled incidence rates of CRC and risk factors associated with dysplasia progression in surveillance cohorts, and prevalence of synchronous advanced neoplasia (CRC and/or high-grade dysplasia) in surgical cohorts.

Results

In 14 surveillance cohort studies of 671 patients with UC-LGD (52 developed CRC), the pooled annual incidence of CRC was 0.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-1.3); the pooled annual incidence of advanced neoplasia was 1.8% (95% CI, 0.9-2.7). Risk of CRC was higher when LGD was diagnosed by expert gastrointestinal pathologist (1.5%) than by community pathologists (0.2%). Factors significantly associated with dysplasia progression were concomitant primary sclerosing cholangitis (odds ratio [OR], 3.4; 95% CI, 1.5-7.8), invisible dysplasia (vs visible dysplasia; OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.0-3.4), distal location (vs proximal location; OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.7), and multifocal dysplasia (vs unifocal dysplasia; OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.5-8.5). In 12 surgical cohort studies of 450 patients who underwent colectomy for UC-LGD, 34 patients had synchronous CRC (pooled prevalence, 17%; 95% CI, 8-33).

Conclusion

In a systematic review of the literature, we found that among patients with UC-LGD under surveillance, the annual incidence of progression to CRC was 0.8%; differences in rates of LGD diagnosis varied with pathologists' level of expertise. Concomitant primary sclerosing cholangitis, invisible dysplasia, distal location, and multifocal LGD are high-risk features associated with dysplasia progression.

Background & aims

The incidence of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) in older adults is increasing. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate progression of elderly onset (EO) IBD in population-based cohorts and compared it with adult onset (AO) IBD.

Methods

In a systematic review through June 1, 2019, we identified population-based cohort studies of EO IBD reporting the cumulative risk of hospitalization, surgery, mortality, treatment patterns, escalation, and/or malignancy. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis as cumulative risk of events at 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years, and compared with data from patients with AO IBD in the same cohorts.

Results

We identified 9 studies, comprising 14,765 patients with EO IBD. In patients with EO Crohn's disease (CD), the cumulative 5-year risk of surgery was 22.6% (95% CI, 18.7-27.2) and was similar to that of patients with AO CD (relative risk [RR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.34). Overall exposure to corticosteroids was comparable between patients with EO CD vs AO CD (5-year risk: 55.4%; 95% CI, 53.4-57.4; RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-1.00), but exposure to immunomodulators (31.5%; 95% CI, 29.7-33.4; RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51-0.77) or biologic agents (6.5%; 95% CI, 5.6-7.6; RR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.25-0.52) was significantly lower for patients with EO CD than for patients with AO CD. Similarly, in patients with EO ulcerative colitis (UC), the cumulative 5-year risk of surgery was 7.8% (95% CI, 5.0-12.0), similar to the risk for patients with AO UC (RR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.79-2.11). Overall exposure to corticosteroids was comparable between patients with EO UC vs AO UC (5-year risk: 57.2%; 95% CI, 55.6-58.7; RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.06), but exposure to immunomodulators (16.1%; 95% CI, 15.0-17.2; RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.54-0.62) or biologic agents (2.0%; 95% CI, 1.6-2.5; RR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.24-0.52) was significantly lower for patients with EO UC than for patients with AO UC. Patients with EO IBD appeared to have increased mortality, but not malignancy, compared with the general population. There were few data on comorbidities or adverse effects of medications.

Conclusions

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that patients with EO IBD have a similar risk of surgery as patients with AO IBD. However, patients with EO IBD are less likely to receive treatment with immunomodulators or biologic agents.

Background & aims

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative risk of serious infections with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists, non-TNF targeted biologics, tofacitinib, and immunosuppressive agents in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs).

Methods

In a systematic search of publications, through March 18, 2018, we identified 15 observational studies (>500 person-years) of patients with IBD treated with TNF antagonists, non-TNF targeted biologics, tofacitinib, and/or immunosuppressive agents (thiopurines, methotrexate) that reported risk of serious infections. Only studies with active comparators were included, to allow appropriate comparative synthesis. We performed random-effects meta-analysis and estimated relative risk (RR) and 95% CIs.

Results

Compared with anti-TNF monotherapy, risk of serious infection increased with the combination of anti-TNF and an immunosuppressive agent (in 6 cohorts: RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03-1.37), with anti-TNF and a corticosteroid (in 4 cohorts: RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.33-2.03), or with all 3 drugs (in 2 cohorts: RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.04-1.77); there was minimal heterogeneity among studies. In contrast, monotherapy with an immunosuppressive agent was associated with a lower risk of serious infections than monotherapy with a TNF antagonist (7 cohorts: RR, 0.61; 95% CI 0.44-0.84) or a TNF antagonist with an immunosuppressive agent (2 cohorts: RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.81). Infliximab-based therapy was associated with a lower risk of serious infections compared with adalimumab-based therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis (4 cohorts: RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.33-0.97), but not Crohn's disease (4 cohorts: RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.49-1.70). Few data were available on the comparative safety of biologic agents that do not inhibit TNF and tofacitinib.

Conclusions

Combination therapies for IBD that include TNF antagonists, especially with corticosteroids, are associated with a higher risk of serious infection, whereas monotherapy with an immunosuppressive agent is associated with a lower risk, compared with monotherapy with a TNF antagonist. Studies are needed to evaluate the comparative safety of non-TNF targeted biologics and small molecules for treatment of IBD.

Background & aims

We investigated 30- and 90-day rates and causes of, risk factors for, and interventions to reduce hospital readmission in patients who received medical treatment for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD).

Methods

We performed a systematic search of publications through July 1, 2018 for studies of rates of hospital readmission and associated causes and risk factors in patients who received medical treatments for IBD. Our final analysis included 17 cohort studies (6324 patients) of hospitalized adults with IBD who had received medical treatment, along with reported readmission rates with detailed chart review. We performed random effects meta-analysis to estimate 30- and 90-day rates of readmission and identified causes and risk factors associated with readmission. We also performed qualitative analyses of studies that focused on interventions to reduce readmission.

Results

Overall, the 30-day rate of readmission was 18.1% (95% CI, 14.4-22.4) and the 90-day rate was 26.0% (95% CI, 22.7-29.6). On meta-regression, studies with higher proportions of patients with ulcerative colitis than Crohn's disease reported higher risks for readmission. Most common reasons for readmission were IBD flare, infection, or complications from unplanned surgeries during hospitalizations. Consistent risk factors for 30-day readmission were admission for pain control (odds ratio [OR], 2.27; 95% CI, 1.69-3.03), need for total parenteral nutrition on discharge (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.36-3.35), and prior or unplanned surgery during admission (OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.27-4.25). Only 1 study focused on interventions (specialized inpatient IBD service) to reduce risk of readmission.

Conclusions

Overall 30- and 90-day rates of readmission for patients who received medical treatment for IBD are 18.1% and 26.0%, respectively. IBD flares and infections are common reasons for readmission, and inadequate pain control and need for parenteral nutrition were common risk factors. Interventional studies to reduce risk of readmission are needed.