Search

Background: COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses are reduced in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) taking anti-TNF or tofacitinib after two vaccine doses. We sought to assess whether immunosuppressive treatments were associated with reduced antibody and T-cell responses in patients with IBD after a third vaccine dose., Methods: VIP was a multicentre, prospective, case-control study done in nine centres in the UK. We recruited immunosuppressed patients with IBD and non-immunosuppressed healthy individuals. All participants were aged 18 years or older. The healthy control group had no diagnosis of IBD and no current treatment with systemic immunosuppressive therapy for any other indication. The immunosuppressed patients with IBD had an established diagnosis of Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, or unclassified IBD using standard definitions of IBD, and were receiving established treatment with one of six immunosuppressive regimens for at least 12 weeks at the time of first dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. All participants had to have received three doses of an approved COVID-19 vaccine. SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody binding and T-cell responses were measured in all participant groups. The primary outcome was anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S1 receptor binding domain [RBD]) antibody concentration 28-49 days after the third vaccine dose, adjusted by age, homologous versus heterologous vaccine schedule, and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was assessed in all participants with available data., Findings: Between Oct 18, 2021, and March 29, 2022, 352 participants were included in the study (thiopurine n=65, infliximab n=46, thiopurine plus infliximab combination therapy n=49, ustekinumab n=44, vedolizumab n=50, tofacitinib n=26, and healthy controls n=72). Geometric mean anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations increased in all groups following a third vaccine dose, but were significantly lower in patients treated with infliximab (2736·8 U/mL [geometric SD 4·3]; p<0·0001), infliximab plus thiopurine (1818·3 U/mL [6·7]; p<0·0001), and tofacitinib (8071·5 U/mL [3·1]; p=0·0018) compared with the healthy control group (16 774·2 U/mL [2·6]). There were no significant differences in anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations between the healthy control group and patients treated with thiopurine (12 019·7 U/mL [2·2]; p=0·099), ustekinumab (11 089·3 U/mL [2·8]; p=0·060), or vedolizumab (13 564·9 U/mL [2·4]; p=0·27). In multivariable modelling, lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations were independently associated with infliximab (geometric mean ratio 0·15 [95% CI 0·11-0·21]; p<0·0001), tofacitinib (0·52 [CI 0·31-0·87]; p=0·012), and thiopurine (0·69 [0·51-0·95]; p=0·021), but not with ustekinumab (0·64 [0·39-1·06]; p=0·083), or vedolizumab (0·84 [0·54-1·30]; p=0·43). Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (1·58 [1·22-2·05]; p=0·0006) was independently associated with higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations and older age (0·88 [0·80-0·97]; p=0·0073) was independently associated with lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 RBD antibody concentrations. Antigen-specific T-cell responses were similar in all groups, except for recipients of tofacitinib without evidence of previous infection, where T-cell responses were significantly reduced relative to healthy controls (p=0·021)., Interpretation: A third dose of COVID-19 vaccine induced a boost in antibody binding in immunosuppressed patients with IBD, but these responses were reduced in patients taking infliximab, infliximab plus thiopurine, and tofacitinib. Tofacitinib was also associated with reduced T-cell responses. These findings support continued prioritisation of immunosuppressed groups for further vaccine booster dosing, particularly patients on anti-TNF and JAK inhibitors., Funding: Pfizer., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JLA reports sponsorship from Vifor Pharma for accommodation and travel to BSG 2019, outside the submitted work. NAK reports grants from AbbVie, Biogen, Celgene, Celtrion, Galapagos, MSD, Napp, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Roche, and Takeda; consulting fees from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Falk, Janssen, Mylan, Pharmacosmos, Galapagos, Takeda, and Tillotts; personal fees from Allergan, Celltrion, Falk, Ferring, Janssen, Pharmacosmos, Takeda, Tilllotts, and Galapagos; and support for attending meetings from AbbVie, Falk, and Janssen, outside the submitted work. AS has received travel expense support from Janssen. SS reports grants from Takeda, AbbVie, Tillots Pharma, Janssen, Pfizer, and Biogen; and personal fees from Takeda, AbbVie, Janssen, Pharmacocosmos, Biogen, Pfizer, Tillots Pharma, and Falk Pharma, outside the submitted work. ALH reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Atlantic, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Falk, Galapogos, Janssen, MSD, Napp Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Shire, and Takeda; global steering committee for Genentech; support for attending meetings from AbbVie, Takeda, and Janssen; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Atlantic, Bristol Myers Squibb, Galapogos, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda. PMI reports grants and personal fees from Celltrion, Takeda, Pfizer, Galapagos; grants from MSD; and personal fees from Gilead, AbbVie, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, and Arena, outside the submitted work. MP receives unrestricted educational grants from Pfizer for genetic analyses to support the IBD BioResource, and speaker fees from Janssen. GRJ has received grants from Wellcome Trust and ECCO; speaker fees from Takeda, Ferring, and Janssen; and support for attending meetings or travel from Ferring. KK reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen and Ferring; support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen and Takeda; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Janssen and Predict Immune. SB reports funding from Ferring and Dr Falk for accommodation, travel, and meeting fees. KVP reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, Dr Falk, Janssen, PreddictImmune, and Takeda; support for attending meetings or travel from AbbVie, Ferring, Janssen, and Tillots; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, Galapagos, and Janssen. AJK reports consulting fees from Janssen; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer and Takeda; support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen, Tillots, and Norgine; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie. LCH reports support for attending meetings or travel from AbbVie. CWL reports a Future Leaders Fellow award from UKRI; personal consulting fees from Galapagos, AbbVie, Takeda, Pfizer, Janssen, and Iterative Scopes; institutional consulting fees from Trellus Health; personal fees from Galapagos, AbbVie, Takeda, Pfizer, Janssen, GSK, Gilead, Fresnius Kabi, Ferring, and Dr Falk; and support for attending meetings from Galapagos, AbbVie, Takeda, Pfizer, Janssen, GSK, Gilead, Fresnius Kabi, Ferring, and Dr Falk. RJB and DMA are members of the Global T cell Expert Consortium and have consulted for Oxford Immunotec outside the submitted work. JRG reports grants from F Hoffmann-La Roche AG; grants from Biogen, Celltrion Healthcare, and Galapagos NV; and non-financial support from Immundiagnostik, during the conduct of the study. TA reports grant funding from Pfizer to his institution to deliver this study; grants from Celltrion, Roche, Takeda, Biogen, and Galapagos; and honoraria for lectures from Takeda and Roche, outside the submitted work. Financial support for the VIP study was provided as a research grant by Pfizer and NP is the principal investigator on this grant. NP has received research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb outside the submitted work; reports personal fees from Takeda, Janssen, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Roche, Lilly, Allergan, and Celgene, outside the submitted work; and has served as a speaker or advisory board member for AbbVie, Allergan, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Falk, Ferring, Janssen, Pfizer, Tillotts, Takeda, and Vifor Pharma. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The effects that therapies for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have on immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are not yet fully known. Therefore, we sought to determine whether COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses were altered in patients with IBD on commonly used immunosuppressive drugs., Methods: In this multicentre, prospective, case-control study (VIP), we recruited adults with IBD treated with one of six different immunosuppressive treatment regimens (thiopurines, infliximab, a thiopurine plus infliximab, ustekinumab, vedolizumab, or tofacitinib) and healthy control participants from nine centres in the UK. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and had received two doses of COVID-19 vaccines (either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [Oxford-AstraZeneca], BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech], or mRNA1273 [Moderna]) 6-12 weeks apart (according to scheduling adopted in the UK). We measured antibody responses 53-92 days after a second vaccine dose using the Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. The primary outcome was anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody concentrations in participants without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, adjusted by age and vaccine type, and was analysed by use of multivariable linear regression models. This study is registered in the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN13495664, and is ongoing., Findings: Between May 31 and Nov 24, 2021, we recruited 483 participants, including patients with IBD being treated with thiopurines (n=78), infliximab (n=63), a thiopurine plus infliximab (n=72), ustekinumab (n=57), vedolizumab (n=62), or tofacitinib (n=30), and 121 healthy controls. We included 370 participants without evidence of previous infection in our primary analysis. Geometric mean anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody concentrations were significantly lower in patients treated with infliximab (156·8 U/mL [geometric SD 5·7]; p<0·0001), infliximab plus thiopurine (111·1 U/mL [5·7]; p<0·0001), or tofacitinib (429·5 U/mL [3·1]; p=0·0012) compared with controls (1578·3 U/mL [3·7]). There were no significant differences in antibody concentrations between patients treated with thiopurine monotherapy (1019·8 U/mL [4·3]; p=0·74), ustekinumab (582·4 U/mL [4·6]; p=0·11), or vedolizumab (954·0 U/mL [4·1]; p=0·50) and healthy controls. In multivariable modelling, lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody concentrations were independently associated with infliximab (geometric mean ratio 0·12, 95% CI 0·08-0·17; p<0·0001) and tofacitinib (0·43, 0·23-0·81; p=0·0095), but not with ustekinumab (0·69, 0·41-1·19; p=0·18), thiopurines (0·89, 0·64-1·24; p=0·50), or vedolizumab (1·16, 0·74-1·83; p=0·51). mRNA vaccines (3·68, 2·80-4·84; p<0·0001; vs adenovirus vector vaccines) were independently associated with higher antibody concentrations and older age per decade (0·79, 0·72-0·87; p<0·0001) with lower antibody concentrations., Interpretation: For patients with IBD, the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines varies according to immunosuppressive drug exposure, and is attenuated in recipients of infliximab, infliximab plus thiopurines, and tofacitinib. Scheduling of third primary, or booster, doses could be personalised on the basis of an individual's treatment, and patients taking anti-tumour necrosis factor and tofacitinib should be prioritised., Funding: Pfizer., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JLA reports sponsorship from Vifor Pharma for accommodation and travel to the British Society of Gastroenterology annual meeting 2019, outside the submitted work. NAK reports grants from AbbVie, Biogen, Celgene, Celtrion, Galapagos, MSD, Napp, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Roche, and Takeda; consulting fees from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Falk, Janssen, Mylan, Pharmacosmos, Galapagos, Takeda, and Tillotts; personal fees from Allergan, Celltrion, Falk, Ferring, Janssen, Pharmacosmos, Takeda, Tilllotts, and Galapagos; and support for attending meetings from AbbVie, Falk, and Janssen, outside the submitted work. AS has received travel expense support from Janssen. SS reports grants from Takeda, AbbVie, Tillots Pharma, Janssen, Pfizer, and Biogen, and personal fees from Takeda, AbbVie, Janssen, Pharmacocosmos, Biogen, Pfizer, Tillots Pharma, and Falk Pharma, outside the submitted work. ALH reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, AZ, Atlantic, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Falk, Galapogos, Janssen, MSD, Napp Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Shire, and Takeda; participation on the Global Steering Committee for Genentech; support for attending meetings from AbbVie, Takeda, and Janssen; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, AZ, Atlantic, Bristol Myers Squibb, Galapogos, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda. PMI reports grants from Celltrion, Takeda, MSD, Pfizer, and Galapagos, and personal fees from Celltrion, Takeda, Pfizer, Galapagos, Gilead, AbbVie, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, and Arena, outside the submitted work. MP receives unrestricted educational grants from Pfizer for genetic analyses to support the IBD BioResource and speaker fees from Janssen. GRJ has received grants from the Wellcome Trust and ECCO; speaker fees from Takeda, Ferring, and Janssen; and support for attending meetings or travel from Ferring. KK reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen and Ferring; support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen and Takeda; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Janssen and PredictImmune. KVP reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, DrFalk, Janssen, PreddictImmune, and Takeda; support for attending meetings or travel from AbbVie, Ferring, Janssen, and Tillots; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, Galapagos, and Janssen. AJK reports consulting fees from Janssen; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer and Takeda; support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen, Tillots, and Norgine; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie. LCH reports support for attending meetings or travel from AbbVie. CWL reports a Future Leaders Fellow award from UK Research and Innovation; personal consulting fees from Galapagos, AbbVie, Takeda, Pfizer, Janssen, and Iterative Scopes; institutional consulting fees from Trellus Health; personal fees from Galapagos, AbbVie, Takeda, Pfizer, Janssen, GSK, Gilead, Fresnius Kabi, Ferring, and Dr Falk; and support for attending meetings from Galapagos, AbbVie, Takeda, Pfizer, Janssen, GSK, Gilead, Fresnius Kabi, Ferring, and Dr Falk. RJB and DMA are members of the Global T cell Expert Consortium and have consulted for Oxford Immunotec outside the submitted work. JRG reports grants from F Hoffmann-La Roche, Biogen, Celltrion Healthcare, and Galapagos, and non-financial support from Immundiagnostik, during the conduct of the study. TA reports grant funding from Pfizer to his institution to deliver this study; grants from Celltrion, Roche, Takeda, Biogen, and Galapagos; and honoraria for lectures from Takeda and Roche, outside the submitted work. NP is the principal investigator on the research grant from Pfizer that helped to fund the VIP study; has received research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb outside the submitted work; reports personal fees from Takeda, Janssen, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Roche, Lilly, Allergan, and Celgene, outside the submitted work; and has served as a speaker or advisory board member for AbbVie, Allergan, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Falk, Ferring, Janssen, Pfizer, Tillotts, Takeda, and Vifor Pharma. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a paucity of evidence to support safe and effective management of patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to identify alterations to established conventional evidence-based management of acute severe ulcerative colitis during the early COVID-19 pandemic, the effect on outcomes, and any associations with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes., Methods: The PROTECT-ASUC study was a multicentre, observational, case-control study in 60 acute secondary care hospitals throughout the UK. We included adults (≥18 years) with either ulcerative colitis or inflammatory bowel disease unclassified, who presented with acute severe ulcerative colitis and fulfilled the Truelove and Witts criteria. Cases and controls were identified as either admitted or managed in emergency ambulatory care settings between March 1, 2020, and June 30, 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic period cohort), or between Jan 1, 2019, and June 30, 2019 (historical control cohort), respectively. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis receiving rescue therapy (including primary induction) or colectomy. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04411784., Findings: We included 782 patients (398 in the pandemic period cohort and 384 in the historical control cohort) who met the Truelove and Witts criteria for acute severe ulcerative colitis. The proportion of patients receiving rescue therapy (including primary induction) or surgery was higher during the pandemic period than in the historical period (217 [55%] of 393 patients vs 159 [42%] of 380 patients; p=0·00024) and the time to rescue therapy was shorter in the pandemic cohort than in the historical cohort (p=0·0026). This difference was driven by a greater use of rescue and primary induction therapies with biologicals, ciclosporin, or tofacitinib in the COVID-19 pandemic period cohort than in the historical control period cohort (177 [46%] of 387 patients in the COVID-19 cohort vs 134 [36%] of 373 patients in the historical cohort; p=0·0064). During the pandemic, more patients received ambulatory (outpatient) intravenous steroids (51 [13%] of 385 patients vs 19 [5%] of 360 patients; p=0·00023). Fewer patients received thiopurines (29 [7%] of 398 patients vs 46 [12%] of 384; p=0·029) and 5-aminosalicylic acids (67 [17%] of 398 patients vs 98 [26%] of 384; p=0·0037) during the pandemic than in the historical control period. Colectomy rates were similar between the pandemic and historical control groups (64 [16%] of 389 vs 50 [13%] of 375; p=0·26); however, laparoscopic surgery was less frequently performed during the pandemic period (34 [53%] of 64] vs 38 [76%] of 50; p=0·018). Five (2%) of 253 patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during hospital treatment. Two (2%) of 103 patients re-tested for SARS-CoV-2 during the 3-month follow-up were positive 5 days and 12 days, respectively, after discharge from index admission. Both recovered without serious outcomes., Interpretation: The COVID-19 pandemic altered practice patterns of gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons in the management of acute severe ulcerative colitis but was associated with similar outcomes to a historical cohort. Despite continued use of high-dose corticosteroids and biologicals, the incidence of COVID-19 within 3 months was low and not associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes., Funding: None., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)