Tofacitinib -Where Does it Fit in Treatment Algorithm for Ulcerative Colitis?

Posted on by

A few recent articles provide a lot of practical information regarding implementation of tofacitinib into treatment regimens for ulcerative colitis (UC).

  • S Danese et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2018; 24: 2106–12. Review article on Tofacitinib.
  • J-F Colombel.  Inflamm Bowel Dis 2018; 24: 2173–80. Review article on Herpes Zoster due to JAK Inhibitors (eg Tofacitinib).
  • KL Winthrop et al.  Inflamm Bowel Dis 2018; 24:  2258-65. Clinical study detailing the risk of Herpes Zoster in patients with UC receiving Tofacitinib.

The first of these articles reviews the mechanism of action of tofacitinib (TFB) and the relevant studies showing efficacy for UC.  A summary of the results are listed in Table 1. Some of the reported results –with TFB dosed at 10 mg BID:

  • In 2012, Sandborn et al: clinical response in 61% at wk 8 and clinical remission of 48% at wk 8.
  • In 2017 (OCTAVE Induction 1): clinical response in 18.5% at wk 8 and clinical remission of 31.3% at wk 8.
  • In 2017 (OCTAVE Induction 2): clinical response in 16.6% at wk 8 and clinical remission of 28.4% at wk 8.
  • In 2017 (OCTAVE Sustain):clinical response in 40.6% at wk 8 and clinical remission of 45.7% at wk 8.
  • In all of these studies, TFB outperformed the placebo arm and has had a good safety profile

Most common adverse effects had similar rates in the placebo arm:

  • Nasopharyngitis
  • Arthralgia
  • Headache

Other adverse effects have included pneumonia, herpes zoster (HZ) infection, and increased lipid levels (more common than with placebo group).  Trials in patients with rheumatoid arthritis have indicated an increased incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer, lymphoma, breast cancer, lung cancer, and gastric cancers.

Preclinical studies have shown that TFB could cause fetal malformations when given at much higher doses.  Though, clinical experience in humans have not found teratogenic effects; this is based on one study with 9815 RA/psoriasis patients and 47 women who became pregnant.

Role for tofacitinib:

  • “Tofacitinib could be used in patients suffering mild, moderate and severe UC…after aminosalicylates (5-ASA)…and as second-line therapy in patients who have been treated with TNF inhibitors.”

Advantages of tofacitinib:

  • Oral administration with rapid absorption
  • Short serum half-life
  • Good experience in large number of patients with rheumatoid arthritis
  • No immunogenicity.
  • Effective in patients who have had previous anti-TNF agents

More on Herpes Zoster Infection:

  • The other two references detail the risk of Herpes Zoster infections with TFB usage.
  • Winthrop et al identified 65 (5.6%) of patients developed HZ among phase II/III open-label, long-term extension trials.
  • The review by Colombel notes that patients with UC have “an increased risk of HZ compared with the general population, and this risk can be increase by the use of immunosuppressive therapy.  JAK inhibitors, including tofacitinib, have been associated with HZ risk…The majority of HZ casees are noncomplicated.”
  • In this review, Colombel details an algorithm for treatment of HZ cases and indicates that adults receiving TFB should consider vaccination to lower the risk of HZ.

My take: A significant portion of patients with UC either do not respond to anit-TNF agents or lose response.  Tofacitinib provides an alternative treatment with a different mechanism of action.  Given the few other non-surgical treatment options, I expect it will be rapidly incorporated into treatment algorithms.

Related blog posts:

Are Probiotics Effective in Changing the Microbiome?

Posted on by

Two recent papers in Cell provide additional questions about the effectiveness of probiotics.

Full Studies:

The coverage of these studies in the media has created some controversy; enough so that the International Scientific Association of Probiotics and Prebiotics disseminated a very critical review:

CLINICAL EVIDENCE AND NOT MICROBIOTA OUTCOMES DRIVE VALUE OF PROBIOTICS

Here is a small excerpt:

Two recent papers have generated much adverse publicity for the probiotic field. Headlines driven by sensationalism, not data, claim “Probiotics labelled ‘quite useless’” (BBC) and “Probiotics ‘not as beneficial for gut health as previously thought’” (The Guardian). The quotes are from author Eran Elinav, who generalizes the study findings to all ‘probiotics’ as a class – a generalization that ignores that specific probiotic are meant for specific purposes…

The scope of these papers is limited to microbiome data; no clinical endpoints are assessed. Without clinical evidence, it is not possible to conclude about the tested probiotic’s usefulness, and it is certainly not possible to conclude about probiotic usefulness in general…. The authors discount the existing body of evidence for probiotic health benefits, including Level 1 placebo-controlled, randomized trials. Cochrane reviews (the gold standard used by physicians and public health policy makers) of the totality of evidence show that specific probiotics can prevent antibiotic associated diarrhea (AAD) and C. difficile diarrhea. This evidence has been translated into evidence-based recommendations for probiotics issued by medical groups. Regardless of an effect on the microbiota, these are established, evidence-based benefits of probiotics.

My take: This controversy points to the problem that probiotics are often considered more effective than the science merits.  While there are some conditions that may respond to probiotics, it should be understood that each probiotic needs to be looked at for each specific clinical scenario.

Related blog posts:

 

Alcohol in the Setting of Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

Posted on by

Briefly noted: V Ajmera et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1511-20.  This study with 285 participants showed that modest alcohol consumption was associated with a lower odds of NASH resolution on biopsy over 4 years compared with no alcohol consumption (OR 0.32). The associated editorial (pg 1404-6) provides a table with 8 studies that reveal conflicting results on this issue.

My take (borrowed from editorial): “Clinicians should not recommend modest drinking” as a way of improving liver health.

Related review article:D Fuster, JH Samet. “Alcohol Use in Patients with Chronic Liver Disease”  NEJM 2018; 379: 1251-61. For NAFLD (and all chronic liver disease): “abstinence should be the goal.”

Related blog posts:

Lake Moraine, Banff

One Bad Apple Spoils the Bunch

Posted on by

A recent NY Times article highlights the end of a renowned food-scientist Brian Wansink’s career at Cornell which “came to an unceremonious end. On Sept. 20. The university announced that a yearlong investigation had found that he committed “academic misconduct in his research and scholarship, including misreporting of research data,” and that he had tendered his resignation.”  This commentary highlights other problems with nutrition studies: More Evidence That Nutrition Studies Don’t Always Add Up

My take: Nutrition studies are difficult –having academic misconduct is going to further undermine the credibility of these studies.

IBD Shorts October 2018

Posted on by

C Ma et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepaatol 2018; 16: 1407-19.  This study examined endpoints in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Crohn’s disease.  Key finding: Among 116 included RCTs (n=27,263 patients), there were 38 unique definitions of clinical response or remission and 32 definitions of loss of response. The most common endpoint was CD activity index.

RP Hirten et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1374-84. This review examines the topic of combining biologics in inflammatory bowel disease. Currently, there is little data in IBD.  From studies completed in rheumatology and dermatology, there are some safety concerns. One current study, the EXPLORER study, which is a phase 4 open label trial evaluating the use of vedolizumab in combination with adalimumab and methotrexate, will provide some useful information.  With regard to safety, gut-specific anti-integrin therapies are likely to be safer in combination than other biologic therapies.

RJ Colman et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2018; 24: 2135-41.  This systematic review and meta-analysis which included 14 eligible studies showed that the pooled clinical remission rate with methotrexate monotherapy for pediatric Crohn’s disease was 57.7% at 3-6 months and 37.1% at 1 year.

AA Wren et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2018; 24: 2093-2105. This study with 93,668 patients in a cohort from Truven MarketScan Database (2007-2015) identified a high rate of opioid therapy usage in U.S. adolescents and young adults (15-29 year olds).  Annual prevalence of chronic opioid use was 9.3% in 2007 and peaked at 12.2% in 2011. In 2015, the prevalence dropped to 10.8%.  Overall, 18.2% had received chronic opioid therapy.  Among the 2503 with chronic opioid usage who were followed longitudinally, 30.5% received opioids for 2 years and 5.3% for 4 years. The associated editorial (ME Kuenzig, EI Benchimol, pg 2140-5) note that these prevalence data may underestimate the true rate of opioid use due to the case definition of IBD used when analyzing the administrative data.

Lake Moraine, Banff

Losing the Obesity Battle Early in Life

Posted on by

A recent study (M Geserick et al. NEJM 2018; 379: 1303-12) performed a prospective and retrospective analysis of a population-based sample of 51,505 German children to examine BMI in early childhood and risk of sustained obesity.

Key findings:

  • Most normal weight adolescents had a normal weight throughout childhood
  • Half (53%) of the obese adolescents had been overweight or obese from 5 years of age onward
  • Almost 90% of children who were obese at 3 years of age were overweight or obese in adolescence
  • Among obese adolescents, the most rapid weight gain had occurred between 2 and 6 years of age

My take: We are losing the childhood obesity battle at very young ages.

Abstract and Link to 1:32 Quick Summary: Acceleration of BMI in Early Childhood

 

Mental Health of Medical Students

Posted on by

It is well-recognized that there is a high rate of burnout and even suicides among physicians.  The concern regarding mental health extends to medical students.  According to a recent commentary (JF Karp, AS Levine. NEJM 2018; 1196-8), “despite entering medical school with relatively good mental health, medical students become depressed, burned out, and suicidal at alarming rates.”  This is thought to be due to “demanding schedules, cost, and stigma” to obtain mental health services.

The editorial advocates for medical students: “Working closely with the physician-services divisions of large hospital systems may help schools and hospitals leverage resources and provide shared opportunities to improve the care of students, trainees, and faculty and staff physicians.”

Related blog posts on burnout:

Frpm NEJM twitter feed

What to Do About Bile Reflux Gastritis?

Posted on by

A recent review (ME McCabe, CK Dilly. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1389-92) provides useful information on bile reflux gastritis.

The authors note that bile reflux gastritis is “increasingly found in individuals without prior gastric surgery, a problem termed ‘primary biliary reflux.'”

Key points:

  • Most often bile reflux gastritis occurs due to prior surgery affecting pylorus, dysmotility, after cholecystectomy (due to loss of bile reservoir), and after biliary sphincterotomy (due to increased biliary flow).
  • Suggested treatments (Figure 5) -are limited by lack of evidence but the following are recommended by the authors: remove offending medications (eg. agents that affect peristalsis) –>proton pump inhibitors –>ursodeoxycholic acid –>sucralfate –>combination therapy –>surgical diversion of bile (generally reserved in those with surgically-induced bile reflux)

Is it Helpful to Check Celiac Serology Titers After 3 Months of a Gluten Free Diet?

Posted on by

A recent prospective study (D Petroff et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1442-49) with 345 pediatric patients with biopsy-proven celiac disease (CD) examined serologic response to a gluten-free diet (GFD) between 2012-2015.

Key findings:

  • Mean TTG IgA concentration decreased 14-fold after 3 months of a GFD.  The study assay used kits from EUROIMMUN.
  • TTG IgA remained above 1-fold ULN in 83.8% and above 10-fold ULN in 26.6%.
  • Deamidated gliadin IgA (DGL IgA) decreased in the vast majority but did not distinguish response of GFD from random fluctuations.
  • The authors note that symptoms improved in most on GFD, but short-term response could reflect “regression to the mean…for a considerable share” as symptoms improved in the non-GFD group as well.

In their discussion, the authors reference a large study (n=487) which showed mean normalization of TTG IgA of ~400 days; longer times were noted in those with type 1 diabetes and higher baseline values.

My take: This study, while showing that TTG IgA levels improve after 3 months of a GFD, helps solidify my opinion that in those who are improving, followup serology could be obtained later.  My practice is to have followup serology after 6 months of a GFD in the majority of patients.

Related blog posts:

Lake Moraine, Banff