Search

Background: Accurate, reliable, and responsive disease activity indices are important to streamline drug approval and treatment modalities for pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (pIBD). We aimed to identify all scoring indices used in pIBD randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to evaluate their operating properties., Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched on December 6, 2022, to identify studies evaluating clinical, endoscopic, imaging, or patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in pIBD including Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Validity, reliability, responsiveness, and feasibility were summarized., Results: Seventy RCTs evaluating pIBD indices were identified. Forty-one studies reported on the operating properties of 14 eligible indices (n = 9 CD, n = 5 UC). The Pediatric Crohn's Disease Activity Index (PCDAI) varied widely in terms of validity and reliability and was less feasible overall. In contrast, the Mucosal Inflammation Noninvasive Index, which includes fecal calprotectin, had better operating properties than the PCDAI. The Simplified Endoscopic Mucosal Assessment of Crohn's Disease appears more feasible and had similar operating properties than the longer Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease. The Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index was feasible, valid, and reliable, but responsiveness needs to be evaluated further. The Endoscopic Mayo score and the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity were reliable, but validity and responsiveness need to be evaluated further. Imaging and PROMs/quality of life indices need further evaluation., Conclusions: The operating properties of pIBD clinical trial end points varied widely. These results highlight the need for further validation and development of novel indices., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background and Aims: We sought to ascertain how prior exposure to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists impacts treatment response with various classes of advanced therapies in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), through a systematic review and meta-analysis., Methods: Through a systematic review of multiple databases through June 30, 2024, we identified 17 randomized controlled trials in 8871 adults with moderate-severe UC who were treated with different advanced therapies vs placebo, and reported efficacy in induction of clinical remission, stratified by prior exposure to TNF antagonists. We calculated the ratio of odds ratio of achieving remission with active drug vs placebo, in TNF antagonist-naïve vs TNF antagonist-exposed patients. We grouped advanced therapies based on primary mechanism of action: lymphocyte trafficking inhibitors (anti-integrins and sphingosine-1 phosphate [S1P] receptor modulators), anti-interleukins (interleukin-12/23 antagonist and selective interleukin-23 antagonists) and Janus kinase inhibitors., Results: Lymphocyte trafficking inhibitors were more efficacious in TNF antagonist-naïve vs exposed patients (5 trials; odds ratio [OR], 1.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-3.49), whereas JAK inhibitors were less efficacious in TNF antagonist-naïve vs exposed patients (6 trials; ratio of OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.22-1.01). No significant difference was observed in efficacy of selective interleukin-23 antagonists vs placebo in TNF antagonist-naïve vs exposed patients (6 trials; ratio of OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.64-1.80). There was minimal heterogeneity across analyses., Conclusion: There is significant heterogeneity of treatment efficacy with different advanced therapies in inducing remission in patients with UC based on prior exposure to TNF antagonists, with plausible potentiation of JAK inhibitors and attenuation of lymphocyte trafficking inhibitors. Future studies on the mechanistic basis for these observations are warranted., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Crohn's Disease (CD) can affect any part of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, including the upper GI tract (UGIT). However, the definitions and classifications of upper GI CD (UGICD) vary. We conducted a scoping review to explore how UGIT and UGICD are defined and to assess the heterogeneity of these definitions in published CD guidelines, aiming to inform future initiatives for harmonizing definitions. We conducted a search of MEDLINE and Embase for English-language guidelines on CD that mentioned upper GI-related terms in the titles, abstracts, or keywords from inception until 26 July 2024. Definitions of UGIT and UGICD were summarized descriptively. Of 1132 citations, only 19 records met our inclusion criteria. Only eight were identified as CD guidelines. None of them focuses on UGICD. Among these, five diagnostic guidelines explicitly mentioned "upper GI" in their abstracts. Only the joint European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation and European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology guidelines clearly defined the UGIT. Most guidelines mentioned UGI terms related to upper endoscopy or biopsy only. It was unclear whether these guidelines typically included the esophagus, stomach, and duodenum in the definition of UGICD while excluding the distal small intestine. Although the latest guideline related to pediatric-onset IBD cited the 2011 Paris classification, none of the three guidelines published after that explicitly mentioned the proposed subdivided location of the upper disease. There is a lack of consistent reporting in defining UGICD according to disease location. It is unclear whether there is a consensus on excluding the small intestine beyond the duodenum. Additionally, there is no indication that the subdivided location of UGIT was considered in CD guideline development. Greater consistency in definitions would aid in diagnosis, clinical care, epidemiological research and inclusion into clinical trials. These findings underscore the need for developing a framework to standardize the classification of UGICD, especially for clinical trials., (© 2024 The Author(s). United European Gastroenterology Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of United European Gastroenterology.)

Objectives: Advanced combination treatment (ACT), defined as a combination of at least 2 biologic agents, a biologic agent and an oral small molecule, 2 oral small molecules drug with different mechanisms of action is a proposed strategy to improve outcomes in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease (IMID). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ACT with monotherapy in patients with select IMIDs., Methods: Through a systematic literature search, we identified 10 RCTs (n = 1154) comparing ACT with single agent therapy (monotherapy). The primary outcome was induction of clinical remission. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, serious adverse events, infections, and serious infections. We performed random-effects meta-analysis and used GRADE to appraise certainty of evidence., Results: Eight out of 10 trials investigated an anti-TNF-α drug (e.g., etanercept, infliximab, golimumab, certolizumab) combined with another biologic (e.g anti-IL-23, anti-integrin, anti-IL-1) or an oral small molecule. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of achieving clinical remission with ACT vs. monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 7 RCTs) (RR, 1.75 [95 % CI 0.60-5.13]; moderate heterogeneity (I 2  = 33 %)] and systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 1) (RR, 1.20 [0.53-2.72]) (GRADE; low certainty evidence). Patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the ACT arm were more likely to experience adverse events (RR, 1.07 [1.01-1.12]) compared to monotherapy. ACT led to higher rates of induction of clinical remission in patients with IBD (n = 2 RCTs) (RR, 1.68 [1.15-2.46]) with minimal heterogeneity (I 2  = 15 %) (GRADE; low certainty evidence), and no differences in the likelihood of adverse events (RR 0.92 [0.80-1.05]). There were no differences in the risk of infections or serious infections in patients treated with ACT or monotherapy with rheumatological disease or IBD., Conclusions: ACT did not offer clinical benefit in patients with rheumatological IMIDs and resulted in higher rate adverse events in rheumatoid arthritis. ACT may offer clinical benefit without a clear safety signal in patients with IBD, but further trials are warranted. The variability in ACT regimens across studies limits the generalizability of these findings., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest VS: No relevant disclosures. YY: No relevant disclosures. SS: has received research grants from Pfizer. CM: has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Amgen, AVIR Pharma Inc, BioJAMP, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, McKesson, Mylan, Takeda, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi; speaker's fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AVIR Pharma Inc, Alimentiv, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, Takeda, Pendopharm, and Pfizer; royalties from Springer Publishing; research support from Ferring, Takeda, Pfizer. OMN: has received speaker fees from Janssen, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Ferring, Alfa Sigma. GF: has received consultancy fees from Takeda, Abbvie, Janssen, Pfizer, Celltrion, Sandoz, Amgen, Ferring, Gilead, Galapagos, BMS. MLAF: has received speaker or advisory board fees from Janssen, Eli Lilly, Abbvie, Asofarma. LB: No relevant disclosure. M-AD: speaker or consultant fees from Novartis, BMS, Janssen, Pfizer, Amgen, Galapagos, AbbVie, UCB, and Eli Lilly. PC reports research grants from UCB, MSD and Pfizer; speaker fees or consultant fees from Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVie, UCB, Eli Lilly, Gilead and Celgene Corporation. JP: Funding for research: Abbvie, BMS, Eli Lilly & Company, Merck, Roche, Seattle Genetics; UCB consulting relationships: AbbVie, Actelion, Amgen, Bayer, BMS, Eicos Sciences, Eli Lilly & Company, Emerald, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB; Speakers Bureau: UCB. LPB: has received consulting fee from AbbVie, Adacyte, Alimentiv, Alma Bio Therapeutics, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, Arena, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, CONNECT Biopharm, Cytoki Pharma, Enthera, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Gossamer Bio, GSK, HAC-Pharma, IAG Image Analysis, Index Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Mopac, Morphic, MSD, Norgine, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, OM Pharma, ONO Pharma, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pandion Therapeutics, Par’Immune, Pfizer, Prometheus, Protagonist, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Takeda, Theravance, Thermo Fisher, Tigenix, Tillots, Viatris, Vifor, Ysopia, Abivax. Received grants from Takeda, Fresenius Kabi, Cell Trion. Speaker fee from Galapagos, AbbVie, Janssen, Genentech, Ferring, Tillots, Celltrion, Takeda, Pfizer, Sandoz, Biogen, MSD, Amgen, Vifor, Arena, Lilly, Gilead, Viatris, Medac. SD: has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv Inc., Allergan, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Athos Therapeutics, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Dr Falk Pharma, Eli Lilly, Enthera, Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc, Gilead, Hospira, Inotrem, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, MSD, Mundipharma, Mylan, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda, TiGenixa, UCB Inc, and Vifor; and lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc, Gilead, Janssen, Mylan, Pfizer, and Takeda. VJ has received consulting/advisory board fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv Inc (formerly Robarts Clinical Trials), Arena pharmaceuticals, Asieris, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Genetech, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Sandoz, Takeda, Topivert; speaker's fees from, Abbvie, Ferring, Galapagos, Janssen Pfizer Shire, Takeda., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: We aimed to evaluate the real-world effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab for the treatment of both bio-naive and bio-exposed ulcerative colitis patients in a real-world setting., Methods: Retrospective, Canadian multicenter cohort study. Primary outcomes were clinical remission and endoscopic remission. Key secondary outcomes included composite clinical and endoscopic response, safety, and persistence. Univariable logistic regression was conducted to examine associations between baseline factors and 12-month clinical and endoscopic response and remission. The primary focus was on the association between these outcomes and bioexposure status., Results: A total of 198 patients were included, of whom 47.5% were female and 85.9% were younger than 65 years. The majority had severe endoscopic activity at baseline (47.5%, n = 87) and were bio-exposed (88.8%, n = 176; 33%, n = 66 previous failure of 3 or more biologics). Patients were followed for a median of 12.8 (interquartile range 8.2-22.1) months after induction. The overall clinical remission rates were 41.3% (69/167), 38.1% (56/147), and 43.6% (58/133) at 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively. Endoscopic remission rates (Mayo endoscopy score = 0) were 8.0% (7/88), 18.7% (23/123), and 12.5% (11/88) at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively, and consistently higher in bio-naive patients compared with bio-exposed patients through 12 months ( P < 0.05 at all time points). Bio-naive patients were more likely to achieve endoscopic remission compared with bio-exposed (hazard ratio = 5.40, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-26.93). Adverse events were reported in 14.1% (18/198)., Discussion: In a highly refractory and largely bio-exposed population, a substantial proportion of patients with ulcerative colitis treated with ustekinumab can achieve clinical and endoscopic outcomes of importance after 12 months. Previous biologic exposure is associated with lower rates of endoscopic remission., (Copyright © 2024 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background: Mucosal healing (MH) is an established treatment goal in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, various definitions of MH exist. We aimed to identify how MH is defined in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD)., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library from inception to December 2023 for phase 2 and 3 RCTs of advanced therapies in IBD., Results: One hundred forty-four studies were included, 72 in UC and 72 in CD, published between 1997 and 2023. In UC, 64% (46/72) RCTs reported MH as an endpoint. 12 definitions of MH were found, from endoscopic assessment alone (35/46; 76%) to the more recent combination of histology and endoscopy (10/46; 22%). 96% (44/46) of studies used the Mayo Endoscopic Subscore. In CD, reporting of MH lagged behind UC, with only 12% (9/72) of trials specifically defining MH as an endpoint, 7 as "absence of ulceration," 2 as Simplified Endoscopic Score for CD score ≤2 or 0. Histological assessment was performed in 3 RCTs of CD. Centralized reading of endoscopy was used in 48% (35/72) of RCTs of UC and 22% (16/72) of CD. Only 1 RCT included transmural healing as an endpoint., Conclusions: A standard definition of MH in IBD is lacking. Definitions have evolved particularly in UC, which now includes the addition of histological evaluation. Transmural healing holds promise as a future target in CD. We support a greater standardization of definitions as we expect endpoints to become increasingly stringent and multimodal with computers automating the assessment., (© 2024 The Author(s). United European Gastroenterology Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of United European Gastroenterology.)

Background: Histology has prognostic value in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, direct comparisons of histological endpoints are lacking., Aim: To perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare histological endpoints with biologics and small molecules., Methods: We searched four databases up until July 2024 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on advanced therapies for moderate-to-severe UC reporting histological endpoints. Outcomes included histological improvement or remission, and histo-endoscopic improvement after induction or during maintenance. We used a random-effects frequentist model and have reported outcomes as relative risk and 95% confidence interval. We estimated relative drug efficacy with the P-score. We conducted subgroup analysis by trial phase and evaluated risk of bias and evidence certainty., Results: We included 24 RCTs (15 therapies, 8874 patients). Nineteen provided data on induction and 10 on maintenance; outcome definitions were similar. Etrasimod 2 mg/day ranked highest in achieving histologic improvement (P-score 0.98) and remission (P-score 0.90) following induction. Globally, guselkumab 200-400 mg ranked first for histo-endoscopic improvement, while etrasimod 2 mg/day and upadacitinib 45 mg/day were superior in the subgroup analysis. During maintenance, upadacitinib 30 mg/day was superior in achieving histologic improvement and remission (P-score 0.88 for both) and histo-endoscopic improvement (P-score 0.94). Etrasimod 2 mg/day ranked second for histologic remission (P-score 0.70) and histo-endoscopic improvement (P-score 0.73), while mirikizumab 200 mg/month ranked second for histologic improvement., Conclusion: These results support the ability of small molecules to achieve stringent endpoints in moderate-to-severe UC. Histological outcome data for biologics was sparser, particularly during maintenance. Head-to-head RCTs are imperative to better inform clinical practice., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background & Aims: Understanding placebo rates is critical for efficient clinical trial design. We assessed placebo rates and associated factors using individual patient data from Crohn's disease trials., Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of phase 2/3 placebo-controlled trials evaluating advanced therapies in moderate to severe Crohn's disease (2010-2021). Deidentified individual patient data were obtained through Vivli Inc and the Yale University Open Data Access Project. Primary outcomes were clinical response and remission. Pooled placebo rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using 1- and 2-stage meta-analytic approaches. Regression analyses identified patient-level factors associated with placebo rates., Results: Analysis of individual patient data from 8 induction (n = 1147) and 4 maintenance (n = 524) trials showed overall placebo clinical response and remission rates for induction were 27% (95% CI, 23%-32%) and 10% (95% CI, 8%-14%), respectively, and 32% (95% CI, 23%-42%) and 22% (95% CI, 14%-33%) for maintenance, respectively. Among biologic (bio)-naïve patients, placebo response and remission rates during induction were 29% (95% CI, 24%-35%) and 11% (95% CI, 8%-15%) respectively, and 26% (95% CI, 20%-33%) and 10% (95% CI, 8%-14%) for biologic (bio)-exposed patients, respectively. During maintenance, biologic-naïve response and remission rates were 41% (95% CI, 34%-48%) and 32% (95% CI, 24%-40%), respectively, and 29% (95% CI, 24%-34%) and 16% (95% CI, 13%-21%) for bio-exposed, respectively. Higher baseline C-reactive protein concentration predicted lower placebo rates, whereas higher baseline albumin levels and body mass index increased the odds of placebo outcomes. Increased baseline Crohn's Disease Activity Index and 2-item patient-reported outcome scores predicted higher response rates in induction, lower response rates in maintenance, and lower remission rates in induction and maintenance., Conclusions: Patient- and trial-level characteristics influence placebo rates in Crohn's disease trials. Careful implementation of eligibility criteria, outcome definitions, and patient stratification may reduce placebo rates., (Copyright © 2025 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The evidence for the management of patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and permanent ileostomy (PI) is limited. We aimed to summarize the interventional studies related to the provision of adjunctive ostomy care in this population., Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to January 5, 2024. Eligible studies were non-randomized or randomized controlled trials (RCTs), or comparative cohort studies predominantly recruiting participants with CD and/or ulcerative colitis (UC) with PI assessing interventions for the management of high stoma output, disease recurrence, peristomal skin care, pouching systems, behavioral interventions, mental health support, and diet., Results: Out of 3217 records, 6 were eligible and all were RCTs ( n  = 95). Out of these, 5 adopted a crossover design, and 1 study was a double-blind parallel-group RCT. All except 1 were published more than 20 years ago (1976-2003). Two studies exclusively included patients with UC, one included CD, and the remaining included both UC and CD. Four studies assessed pharmacological interventions (loperamide, 5-aminosalysilate [5-ASA], azodisal sodium, and budesonide), one assessed oral supplement with different osmolarities, and one assessed dietary intervention (unrefined vs refined carbohydrate). A decrease in ileostomy output was the primary outcome of interest in 4 studies. None of the studies assessed interventions for peristomal skin care, quality of life, stoma pouching systems, behavioral interventions, mental health, or CD recurrence., Conclusions: This study highlights that the evidence base to inform care for patients with IBD and PI is almost non-existent. There is an urgent need for focused research in this area to inform evidence-based treatment decisions., Competing Interests: SKV has received a consulting fee from Alimentiv. VS has none to disclose. YY has none to disclose. NN holds a McMaster University AFP Clinician Researcher Award. Neeraj Narula has received honoraria from Janssen, Abbvie, Takeda, Pfizer, Sandoz, Novartis, Iterative Health, Innomar Strategies, Fresinius Kabi, Amgen, Organon, Eli Lilly, and Ferring. SS has received research grants from Pfizer. CM has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Amgen, AVIR Pharma Inc, BioJAMP, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, McKesson, Mylan, Takeda, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi; speaker's fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AVIR Pharma Inc, Alimentiv, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, Takeda, Pendopharm, and Pfizer; royalties from Springer Publishing; research support from Ferring, Takeda, Pfizer. FR is consultant to Adnovate, Agomab, Allergan, AbbVie, Arena, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene/BMS, CDISC, Celsius, Cowen, Ferring, Galapagos, Galmed, Genentech, Gilead, Gossamer, Guidepoint, Helmsley, Horizon Therapeutics, Image Analysis Limited, Index Pharma, Jannsen, Koutif, Mestag, Metacrine, Mopac, Morphic, Organovo, Origo, Pfizer, Pliant, Prometheus Biosciences, Receptos, RedX, Roche, Samsung, Surmodics, Surrozen, Takeda, Techlab, Theravance, Thetis, Tr1X Bio, UCB, Ysios, 89Bio. VJ has received consulting/advisory board fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Arena pharmaceuticals, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Asieris, Astra Zeneca, Avoro Capital, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Endpoint Health, Enthera, Ferring, Flagship Pioneering, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilde Healthcare, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, Gilead, Innomar, JAMP, Janssen, Merck, Metacrine, Mylan, MRM Health, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist, Prometheus Biosciences, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Roivant, Sandoz, Second Genome, Sorriso, Synedgen, Takeda, TD Securities, Teva, Topivert, Ventyx, Vividion; speaker’s fees from, Abbvie, Ferring, Bristol Myers Squibb, Galapagos, Janssen Pfizer Shire, Takeda, Fresenius Kabi., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn's & Colitis Foundation.)

Background & Aims: Although participants with inflammatory bowel diseases in clinical trials of biologics and small molecule drugs (henceforth, advanced therapies) frequently receive several medications concomitantly, it is unclear how they modify treatment effect., Methods: Through an individual patient data pooled analysis of 10 clinical trials of advanced therapies for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis, we assessed whether concomitant exposure to corticosteroids, immunomodulators, mesalamine, proton pump inhibitors, histamine receptor antagonists, opiates, antidepressants, and antibiotics modified the effect of the intervention on treatment efficacy and safety outcomes, using modified Poisson regression model., Results: Of 6044 patients (4280 receiving intervention, 1764 receiving placebo), several received concomitant corticosteroids (47%), immunomodulators (28%), mesalamine (68%), proton pump inhibitors (14%), histamine receptor antagonists (2%), opiates (7%), antidepressants (6%), and/or antibiotics (5%). After adjusting for confounders and examining treatment efficacy of intervention versus placebo, we observed no impact of concomitant exposure to corticosteroids (ratio of relative risk of drug vs placebo with vs without concomitant exposure: ratio of risk ratio [RRR], 0.81 [95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.06]), mesalamine (RRR, 1.04 [0.78-1.39]), proton pump inhibitors (RRR, 0.87 [0.61-1.22]), histamine receptor antagonists (RRR, 1.72 [0.97-14.29]), opiates (RRR, 0.90 [0.54-1.49]), antidepressants (RRR, 1.02 [0.57-1.83]), and antibiotics (RRR, 0.72 [0.44-1.16]) on likelihood of clinical remission. Concomitant exposure to immunomodulators was associated with lower likelihood of achieving clinical remission (RRR, 0.73 [0.55-0.97]), particularly with non-tumor necrosis factor antagonists., Conclusions: In clinical trials of advanced therapies for ulcerative colitis, baseline concomitant exposure to multiple commonly used class of medications does not impact treatment efficacy or safety. These findings directly inform design of regulatory clinical trials with respect to managing concomitant medications at baseline., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinical, endoscopic, histological, and composite instruments are currently used to measure disease activity in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). We compared the responsiveness of the Mayo Clinic score (MCS), modified MCS (mMS; excluding physician global assessment), partial MCS (pMS; MCS without endoscopic subscore), Robart's Histopathology Index (RHI), and UC-100 score to change after ustekinumab treatment in patients with moderately to severely active UC., Methods: Post hoc analysis of the phase 3 UNIFI induction trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02407236) was conducted. Participants with moderately to severely active UC were randomized to receive ustekinumab or placebo. Treatment assignment was the criterion to assess responsiveness, which was quantified using the probability of a treated participant having a larger change in score than a placebo participant, termed the win probability (WinP), and estimated using nonparametric methods., Findings: The UC-100 score demonstrated large responsiveness (WinP 0.72 [95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.78]), and the MCS (0.68 [0.62-0.73]), mMS (0.69 [0.63-0.75]), and pMS (0.65 [0.59-0.71]) demonstrated similar effect sizes. Of the component items of the Mayo score, the endoscopic subscore (WinP 0.76 [0.69-0.82]) and the stool frequency subscore (WinP 0.74 [0.69-0.79]) were the most responsive. The Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) quality-of-life questionnaire was also responsive (WinP 0.78 [0.72-0.82])., Conclusions: UC disease activity indices are similarly responsive. Depending on the treatment setting, time point of evaluation, and feasibility of measurement, different scores may be used to demonstrate response. These results support the use of mMS as a composite primary endpoint, incorporating both patient-reported and endoscopic outcome measures. The UC-100 score may be more appropriate in settings that also routinely incorporate histological evaluation., Funding: There is no funding for this study., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests R.P. has served as a consultant for Abbott, AbbVie, Abbivax, Alimentiv, Inc. (formerly Robarts Clinical Trials), Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Cosmos Pharmaceuticals, Eisai, Elan, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Galapagos, Fresenius Kabi, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, JAMP Bio, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Novartis, Oppilan Pharma, Organon, Pandion Pharma, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus Biosciences, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Sandoz, Satisfai Health, Shire, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Theravance Biopharma, Trellus, Viatris, Ventyx, and UCB; received speaker’s fees for AbbVie, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Merck, Organon, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Shire, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals; and has served on advisory boards for AbbVie, Alimentiv, Inc. (formerly Robarts Clinical Trials), Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, JAMP Bio, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Novartis, Oppilan Pharma, Organon, Pandion Pharma, Pfizer, Progenity, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Sandoz, Shire, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, and Ventyx Biosciences. B.E.S. has served as a consultant or received speaker’s fees from AbbVie, Abivax, Adiso Therapeutics, Alimentiv, Inc., Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Artizan Biosciences, Artugen Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bacainn Therapeutics, Biora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Calibr, Celltrion, ClostraBio, Connect Biopharm, Cytoki Pharma, Eli Lilly, Enthera, Evommune, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Gossamer Bio, HMP Acquisition, Imhotex, Immunic, InDex Pharmaceuticals, Innovation Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Kaleido, Kalyope, Merck, MiroBio, Morphic Therapeutic, MRM Health, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus Biosciences, Prometheus Laboratories, Protagonist Therapeutics, Q32 Bio, RedHill Biopharma, Sun Pharma Global, Surrozen, Synlogic Operating Company, Takeda, Target RWE, Theravance Biopharma R&D, TLL Pharmaceutical, USWM Enterprises, Ventyx Biosciences, Viela Bio and stock options from Ventyx Biosciences. Z.W. was an employee of Alimentiv, Inc. M.H. is an employee of Alimentiv, Inc. G.Z. has received consulting fees from Alimentiv, Inc. L.P.-B. has received personal fees from AbbVie, Adacyte, Alimentiv, Inc., Alma Bio Therapeutics, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, Arena, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Connect Biopharm, Cytoki Pharma, Enthera, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Gossamer Bio, GSK, HAC-Pharma, IAG Image Analysis, Index Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Mopac, Morphic, MSD, Norgine, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, OM Pharma, ONO Pharma, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pandion Therapeutics, Par’Immune, Pfizer, Prometheus, Protagonist, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Takeda, Theravance, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Tigenix, Tillots, Viatris, Vifor, Ysopia, Abivax, Samsung, Ventyx, Roivant, and Vectivbio. S.D. reports consultancy fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Inc., Allergan, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, AstraZeneca, Athos Therapeutics, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Dr. Falk Pharma, Eli Lilly, Enthera, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Gilead, Hospira, Inotrem, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Morphic, MSD, Mundipharma, Mylan, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda, Teladoc Health, TiGenix, UCB, Vial, and Vifor and reports lecture fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Gilead, Janssen, Mylan, Pfizer, and Takeda. L.J.C. is an employee of Alimentiv, Inc. B.G.F. is a scientific advisory board member for AbbVie, Allergan, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Avaxia Biologics, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Elan, Biogen, Ferring, Genentech-Roche, Janssen-Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Millennium, Nestlé, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus, Protagonist, Receptos, Salix, Sigmoid Pharma, Takeda, Teva, TiGenix, Tillotts Pharma, and UCB Pharma; consulting fees from AbbVie, Actogenix, Akros, Albireo Pharma, Allergan, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Avaxia Biologics, Avir Pharma, Axcan, Baxter Healthcare, Biogen Idec, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Calypso Biotech, Celgene, Elan-Biogen, EnGene, Ferring, Genentech-Roche, GiCare Pharma, Gilead Sciences, Given Imaging, GlaxoSmithKline, Ironwood, Janssen Biotech-Centocor, Janssen-Johnson & Johnson, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Eli Lilly, Merck, Mesoblast Pharma, Millennium, Nestlé, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus, Protagonist, Receptos Salix, Sanofi, Shire, Sigmoid Pharma, Synergy Pharma, Takeda, Teva, TiGenix, Tillotts Pharma, UCB Pharma, Vertex, VHsquared, Wyeth, Zealand, and Zygenia; lecture fees from AbbVie, Janssen-Johnson & Johnson, Takeda, and UCB Pharma; and grant support from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Biotech-Centocor, Janssen-Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Receptos, Sanofi, and Takeda and is the senior scientific officer of Alimentiv, Inc. S.S. has received research grants from Pfizer. V.J. has received consulting/advisory board fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Inc., Arena Pharmaceuticals, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Asieris, AstraZeneca, Avoro Capital, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Endpoint Health, Enthera, Ferring, Flagship Pioneering, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilde Healthcare, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, Gilead, Innomar, JAMP, Janssen, Merck, Metacrine, Mylan, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist, Prometheus Biosciences, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Roivant, Sandoz, SCOPE, Second Genome, Sorriso, Takeda, TD Securities, Teva, Topivert, Ventyx, and Vividion and speaker’s fees from Abbvie, Ferring, Bristol Myers Squibb, Galapagos, Janssen Pfizer Shire, Takeda, and Fresenius Kabi. C.M. has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Inc., Amgen, Avir Pharma, BioJAMP, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, McKesson, Mylan, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, and Tillotts Pharma; speaker’s fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Avir Pharma, Alimentiv, Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, Organon, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Takeda; royalties from Springer Publishing; and research support from AbbVie, Ferring, and Pfizer., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The performance of bowel preparation (BP) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) is unknown., Aims: To evaluate the operating properties of instruments used to assess BP quality in patients with CD., Methods: We used the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, modified Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, Harefield Cleansing Scale, Food and Drug Administration Bowel Cleansing Assessment Scale (BCAS), and a 100-mm visual analogue scale of bowel cleanliness to assess BP quality in 50 videos from 40 patients with CD. We assessed endoscopic activity with the Simple Endoscopic Score for CD (SES-CD). Assessments were on endoscope insertion and withdrawal. Reliability was quantified using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). We assessed validity by within-patient correlation between instruments and the visual analogue scale using mixed-effect models. The correlation between BP quality and SES-SD scores was assessed using Spearman's rho., Results: Inter- and intra-rater reliability for all BP quality instruments was substantial (ICC ≥0.61) except for the Food and Drug Administration BCAS on insertion (inter-rater reliability ICC ≥0.41). The visual analogue scale had substantial inter- and almost perfect (ICC ≥0.81) intra-rater reliability. Correlation coefficients for the validity of the instruments exceeded 0.58. BP quality and endoscopic disease activity scores in the colon were negatively correlated., Conclusion: Most existing instruments reliably assess BP quality in patients with CD. These results support the use of these instruments in clinical practice, provide a framework for scoring BP quality in CD clinical trials, and support evaluation of novel BP agents in patients with CD., (© 2024 The Author(s). Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Standardized clinical care processes for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and a permanent ileostomy (PI) are lacking. The EndOTrial consortium aims to address this gap by developing pathways for care., Methods: In this umbrella review, we searched major databases for relevant systematic reviews (SRs) or scoping reviews (ScR) published until January 5, 2024. Screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal (AMSTAR 2) were performed by two independent reviewers., Results: Of 1349 screened papers, 22 reviews met our inclusion criteria, including 20 SRs (eight with meta-analysis) and 2 ScRs. None exclusively focused on PI. Furthermore, nine reviews did not mention patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and only two reviews included patients with high-output ileostomy, highlighting a large evidence gap. The identified reviews covered six categories with nine types of interventions, including ostomy care pathways, peristomal skin care, patient education, clinical management of high-output stoma, management and prevention of postoperative ileus, dietary and nutritional support, nursing and supporting care, telemedicine, and self-management interventions. Most SRs including nursing interventions for stoma care highlighted nurses' role in a variety of standard and specialized treatments. Notably, none of the reviews exclusively examined disease recurrence, stoma pouching systems or adhesives, behavioral interventions, or mental health in patients living with ileostomy., Conclusions: Evidence for best practice interventions to treat complications and improve quality of life in patients living with an ileostomy for CD is limited and heterogeneous. These results outline the need for standardized clinical care processes and pathways tailored to the unique needs of this patient population., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background & Aims: The operating properties of histologic indices for evaluating Crohn's disease (CD) activity are poorly characterized. We assessed the reliability and responsiveness of existing histologic indices/items used in CD and ulcerative colitis (UC), in addition to 3 novel items, and developed exploratory ileal, colonic, and colonic-ileal CD instruments., Methods: Blinded central readers independently reviewed paired baseline and week 12 image sets from the EXTEND trial. Disease activity was scored using 4 indices (the Global Histologic Activity Score, Geboes Score, Nancy Histological Index, and Robarts Histopathology Index) and 3 items identified by an expert panel (mucin depletion, basal plasmacytosis, and ileal pyloric gland metaplasia). Reliability and responsiveness were quantified using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), respectively. Exploratory indices were developed using backward stepwise linear regression analysis. Candidate independent variables were items with an inter-rater ICC ≥0.40 and AUC ≥0.56. The dependent variable was histologic disease activity measured by a 100-mm visual analogue scale., Results: Paired image sets were available from 55 patients. Substantial to almost perfect inter-rater reliability (ICC, 0.63-0.87) and some responsiveness (AUC, 0.57-0.94) were observed for all existing indices regardless of whether individual colonic and ileal segments, combined colonic segments, or combined colonic and ileal segments were assessed and the calculation method used. Five items were tested as candidate items, and exploratory colonic, ileal, and colonic-ileal indices were developed., Conclusions: CD and UC indices were similarly reliable and responsive in measuring histologic CD activity. Exploratory index development did not offer benefit over current histologic instruments., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Stricturing, penetrating complications and extraintestinal manifestations (EIMs) are frequent in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). There is limited data on the prevalence of these complications in patients with IBD. Therefore, we aimed to assess the burden of these complications detected incidentally on cross-sectional imaging., Methods: A retrospective study conducted at two tertiary care centers in London, Ontario. Patients (≥18 years) with a confirmed diagnosis of IBD who underwent CT enterography (CTE) or MR enterography (MRE) between 1 Jan 2010 and 31 Dec 2018 were included. Categorical variables were reported as proportions and the mean and standard deviations were reported for continuous variables., Results: A total of 615 imaging tests (MRE: 67.3% [414/615]) were performed in 557 IBD patients (CD: 91.4% [509/557], UC: 8.6% [48/557]). 38.2% (213/557) of patients were male, with mean age of 45.6 years (±15.8), and median disease duration of 11.0 years (±12.5). Among patients with CD, 33.2% (169/509) had strictures, with 7.8% having two or more strictures and 66.3% considered inflammatory. A fistula was reported in 10.6% (54/509), the most common being perianal fistula (27.8% [15/54]), followed by enterocutaneous fistula (16.8% [9/54]), and enteroenteric fistula (16.8% [9/54]). Additionally, 7.4% (41/557) of patients with IBD were found to have an EIM on cross-sectional imaging, with the most prevalent EIM being cholelithiasis (63.4% [26/41]), followed by sacroiliitis (24.4% [10/41]), primary sclerosing cholangitis (4.8% [2/41]) and nephrolithiasis (4.8% [2/41])., Conclusions: Approximately 40% of patients with CD undergoing cross-sectional imaging had evidence of a stricture or fistulizing disease, with 7% of patients with IBD having a detectable EIM. These results highlight the burden of disease and the need for specific therapies for these disease phenotypes., (© 2024 The Author(s). United European Gastroenterology Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of United European Gastroenterology.)

Background: Crohn's disease (CD) is characterized by discontinuous inflammation. Failure to identify skipping lesions of the terminal ileum (TI) or transmural changes can lead to incorrect management., Methods: Eligible adult patients with CD undergoing ileo-colonoscopy and computed tomography enterography or magnetic resonance enterography within 6 months. We determined the prevalence of endoscopic skipping (normal ileum on colonoscopy but proximal small bowel inflammation on cross-sectional imaging), skip lesions (discontinuous inflammation along the gastrointestinal tract identified on cross-sectional imaging), structuring, and penetrating complications., Results: Among 202 patients, 45 (22.3%) had endoscopic skipping proximal to TI intubation. Fifty patients (24.5%) had small bowel skip lesions, primarily in the ileum. Strictures were identified in 34 patients (16.8%) through both imaging and ileo-colonoscopy, in 21 patients (10.4%) solely through cross-sectional imaging, and in 3 patients (1.5%) solely through ileo-colonoscopy. Approximately 36.2% of stricturing cases would be missed without cross-sectional imaging. Penetrating complications, including abscesses (2.5%) and various fistula types (4.9%), were detected in 15 (7.4%) patients., Conclusions: Ileo-colonoscopy missed detection of active CD in approximately one-fifth of cases due to more proximal disease location. Stricturing disease might be missed in more than a third of cases if cross-sectional imaging is not performed., (© 2024 Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation.)

Introduction: Despite a growing armamentarium of medical therapies for ulcerative colitis, colectomy remains an important therapeutic option. To better inform shared decision-making about surgery, we estimated the contemporary risk of mortality after colectomy., Methods: Mortality rates were estimated using the National Inpatient Sample (2016-2020). Factors associated with postcolectomy death were evaluated in multivariable regression., Results: Postcolectomy mortality occurred in 1.2% (95% CI: 0.8%, 1.9%) of hospitalizations. Comorbidity burden, emergent laparotomy, and delays to surgery >5 days after admission were associated with mortality., Discussion: Colectomy may be associated with mortality; however, this risk is heterogeneous based on patient- and procedural-related factors., (Copyright © 2024 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

The medical management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been transformed over the past few decades by the approval of multiple classes of advanced therapies and the integration of more targeted treatment strategies for Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. These changes have been driven by an increasing number of pivotal randomized controlled trials, which have grown in size and complexity over time. Several landmark studies that are anticipated to change current IBD management paradigms have recently been completed or are on-going, including the first head-to-head biologic trials, advanced combination treatment trials, therapeutic strategy and treatment target trials, and multiple phase 3 registrational programs of novel compounds. Despite these advances, the future of IBD trials also faces major challenges with respect to cost, feasibility, and recruitment. Accordingly, innovative methods for early and late phase randomized controlled trials must be adopted. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of modern IBD trials, discuss methods for improving trial efficiency in early and late phase development, and provide insights into the interpretation and implications of these data for clinical care., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The concept of disease clearance has been proposed as a potential target in ulcerative colitis (UC). We conducted a systematic review to investigate the role of disease clearance, defined as a composite outcome including simultaneous clinical, endoscopic, and histologic remission of disease in the management of patients with UC. Based on the literature data, statements regarding disease clearance were developed and voted on by the members of the International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IOIBD) according to a Delphi methodology. A definition of disease clearance was proposed to standardize its use in clinical practice and clinical trials and to provide practical recommendations for its implementation as a therapeutic target in UC., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background and Aims: In this systematic review we summarise existing scoring indices for assessing disease activity and quality of life in perianal fistulising Crohn's disease [PFCD], and highlight gaps in the literature., Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched from August 24, 2022, to identify studies evaluating clinical, radiological, or patient-reported outcome measures [PROMS] in PFCD. The primary objective was to identify all available scoring indices and describe the operating properties of these indices., Results: A total of 53 studies reported on the use of one clinical index [Perianal Disease Activity Index: PDAI], three PROMs, and 10 radiological indices; 25 studies evaluated the operating properties of these indices. The PDAI demonstrated content validity, construct validity, and responsiveness but criterion validity or reliability were not assessed. The Van Assche Index [VAI], modified VAI, and the Magnetic Resonance Index for Assessing Fistulas in Patients with CD [MAGNIFI-CD] were the most studied radiological indices. These indices demonstrated responsiveness and reliability. The VAI and MAGNIFI-CD demonstrated construct validity; criterion and content validity and feasibility have not been assessed. Among the three PROMs, the Crohn's Anal Fistula Quality of Life index demonstrated content and construct validity, inter-observer reliability, and responsiveness; criterion validity, intra-observer reliability, and feasibility have not been assessed for this index., Conclusions: There are no fully valid, reliable, and responsive clinical disease or radiological indices for PFCD. Although the radiological indices demonstrated responsiveness and reliability, well-defined cut-offs for response and remission are lacking. Future research should focus on establishing standardised definitions and thresholds for outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The pivotal role of TL1A in modulating immune pathways crucial for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and intestinal fibrosis offers a promising therapeutic target. Phase 2 trials (TUSCANY and ARTEMIS-UC) evaluating an anti-TL1A antibody show progress in expanding IBD therapeutic options. First-in-human data reveal reduced expression of genes associated with extracellular matrix remodeling and fibrosis post-anti-TL1A treatment. Investigational drug TEV-48574, potentially exerting dual antifibrotic and anti-inflammatory effects, is undergoing a phase 2 basket study in both ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn disease (CD). Results are eagerly awaited, marking advancements in IBD therapeutics. This critical review comprehensively examines the existing literature, illuminating TL1A and the intricate role of DR3 in IBD, emphasizing the evolving therapeutic landscape and ongoing clinical trials, with potential implications for more effective IBD management., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests V.J. has received consultancy/advisory board fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Asieris, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Flagship Pioneering, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Sandoz, Second Genome, Takeda, Teva, Topivert, Ventyx, and Vividion, and speaker’s fees from AbbVie, Ferring, Galapagos, Janssen Pfizer Shire, Takeda, and Fresenius Kabi. L.P.-B. has served as a speaker, consultant, and advisory board member for Merck, AbbVie, Janssen, Genentech, Mitsubishi, Ferring, Norgine, Tillots, Vifor, Hospira/Pfizer, Celltrion, Takeda, Biogaran, Boerhinger Ingelheim, Lilly, HAC Pharma, Index Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Sandoz, Forward Pharma GmbH, Celgene, Biogen, Lycera, Samsung Bioepis, and Theravance. S.D. has served as a speaker, consultant, and advisory board member for Schering-Plough, AbbVie, Actelion, Alphawasserman, AstraZeneca, Cellerix, Cosmo Pharmaceuticals, Ferring, Genentech, Grunenthal, Johnson & Johnson, Millenium Takeda, MSD, Nikkiso Europe GmbH, Novo Nordisk, Nycomed, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, UCB Pharma, and Vifor., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Fistulas are a debilitating complication of Crohn's disease [CD]. We conducted a systematic review to assess the efficacy of medical therapies for fistulizing CD., Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched on May 26, 2022, for randomized controlled trials [RCTs] of pharmacological therapy in adults with fistulizing CD. The primary outcome was induction and maintenance of fistula response. Pooled risk ratios [RRs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs] were calculated. GRADE was used to assess the certainty of evidence., Results: Thirty-eight RCTs were included. Nineteen trials [50%] exclusively involved perianal fistula. The remaining studies included some participants with non-perianal fistula. Pooled RRs for anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] agents were not statistically significant for induction [RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.97-1.91] or maintenance of fistula response [RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.97-2.27]. However, in a sensitivity analysis of studies with fistula response as the primary outcome, anti-TNFs were superior to placebo for induction [RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.10-3.41] and maintenance [RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.23-2.88] of fistula response. Oral small molecules [RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.18-5.53] and mesenchymal stem cell [MSC] therapy [RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.01-1.57] were effective for induction of fistula response. Ustekinumab was associated with maintenance of fistula response [RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.04-3.11]. Vedolizumab was not superior to placebo. The certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate., Conclusion: Very low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests that anti-TNF therapy, oral small molecules, ustekinumab, and MSCs are effective for perianal fistulizing CD. Dedicated fistula studies evaluating biologics and small molecules are needed., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: A better understanding of motivations to participate as well as recommendations to reduce barriers to enrollment may assist in design of future clinical trials., Methods: We developed a 32-item electronic questionnaire to explore motivations, experiences, and recommendations of inflammatory bowel disease patients, who had participated in pharmaceutical clinical trials in a tertiary center in Canada over the last decade. We employed a mixed-methods approach that integrates both quantitative and qualitative research methods., Results: We distributed a total of 69 e-mails with surveys and received 46 responses (66.6% response rate). Study participants were mostly male (27/46, 58.7%), non-Hispanic White (43/46, 93.5%), with a mean age of 45.5 years (SD 10.9). Most decided to participate in a clinical trial to benefit future patients (29/46, 63.0%). Half of the participants (23/46, 50.0%) reported they were worried about the possibility of receiving placebo, although the majority (29/46, 63.0%) understood they could improve on placebo. The most challenging aspect reported was the number and length of questionnaires (15/46, 32.6%), as well as the number of colonoscopies (14/46, 30.4%). Strategies recommended to increase enrollment were reduction of the chance of receiving placebo (20/46, 43.5%), facilitating inclusion of patients who have failed multiple therapies (20/46, 43.5%), allowing virtual visits (18/46, 39.1%), including subtypes of disease traditionally excluded from trials (16/46, 34.8%) and improving outreach to underrepresented populations (13/46, 28.3%). The vast majority (37/46, 80.4%) reported their experience of participation to be better than expected., Conclusions: These results should help inform the design of future clinical trials with a focus on patient-centricity., Competing Interests: V Solitano, H Prins, M Archer, and L Guizzetti disclose no conflicts. V Jairath reports consulting/advisory board fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv Inc, Arena pharmaceuticals, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Asieris, Astra Zeneca, Avoro Capital, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Endpoint Health, Enthera, Ferring, Flagship Pioneering, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilde Healthcare, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, Gilead, Innomar, JAMP, Janssen, Merck, Metacrine, Mylan, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist, Prometheus Biosciences, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Roivant, Sandoz, SCOPE, Second Genome, Sorriso, Takeda, TD Securities, Teva, Topivert, Ventyx, Vividion; speaker’s fees from, Abbvie, Ferring, Bristol Myers Squibb, Galapagos, Janssen Pfizer Shire, Takeda, Fresenius Kabi, (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn's & Colitis Foundation.)

Background and Aims: The Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) proposed measures to address severe side effects linked to Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID). Use of these medications in individuals aged 65 and older, those at high cardiovascular risk, active or former long-term smokers, and those with increased cancer risk should be considered only if no alternatives exist. Caution is advised when administering JAKi to patients at risk of venous thromboembolism. We aim to implement recommendations from regulatory guidelines based on areas of uncertainty identified., Methods: A two-round modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness methodology study was conducted. A panel of 21 gastroenterologists, dermatologists and rheumatologists used a 9-point Likert scale to rate the appropriateness of administering a JAKi for each proposed clinical scenario. Scores for appropriateness were categorized as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate. Two rounds were performed, each with online surveys and a virtual meeting to enable discussion and rating of each best practice., Results: Round 1 involved participants rating JAKi appropriateness and suggesting descriptors to reduce uncertainty. Survey results were discussed in a virtual meeting, identifying areas of disagreement. In round 2, participants rated their agreement with descriptors from round 1, and the level of uncertainty and disagreement reduced. Age flexibility is recommended in the absence of other risk factors. Active counseling on modifiable risks (e.g., overweight, mild hyperlipidemia and hypertension) and smoking cessation is advised. Uncertainty persists regarding cancer risk due to various factors., Conclusions: We outlined regulatory guidance without a personalized evaluation of the patient's risk profile might lead to uncertainty and become an arid technicality. Therefore, we identified gaps and implemented PRAC recommendations to help health professionals in clinical practice., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Virginia Solitano and Magnus Petersen declare no conflict of interest. Paola Facheris has served as consultant for Eli Lilly. Ferdinando D'Amico has served as a speaker for Sandoz, Janssen, Galapagos, and Omega Pharma. He has also served as advisory board member for Abbvie, Ferring, Galapagos, and Nestlè. Michela Ortoncelli has declared no conflicts of interest. Daniel Aletaha received grants from AbbVie, Amgen, Galapagos, Eli Lilly and Sanofi, and honoraria (speaker's bureau, consultancy) from AbbVie, Amgen, Galapagos, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and Sandoz and is a member of the ARD Editorial Board. Pablo A. Olivera received consulting fees from Abbvie, Takeda, and Janssen and lecture fees from Takeda and Janssen. Thomas Bieber was speaker or consultant or Investigator for AbbVie, Affibody, Allmiral, AnaptysBio, Arena, Asana Biosciences, ASLAN pharma, Bayer Health, BioVerSys, Böhringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Connect Pharma, Dermavant, Domain Therapeutics, EQRx, Eli Lilly and Company, Galderma, Glenmark, GSK, Incyte, Innovaderm, IQVIA, Janssen, Kirin, Kymab, LEO, LG Chem, L'Oréal, MSD, Novartis, Numab, OM-Pharma, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Q32bio, RAPT, Sanofi/Regeneron, UCB. He is founder and chairman of the board of the non-profit biotech “Davos Biosciences”. Sofia Ramiro research grants and/or consultancy fees: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janseen, Galapagos, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Sanofi. Subrata Ghosh declares receiving consulting fees from Pfizer, Janssen, AbbVie, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, Receptos, Celgene, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and Boehringer Ingelheim, and speaker fees from AbbVie, Janssen, Takeda, Ferring, Pfizer, Shield, and Falk Pharma outside of the submitted work. Maria Antonietta D'Agostino reports speaker or consultant fees from Novartis, BMS, Janssen,Pfizer, Amgen, Galapagos, AbbVie, UCB, and Eli Lilly. PC reports research grants from UCB, MSD and Pfizer; speaker fees or consultant fees from Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVie, UCB, Eli Lilly, Gilead and Celgene Corporation. Britta Siegmund has served as consultant for Abbvie, Abivax, Arena, BMS, Boehringer, CED Service GmbH, Celgene, CT Scout, Endpoint Health, Falk, Forga Software, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, Materia Prima, Pfizer, Takeda, Pharma Insight, Predictimmune, PsiCro; Speaker fees: AbbVie, BMS, CED Service GmbH, Chiesi, Falk, Ferring, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Materia Prima, Takeda, Pfizer and grant support by Arena/Pfizer (served as representative of the Charité). Isabelle Chary-Valckenaere received consulting fees from Abbvie, BMS, Galapagos, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Ailsa Hart has served as consultant, advisory board member or speaker for AbbVie, Arena, Atlantic, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Falk, Galapogos, Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Napp Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Shire and Takeda. She also serves on the Global Steering Committee for Genentech. Lorenzo Dagna Lorenzo Dagna received consultation honoraria from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Genzyme, SOBI, and Vifor outside of the current work. Fernando Magro has served as a speaker and received honoraria from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Abbvie, Vifor, Falk, Laboratorios Vitoria, Ferring, Hospira, and Biogen. Renaud Felten has been a consultant for Amgen, BMS, Galapagos, GSK, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, Medac, MSD, Nordic, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, UCB. Paulo Kotze has received honoraria from AbbVie, Ferring, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda as a speaker and member of advisory boards. He also received scientific research grants from Pfizer and Takeda. Vipul Jairath has received consultancy/advisory board fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv Inc., Arena pharmaceuticals, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Asieris, Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Flagship Pioneering, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Sandoz, Second Genome, Takeda, Teva, Topivert, Ventyx, and Vividion; and speaker's fees from, Abbvie, Ferring, Galapagos, Janssen Pfizer Shire, Takeda, and Fresenius Kabi. Antonio Costanzo has served as an advisory board member, consultant and has received fees and speaker's honoraria or has participated in clinical trials for Abbvie, Almirall, Biogen, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme and UCB-Pharma. Lars Erik Kristensen has received fees for participation in speakers bureaus, research grants and consultancy fees from Pfizer, AbbVie, Amgen, Galapagos, UCB, Celgene, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Eli Lilly and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Laurent Peyrin Biroulet has served as a speaker, consultant, and advisory board member for Merck, Abbvie, Janssen, Genentech, Mitsubishi, Ferring, Norgine, Tillots, Vifor, Hospira/Pfizer, Celltrion, Takeda, Biogaran, Boerhinger Ingelheim, Lilly, HAC Pharma, Index Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Sandoz, Forward Pharma GmbH, Celgene, Biogen, Lycera, Samsung Bioepis, and Theravance. Silvio Danese has served as a speaker, consultant, and advisory board member for Schering-Plough, AbbVie, Actelion, Alphawasserman, AstraZeneca, Cellerix, Cosmo Pharmaceuticals, Ferring, Genentech, Grunenthal, Johnson and Johnson, Millenium Takeda, MSD, Nikkiso Europe GmbH, Novo Nordisk, Nycomed, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, UCB Pharma, and Vifor., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background & Aims: Withdrawal of immunomodulators (IMMs) or tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) in remission on combination therapy is attractive. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of (1) IMM, or (2) TNF antagonist withdrawal in patients with IBD in sustained remission on combination therapy., Methods: Through a systematic review till March 31, 2023, we identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy and safety of IMM or TNF antagonist withdrawal vs continued combination therapy, in patients with IBD in sustained corticosteroid-free clinical remission for >6 months on combination therapy. Primary outcome was risk of relapse and serious adverse events at 12 months. We conducted meta-analysis to calculate relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) and used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to appraise certainty of evidence., Results: We identified 8 RCTs with 733 patients (77% with Crohn's disease, 91% on infliximab-based combination therapy). On meta-analysis of 5 RCTs, there was no difference in the risk of relapse between patients with IMM withdrawal (continued TNF antagonist monotherapy) vs continued combination therapy (16.8% vs 14.9%; RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.75-1.76) without heterogeneity (low certainty of evidence). TNF antagonist withdrawal (continued IMM monotherapy) was associated with 2.4-times higher risk of relapse compared with continuing combination therapy (31.5% vs 11.2%; RR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.38-4.01), with minimal heterogeneity (low certainty of evidence). There was no difference in the risk of serious adverse events with IMM or TNF antagonist withdrawal vs continued combination therapy., Conclusions: In patients with IBD in sustained corticosteroid-free clinical remission for >6 months on combination therapy, de-escalation with TNF antagonist withdrawal, but not IMM withdrawal, was associated with an increased risk of relapse., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Oral small-molecule drugs [SMDs] are expanding the therapeutic landscape for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes the efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitor [JAKi] and sphingosine-1-phosphate [S1P] receptor modulator treatments for ulcerative colitis [UC] and Crohn's disease [CD]., Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to May 30, 2022. Randomized controlled trials [RCTs] of JAKi and S1P receptor modulators in adults with UC or CD were eligible. Clinical, endoscopic, histological, and safety data were pooled and analysed using a random-effects model., Results: Thirty-five RCTs [26 UC, nine CD] were included. In UC, JAKi therapy was associated with induction of clinical (risk ratio [RR] 3.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.03-4.92; I2 = 65%) and endoscopic [RR 3.99, 95% CI 2.36-6.75; I2 = 36%] remission compared to placebo. Upadacitinib was associated with histological response [RR 2.63, 95% CI 1.97-3.53]. S1P modulator therapy was associated with induction of clinical [RR 2.52, 95% CI 1.88-3.39; I2 = 1%] and endoscopic [RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.07-5.33; I2 = 0%] remission relative to placebo. Ozanimod was superior to placebo for inducing histological remission in UC [RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.43-3.37; I2 = 0%], while etrasimod was not [RR 2.36, 95% CI 0.71-7.88; I2 = 0%]. In CD, JAKi therapy was superior to placebo for induction of clinical remission [RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.19-1.98; I2 = 31%], and endoscopic remission [RR 4.78, 95% CI 1.63-14.06; I2 = 43%] compared to placebo. The risk of serious infections was similar for oral SMDs and placebo., Conclusion: JAKi and S1P receptor modulator therapies are effective in IBD for inducing clinical and endoscopic remission and, in some circumstances, histological response., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Biologic agents and oral small molecules are the mainstays of inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] management. However, an unmet clinical need remains for additional agents with novel mechanism of action which are effective, safe, and disease-modifying; this is due to the substantial proportion of patients who do not respond, lose response, or develop intolerance to currently marketed products. microRNAs [miRNAs] that play a role in the modulation of signal transduction pathways implicated in the development of IBD hold the potential to be used as therapeutic targets. Recently, a novel first-in-class compound, obefazimod, originally conceived as a human immunodeficiency virus [HIV] infection drug, has shown great promise in phase II induction trials for ulcerative colitis [UC] patients. Findings from the maintenance phases of trials showed that long-term obefazimod treatment provides continued improvement in clinical symptoms of disease, with a substantial proportion of patients in clinical remission, and an overall good safety profile. With a novel mechanism of action, obefazimod is an orally available small molecule with anti-inflammatory properties through the specific and selective upregulation of miR-124 expression. The aim of this paper is to critically review the available evidence related to pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and to discuss the potential clinical implications of this first-in-class oral small molecule., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Phase 2 trials are fundamental to the rational and efficient design of phase 3 trials. We aimed to determine the relationship of treatment effect size estimates from phase 2 and phase 3 clinical trials on advanced therapeutics in inflammatory bowel disease., Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane library were searched from inception to December 19, 2022, to identify paired phase 2 and 3 placebo-controlled induction studies of advanced therapeutics for Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Treatment effect sizes were expressed as a risk ratio (RR) between the active arm and placebo arm. For the same therapeutics, RRs from phase 2 trials were divided by the RR from phase 3 trial to quantify the relationship of effect sizes between phases., Results: Twenty-two studies (9 phase 2 trials, 13 phase 3 trials) were included for CD and 30 studies (12 phase 2 trials, 18 phase 3 trials) for UC. In UC (pooled RR 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.58-0.86; RR <1 indicates smaller treatment effect sizes in phase 2 trials), but not CD (pooled RR 1.01; 95% confidence interval: 0.84-1.18), phase 2 trials systematically underestimated treatment effect sizes for the primary endpoint compared with phase 3 trials. The underestimation was observed for clinical, but not endoscopic, endpoints in UC., Discussion: Treatment effect sizes for the primary and clinical endpoints were similar across clinical trial phases in CD, but not UC, where only endoscopic endpoints were comparable. This will help inform clinical development plans and future trial design., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background & Aims: Identifying patients at high risk of immunogenicity is important when selecting tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonists in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). We evaluated the association HLA-DQA1∗05 genotype and risk of immunogenicity with TNF-α antagonists., Methods: Through a systematic review through July 14, 2022, we identified studies in patients with IMIDs treated with TNF-α antagonists, which reported the risk of immunogenicity and/or secondary loss of response in patients with HLA-DQA1∗05 variants. Primary outcome was risk of immunogenicity. We performed random effects meta-analysis and used GRADE to appraise certainty of evidence., Results: On meta-analysis of 13 studies (3756 patients; median follow-up, 12 months; 41% with variants), HLA-DQA1∗05 variants were associated with 75% higher risk of immunogenicity compared with non-carriers (relative risk, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-2.25) with considerable heterogeneity (I 2  = 62%) (low certainty evidence). Positive and negative predictive values of HLA-DQA1∗05 variants for predicting immunogenicity were 30% and 80%, respectively. Proactive therapeutic drug monitoring, but not concomitant use of IMMs, IMIDs, and TNF-α antagonist-type, modified this association. Patients with HLA-DQA1∗05 variants experienced 2.2-fold higher risk of secondary loss of response (6 cohorts; relative risk, 2.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.67-3.00; I 2  = 0%) (moderate certainty evidence)., Conclusion: Variants in HLA-DQA1∗05 are associated with an increased risk in immunogenicity and secondary loss of response in patients with IMIDs treated with TNF-α antagonists. However, the positive and negative predictive value is moderate, and decisions on concomitant use of IMMs to prevent immunogenicity should be individualized based on all factors that influence drug clearance., (Copyright © 2023 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

As the patents for biologic originator drugs expire, biosimilars are emerging as cost-effective alternatives within healthcare systems. Addressing various challenges in the clinical management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains crucial. To shed light on physicians' current knowledge, beliefs, practical approaches, and concerns related to biosimilar adoption-whether initiating a biosimilar, transitioning from an originator to a biosimilar, or switching between biosimilars (including multiple switches and reverse switching)-a global survey was conducted. Fifteen physicians with expertise in the field of IBD from 13 countries attended a virtual international consensus meeting to develop practical guidance regarding biosimilar adoption worldwide, considering the survey results. This consensus centered on 10 key statements covering biosimilar effectiveness, safety, indications, rationale, multiple switches, therapeutic drug monitoring of biosimilars, non-medical switching, and future perspectives. Ultimately, the consensus affirmed that biosimilars are equally effective and safe when compared to originator drugs. They are considered suitable for both biologic-naïve patients and those who have previously been treated with originator drugs, with cost reduction being the primary motivation for transitioning from an originator drug to a biosimilar.

Background: Targeting interleukin-23 (IL-23) is an important therapeutic strategy for Crohn's disease (CD)., Aims: This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of selective IL-23p19 and IL-12/23p40 inhibitors in patients with moderate-to-severe CD., Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library (CENTRAL) were searched from inception to May 24, 2023, for randomized, placebo- or active comparator-controlled induction and/or maintenance trials of selective IL-23p19 and IL-12/23p40 inhibitors in pediatric and adult patients with CD. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in clinical remission. Secondary outcomes were clinical response, endoscopic remission, endoscopic response, and safety. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE criteria, respectively., Results: Eighteen trials (n = 5561) were included. Most studies were rated as low risk of bias. Targeting IL-23 was significantly superior to placebo for inducing clinical (risk ratio [RR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-2.21) and endoscopic (RR = 3.20, 95%CI 2.17-4.70) remission and maintaining clinical remission (RR = 1.39, 95%CI 1.10-1.77) (GRADE high certainty evidence for all outcomes). Subgroup analysis showed that targeting IL-23 was superior to placebo for inducing clinical remission in biologic-naïve (RR = 2.20, 95%CI 1.46-3.32, I 2  = 0%, p = 0.39) and biologic-experienced patients (RR = 1.82, 95%CI 1.27-2.60, I 2  = 56.5%, p = 0.01). Targeting IL-23 was associated with a decreased risk of serious adverse events in induction (RR = 0.55, 95%CI 0.44-0.73) and maintenance (RR = 0.72, 95%CI 0.53-0.98) trials compared to placebo (high certainty evidence)., Conclusion: Targeting IL-23 is effective and safe for inducing and maintaining clinical and endoscopic remission in patients with moderate-to-severe CD., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: We performed a systematic review to investigate whether patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and permanent ileostomy (PI) have been included in clinical trials evaluating biologics and small molecules., Methods: MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library (CENTRAL) data bases were searched from inception to May 16, 2022 for placebo controlled induction and/or maintenance randomized controlled trials assessing biologics and oral small molecules in adult patients with active CD., Results: Of the 81 induction and maintenance trials assessing biologics and oral small molecules in CD, none permitted the enrollment of patients with PI. Patients with CD and PI have been universally excluded from pharmaceutical trials of biologics and small molecules to date., Discussion: There is an urgent need to identify barriers to enrollment and develop eligibility and outcome measures enabling the inclusion of patients with CD and PI into clinical trials., (Copyright © 2023 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and stroke are the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Along to the traditional risk factors for these diseases, chronic inflammation is known to be an important player in accelerating the process of atherosclerosis, which can result in an increased incidence of arterial thromboembolic events. As in other chronic inflammatory diseases, in the past few years, several studies suggested that subjects affected by inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) may also be at an incremented risk of atherosclerotic disease, especially during the periods of disease's flare. Therefore, IBD treatment may assume an important role for achieving both disease remission and the control of the atherosclerotic risk. In this article we aimed to perform a comprehensive review on evidence on the increased risk of arterial thromboembolic events in patients affected by IBD and discuss the potential role of IBD therapy in reducing this risk., Competing Interests: AA has received consulting and/or advisory board fees from AbbVie, Allergan, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli-Lilly, Ferring, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Mylan, Pfizer, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, and Takeda; lecture and/or speaker bureau fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli-Lilly, Ferring, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Takeda, and Tigenix; and research grants from MSD, Pfizer, Takeda and Biogen. AS has served as a speaker, consultant or advisory board member for Ethicon, Takeda, Pfizer, Sofar, and Oasis. AR received a consultancy fee from Medtronic. RG has received speaker fees from Pfizer. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 2023 Gabbiadini, Dal Buono, Mastrorocco, Solitano, Repici, Spinelli, Condorelli and Armuzzi.)

The use of combination therapy with a biologic agent and immunosuppressant has well-established efficacy and safety and is common practice in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Current research has shifted focus toward the use of advanced combination treatment (ACT). This term was coined to describe combination therapy using 2 or more advanced treatments (biologic agents and/or oral small molecule drugs) with the aim of achieving optimal disease control in selected patients. An ACT approach may be particularly beneficial in patients with documented medically refractory IBD and in patients with a poor prognosis, extraintestinal manifestations, or concomitant immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. To date, the body of evidence for ACT strategies in IBD is largely comprised of uncontrolled retrospective case series and cohort studies in highly refractory patients. Recently, results from the VEGA trial have suggested that combination induction therapy with guselkumab and golimumab was more effective in ulcerative colitis than either agent alone. However, questions remain about issues such as related costs, ACT duration, and optimal combinations to adopt. Future randomized controlled trials are likely to evaluate rationally selected combinations of agents. This article summarizes the available literature on ACT, including comparisons with traditional combination therapy and the rheumatology field, and discusses practical recommendations, profiles of IBD patients who should be considered for combination approaches in clinical practice, and remaining knowledge gaps., (Copyright © 2023, Gastro-Hep Communications, Inc.)

Fibro-stenosing Crohn's disease (CD) is a common disease presentation that leads to impaired quality of life and often requires endoscopic treatments or surgery. From a pathobiology perspective, the conventional view that intestinal fibro-stenosis is an irreversible condition has been disproved. Currently, there are no existing imaging techniques that can accurately quantify the amount of fibrosis within a stricture, and managing patients is challenging, requiring a multidisciplinary team. Novel therapies targeting different molecular components of the fibrotic pathways are increasing regarding other diseases outside the gut. However, a large gap between clinical need and the lack of anti-fibrotic agents in CD remains. This paper reviews the current state of pathobiology behind fibro-stenosing CD, provides an updated diagnostic and therapeutic approach, and finally, focuses on clinical trial endpoints and possible targets of anti-fibrotic therapies.

Background & Aims: Safety is a key consideration when choosing advanced therapies (biologic agents and oral small-molecule inhibitors/modulators) in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the risk of serious infections with advanced therapies in active comparator studies., Methods: Through a systematic search until February 28, 2022, we included 20 head-to-head studies comparing risk of serious infections with tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) antagonists, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, tofacitinib, filgotinib, and ozanimod in patients with IBD. We performed random-effects meta-analysis comparing different advanced therapies., Results: No significant difference was observed in the risk of serious infections between vedolizumab vs TNFα antagonists in all patients with IBD (17 cohorts: odds ratio [OR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68-1.04), with moderate heterogeneity (I 2  = 37%); on subgroup analysis, vedolizumab was associated with a lower risk of serious infections in patients with ulcerative colitis (11 cohorts: OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83; I 2  = 0%), but not in Crohn's disease (CD) (9 cohorts: OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.78-1.35; I 2  = 42%). Age, sex, prior biologic exposure, and use of biologic monotherapy did not influence this association. In patients with CD, ustekinumab was associated with a lower risk of serious infections vs TNFα antagonists (3 cohorts: OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.93; I 2  = 16%) and vs vedolizumab (3 cohorts: OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.17-0.93; I 2  = 67%). Few studies compared other advanced therapies., Conclusions: Vedolizumab may offer net benefit over TNFα antagonists in patients with ulcerative colitis, but not in CD. Ustekinumab may offer net benefit over TNFα antagonists and vedolizumab in patients with CD., (Copyright © 2023 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)