Tag Archives: acute severe ulcerative colitis

Pediatric Guidelines for Ulcerative Colitis (Part 2: Acute Severe Colitis)

Posted on by

With regard to yesterday’s post (Pediatric Guidelines for Ulcerative Colitis (Part 1)), the use of combination therapy with thiopurines is frequently avoided in the pediatric population in the U.S. due to safety concerns (eg. low risk of lymphoma). Anti-TNF monotherapy with pTDM appears to be a more common practice in the U.S. (Related blog post: Can Therapeutic Drug Monitoring with Monotherapy Achieve Similar Results to Combination IBD Therapy?). These pediatric guidelines with regard to combination therapy are similar to recent ACG guidelines for adults (D Rubin et al. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 120(6):p 1187-1224, June 2025. Open Access! ACG Clinical Guideline Update: Ulcerative Colitis in Adults).

————

A Assa et al. JPGN 2025; 81:816–85. Open Access! Management of paediatric ulcerative colitis, part 2: Acute severe colitis—An updated evidence-based consensus guideline from the European Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition and the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization

Comprehensive review (69 pages!) of all the topics related to acute severe colitis are covered. Topics include associated enteric infections (C diff, CMV), toxic megacolon, antibiotics, pain management, VTE, surgery, and pouchitis.

Some of the recommendations:

  • All mesalamine preparations (oral and rectal) should be discontinued upon admission to exclude mesalamine intolerance, especially when mesalamine has been commenced during the preceding few weeks; (re-) introduction should be considered after significant improvement in the clinical condition [EL5, adults EL5] (*100% agreement).
  • Regular diet should be continued in most ASC cases [not in toxic megacolon]. Enteral nutrition may be used if oral feeding is not tolerated or in malnourished children [EL4, adults EL1] (*100% agreement).
  • Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for reducing the risk of VTE should be considered in all inpatient children with ASC (Figure 1) [EL5, adults EL2] (*100% agreement).
  • Intravenous methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg/day (up to 40 mg/day) once daily is the first-line treatment in ASC and should be promptly started [EL2, adults EL1]. A higher dose of 1.5 mg/kg/day (up to 60 mg/day) can be used at the clinician’s discretion (e.g., in patients on oral corticosteroids at admission and/or with a more severe spectrum of ASC) [EL4, adults EL4] (*100% agreement).
  • Intravenous methylprednisolone should not be extended beyond 7–10 days of total course, since it carries no additional benefit and increases toxicity. In corticosteroid-refractory patients in whom second-line therapy is initiated, there is no need for corticosteroid tapering if corticosteroids are given as an isolated short course (up to 10 days) (*100% agreement).
  • A PUCAI > 45 on the 3rd day of IVCS treatment should dictate planning for second-line therapy between Days 3–5 [EL2, adults EL2] (*100% agreement).
  • Second-line therapy should be initiated on the 5th day of IVCS treatment in children with a PUCAI ≥ 65 [EL2, adults EL2] (*100% agreement).
  • Infliximab is recommended as the preferred second-line medical therapy for anti-TNF naive children failing IVCS [EL3, adults EL1] (*100% agreement).
  • To reduce unnecessary immunosuppression, corticosteroids (when ineffective) should be rapidly weaned following introduction of second-line therapy or decision to proceed to colectomy (stopped if in use ≤10 days and reduced to prednisone ≤0.2 mg/kg or equivalent to 10 mg adult dose with gradual tapering thereafter if >10 days) [EL5, adults EL5] (*100% agreement).
  • Third-line sequential rescue therapies (CNIs after infliximab, infliximab after CNI or a JAK inhibitor after either) may be considered in stable patients, in specialised centres and in those whose corticosteroids were weaned off or nearly weaned off as stated above [EL5, adults EL2] (*100% agreement).

Related blog posts:

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

Does Accelerated Dosing of Infliximab Work for Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis?

Posted on by

MC Choy et al. The Lancet Gastroenterology 2024; Intensified versus standard dose infliximab induction therapy for steroid-refractory acute severe ulcerative colitis (PREDICT-UC): an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Methods: In this open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled trial, patients aged 18 years or older from 13 Australian tertiary hospitals with intravenous steroid-refractory ASUC were randomly assigned (1:2) to receive a first dose of 10 mg/kg infliximab or 5 mg/kg infliximab (randomization 1). Block randomization was used and stratified by history of thiopurine exposure and study site, with allocation concealment maintained via computer-generated randomization. Patients in the 10 mg/kg group (intensified induction strategy [IIS]) received a second dose at day 7 or earlier at the time of non-response; all patients in the 5 mg/kg group were re-randomized between day 3 and day 7 (1:1; randomization 2) to a standard induction strategy (SIS) or accelerated induction strategy (AIS), resulting in three induction groups. Patients in the SIS group received 5 mg/kg infliximab at weeks 0, 2, and 6, with an extra 5 mg/kg dose between day 3 and day 7 if no response. Patients in the AIS group received
5 mg/kg infliximab at weeks 0, 1, and 3, with the week 1 dose increased to 10 mg/kg and given between day 3 and day 7 if no response.

Thus, this was the first RCT comparing an intensified induction strategy (IIS; 10 mg/kg infliximab at weeks 0 and 1, with the second dose given earlier if no clinical response), an accelerated induction strategy (AIS; 5 mg/kg infliximab at weeks 0, 1, and 3, with the second dose increased to 10 mg/kg and given earlier if no response), and a standard induction strategy (SIS; 5 mg/kg at weeks 0, 2 and 6; with an extra 5 mg/kg dose before day 7 if no
response) in steroid-refractory patients with ASUC.

Key findings:

  • There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who had a clinical response by day 7 between the 10 mg/kg and 5 mg/kg groups: 65% vs 61%
  • In patients with a baseline albumin of less than 25 g/L, a day 7 response occurred in nine (64%) of 14 patients in the 10 mg/kg group versus 14 (45%) of 31 in the 5 mg/kg group (RR 1·43, p=0·17)
  • In patients with a baseline CRP of 50 mg/L or higher, a day 7 response occurred in six (60%) of ten patients in the 10 mg/kg group versus eight (42%) of 19 in the 5 mg/kg group (RR 1·39, p=0·34)
  • The proportions of patients with clinical response at day 14: 74% in the IIS group, 73% in the AIS group, and 68% of 44 in the SIS group.
  • The clinical remission at month 3: 50% in the IIS group, 52% in the AIS group, and 48% in the SIS group
  • The steroid-free remission at month 3: 41% in the IIS group, 42% in the AIS group, and 41% in the SIS group
  • The endoscopic remission at month 3: 46% in the IIS group, 46% in the AIS group, and 48% in the SIS group
  • The colectomy rate at month 3: 7% in the IIS group, 19% in the AIS group, and 12% in the SIS group colectomy at month 3 were not significantly different between group (P=0.20)
  • The colectomy rate at month 12: 7% in the IIS group, 22% in the AIS group, and 15% in the SIS group colectomy at month 3 were not significantly different between group (p=0.13)
  • In post-hoc analysis of second-dose salvage strategies (among the group who had not responded at day7), a clinical response was observed in 19 (59%) of 32 patients who received a 10 mg/kg salvage dose versus nine (64%) of 14 who received a 5 mg/kg salvage dose (RR 0·92). Endoscopic remission at month 3 was observed in 11 (34%) who received 10 mg/kg salvage versus six (43%) who received 5 mg/kg salvage (RR 0·80). Colectomy by 3 months occurred in ten (31%) who received 10 mg/kg salvage compared with three (21%) who received 5 mg/kg salvage (HR 1·46)
  • Higher proportions of patients with clinical and biochemical remission between weeks 2 and 6 were apparent in the IIS and AIS groups versus the SIS group, but by 3 months, these differences were lost

My take: Intensified, accelerated, and standard induction regimens in the PREDICT-UC study did not result in a statistically-significant difference in clinical response by day 14 or in remission or colectomy rates by month 3. However, there are some important caveats:

  1. There appeared to be a trend towards a lower colectomy rate in the IIS group.
  2. There appeared to be a favorable trend towards an improved response to IIS group in those with low albumin (<25 g/L) and high CRP (>5 mg/L). The smaller numbers in these subgroups could have precluded statistical significance
  3. Also, even the SIS group were able to receive a 4th induction 5 mg/kg dose between days 3-7 if they had not responded to treatment
  4. In patients who had not responded to either 10 mg/kg or 5 mg/kg, a salvage dose at day 7 resulted in a >60% response rate
  5. It is possible that a sustained strategy of more aggressive dosing (not done in this study) aided with therapeutic drug monitoring could result in better outcomes following IIS

IBD Updates: SMART IBD App, SC Vedolizumab Durability, Risk Factors in Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Posted on by

KA Hommel et al. JPGN 2024; 78:1273–1278. Pilot and feasibility of the SMART IBD mobile app to improve self-management in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease

The Self‐Management Assistance with Recommended Treatment (SMART) IBD app –Key findings:

  • Patients rated the app quality as good and accessed the app adequately overall, with some pages being used often.
  • Medication adherence increased over the course of the study and was associated with sleep duration, mood, and stool consistency and blood content.

My take: IBD Management apps could be quite helpful, especially for teens and young adults.

S Hsiang et al. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Volume 30, Issue 8, August 2024, Pages 1284–1294, https://doi.org/10.1093/ibd/izad166. Safety, Effectiveness, and Treatment Persistence of Subcutaneous Vedolizumab in IBD: A Multicenter Study From the United Kingdom

Methods: IBD patients (n=563) on IV vedolizumab across 11 UK sites agreed to transition to SC injections or otherwise continued IV treatment

Key findings:

  • Data from 563 patients, demonstrated no differences in disease activity, remission rates, and quality of life between the SC and IV groups at all time points
  • Drug persistence at week 52 was similar (81.1% vs 81.2%; P = .98)

Related blog posts:

CFD Li Wai Suen, et al. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Volume 30, Issue 8, August 2024, Pages 1389–1405, https://doi.org/10.1093/ibd/izad183. Factors Associated With Response to Rescue Therapy in Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis 

This systematic review identified 101 completed studies were eligible for inclusion.

Related blog posts:

IBD Brief Updates: Anti-TNF Loss of Response, Upadacitinib for ASUC, Risk Factors for Developing IBD

Posted on by

EHJ Savelkoul et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2023; 29: 1633-1647. Open Access! Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Loss of Response and Need for Dose Escalation of Infliximab and Adalimumab in Ulcerative Colitis

Methods: A systematic search was conducted from August 1999 to July 2021 for studies (50 studies identified) reporting loss of response and dose escalation during infliximab and/or adalimumab use in ulcerative colitis patients with primary response

Key findings:

  • Annual loss of response was 10% for infliximab and 13% for adalimumab, with higher rates during the first year.
  • The annual LOR incidences were higher during the first 65 weeks of treatment for both IFX (14%) and ADA (23%).
  • Annual dose escalation rates were 14% (infliximab) and 21% (adalimumab), with clinical benefit in 72% and 52%, respectively

CH Zinger et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2023; 29: 1667-1669. Upadacitinib for Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Key finding: 4 patients (age 18-25 yrs) received upadacitinib for acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) after failing to respond to infliximab and IV steroids. 3 of 4 responded to treatment (45 mg/day) between 4 to 8 days. Three months later, two of these patients were in steroid-free clinical-endoscopic remission and one had maintained a clinical response.

In their discussion, the authors note a similar response rate to tofacitinib, another JAK inhibitor, for ASUC; though, the authors speculate that upadacitinib may be efficacious.

N Narula et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 21: 2649-2659. Associations of Antibiotics, Hormonal Therapies, Oral Contraceptives, and Long-Term NSAIDS With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Results From the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) Study

In a a prospective cohort study of 133,137 individuals between the ages of 20 and 80 from 24 countries, the authors examined the relationship between exposures to antibiotics, NSAIDs and hormonal therapies with the development of IBD over a median 11 year period.

Key findings:

  • Incident IBD was associated significantly with baseline antibiotic (aOR, 2.81; P = .0001) and hormonal medication use (aOR, 4.43; P = .001).
  • Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug users also were observed to have increased odds of IBD (aOR, 1.80 P = .002), which was driven by long-term use (aOR, 5.58; P < .001)
Near Cassis, France

Giving Tacrolimus Another Look for Severe Colitis

Posted on by

The retrospective study by Zimmerman et al involved 170 pediatric patients (IFX (n = 84) and TAC (n = 86)) with acute severe colitis (ASC) form 2005 to 2017; TAC was generally used prior to 2014 and patients were more likely to be receiving 6MP as a long-term maintenance agent; the mean TAC level was 10.7 ng/mL. The mean dose of infliximab (IFX) initially was 7 mg/kg. Key findings:

  • The rate of colectomy 6 months from rescue therapy was similar whether patients received IFX or TAC (22.6% vs 26.7%, respectively, P = 0.53).
  • The mean decline in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index scores from admission to discharge in those treated with IFX (31.9) or TAC (29.8) was similar (P = 0.63).
  • Similar rates of adverse effects were seen. 4 patients in the TAC group experienced neurologic symptoms.
  • About half of the steroid-refractory ASC patients failing either agent as initial rescue therapy required colectomy, even if they switched to the alternative agent.
  • 17.9% of patients receiving high-dose IFX required colectomy by 6 months compared to 25% in the “typical” IFX dosing group; this was not statistically significant, likely due to limitations of sample size.

In the systematic review/meta-analysis study by Bolia et al., the authors identified 7 studies with 166 children (111 steroid-refractory, 52 steroid-dependent, 3 no steroids). The majority of cases (150/166 [90%]) were naïve to biologics. None of the participants in these studies have been treated recently (only 10 patients since 2014 and none after 2016). The two most recently published studies in 2018 and 2019 had enrollment in 2014-2016 and 2000-2012, respectively. Key findings:

  • An initial response to tacrolimus therapy was seen in 84% 
  • No difference was observed between children with high (>10 ng/mL) or low tacrolimus levels (127/150 [85%] vs 12/16 [75%], P = 0.3).
  • The pooled frequency of 1-year colectomy-free survival in children treated with initial oral tacrolimus was 64% (95% CI: 53%–75%). Twelve (7.2%) patients required cessation of therapy because of side effects.

My take: Both of these studies indicate that tacrolimus could be a useful agent for ASC and may find a role as a bridge therapy for biologic agents with slower onset of action.

Related blog posts:

NRocks Climb in Circleville, WV

ARCH Study: Higher Doses of Infliximab in Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Posted on by

KG Whaley et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 21: 1338-1347. Multicenter Cohort Study of Infliximab Pharmacokinetics and Therapy Response in Pediatric Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis

This was a multicenter prospective cohort of hospitalized children initiating IFX for ASUC or IBD-unclassified (n=38).

Key findings:

  • Compared to previous publications of pediatric ASUC, there was a low colectomy rate in this cohort of 2.7% at week 26 and 10.8% at 2 years
  • Median initial IFX dose was 9.9 mg/kg
  • Early rapid clearance was strongly associated with colectomy
  • Faster clearance was associated with higher WBC, presence of antibodies to infliximab and lower albumin. Higher platelets were associated with increased volumes of distribution. Concomitant immunomodulator use (26% with methotrexate, 13% thiopurine) “was not a significant covariate for PK parameters”

Discussion points:

  • Higher IFX dosing (10 mg/kg) may sufficiently optimize early outcomes in pediatric ASUC. Prior retrospective studies of adult and pediatric ASUC patients have supported lower colectomy rates with intensified induction regimens compared to standard induction regimens
  • The availability of vedolizumab may also have contributed to a lower colectomy rate
  • WBCs, “specifically neutrophils, may participate in the elimination of IFX”
  • Limitations: observational study, lack of dose standardization, lack of endoscopic outcomes

My take: Especially in pediatric patients, there is ample data to support using 10 mg/kg dosing for infliximab in patients with more severe inflammatory bowel disease, both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease.

Related blog posts:

Treatments for “Bad” Inflammatory Bowel Disease (Part 3)

Posted on by

D Tarabar et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2022; 28: 1549-1554. A Prospective Trial with Long Term Follow-up of Patients With Severe, Steroid-Resistant Ulcerative Colitis Who Received Induction Therapy With Cyclosporine and Were Maintained With Vedolizumab

As noted previously, in my view, “bad” inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) occurs when treatments are not working; though, many would argue that any IBD is bad IBD. Today’s post concludes several reviewed articles that focus on the problem of IBD that is not responding well to treatment.

Methods: Seventeen steroid-resistant adult UC patients were treated with cyclosporine in combination with vedolizumab, with a follow up of 52 weeks. Only 2 patients in this chort had failed infliximab therapy. The authors administered IV cyclosporine at a dose of “2 to 4 mg/kg/d IV for 7 days, titrated to a goal trough level of 300 to 400 ng/mL.” In those with a response, patients were started on oral therapy along with IV vedolizumab. During oral therapy (for 8 weeks), goal trough levels were 150 to 250 ng/mL (measured weekly).

Key findings:

  • Fifteen (88%) of 17 patients initially responded to cyclosporine and were started on vedolizumab
  • At week 10, 11 (73%) of 15 patients had achieved endoscopic remission with a Mayo score of ≤1. 
  • At week 26, 14 (93%) of 15 of the patients were in clinical remission and 11 (73%) were in endoscopic remission.
  • At week 52 of follow-up, 10 (71%) of 14 of these patients continued to be in endoscopic remission and 11 (79%) of 14 were in clinical remission.
  • Colectomy-free survival rate was 82% (n = 14 of 17) at 1 year and mean C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and fecal calprotectin levels were 3.2 mg/L, 16.1 mm/h, and 168.3 µg/g, respectively

My take: Cyclosporine is a fast-acting medication and thus appropriate as a salvage therapy in those with severe disease. Concerns for adverse effects have led most pediatric GIs to favor infliximab for refractory severe UC. However, in selected patients, it could be a useful “bridge” to slower-acting long-term treatments. It is possible (likely) that insurance issues would be less with cyclosporine than tofacitinib as a bridge therapy.

**An alternative agent to cyclosporine is tacrolimus. Hamel B, Wu M, Hamel EO, Bass DM, Park KT. Outcome of tacrolimus and vedolizumab after corticosteroid and anti-TNF failure in paediatric severe colitis. BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2018;5(1):e000195 (“Positioning Biologic Therapies in the Management of Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease” & 14% of U.S. Infected with COVID-19)

Related blog posts:

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

Island Ford National Recreational Area, Sandy Springs GA

Treatments for “Bad” Inflammatory Bowel Disease (Part 2) & Reassuring Data on Tofacitinib

Posted on by

As noted yesterday, in my view, “bad” inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) occurs when treatments are not working; though, many would argue that any IBD is bad IBD. Over the next few days, reviewed articles will focus on the problem of IBD that is not responding well to treatment. This article reports on the use of tofacitinib to avoid colectomy in children with severe ulcerative colitis.

BD Constant et al. JPGN 2022; 75: 724-730. Tofacitinib Salvage Therapy for Children Hospitalized for Corticosteroid- and Biologic-Refractory Ulcerative Colitis

This small (n=11) retrospective single-center cohort study of consecutive hospitalized pediatric patients initiating tofacitinib for refractory ulcerative colitis from 2018 to 2021. All patients demonstrated nonresponse to both intravenous corticosteroids and anti-TNF therapy prior to tofacitinib initiation.

Key findings:

  • Eight of 11 patients remained colectomy-free at 90 days following hospital admission and 6 remained colectomy-free over median 182-day follow-up, including 4 of whom remained on tofacitinib
  • The authors note that three patients started with TID dosing and eight received BID dosing (10 mg per dose). The higher dosing was influenced by a case control study by Bernstein et al which showed a 15% 90-day colectomy rate among adults with acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC), particularly those dosed at TID (Open Access: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 19: 2112-2120. Tofacitinib for Biologic-Experienced Hospitalized Patients With Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis: A Retrospective Case-Control Study)
  • “Remission rates peaked at 12-16 weeks and decreased at 6 months…tofacitinib may …bridge to slower-acting and possibly safer long-term therapies such as ustekinumab or vedolizumab”
  • The median time to corticosteroid discontinuation was 89 days
  • No serious tofacitinib-related adverse events were observed

My take: Given the small numbers, this is clearly an area where cooperation (& ImproveCareNow) could be helpful in determining the safety and effectiveness of tofacitinib for pediatric ASUC. Also, if tofacitinib is used as a ‘bridge’ this is likely to present insurance coverage issues.

Related article:

Hoisnard L, Pina Vegas L, Dray-Spira R, et al. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases Published Online First: 05 October 2022. doi: 10.1136/ard-2022-222824. Risk of major adverse cardiovascular and venous thromboembolism events in patients with rheumatoid arthritis exposed to JAK inhibitors versus adalimumab: a nationwide cohort study Methods: This was a nationwide population-based cohort study (n=15,835) of the French national health data system, the exposed group initiating a JAKi and non-exposed group initiating adalimumab Key findings:  Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) for the exposed versus non-exposed group was not significant: HRw 1.0 (95% CI 0.7 to 1.5) (p=0.99), nor was risk of VTEs significant: HRw 1.1 (0.7 to 1.6) (p=0.63). This study provides reassuring data regarding the risks of MACEs and VTEs in patients initiating a JAKi versus adalimumab, including patients at high risk of cardiovascular diseases.

Related blog posts:

From Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation, Georgia Chapter, December Newsletter: Donate to Cohen-Saripkin Fund

@MondayNightIBD and Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis Algorithm

Posted on by

A summary of the discussion and more detailed information on this topic from Gastroenterology and Endoscopy News (4/20/22): Open Access: ASUC: A Medical and Surgical Emergency Requiring Comprehensive, Timely Multidisciplinary Care

Lab workup per article:

For infliximab salvage therapy, the article recommends re-dosing at 3-5 days after initial dose.

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

“For Hospitalized Patients With ASUC, 5-ASA Adds No Value to Steroids”

Posted on by

From Gastroenterology and Endoscopy News (4/25/22): Open Access: For Hospitalized Patients With ASUC, 5-ASA Adds No Value to Steroids

In the first prospective randomized study, presented at the 2022 Crohn’s & Colitis Congress and published in Inflammatory Bowel Dis (S Ben-Horin et al 2022;28 [suppl 1]:S14 CORTICOSTEROIDS AND 5ASA VERSUS CORTICOSTEROIDS ALONE FOR ACUTE SEVERE ULCERATIVE COLITIS: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL), investigators at 10 centers in six countries randomly assigned 149 patients hospitalized for ASUC to receive daily doses of 300 mg of hydrocortisone (or equivalent methylprednisolone) alone or in combination with 4 g of mesalamine.

Key findings:

  • 72.6% of patients receiving combination corticosteroids with 5-ASA responded to treatment at one week compared with 76.3% of responders in the group receiving corticosteroids alone
  • “There were no differences in hospital length of stay between groups (median, 10 vs. nine days for the combination and monotherapy groups, respectively), the proportion of patients whose C-reactive protein level normalized (34.2% vs. 34.3%, respectively), or the proportion requiring colectomy within 90 days (4.9% vs. 4.5%, respectively).”
  • While 5-ASAs did not alter the trajectory of acute colitis, one other finding was a lower rate of biologic use (27% vs 47%, P=.07) at 90 days in those who continued to receive 5-ASA therapy at 90 days.

My take: 5-ASAs do not appear to be helpful during hospitalization for ASUC but may be beneficial as a maintenance therapy in some patients.

Related blog posts:

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