This article describes a “multidisciplinary development and testing of a standardized pediatric IBD medical transfer summary template (PIBD-MTS) as a tool to improve the handoff of patient care.”
The “succinct nature allows AGIs [adult GIs] to review information within 10 min, in contrast to typically sifting through copious disorganized notes that may be redundant, at times irrelevant or missing key information. Its comprehensive nature includes prompts for disease monitoring, health maintenance, nutrition as well as mental health and socioeconomic factors that may affect IBD care.”
My take: This is a good template for transitioning patients. Though the focus is on transfers to adult gastroenterologists as patients get older, this form would be applicable for many patients who see other pediatric gastroenterologists for location or second opinions. It would be a good idea for this form to be available on the ImproveCareNow website. (It may be there but I did not see it). In addition, many centers may want to incorporate this template into their EMRs (eg. EPIC letter).
We had a terrific lecture given to our group by Dr. Bonney Reed. She is a pediatric psychologist with a clinical and research focus on children with inflammatory bowel disease. Our group has worked closely with Dr. Reed for many years. Many of her slides are included below along with my notes; my notes may contain errors in transcription and in omission.
GI symptoms may begin as the result of organic disease (e.g., IBD). Anxiety and chronic activation of the stress response system may lead to alterations in the brain, spinal cord, and gut increasing the load of GI symptoms. In turn, distress associated with GI symptoms may contribute to anxiety or depressed mood, creating a cycle of worsening GI symptoms and overall psychological distress.
Consistent with a brain-gut axis model, individuals with IBD, compared to healthy controls, demonstrate dysfunction of the ANS indicative of a chronic stress response which is characterized by increased sympathetic nervous system (SNS) activity and reduced parasympathetic nervous system (PNS) activity
Psychological factors are the key factor for pediatric patients with IBD when self-rating their global health
Factors that contribute to an individual’s current QoL: symptom exacerbation, psychological functioning including stress, and family support.
Health-related quality of life factors: major life transitions (eg. graduating high school and needing to manage IBD at college), fatigue ( persists despite controlled inflammation), poor body image (especially with weight changing rapidly), a diminished self-perception or seeing oneself as less capable, comorbid functional abdominal pain (about a quarter of youth with IBD), and food restrictions that can interfere with daily quality of life.
Stress plays important role influencing (bidirectional) disorders of brain gut interaction (DBGI)
Dr. Reed’s research includes a longitudinal cohort of newly-diagnosed (w/in 45 days) pediatric patients with IBD. This cohort undergoes psychosocial assessment along with ANS assessment
Emotional reactivity indicates individuals with a ‘short fuse’ who take longer to return to normal. Those with emotional reactivity are at increased risk for anxiety/depression.
Skin conductance response (SCR) can help determine autonomic nervous system (ANS) dysfunction. It is a measure of sympathetic arousal and stress
Stressful life events increase the rates of depression and correlate with skin conductance at medium and high levels
Within this model, Dr. Reed’s research focuses on the hypothesis that autonomic dysfunction is indicative of a chronic stress response. This, in turn, contributes to increased sympathetic nerve activity and decreased parasympathetic activity. This contributes to symptoms of anxiety and depression as well as GI clinical symptoms, all of which lead to impairments in QoL. Addressing autonomic dysfunction may provide a mechanism by which to address all of these QoL drivers
ANS dysfunction (which is also seen in cyclic vomiting syndrome) can improve with biofeedback focused heart rate variability (HRV). HRV, in turn, is associated with increase inflammation
Preliminary data from breath pacer intervention has shown in improvement in multiple variables
Methods: The authors calculated IBD polygenic scores (PGS) for 3732 Danish patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) and 4535 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), and investigated their association with disease outcomes.
“The Danish National Biobank stores neonatal blood spots from almost all Danes born since 1982…The North Denmark IBD (NorDIBD) cohort is a population-based cohort of all patients from the North Denmark Region with a confirmed IBD diagnosis from 1978–2020.17 From this cohort, 940 patients with IBD and a further 973 blood donors with no IBD diagnosis were genotyped from whole blood…applied variant loadings for calculating PGS for CD and UC susceptibility generated by Middha et al19 to our dataset. These variant loadings were derived from summary statistics from the IIBDGC.” This cohort had a young age. Only 2% and 3% of CD and UC patients, respectively, were 40+.
Severe Disease Definitions:
For patients with CD, a severe disease course was defined as experiencing (1) 2 or more IBD-related hospitalizations exceeding 2 days, (2) 2 or more IBD-related major surgeries, (3) 1 IBD-related hospitalization and 1 IBD-related major surgery not overlapping in time, or (4) a total use of at least 5000 mg prednisolone-equivalent systemic corticosteroids within the first 3 years after diagnosis
For patients with UC the severity definition was modified to experiencing (1) 2 or more IBD-related hospitalizations exceeding 2 days, (2) 1 or more IBD-related major surgeries, or (3) a total use of at least 5000 mg prednisolone-equivalent systemic corticosteroids.
Key findings:
Increased PGS was associated with higher fecal calprotectin and C-reactive protein levels, and decreased hemoglobin levels
When comparing the highest vs lowest PGS quintile, we observed a hazard ratio for major surgery of 2.74 in patients with CD and of 2.04 in UC
Patients with severe disease had higher PGS than patients with less severe disease (CD, odds ratio = 1.25; UC, odds ratio = 1.33)
The graphs below show the differences in hospitalization and surgery based on PGS for CD (A & B) and then for UC (C & D)
Discussion:
“Our results suggest that IBD susceptibility genetics only explain part of the severity of IBD, hence leaving room for other factors at play… This observation is promising, as it points toward the possibility of modulating the effects of genetic susceptibility through lifestyle interventions directed toward potential environmental factors that are yet to be uncovered.”
My take: It is intuitive that those with more genetic risk factors would be more likely to have severe disease. This study shows this assumption is correct in this cohort; in fact, there is a dose-response relationship. Those with higher PGS had more hospitalizations, major surgeries and medical treatments.
Methods: In the study by Lee et al, the authors identified 14 randomized controlled trials in 3139 patients with moderate-to-severe CD who were treated with different advanced therapies vs placebo, and reported efficacy in inducing clinical remission, stratified by disease location (isolated colonic vs ileal disease, excluding ileocolonic disease). The authors did not identify any RCT of TNF antagonists that reported induction of remission by disease location.
Key findings:
All advanced therapies had better success with colonic disease rather than ileal disease
Anti-interleukins (eg. IL23 o rIL12/IL23 agents) worked best for ileal disease among these advanced therapies
JAK inhibitors did not work well for ileal disease, but performed well for colonic disease
Anti-integrins, like vedolizumab, had some efficacy for ileal disease but generally a lower clinical remission rate than other agents
Lmitations included the use of clinical remission as the primary outcome
While this study did not provide data on anti-TNF therapy, in the discussion the authors note that “TNF antagonists may have advantages in small bowel CD…infliximab demonstrated the highest rate of improvement in large ileal ulcers (>0.5 cm).” [ref#45] “Additionally, infliximab has been reported to reduce fibrostenosis-associated inflammation, [Ref#46] making it currently the most suitable therapeuctic option for small bowel CD.”
In the study by Sands et al, this post-hoc analysis included week 10 responders (n=329) to intravenous IFX induction therapy who were randomized to receive IFX SC 120 mg every 2 weeks or placebo (PBO) during maintenance therapy.
Key findings:
My take: These two studies indicate that anti-TNF agents (particularly infliximab) and IL-23 type agents are most effective for Crohn’s disease affecting the ileum. JAK inhibitors are best for colonic disease.
D Turner et al. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2026;82:867–894. Reshaping study design for faster extrapolation‐baseddrug approval in pediatric inflammatory boweldiseases: An ESPGHAN–NASPGHAN position paper
“It has been 11 years since the adult approval of vedolizumab and 9 years since the approval of ustekinumab, yet neither is currently approved for use in children (Table 1). Instead of taking the necessary steps to shorten this unacceptable delay, there are now extra hurdles for clinical trials such as three ileocolonoscopies over 1 year in both pediatric CD and UC, as suggested by the FDA…”
Addendum: See comment by Matthew Kowalik, MD who is the Director (Acting) of Division of Gastroenterology for FDA/CDER/OND/OII. There has been recent approval recent of Stelara (ustekinumab) for the treatment of pediatric patients 2 years and older with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease. Here’s a link: Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) Gains FDA Approval for Pediatric Crohn’s Disease Treatment
“Pediatric extrapolation is based on assessing relevant similarities in disease characteristics, drug pharmacology, and treatment response between the target pediatric population and adults or other reference pediatric populations. While, historically, extrapolating safety data was considered unacceptable, the recent International Council for Harmonization (ICH) E11A Guideline on pediatric extrapolation that has been endorsed in 2024 by the EMA”[European Medicines Agency (EMA) ]
Selected Summary Statements (total of 24 are in the report):
1.There is no evidence that differences in pathogenesis and pathobiology between pediatric and adult patients with IBD are associated with differences in response to pharmaceutical therapies, except for monogenic disease (agreement 21/22).
2.In general, efficacy and drug-related safety outcomes in children older than 2 years are comparable to adults (agreement 22/22).
9. Optimal dosing should be used in all study arms in pediatric trials. Placebo, sham, or doses demonstrated to be subtherapeutic in prior studies should not be permitted. They are unethical in children, reduce feasibility of enrollment, and are not expected to be informative given the underpowered sample size of pediatric studies (agreement 22/22).
13.Ileocolonoscopic assessment is the gold standard for assessing mucosal healing (MH) and should be required at most twice in each study: that is, at baseline and study end (agreement 22/22).
14. Noninvasive objective measures, including serum and fecal biomarkers, magnetic resonance enterography (MRE), and/or intestinal ultrasound (IUS), should be used for assessing postinduction interim therapeutic response between the two ileocolonoscopies rather than requiring a third ileocolonoscopy (agreement 22/22).
My take (borrowed from the authors):
“While it is paramount to achieve a precise and comprehensive approval process for new drugs in pediatric IBD, it is equally important to expedite the process, so children and adolescents are not denied effective treatment available for adults with IBD…”
“Under these assumptions, future trial designs should be single-arm and open-label to focus on dosing and pharmacokinetics in children weighing <30–40 kg while mandating long-term safety registries, disease- and not necessarily drug-specific. Data should be supported by meticulously collected real-world evidence. Pediatric data must be collected as soon as a confident signal of efficacy and safety is achieved in adult studies…”
“This will resolve the current paradox in which children have the most severe and extensive disease and the highest efficacy of drugs, yet very limited access to these drugs.”
Methods: This retrospective cohort study used an administrative claims database and identified patients with IBD who were new users of either JAK inhibitors (n=856) or TNF antagonists (n=9422) between 2016 and 2023. Mean age was 45 years.
Key findings:
There was no difference in the risk of VTE (1.3 vs 1.2; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.28–1.57) and MACE (0.4 vs 0.7; HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.19–1.30)
There was no difference in the risk of serious infections (4.9 vs 5.4; HR, 0.97); however, JAK inhibitors were associated with an increase risk of overall infections (incidence rate, 62.4 per 100 person-years [PY] vs 37.4 per 100 PY; hazard ratio [HR], 1.60)
The authors note that their findings differ from the ORAL study (Ytterberg et al. NEJM 2022; 386: 316-326.) which showed higher risk of MACE in patients receiving tofacitinib. In the current study, even in patients deemed to be at higher risk for MACE (age >50 years with at least 1 cardiovascular risk factor), JAK inhibitors were associated with lower incidence and risk of MACE compared with TNF antagonists (IR per 1000 PY, 0.4 vs 2.1, HR 0.10).
My take (borrowed from the authors) “It is unlikely that JAK inhibitors are associated with higher risk of VTE and MACE compared with TNF antagonists in most patients with IBD.”
Methods: This was a prospective cohort study of patients (n=181 — 79 CD, 83 UC, 6 -IBD-U, 13 with IPAA) treated with UPA between April 2022 and November 2023. Included patients responded to UPA induction, had loss of response (LOR) after dose reduction, and subsequently received reinduction therapy with 45 mg QD. They were followed for a median duration 93 weeks.
Key findings:
Dose escalation to 45 mg QD for a median of 13 weeks (IQR, 8–36 weeks) recaptured clinical response in 80.4%
Among patients who recaptured response, 19 again reduced dose
93.8% of patients on 45 mg QD maintained remission vs 21.1% who again dropped to 30 mg QD (P < .001)
Acne/rosacea was the most common adverse event (39%); there were no serious adverse events
In their discussion, the authors note that dose escalation with another JAK inhibitor, tofacitinib, also has been shown to reverse LOR (in about 50%). In addition, they note that “in our experience, prolonged exposure to 45 mg QDD UPA is safe.” Though, “a longer follow-up period…is required to address long-term safety of UPA in IBD, especially at a higher dose.”
My take: Many patients taking UPA have not responded to multiple other advanced therapy. As such, the potential to recapture response with a higher dose of UPA is an important finding. Dose intensification is an effective strategy for most of the advanced therapies.
Briefly noted: S Honap et al.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2026; 24: 784-793. Open Access! Comparative Effectiveness of Tofacitinib vs Upadacitinib for the Treatment of Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis In this retrospective study of 111 adults with ASUC, Between days 3 and 7 after treatment initiation, upadacitinib was associated with greater response rates (84% vs 54%), but response/remission was comparable at day 98 (45%/36% vs 55%/48%) and day 182 (29/29% vs 39/34%).
Background: The ADMIRE CD II, a phase 3 trial of the efficacy and safety of darvadstrocel in patients with complex perianal fistulas (CPF) at weeks 24 and 52, conducted in more than twice as many sites and patients (n=568) as ADMIRE CD, from North America as well as Europe and Israel. This trial was conducted after the approval of darvadstrocel in Europe and Japan and therefore aimed to provide further confirmation of efficacy in patients with CPF.
Key findings:
At week 24, combined remission was achieved in 138 of 283 (48.8%) patients in the darvadstrocel group and 132 of 285 (46.3%) in the placebo group
There were no significant differences in key secondary endpoints for darvadstrocel vs placebo (clinical remission at week 24 [P = .515] and time to clinical remission [P = .374])
Treatment-emergent adverse events were infrequent and experienced by similar proportions of patients receiving darvadstrocel (203/278 [73.0%]) and placebo (201/274 [73.4%])
In the discussion, the authors speculate on why ADMIRE CD found a significant response to darvadstrocel whereas the current larger ADMIRE CD II did not.
” In ADMIRE CD II, all patients had seton placement (mandatory at least 2–3 weeks before treatment administration), whereas in ADMIRE CD, seton placement was as clinically indicated, and 10 patients (2 darvadstrocel, 8 placebo) did not have a seton. The fact that all patients, including those in the control group, underwent fistula preparation before treatment administration may have enhanced response rates in the placebo group in ADMIRE CD II”
“In patients with CPF, it is well established that higher trough levels of concomitant systemic therapies are associated with improved fistula healing outcomes compared with lower trough levels. These data were not collected during ADMIRE CD II or ADMIRE CD, but it is acknowledged that the possibility of higher trough levels in ADMIRE CD II compared with ADMIRE CD could have contributed to the difference in placebo response rates between trials… also relevant to consider the higher proportion of patients using background immunosuppressants or a combination of immunosuppressants and monoclonal antibodies in ADMIRE CD II compared with ADMIRE CD.”
My take (borrowed in part from the authors): These results “challenge the relevance of stem cell therapy for perianal fistula healing.” It appears that good surgical management along with optimized medical therapy achieve the same results.
Methods: Eligible patients were adults aged 18–80 years with moderate to severe Crohn’s disease (Crohn’s Disease Activity Index [CDAI] 220–450, with ulcers at endoscopy). Patients were divided into two groups: those with early Crohn’s disease, n=86 (defined as a diagnosis less than 2 years ago and naive to advanced treatment [naive or only treated with corticosteroids or immunomodulators, or both]); and those with late Crohn’s disease, n=174 (defined as a diagnosis more than 2 years ago and previously treated with corticosteroids, immunomodulators, and anti-TNF agents). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with clinical and endoscopic remission (defined as CDAI ≤150 and SES-CD <4) at both week 26 and 52.
Key findings:
Clinical and endoscopic remission at both week 26 and 52 was achieved in 27 (31·4%) of 86 patients with early Crohn’s disease versus 15 (8·6%) of 174 patients with late Crohn’s disease (difference 22·8%, 95% CI 12·6–33·7)
Serious adverse events occurred in three (3·5%) of 86 patients with early Crohn’s disease versus 46 (26·4%) of 174 patients with late Crohn’s disease and included infections (one [1·2%] vs 13 [7·5%]), surgery (none vs eight [4·6%]), intestinal obstruction (none vs four [2·3%]), exacerbation of Crohn’s disease (one [1·2%] vs six [3·4%]), and malignancy (none vs three [1·7%])
Corticosteroidfree clinical remission at all timepoints
Discussion:
“After 52 weeks of open-label treatment, almost 60% of patients with early disease achieved clinical remission and more than 50% were in endoscopic remission. By contrast, deep remission rates at both weeks 26 and 52 were observed in less than 10% of patients with late Crohn’s disease (ie, those with longstanding disease and previous exposure to anti-TNF agents).”
“Despite the earlier stage at which vedolizumab was initiated, disease severity was comparable betweenthe early and late Crohn’s disease groups, from a clinical (median CDAI 255 vs 259), endoscopic (median SES-CD 9 vs 12), and biochemical perspective (median serum C-reactive protein 9 mg/L vs 8 mg/L).”
“A pivotal observation in LOVE-CD was that dose intensification after week 26 (ie, doubling the dose) in patients without an endoscopic response did not lead to higher endoscopic remission rates, despite significantly higher serum vedolizumab concentrations. This finding suggests that the dosing schedule that was originally designed and approved is optimal for most patients and saturates the target. Patients who do not respond most likely have other dominant immune pathways that are activated and remain unaffected by vedolizumab.”
“All three classes of biologics approved for the treatment of Crohn’s disease perform better when initiated early in the disease course.”
My take: For Crohn’s disease (CD), vedolizumab should be mainly used in those without prior biologic therapy. In addition, changes in vedolizumab dosing based on concentrations is much less helpful than it is with anti-TNF agents.
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.
M Matar et al. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2026;82:487–494. Chronic nonbacterial osteomyelitis associated with pediatric inflammatory bowel disease: : A multicenter retrospective study from the Paediatric inflammatory bowel disease Porto Group of ESPGHAN
Methods: Retrospective study with 45 pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease (n=32 with Crohn’s disease, n=8 with ulcerative colitis, n=5 with IBD-U)
Key findings:
CNO presented in 15 patients (33%) within 3 months of IBD diagnosis, and in additional 20 (44%) patients after IBD diagnosis; in 10 (22%) patients CNO preceded the diagnosis of IBD with a median time 46 (25–248) weeks
11 (24%) subjects displayed at least one additional extra-intestinal manifestations, including arthritis (6, 13%), erythema nodosum (4, 9%), sacro-ileitis (2, 4%), psoriasis (1, 2%), and pyoderma gangrenosum (1, 2%).
Complications occurred in six patients and included vertebral collapse, bone fracture, and bone deformity. In eight (18%) subjects vertebral collapse was present already at the time of diagnosis.
“While in most patients, diagnosis of CNO was associated with either clinical or laboratory indices of active IBD, especially CD, in some cases, the intestinal disease was quiescent.”
“All patients achieved remission of CNO at some point during follow-up, which may support the hypothesis that anti-TNF treatment is unlikely to promote CNO development and does not reinforce the theory of a paradoxical effect that has been suggested by Cordesse et al.22“
My take: This is a useful review highlighting the association of CNO with both active disease and quiescent IBD. The authors argue that their data does not support the development of CNO as a paradoxical effect. I disagree with this premise. Many of the extraintestinal manifestations, that anti-TNF agents can treat, rarely can be caused by them. Besides CNO, paradoxical reactions to anti-TNF agents have included the development of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, hidradenitis suppurativa and autoimmune liver disease.
10 
gutsandgrowth 