Background: “Since vedolizumab is a gut-selective anti-α4β7 integrin, its effect on EIMs has been a matter of debate, with relevant data lacking in pediatric IBD. A systematic review, which included three interventional studies, five non-interventional studies, and three case series, concluded that there is insufficient evidence supporting the efficacy of vedolizumab for treating pre-existing EIMs in adults.3“
Methods: This was a subgroup analysis of the pediatric VedoKids cohort, a multicenter, prospective “real-life” study of children (aged 0–18 years) with IBD treated with vedolizumab and followed through 54 weeks.
Key findings:
EIMs were identified in 18/142 (12.6%) children at baseline
Children with EIMs had an average age of diagnosis of 9 yrs compared to 12 yrs in those without EIMs
Children with EIMs had higher rate of pancolitis in UC and ileocolonic distribution in CD
Prior anti-TNF medication was noted in 16 (89%) of EIM cohort compared to 74 (60%) of non-EIM cohort
Concomitant medications were administered in 72% of EIM cases and to a similar number of non-EIM patients. For EIM patients, ASA were given in 7, steroids in 10, thiopurines in 4 and methotrexate in 2
Children with EIMs had more active disease (see below)
EIM resolution rate of 89%, mainly occurring within the early weeks of vedolizumab treatment
My take: While this study has several limitations, including the high rate of concomitant medications, it shows that most patients receiving vedolizumab had resolution of their EIMs. In addition, it shows that patients with EIMs had a more severe IBD phenotype.
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:
“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“
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.
The best available evidence supports TDM during induction of vedolizumab as well.
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.
This was a nationwide Israeli study with 15,111 patients with UC, of whom 2322 (15%) received biologics, with a median follow-up of 7.0 years. The dataset includes ~98% of the Israeli population; “the accuracy of medication data is high, as the Israeli health care system provides medications almost free of charge through the HMOs, and the electronic dispensing of drugs contributes to reliable and precise data.”
Key findings:
After 5 years of treatment, 43% of the patients with UC sustained their first biologic
The durability rate was similar between pediatric-onset and adults after 1 and 5 years from initiation of treatment (72% and 43% vs 71% and 43%, respectively)
Durability of adalimumab vs infliximab after 1 or 5 years was similar, whether prescribed as monotherapy (65%/46% vs 63%/33%, respectively) or combotherapy (78%/56% vs 91%/58%, respectively)
Durability of infliximab at 1 yr and 5 yrs was higher as combotherapy (85%/50%) vs monotherapy (69%/42%; , P = .007), while it was similar for adalimumab (80%/52% vs 74%/52%)
The durability rate was similar for vedolizumab monotherapy at 1 yr and 5 yrs (77%/56%) compared with adalimumab monotherapy (69%/52%), and infliximab monotherapy (73%/55% vs 62%/44%). However, combotherapy of antitumor necrosis factors (TNFs) had longer durability than vedolizumab (85%/50% vs 75%/43%), respectively;
My take: When looking at the durability plots, the three main biologics in this study, infliximab, adalimumab and vedolizumab, performed similarly. Whether therapeutic drug monitoring would influence theses results is not clear. It is interesting that a recent study in the pediatric population found that combination therapy was important for adalimumab and not infliximab (see: Why Do Children Taking Adalimumab Benefit from Methotrexate Dual Therapy?)
Also, from AGA Today (3/20/25): FDA Approves Guselkumab To Treat Patients With Crohn’s Disease
HCPlive (3/20, Campbell) reports the FDA on Thursday announced the approval of “guselkumab (Tremfya) for the treatment of adults with moderately to severely active Crohn disease.” The announcement from Johnson and Johnson claims the “approval is based on data from multiple phase 3 trials, including the GALAXI trials, which found guselkumab outperformed ustekinumab (Stelara) for multiple endoscopic endpoints. The agent now boasts indications for moderately to severely active Crohn disease and moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC).” This is the fourth indication for guselkumab in the US
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.
In the REPREVIO study, a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 80 adults received either vedolizumab (300 mg IV) (n=43) or placebo (n=37) at weeks 0, 8, 16 and 24 following ileocolonic resection and had one or more risk factors for recurrence.
Key findings:
At week 26, the probability of a lower modified Rutgeerts score with vedolizumab versus placebo was 77·8% (95% CI 66·4 to 86·3; p<0·0001).
Severe endoscopic recurrence was observed in ten (23·3%) of 43 patients in the vedolizumab group versus 23 (62·2%) of 37 patients in the placebo group (difference –38·9% [95% CI –56·0 to –17·3]; p=0·0004).
Adverse effects were noted in three patients who received vedolizumab (bilateral tubo-ovarian abscesses, thrombosed hemorrhoids, and pancreatic adenocarcinoma) and two patients who received placebo (intestinal perforation related to Crohn’s disease and severe abdominal pain)
My take: This study shows that vedolizumab is another biologic capable of reducing postoperative recurrence following ileocolonic resection in Crohn’s disease. Infliximab has been shown to reduce recurrence as well (shown in the PREVENT study).
Methods: This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial recruited UC patients (n=62) on vedolizumab 300 mg intravenously every 8 weeks and a thiopurine. Patients in steroid-free clinical remission for ≥6 months and endoscopic remission/improvement (Mayo endoscopic subscore ≤1) were randomized 2:1 to withdraw or continue thiopurine.
Key findings:
At week 48, vedolizumab trough concentrations were not significantly different between continue and withdrawal groups (14.7 μg/mL versus 15.9 μg/mL, respectively, P = 0.36).
The continue group had significantly higher fecal calprotectin remission (calprotectin <150) (95.0%, 19/20 versus 71.4%, 30/42; P = .03), histologic remission (80.0%, 16/20 versus 48.6%, 18/37; P = .02), and histo-endoscopic remission (75.0%, 15/20 versus 32.4%, 12/37; P = .002) than the withdrawal group. Clinical and endoscopic remission favored the continue group though this did not reach statistical significance.
Histologic activity (hazard ratio [HR], 15.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6–146.5; P = .02) and prior anti-tumor necrosis factor exposure (HR, 6.5; 95% CI, 1.3–33.8; P = .03) predicted clinical relapse after thiopurine withdrawal.
Discussion: “In Australia, requirements are for UC patients to have failed at least 3 months of an immunomodulator before vedolizumab initiation. Consequently, UC patients are typically on combination therapy initially, and hence this study was designed as a withdrawal trial.” The authors note that previous studies have not shown superior outcomes with combination therapy (See blog post: No Benefit of Combination Therapy with Ustekinumab or Vedolizumab). “However, methodological flaws, heterogenous outcomes, and shorter durations of treatment limit these findings.”
My take (borrowed from authors): “Thiopurines might provide an incremental benefit to patients with UC using vedolizumab, … independent of vedolizumab pharmacokinetics.”
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.
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).
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.
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)
“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.
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.
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 SC1versus 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.
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 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
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.
gutsandgrowth 