Tag Archives: Upadacitinib

IBD Briefs: Upadcitinib in Children with Severe Colitis and Timing of Infliximab Switch to SC Route in Adults

Posted on by
Reply

A Yerushalmy-Feler et al. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, 2025, 31, 3320–3326. Real-World Experience with Upadacitinib for Pediatric Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis: An International Multicenter Retrospective Study from the Pediatric IBD Porto Group of ESPGHAN

In this study of 22 pediatric patients with ASUC refractory to infliximab, key findings:

  • By week 26, 14 (64%) were in corticosteroid-free clinical remission and 16 (73%) patients remained colectomy-free
  • Two serious AEs of an appendiceal neuroendocrine tumor and cytomegalovirus colitis

My take: It is good to see more pediatric data. The availability of upadacitinib will likely lead to lower colectomy rates.

Related blog post: IBD Briefs: Upadacitinib in Children, Predicting Crohn’s Disease, and Autoimmune Diseases Associated with IBD

L Bertani et al. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, 2025, 31, 3363–3369. When to Switch to Subcutaneous Infliximab? The RE-WATCH Multicenter Study

Methods: The RE-WATCH study was an observational, multicenter, retrospective study performed in four IBD referral centers. Inclusion criteria meant that only patients receiving on label SC-IFX at a dosage of 120 mg every other week were included in the study. The initiation of IFX therapy as the baseline timepoint.

Key findings:

  • There were no statistical differences between the two groups, early vs. late switch, after one year in terms of the respective endoscopic response (71.4% vs 70.8%, P = .95), steroid-free clinical remission (62.5% vs 68.7%, P = .51), or IFX retention rate (75.0% vs 66.7%, P = .35).
  • There was higher endoscopic remission rates in early switch patients as compared to late switch patients; however, this trend was not significant (69.6% vs 52.1%, P = .07).
  • A return to IV-IFX was required in 1 of 43 early switch patients and in 3 of 44 late switch patients (2.3% vs 6.8%, P = .31)
  • While the early switch group appears to fare a little better, there is likely a selection bias. For example, the early group had a much lower rate of severe endoscopic score at baseline (20% vs. 54%) and lower rate of Crohn’s fistulizing disease (8% vs 33%).
partial Mayo score (pMS)
Harvey–Bradshaw index (HBI)

My take: These results indicate that outcomes are similar between patients switching from to IFX SC at both early (after induction) and late (after 6 months).

It is worth noting that prior studies have shown that home-based therapies (eg. home infusion), compared to office-based therapies, have been “associated with suboptimal outcomes including higher rates of nonadherence and discontinuation of infliximab.” This is a concern for SC biologics as well.

Related blog posts:

Postoperative Outcomes with Tofacitinib Following Colectomy for ASUC and Real-World Outcomes for Upadacitinib in Crohn’s Disease

Posted on by

C Larson et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025; 23: 2263-2271. Postoperative Outcomes in Tofacitinib-Treated Patients With Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis Undergoing Colectomy

This  was a multicenter, retrospective, case-control study of patients hospitalized with ASUC who underwent colectomy, comparing patients treated with tofacitinib (n=41) prior to colectomy with infliximab-treated controls (n=68).

Key findings:

  • Compared with tofacitinib-treated patients, infliximab-treated patients had higher overall rates of overall (44 [64.7%] vs 13 [31.7%]; P = .002) and serious (19 [27.9%] vs 3 [12%]; P = .019) postoperative complications

My take: This study supports the safety of JAK inhibitor therapy for ASUC. It showed a significantly lower rate of overall postoperative complications in ASUC patients treated with tofacitinib compared with infliximab; the authors note that “these findings can likely be extrapolated to upadacitinib, a selective JAK inhibitor, given its similar mechanism of action.”

J Devi et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025; 23: 2281-2291. Open Access! Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Upadacitinib in Crohn’s Disease: A Multicenter Study

Related blog posts:

Upadacitinib for Crohn’s Disease: U-ENDURE Study

Posted on by

R Panaccione et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025; (In press) Open Access! Upadacitinib Maintenance Therapy in Crohn’s Disease: Final Results From the Randomized Phase 3 U-ENDURE Study

Methods: Clinical responders to 12 weeks of upadacitinib 45 mg once daily (QD) induction were randomized (1:1:1) to receive upadacitinib 15 mg QD (n = 221), upadacitinib 30 mg QD (n = 229), or placebo (n = 223) as maintenance therapy for 52 weeks

**This study presents data from the entire cohort (n=673); a previous report from ENDURE-3 analyzed data on 502 patients (though findings were nearly identical). EV Loftus et al. N Engl J Med 2023; 388:1966-1980 (Related post: Landmark Study: Oral Biologic for Crohn’s –Upadacitinib)

Key findings:

  • At week 52, more upadacitinib-treated vs placebo patients achieved CDAI clinical remission (upadacitinib 15 mg, 36.2% and upadacitinib 30 mg, 51.5% vs placebo, 15.2%)
  • The rates of endoscopic response were 27.3% for upadacitinib 15 mg and 40.7% for upadacitinib 30 mg vs 7.2% for placebo
  • Herpes zoster infections occurred more frequently in the upadacitinib groups compared with placebo; all were nonserious, and most involved a single dermatome
  • In U-ENDURE, no dose-dependent risk for MACE, VTE, or malignancy (excluding NMSC) was observed during the 52-week maintenance period

My take: Upadacitinib is a effective in a good number of patients with with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease who have been refractory to other advanced therapies.

Related blog posts:

IBD Management in Pregnancy: Global Consensus

Posted on by

U Mahadevan et al. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2025 (published ahead of print). Open Access! Global Consensus Statement on the Management of Pregnancy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Addendum -updated reference: U Mahadevan et al. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2025; 23: S1-S60. Open Access! Global Consensus Statement on the Management of Pregnancy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

This is a 60 page open access article. Table 1 lists 34 “GRADE” statements and Table 2 lists 35 consensus statements. This article is also jointly published in the following:

  • Gut
  • Am J Gastroenterol
  • Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
  • Journal of Crohn’s and Colitis
  • Aliment Pharmacol Ther

For Moms:

For Babies:

My take: This is a useful reference –mainly helpful for gastroenterologists rather than pediatric providers.

Related blog posts:

Long-term Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib for Ulcerative Colitis

Posted on by

R Panaccione et al. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2025; 10: 507 – 519. Open Access! Long-term efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: an interim analysis of the phase 3 U-ACTIVATE long-term extension study

Methods: U-ACTIVATE is an ongoing, 288-week, phase 3, long-term extension study that enrolled patients (n=369) aged 16–75 years with a confirmed diagnosis of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis; patients who had a clinical response in the induction studies were eligible to enter the U-ACHIEVE maintenance study. Patients not in clinical remission originally randomly assigned to upadacitinib 15 mg were eligible to escalate to upadacitinib 30 mg, those originally randomly assigned to upadacitinib 30 mg continued on upadacitinib 30 mg, and those originally assigned to placebo were eligible to escalate to upadacitinib 15 mg in a masked way

Key findings:

  • In the as-observed population, 84 (71%) of 118 patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg were in clinical remission at week 48, as were 130 (67%) of 193 receiving upadacitinib 30 mg
  • By week 96, 69 (76%) of 91 patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg and 104 (74%) of 141 of those receiving upadacitinib 30 mg were in clinical remission
  • The most common adverse events of special interest were hepatic disorder, lymphopenia, creatine phosphokinase elevation, serious infection, neutropenia, and herpes zoster
mNRI indicates modified non-responder imputation analysis response

My take: This study shows a good durable (3 year) response to upadacitinib treatment with both 15 mg and 30 mg dosing.

Related blog posts:

    Dr. Maria Oliva-Hemker: Positioning Therapies for Pediatric Crohn’s Disease

    Posted on by

    Recently, Dr. Maria Oliva-Hemker gave our group an excellent update on Crohn’s disease therapies.  My notes below may contain errors in transcription and in omission. Along with my notes, I have included many of her slides.

    Key points:

    • Early advanced therapy results in better outcomes (see The PROFILE study results below as one example)
    • Anti-TNFs are the only therapy with a specific FDA pediatric indication. Medications can take 8-10 years after use in adults for pediatric labeling
    • IL-23 specific agents (like risankizumab) are more effective than ustekinumab that target both IL-23/IL-12
    • Recent studies show that ustekinumab is effective in children. Also, in patients who respond to ustekinumab, there is good durability
    • Infliximab is a top-line therapy in Crohn’s disease
    • Risankizumab is a top-line therapy in both biologic-naive and biologic-exposed patients with Crohn’s disease. Higher maintenance doses may capture more patients.
    • Upadacitinib is a very good therapy in patients with prior advanced therapies with either Crohn’s or ulcerative colitis. It also has a rapid onset of action (within 2 weeks)
    • Vedolizumab is less effective in those who are biologic-exposed. However, patients with predominantly colonic (UC-like) involvement may be better-suited for this therapy
    • Close monitoring and treat-to-target approaches are recommended. Usually followup scope is undertaken after one year (&/or one year after switching therapy)
    • Combination advanced therapies have shown effectiveness but it is unclear which combinations are optimal
    This slide shows the Montreal Classification, an organ-based phenotype, to describe the anatomic extent and behaviors of Crohn’s disease;. The figure on the right illustrates extraintestinal manifestations of IBD. It is expected that disease classification will rely more on a molecular based approach.
    The STRIDE project which defined goals of treatment was the result of consensus achieved by the International Organization of IBD. The first recommendations came out in 2015 and then these were updated in 2021 to incorporate a pediatric component.
    The PROFILE study with 386 adults showed how important early effective advanced therapies. Patients receiving infliximab/azathioprine within a median of 15 days from diagnosis had remarkably better outcomes compared to step up treatment with prednisone + azathioprine.
    The cytokine IL12 and IL23 shown as circles with 2 subunits attaching to their receptors share a p40 subunit (shown in red). Ustekinumab binds to that p40 subunit thereby inhibiting both the IL12 and IL23 pathways. IL23 inhibitor. Risankizumab, Mirkizumab, Guselkumab inhibit only the p19 subunit (shown in blue) and so  they only downregulate the IL-23 pathway.
    Jak inhibitors targets are intracellular in location.
    Pediatric data: Multicenter 2015-2020; primary outcome was CS-free remission after 1 yr. Prior to use, 50% failed 1 anti TNF and 30% 2 anti TNF. At one year, 59/101 were in steroid free remission
    Upadactinib studies: Oral induction dose for UC and CD is 45 mg daily for induction
    and with reduction in maintenance to 30 mg or 15 mg
    Due to limited head-to-head studies, network meta analyses provides indirect evidence of comparative effectiveness. It relies on how effective a medication was compared to placebo. One of the problems with these comparisons is that there are different populations in each of these studies.
    In patients who need speed to reduce symptoms, upadacitinib is favored over IL-23 agents

    Though Dr. Oliva-Hemker’s lecture did not focus on ulcerative colitis, she did note that their center has recommended frequent colonoscopies (often yearly) in many of their patients with the combination of ulcerative colitis and PSC. This is due cases of colon cancer in their pediatric cohort.

    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.

    IBD Briefs: Upadacitinib in Children, Predicting Crohn’s Disease, and Autoimmune Diseases Associated with IBD

    Posted on by

    J Runde et al. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2025;80:133–140. Upadacitinib is associated with clinical response and steroid-free remission for children and adolescents with inflammatory bowel disease

    In this single-center retrospective study, n=20 (3 CD, 13 UC, 4 IBD-U), steroid-free clinical remission (SF-CR) was seen in 75% (16/20) following induction and maintained in 65% (11/17) reaching Week 24 of therapy

    J Gaifem et al. Nature Immunology 2024; 25: 1692-1703. Open Access! A unique serum IgG glycosylation signature predicts development of Crohn’s disease and is associated with pathogenic antibodies to mannose glycan.

    “Analysis of preclinical serum samples, up to 6 years before IBD diagnosis (from the PREDICTS cohort), revealed the identification of a unique glycosylation signature on circulating antibodies (IgGs)…[which] elicits a proinflammatory immune pathway through the activation and reprogramming of innate immune cells.”

    LR Jolving et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2025; 31: 87-94. Children and Adolescents Diagnosed With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Are at Increased Risk of Developing Diseases With a Possible Autoimmune Pathogenesis

    Using Danish registry and 50-fold matched controls, there was a significant increase for a large number of autoimmune diseases: The adjusted hazard ratio after full follow-up was 4.72 for psoriatic arthritis, 5.21 for spondyloarthritis, 2.77 for celiac disease, 2.15 for rheumatoid arthritis, 1.69 and 1.64 for type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. For thyroid disease, it was 1.16.

    Related blog posts:

    La Fortuna, Costa Rica

    How Quickly Does Upadacitinib Work for Crohn’s Disease Symptoms?

    Posted on by

    JF Colombel. et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2024; 22: 1668-1677. Open Access! Upadacitinib Reduces Crohn’s Disease Symptoms Within the First Week of Induction Therapy

    This study was a post hoc analysis included pooled data from 2 phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, 12-week induction trials (U-EXCEL and U-EXCEED) and 1 maintenance trial (U-ENDURE). The study included 1021 patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) (n = 674 UPA45; n = 347 PBO).

    Key findings:

    • Upadacitinib 45 mg taken once daily resulted in rapid relief from CD symptoms within 5 to 6 days of treatment initiation and improved clinical outcomes starting at week 2.
    • The present analysis demonstrates symptomatic relief as early as day 5 to 6 for patients receiving UPA, with 16.7% of patients experiencing daily SF/APS clinical remission by day 5. 
    • The first achievement of daily stool frequency/abdominal pain score (SF/APS) clinical remission occurred earlier with UPA45 (median, 13 d) vs PBO (median, 32 d)
    • Patients treated with UPA45 showed improved rates of SF/APS clinical remission (21.1% UPA45 vs 8.9% PBO) and clinical response (58.8% UPA45 vs 37.9% PBO) starting at week 2 (both P ≤ .01).

    In their discussion, the authors note that time to response to treatment with upadacitinib compares favorably to other advanced therapies:

    “Vedolizumab resulted in symptomatic improvement within 2 to 4 weeks of treatment initiation16; ustekinumab led to clinical response and remission at week 3 or 6, depending on the dose.17 Similarly, of the time points analyzed, clinical response and/or clinical remission was observed as early as week 2 for risankizumab, 5 infliximab,18 and certolizumab pegol,19 and as early as week 1 for adalimumab.20,21“

    My take: The rapid response seen in many patients indicate that upadacitinib can be a steroid-sparing therapy in patients with Crohn’s disease.

    Unrelated article: E Louis et al. JAMA 2024; doi:10.1001/jama.2024.12414. Risankizumab for Ulcerative Colitis: Two Randomized Clinical Trials

    Key findings:  Among the 975 patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis, analyzed in the induction trial, 1200 mg of risankizumab significantly increased the rates of clinical remission at 12-week follow-up compared with placebo (20.3% vs 6.2%, respectively). Among 548 patients included in the primary efficacy analysis for the maintenance trial, 180 mg of risankizumab and 360 mg of risankizumab significantly increased the rates of clinical remission (40.2% and 37.6%, respectively) compared with placebo (25.1%).

    Related blog posts:

    Comparative Evidence and Positioning Advance Therapies for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

    Posted on by

    PS Dulai et al. Gastroenterol 2024; 166: 396-408. Open Access! Integrating Evidence to Guide Use of Biologics and Small Molecules for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

    “In this review, we provide a framework for clinicians and researchers to understand key differences in sources of evidence, how different methodologies are applied to study the comparative effectiveness of advanced medical therapies in IBD, and considerations for how these sources of evidence can be used to better integrate current guideline recommendations.”

    This article explains the use of randomized controlled trials, “real-world evidence”/observational comparative studies, network meta-analysis, and post-hoc comparisons from randomized studies.

    “The authors advocate for “”Given the rapidity with which new advanced medical therapies are becoming available in IBD, which quickly make current guidelines obsolete, living guidelines may offer a unique consideration to ensure applicability to routine care.”

    My take: This article provides a useful update of current advanced therapies and information in positioning these advanced therapies. It would be a great service if the IBD community could create something similar to HCVguidelines.org. The latter was a coordinated effort by the AASLD and IDSA to help provide expert advice during a deluge of amazing advances in HCV. And just like HCVguidelines, it is important to address “special” populations including pediatric patients and patients with very early onset IBD.

    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.

    Upadacitinib vs Ustekinumab for Ulcerative Colitis

    Posted on by

    RS Dalal et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2024; 22: 666-668. Comparative Effectiveness of Upadacitinib vs Ustekinumab for Ulcerative Colitis: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

    This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of adults with ulcerative colitis comparing upadacitinib (n=70) to ustekinumab (n=148). The upadacitinib-treated patients were all bio-exposed, had more advanced therapy failures, and higher baseline SCCAI (simple clinical colitis activity index).

    Key findings:

    • Upadacitinib-treated patients had better outcomes: Clinical response of 82.9% vs. 63.5%, Steroid-free clinical remission 62.1 % vs. 34.7%, improvement in arthralgia 64.3% (9 of 14) vs 23.4% (11 of 47), and endoscopic remission 37.5% (9 of 24) compared with 15.9% (7 of 44).
    • The odds ratio (OR) after inverse probability of treatment-weighting were in favor of upadacitinib: Clinical response OR 2.39, SFCR OR 3.17, and endoscopic remission OR 5.10
    • Similar amounts of adverse effects were reported in each group

    My take: Upadacitinib had better response rates within 52 weeks even though the patients receiving this medication had more advanced therapy failures. However, it is important to keep in mind the limitations of this retrospective study. The improved outcomes are in contrast to a study comparing another JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib) to ustekinumab in which the outcomes appeared equivalent (Tofacitinib vs Ustekinumab -Which is Better for Ulcerative Colitis?).

    Related blog posts:

    Heron at Azalea Park (Sandy Springs, GA)