Background and Aims As no population-based study has investigated the susceptibility and disease course of COVID-19 among patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), we aimed to investigate this topic in a population-based setting. Methods Two cohorts were investigated. First, a nationwide cohort of all IBD patients diagnosed with COVID-19 was prospectively followed to investigate the disease courses of both diseases. Second, within a population-based cohort of 2.6 million Danish citizens, we identified all individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 to determine the occurrence of COVID-19 among patients with and without IBD and other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). Results Between January 28, 2020 and June 2, 2020, a total of 76 IBD patients with COVID-19 were identified in the national cohort and prospectively followed for 35 days (interquartile range (IQR): 25-51). A large proportion (n=19;25%) required a COVID-19-related hospitalization for seven days (IQR: 2-8.5) which was associated with being 65 years or older (odds ratio (OR)=23.80 (95% confidence interval (CI) 6.32-89.63), p<0.01) and presence of any non-IMID comorbidity (OR=8.12 (95% CI 2.55-25.87), p<0.01), but not use of immunomodulators (p=0.52) or biologic therapies (p=0.14). In the population-based study, 8,476 of 231,601 (3.7%) residents tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; however, the occurrence was significantly lower among patients with IBD (62 of the 2,486 patients=2.5%, p<0.01) and other IMIDs (531 of 16,492 patients=3.2%, p<0.01) as compared to patients without IMIDs. Conclusion Patients with IMIDs, including IBD, had a significantly lower susceptibility to COVID-19 than patients without IMIDs and neither immunosuppressive therapies nor IBD activity were associated with the disease course of COVID-19.

No abstract

Summary Background Anti‐tumor necrosis factor‐α (TNF‐α) is used for the treatment of severe cases of IBD, including Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). However, one‐third of the patients do not respond to the treatment. We have previously investigated whether single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in inflammation were associated with response to anti‐TNF therapy among patients with CD or UC. Aim A new cohort of patients was established for replication of the previous findings and to identify new SNPs associated with anti‐TNF response. Methods Fifty‐three SNPs assessed previously in cohort 1 (482 CD and 256 UC patients) were genotyped in cohort 2 (587 CD and 458 UC patients). The results were analysed using logistic regression (adjusted for age and gender). Results Ten SNPs were associated with anti‐TNF response either among patients with CD (TNFRSF1A(rs4149570) (OR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.02‐3.60, P = 0.04), IL18(rs187238) (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.00‐1.82, P = 0.05), and JAK2(rs12343867) (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.02‐1.78, P = 0.03)), UC (TLR2(rs11938228) (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.33‐0.92, P = 0.02), TLR4(rs5030728) (OR: 2.23, 95% CI: 1.24‐4.01, P = 0.01) and (rs1554973) (OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.27‐0.90, P = 0.02), NFKBIA(rs696) (OR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.06‐2.00, P = 0.02), and NLRP3(rs4612666) (OR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.44‐0.91, P = 0.01)) or in the combined cohort of patient with CD and UC (IBD) (TLR4(rs5030728) (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.01‐2.11, P = 0.04) and (rs1554973)(OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65‐0.98, P = 0.03), NFKBIA(rs696) (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.01‐1.54, P = 0.04), NLRP3(rs4612666) (OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.57‐0.95, P = 0.02), IL1RN(rs4251961) (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.66‐1.00, P = 0.05), IL18(rs1946518) (OR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.01‐1.53, P = 0.04), and JAK2(rs12343867) (OR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.01‐1.53, P = 0.04)). Conclusions The results support that polymorphisms in genes involved in the regulation of the NFκB pathway (TLR2, TLR4, and NFKBIA), the TNF‐α signalling pathway (TNFRSF1A), and other cytokine pathways (NLRP3, IL1RN, IL18, and JAK2) were associated with response to anti‐TNF therapy. Our multi‐SNP model predicted response rate of more than 82% (in 9% of the CD patients) and 75% (in 15% of the UC patients), compared to 71% and 64% in all CD and UC patients, respectively. More studies are warranted to predict response for use in the clinic.

The influence of the hospital environment on hospitalized people with cancer and their interpersonal interaction needs to be acknowledged by healthcare professionals. In addition, evidence-based hospital design must include research into patient preferences and arguments. Further investigation is needed.

Patients' interaction resembled care as well as self-care. Patient-patient interaction was an important part of the social support system during hospitalization.