Superiority of Anti-TNF Therapy (Part 2)

A recent blog (Superiority of Anti-TNF Therapy in Children | gutsandgrowth) described a recent article showing that kids treated with anti-TNF therapy at the time of diagnosis had improved outcomes compared to children who were treated with other medications.  In this day of multimedia, there is a video explaining the study which may be helpful for families and clinicians alike –here’s the link:  Dr. Michael Stephens discusses the research findings: .

An excerpt from the explanation with the video:

The current research study looks at outcomes and compares three different types of treatments. The first group receives anti-TNF therapy. The second group received immune modulating therapy. The third group received no treatment within the first three months. This study was an observational study and the choice of treatment was at the discretion of the physician. In order to correct for this factor, a statistical technique was used. Patients with similar characteristics were paired within the three groups . The results showed that patients who received the anti-TNF therapy had an improved outcome, such as a higher remission rate and some indications of improved growth, at one year. All three groups had improvements in weight and body mass index but only the anti-TNF group had improvements in linear growth.

Just the Beginning: Mutations in Very Early Onset Inflammatory Bowel Disease

A recent study (Gastroenterol 2014; 146: 1028-39) indicates that mutations in tetratricopeptide repeat domain 7A (TTC7A) can result in a severe form of very early onset inflammatory bowel disease (VEOIBD).

After identifying a TTC7A heterozygote mutation in an infant by using whole exome sequencing of DNA, the authors subsequently identified 4 additional patients (2 siblings from 2 families) who also had loss of function mutations in VEOIBD.  Thus far, four of the five identified infants have died.

The manuscript has some terrific figures describing endoscopic/histologic characteristics, TTC7A genetic analysis, functional TTC7A enterocyte studies with immunofluorescence, impaired cell adhesion figure, tandem mass spectrometry, and a summary mechanistic figure (figure 6).  Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation has not been effective and might not work due to the enterocyte defect.

This study adds another VEOIBD gene mutation.  Previous mutations have involved in VEOIBD have included IL10RA/B, XIAP, ADAM17, NCF4, and NCF2/RAC2. The specific subtype matters as some defects may respond to stem cell transplantation.

Take-home message: there are a diverse number of pathways that can lead to VEOIBD.  Given the recent availability of whole exome sequencing, more mutations are sure to be identified soon.

Related blog post/link:

IL-10 and early onset IBD | gutsandgrowth In addition to the Toronto group (noted in this blog), a group in Boston with Harland Winter/CJ Moran is also interested in whole exome sequencing for VEOIBD patients.

Causes and Treatment of Very-Early Onset IBD -this link is to the AGA Journals blog post on the same subject.

The Search for a Dietary Culprit in IBD

Uniformly, patients diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), both ulcerative colitis and Crohn disease, are interested in whether there is a dietary culprit which triggered their IBD and what modifications in their diet can help improve their IBD.  A really good summary of what we know has been published (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2014; 20: 732-41).

A summary of the key points:

Traditional dietary recommendations:  These diets may help decrease symptoms but are not thought to improve disease control.

  • Low-residue: <10-15 g/d of fiver. Potential deficiencies: folate, vitamin A, vitamin C, and potassium.  Overall, this diet is poorly studied.  “One small randomized controlled trial showed that low-residue diet made no difference in symptoms, need for hospitalization, need for surgery…when compared with an unrestricted diet.”
  • Lactose-free: potential deficiencies: calcium, vitamin D

Carbohydrate-restrictive:  Potential deficiencies with all carbohydrate restriction: folate, thiamine, vitamin B6

  • Specific carbodydrate diet: allows only monosaccharides.  Restricts complex sugars, starches, grains and legumes.  This diet was popularized by Elaine Gottschall in 1994 (Breaking the Vicious Cycle) but was developed by Dr. Sidney Haas in 1924.  The premise of SCD is that “complex carbohydrates and legumes are poorly absorbed in gastrointestinal disease…they promote bacterial overgrowth and fermentation.  By-products from bacterial dysbiossis are postulated to contribute to gut inflammation.”  Nevertheless, it “has been poorly studied.”
  • Low FODMAPs (see numerous previous posts).  “A small restrospective study…showed that the low FODMAPs diet resulted in improvement in functional symptoms present in patients with IBD who were in remission.”  This diet is difficult for long-term adherence.
  • Gluten-free: not truly a carbohydrate-restrictive diet, but breads/cereals contain large amounts of carbs. “No evidence that a gluten-free diet has any effect on disease activity in IBD.”

Fat-modified diets

  • Fat-restrictive diets: “On a cellular level, multiple animal studies have shown that prolonged feeding of a high-fat diet seems to promote colitis/ileitis and to perturb barrier function…shifts in microbiome composition…Despite some biologic plausibility, there is a paucity of data evaluating efficacy of fat-restrictive diet for IBD management.”
  • Vegetarian/semi-vegetarian: Potential deficiencies: iron, vitamin B12 (vegans), calcium, vitamin D, ω-3 fatty acids.   A small study of 22 patients with Crohn’s disease who adhered to a semi-vegetarian diet, had lower rate of relapse.  “There does not seem to be sufficient evidence at this time to recommend eliminating meat to patients with IBD as a means to control their disease.”
  • Modified ratio of ω-3/ω-6 polyunsaturated fat: “The efficacy of dietary interventions with ω-3 PUFA has been disappointing..recently, 2 large multicenter clinical trials demonstrated that ω-3 PUFA (fish oil) at a dose of 4 g/day was not significantly better than placebo at maintaining remission in CD.”

Restriction of Multiple food groups

  • Paleolithic: based on the “premise that human genetics have scarcely changed over the past 3000 years, and thus modern humans are genetically adapted to the diet of their Paleolithic ancestors (i.e. Stone Age)…daily calories should come from plant sources (50-65%) and from animal sources (35-45%) with fish preferred over meat.  Most of the restricted foods are carbohydrates..refined salt, and refined oils as well as any “processed foods.”  However, there are “no data that this diet has any effect in IBD.”  Previous reports of improvement in IBD are mainly testimonials (anecdotal evidence).
  • Exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN)/Elemental/Semielemental: In pediatric CD, “EEN has been shown to be as effective as corticosteroids in inducing remission (70-90%)..EEN does not seem to be effective in UC.”  High rate of relapse when diet is stopped.  Formula type does not seem to be very important.

Take-home message: “Clinical trials in all dietary strategies (with possible exception of EEN in pediatric patients) are lacking and further study is needed.” “From the current evidence available, a low FODMAPS or gluten-free diet may be the most helpful in controlling diarrheal and bloating symptoms…However, …symptom improvement does not equate to remission or objective evidence of disease regression.”

Related Blog Posts:

ImproveCareNow has published information on IBD and Nutrition as well.  Here’s an excerpt from their Circle eNewsletter:(initially published April 2013, Stacie Townsend, MS, RD, LDN, CSP)

Diet is an important part of your IBD treatment plan and should be used in conjunction with medications. Proper nutrition plays a critical role in managing IBD. Eating healthfully and in appropriate amounts will improve IBD symptoms, contribute to age-appropriate growth, and decrease risk of anemia, poor bone density, and vitamin/mineral deficiencies. It can also increase effectiveness of IBD medications.

No one diet has been proven to prevent IBD or to prevent flare ups, although several diet books and plans have claimed to “cure IBD”. Unfortunately, there is little scientific evidence to prove that these diet plans, such as the Specific Carbohydrate Diet (still being studied) and the Guts and Glory Program, are effective, and most of these plans avoid entire food groups, which can then lead to vitamin and mineral deficiencies and poor weight gain.

Nutritionists frequently get asked what foods are safe for people with IBD, and creating a diet plan for you is often trial and error… The best diet plan is one that includes all food groups (proteins, grains, fruits, vegetables, dairy, and oils) and in appropriate portions for your age, weight, and physical activity level… If gas, bloating, and diarrhea are among your symptoms, lactose free dairy products may be better tolerated.

So what IS the most appropriate diet for IBD? The United States Department of Agriculture’s food guidance system, MyPlate, is the appropriate diet plan for you… and the SuperTracker within the MyPlate website can help you track what you eat each day, and how your diet measures up to the recommended diet plan for you.

General nutrition guidelines for individuals with IBD include:

  • choose foods from all food groups
  • limit fried/fatty foods, caffeine and spicy foods, especially if these foods worsen symptoms of IBD
  • drink fluids at each meal to maintain hydration
  • consume a multivitamin daily to aid nutrient absorption
  • consume small frequent meals (eat every 2-3 hours while awake) if volume of foods at a meal is an issue

…If you want additional help with your diet, make an appointment to see our nutritionist.

Disclaimer: These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications/diets (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician/nutritionist.  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.

 

Head-to-Head: Capsule Endoscopy versus Colonoscopy

A recent study shows how useful capsule endoscopy (CE) can be in diagnosing Crohn disease (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 12: 609-15).  Congratulations to one of my partners, Dr. Stan Cohen, who is one of the authors.

This prospective study examined 80 patients with signs and/or symptoms of small-bowel Crohn disease (age, 10-65 years) who underwent CE, small-bowel follow-through (SBFT), and colonoscopy.

Presenting suggestive features included the following:

  • Diarrhea >6 weeks but less than 3 years
  • Abdominal pain >6 weeks but less than 3 years
  • Extraintestinal IBD manifestations: pyoderma gangrenosum, erythema nodosum, perianal disease, arthritis, aphthous stomatitis, and uveitis
  • Along with abnormal laboratory/clinical finding:
  1. positive inflammatory marker: sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, calprotectin/lactoferrin
  2. unexplained iron deficiency
  3. hypoalbuminemia
  4. positive IBD serology (eg. anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibodies)
  5. or other clinical findings: recurrent fevers, GI bleeding, growth failure, abnormal radiologic study

Results:

  • CE/colonoscopy in combination detected 107 of 110 inflammatory lesions (97.3%)
  • SBFT/colonoscopy detected 63 lesions (57.3%)
  • “The diagnostic yield of CE compared with colonoscopy was not different.”
  • Of the 80 patients with suspected Crohn disease, 25 (31.3%) had the diagnosis confirmed. 9 patients had diagnostic findings on at least 2 of the 3 modalities.  11 were diagnosed with CE alone and 5 by colonoscopy alone.

The authors conclude that colonoscopy remains the initial diagnostic test of choice.  However, “CE is safe and can establish the diagnosis of Crohn’s disease in patients when ileocolonoscopy results are negative or the terminal ileum cannot be evaluated.”

Take-home message: in patients with symptoms suggestive of Crohn disease, a negative colonoscopy is not sufficient to exclude the disease.  Other modalities like CE or MRE may be needed.

Related post:

Pediatric Capsule Endoscopy Experience

EXTEND & MUSIC: Optimizing Crohn Disease Care

As noted in recent posts (see links below), there is increased interest in showing direct mucosal healing and achieving optimal drug levels in controlling Crohn disease (CD).

  1. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014: 12: 414-422.
  2. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014: 12: 423-431.

The first study examines the rates of deep remission induced by adalimumab.  Deep remission is “defined as the absence of mucosal ulceration and CD Activity Index scores less than 150.”

Design: The data is derived from the EXTEND (EXTend the Safety and Efficacy of Adalimumab Through ENDoscopic Healing) trial.  EXTEND was a 52-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of adalimumab (ADA) for adults (n=135) with moderate to severe ileocolonic CD.  All patients received open-label induction with ADA (160/80 mg at weeks 0/2), then were randomized to ongoing ADA 40 mg every other week or placebo.

Results: Rates of DR were 16% in ADA patients compared with 10% of placebo-treated patients at week 12.  By week 52, 19% of ADA patients were in DR compared with 0% of placebo-treated patients.

Key findings:

  • Analysis showed that shorter disease duration was associated with DR.  One-third of patients with CD for <2 years achieved DR.
  • Patients with DR had better outcomes than those with only mucosal healing (n=8); those with isolated clinical remission (n=19, no mucosal healing), but not DR, had similar outcomes to those with DR.  The associated editorial (pg 432) notes “symptoms will still make patients go to the emergency department, or miss work, or feel miserable, regardless of how good their mucosa looks.”
  • The authors state that during the 40 weeks after early CR, “estimated savings were $6117 for direct medical costs and $4243 for indirect costs” (total $10,360).  This monetary savings may not be offset in clinical practice by ileocolonoscopy which is not only invasive but also expensive.

Conclusion (from the authors): “Before any recommendation to adopt DR as a treatment target, establishing a clear association between achievement of DR and better long-term prognosis is necessary.”  The editorial advises against adopting DR as a treatment goal: “combining symptoms and mucosal healing into 1 end-point should be reconsidered as a measure of response to anti-inflammatory therapies.”

The second study, referenced above, examined plasma concentrations of certolizumab pegol (CZP) and endoscopic outcomes of patients with Crohn disease.

Design: The authors analyzed data (post hoc analysis) from the MUSIC (The Endoscopic MUcoSal Improvement in Patients with Active CD Treated with CZP) study. Adult patients received subcutaneous CZP (400 mg) at weeks 0, 2, and 4 followed by every 4 week treatment for 52 weeks.  Endoscopic evaluation took place at weeks 0, 10, and 54 and CZP concentrations were measured at weeks 8 and 54. At week 10, there were 45 patients analyzed and at week 54, 18 patients.

Key findings:

  • Mean CZP concentrations: 11.1 mcg/mL at week 8 (4 weeks after previous dosing) and 14.9 mcg/mL at week 54 (2 weeks after previous dosing).
  • Higher CZP concentration (by quartile values) correlated with endoscopic response (P=.0016) and remission (P=.0302) at week 10.
  • Among those with the highest CZP values, their 8-week CDEIS (CD Endoscopic Index of Severity) remission rate was 75% (12/16).  Overall, CDEIS remission was noted in 56% (25/45) at week 8.
  • At week 54, endoscopic remission correlated with plasma CZP values (P=.0206).
  • Both high CRP and high body weight inversely correlated with CZP concentrations.

Conclusion from this study: As with other anti-TNF agents, higher serum levels were associated with mucosal healing.  However, the data do not prove causality.  “It is possible that higher trough concentrations at week 8 may be a consequence of mucosal healing” rather than the reverse.

Bottomline: These two studies together show that achieving optimal long-term response correlates with therapeutic drug levels and mucosal healing.  At the same time, these studies along with many other indicate that we have along way to go in order for us to achieve these objectives consistently.

Related blog posts:

 

Digging into the COMMIT Study

“Lies, damned lies, and statistics” –Mark Twain (who attributed this quote to Benjamin Disraeli)

Using statistics, the recent COMMIT study (Gastroenterol 2014; 146: 681-88) showed that the combination therapy of methotrexate (MTX) and infliximab (IFX) was not more effective than IFX alone. Does this result makes sense? No.

Before getting back to that question, here’s the background: this 50-week study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with patients assigned to either methotrexate at dose escalated gradually to 25 mg/week (n=63) or placebo (n=62); both groups received a prednisone induction (with tapering starting at week 1) along with IFX (5 mg/kg) at weeks 1, 3, 7, 14, 22, 30, 38, and 46.  Remission was considered to be a CD Activity Index (CDAI) of <150 in individuals off prednisone.  The patients enrolled in this study were on average about 40 years of age and had similar baseline characteristics, including disease duration of more 9 years.

Amazing to me was the fact that nearly 40% of both the treatment and control group included current smokers (since smoking clearly worsens CD).

Key Results:

  • Combination therapy resulted in fewer antibodies to IFX (ATIs): 4% vs. 20% (P=.01)
  • Combination therapy resulted in higher IFX trough levels: 6.35 mcg/mL vs. 3.75 mcg/mL (P=.08); the proportion with detectable trough levels was also higher in the combination group: 52% compared with 46%.
  • Safety was similar.  “No clinically relevant hepatotoxicity was identified.” However, 14 patients did experience an increase in liver enzymes. Infusion-related reactions were infrequent: 1 in combination group, and 3 in IFX monotherapy.
  • At week 14, 76% of combination group achieved prednisone-free remission and 78% of IFX monotherapy.  At week 50, these numbers were 56% and 57% respectively.

Getting back to the question about why this does not add up as a negative study –the combination group had lower ATIs and better IFX drug levels, this usually translates into better response.  As such, the limitations of this study deserve to be scrutinized:

  • Relatively small numbers of patients
  • Objective markers like colonoscopy were not included
  • Short duration of study period.  While a 1 year study is not really all that short, some benefits of medications can take a longer time to appreciate
  • Prednisone induction may have obscured MTX benefit
  • Treatment group had long duration of disease.  Those with shorter disease duration may have a more inflammatory component to their disease and respond more favorably.

Bottomline: this study showed that the combination of MTX/IFX was not statistically-superior to IFX alone.  Given the favorable benefit on ATIs and IFX drug levels, MTX combination may still be useful, particularly in those with more recent onset of IBD.

Plus One More Reference:

Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 12: 434-42.  This retrospective study of 425 patients (1975-2012) examined features associated with failure of medical treatment. “Patients prescribed thiopurine or anti-TNF therapy when they have a complicated stage of CD are more likely to require surgery.  Better patient outcomes are achieved by treating CD at early inflammation stages.”

Related blog entries:

 

 

Cannabis: Feel better, Worse Crohn Disease

To my amazement, the Georgia legislature has voted to eliminate all speed limits for those individuals with a gun permit.  After all, if you need a gun for self-defense, you might need to get somewhere quick to use it.  In addition, they have mandated that all dictionaries sold in the state to list “Obamacare” as an official synonym for the word “evil.”

The first part of this post is in jest. Today’s post is not all fiction:

While cannabis is not a frequent pediatric GI issue, it has received a lot of press of late.    A recent article has shown that cannabis is associated with worse disease prognosis in Crohn disease despite symptom relief (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2014; 20: 472-80).

Design: 313 consecutive patients (69% response of initial 461 distributed questionnaires) seen in Calgary (2008-2009) completed a structured anonymous questionnaire.  Subjects who had taken cannabis for IBD symptom relief were compared with those who had not.  Cannabis user had a mean age of 36.6 yrs compared with 40.2 yrs for nonusers.

Key findings:

  • Cannabis had been used by 17.6% of respondents to relieve IBD symptoms, mostly by inhalation (96%).  It reportedly improved abdominal pain, joint pain, and diarrhea.
  • The use of cannabis for more than 6 months at any time for IBD symptoms was a strong predictor of requiring surgery (odds ratio =5.03) after controlling for other demographic factors including tobacco smoking.

Limitations:

  1. Questionnaire honesty, though authors indicate several reasons why the number of cannabis users is likely fairly accurate.
  2. Previous surgery was higher in the cannabis users.  It is possible that patients with greater disease severity take cannabis more frequently; in this situation, cannabis would be a marker of disease severity rather than a potentially causative factor.
  3. The average patient had long-standing disease, >13 years.  Cannabis could potentially be more helpful (or less harmful) at an earlier inflammatory stage.

The study findings are in contrast to a small study previously reviewed on this blog which indicated that cannabis may improve Crohn disease: Crohn’s Research: Going to Pot | gutsandgrowth.

Take home message: For those of you planning to move to Colorado, cannabis does not cure all ills.  In this single center, tertiary care study, it was associated with a worse prognosis in adults with Crohn disease.

Second-Guessing Aggressive Medical Treatment in Pediatrics

An excerpt of a review of a recent study (Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2014;20:291-300.) from Healio Gastro, http://bit.ly/1njexRZ.  This study was briefly referenced at the bottom of a previous blog post (UC SUCCESS | gutsandgrowth).

Mortality and malignancy, the most serious complications of pediatric inflammatory bowel disease, were relatively rare and linked most commonly with aggressive treatment rather than the condition itself, according to recent study data.

In a multinational retrospective study, researchers surveyed all pediatric gastroenterologists in 20 European countries and Israel on cancer and/or mortality among their pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease (PIBD) from 2006 to 2011.

Among 44 children diagnosed with IBD (median age at diagnosis, 10 years; 26 boys), 18 cases of cancer were identified and/or 31 patients died. Twelve cancer patients had Crohn’s disease, and 19 patients who died had ulcerative colitis (UC). The most common cancers were hematopoietic tumors (n=11). Mortality was attributed to infections (n=14) and other causes, including cancer (n=5), uncontrollable disease activity related to IBD (n=4) and procedural complications (n=3).

“Cancer and mortality in PIBD are rare, but cumulative rates are not insignificant,” the researchers wrote. “…. At least six lymphomas were likely treatment-associated by virtue of their phenotype.”

Researchers said that aggressive therapy with immunosuppressants and biologics has become common among PIBD patients because their disease is often more severe than that found in adults with IBD…

“Nine out of 19 patients with UC died because of an infectious complication. These fatalities may have been prevented by earlier surgical intervention when intensified medical treatment is ineffective.”

Bottomline: Making a colectomy decision is quite difficult when medical therapies may be effective.  Recent guidelines using PUCAI scores may assist physicians in identifying medical failures more quickly.

 

CCFA Conference Notes 2014 (part 2)

Yesterday’s notes highlighted the most useful discussion at this year’s meeting regarding mucosal healing (MH) in inflammatory bowel disease.

Many points were intriguing but often at odds. For example, the speakers noted that symptoms and scoring systems like CDAI are unreliable in establishing remission.  It was noted that the FDA is mandating more objective measures (like endoscopic improvement) in future studies. Yet, the studies cited for their arguments often were derived from studies which did not use objective endpoints. Similarly, some of the arguments were based on small studies and yet experts often caution to use evidence-based medicine.

Bo Shen (Cleveland Clinic) “Surgerical Options in IBD”

  • 50-71% of CD patients require some type of surgery within 10 years of diagnosis
  • End-ileostomy may be a cure for some CD patients,  For UC, end-ileostomy 98% are cured.  2% develop enteritis.
  • Can use infliximab after surgery.  Immune system different after surgery and may work even
  • ‘Don’t operate until a CD patient develops a complication. But, don’t wait until further complications develop.’

Different type strictures –web-like strictures are suitable for dilatation, others are more difficult: spindle-like (longer) , ulcerated stricture, and anastomotic.

  • Classification: Gast Endosc 2013; 78: 8181-35.
  • Etiology: primary, secondary (anastomotic), benign, malignant
  • Short-long: Length (<4cm) if dilating
  • Degree: high-grade, low-grade
  • Number: single, multiple
  • Associated conditions: abscess, others

Determining resection margin –does not depends on absence of histologic activity (Ann Surg 1996; 224: 563-71).  Try to save as much bowel as possible, often based on how thick bowel is rather than histologic margins.

Save the gut –stricturoplasty.  1st surgery –usually is a resection rather than stricture plasty.  Heineke-Mikulicz (most common) <10 cm for short , Finney for strictures 10-20 cm, Michelassi >20 cm (sid-to-side isoperistaltic). (Dis Colon Rectum 2007) Stricturoplasty –best for mid small bowel, minimum inflammation, no fistula

Fistula –Hollow-organ to hollow-organ fistula –treat surgically. Whereas if fistula is perianal, start with medical treatment. Perianal fistulas often treated with seton; seton often kept in place for a long time (“forever if not bothering patient”).

Abscess—avoid surgical drainage if possible.  Delineate anatomy and consider elective surgery later.  If less than 3 cm, could aspirate and not leave in drain. If >3 cm, start with interventional radiology

Post-op management –Ruttgerts score.  Rescope 6 months post-op to determine if needs more aggressive treatment.

UC Surgery: issues: preoperative biologics, 2- or 3-stage operations, what type of pouch

  • There may be increased risk with biologics (studies have not shown this consistently) –depends on type of surgery.  If very sick, use 3-stage rather than 2-stage operation.  Don’t do pouch at time of 1st operation if very sick DCR 2013; 56: 1243-52).
  • J-pouch now standard.  Kock pouch –catheterize pouch/no ostomy.  S-pouch –problemswith mechanical obstruction.
  • Even with mucosectomy (vs. stapler/no mucosectomy)–can still develop cuffitis and malignancy.  Mucosectomy may increase risk of incontinence.

Edward Loftus (Mayo Clinic) “Optimizing Biologic Therapy: Maximizing Benefit and Minimizing Risk”

Is azathioprine an effective drug? Should we be using biologics sooner?

Key points:

  • ACT1 and ACT2 were pivotal studies for infliximab approval for UC.  1/3rd chance of going into full remission, 1/3rd chance of response, 1/3rd chance of not responding.  Infliximab lowers risk of colectomy.  Favorable studies of other anti-TNFs as well: adalimumab (Gastroenterol 2012; 142: 257-65) and golimumab (Gastroenterol 2014; 46: 85-95 & 96-109). No head-to-head anti-TNF trials.
  • Crohn disease:  5-ASA products don’t work for Crohn disease.  Reviewed pivotal trials of anti-TNF agents (infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab)-30% in remission.
  • Natalizumab (anti-alpha 4 integrin) for refractory disease was discussed (NEJM 2005; 353: 1912-25).  Takes longer to work then anti-TNFs but maintenance data look good. PML risk: 395 cases among 118,100 patients treated as of August 2013.  Lots of paperwork and physicians have to be certified.  If you are JC virus serology is negative, “your risk is about 1 in one million in the next year. If you are positive, about a 1% risk in the following year.”
  • Azathioprine (AZA) not very effective (Gastroenterol 2013; 145: 766-74 & 758-65).  Prospective double-blind Spanish study (n=131) –no statitistical benefit.  2nd reference is French study. N=132. No significant difference at 36 months in patients with added AZA.  In U.S., most “thought leaders” going straight to anti-TNFs.
  • Combination therapy works best in adults (SONIC study for Crohn disease, UC Success for UC).  UC Success only studied 16 weeks, no maintenance therapy trial.  However, methotrexate (MTX) with anti-TNFs combination has not been proven to be effective (Gastroenterol 2014; 146: 681-8).  Reason this was a negative study, per lead author, may have been related to steroid use.

Other pointers:

  • Don’t rely on symptoms alone.  Symptoms/CDAI do not correlate with CDEIS (endoscopic improvement).  FDA mandating all future trials have an endoscopic endpoint and not rely on use of CDAI alone. Other factors cause symptoms including IBS, infections, and bacterial overgrowth. Take-home point: Need to look (endoscopy) if someone is not doing well.
  • In the SONIC trial –if there was inflammation on endoscopy, there was an impressive 30% delta in response to treatment (with combination therapy compared with AZA monotherapy). Whereas if you have no lesions, combination therapy no more effective than either monotherapy agent.  Patients whose complaints are due to irritable bowel rather than inflammation do not respond well to treatment.
  • OLD paradigm –treat based on symptoms.  NEW paradigm–treat based on biologic/radiographic markers or endoscopic findings.  “Treat to target” has been approach used by Dr. Sandborn. Target mucosal healing and then assess mucosal healing every 6 months until target achieved, then less frequently.  Yet mucosal healing cannot be achieved in many/most patients.
  • Therapeutic drug monitoring.  For example, 6-TGN >235 associated with better response to AZA (OR 5.0)
  • Pharmacokinetics of anti-TNFs: lower clearance if concomitant use of immunomodulators, increased clearance if high CRP, higher BMI
  • New drugs: Ustekinumab –three phase 3 trials underway.  Should be available in about 2 yrs for Crohn disease. Vedolizumab –under FDA review (NEJM 2013; 369: 699-710).  Infusion (similar to remicade frequency). Blocks lymphocyte homing in the gut. UC data much more robust than with CD, but probably will be approved for both.  Rate of adverse events were low. Etrolizumab—similar to Vedolizumab, but SC administered. Currently, this drug is in phase 2 studies.

Eva Szigethy (Pittsburgh Pediatrics) “Psychological evaluation and assessment in IBD”

Key points:

  • Anxiety/depression ~25-40% of pediatric IBD.  Occurs in both active and inactive disease.
  • IBD effects on brain: inflammation, drugs (steroids, biologics)–both have direct effects on brain.
  • 15% of kids and 25% of adults are having thoughts of death on screening tools. Pain is frequent trigger for suicidal thoughts.
  • Simple depression screen: Mood, Energy, Sleep, Suicide/Self-esteem, Anhedonia (lack of pleaure), Guilt, Eating (change in appetite)
  • We should not ignore adjustment disorders.  We may be able to prevent a full-blown psychiatric disorder.  Each time we let problems like anxiety or depression go untreated, this can leave long-term changes in brain.
  • Anxiety screen: Tense, Tired, Recurrent worries/fear, Restless, Avoidance, Poor sleep/nightmares, Poor concentration
  • Important to look at patient perspective of their disease: identity (what they see as their symptoms), cause/etiology, timeline (how long the patient believes that the illness will last), consequences, cure/control.
  • Catastrophizing –more persistent pain and increased visceral hyperalgesia.  Abnormal brain activation. Poor coping drives development of depression and anxiety.
  • With adult IBD, 20% of patients consume up to 80% of medical costs.  Chronic pain and depression are key factors (Binion et al 2010).
  • Management of anxiety/depression: Cognitive Behavioral therapy –changing behaviors and thinking, problem-solving. ACT –activities, calm (relaxation, guided imagery, hypnosis), think positive (cognitive reframing). Antidepressants: TCA, SSRI, SNRI.  SSRI/SNRI –few side effects or drug interactions.  Overdose risk is highest with TCA (but typically using low doses of these agents).  No pediatric studies in IBD and only small studies in adults. If inactive IBD, SSRI often 1st line. If active IBD, Bupropion often used as 1st line.
  • For anxiety, most likely use SSRI if comorbid anxiety
  • For pain, most likely use SNRI  or low dose TCA
  • Opiates are problematic due to psychological/physical dependence, increased mortality/infection risk, narcotic bowel
  • Sleep –don’t go to bed if not tired, aim for consistency, if not asleep in 20 minutes, then do something else.  1st line pharmacology: consider antihistamines or melatonin.

Sachin Kunde (Michigan State University, Helen DeVos Children’s Hospital) “FMT for IBD”

Key points:

  • Microbial diversity altered in IBD –can we modulate dysbiosis to treat IBD?
  • Issues with cause and effect.  Is dysbiosis due to IBD or causing IBD.
  • FMT –“the ultimate probiotic.” Application of FMT.  For recurrent C difficile, cure rate nearly 90% –?better with lower GI route. For any indication besides C difficile infection (CDI), can only be given through clinical trials (FDA IND).  Currently 9 ongoing trials for IBD (1 pediatric, 3 in U.S).

FMT in IBD: Studies:

  1. -Anderson et al.  Aliment Phar Ther 2012: 13/18 without CDI had some resolution of IBD symptoms.
  2. -Kunde et al JPGN 2013: n=10. PUCAI decrease by 15 indicated response found in 78% (7/9) at 1 week, and 67% (6/9) at 1 month, 3 (33%) went into remission.
  3. -Kump et al IBD 2013: n=6. FMT for UC was not effective.  Transient improvement in 2/6 patients, 1/6 improved on Mayo sub score.

Bottomline for FMT & IBD: More questions than answers: efficacy, route of administration, # of infusions needed, fresh vs. frozen, adverse effects, best donor, etc.

For today’s post today and yesterday’s post, I may have made some transcription errors and these notes were not reviewed with the speakers.  Also, due to brevity, some useful information was not included.  Thus, the disclaimer with these posts is particularly important.

Disclaimer: These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  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.

Related blog posts:

CCFA Conference Notes 2014 (part 1)

Each year our local CCFA chapter holds a one day seminar with separate lectures for health care providers and families.  Overall, it is a good opportunity to hear ‘cutting edge’ material.  I did not pick up as much at this year’s seminar as in previous years, but will highlight what I thought was most important.

Key points:

  1. Symptoms are not accurate at determining effectiveness of IBD therapy.
  2. More frequent use of objective markers are needed to optimize treatment.  Mucosal healing is starting to be a target in clinical practice, but limited by number of medications available.
  3. Stricture classification and operative techniques were reviewed.
  4. IBD frequently results in psychological problems: anxiety, depression, pain, sleep. 15% of kids and 25% of adults are having thoughts of death on screening tool intake.
  5. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) –not enough data to recommend for IBD.  Clinical trials ongoing.

Debate: What should be the End Points in Therapy? 

  • Tanvi Dhere (Emory): Goal: clinical symptoms
  • Cary Sauer (Emory Pediatrics): Goal: mucosal healing and normal bloodwork

In my opinion, this was the most thought-provoking and best presentation

Mucosal healing (MH) consensus definition –normal mucosa after previously abnormal with complete absence of ulceration, macroscopic and histologic signs of inflammation.  In practice MH = absence of ulcerations.

Reasons why mucosal healing as a target is problematic:

  • Problems with MH –not validated.  No long-term data utilizing endoscopic scoring indices of MH.
  • MH relies on a binomial endpoint –Yes or no, but there may be intermediate endpoints.
  • How likely is MH (different definitions in these studies)?  SONIC –MH in 43.9% of combination Rx (30.1% in those with infliximab monotherapy); EXTEND (Adalimumab) 27% and 24.2% 12/52 weeks; MUSIC (certolizumab at 10/54 weeks) 11.5% and 18.9%.

In practice, Mayo Score 0-1 both considered to have MH.

MayoScore Visual

Images above online at www.nature.com

In small study, MH at 1 year were not associated with improved outcomes at 5 years.  Risks of MH: more procedures, more costs of treatment, and potential for more complications.

Dr. Sauer’s reply.  Three simple questions –why should I try to target MH, is it possible, what is needed to get this done?

  1. If the goal were only an asymptomatic patient – why do screening colonoscopy in the general population, much less in IBD?
  2. In IBD, long-term evolution of IBD (Cosnes J et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2002 Jul;8(4):244-50) is toward structuring and penetrating disease. CD Evolution This needs to be modified if possible.

Why MH? Improved symptoms, better quality of life, less likely to develop colon cancer, and it is an objective measure of treatment response.

  • In MH patients, less steroids and fewer flares over 2 year period.
  • MH healing patients have sustained clinical benefit over 96 months.
  • With MH, there is a decreased colectomy in UC.  In one study, there was a lower  colectomy rate at 8 years if colonic CD (62% vs 8%), decreased steroids in CD, decreased hospitalizations, & decreased fistulae.

Is MH possible in clinical practice?  The accuracy of CDAI to detect endoscopic healing is low in patients with CD. (Bouguen G et al Clin Gastrohep 2014).  More frequent adjustments in medical therapy –could lead to MH in up to 80% over 80 week study period.  Same story in UC (Bouguen G et al IBD 2014).

What do I need to do to obtain MH? Endoscopy (or MRE), maximize medications (checking levels), change medications, and most important –set a target. “Adjusting infliximab dose alone could lead to MH in up to 60%.”

When to assess for MH?  Consider endoscopy at 6 months into treatment if symptoms and at 12 months if in clinical remission.

Other viewpoints on MH from panel:

Dr. Loftus –“I think of this like oncology.” He agreed with using the best evaluating tool 6 months into treatment.  Cross-sectional imaging is often more helpful, but may need more than one tool.

Dr. Long—“Are we going to check every 6 months?” No.  She stated that she does not do this and tries to avoid repeated endoscopic procedures if this will not change treatment.  Goal is to make sure patient is headed in right direction, often after starting therapy.  Dr. Long stated that stool biomarkers most useful for colonic disease.

Dr. Dhere—documenting MH is important for deescalating treatment.

Millie Long  “Quality of Care in IBD”

  • 75% of Crohn disease patients will need surgery, 10% in 1st year
  • “One way to gauge quality of care is to examine the degree of consistency in care”
  • High variability in care in IBD (Aliment Pham Ther 2007; 26: 1005-18)
  • “Over half of institutions with worst quality have mortality in normal range.” Outcomes may not occur until several years after treatment, thus more useful to measure process measures

PQRS IBD Quality Measures in Adults: 10 Measures

  • #1 Establishing/documenting IBD type, anatomic location, and activity
  • #2 Preventive care: corticosteroid sparing.  Steroids associated with mortality (OR 2.1 in TREAT registry)
  • #3 Preventive care:  Preventing bone loss.  Limiting steroid use.  Recommend weight-bearing exercise, Quit Smoking, Measure DEXA, added Calicum/Vit D/Bisphosphonates
  • #4: Vaccination –pneumococcal vaccine.  Avoid live virus vaccines
  • #5 Vaccination –influenza vaccine, zoster vaccine
  • #6 Testing for latent TB prior to anti-TNF
  • #7 Testing for hepatitis B virus
  • #8 Testing for C diff with patients hospitalized with IBD
  • #9 VTE prophylaxis in adult IBD patients.  Risk assessment on admission to hospital is recommended.  IBD patients have 1.5-3.5-fold higher risk of VTE àwhich can increase mortality risk
  • #10 Screening for tobacco.  Tobacco use after surgery increases recurrence by 2.5-fold.  It also increases risk for reoperation.

Last year’s notes:

Disclaimer: These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  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.