Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology最新文献

Background: Several adalimumab preparations are now available for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Comparative satisfaction and tolerability are unknown.

Objectives: This study investigated IBD patient satisfaction with approved adalimumab biosimilars and their originator.

Design: In this cross-sectional study, we included 941 consecutive adalimumab-treated patients with IBD across 45 centres affiliated with the Groupe d'Etude Therapeutique des Affections Inflammatoires du tube Digestif who completed a satisfaction questionnaire comprising four items each rated by a 10-point scale.

Methods: The differences in responses were performed using a one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey's honest significant difference test.

Results: The most commonly used drugs at inclusion were Humira^® (436/941, 46.3%), Amgevita^® (177/941, 18.8%) and Hulio^® (105/941, 11.2%). The mean overall satisfaction rate with adalimumab was 8.5 (standard deviation 1.8). Overall satisfaction was significantly higher in patients treated with Humira (8.6 (1.5)), Hulio (8.6 (1.8)) or Amgevita (8.5 (1.4)) (p < 0.05). Satisfaction with the subcutaneous injection form was higher for patients treated with Yuflyma^® (9.0 (1.4)), Humira (8.9 (1.3)) and Hulio (8.9 (1.7)) (p < 0.05). A total of 299 patients (31.8%) described injection site reactions. In all, 223 patients (23.7%) reported being previously treated with another adalimumab of which (32/223, 14.3%) discontinued treatment due to side effects.

Conclusion: In this real-world setting, patients with IBD had a high level of satisfaction with adalimumab treatment, with some differences in terms of overall satisfaction and satisfaction with the injection device.

Background: The risk of serious infection and active tuberculosis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has not been concurrently evaluated based on the use of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α agents versus non-anti-TNF biologics (vedolizumab/ustekinumab) in the Korean population.

Objectives: We compared the risk of serious infection and active tuberculosis in Korean patients with IBD treated with non-anti-TNF biologics (vedolizumab/ustekinumab) or anti-TNF-α agents.

Design: This study was a population-based cohort analysis of nationwide administrative claims data.

Methods: Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service claims data (representing 97% of the South Korean population) from between January 2007 and February 2021 were reviewed, and adults with IBD who initiated vedolizumab/ustekinumab or anti-TNF-α treatment (n = 6123) between 2017 and 2020 were enrolled. Intergroup differences in the risk of serious infection requiring hospitalization/emergency department visits or active tuberculosis during the follow-up period were analyzed.

Results: In the patients treated with anti-TNF-α agents or vedolizumab/ustekinumab during a mean follow-up of 1.55 ± 1.05 and 0.84 ± 0.69 years, the incidence rates of serious infection were 9.43/100 and 6.87/100 person-years, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed no significant intergroup difference in the risk of serious infection with vedolizumab/ustekinumab or anti-TNF-α treatment; the adjusted relative risk of vedolizumab/ustekinumab compared with anti-TNF-α agents was 0.81 (95% confidence interval 0.46-1.44, p = 0.478). Among patients treated with anti-TNF-α agents and vedolizumab/ustekinumab, the incidence rates of active tuberculosis were 0.87 and 0.37 per 100 person-years, respectively. The relative risk of vedolizumab/ustekinumab compared with anti-TNF-α agents was 0.31 (95% confidence interval 0.07-1.26, p = 0.101). In a subset analysis comparing vedolizumab and ustekinumab with anti-TNF-α agents, similar results were observed.

Conclusion: In Korean patients with IBD, non-anti-TNF biologics (vedolizumab/ustekinumab) tended to be associated with a lower risk of serious infection or active tuberculosis than anti-TNF-α agents.

Background: Biologic agents have demonstrated efficacy in treating ulcerative colitis (UC); however, treatment failure to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) is common in the real world. Data on preferential sequencing in clinical practice after failure remain limited.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate real-world outcomes of patients cycling to TNFis or switching to non-TNFi biologics following first-line failure with TNFis.

Design: Retrospective cohort study in Germany.

Methods: Adult patients with UC were identified using administrative claims data from 1 May 2014 to 30 June 2022 provided by a statutory sickness fund. Patients newly initiating first-line therapy with TNFis and then switching to another agent were identified. Patients were defined as within-class switched (WCS), if they cycled to another TNFi, or outside-class switchers (OCS), if they switched to a non-TNFi biologic [ustekinumab (UST) or vedolizumab (VDZ)] and followed from index (switch date) to death, insurance end, or study end on 30 June 2022. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between groups, and weighted Cox regression models were used to compare primary (time to discontinuation and second treatment switch) and secondary outcomes (corticosteroid-free drug survival).

Results: We identified 166 patients initiating TNFis and switching to a subsequent treatment (mean age: 42.9 years, 49.4% female). Following IPTW, there were 71 and 76 patients in the WCS and OCS groups, respectively. Compared to OCS, WCS were more likely to discontinue the new therapy [hazard ratio (HR), 1.82, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.14-2.89, p = 0.012], and switch a second time (HR, 3.46, 95% CI, 1.89-6.36, p < 0.001). Moreover, WCS showed an increased likelihood of initiating prolonged corticosteroid therapy (HR, 1.42, 95% CI, 0.77-2.59, p = 0.260); however, the results were not significant.

Conclusion: Following first-line TNFi failure, this study suggests that real-world outcomes among patients with UC are less favorable when cycling to another TNFi, compared to switching to a non-TNFi such as UST or VDZ.

Background: Long-term vedolizumab (VDZ) outcomes in real-world cohorts have been largely limited to 1-year follow-up, with few bio-naïve patients or objective markers of inflammation assessed.

Objectives: We aimed to assess factors affecting VDZ persistence including clinical, biochemical and faecal biomarker remission at 1, 3 and 5 years.

Design: We performed a retrospective, observational, cohort study.

Methods: All adult inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients who had received VDZ induction for ulcerative colitis (UC)/IBD-unclassified (IBDU) were included. Baseline phenotype and follow-up data were collected via a review of electronic medical records.

Results: We included 290 patients [UC n = 271 (93.4%), IBDU n = 19 (6.6%)] with a median time on VDZ of 27.6 months (interquartile range: 14.4-43.2). At the end of follow-up, a total of 157/290 (54.1%) patients remained on VDZ. The median time to discontinuation was 14.1 months (7.0-23.3). Previous exposure to ⩾1 advanced therapy, steroid use at baseline and disease extension (E3 and E2 versus E1) were independent predictors for worse VDZ persistence. Clinical remission (partial Mayo < 2) was 75.7% (171/226), 72.4% (157/217) and 70.2% (127/181) at years 1, 3 and 5, respectively. Steroid use during maintenance VDZ therapy occurred in 31.7% (92/290), hospitalization in 15.5% (45/290) and surgery in 3.4% (10/291). The rate of serious adverse events was 1.2 per 100 patient-years of follow-up.

Conclusion: VDZ effectiveness appears enduring with favourable long-term safety profile. VDZ persistence was influenced by previous exposure to biologics/small molecules, disease distribution and steroid use at baseline in our study.

Background: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a disorder of gut-brain interaction characterized by recurrent abdominal pain related to defecation and/or associated to a change in bowel habits. According to the stool type, four different IBS subtypes can be recognized, constipation predominant (IBS-C), diarrhea predominant (IBS-D), mixed (IBS-M), and undefined (IBS-U). Patients report that their IBS symptoms are exacerbated by food. Thus, it is important to find a nutritional approach that could be effective in reducing IBS symptoms.

Objective: The present work is a post hoc analysis of the previously published DOMINO trial. It aimed to evaluate the effects of a self-instructed FODMAP-lowering diet smartphone application on symptoms and psychosocial aspects in primary care IBS stratifying the results for each IBS subtypes.

Design: Post hoc analysis.

Methods: Two hundred twenty-two primary care IBS patients followed a FODMAP-lowering diet for 8 weeks with the support of a smartphone application. Two follow-up visits were scheduled after 16 and 24 weeks. IBS-Symptoms Severity Score (IBS-SSS), quality of life (QoL), and adherence and dietary satisfaction were evaluated.

Results: After 8 weeks, IBS-SSS improved in all IBS subtypes (p < 0.0001). Physician Health Questiionnaire (PHQ-15) improved only in IBS-D (p = 0.0006), whereas QoL improved both in IBS-D (p = 0.01) and IBS-M (p = 0.005).

Conclusion: This post hoc analysis showed that the app is useful in all IBS subtypes; thus, it could be used as an effective tool by both general practitioners and patients to manage symptoms in primary care.

Trial registration: Ethical Commission University Hospital of Leuven reference number: S59482. Clinicaltrial.gov reference number: NCT04270487.

Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is a chronic autoimmune cholestatic disease characterized by the destruction of the small intrahepatic bile ducts, which can progress to liver cirrhosis. The gold standard in the treatment of PBC is ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), which is indicated in all patients with PBC because it improves not only biochemical parameters but also patients' survival. An important milestone in the identification of patients at risk is the assessment of biochemical response to UDCA. Patients who respond to treatment have a lower incidence of hepatic events and better prognosis than patients who do not. Several scoring systems can be used to assess the response and identify non-responders who will benefit from second-line treatment. Obeticholic acid (OCA) is currently the only approved second-line treatment for PBC, which is effective for non-responders to UDCA therapy or patients, who have not tolerated UDCA therapy. However, OCA is contraindicated in advanced liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Moreover, pruritus may be a limiting factor for the administration of OCA. Fibrates have shown promising data supporting their use in non-responders to UDCA because they improve the biochemical parameters and elastographic findings and have possible antipruritic effects. Therefore, the idea of a triple treatment seems interesting. Clinical research is focusing on several other groups of drugs: peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) δ- and α/δ agonists, non-steroidal farnesoid X receptor agonists, fibroblast growth factor 19 modulators, and inhibitors of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidase 1 and 4.

Wireless capsule endoscopy (CE) has revolutionized gastrointestinal diagnostics, offering a non-invasive means to visualize and monitor the GI tract. This review traces the evolution of CE technology. Addressing the limitations of traditional white light (WL) CE, the paper explores non-WL technologies, integrating diverse sensing modalities and novel biomarkers to enhance diagnostic capabilities. Concluding with an assessment of Technology Readiness Levels, the paper emphasizes the transformative impact of non-WL colon CE devices on GI diagnostics, promising more precise, patient-centric, and accessible healthcare for GI disorders.

Background: The approval of ustekinumab (UST) has opened new options for the treatment of Crohn's disease (CD), but potential markers predicting the efficacy of this interleukin-12/23 inhibitor are lacking. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is non-invasive alternative to endoscopy, demonstrating early transmural changes after treatment induction.

Objectives: We conducted a prospective monocentric study aiming to explore the value of multimodal intestinal ultrasound (IUS) in predicting the response to UST in patients with active CD who have been previously exposed to anti-tumour necrosis factor α (TNFα).

Design and methods: Consecutive patients with moderate-to-severe CD involving the terminal ileum who were scheduled to begin UST therapy were enrolled between January 2020 and October 2021 in the inflammatory bowel diseases outpatient centre. A complete IUS evaluation, including B-mode, Doppler, dynamic CEUS and elastography, was performed at the time of induction (T0) and after 8 (T1), 16 (T2), 24 (T3) and 48 (T4) weeks of therapy. Each IUS parameter and their variations from baseline were correlated with endoscopic response and mucosal healing after 1 year.

Results: A total of 52 patients were included, 29 (55.8%) of which reached endoscopic response at T4. The univariate analysis revealed that, between T3 and T0, the percentage changes of bowel wall thickness, Limberg score, mean signal intensity, rise time, wash-in rate, C reactive protein and Harvey-Bradshaw Index were associated with long-term therapeutic outcome. Based on the above parameters, we developed an IUS score that showed a good performance in predicting 1 year-endoscopic response (area under the curve: 0.91).

Conclusion: Multimodal ultrasound could be helpful to predict long-term therapeutic outcome in patients with CD treated with UST.

Registration: NCT05987501.

Background: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) are recommended for erosive esophagitis (EE), with good safety and tolerance. However, it is unclear which is the best treatment option for EE.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy of P-CABs and PPIs for healing EE patients, seeking an appropriate treatment choice in the 4- or 8-week treatment and standard or double dose.

Design: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Data sources and methods: Relevant databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials of PPIs and P-CABs in the treatment of EE up to 31 May 2023. Studies on standard or double-dose PPIs or P-CABs which were published in English and assessed 4- or 8-week healing effects in EE were included. A network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of the treatments under the frequentist framework. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses of patients with different baseline EE were also conducted.

Results: In all, 34 studies involving 25,054 patients and 9 PPIs, 6 P-CABs, or placebo treatment interventions were included. The pooled 4-week healing rate was significantly statistically lower than the pooled 8-week healing rate for most treatments. Besides, the higher healing rate of double-dose treatment than standard-dose treatment was not observed in the initial treatment of most drugs. The main analysis only included studies conducted for both patients with and without severe EE at baseline, and the proportion of severe EE included in the study was >10%, Keverprazan 20 mg qd ranked best with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 84.7, followed by Ilaprazole 10 mg qd with a SUCRA value of 82.0, for the healing rate at 8 weeks. Sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust. Subgroup analysis showed that most P-CABs had higher healing rates than PPIs, particularly for patients with severe EE. And the healing rate of Keverprazan 20 mg qd at 8 weeks ranked best in the subgroup without or with severe EE at baseline.

Conclusion: This study showed that an 8-week treatment seemed more effective than the 4-week treatment for healing EE patients. The healing effect of Keverprazan (20 mg qd) ranked best in 8-week treatment, for both severe and non-severe EE patients.

Trial registration: The study protocol was registered with INPLASY (registration number INPLASY2023120053).