No abstract

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination is recommended for all individuals with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including those on immunosuppressive therapies; however, little is known about vaccine safety and efficacy in these patients or the impact of vaccination on IBD disease course. Methods We evaluated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine–related adverse events (AEs) and the effect of vaccination on IBD disease course among participants in the PREVENT-COVID (Partnership to Report Effectiveness of Vaccination in populations Excluded from iNitial Trials of COVID) study, a prospective, observational cohort study. Localized and systemic reactions were assessed via questionnaire. Disease flare was defined by worsening IBD symptoms and change in IBD medications. Outcomes were stratified by vaccine type and IBD medication classes. Results A total of 3316 individuals with IBD received at least 1 COVID-19 vaccine. Injection site tenderness (68%) and fatigue (46% dose 1, 68% dose 2) were the most commonly reported localized and systemic AEs after vaccination. Severe localized and systemic vaccine-related AEs were rare. The mRNA-1273 vaccine was associated with significantly greater severe AEs at dose 2 (localized 4% vs 2%, systemic 15% vs 10%; P < .001 for both). Prior COVID-19 infection, female sex, and vaccine type were associated with severe systemic reactions to dose 1, while age <50 years, female sex, vaccine type, and antitumor necrosis factor and vedolizumab use were associated with severe systemic reactions to dose 2. Overall rates (2%) of IBD flare were low following vaccination. Conclusions Our findings provide reassurance that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine is safe and well tolerated among individuals with IBD, which may help to combat vaccine hesitancy and increase vaccine confidence.

Background and Aims Inflammation of the pouch after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) can significantly impact quality of life and be difficult to treat. We assessed the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab in Crohn’s disease (CD) of the pouch and chronic antibiotic-dependent or antibiotic-refractory pouchitis. Methods This was a retrospective, multicenter cohort study at 5 academic referral centers in the United States. Adult patients with endoscopic inflammation of the pouch who received vedolizumab were included. The primary outcome was clinical response at any time point. Secondary outcomes included clinical remission, endoscopic response, and remission. Univariate analysis and multivariate analysis were performed for the effect of the following variables on clinical response: fistula, onset of pouchitis less than 1 year after IPAA, younger than 35 years old, gender, previous tumor necrosis factor inhibitor-alpha use, and BMI >30. Results Eighty-three patients were treated with vedolizumab for inflammation of the pouch between January 2014 and October 2017. Median follow-up was 1.3 years (interquartile range 0.7–2.1). The proportion of patients that achieved at least a clinical response was 71.1%, with 19.3% achieving clinical remission. Of the 74 patients with a follow-up pouchoscopy, the proportion of patients with endoscopic response and mucosal healing was 54.1% and 17.6%, respectively. Patients who developed pouchitis symptoms less than 1 year after undergoing IPAA were less likely to respond to vedolizumab, even after controlling for other risk factors. Conclusions Vedolizumab is safe and effective in the management of CD of the pouch and chronic pouchitis. Further studies are needed to compare vedolizumab with other biologic therapies for pouchitis and CD of the pouch.

No abstract

INTRODUCTION:Although an additional coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine dose for immunocompromised persons has been recommended in some countries, further data to guide vaccination strategies for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are urgently needed. We sought to identify factors affecting initial humoral immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines among patients with IBD.METHODS:In this prospective cohort of SARS-CoV-2 immunized patients with IBD, we evaluated associations between participant age, sex, vaccine type, medication use, and the presence of a detectable antireceptor binding domain antibody and quantitative antibody level.RESULTS:In total, 1,909 participants were included (1,123, 692, and 94 received BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S, respectively) of whom 96% achieved a positive antibody response. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with lack of antibody response were older age (P = 0.043), BNT162b2 vs mRNA-1273 (odds ratio [OR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0–3.9), and combination therapy with anti-TNF and 6MP, azathioprine, or methotrexate (OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.4–7.3). The use of 5-aminosalicylate or sulfasalazine (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1–0.8) and ustekinumab (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.05–0.8) was associated with decreased odds of lacking antibody response.DISCUSSION:Most patients with IBD mount an initial response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination; however, older patients and those treated with anti-TNF and immunomodulator have blunted responses and may benefit the most from an additional vaccine dose. Patients treated with other classes of immunosuppressive medications have more robust initial immune responses to vaccination. These data should inform key decisions about patient selection for additional coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine doses in patients with IBD.