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

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

Should Vedolizumab Be Used as a First Line Agent for Crohn’s Disease?

B Bokemeyer et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2024; 30: 746-756.

Methods: 3277 adult biologically-unexposed CD patients starting therapy with VEDO or anti-TNF were consecutively enrolled in 45 IBD centers across Germany (2017-202). This was a non-randomized, observational study with prospectively collected data.

Findings:

  • Anti-TNF agents had higher induction clinical remission rates compared to vedolizumab: 73.9% 56.3% vs, P < .05
  • Vedolizumab (VEDO) had higher long-term clinical remission rates: clinical remission after 2 years was significantly better for VEDO compared with anti-TNF, 74.2% vs 44.7%; P < .05. This was associated with a much better treatment persistent rate. The switch rate for VEDO was 17% compared with 44% for anti-TNF agents.
  • Among week 14 responders, VEDO 2-year clinical remission rates were 88.6% compared to 45.8% (P < .00001) for anti-TNF agents

The discussion describes the strengths and limitations of this study. As it is not a randomized control trial, there can still be selection bias and confounding even with propensity scoring that was done in this study. The authors note that in a prior analysis of RCTs comparing infliximab to vedolizumab in CD patients, that infliximab had higher efficacy for induction and maintenance, though the clinical remission rates were only modestly improved at 1 year. (L Peyrin-Biroulet et al. BMC Gastroenterol 2022; 22: 291).

Recent expert guidance (2024) has favored infliximab and risankizumab over other advance therapies in CD patients who have not had previous biologic therapies (see: Comparative Evidence and Positioning Advance Therapies for Inflammatory Bowel Disease).

My take: This study shows that vedolizumab is a good advanced therapy for patients with Crohn’s disease without prior therapy. Among those with a clinical response at 14 weeks, the treatment durability was particularly impressive in this cohort.

It would be great to see an RCT in children with CD comparing IFX to VEDO. Treatment persistence is even more important in younger patients.

Related blog posts:

IBD Updates: Reducing Postoperative Crohn’s Disease, How Effective is IFX after Adalimumab, UST vs VDZ in Pediatric UC

C Hernandez-Rocha et al. J Crohns Colitis 2024: 18: 615–627. Clinical Predictors of Early and Late Endoscopic Recurrence Following Ileocolonic Resection in Crohn’s Disease

Prospective Study n=365 adult patients with post-operative Crohn’s disease. Findings: At first colonoscopy, 109 [29.9%] had recurrence. Male gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.95), non-White ethnicity [OR = 2.48], and postoperative smoking [OR = 2.78] were associated with recurrence, while prophylactic anti-TNF reduced the risk [OR = 0.28]. Postoperative anti-TNF prophylaxis had a protective effect on anti-TNF experienced patients but not on anti-TNF naïve patients. Among patients without recurrence at first colonoscopy, Rutgeerts score i1 was associated with subsequent recurrence [OR = 4.43]

A Lecoutour et al JPGN 2024; 78:1116–1125. Efficacy of infliximab after loss of response of/intolerance to adalimumab in pediatric Crohn’s disease: A retrospective multicenter cohort study of the “GETAID pédiatrique”

Key findings: In this retrospective study, 27 of 32 patients (84.4%) were still on IFX at 12 months of the switch. Among them, 13 had discontinued ADA because of a LOR, 12 for insufficient response and 2 due to primary nonresponse. At 1 year, 22 patients were in corticosteroid free clinical remission (68.7%).

PV Patel et al. JPGN 2024; 78:1126–1134. Real‐world effectiveness of ustekinumab and vedolizumab in TNF‐exposed pediatric patients with ulcerative colitis

Using the ICN registry, this observational study had 262 anti-TNF refractory patients receiving VDZ and 74 patients receiving UST. Key finding: At 6 months, 28.3% of patients on VDZ and 25.8% of those on UST achieved CFCR (p= 0.76)

Orchid, Atlanta Botanical Gardens

SC Infliximab versus Vedolizumab for Crohn’s Disease and for Ulcerative Colitis

Peyrin‐Biroulet, L., Arkkila, P., Armuzzi, A. et al. BMC Gastroenterol 24, 121 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-024-03163-5. Open Access! Comparative efficacy and safety of subcutaneous infliximab and vedolizumab in patients with Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis included in randomised controlled trials. 

Methods: Studies included in the current analysis were parallel-group, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated treatment with IFX SC, following induction therapy with IFX IV, or treatment with VDZ (either with VDZ IV or with VDZ SC [following IV induction therapy]). The authors identified three eligible CD trials and four eligible UC trials that assigned over 1200 participants per disease cohort to either IFX SC or VDZ.

Key findings:

Crohn’s disease: Intravenous induction therapy with IFX demonstrated better efficacy compared with VDZ; during the maintenance phase, IFX SC showed numerically better efficacy than VDZ. A lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year.

Comparison of IFX SC versus VDZ for key efficacy outcomes in patients with Crohn’s disease

Ulcerative colitis: Efficacy profiles were similar with IFX SC and VDZ during the induction and maintenance phases, and a lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year.

Comparison of IFX SC1 versus VDZ for key efficacy outcomes in patients with ulcerative colitis

Safety: In both cohorts, safety profiles for IFX SC and VDZ were generally comparable during 1 year.

Discussion Points:

  • The authors discuss some limitations of their study. “The GEMINI I, GEMINI II, and VISIBLE 1 trials were rated as being at high risk of bias for the category ‘other’ bias, because only patients who achieved a clinical response during induction went on to participate in the maintenance phase, which could potentially lead to a higher estimate of efficacy during the maintenance phase than if patients who did not achieve a clinical response were also included.”
  • The vedolizumab studies notably included a high proportion of patients who failed to respond to anti-TNFs. “All VDZ studies permitted enrolment of patients with prior TNFi failure, accounting for 47.5% of VDZ-treated patients overall.” Thus, in a true head-to-head study with patients unexposed to biologics, VDZ may achieve better results.

My take: This study indicates that SC infliximab (like IV infliximab) appears to be more effective than vedolizumab for patients with Crohn’s disease and similarly effective for ulcerative colitis, keeping in mind the aforementioned discussion points. While not evident in this study, vedolizumab has a superior safety profile.

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.

Dr. Joel Rosh: Positioning Therapies for Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis

Dr. Joel Rosh gave our group an excellent update on sequencing therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC).  My notes below may contain errors in transcription and in omission. Along with my notes, I have included many of his slides.

  • There are only two FDA-approved biologics in pediatric Ulcerative Colitis. It typically takes 8-10 years for a medication with approval in adults to receive FDA approval in children
  • The concept of IBD as two diseases, Crohn’s disease and UC, is flawed; there are more than 200 susceptibility genes for inflammatory bowel disease
  • There has been an increasing incidence and prevalence of IBD. Some of this increase is likely due to our diet and its effects on the microbiome
  • Ultrasound is a nice tool to see what is going on in real time and shows that UC is really a transmural disease.  UC changes in the bowel can result in fibrosis
  • Consider cytokine-basis for disease as a way to conceptualize disease presentation compared to organ-based disease. Many autoimmune diseases (eg. JIA, RA, Psoriasis) are different manifestations related to cytokine-based autoimmunity
  • Almost all pediatric IBD can be considered higher risk based on known risk factors including disease extent (>80% of pediatric UC is pancolitis) and disease age of onset
  • Mesalamine steroid-free clinical remission rates are about 1/3rd after 1 year of treatment
  • Overall, there has been an improvement in colectomy rates since 2001; there still appears to be a bump in the colectomy rate after having UC for more than 10 years
  • Elevated CRP is less common in patients with UC, compared to Crohn’s disease, and is a marker for more severe disease activity
  • Dr. Rosh prefers to avoid some terms including biologic-naive and steroid failure; he favors biologic-unexposed for the former. For the latter, he tries to make it clear that the patient was not a steroid failure. Steroids failed the patient rather than the patient failing the steroids
  • Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is mainly beneficial for anti-TNF agents at this time. Use of TDM can help monotherapy achieve similar results as combination therapy. For infliximab, Dr. Rosh’s ‘rule of thumb’ is 28-18-8 for 2 week trough, 6 week trough, and maintenance trough. Therapeutic levels will meet or exceed these trough levels.
  • Combination therapy has not been shown to improve pharmacokinetics for vedolizumab or ustekinumab
  • Generally, a washout period is not needed when changing biologic therapies. In fact, having some overlap in the medications may have some therapeutic benefit
  • Upadacitinib (Rinvoq) appears to be the most effective JAK for IBD. It is labelled for use as a 2nd-line agent but may be superior for some sicker patients. Rinvoq could be considered as a ‘bridge’ medication in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis with transition to another biologic like vedolizumab
  • It is important for families to be informed that there is a black box warning for the use of JAK inhibitors. However, major cardiac adverse events (MACE) do not appear to be increased in patients without preexisting cardiac disease risk factors

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.

Is It RISKy Not To Use Anti-TNF Therapy for Pediatric Crohn’s Disease?

D Geem et al (Senior author: Subra Kugasthasan). Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2024; 22: 368-376. Progression of Pediatric Crohn’s Disease Is Associated With Anti–Tumor Necrosis Factor Timing and Body Mass Index Z-Score Normalization

Congratulations to my colleagues at Emory who led/participated in this study.

This study examined 5-year longitudinal data from the pediatric multicenter RISK cohort (n=1075). RISK=risk stratification and identification of immunogenetic and microbial markers of rapid disease progression in children

Key findings:

  • For children with a low BMIz at diagnosis (n = 294), BMIz normalization within 6 months of diagnosis were associated with a decreased risk for surgery (HR 0.47). Patients without BMIz normalization were enriched for genes in cytokine production and inflammation.
  • Unsurprisingly, baseline B2 (stricturing disease) and B2+B3 (stricturing and penetrating disease) were associated with increased risk of surgery with HR, 4.20 and HR, 8.24 respectively
  • Earlier anti-TNF therapy was associated with a lower hazard rate (HR) of needing surgery


My take: It appears that early anti-TNF therapy lowers the risk of surgery. Improved BMI with treatment is another good prognostic variable. There may be an early window in which effective treatment prevents long-term damage to the GI tract in pediatric patients with Crohn’s disease.

This study has overlapping findings (also with RISK cohort) by Adler et al showing early treatment preventing perianal fistulas. Blog post: Early Treatment Can Prevent Fistulas in Pediatric Crohn’s Disease

Related article: JC McCurdy et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2024; 22: 377-385. Open Access! Comparative Effectiveness of Biologic Therapies in Preventing Penetrating Complications in Patients With Crohn’s Disease

In this observational retrospective study with 40,693 patients: 93% anti-TNF, 3% UST (ustekinumab), and 4% VDZ (vedolizumab), “Anti-TNF therapy was associated with a lower risk of LPD and PPD [luminal and perianal penetrating disease] compared with VDZ, and lower risk of LPD compared with UST.”

Related blog posts:

Immune Mediated Disorders Associated with TNF Inhibitors Can Involve the Liver Too

Yesterday’s post highlighted immune-mediated disorders likely caused by anti-TNF therapy; this includes rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, hidradenitis suppurativa, and chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis. Anti-TNF inhibitors can be the reason for drug-induced liver disease (DILI) including autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) as well. 

  • In one study, 8% of children receiving anti-TNF therapy developed a new elevation in ALT.
  • Most often liver enzyme elevation is mild and transient
  • Differential diagnosis for persistent elevation can be due to DILI, autoimmune liver disease (eg. PSC, AIH), or rarely due to a combination (autoimmune drug-induced liver disease). The latter can improve with drug cessation and with corticosteroid treatment.

Some slides on this topic (courtesy of William. Balistreri):

My take: Serious liver injury related to anti-TNF therapy is rare. When liver enzymes are persistently elevated, consider DILI including anti-TNF agents.

Related blog posts:

Vedolizumab and Infliximab: Expected Dosing When Switching From IV to SC Routes

Z Wang et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 3188-3190. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Can Guide the Intravenous-to-Subcutaneous Switch of Infliximab and Vedolizumab: A Simulation Study

The authors performed population pharmacokinetic (popPK) simulations to determine optimal dosing recommendations.

Key points:

  • Infliximab: “The Q2W SC dosing regimen of infliximab has been selected with the purpose of exceeding a C,trough,ss of 5 mg/L.” This tends to align with 5 mg/kg Q8W IV dosing.
  • Infliximab: “Patients on Q6W or Q8W IV infliximab can safely switch to Q2W SC infliximab…only patients on Q4W IV infliximab need Q1W SC dosing”
  • Vedolizumab: “Only patients on Q4W IV vedolizumab should switch to Q1W SC dosing”
  • Both agents: “Switching 4 instead of 8 weeks after the last IV dose can hit SS[steady state] faster, thereby avoiding the risk of temporary underexposure.”

My take: It is still important to see how switching from IV to SC route affects clinical outcomes in real-world cohorts. This study, though, does provide a good starting point when trying to provide the right dose frequency to achieve good therapeutic troughs.

Related blog posts:

Japanese Maple tree

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.

Granulomatous Lung Disease: Case for GI Doctors

JB McCannon et al. NEJM 2023; 389: 1902-1911. Case 35-2023: A 38-Year-Old Woman with Waxing and Waning Pulmonary Nodules

In this case report, A 38-year-old woman was evaluated because of dyspnea, chest discomfort, and waxing and waning pulmonary nodules. She had a prior history of ulcerative colitis. This article reviews reasons for pulmonary nodules including cancer, infection, vasculitis, connective tissue disorders, sarcoidosis and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) which has a number of pulmonary manifestations including necrobiotic nodules.

In this case, the granulomatous lung disease was attributed to be an extraintestinal manifestation of IBD. She was treated with TNF-alpha targeted therapy which has been effective in a prior case report (J Crohns Colitis 202; 14: 480-489).

My first reaction to this article — I have seen this! However, our case was atypical in that the 15 year old patient presented with respiratory symptoms (no preceding GI diagnosis). It was noted that her gastric wall was severely thickened as an incidental finding on her chest CT which showed extensive tiny pulmonary nodules. Her endoscopy showed disease isolated to her stomach. Both her gastric findings and CT of her chest resolved with infliximab treatment. This included mucosal healing of her stomach on followup endoscopy.

CT scan showing severely thickened gastric wall
Mucosal appearance of stomach with erythema and numerous ulcerations prior to treatment

Related blog post: IBD Update January 2015 (Part 1) NEJM 2014; 371: 2418-27 -case report of 9 yo with  Crohn’s Disease and pulmonary nodules

Genetic Test to Help Determine Need for Combination Therapy with Anti-TNF

V Solitano et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 21: 3019-3029. HLA-DQA1∗05 Genotype and Immunogenicity to Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Antagonists: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Key findings:

  • On meta-analysis of 13 studies (3756 patients; median follow-up, 12 months; 41% with variants), HLA-DQA1∗05 variants were associated with 75% higher risk of immunogenicity compared with non-carriers (relative risk, 1.75) with considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 62%) (low certainty evidence).
  • In addition, patients with HLA-QQA1*05 variants had clinical loss of response (LOR) in 67% compared to 30% in those without this variant (wild-type); thus, a 124% higher risk of LOR.
  • Positive and negative predictive values of HLA-DQA1∗05 variants for predicting immunogenicity were 30% and 80%, respectively
  • Proactive therapeutic drug monitoring, but not concomitant use of IMMs, IMIDs, and TNF-α antagonist-type, modified this association.

My take:

  • The ~40% of individuals with HLA-DQA1*05 variants are at higher risk of LOR and are more likely to benefit from both therapeutic drug monitoring and probably from use of combination (with immunomodulator) therapy.
  • The positive predictive value (30%) is low indicating that the majority of patients with these variants will not develop anti-drug antibodies within 12 months.
  • In those with negative testing for HLA-DQA1*05 (~60%), the higher negative predictive value indicates a patient is more likely to do well with monotherapy.
  • HLA-DQA1*05 testing is available commercially (usually part of Celiac HLA typing).

Related blog posts:

This is the Initiation Well at Quinta da Regaleira in Sintra, Portugal.
It is pretty cool because it seems to start at ground level and then goes down many floors.
There is an exit to a number of tunnels at the lower level.