No abstract

Metabolite testing resulted in a change in management in most patients not responding to thiopurines or experiencing adverse events. Weight-based dosing did not increase rates of therapeutic levels but was associated with increased 6MMP shunting.

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.