Category Archives: Pediatric Gastroenterology Intestinal Disorder

Time Will Tell: Granulomatous Upper GI Inflammation

Posted on by

A recent retrospective study (K Queliza et al. JPGN 2018; 66: 620-23) describes seven patients with granulomatous disease in the upper GI tract who were diagnosed with ulcerative colitis.

This study examined patients at a single center between 2007-2016 with ages ranging from 2 years to 17 years.  Median time of followup is not provided.  Two patients required colectomy.  All patients had non-casseating granulomas identified in either the stomach or duodenum (or both) along with moderate to severe pancolitis.  All of the patients had extensive investigations, generally cross-sectional imaging (MRE or CT) or capsule endoscopy

Key point::

  • “The final classification of IBD was based on expert opinion from gastroenterologists, radiologists, and pathologists upon thorough review of the medical records.”

My take: This study highlights the confusion of the essentially binary classification of IBD into either Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis, when in fact there are hundreds of genetic mutations which give rise to inflammatory bowel disease.  Given that granulomas are a hallmark of Crohn’s disease and there are no pathognomic features of ulcerative colitis, only time will tell if these patients have an ulcerative colitis phenotype.  I wonder how many centers would take exception to this classification and describe these patients as ‘indeterminate’ colitis/IBDU (IBD unclassified).

Related blog posts:

Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Associated with Increased Necrotizing Enterocolitis in Observational Study

Posted on by

A recent retrospective study (AF Kane et al. J Pediatr 2018; 195: 73-9) with 640 VLBW infants found that the probiobiotic, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG), was associated with an increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC).

LGG supplementation was started at a median age of 6 days at a dose of 2.5 to 5 x 10 to the 9th CFU/day.

Key finding:

  • LGG group had an aOR of 2.10 for developing NEC.  LGG group NEC incidence was 16.8% whereas NEC incidence was 10.2% prior to institution of LGG.

The authors note their findings are in contrast to findings from 38 randomized trials (10,520) which have found that probiotics lowered the risk of NEC.

My take: This study reinforces the need for further studies to identify which factors and probiotic strains are likely to lead to reduced rates of NEC.

Related blog posts:

Joint Mobility –Not Associated with Increased Functional GI Disorders

Posted on by

According to a recent study (M Saps et al. JPGN 2018; 66: 387-90), joint hypermobility is not associated with an increased risk of functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs).

From a school-based study of 654 children from a public school in Cali, Columbia, 148 (22.6%) were identified as having an FGID. Among this group, 136 children participated in the study along with 136 age/sex-matched healthy controls. Joint laxity was assessed to establish a Beighton score.

Key finding:

  • There was no significant difference in joint laxity between the FGID group and the control group, with OR of 1.03.

The implication of this study is that previous associations between joint hypermobility (JH) and FGIDs could be due to selection bias at tertiary care centers.  Alternatively, “it is possible that the association between FGIDs and JH exists, but it is only limited to a subset of patients that consult at specialized clinics.”

My take: This article challenges the idea that JH increases the risk of FGID.  Based on this study, if JH is a risk factor, it is hard to detect in a general population.

Related blog post:

 

Amber Cove, Dominican Republic

Vedozlizumab -Detectable in Breastmilk

Posted on by

A recent correspondence (M Julsgaard et al.Gastroenterol 2018; 154: 752-65) shows that vedolizumab is detectable in varying concentrations in breastmilk.  The authors collected samples from 5 mothers who were receiving vedolizumab (VDZ) for inflammatory bowel disease.

Key findings:

  • Peak VDZ concentration in breastmilk was 0.318 mcg/mL which was 1/179th of the corresponding concentration of the maternal serum levels.
  • The authors calculated a maximum oral dose of 0.048 mg/kg/day for breastfed infants based on this peak level. “This minute quantity is furthermore anticipated to undergo proteolysis in the stomach” and be bound/excreted in GI tract.
  • VDZ was detectable in all samples for 30 minutes prior to infusion (trough) through 14 days.

This study is in agreement with another study showing that levels in the breastmilk were minute (~1/100) of serum levels (A Lahat et al. J Crohns Colitis. 2018 Jan 5;12(1):120-123).

My take: These are low levels of VDZ –nevertheless further monitoring of infants to determine conclusively whether VDZ enterally causes any adverse effects is warranted.

Views from Mike O’Callahan -Pat Tillman Bridge

 

Pediatric Home and Office Biologic Infusions -What is Needed

Posted on by

A recent clinical report (E Barfield et al. JPGN 2018; 66: 680-86) will be influential.  This guideline is from the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.  Congratulations to my partner, Chelly Dykes, who is one of the coauthors.

Full text: Assuring Quality for Non-Hospital Based Biologic Infusions in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Clinical Report from the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition

For many years, our office has had an office-based infusion center which has provided infusions in a safe and cost-effective manner.  Recently, there have been some situations in which home-based infusions have been proposed either to lower costs and/or for convenience.  This report succinctly describes the hurdles that need to be addressed before recommending this treatment pathway. As noted below, patient safety encompasses a great deal more than infusion reactions. Delays in infusions (which can increase risk of loss of response) due to reactions and lapses in communication are additional issues.

Recommendation 1: Home- or office-based infusions should ensure safe administration of the biologic infusion, provide reliable execution of infusion-related orders (eg, laboratories for therapeutic drug monitoring, dose optimization protocols, etc), and be equipped to recognize and respond to potential complications.

  • Infusion reactions:  ” Infusion reactions associated with infliximab and vedolizumab can range from mild reactions such as fever and chills, dyspnea, pruritus, or urticaria (in approximately 5%–10%), to severe reactions including anaphylaxis, convulsions, and hypotension (<1%)”
  • Emergencies: “In the event of an urgent or emergent reaction during home- or office-based infusions, the in-home services agency (IHSA) nurse needs to be able to contact the appropriate ordering medical team member expeditiously by phone or pager to review/clarify specific concerns or needs to have an established clear policy on how to proceed with managing the reaction.” 
  • Communication: “We identified the lack or inconsistency of on-call coverage by the primary medical team when home- or office-based infusions occur as a significant barrier to safely initiating or continuing home- or office-based infusion programs. Difficulty in reaching a knowledgeable team member is a breach in reliable care and represents serious patient risk.”
  • Related work: “In addition to administering the biologic infusion, executing all other infusion-related orders is an important safety consideration. Implementing unique home infusion protocols is linked to treatment efficacy.”  

Recommendation 2: Pediatric home- or office-based infusions, particularly for patients 12 years and younger, should be staffed by a pediatric nurse professional with Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) certification and clinical experience with pediatric patients.

Recommendation 3: Evidence-based standard of care for biologic therapy maximizing effectiveness and treatment sustainability should be established before initiating home or office-based infusions.

Recommendation 4: Home- or office-based infusion pathways that decrease opportunity loss for patients and families and deliver high-quality, patient-centered care should be supported and reproduced.

Recommendation 5: Pediatric gastroenterologists should ensure appropriate shared liability with IHSAs to deliver high-quality care in home-based infusions for children by executing pragmatic steps as outlined below:

  1. “Document discussion with the patient and family about the indication, risks, and adverse event management …
  2. Refer the patient to an accredited, licensed IHSA based on patient’s insurance coverage. If no accredited, licensed IHSA for the pediatric patient exists, this is grounds for not initiating home- or office-based infusions…
  3. & 4. Use an infusion protocol… with clear directives on recognition of signs/symptoms of reactions and administration of reaction medications and use of EMS or parent transport to an emergency room.
  4. Maintain accurate documentation and communication of therapy type, dose, and frequency.
  5. Provide a reliable communication mechanism for the IHSA to notify provider of changes or infusion-related events
  6. Regularly reviewing ongoing IHSA performance with regard to delivery of services, accurate laboratory ordering and turnaround time, safety and quality concerns and timely redressal of these issues.
  7. Switch to another IHSA if the performance reliability is unsatisfactory. …we acknowledge that changing IHSAs may be difficult.”

Recommendation 6: A more equitable division of labor should be established to offset increased administrative burden placed on the pediatric gastroenterologist and medical team to effectively facilitate and maintain home- or office-based infusions, especially when driven by payer-mandated policies.

Recommendation 7: …Among patients receiving home- or office-based infusions, unreliable follow-up care with the provider as scheduled is grounds for discontinuation of home- or office-based biologic therapy.

Recommendation 8: A proper appeals process should be in place to prevent cost transference from payer to patient in payer-mandated decisions for home- or office-based infusions.

Our office practice:

  • Emergencies: In our office, there is always one physician dedicated to being available to assess patients who are receiving infusions.  This helps insure safety and in addition, helps to make sure that minor medical problems do not needlessly postpone important treatment.
  • Documentation: With our office-based infusions, each infusion is documented by the administering nurse.  This documentation along with labs are embedded in the medical record (EPIC) to help modify treatment.
  • Communication: In our office, prior to each infusion, each patient’s chart is reviewed and specific orders are given.  This assures that needed blood tests/imaging, additional treatments (eg. iron infusion), insurance authorizations, necessary followup, and personalized adjustments are made.  This type of communication needs to be replicated for home-based infusions; hence, the use of home-based infusions could result in a huge increase in uncompensated work for the treating physician.

My take: In my experience, office-based infusions can be provided safely and in a cost-effective manner.  While the convenience of home-based infusion is desirable, before implementing broadly, issues regarding communication, safety protocols, and documentation to allow modifications in therapy need to be proactively addressed. Families may not realize some of the complexities involved in managing infusions and how these issues could affect their child’s long-term response to biologic therapy.

Related blog posts:

The following image relates to another convenience-related health trend:

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.

Do Acid Blockers Given to Infants Increase the Risk of Allergic Disease?

Posted on by

A recent retrospective study (Mitre E, et al. JAMA Pediatr. 2018;doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.0315) suggests that acid blockers, both histamine receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors increase the risk of developing allergic disease.  Since this is a retrospective study, this association with allergic diseases has NOT been proven to have a causal relationship; thus, an alternative explanation would be that infants who are likely to develop allergic diseases could be prescribed these agents more frequently due to symptoms attributed to reflux.

Here is an excerpt from a summary of this study (from Healio):  Acid-suppressor, antibiotic use in infancy tied to later allergic disease

Of the 792,130 children included in the study (49.9% female), 7.6% were prescribed a histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) and 1.7% were prescribed a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) within the first 6 months of life. Antibiotics also were prescribed for 16.6% of infants included in the study during this time. Mitre and colleagues noted that data continued to be collected on these infants for a median of 4.6 years…

When children were prescribed an H2RA, the researchers noted adjusted HRs of 2.18 (95% CI, 2.04-2.33) for food allergy, 1.70 (95% CI, 1.60-1.80) for medication allergy, 1.51 (95% CI, 1.38-1.66) for anaphylaxis, 1.50 (95% CI, 1.46-1.54) for allergic rhinitis and 1.25 (95% CI, 1.21-1.29) for asthma.

Infants who were prescribed PPIs had comparable aHRs, which the researchers observed at 2.59 (95% CI, 2.25-3.00) for food allergy, 1.84 (95% CI, 1.56-2.17) for medication allergy, 1.45 (95% CI, 1.22-1.73) for anaphylaxis and 1.44 (95% CI, 1.36-1.52) for asthma.

Mitre and colleagues also calculated the aHRs related to later allergic disease in children who were prescribed antibiotics within the first 6 months of life. They observed these rates at 2.09 (95% CI, 2.05-2.13) for asthma, 1.75 (95% CI, 1.72-1.78) for allergic rhinitis, 1.51 (95% CI, 1.38-1.66) for anaphylaxis and 1.42 (95% CI, 1.34-1.50) for allergic conjunctivitis.

My take: This study is another reminder that these agents may be more detrimental than beneficial in the vast majority of infants.

Related blog post:

Interchangeability, Immunogenecity and Infliximab Biosimilars

Posted on by

A recent study (G Fiorino et al. IBD 2018; 24: 601-6, editorial by KH Katsanos et al 465-6) provides more data on “full interchangeability” in regards to infliximab (IFX) and biosimilars CT-P13 and SB2. Full abstract below.

Key finding in study:

  • Antibodies to infliximab (ATI) cross-reacted with any type of IFX or IFX-biosimilar

Points from the editorial:

  • “The landmark NOR-SWITCH randomized controlled trial showed that 1-time switching from RMC [Remicade] to CT-P13 is not inferior to continued treatment with the infliximab originator…there are no data regarding multiple switches…Consequently, cross-switching (switching between 2 biosimilars), reverse switching (switching from biosimilar to its originator) or multiple/repeated switching is not currently recommended.”
  • This study, however, shows that “if you have already developed antibodies to 1 infliximab product, there is no point in switching to another infliximab product.”

Abstract:

Background: Infliximab (IFX) biosimilars CT-P13 and SB2 have comparable efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity to the originator Remicade (RMC). However, concerns about cross-switching patients between the 3 brands were raised in the absence of cross reactivity data between them. We aimed to determine whether antibodies to infliximab (ATI) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients cross-react with RMC, CT-P13, and SB2.

Methods: Based on previous ATI status, samples from 34 patients participating in the BIOSIM01 study (13 RMC, 9 CT-P13, and 12 switchers) were selected. Patients were treated with either RMC only, or CT-P13 only, or with RMC switched to CT-P13. Additionally, 28 IFX-naïve patients were assayed as controls. In total, 180 samples were analyzed. ATI trough levels were measured in parallel with 3 different bridging Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assays constructed using the 3 drugs. Spearman’s coefficient and percentages of agreement were used to study the correlation between each assay.

Results: In total, 76 samples out of 152 IFX-treated patient samples were ATI-positive (30 RMC, 14 CT-P13, and 32 switchers). All resulted ATI-positive when either CT-P13 or SB2 bridging assays were used. The overall percentage of agreement was 100% when compared either with CT-P13 or SB2 assays. No significant differences were found among ATI levels and coefficients (Spearman’s 0.98 to 1.0, P < 0.0001).

Conclusions: ATI of RMC-treated, CT-P13-treated or RMC to CT-P13 switched patients show full cross-reactivity with CT-P13 and SB2. Findings suggest that immunodominant epitopes in the reference and CT-P13 drugs are equally present in SB2. Data support full interchangeability between biosimilars in regard to immunogenicity.

My take: In patients doing well with IFX, switching to a biosimilar is not currently recommended.  In patients naive to IFX, use of IFX or biosimilar is expected to have similar efficacy.

Related study: B Kang et al. IBD 2018; 24: 607-16.  This prospective study of 36 pediatric patients did not identify any significant differences in efficacy…or immunogenicity after switching from IFX to CT-P13.

Related blog posts:

Does C-section Increase Risk of Celiac Disease? Probably Not

Posted on by

Using data from the prospective TEDDY (The Environmental Determinants for Diabetes in the Young) from 2004-2010, a recent study (S Koletzko et al. JPGN 2018; 66: 417-24) has shown that cesarean section is not associated with an increased risk of celiac disease (CD) or celiac disease autoimmunity (CDA). TEDDY participants are at increased risk for CD and type 1 diabetes (T1D) based on HLA-risk genotypes.

Key findings:

  • Of the 6087 singletons, 1600 (26%) were born via C-section
  • C-section was associated with a lower risk for CDA (HR 0.85) and a lower risk of CD (HR 0.75)

My take: While environmental factors are likely to be responsible for increasing incidence of CD, C-section compared to vaginal delivery does not appear to be a risk factor.

Related blog posts:

Amber Cove, Dominican Republic

Eluxadoline and Pancreatitis

Posted on by

It looks like eluxadoline, recently FDA-approved for IBS-D, is associated with a significant rate of pancreatitis.  The most recent report: AJ Gawron, K Bielefeldt. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 378-84.

The authors extracted reports of eluxadoline adverse events using the Federal Adverse Event Reporting System.

  • Of the 597 reports, 98 (16.4%) were due to pancreatitis; 53 cases required hospitalization.  (The FDA separately reported 120 cases of pancreatitis –https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm546154.htm)
  • The FDA report, which noted the risk primarily in those with prior cholecystectomy, “listed 1 fatality caused by pancreatitis..which manifested within the first day of therapy.”

My take: This study showing a significant risk of pancreatitis changes the risk-benefit ratio of eluxadoline.  Since pancreatitis can result in hospitalization and even death, alternative therapies for IBS will be favored.

Related blog posts:

Autoimmune Hepatitis Associated with Anti-TNF Therapy

Posted on by

A recent study (A Ricciuto et al. J Pediatr 2018; 194: 128-35) identified an index case of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) associated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy and reviewed liver biochemistries in a cohort of 659 children.

Key findings:

  • In the index case, features of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) on liver biopsy were noted 23 weeks after starting infliximab.   These findings resolved entirely within 4 months after withdrawal of infliximab
  • Overall, 7.7% of cohort had elevations of ALT while receiving anti-TNF therapy.  Most were mild and attributable to other causes than drug toxicity. No other cases of AIH were identified.

The authors recommend a careful investigation in those with elevations >2-3 times ULN which persists >3 months. Livertox (NIH) website notes the following for infliximab:

“The liver injury caused by infliximab is usually mild and rapidly reversed once therapy is stopped.  However, fatal instances of HBV reactivation and induction of autoimmune hepatitis due to infliximab have been reported, and regular monitoring of patients early during the course of infliximab is recommended.”

My take: Serious liver injury related to anti-TNF therapy is rare. A great place to understand the spectrum of liver problems potentially related to infliximab is the livertox website:

Related blog entries:

AIH:

Views from inside Hoover Dam, including Mike O’Callaghan–Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge