Tag Archives: Ulcerative colitis

How to Best Use Steroids for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Posted on by
Reply

JD Feuerstein et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025; 23: 2068-2082. Open Access! Appropriate Use and Complications of Corticosteroids in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Comprehensive Review

Steroids are commonly used and misused for inflammatory bowel disease. This article reviews best practices, steroid formulations/dosing, and potential complications.

  • For moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (in adults), the authors recommend treatment with 40 mg of prednisone daily. Patients with ASUC (acute severe ulcerative colitis) should be treated with 60 mg of IV methylprednisolone for 3 to 5 days, after which rescue therapy should be initiated
  • Use of budesonide is recommended as an option for many clinical situations to minimize steroid adverse effects. These situations include mild-moderate UC failing to respond to mesalamine, ileal CD and older patients
  • Postoperative complications: “In the postoperative period, patients treated with CS had a higher risk of both infectious complications (aOR, 3.69; 95% CI, 1.24–10.97) and major infectious complications (aOR, 5.54; 95% CI, 1.12–27.26) [Abrerra et al].135  Subramanian pooled data from 7 studies showing that preoperative CS use is associated with increased postoperative complications (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.07–1.87) as well as infectious complications.

The authors note that corticosteroids “remain widely available and are an effective short-term option for induction of remission in patients with active UC or inflammatory CD. However, their well-described and significant safety profile warrants proactive strategies to limit their use through non-systemic formulations, short-term exposures, steroid-sparing maintenance options, and most recently, complete steroid avoidance strategies.”

My take: Continuing steroids when they are not effective prior to potential surgery (eg. ASUC) remains a frequent problem. Sometimes, it is difficult to know it they are helping some.

Prior Exposure to TNF Antagonists May Increase Response to JAK Inhibitors in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis

Posted on by

HH Lee et al. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2025; 23, 2102 – 2114. Open Access! Differential Efficacy of Advanced Therapies in Inducing Remission in Ulcerative Colitis Based on Prior Exposure to TNF Antagonists

Methods: Meta-analysis of 17 randomized controlled trials in 8871 adults with moderate-severe UC. The authors calculated the ratio of odds ratio of achieving remission with active drug vs placebo, in TNF antagonist–naïve vs TNF antagonist–exposed patients.

Key findings:

  • JAK inhibitors: Less efficacious in TNF antagonist–naïve vs exposed patients (6 trials; ratio of OR, 0.47)
  • IL-23 antagonists: No significant difference was observed in efficacy of selective interleukin-23 antagonists vs placebo in TNF antagonist–naïve vs exposed patients (6 trials; ratio of OR, 1.07)
  • Lymphocyte trafficking inhibitors: More efficacious in TNF antagonist–naïve vs exposed patients (5 trials; odds ratio [OR], 1.88)

Discussion:

  • This study “confirmed prior observations that exposure to TNF antagonists significantly reduces the efficacy of lymphocyte trafficking inhibitors in inducing remission, including both vedolizumab and S1P receptor modulators, by approximately 50%.In contrast, prior exposure to TNF antagonists was associated with a significant increase in the efficacy of JAK inhibitors in inducing remission, with 2-fold higher efficacy in TNF antagonist–exposed vs TNF antagonist–naïve patients”
  • In the SELECT-COMPARE trial in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, there was also an improved response to upadacitinib in patients with prior adalimumab.
  • “The current findings raise the intriguing possibility that exposure to TNF antagonists could result in lasting effects on the immune system that differentially alter responsiveness to therapies with distinct mechanisms of action”

My take: This study suggests that JAK inhibitors are a good choice for secondary therapy after anti-TNF agents. Other factors, besides efficacy, including safety, extraintestinal manifestations, and cost, have to be considered as well.

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.

Comprehensive ACG Clinical Guidelines for Ulcerative Coliits (2025)

Posted on by

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

Today and tomorrow I am highlighting two adult clinical guidelines both of which are equivalent to up-to-date textbook chapters with specific recommendations; both are open access. In addition, the articles have accompanying author podcasts. Thanks to Ben Gold for these references.

Table 2 in the UC guideline makes 54 recommendations and Table 3 provides 57 key concepts.

Selected Management Recommendations:

  • Table 2, #4: We recommend treating patients with UC to achieve endoscopic improvement (Mayo score 0 or 1) to increase the likelihood of sustained steroid-free remission and to prevent hospitalization and surgery
  • Table 2, #5: We recommend the use of FC (fecal calprotectin) in UC to assess response to therapy, to evaluate suspected relapse, and during maintenance
  • Table 2, #33: When infliximab is used as induction therapy for patients with moderately to severely active UC, we recommend combination therapy with a thiopurine
  • Table 2, #43: Recommend continuing tofacitinib or upadacitinib as compared with no treatment for maintenance of remission in patients with prior moderately to severely active UC now in remission after induction with tofacitinib or upadacitinib. **The authors recommend continuing each biologic that achieved remission with induction therapy (#38-#43)
  • Table 2, #51: In patients with ASUC failing to adequately respond to intravenous corticosteroids (IVCS) by 3 days, we recommend medical rescue therapy with infliximab or cyclosporine (Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence).

Key concepts:

  • Table 3, #29: Patients who are primary nonresponders to an anti-TNF (defined as lack of therapeutic benefit after induction and despite sufficient serum drug concentrations) should be evaluated and considered for alternative mechanisms of disease control (e.g., in a different class of therapy) rather than cycling to another drug within the anti-TNF class.
  • Table 3, #31:  Subcutaneous infliximab and vedolizumab are considered equivalent to the standard intravenous maintenance dosing of these agents. The equivalence of the subcutaneous formulations for induction or as substitution for escalated doses of these therapies has not been robustly established.
  • Table 3, #41: Patients with UC should have available all medical options as recommended by their doctor and healthcare team. Third-party payers and requirements for step therapy should not come between the patient and their healthcare team in making decisions about treatment for UC.
  • Table 3, #48: All patients with ASUC should undergo a flexible sigmoidoscopy within 72 hours and preferably within 24 hours of admission. This should be used to assess endoscopic severity of inflammation and to obtain biopsies to evaluate for cytomegalovirus (CMV) colitis.
  • Table 3, #51: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), narcotics, and medications with anticholinergic side effects should be avoided in ASUC.
  • Table 3, #57: In patients with ASUC initiating infliximab, dose intensification should be considered for those patients with low serum albumin (<2.5 g/dL).

My take: This article does an excellent job of summarizing current available evidence and good practice. Many of the recommendations may be helpful in garnering approval from third party payers.

Related blog posts:

Why Pediatric Patients Need Higher Dosing of Infliximab

Posted on by

E Stenke et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2025; 31: 2331-2337. Higher-Dose Infliximab Induction Achieves Better Maintenance Trough Levels in a National Pediatric IBD Cohort—A Retrospective Study

In this single center retrospective study from Ireland, the authors examined 122 patients (93 with Crohn’s disease [CD], 18 with ulcerative colitis [UC], 1 with IBDU) who received infliximab and had prospectively-collected data. The earlier cohort 2018-2019 received 5 mg/kg/dose and the later group 10 mg/kg/dose. Both groups had proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (pTDM).

Key findings:

  • The 5 mg/kg group, compared to the 10 mg/kg group, was less likely to have target pre-third TLs (6% vs 80%, P < .001) with the stated goal of >/= 15 microgm/mL
  • Fewer patients in the 5 mg/kg than 10 mg/kg group had pre-fourth TLs ≥5 µg/mL (6/48 [12.5%] vs 28/50 [56%], P < .001; mean [SD] TL 3.5 [6.3] vs 10.0 [9.9], P < .001)
  • Concurrent immunomodulator therapy was more common in the 5 mg/kg group (43% compared to 24%)
  • 80% of patients were still receiving infliximab at 1 year including 87% of patients with CD and 54% with UC
  • The higher dose group had a lower CRP at 1 year followup. 26% of patients receiving the lower dose had a CRP > 5 mg/L compared with 9% in the higher dose group.
  • Some other measures of long term outcome (eg. IFX durability, clinical remission) were slightly better but did not reach statistical significance (see below)

Discussion Points:

  • “Our data show higher rates of below-target infliximab levels during and after induction in the 5 mg/kg group. Higher rates of dose escalation in this group during the first year resulted
    in similar dosing regimens…Thus, the similar infliximab durability and clinical outcomes
    at 1-year follow-up reflect early-dose optimization leading to dose equalization between the 2 groups, rather than a lack of benefit to higher dosing regimens”
  • “Our data affirm that proactive TDM with pre-emptive dose escalation restores
    below-target infliximab TLs and sustains clinical response…Indeed, in our cohort, some patients with low IFX levels pre-third dose were given their fourth dose 6 weeks later, rather
    than the standard 8 weeks. Without proactive TDM results, our rate of suboptimal TLs pre-fourth and during maintenance therapy would have been higher in both groups”
  • “Rates of immunomodulator use in the 10 mg/kg group were lower than in the earlier cohort of 5 mg/kg, reflecting changes in clinical practice over time”

My take:

  1. This study shows that 94% of pediatric patients did NOT achieve adequate levels of infliximab at the pre-third dose with “standard” therapy. This was true even with 43% of the lower dose cohort receiving combination therapy (which often helps improve pharmacokinetics)
  2. Proactive therapeutic drug monitoring helped mitigate the clinical outcomes, especially in the lower dosed cohort
  3. “Children with IBD treated with the historic standard dose of 5 mg/kg induction are at increased risk of pharmacokinetic treatment failure related to high rates of suboptimal TLs”

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.

NASPGHAN Pediatric Position Paper for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

Posted on by

LM Felipez et al. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2025;81:1100–1117. Open Access! North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition position paper on the therapeutic drug monitoring in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease

Therapeutic Drug Targets Based on Condition, Medication and Time of Therapy:

Discussion Points:

  • Pediatric Dosing is Different: “Pediatric studies have also determined adult infliximab targets are insufficient…In a prospective pediatric study, Clarkston et al. found that a trough level of 29 μg/mL at 2 weeks is required to achieve both clinical and biologic response. Patients with lower trough levels had 13-fold greater odds of clinical nonresponse. Additionally, a trough of 18 μg/mL at 6 weeks was associated with improved response. Patients with lower trough levels had sixfold greater odds of clinical nonresponse. They also observed that patients who did not achieve a trough >5–7 μg/mL by 14 weeks of therapy had a 21-fold increase in the odds of clinical nonresponse.62“
  • Undetectable/very low anti-TNF levels: “If the serum level is extremely low or undetectable, then full re-induction is warranted in addition to dose escalation.”
  • Timing of TDM: “As a practice point, TDM is routinely recommended at the end of induction for most patients. We recommend obtaining TDM earlier during induction in at-risk populations, including younger age children, those with hypoalbuminemia, and those with increased inflammatory burden.”
  • Maintenance proactive TDM: “Based on prospective randomized trial evidence, we recommend proactive TDM during maintenance every 6–12 months…yearly proactive TDM was associated with 55% reduced risk of developing antidrug antibodies.26“
  • Increased Antidrug Antibodies with Lower Infliximab Dosing: “In the pivotal REFINE study on immunogenicity in pediatric IBD, Coleman et al. found that antibodies to infliximab were detected in 68% of patients in the cohort, and starting dose under 7.5 mg/kg was one of the strongest predictors of developing antidrug antibodies.4“
  • Higher Doses Prevent Antidrug Antibodies: “The best available evidence for preventing immunogenicity supports initiating therapy with infliximab doses greater than 8 mg/kg, and in the case of hypoalbuminemia, doses greater than 10 mg/kg. For children <40 kg, doses of 200 mg/m2 are more appropriate.”
  • Perianal fistulas: “Overall, there is less evidence to support adalimumab use over infliximab for treatment of perianal fistulas. It is possible that adalimumab may have lower efficacy for perianal fistula.105 However, it is unclear if this is inherent to adalimumab, or if it relates to less frequent TDM or less frequent dose escalation in practice.”
  • Vedolizumab: “In general, as with other biologic therapies, a higher serum vedolizumab concentration is associated with higher likelihood of treatment response…Multiple studies identified that in patients with IBD (either UC or CD) early trough levels at Week 2132 with a cut off of >23.2 μg/mL or Week 6133, 134 with a cut off of above 22–28 μg/mL or at Week 14135) above 16.55 μg/mL predicted a higher likelihood of sustained response over the first year. In regard to clinical remission one study identified that corticosteroid free, clinical and biochemical remission was correlated to higher trough vedolizumab concentration.136“
  • Vedolizumab in younger patients: “Children under 30 kg require vedolizumab doses of 200 mg/m2 or 10 mg/kg.”

My take: “This NASPGHAN position paper should also serve to document that high-dose therapy, especially guided by TDM, is evidence-based standard of care.” This article clearly establishes three key points:

  1. “Intensive anti-TNF⍺ dosing strategies are not experimental. The initial doses of infliximab and adalimumab approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) routinely lead to under-treatment, poor outcomes, and treatment discontinuation.60, 117 There is a rich, corroborated, and verified evidence-base to support the safety and efficacy of high-dose therapy anti-TNF⍺ therapy when clinically indicated, especially as supported by TDM.50, 62, 65, 100, 101, 103, 118“
  2. Therapeutic drug monitoring is essential in the pediatric population to optimize drug levels, allow many patients to do well with monotherapy, and to help avoid development of antidrug antibodies.
  3. The best available evidence supports TDM during induction of vedolizumab as well.

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.

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.

Pediatric Guidelines for Ulcerative Colitis (Part 1)

Posted on by

E Wine et al. JPGN 2025;81:765–815. Open Access! Management of paediatric ulcerative colitis, part 1: Ambulatory care—An updated evidence-based consensus guideline from the European Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition and the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation

This is the first of two highly-detailed papers. (This is a 50 page report.) it has extensive/comprehensive recommendations and information on all aspects of UC management, except acute severe colitis which is covered tomorrow.

Here are some of the recommendations:

  • Thiopurines are recommended for maintaining remission in children who, despite optimal 5-ASA treatment, are corticosteroid-dependent or have frequent relapses (≥2 relapses per year) or in 5-ASA-intolerant patients; thiopurines should be considered following discharge from ASC episodes (EL4, adults EL3) (Agreement 100%).
  • Infliximab should be considered, preferably in combination with an IMM, as the first-line biologic agent in chronically active or corticosteroid-dependent UC, uncontrolled by 5-ASA, and in most cases also thiopurines, for both induction and maintenance of remission [EL1, adults EL1] (Agreement 96%).

It is worth noting that anti-TNF monotherapy with pTDM is common practice in the U.S. due to concerns about the safety of combined therapy with a thiopurine (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).

  • Infliximab is recommended to be used preferably in combination with an IMM (with the most evidence in UC being for thiopurines) to reduce the likelihood of developing antibodies to infliximab (ATIs) and in thiopurine-naïve patients, to enhance effectiveness. Methotrexate may also be used to mitigate ATIs. For immunogenicity prevention, lower doses of azathioprine (1–1.5 mg/kg) may be used. Data on methotrexate dose in this setting are scarce, but low total doses of 7.5–12.5 mg weekly are reported. Proactive TDM is recommended, particularly when infliximab is prescribed as monotherapy (Agreement 96%).
  • In most cases, higher doses of infliximab (e.g., 10 mg/kg/dose at Weeks 0, 2 and 6, followed by 10 mg/kg every 4–8 weeks for maintenance) are required to provide the best chance of reaching the desired clinical and endoscopic outcome. The dose can be subsequently reduced, guided by TDM. Lower dosing (5 mg/kg) can be used in less severe cases. In cases in which IV infliximab treatment is switched to subcutaneous injections, the recommended dosing schedule (established only for >40 kg) is 120 mg every 2 weeks. See Table 2 for dosing details (Agreement 100%).
  • Proactive TDM is recommended for both infliximab and adalimumab, particularly at the end of induction (before the 4th infliximab infusion and after 3 adalimumab injections) [EL4] (Agreement 100%).

Cancer Surveillance:

  • 1. Children with UC aged 12 years and over with a disease duration of greater than 8 years should be considered for surveillance for CRC and dysplasia [EL4, Adults EL1] (Agreement 96%).
  • 2. Children with UC and PSC should be considered for surveillance for CRC and dysplasia starting at age 12, regardless of disease duration [EL4, Adults EL3] (Agreement 100%).

My take: The referenced paper in today’s post and tomorrow’s are essentially updated published book chapters with specific management recommendations. There are likely some practice variations but overall the recommendations will help garner support for current practices like optimizing infliximab dosing and using proactive TDM.

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

What Caught My Eye in a Recent Anti-IL23 Commentary

Posted on by

This recent commentary on the all-subcutaneous induction and maintenance treatment with guselkumab, an anti-IL23 agent, reviewed the GRAVITI study. Related post: Guselkumab for Crohn’s Disease: Pivotal GRAVITI Study

However, what captured my attention was the last sentence: “The convenience of subcutaneous induction enhances patient friendliness, positioning guselkumab as a strong market contender. Could an oral anti–IL-23 formulation be the next game changer?14“

“Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ) today announced positive topline results from ANTHEM-UC, a Phase 2b study of icotrokinra (JNJ-2113), the first investigational targeted oral peptide that selectively blocks the IL-23 receptor, in adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC)…

In the ANTHEM-UC study (n=252), three doses of once daily icotrokinra were tested with all meeting the primary endpoint of clinical response at Week 12. A response rate of 63.5% for patients treated with the highest dose of icotrokinra was achieved at Week 12 versus 27% for placebo (p<0.001). Further, 30.2% of patients treated with the highest dose of icotrokinra demonstrated clinical remission at Week 12 versus 11.1% of patients who received placebo (p<0.01). Remission and response rates continued to improve through Week 28.

  • Clinical response is defined as decrease from baseline in the modified Mayo score by greater than or equal to (>=) 30 percent (%) and >=2 points, with either a >=1-point decrease from baseline in the rectal bleeding subscore or a rectal bleeding subscore of 0 or 1.
  • Clinical remission is defined as a Mayo stool frequency subscore of 0 or 1 and not increased from induction baseline, a Mayo rectal bleeding subscore of 0, and a Mayo endoscopy subscore of 0 or 1 with no friability present on the endoscopy.”

My take: It would be terrific for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (and other immune-mediated diseases) to have another excellent oral therapy. A prior study of plaque psoriasis indicated that an oral IL-23 medication is feasible (Related post: In Trials: An Oral IL-23 Antagonist Peptide).

Related joke (regarding “caught my eye” in the title of this post):

A man who lived in a block of apartments thought it was raining and put his head out the window to check.  As he did so a glass eye fell into his hand. He looked up to see where it came from in time to see a young woman looking down. “Is this yours?” he asked.

She said, “Yes, could you bring it up?” and the man agreed. On arrival she was profuse in her thanks and offered the man a drink. Shortly afterwards she said, “I’m about to have dinner.  There’s plenty; would you like to join me?” He readily accepted her offer and both enjoyed a lovely meal. As the evening was drawing to a close the lady said, “I’ve had a marvelous evening.  Would you like to stay the night?”  The man hesitated then said, “Do you act like this with every man you meet?”

“No,” she replied, “only those who catch my eye.”

The Manneporte by Claude Monet (at the Metropolitan Museum of Art)

Sulfasalazine vs 5-ASA: Treatment Outcomes in Pediatric UC

Posted on by

I Mansuri et al. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2025;80:988–997. Clinical outcomes of maintenance therapy with sulfasalazine compared to 5-aminosalicylates in children with ulcerative colitis

Methods: This was a retrospective review of children diagnosed with UC between June 1999 and December 2019 at Boston Children’s Hospital. 124 started on sulfasalazine (SZ) and 309 on 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA). Most patients had mild to moderate disease based on PUCAI score; ~12% had severe disease.

Key findings:

  • At 1 year, 54%, 44.3%, and 36.6% of patients on SZ, 5-ASA, and those who switched, respectively, were in steroid-free remission (p = 0.13)
  • All medication switches due to adverse reactions (24) were from SZ to 5-ASA. No patient was switched from 5-ASA to SZ because of adverse reactions. The non-severe adverse reactions noted were nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, non-severe skin rash, headache, mild leucopenia, and lymphadenitis. Three patients had serious skin reactions, and one had pancreatitis.
  • SZ tended to have more minor adverse reactions. Except for countering adverse reactions, switching between SZ and 5-ASA did not offer therapeutic benefits. Disease severity at diagnosis predicted early treatment escalation

Discussion Points:

  • SZ offers advantages such as lower cost and availability in suspension form; the suspension form is particularly beneficial for young children and those unable to swallow the solid form of medication.
  • 5-ASA formulations can be almost 10–50 times more expensive than SZ. For example, the wholesale acquisition cost of monthly generic SZ is $30 compared to $274 for generic Lialda, $1131 for generic Pentasa, and $1890 for generic Asacol HD

My take: About 20% of patients had to switch from Sz to 5-ASA due to adverse reactions; though, Sz had a mildly higher response rate (not statistically-significant). Switching between SZ and 5-ASA or vice versa is unlikely to provide much therapeutic benefit; patients who switched agents for medical reasons (rather than reactions) were more likely to require escalation to either a biologic or immune modulator.

Related blog posts:

Chatttahoochee River (Sandy Springs)

Understanding the Prevalence and Burden of Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease in U.S.

Posted on by

 From editorial (which is more expansive than the study):

Kappelman et al4 report the US prevalence of pediatric-onset IBD (diagnosed before the age of 20 years by a physician) as well as rates of disease based on race and ethnic background. To ensure that a representative population was captured, they combined multiple health administrative databases…

The authors report that the US currently has a pediatric IBD prevalence of 125 per 100,000 population, increased from 110 per 100,000 in 2011. This is higher than previously reported in Canada (82 per 100,000 in 2023)6 and Sweden (75 per 100,000 in 2010).7 These differences may be due to the older age cutoff used in the US data, <20 years vs <18 years in the Canadian and Swedish studies. However, misclassification bias may also play a role...

Nevertheless, understanding the approximate prevalence of pediatric IBD in the US allows for adequate human and financial resource planning for this important population of children with an impactful chronic disease. The high prevalence should raise concerns among health care practitioners and policy makers that we have under-resourced IBD care in children, especially considering the high rate of use of biologics and the growing direct health costs incurred in the treatment of this population.11

The burden of IBD in pediatrics goes beyond that of the child. Compared with adult IBD, it disproportionately affects caregivers and families (owing to missed work for appointments, hospitalizations, and home care), mental health of both the patient and the parents, and the health system...

They report that pediatric IBD is more frequent among White children and adolescents (145 per 100,000) compared with Black (91 per 100,000) and Hispanic (88 per 100,000) children, whereas children of Asian origin have markedly lower rates (52 per 100,000).“

My take: The updated prevalence data helps understand the increasing frequency of pediatric IBD. The associated commentary reminds us of the broader burden the disease has for families and for our communities.

Related blog posts: