No abstract

Background Acute severe ulcerative colitis is a high stakes event with significant numbers still requiring emergent colectomy, representing a need to establish alternative medical management options. We report a case series of tofacitinib as rescue therapy in biologic-experienced patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis. Methods Four patients were identified over a 1-year period at our institution who initiated tofacitinib for acute severe ulcerative colitis. All four had previously failed at least two biologics, including infliximab, and were failing high-dose oral prednisone therapy before admission. All patients had Mayo disease activity index of at least 10 at admission. After no significant improvement despite receiving a minimum of 3 days of intravenous methylprednisolone and based on elevated Ho and Travis indices at Day 3, patients were offered rescue tofacitinib for induction of remission, or colectomy. Standard induction of tofacitinib was used [10 mg twice daily], and one patient was escalated to 15 mg twice daily after inadequate response. Results All patients experienced improvement in objective symptoms and laboratory markers, and were discharged without colectomy on tofacitinib as maintenance therapy and prednisone taper; 30-day and 90-day colectomy rates on tofacitinib maintenance therapy were zero and 90-day readmission rate was also zero. Two of four patients achieved steroid-free remission on maintenance tofacitinib monotherapy based on clinical symptoms and follow-up endoscopy. No major adverse reaction was reported during induction or maintenance therapy. Conclusions Tofacitinib may be an acceptable rescue agent in biologic-experienced patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis. Tofacitinib may also be safely continued as maintenance therapy once remission has been achieved.

Before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of care for inflammatory bowel disease patients was provided in-person. The practice of gastroenterology care has since rapidly transformed, with telemedicine emerging as an essential tool to provide medical care to patients while maintaining social distancing and conserving personal protective equipment. This article provides insight into past and current practices among inflammatory bowel disease specialists and shares regulatory, financial and practical considerations for incorporating telemedicine into clinical practice. Continued government and other payer support for telemedicine and ongoing innovation to provide remote objective patient data will help to sustain the use of telemedicine long after the current pandemic subsides.

Uncertainty exists regarding safety and efficacy of dual biological therapy (DBT) in inflammatory bowel disease. We present four cases of DBT in Crohn’s disease. Three patients had refractory disease non-responsive to biological monotherapy or combination therapy with immunomodulators. One patient had concomitant ankylosing spondylitis. DBT was implemented by combining vedolizumab with an anti tumour necrosis antibody or with ustekinumab. DBT was well-tolerated, though two patients did experience self-limited infections. The efficacy of DBT remains unproven but it appears promising as three of the four patients achieved clinical remission. Our case series contributes insight into the safety of DBT that incorporates vedolizumab for future efficacy studies.

Abstarct Background Hospitalization for ulcerative colitis is a high-risk period associated with increased risk of Clostridium difficile infection, thromboembolism, and opiate use. The study aim was to develop and implement a quality-improvement intervention for inpatient ulcerative colitis management that standardizes gastroenterology consultant recommendations and improves delivery of evidence-based care. Methods All adult patients hospitalized for ulcerative colitis between July 1, 2014, and December 31, 2017, who received intravenous corticosteroids were included. On July 1, 2016, the UCSF Inpatient Ulcerative Colitis Protocol was implemented, featuring standardized core recommendations and a daily checklist for gastroenterology consultant notes, a bundled IBD electronic order set, and an opiate awareness campaign. The composite primary outcome was adherence to all 3 evidence-based care metrics: C. difficile testing performed, pharmacologic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis ordered, and opiates avoided. Results Ninety-three ulcerative colitis hospitalizations occurred, including 36 preintervention and 57 postintervention. Age, gender, disease duration, disease extent, and medication use were similar preintervention and postintervention. C. difficile testing was performed in 100% of hospitalizations. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis was ordered on 84% of hospital days before intervention compared with 100% after intervention (P ≤ 0.001). Opiates were administered in 67% of preintervention hospitalizations, compared with 53% of postintervention hospitalizations (P = 0.18). The median daily dose of oral morphine equivalents decreased from 12.1 mg before intervention to 0.5 mg after intervention (P = 0.02). The composite outcome of adherence to all 3 metrics was higher after intervention (25% vs. 47%, P = 0.03). Conclusions Evidence-based inpatient ulcerative colitis management may be optimized with standardized algorithms that reinforce core principles, reduce care variation, and do not require IBD specialists to implement.