Background Endoscopic-post-operative-recurrence (ePOR) in Crohn’s disease (CD) after ileocecal resection (ICR) is a major concern. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of early prophylaxis with biologics and to compare anti-TNF therapy to vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST) in a real-world setting. Methods A retrospective multicenter study of CD-adults after curative ICR on early prophylaxis. ePOR was defined as a Rutgeerts score [RS]≥i2 or colonic-segmental-SES-CD≥6. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate risk factors, and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to compare the effectiveness between agents. Results Included 297 patients (53.9% males, age at diagnosis 24y[19-32], age at ICR-34y[26-43], 18.5% smokers, 27.6% biologic-naïve, 65.7% anti-TNF experienced, 28.6%≥2 biologics, and 17.2% previous surgery). Overall, 224, 39 and 34 patients received anti-TNF, VDZ or UST, respectively. Patients treated with VDZ and UST were more biologic experienced with higher rates of previous surgery. ePOR rates within 1-year were: 41.8%. ePOR rates by treatment groups: anti-TNF 40.2%, VDZ 33% and UST 61.8%. Risk factors for ePOR at 1-year: past-infliximab (adj.OR=1.73[95%CI:1.01-2.97]), past-adalimumab (adj.OR=2.32[95% CI:1.35-4.01) and surgical aspects. After IPTW, the risk of ePOR within 1-year of VDZ vs. anti-TNF or UST vs. anti-TNF was comparable (OR=0.55[95%CI:0.25-1.19], OR=1.86[95%CI:0.79-4.38]), respectively. Conclusion Prevention of ePOR within 1-year after surgery was successful in ~60% of patients. Patients treated with VDZ or UST consisted of a more refractory group. After controlling for confounders, no differences in ePOR risk were seen between anti-TNF prophylaxis and other groups.
Background and Aims: Skin eruptions are prevalent among patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), often associated with therapies and frequently leading to dermatological consults and treatment interruptions. We aimed to assess the impact of joint shared decision-making in a multidisciplinary (MDT) IBD-DERMA clinic. Methods: This retrospective cohort study assessed a consecutive group of patients with IBD who were referred for consultation in an MDT clinic at a tertiary referral center in Israel. Results: Over 1 year, 118 patients were evaluated in the MDT-IBD-DERMA clinic: 68 (57.6%) males; age – 35.2 ± 13.5 years, disease duration – 7.1 (interquartile range: 3.7–13.9) years; Crohn’s disease – 94/118 (79.6%). Skin eruption induced by an anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) were the most common diagnoses [46/118 (39%)], including psoriasiform dermatitis (PD) – 31/46 (67.4%) and inflammatory alopecia (IA) – 15/46 (32.6%). Of these, 18 patients (39.1%) continued the anti-TNF agent concomitantly with a topical or systemic anti-inflammatory agent to control the eruption. The remaining 28 patients (60.9%) discontinued the anti-TNF, of whom 16/28 (57.1%) switched to ustekinumab. These strategies effectively treated the majority [38/46 (82.6%)] of patients. Continuation of the anti-TNF was possible in a significantly higher proportion of patients with PD: 12/31 (38.7%) than only one in the IA group, p = 0.035. There was a higher switch to ustekinumab among the IA 7/15 (46.6%) compared with the PD 7/31 (22.6%) group, P = .09. Following IBD-DERMA advised intervention, IBD deteriorated in 9/4 6(19.5%) patients, 5/9 on ustekinumab (PD versus IA, P = NS). Conclusion: Shared decision-making in an integrated IBD-DERMA clinic allowed successful control of skin eruptions while preserving control of the underlying IBD in more than 80% of cases. Patients with IA profited from a switch to ustekinumab.
Background Endoscopic post-operative recurrence (ePOR) is common following ileocecal resection (ICR) in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD), reaching up to, 70% at, 1-year. In clinical trials, prophylaxis with anti-TNF therapies demonstrated a decrease in ePOR to around, 20% at, 1-year. Here we aimed to compare the effectiveness of vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST) to anti-TNFs for preventing ePOR after curative ICR in adults with CD in a real-world setting. Methods This was a retrospective multicenter study, assessing patients with CD >17years who underwent ICR between, 2015–2019, started prophylaxis within six months of surgery, and underwent an ileocolonoscopy ≥ four months after prophylaxis. ePOR (Rutgeerts score ≥ i2 or colonic-segmental-SES-CD≥6) was assessed at, 12, 24, 36-months periods post-surgery. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess risk factors for ePOR, and IPTW was performed to compare the effectiveness between agents. Results Included, 297 patients [53.9% males, age-at-diagnosis, 24(19–32) years (median;IQR), age-at-ICR, 34(26–43)years (median;IQR), 18.5% current-smokers]. Of these, 17.2% had previous-ICR, 8.1% were biologic naïve, 65.7% anti-TNF experienced, and, 28.6% exposed to, 2 biologics. Overall, 224, 39 and, 34 patients received respectively anti-TNFs, VDZ or UST for prevention of POR. Patients on VDZ and UST were more likely to be biologic experienced or post previous-ICR. ePOR rates for the entire cohort, anti-TNF, VDZ and UST were:, 41.8%, 40.2%, 33%, and, 61.8% at, 12-months, 49.0%, 46.5%, 44.4%, and, 72.4% at, 24- months, and, 48.6%, 47.9%, 44.0% and, 62.5% at, 36-months, respectively. Risk factors for ePOR: past infliximab (Adj.OR =1.73 [95% CI:, 1.01–2.97], p=0.045) or adalimumab (Adj.OR = 2.32 [95% CI:, 1.35–4.01], p=0.002), and technical aspects of anastomosis. After controlling for the disparities between groups by the IPTW method risk of ePOR at, 12-months was comparable between patients on anti-TNFs vs VDZ or anti-TNFs vs UST. However, comparison between VDZ vs UST groups revealed that patients on UST were at a higher risk for ePOR at, 12-months (OR=3.75 [95% CI:, 1.33–10.6]), p=0.012. Conclusion Prevention of ePOR was successful in ~60% of patients at, 12-months period. Patients on prophylaxis VDZ or UST consisted of a distinct, more refractory group with higher rates of ePOR. Post-operative treatment with UST or VDZ resulted in a similar risk of ePOR when compared to post-operative prophylaxis with anti-TNF after controlling for disease severity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.