Practice Tips for New IBD Therapies

Posted on by

A recent review provides some helpful advice: “A Practical Guide to the Safety and Monitoring of New IBD Therapies” (B Click, M Regueiro. Inflamm Bowel Dis 209; 25: 831-42).

This review discusses infection risk, malignancy risk, immunologic issues and other complications.

In terms of infection risk assessment, the authors describe a pyramid in which they stratify the risks of medications.  The safest to least safe in their assessment: vedolizumab –>ustekinumab–>anti-TNF monotherapy–>thiopurine or tofacintinib–>thiopurine/anti-TNF combination–>steroids.

Their Tables:

  • Table 1 lists potential infections and vaccination recommendations
  • Table 2 suggests management of active infections by IBD Medication Class
    • For anti-TNF agents and for IL12/23 agents: the authors recommend continuation of agent if viral (eg EBV, VZV, HSV) or bacterial (eg. Strep/Staph)/C difficile infections (unless severe) but holding for opportunistic infections.
    • For integrin agents, the authors recommend continuation of medications in the face of infections except “consider holding dose” during active C difficile infection
    • For JAK agents, the authors recommend stopping during viral infections and with opportunistic infections.  They recommend continuing with bacterial infections (hold if severe) and continuing with C difficile infection
  • Table 3 suggests management in the setting of active malignancy
    • Table 4 lists recommendations in the setting of immunologic complications.  Theses categories include antidrug antibodies,lupus-like reactions, demyelinating conditions, and psoriasis.
    • One of the points alluding to in this chart is that addition of methotrexate may help in patients receiving anti-TNF therapy with psoriasis.
    • No psoriatic reactions have been reported with vedolizumab, ustekinumab or tofacitinib; ustekinumab is FDA-approved for use in psoriasis and tofacitinib is FDA-approved for psoriatic arthritis.
  • Table 5 suggests recommendations in the setting of altered liver enzymes and altered lipids/creatine kinase

Related posts:

Antidepressants for Patients with IBD and Their (Beneficial) Affect on Bowel Disease Activity

Posted on by

A recent population-based cohort study (MS Kristensen et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2019; 25: 886-93) indicates that antidepressants are likely to be beneficial for patients with inflammatory bowel disease and could lower disease activity in addition to improving mood.

This study population, n=42,890, with prospectively collected data comprised all patients in the Danish National Patient Registry from 2000-2017 with ICD diagnoses of ulcerative colitis (UC, 69.5%) or Crohn’s disease (CD, 30.5%).  Outcome measures included markers of disease relapse:

  • hospitalizations with IBD as primary diagnosis
  • surgery with IBD as primary operation code
  • step-up medications with corticosteroids or anti-TNF treatment

Key findings:

  • After adjusting for confounders, lower incidence rate of disease activity was found among antidepressant users than nonusers.
    • For CD, the incidence rate ratio was 0.75 (CI 0.68-0.82).
    • For UC, the incidence rate ratio was 0.90 (CI 0.84-0.95).
    • For CD patients without prior use of antidepressants before diagnosis of CD, there was markedly lower incidence rate ratio of 0.51 (CI 0.43-0.62).
  • 28% of the study population redeemed at least 1 prescription for an antidepressant at some point.  This is similar to a Finnish study in which antidepressant use in IBD was 28% compared to 19% in general population

The authors note that anti-depressants may affect the level of pro-inflammatory cytokines which are involved in the pathogenesis of IBD.  This study did not assess potential adverse effects of using anti-depressants.

My take: This study is intriguing and suggests that antidepressants may improve the disease course in IBD. Whether this is related to more favorable brain-gut interaction or whether this is related to drug effects on inflammatory agents is unclear.

Related blog post: Psychosocial Problems in Adolescents with IBD

Park Guell -Fantastic Park in Barcelona (need to buy a pass to get to some parts)

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.

 

Liver Shorts: May 2019

Posted on by

ED Bethea et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 739-47. Using a Markov-based mathematical model, the authors “found transplanting HCV-positive livers into HCV-negative patients with preemptive DAA therapy to a cost-effective strategy that could improve health outcomes.”

A Villanueva. NEJM 2019; 1450-62. This is a succinct review of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Some points:

  • More than 1 million patients will die from liver cancer in 2030.
  • The rate of death from liver cancer increased 43% from 2000 to 2016,.  The 5-year survival rate is grim at only 18%.  Only pancreatic cancer is more lethal.
  • HCC is rare among patients without preexisting liver disease.  Cirrhosis is the main risk factor, though hepatitis B has direct oncologic effects even in the absence of cirrhosis.
  • The authors note that cancer surveillance has no “high-quality randomized controlled trials.” However, this may be due to difficulties with enrollment. In one study, 99%of patients declined to assume the risk of being randomly assigned to the nonsurveillance group. Nonetheless, mathematical models, and lower quality studies all show survival benefits of surveillance.

Related blog post:

  • Liver Shorts April 2019 Obesity/NAFLD and alcoholic liver disease are driving an increase in HCC and liver cancer mortality

Large Study Shows FMT Efficacy/Safety in Children

Posted on by

Clinical Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019. In press: Efficacy of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Clostridium difficile Infection in Children Thanks to Ben Gold for this reference.

Abstract

Background & Aims

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is commonly used to treat Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). CDI is an increasing cause of diarrheal illness in pediatric patients, but the effects of FMT have not been well studied in children. We performed a multi-center retrospective cohort study of pediatric and young adult patients to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and factors associated with a successful FMT for the treatment of CDI.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of 372 patients, 11 months to 23 years old, who underwent FMTs at 18 pediatric centers, from February 1, 2004 to February 28, 2017; 2-month outcome data were available from 335 patients. Successful FMT was defined as no recurrence of CDI in the 2 months following FMT. We performed stepwise logistic regression to identify factors associated with successful FMT.

Results

Of 335 patients who underwent FMT and were followed for 2 months or more, 271 (81%) had a successful outcome following a single FMT and 86.6% had a successful outcome following a first or repeated FMT. Patients who received FMT with fresh donor stool (odds ratio [OR], 2.66; 95% CI, 1.39–5.08), underwent FMT via colonoscopy (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.26–4.61), did not have a feeding tube (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.05–4.11), or had 1 less episode of CDI before FMT (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.04–1.39) had increased odds for successful FMT. Seventeen patients (4.7%) had a severe adverse event during the 3-month follow-up period, including 10 hospitalizations.

Conclusion

Based on the findings from a large multi-center retrospective cohort, FMT is effective and safe for the treatment of CDI in children and young adults. Further studies are required to optimize the timing and method of FMT for pediatric patients—factors associated with success differ from those of adult patients.

Related blog posts:

Park Guell, Barcelona

Vedolizumab vs Adalimumab for Infliximab Failure in Ulcerative Colitis –Which is Better?

Posted on by

A recent retrospective study (A Favale et al. Comparative Efficacy of Vedolizumab and Adalimumab in Ulcerative Colitis Patients Previously Treated With Infliximab Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, izz057, https://doi.org/10.1093/ibd/izz057 Published: 01 April 2019) suggests that vedolizumab is more effective for ulcerative colitis with secondary infliximab failure.

Here’s the abstract:

Background

Adalimumab (ADA) and vedolizumab (VDZ) have shown efficacy in moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) patients who failed infliximab (IFX). Although, a comparative efficacy evaluation of ADA and VDZ in this clinical setting is currently missing.

Aim

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of ADA and VDZ in patients affected by UC who failed IFX.

Methods

Clinical records of UC patients from 8 Italian IBD referral centers who failed IFX and were candidates to receive either ADA or VDZ were retrospectively reviewed. The primary end point was therapeutic failure at week 52. Secondary end points included therapy discontinuation at weeks 8, 24 and 52, the discontinuation-free survival, and safety.

Results

One hundred sixty-one UC patients, 15 (9.2%) primary, 83 (51.6%) secondary IFX failures, and 63 (39.2%) IFX intolerants were included. Sixty-four (40%) patients received ADA and 97 (60%) VDZ as second line therapy. At week 52, 37.5% and 28.9% of patients on ADA and VDZ, respectively, had therapeutic failure (P = 0.302). However, the failure rate was significantly higher in the ADA group as compared with VDZ group among IFX secondary failures (48.0% ADA vs 22.4%VDZ, P = 0.035). The therapy discontinuation-free survival was significantly higher in the group of IFX secondary failures who received VDZ as compared with ADA at both the univariate (P = 0.007) and multivariate survival analysis (OR 2.79; 95% CI, 1.23–6.34; P = 0.014). No difference in the failure and biologic discontinuation-free survival was observed in the IFX primary failure and intolerant subgroups.

Conclusion

Vedolizumab might be the therapy of choice in those UC patients who showed secondary failure to IFX.

Link to video abstract (2 min):  Comparative Efficacy of Vedolizumab and Adalimumab in Ulcerative Colitis Patients Previously Treated With Infliximab

 

Outcomes and Risk Factors in Cystic Fibrosis Liver Disease

Posted on by

A recent retrospective study (P-Y Boelle et al. Hepatology 2019; 69: 1648-56, associated editorial 1379-81) examines a large cohort of 3,328 patients with cystic fibrosis and pancreatic insufficiency (born after 1985) who were followed into a longitudinal “French CF Modifier Gene Study.”

Background from editorial:

  • Cystic fibrosis liver disease (CFLD) has been thought to occur mainly before puberty with ~40% of patients developing biochemical or ultrasonographic signs of liver involvement by age 12 years.
  • Registry studies have shown slow progression of liver disease with the development of cirrhosis and portal hypertension in 5-10% of patients.  Due to difficulty identifying those at high risk for disease progression and the long time course, it has been impractical to complete definitive clinical trials to establish whether any therapies alter the natural history.
  • Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the only current treatment available for CFLD; UDCA has been shown to have beneficial effects on biochemistries and liver stiffness, but effects on survival or need for transplantation are unknown.
  • Concerns have been raised about the potential for toxic UDCA metabolites (eg. lithocholic acid) in part based on unfavorable results of high-dose UDCA with primary sclerosing cholangitis

Key findings of this current study:

  • The incidence of CFLD increased “by approximately 1% every year, reaching 32.2% by age 25”
  • The incidence of severe CFLD increased “only after age 5, reaching 10% by age 30.”
  • Risk factors for CFLD and severe CFLD: male sex, CFTR F508del homozygosity, and history of meconium ileus.
  • Earlier introduction of UDCA (over the last 20 years) “did not change the incidence of severe CFLD.”

My take: This study confirms a previous study showing that CFLD occurs also in adulthood (Koh C et al. Hepatology 2017; 66:591-601) and adds further doubt about whether UDCA is beneficial.

Related article: AJ Freeman et al. “A Multidisciplinary Approach to Pretransplant and Posttransplant Management of Cystic Fibrosis-Associated Liver Disease” Liver Transplantation 2019; 25: 640-57.

Related blog posts:

Peonie in Sandy Springs

Expanding Organ Transplantation with Hepatitis C-Positive Donors

Posted on by

A recent study (AE Woolley et al NEJM 2019; 380: 1606-17) highlighted the outcomes of heart and lung transplant (uninfected) recipients of organs from HCV-infected donors (“DONATE HCV” trial).

In this study, 44 patients (36 lung transplant recipients, 8 heart transplant recipients) were treated preemptively with 4 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir to block viral replication.

Key findings:

  • 42 of 44 (95%) had a detectable viral load immediately after transplantation.
  • The first 35 (who have all completed 6 months of folllowup) all cleared HCV viremia –undetectable HCV at 6 months post-transplantation
  • No treatment-related complications were noted

In the associated editorial by EA Blumberg (1669-70), it is noted that organs for transplantation are in short supply for the more than 113,000 persons on waiting lists in the U.S.  “In 2018, only 36,500 persons received transplants…and 12,225 persons were removed from the waiting list because of death or progressive illness than rendered them” too sick for transplantation.

HCV donors will expand the donor pool substantially (up to one-third more donors) and these donors are typically younger and with fewer coexisting conditions.

My take: With the high response rate of the newer direct-acting antivirals (100% in this study) along with the (cost) effectiveness of a shorter course, this study shows how promising HCV-positive donors are for improving outcomes in patients in need of organ transplantation.  Long term data are still needed to determine if there are unforeseen problems (eg. late severe relapse of HCV, increased cardiovascular disease).

Related blog post: Increased Organ Availability Related to Opioid Epidemic

More Data, More Nuance with MMP-7: Best Biliary Atresia Biomarker

Posted on by

As noted by my previous blog (New Way to Diagnose Biliary Atresia), I am enthusiastic about the development of MMP-7 (Serum Matrix Metalloproteinase-7) as a biomarker for biliary atresia.

A new study (Wu J-F , Jeng Y-M, Chen H-L, Ni Y-H, Hsu H-Y, Chang M-H. Quantification of serum matrix metallopeptide 7 levels may assist the diagnosis and outcome prediction for biliary atresia. J Pediatr. 2019;208:30–7) and associated editorial provide additional data and nuance.

Key points:

  • “Wu et … studied 100 cholestatic infants presenting consecutively to their institution over a 10-year period, including 36 eventually diagnosed with biliary atresia. Median serum MMP-7 levels were significantly higher in biliary atresia at the time of diagnosis, with an optimal serum MMP-7 level of >1.43 ng/mL for predicting biliary atresia.  In comparison, similarly high MMP-7 levels were found in only 1 infant who was cholestatic without biliary atresia.”
  • “The authors found that serum MMP-7 levels were significantly lower in the 14 infants ≤30 days old diagnosed with biliary atresia, compared with the 22 infants >30 days old at diagnosis. In some cases, serum MMP-7 levels in younger infants with biliary atresia overlapped with those from infants with other liver diseases, such as neonatal hepatitis.”
  • After Kasai portoenterostomy: “Serum MMP-7 levels were significantly higher 6 months post-Kasai portoenterostomy in infants who later required liver transplant, with a serum MMP-7 level of >10.30 mg/dL optimally predicting transplant 3-4 years after Kasai portoenterostomy … serum MMP-7 levels are still high even in patients who do not need liver transplant.”
  • The authors “highlight 1 complication with using serum MMP-7 levels: values can vary widely among different enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits used.”

Related blog posts:

Sagrada Familia -work in progress.  Amazing.

 

Surprising Findings in Prospective Budesonide-Eosinophilic Esophagitis Study

Posted on by

A recent study (ES Dellon et al Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 666-73) prospectively followed patients in a 24 week open-label extension of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of budesonide oral suspension (BOS) for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). The authors defined histologic response as ≤6 eos/hpf. During the extension, the dosage of BOS was reduced from 2 mg twice daily to 2 mg once a day.

Key findings:

  • No new safety signals. One patient in placebo/BOS arm (n=37) developed oral candidiasis and one patient in the BOS/BOS arm (n=45) did as well. In addition, four patients in placebo/BOS developed esophageal candidiasis. No clinically relevant changes in morning serum cortisol levels were identified.
  • Histologic response was observed in 49% (16/33) in placebo/BOS arm and 23% (9/39) of BOS/BOS arm. 58% of placebo/BOS and 28% of BOS/BOS patients had ≤15 eos/hpf.
  • Mean peak eosinophil count decreased in placebo/BOS arm from 119 to 29 and increased in BOS/BOS arm from 38 to 72.
  • Overall, only 42% of patients who responded to BOS during double-blind 12 week study maintained a histologic response.

While this study shows that BOS is effective for many patients with EoE, it also shows that many lose a response.  In addition, most patients who “did not respond to treatment during the double-blind phase did not gain a histologic or endoscopic response with longer-term treatment.”  Only 1 of 26 patients (4%) gained a response. This has several important implications:

  • Some patients may develop corticosteroid resistance
  • In patients who respond to induction, it may be prudent to continue with the same induction dose rather than reducing the dosage
  • In patients who do not respond to induction, further treatment is not beneficial

My take: Though the response to BOS was not very high in this study, the population studied was highly symptomatic and had histologically-severe EoE.  Thus, in a more typical population of patients with EoE, the response rate is likely to be more favorable. Also, many patients will not maintain a response to BOS at a lowered dose.

Related blog posts:

Boqureia Market, Barcelona

 

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.

Getting In the Shower for Emetic Symptoms

Posted on by

A recent study (I Aziz et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 878-86) examined the epidemiology and clinical characteristics of Rome IV functional nausea and vomiting disorders (FNVDs) in adults.  The study used internet cross-sectional health surveys from 5931 adults in 2015.

Key findings:

  • 2.2% of the population (n=131) fulfilled criteria for Rome IV FNVDs
  • Hot water bathing, which has been reported in cannaboid hyperemesis syndrome, was also noted  in patients with cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) in 44%.  “This behavior was independent of cannabis but augmented by its use.”

My take: FNVDs are common and hot water bathing is not pathognomonic for cannaboid hyperemesis syndrome.

Related references:

  1. Moon AM, Buckley SA, Mark NM. Successful treatment of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome with topical capsaicin. ACG Case Rep J. 2018 Jan 3;5:e3.
  2. Graham J, Barberio M, Wang GS. Capsaicin cream for treatment of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome in adolescents: A case series. 2017 Dec;140(6): e20163795.

Hotel in Barcelona