Search

BACKGROUND: Whether infliximab therapy can be successfully discontinued after patients with Crohn’s disease have attained sustained, clinical, biochemical, and endoscopic remission is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled withdrawal study of infliximab in patients with Crohn’s disease who were in clinical, biochemical, and endoscopic remission after standard infliximab maintenance therapy for at least 1 year. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to continue infliximab therapy or to receive matching placebo for 48 weeks. The primary end point was time to relapse. RESULTS: This study randomly assigned 115 patients to either the infliximab-continuation group or to the infliximab-discontinuation group. No relapses were observed among the 59 patients continuing infliximab, whereas 23 of 56 patients discontinuing infliximab experienced relapse. Time to relapse was significantly shorter among patients who discontinued infliximab than among those who continued infliximab (hazard ratio, 0.080; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.035 to 0.186; P<0.001). At the end of the trial at week 48, relapse-free survival was 100% in the infliximab-continuation group and 51% in the infliximab-discontinuation group. The key secondary end point, time to loss of remission, was significantly shorter among patients discontinuing infliximab therapy than those continuing infliximab (hazard ratio, 0.025; 95% CI, 0.003 to 0.187; P<0.001). No unexpected adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation of infliximab for patients with Crohn’s disease receiving long-term infliximab therapy and in clinical, biochemical, and endoscopic remission leads to a considerable risk of relapse. (Funded by the Nordic Trial Alliance [NordForsk], the Medical Fund of the Danish Regions [Regionernes Medicin og Behandlingspulje], the Danish Colitis-Crohn Association, and the A.P. Moller Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01817426; EudraCT number, 2012-002702-51.)

Background: Primary infliximab treatment failure is common in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and represents a challenge to clinicians. Treatment options are limited. This study assessed the prognosis, defined as surgery-free survival, in patients with primary infliximab treatment failure as compared to patients without primary failure (initial responders). Furthermore, this study assessed the specter of medical therapies used after primary infliximab treatment failure along with treatment outcomes., Methods: Retrospective, observational, cohort study of patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with infliximab as first-line anti-tumor necrosis factor treatment at a tertiary center. Primary infliximab treatment failure was defined as no clinical improvement during infliximab induction therapy resulting in discontinuation of infliximab therapy., Results: A total of 560 patients (Crohn's disease n = 353 and ulcerative colitis n = 207) were treated with infliximab. Among these, 81 (15%) had primary infliximab treatment failure after a median of 3 infusions (weeks 0, 2, and 6) (interquartile range 2-4). The median surgery-free survival was 196 days from first infusion. One year after primary infliximab treatment failure, the majority of patients (n = 51, 63%) had inflammatory bowel disease-related surgery (Crohn's disease n = 19, 58%; ulcerative colitis n = 32, 67%; P = 0.49). There was a markedly increased risk of surgery in patients with primary infliximab treatment failure as compared to initial responders: odds ratio 6.3 (3.8-10.6), P < 0.0001. Among 30 patients handled by medical therapies, 16 (53%) still had active disease 1 year after primary infliximab treatment failure., Conclusions: Primary infliximab treatment failure is associated with poor outcome including high risk of surgery or sustained active disease despite medical interventions.

Antibodies (Abs) against infliximab (IFX) increase IFX clearance and can result in treatment failure and acute hypersensitivity reactions. However, interpretation of their clinical value is complicated by individual differences in Ab responses and methods used for quantification. The increase in IFX clearance imposed by anti-IFX Abs has generally been evaluated using a binary classification, i.e., positive or negative. This analysis aimed to investigate if anti-IFX Ab concentrations provide a more adequate prediction of alterations in clearance. Data originated from a clinical trial on Crohn's disease patients with IFX treatment failure. The trial was not originally designed for pharmacokinetic analysis. Therefore, published pharmacokinetic models were utilized as priors to enable covariate investigation. The impact of anti-IFX Abs on clearance was assessed using different mathematical relationships and exploiting information from two different quantification assays, measuring semi-quantitative "total" or "unbound neutralizing" concentrations of anti-IFX Ab, respectively. Inclusion of anti-IFX Ab status/concentration improved the model's performance for all investigated relationships. The anti-IFX Ab concentrations were superior to the binary classifications, indicating that the magnitude of increase in IFX clearance imposed by anti-IFX Abs closely relates to their concentration. Furthermore, total anti-IFX Ab concentrations appeared superior to the unbound neutralizing fraction in identifying high clearance individuals. Simulations showed that even at low concentrations, anti-IFX Abs lead to sub-therapeutic IFX concentrations, supporting a need of treatment interventions in all anti-IFX Ab positive patients. The developed model can serve as a basis for further investigations to refine treatment recommendations for patients with anti-IFX Abs.

Background: This study assessed the effects of infliximab (IFX) treatment failure on patient-reported outcomes and explored the influence of using personalized treatment in this situation., Methods: Sixty-nine Crohn's disease patients with IFX treatment failure were randomized to an intensified IFX regimen (n = 36) or personalized treatment defined by IFX and anti-IFX antibodies (n = 33). Health-related quality of life evaluated with the Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) and productivity evaluated with the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI:CD) were assessed at treatment failure and after 4, 8, 12 and 20 weeks., Results: Median IBDQ score at manifestation of IFX treatment failure was 40 and improved markedly in responders by 11 at weeks 4 and 8 (p < 0.001) and by 13 at weeks 12 and 20 (p < 0.001). Non-responders improved modestly at weeks 12 and 20 (increase of median 4, p < 0.05). Overall activity impairment was high at IFX failure (median 70%) and decreased substantially in responders (40-50%, p < 0.001) and to a lesser extent in non-responders (15-40%, p < 0.05). In employed patients (55%), absenteeism was negligible during the entire study period. However, median presenteeism was 40% at manifestation of IFX failure and decreased only among responders across time (decrease 10-30%, p < 0.05). Although anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy was discontinued in most patients handled by personalized treatment, IBDQ and WPAI:CD scores were similar in these patients compared with patients routinely dose-intensified on IFX., Conclusion: Regaining low disease activity after IFX failure is necessary for minimizing patient impairment and indirect disease-related costs. A personalized treatment strategy does not have a negative influence on patient-reported outcomes., (Copyright © 2015 European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation (ECCO). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background and Aims: Intensification of the infliximab (IFX) regimen is recommended if the treatment effect is inadequate. However, the rationale for this is not well defined as the underlying mechanisms vary. The aim of this study was to explore the association between changes in serum IFX and anti-IFX antibodies (Abs) after IFX intensification and clinical outcomes., Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial including 42 Crohn's disease patients with IFX treatment failure, all treated with an intensified IFX regimen (5mg/kg every 4 week) for 12 weeks. Trough serum IFX and anti-IFX Ab concentrations were measured by a homogeneous mobility shift binding assay (HMSA) and a functional cell-based reporter gene assay (RGA) at treatment failure and the end of the trial., Results: Twenty-one patients (50%) regained clinical response on the intensified IFX regimen. The increase in serum trough levels of IFX during treatment intensification was higher among responders than non-responders (RGA, 8.8 versus 3.0 μg/mL, p = 0.035; HMSA, 9.9 versus 4.7 μg/mL, p = 0.040), and differentiated patients by clinical outcome (RGA, area under receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.75 [0.53-0.97], p = 0.035; HMSA, AUC 0.74 [0.53-0.95], p = 0.042). All responders exhibited an IFX increase ≥2.6 μg/mL (sensitivity 100%, specificity 50%). Anti-IFX Abs detected by HMSA in 13 patients (32%) were often non-functional and became undetectable during IFX intensification. However, even functional anti-IFX Abs detected by RGA in six patients (15%) became undetectable., Conclusion: Increase in IFX levels following treatment intensification was associated with improved clinical outcomes, indicating insufficient drug levels in a subgroup of patients. Anti-IFX Abs may become undetectable during treatment intensification, suggesting lowered production or the formation of immune complexes., (Copyright © 2015 European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation (ECCO). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: Cost-effective guidance of therapeutic strategy in Crohn's disease patients with secondary infliximab (IFX) treatment failure may be achieved by serum IFX and anti-IFX antibody (Ab) measurements by radioimmunoassay (RIA). This study investigated implications of using other techniques for this purpose., Methods: This is a post hoc analysis of randomized clinical trial including 66 Crohn's disease patients with IFX failure in whom IFX and anti-IFX Ab measurements by RIA had been used for therapeutic guidance. Samples were additionally assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), homogeneous mobility shift assay (HMSA), and functional cell-based reporter gene assay (RGA)., Results: IFX detection was comparable between assays (82% RIA, 76% ELISA, 88% HMSA, and 74% RGA), and it correlated significantly (Pearson's r=0.91-0.97, P<0.0001). However, IFX concentrations varied systematically between all pair of assays except RIA-RGA. Anti-IFX Ab detection was variable (27% RIA, 9% ELISA, 33% HMSA, and 11% RGA), but correlated significantly (Pearson's r=0.77-0.96; P<0.0001). Anti-IFX Abs detected by RIA and HMSA were often from sera without drug-neutralizing activity (RGA). Assays agreed on classification of underlying mechanism for treatment failure in most cases (79-94%). The majority (74-88%) failed IFX owing to pharmacodynamic problems, or had noninflammatory pathophysiology for symptoms resembling relapse. Applied threshold for therapeutic vs. subtherapeutic IFX level influenced classifications. The four different assays did not differ in terms of the ability to predict response to interventions defined by the algorithm., Conclusions: Despite variable analytical properties, common assays result in similar classifications and interventions in patients with IFX treatment failure, and with comparable clinical outcomes. Implications are, however, profound for the minority classified differently.

Antibody constructs targeting tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF) have become important in the management of several chronic immunoinflammatory diseases. Four recombinant anti-TNF drugs are currently approved for clinical use in patients with various chronic inflammatory diseases, three of which are effective in chronic inflammatory bowel disease. These proteins can dramatically lower disease activity and, in some patients, induce remission. Unfortunately, however, not all patients respond favourably to anti-TNF antibodies. For example, patients suffering from Crohn's disease do not benefit from etanercept, and some patients treated with the other anti-TNF constructs either do not respond at all (primary response failure), or they respond initially but have later relapses (secondary response failure) despite increased dosage and/or more frequent administration of the drugs. The reason(s) for these response failures are not clear but inter-individual and even intra-individual differences in bioavailability and pharmacokinetics may contribute. Furthermore, immunogenicity of the drugs, causing patients to develop anti-drug antibodies (ADAs), contributes to treatment failure. Monitoring patients for circulating levels of functional anti-TNF drugs and ADAs is therefore warranted so that treatment can be tailored to the individual patient (individual medicine or personal medicine) in order that effective and economical long-term therapy can be given with minimal risks to the patients.