Category Archives: inflammatory bowel disease

Ionizing Radiation Exposure in Adults with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Posted on by

From The Onion:

In the largest reported cohort to date, GC Nguyen et al (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2020; 26: 898-906) describe the ionization radiation exposure (IRE) in individuals (≥18 years) with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Methods: N=72,933 with IBD,1994-2016. During 1st 5 yrs after diagnosis, IRE was estimated in a retrospective matched cohort in Ontario.

Key findings:

  • IBD patients were exposed to nearly 6-fold IRE due to abdominal imaging compared to controls: 18.6 mSv vs 2.9 mSv
  • Patients with CD had higher IRE than UC: 26 mSv vs 12 mSv (P<0.001).  CD patients were more likely to have >50 mSv exposure (15.6% vs 6.2%) and >100 mSv 5.0% vs 2.1%
  • Women were less likely to have high IRE compared to males
  • Residents in the poorest neighborhoods were 27% more likely to have IRE >100 mSv.  Socioeconomic status was an independent factor after accounting for comorbidities. The authors speculate that this could be related to increased use of emergency rooms where they may be more likely to receive a CT.
  • The use of CT scan began to decline after 2007…likely explained by the rise of MRE studies.

While strict guidelines on IRE are lacking, the International Commission on Radiological Protection has suggested that occupational exposure (eg. nuclear workers) should be limited to <100 mSv over 5 years and not more than 50 mSv in a single year.

My take: We need to continue efforts to reduce IRE due to concerns about subsequent secondary malignancies. This likely means avoiding CT for non-emergencies and working with our ED colleagues to think carefully about lifetime IRE in IBD patients.

Related blog posts:

Additional references:

  • -AJR 2001; 176: 289-96. Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT
  • -Br J Radiol 2012; 85: 523-28.  Justification of CTs -some not needed
  • -AJR 2010; 194: 868-73.  Lower CT radiation doses in pediatric patients.  ‘Image gently’
  • -Arch Intern Med 2009; 169: 2078-86.

From LA Times:

 

1st Cases of COVID-19 in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease –All Mild

Posted on by

A recent case series, D Turner et al. JPGN June 2020 – Volume 70 – Issue 6 – p 727-733 doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000002729: Full text: Corona Virus Disease 2019 and Paediatric Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

  • Eight PIBD children had COVID-19 globally, all with mild infection without needing hospitalization despite treatment with immunomodulators and/or biologics. ..
  • Preliminary data for PIBD patients during COVID-19 outbreak are reassuring. Standard IBD treatments including biologics should continue at present through the pandemic, especially in children who generally have more severe IBD course on one hand, and milder SARS-CoV-2 infection on the other.

Related blog posts:

Expert Guidance on Inflammatory Bowel Disease (Part 3)

Posted on by

A recent issue of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology focused solely on the clinical features and management of inflammatory bowel disease. Even for those with expertise in IBD, there is a lot of useful information and concise reviews of what is known.

Here are some of my notes from this issue (part 3):

RP Hirten et al. Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol: 2020; 18: 1336-45. A User’s Guide to De-escalating Immunomodulator and Biologic Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

This article emphasizes the need for assessment of bowel disease activity before attempting de-escalation and provides a list of risk factors for flare-up off therapy.

Some of the Risk factors for Disease Flare with De-escalation:

  • Disease activity/abnormal biomarkers (CRP, WBC, Hemoglobin, Calprotectin)
  • Perianal disease
  • Penetrating disease
  • Extensive disease involvement
  • Abnormal bowel wall thickening on MRE
  • Young age at diagnosis
  • Short treatment duration
  • Prior surgeries

Key points:

  • In individuals on combination therapy, dropping immunomodulator therapy (but not biologic therapy) did NOT increase the short term risk of a flare up in a recent Cochrane review.  However, this did impact anti-TNF kinetics and lowers anti-TNF troughs.
  • With regard to stopping biologics, among patients in deep remission, the authors advise counseling patients (CD and UC) that stopping biologic agents results in a “40-50% relapse over the following 2 years that will further increase over time.”
  • Careful followup is recommended if a patient elects to stop biologic therapy. “CD and UC are progressive relapsing conditions…and approximately 80% of subjects” require re-initiation of biologic therapy with 7 years.”
  • “Repeat colonoscopy or imaging should be performed if a significant change in symptoms occurs or abnormal biomarkers are detected.”
  • In patients who resume infliximab, the authors advocate for an initial induction of 0, 4, and 8 weeks.  The presence of antidrug antibodies at week 2 “precludes drug administration and alternative agent should be started.”

Related blog posts:

M Kaur et al Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 1346-55. Inpatient Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease-Related Complications

This article reviews the approach to acute severe ulcerative colitis which has been discussed recently on this blog post and offers management recommendations for complications related to Crohn’s disease including abscesses, strictures/bowel obstruction.  With regard to abscess management, the authors note that medical therapy is more likely to be effective in those with a first-time abscess, spontaneous origin, right lower quadrant location, and smaller abscess size (<3 cm).  Stricture with upstream dilatation of bowel, multi-loculated abscesses and steroid use are features that make therapy less likely to be successful.

Related blog posts -ASUC:

Abscess-related blog posts:

EL Barnes et al Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 1356-66. Perioperative and Postoperative Management of Patients With Crohn’s Disease and Ulcerative Colitis

This article reviews risk factors for disease recurrence after surgery, presurgical management (eg. minimize steroids, improve nutrition, do not delay surgery based on preoperative biologic exposure), postoperative strategies and management of pouchitis.

  • In those at high risk for postoperative disease recurrence, the authors advocate anti-TNF therapy plus an immunomodulator with colonoscopy at 6-12 months. In those at low risk, many are placed on no medications and have a colonoscopy at 6 months postoperatively.
  • The section on pouchitis lists alternatives to metronidazole and ciprofloxacin if these lose efficacy.  This includes amoxicillin-clavulanate, sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim, doxycycline and vancomycin.
  • Related blog post: What’s Going on With Pouchitis?

S Singh et al Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 1367-80. Management of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases in Special Populations: Obese, Old, or Obstetric

A Levine et al Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 1381-92. Dietary Guidance From the International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

  • The authors recommend more vegetables and fruits with CD (but low insoluble fiber if stricture present)
  • “Prudent to reduce intake of red and processed meat” with UC
  • “Prudent to increase dietary omega-3 fatty acids” from marine fish but not from dietary supplements with UC
  • ‘Prudent to use a low FODMAP diet for patients with persistent symptoms for CD and UC despite resolution of inflammation’

M Collins et al Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 1393-1403.Management of Patients With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Induced Enterocolitis: A Systematic Review

This study reviews colitis induced by immune checkpoint inhibitors which are similar to young patients with inherent CTLA4b deficiency.

Related blog posts:

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

Expert Guidance on Inflammatory Bowel Disease (Part 2)

Posted on by

A recent issue of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology focused solely on the clinical features and management of inflammatory bowel disease. Even for those with expertise in IBD, there is a lot of useful information and concise reviews of what is known.

Here are some of my notes from this issue (part 2)

S Danese et al. Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol: 2020; 18: 1280-90. Positioning Therapies in Ulcerative Colitis

This is a good article but recent AGA publications are probably better –there are some links below. One statement that was interesting: “the safety profile of vedolizumab seems even better than placebo in terms of risk of serious” adverse events. The authors favored infliximab in combination with azathioprine in those needing biologic therapy with moderate-severe UC.

Related blog posts:

S Vermeire et al. Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol: 2020; 18: 1291-9. How, When, and for Whom Should We Perform Therapeutic Drug Monitoring?

“Although reactive TDM, testing at time of loss of response, is widely accepted in practice, especially for anti–tumor necrosis factor antibodies, there are less data for the other monoclonal antibodies belonging to other classes. Besides reactive testing, there is a movement toward proactively adjusting biologic dosing to prevent loss of response, in keeping with the tight control philosophy of inflammatory bowel disease care.” The authors favor proactive monitoring: “we are now beginning to see with well-powered proactive TDM studies” that proactive monitoring can maximize the benefits of TDM with “the potential to maximize durability of biologics and improve the outcomes of IBD patients.”

Related blog posts:

PS Dulai et al. Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol: 2020; 18: 1300-8. How Do We Treat Inflammatory Bowel Diseases to Aim For Endoscopic Remission?

The initial part of this article reviews treatment targets -resolution of symptoms and resolution of endoscopic damage. The algorithm provides the authors’ suggested approach:

  • At initiation of therapy, patients should have a full assessment.  In addition to ileocolonoscopy, for patients with CD, the authors recommend cross-sectional imaging.
  • After treatment initiation, the authors recommend biomarker assessment every 3 months.  Mucosal assessment can occur 6-9 months after treatment initiation.
  • For UC, the authors note that fecal calprotectin (FC) “appears to be more stratightforward, and a cutoff of 250 mcg/g can be used reliably across all scenarios to make treatment adjustments.”  Though, they recommend endoscopic confirmation prior to transition to a biologic or small molecule therapy.
  • For CD, the authors suggest making treatment adjustments in those with FC >250 mcg/g and in those with lower values, followup colonoscopy is recommended.
  • The authors note that in the post-operative setting with CD, mucosal inflammation precedes symptomatic activity and “waiting for symptoms to emerge may unnecessary allow for disease progression.”
  • The authors suggest that tighter disease control will reduce disease-related complications, while acknowledging a lack of prospective clinical trials.
  • One thorny issue: :”For CD: it remains unclear what degree of residual mucosal healing is acceptable to impact important outcomes such as CD-related complications, hospitalizations, and surgeries.”

Related blog posts:

M Allocca et al. Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol: 2020; 18: 1309-23. Use of Cross-Sectional Imaging for Tight Monitoring of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

“Computed tomography is limited by the use of radiation, while the use of magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) is limited by its cost and access. There is growing interest in bowel ultrasound that represents a cost-effective, noninvasive, and well-tolerated modality in clinical practice, but it is operator dependent… Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is a MR imaging technique that increasingly is used in both IBD and non-IBD conditions and has been shown to be a valuable and accurate tool for assessing and monitoring IBD activity.

L Beaugerie et al. Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol: 2020; 18: 1324-35. Predicting, Preventing, and Managing Treatment-Related Complications in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

The first part of this article reviews potential adverse effects from the medications used for IBD treatment, noting in Table 1 that there are not complications to monitor for with both vedolizumab and ustekinumab.

The article reviews infections, vaccination strategies and issues related to malignancy Some of the recommendations:

  • vaccine against pneumococcus should be given before patients begin immunosuppressive therapy
  • physicians should consider giving patients live vaccines against herpes zoster (in adults) before they begin immunosuppressive therapy or a recombinant vaccine, when available, at any time point during treatment
  • sun protection and skin surveillance from the time of diagnosis are recommended
  • despite concerns about therapy, the authors note that “the extensive use of immunosuppressive therapy leads to a substantial decrease in the incidence of IBD complications, with a globally favorable benefit-risk ratio, which can be optimized further thanks to a good degree of awareness and knowledge of drug complications.”

It is interesting that this article (and the entire issue) does not address mental health concerns related to the diagnosis of IBD.  This likely creates more morbidity and complications than most of the other issues that are discussed.

Above: Why did the picture go to jail? Because it was framed.

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

Expert Guidance on Current Management of IBD (Part 1)

Posted on by

A recent issue of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology focused solely on the clinical features and management of inflammatory bowel disease. Even for those with expertise in IBD, there is a lot of useful information and concise reviews of what is known.

Here are some of my notes from this issue:

AN Ananthakrishnan et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 1252-60. Changing Global Epidemiology of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Sustaining Health Care Delivery Into the 21st Century

Reviews risk factors and recommends the following as ways to lower risk of developing IBD for at-risk individuals:

  • Breastfeeding in infancy
  • Do not start smoking
  • Avoid vitamin D deficiency
  • Minimize non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use
  • Minimize antibiotic use especially for young children and during pregnancy
  • Encourage moderate physical activity, healthy weight, low stress and regular sleep
  • Diet high in fruit, vegetables, fiber, and fish

Reviews the epidemiology and notes that there has been a evidence of a decline in incidence in IBD in (at least) the Western world; however, because of compounding prevalence, it is expected that the number of individuals with IBD will continue to rise.  In Canada, for example, it is expected that the prevalence will rise from 0.7% in 2018 to 1% by 2030.

In newly industrialized countries, it is expected that rising incidence is going to substantially increase the global disease burden. The authors note the following as areas needed in research and clinical care to meet global IBD care burden:

  • tools for early diagnosis
  • early effective intervention to prevent irreversible bowel damage
  • precision medicine to select the right treatment for the right patient
  • need for less costly and more safe therapies
  • simple tools to monitor disease activity
  • primary disease prevention strategies, especially for those at high risk

CA Siegel, CN Bernstein. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 1261-7. Identifying Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases at High vs Low Risk of Complications

This article’s disease-stratification information overlaps with subsequent articles which detail the positioning of therapies for Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) respectively.

NH Nguyen, S Singh, WJ Sandborn. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 1267-79. Positioning Therapies in the Management of Crohn’s Disease.

Some of the information summarized in this article:

Table 2 -Comparative Efficacy of Biologics for Moderate to Severe Active Crohn’s Disease (CD):

  • Infliximab: For induction: OR compared to placebo for remission: 5.90 (2.78-12.51); probability of remission 60%. For maintenance in those with clinical response: probability of remission SUCRA ranking: 48%; 0.68
  • Adalimumab: For induction: OR compared to placebo for remission: 3.80 (1.76-8.18); probability of remission 49%. For maintenance in those with clinical response: probability of remission SUCRA ranking: 58%; 0.97
  • Ustekinumab: For induction: OR compared to placebo for remission: 2.75 (1.76-4.32); probability of remission 41%.  For maintenance in those with clinical response: probability of remission SUCRA ranking: 39%; 0.36
  • Vedolizumab: For induction: OR compared to placebo for remission: 2.69 (1.36-5.32); probability of remission 40%.  For maintenance in those with clinical response: probability of remission SUCRA ranking: 42%; 0.52
  • Certolizumab pegol: For induction:  OR compared to placebo for remission: 1.36 (0.89-2.08); probability of remission 25%.  For maintenance in those with clinical response: probability of remission SUCRA ranking: 42%; 0.48

In deciding therapy, the authors specify factors that help classify as high-risk CD Table1):

  • Structural damage: large or deep mucosal lesions, fistula or perianal abscess, prior resections (especially if >40 cm)
  • Inflammatory burden: extensive disease involvement (ileal disease >40 cm or pancolitis), increased C-reactive protein, low albumin
  • Impact on quality of life: presence of stoma, >10 loose stools/week, lack of symptomatic improvement with prior biologics and/or immunomodulators, presence of anorectal symptoms, anemia, daily abdominal pain
  • Emerging predictors: antimicrobial antibody pattern, antimicrobial genetic peptide signature

Though the authors note a lack of adequate head-to-head comparative studies, they make some recommendations for treatment:

  • For severe disease, they suggest first-line therapy for CD would be infliximab or adalimumab in combination therapy regimen (with infliximab favored for higher disease severity)
  • For second-line therapy, they suggest ustekinumab for most patients in combination therapy or 2nd anti-TNF in those with loss or response due to immunogenicity or intolerance
  • For those with higher risk factors for adverse events (or preference) and moderate disease severity, the authors recommend vedolizumab as 1st line and ustekinumab as 2nd line.  For this same group with higher disease severity, they suggest ustekinumab as 1st line treatment.

Other key points:

  • In terms of risk of malignancy, the authors note that in a comprehensive systematic review of 23 RCTs of TNF-alpha antagonists in IBD, there was NO significant increase in the risk of malignancy with TNF-alpha antagonists.
  • In terms of combination therapy, the authors note that their has been an observed benefit which is “at least partly attributed to achieving a higher biologic trough concentration….no differences in efficacy of combination therapy vs infliximab were observed when evaluating patients by quartiles of infliximab trough concentration; however, currently this represents association rather than causation, and it is possible that superior remission rates drove higher trough concentrations, rather than vice versa.”

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

How to Get Rid of the Placebo Effect in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Trials

Posted on by

A recent study (M Duijvestein et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 1121-32, editorial 1030-32) analyzed data from recent randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials for Crohn’s disease (CD).  In these induction trials fro eldelumab, filgotinib, risankizumab, and ustekinumab, the authors found very low rates of placebo response (n=188 in placebo arms).

Key findings:

  • Based on endoscopic assessment of CD activity, response rate to placebo was 16.2%; response indicated >50% reduction in the simple endoscopic score for CD.
  • The rate of remission was 5.2%
  • Even lower rates of response were noted in those with elevated CRP at baseline (OR 0.93) and those with history of anti-TNF therapy (OR 0.31)

Commentary:

  • The key to lowering the placebo response are to use objective biologic markers rather than relying exclusively on clinical symptoms.
  • Central reading of endoscopic endpoints also is thought to minimize placebo effect
  • The editorial notes that the use of placebo in clinical trials “must be justified by the importance of the additional scientific value gained, and placebo should be used in trials only if there is genuine equipoise between the active treatment and placebo.”
  • “Because of ethical questions concerning placebo and the emergence of head-to-head trials, placebo arms may disappear from future IBD trials.”

My take: In reality, very few individuals with CD improve without adequate treatment.  Use of objective criteria is crucial to finding out what really works, both in clinical trials and in clinical practice.

Related blog posts:

Early Treatment with Anti-TNF Agents and Development of Perianal Fistulas

Posted on by

AAM Singer, DA Bloom, J Adler. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; In Press: Factors Associated With Development of Perianal Fistulas in Pediatric Patients With Crohn’s Disease

Also, related article:

Full Text: 2019 Jan 1;25(1):1-13. doi: 10.1093/ibd/izy247. Clinical Practice Guideline for the Medical Management of Perianal Fistulizing Crohn’s Disease: The Toronto Consensus.

Related blog posts:

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

Economic Burden of Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Fewer Operations and Emerging Treatments

Posted on by

Pouillon, L., Travis, S., Bossuyt, P. et al. Head-to-head trials in inflammatory bowel disease: past, present and future. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-020-0293-9 (Thanks to KT Park for this reference)

An excerpt:

This Perspective provides an overview of the past, current and future concepts in IBD trial design, with a detailed focus on the role of comparative research and the challenges and pitfalls in undertaking and interpreting the results from such studies.

Related blog posts:

GR Lichenstein et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 889-97.  Using Truven MarketScan Insurance Claims data (2008-2015) from more than 160,000 patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), the authors estimated economic burdens from Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC).

  • For CD, lifetime incremental cost was $416,352 on average, but was $707,711 if diagnosis was established between 0-11 years of age. The lifetime costs, $622,056, consisted of $273,056 for outpatient care, $164,298 for inpatient care, $163,722 for pharmacy costs, and $20,979 for emergency room care.
  • For UC, lifetime incremental cost averaged $230,102, but was $369,955 if diagnosis was established between 0-11 years of age. The lifetime costs, $405,496, consisted of $153,670 for outpatient care, $123,190 for inpatient care, $105,142 for pharmacy costs, and $13,493 for emergency room care.
  • The lifetime costs for UC and CD were both greater than that for rheumatoid arthritis ($100,273) and for type 2 diabetes ($89,064).
  • Related blog post: IBD Shorts 2020  Cost of IBD Care is Increasing. From Healio Gastro: Chronic inflammatory disease expenditures nearly double over last 2 decades

T Shinagawa et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 898-907.  In this study from Japan with 1871 patients with CD, the 5- and 10-year reoperation rates were 23.4% and 48.0% respectively.  However, reoperation rates were significantly lower after 2002 than prior with HR 0.72.  Postoperative use of immunomodulators (OR 0.60) and anti-TNF therapy (HR 0.71) were associated with a reduced the risk of reoperation.

AGA Guidelines: Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Posted on by

Full Text: JD Feuerstein et al. Gastroenterol 2020; 158: 1450-61. AGA Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Full Tex PDF: AGA Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis

 

Associated articles included the following:

  • Clinical decision support tool (1462-63)
  • PDF: Spotlight (summary -images above) (1464)
  • Technical Review (1465-96)

Key recommendations:

  • 2a. In adult outpatients with moderate to severe UC who are naïve to biologic agents, the AGA suggests using infliximab or vedolizumab rather than adalimumab, for induction of remission. Comment: Patients, particularly those with less severe disease, who place higher value on the convenience of self-administered subcutaneous injection, and a lower value on the relative efficacy of medications, may reasonably chose adalimumab as an alternative
  • 2c. In adult outpatients with moderate to severe UC who have previously been exposed to infliximab, particularly those with primary nonresponse, the AGA suggests using ustekinumab or tofacitinib rather than vedolizumab or adalimumab for induction of remission.
  • 6. In adult outpatients with moderate to severe UC, the AGA suggests early use of biologic agents with or without immunomodulator therapy rather than gradual step up after failure of 5-ASA. Comment: Patients, particularly those with less severe disease, who place higher value on the safety of 5-ASA therapy and lower value on the efficacy of biologic agents or tofacitinib may reasonably chose gradual step therapy with 5-ASA therapy.
  • 10. In hospitalized adult patients with ASUC refractory to intravenous corticosteroids, the AGA suggests using infliximab or cyclosporine

Summary of recommendations:

Related blog posts:

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition

IBD Pediatric Costs & Cannabis Still No Data for IBD

Posted on by

Happy birthday to my favorite follower!!!

A recent single-center study (AW Fondell et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2020; 26: 635-40, editorial by Joel Rosh, 641-2) examined the first-year costs of children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in 2016.  There were 67 patients (43 with Crohn’s disease (CD), and 24 with ulcerative colitis (UC)).

Key findings:

  • Mean cost was $45,753; $43,095 for CD, $50,516 for UC
  • Severe CD (n=11) was $71,176 and severe UC (n=5) was $134,178; it is notable that only one patient with CD had surgery and only one patient with UC had surgery.
  • Overall cost distribution: 37% from infusion costs, 25% hospital costs, 18% outpatient procedures, 10% outpatient oral medications, 7% outpatient imaging and 3% outpatient visits.
  • 69% of CD patients and 33% of UC patients received biologics
  • 21% (n=9) of CD patients and 45% (n=11) of UC patients were hospitalized
  • Private payer reimbursement was a mean of $51,269 compared to $24,610 mean for Medicaid.

Limitations: 

  • In any cost analysis, many assumptions are needed.  For medications, for example, the author used pharmaceutical retail prices.  The actual costs are near-impossible to calculate as every insurance policy and every hospital system has a multitude of charges based on proprietary negotiations.
  • While this data comes from a referral center, all of the patients in the study were from Connecticut.

Due to the expense of care, Dr. Rosh points out that many insurers have often mandated the use of “standard dosing” of biologic therapy, “ignoring that robust data” indicate that this dosing is “the exception rather than the rule in pediatric IBD patients.”  These type of short-sighted interventions could affect long-term medical outcomes.

My take: There clearly are areas where costs can be reduced (eg. lower infusion costs, lower endoscopy costs, biosimilars).  However, no amount of cost cutting will change the conclusion that good care for IBD is expensive.

Briefly noted: TS Kafil et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2020; 26: 502-9.   This study examined evidence for cannabis effectiveness in IBD.  After performing a literature search, the authors could only identify five randomized controlled trials (n=185).  Each study used different doses, formulations and routes of administration.  No studies evaluated maintenance treatment and relapse in CD or UC.  Findings: “no firm conclusions can be made regarding the safety and effectiveness of cannabis and cannabionoids in adults with CD and UC.”

Related blog posts:

 

Cobb County -Concord Covered Bridge Historic District