IBD & Intestinal Disorders

SAN DIEGO – Inpatient infliximab rescue for severe, steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis is more likely to work if patients receive a second infusion 3 days after the first, according to a review of 55 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, patients.

The traditional approach is one inpatient 5-mg/kg infusion, followed by either colectomy or subsequent outpatient infusions, depending on response. In 2013, physicians at the university began offering a second infusion at 72 hours to patients whose C-reactive protein (CRP) levels did not drop below 0.7 mg/dL after their first infusion, and they also began opting more often for 10-mg/kg dosing.

The review found that 90-day colectomy-free survival was 50% in the 16 accelerated-dosing patients, up from 10.2% in the 36 patients treated with the traditional approach (P less than .001). The finding has led to a new, more aggressive infliximab protocol for inpatient ulcerative colitis.

Among patients who did undergo colectomies, postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. But for reasons that are not clear, 30-day postoperative readmission rates were higher in accelerated patients (58% vs. 25%).

In an interview at the annual Digestive Disease Week, lead investigator Dr. Shail Govani of the University of Michigan explained the thinking behind the new approach, how CRP/albumin ratios come into play, and how to counsel patients in light of the findings.

 aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN DIEGO – Inpatient infliximab rescue for severe, steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis is more likely to work if patients receive a second infusion 3 days after the first, according to a review of 55 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, patients.

The traditional approach is one inpatient 5-mg/kg infusion, followed by either colectomy or subsequent outpatient infusions, depending on response. In 2013, physicians at the university began offering a second infusion at 72 hours to patients whose C-reactive protein (CRP) levels did not drop below 0.7 mg/dL after their first infusion, and they also began opting more often for 10-mg/kg dosing.

The review found that 90-day colectomy-free survival was 50% in the 16 accelerated-dosing patients, up from 10.2% in the 36 patients treated with the traditional approach (P less than .001). The finding has led to a new, more aggressive infliximab protocol for inpatient ulcerative colitis.

Among patients who did undergo colectomies, postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. But for reasons that are not clear, 30-day postoperative readmission rates were higher in accelerated patients (58% vs. 25%).

In an interview at the annual Digestive Disease Week, lead investigator Dr. Shail Govani of the University of Michigan explained the thinking behind the new approach, how CRP/albumin ratios come into play, and how to counsel patients in light of the findings.

 aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN DIEGO – Inpatient infliximab rescue for severe, steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis is more likely to work if patients receive a second infusion 3 days after the first, according to a review of 55 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, patients.

The traditional approach is one inpatient 5-mg/kg infusion, followed by either colectomy or subsequent outpatient infusions, depending on response. In 2013, physicians at the university began offering a second infusion at 72 hours to patients whose C-reactive protein (CRP) levels did not drop below 0.7 mg/dL after their first infusion, and they also began opting more often for 10-mg/kg dosing.

The review found that 90-day colectomy-free survival was 50% in the 16 accelerated-dosing patients, up from 10.2% in the 36 patients treated with the traditional approach (P less than .001). The finding has led to a new, more aggressive infliximab protocol for inpatient ulcerative colitis.

Among patients who did undergo colectomies, postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. But for reasons that are not clear, 30-day postoperative readmission rates were higher in accelerated patients (58% vs. 25%).

In an interview at the annual Digestive Disease Week, lead investigator Dr. Shail Govani of the University of Michigan explained the thinking behind the new approach, how CRP/albumin ratios come into play, and how to counsel patients in light of the findings.

 aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN DIEGO – A new analysis of phase II research finds that the experimental drug ozanimod prompted histologic healing in ulcerative colitis patients at 8 and 32 weeks.

“Ozanimod both induces and maintains remissions in a proportion of patients with refractory ulcerative colitis,” said study coauthor Dr. Stephen B. Hanauer, professor of medicine and medical director of the Digestive Health Center at Northwestern University, Chicago. “It’s a safe and effective oral drug for ulcerative colitis and possibly Crohn’s disease.”

Ozanimod, an experimental drug developed by Celgene and its subsidiary Receptos, has been undergoing review as a treatment for both multiple sclerosis and ulcerative colitis.

“Ozanimod impacts lymphocyte trafficking by retaining lymphocytes in lymph nodes and prevents recirculation. The mechanism of action is impairing S1P [sphingosine-1-phosphate] that ‘traps’ lymphocytes in lymph nodes.” Dr. Hanauer said.

“Other mechanisms by which lymphocyte trafficking has been inhibited have been effective in treating multiple sclerosis and Crohn’s disease (natalizumab) and both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease (vedolizumab),” he said. However, he said, natalizumab has been linked to a risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, a rare and mostly fatal brain disease.

Vedolizumab, meanwhile, “is a biologic that requires IV infusions.” By contrast, he says, ozanimod is an oral drug.

In a recent issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers published findings from a phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ozanimod in 197 patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. Patients were assigned to high dose (n = 67), low dose (n = 65), or placebo (n = 65) (N Engl J Med. 2016 May;374:1754-62).

At 8 weeks, clinical remission (Mayo Clinic score less than or equal to 2, with no subscore over 1) occurred in 16% of patients who received 1-mg doses (P = .048) and 14% of those who received the 0.5-mg doses (P = .14); the remission rate was 6% for placebo.

The new analysis examined histologic improvement from baseline to 8 and 32 weeks. (Those who reached clinical response continued through 32 weeks.) Improvement was greater in the high-dose group than in the placebo group at week 8 (Geboes score [–4.37 vs. –2.20; P = .0345]) and week 32 (Geboes score [–5.50 vs. –2.24; P = .0033]); low-dose improvement was greater than placebo but didn’t reach statistical significance.

Histologic remission (Geboes score less than 2) occurred in 15/67 (22.4%) for high dose (P = .0705, compared with placebo), 9/65 (13.8%) for low dose (P = .6294, compared with placebo) and 7/65 (10.8%) for placebo at week 8. At week 32, remission was 21/67 (31.3%) for high dose (P = 0.0006, compared with placebo), 15/65 (23.1%) for low dose (P = .0164, compared with placebo) and 5/65 (7.7%) for placebo.

Adverse events were “minor, without significant cardiotoxicity or risk of infections,” Dr. Hanauer said. The events affected 26/67 (38.8%) patients on the high dose, 26/65 (40.0%) on the low dose, and 26/65 (40.0%) on placebo; worsening of ulcerative colitis and anemia were most common, especially in the placebo group.

The cost of the drug is unclear, Dr. Hanauer said.

The patients are now in open-label follow-up, he said.

The study is industry funded by Receptos. Dr. Hanauer is on the ozanimod steering committee and consults for Celgene and its subsidiary research division, Receptos.

SAN DIEGO – A new analysis of phase II research finds that the experimental drug ozanimod prompted histologic healing in ulcerative colitis patients at 8 and 32 weeks.

“Ozanimod both induces and maintains remissions in a proportion of patients with refractory ulcerative colitis,” said study coauthor Dr. Stephen B. Hanauer, professor of medicine and medical director of the Digestive Health Center at Northwestern University, Chicago. “It’s a safe and effective oral drug for ulcerative colitis and possibly Crohn’s disease.”

Ozanimod, an experimental drug developed by Celgene and its subsidiary Receptos, has been undergoing review as a treatment for both multiple sclerosis and ulcerative colitis.

“Ozanimod impacts lymphocyte trafficking by retaining lymphocytes in lymph nodes and prevents recirculation. The mechanism of action is impairing S1P [sphingosine-1-phosphate] that ‘traps’ lymphocytes in lymph nodes.” Dr. Hanauer said.

“Other mechanisms by which lymphocyte trafficking has been inhibited have been effective in treating multiple sclerosis and Crohn’s disease (natalizumab) and both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease (vedolizumab),” he said. However, he said, natalizumab has been linked to a risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, a rare and mostly fatal brain disease.

Vedolizumab, meanwhile, “is a biologic that requires IV infusions.” By contrast, he says, ozanimod is an oral drug.

In a recent issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers published findings from a phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ozanimod in 197 patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. Patients were assigned to high dose (n = 67), low dose (n = 65), or placebo (n = 65) (N Engl J Med. 2016 May;374:1754-62).

At 8 weeks, clinical remission (Mayo Clinic score less than or equal to 2, with no subscore over 1) occurred in 16% of patients who received 1-mg doses (P = .048) and 14% of those who received the 0.5-mg doses (P = .14); the remission rate was 6% for placebo.

The new analysis examined histologic improvement from baseline to 8 and 32 weeks. (Those who reached clinical response continued through 32 weeks.) Improvement was greater in the high-dose group than in the placebo group at week 8 (Geboes score [–4.37 vs. –2.20; P = .0345]) and week 32 (Geboes score [–5.50 vs. –2.24; P = .0033]); low-dose improvement was greater than placebo but didn’t reach statistical significance.

Histologic remission (Geboes score less than 2) occurred in 15/67 (22.4%) for high dose (P = .0705, compared with placebo), 9/65 (13.8%) for low dose (P = .6294, compared with placebo) and 7/65 (10.8%) for placebo at week 8. At week 32, remission was 21/67 (31.3%) for high dose (P = 0.0006, compared with placebo), 15/65 (23.1%) for low dose (P = .0164, compared with placebo) and 5/65 (7.7%) for placebo.

Adverse events were “minor, without significant cardiotoxicity or risk of infections,” Dr. Hanauer said. The events affected 26/67 (38.8%) patients on the high dose, 26/65 (40.0%) on the low dose, and 26/65 (40.0%) on placebo; worsening of ulcerative colitis and anemia were most common, especially in the placebo group.

The cost of the drug is unclear, Dr. Hanauer said.

The patients are now in open-label follow-up, he said.

The study is industry funded by Receptos. Dr. Hanauer is on the ozanimod steering committee and consults for Celgene and its subsidiary research division, Receptos.

SAN DIEGO – A new analysis of phase II research finds that the experimental drug ozanimod prompted histologic healing in ulcerative colitis patients at 8 and 32 weeks.

“Ozanimod both induces and maintains remissions in a proportion of patients with refractory ulcerative colitis,” said study coauthor Dr. Stephen B. Hanauer, professor of medicine and medical director of the Digestive Health Center at Northwestern University, Chicago. “It’s a safe and effective oral drug for ulcerative colitis and possibly Crohn’s disease.”

Ozanimod, an experimental drug developed by Celgene and its subsidiary Receptos, has been undergoing review as a treatment for both multiple sclerosis and ulcerative colitis.

“Ozanimod impacts lymphocyte trafficking by retaining lymphocytes in lymph nodes and prevents recirculation. The mechanism of action is impairing S1P [sphingosine-1-phosphate] that ‘traps’ lymphocytes in lymph nodes.” Dr. Hanauer said.

“Other mechanisms by which lymphocyte trafficking has been inhibited have been effective in treating multiple sclerosis and Crohn’s disease (natalizumab) and both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease (vedolizumab),” he said. However, he said, natalizumab has been linked to a risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, a rare and mostly fatal brain disease.

Vedolizumab, meanwhile, “is a biologic that requires IV infusions.” By contrast, he says, ozanimod is an oral drug.

In a recent issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers published findings from a phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ozanimod in 197 patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. Patients were assigned to high dose (n = 67), low dose (n = 65), or placebo (n = 65) (N Engl J Med. 2016 May;374:1754-62).

At 8 weeks, clinical remission (Mayo Clinic score less than or equal to 2, with no subscore over 1) occurred in 16% of patients who received 1-mg doses (P = .048) and 14% of those who received the 0.5-mg doses (P = .14); the remission rate was 6% for placebo.

The new analysis examined histologic improvement from baseline to 8 and 32 weeks. (Those who reached clinical response continued through 32 weeks.) Improvement was greater in the high-dose group than in the placebo group at week 8 (Geboes score [–4.37 vs. –2.20; P = .0345]) and week 32 (Geboes score [–5.50 vs. –2.24; P = .0033]); low-dose improvement was greater than placebo but didn’t reach statistical significance.

Histologic remission (Geboes score less than 2) occurred in 15/67 (22.4%) for high dose (P = .0705, compared with placebo), 9/65 (13.8%) for low dose (P = .6294, compared with placebo) and 7/65 (10.8%) for placebo at week 8. At week 32, remission was 21/67 (31.3%) for high dose (P = 0.0006, compared with placebo), 15/65 (23.1%) for low dose (P = .0164, compared with placebo) and 5/65 (7.7%) for placebo.

Adverse events were “minor, without significant cardiotoxicity or risk of infections,” Dr. Hanauer said. The events affected 26/67 (38.8%) patients on the high dose, 26/65 (40.0%) on the low dose, and 26/65 (40.0%) on placebo; worsening of ulcerative colitis and anemia were most common, especially in the placebo group.

The cost of the drug is unclear, Dr. Hanauer said.

The patients are now in open-label follow-up, he said.

The study is industry funded by Receptos. Dr. Hanauer is on the ozanimod steering committee and consults for Celgene and its subsidiary research division, Receptos.

SAN DIEGO – For patients with diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome, avoiding FODMAPs (fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols) improved abdominal pain and bloating significantly more than following standard advice to eat smaller meals and limit caffeine and alcohol, researchers reported.

“Both diets provided adequate relief to about 40%-50% of patients, but the low-FODMAP diet led to significantly greater improvements in abdominal symptoms,” Dr. Shanti L. Eswaran of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, said at the annual Digestive Disease Week. Results from the randomized, controlled trial, the first of its kind in the United States, “support a role for the low-FODMAP diet in the treatment of patients with diarrhea-predominant IBS,” she added.

FODMAPs are poorly absorbed or indigestible fermentable carbohydrates that can cause bloating, flatulence, and diarrhea when eaten in excess. Hence, the low-FODMAP diet involves avoiding or limiting foods high in fructose (such as honey and dried fruit), lactose (dairy), fructans (wheat, garlic, and onions), galactans (legumes), and polyols (apples and stone fruits). Several smaller studies have linked a low-FODMAP diet to improvements in IBS, “but the existing data are limited and inconsistent, and there is no randomized, controlled trial data from adults in the United States,” Dr. Eswaran said.

To fill that gap, she and her associates randomly assigned 92 adults meeting Rome III criteria for diarrhea-predominant IBS to follow either a low-FODMAP diet or a control diet that was based on recommendations from the National Institute for Health Care and Excellence (NICE, in the United Kingdom). The modified NICE diet included eating smaller, more frequent meals, limiting caffeine and alcohol, and avoiding foods that patients knew worsened their symptoms. Both groups of patients worked with a dietitian.

At baseline, all patients reported having regular bouts of at least moderate abdominal pain and stool consistency of 5 or higher (that is, looser) on the Bristol Stool Form Scale. In all, 52% of patients on the low-FODMAP diet and 41% of patients on the control diet reported adequate symptom relief during at least one of the last 2 weeks of the study – a statistically similar level of improvement, Dr. Eswaran said. “We were really underpowered for our primary endpoint,” she added. “We had calculated a 30% difference, and we did not get anywhere near that.” In fact, enrollment in the trial ended early because many patients were already putting themselves on the low-FODMAP diet, she added.

But despite its limited power, the study uncovered significant differences in abdominal symptoms with the two diets. More than half of patients on the low-FODMAP diet reported a clinically meaningful improvement in abdominal pain, compared with only 23% of patients on the control diet (P = .008). Likewise, 52% of patients reported clinically meaningful improvement in bloating, compared with about a quarter of patients on the control diet (P = .013). Low-FODMAP patients also were more likely to report improvements in stool consistency (42%, versus 28% for control patients; P = .18). However, there was no evidence that the low-FODMAP diet improved stool consistency or urgency, Dr. Eswaran said.

“Both diets were safe and well tolerated, although dropouts were more common with the low-FODMAP diet,” the researchers noted. Dietary analyses showed that at 4 weeks, the low-FODMAP group was consuming significantly less total carbohydrates, but similar quantities of total calories, protein, fat, dietary fiber, and alcohol as the control group. “The low-FODMAP diet is not designed to be long term, because it is fairly restrictive,” Dr. Eswaran commented. “I think it would be a good idea for the next set of studies to see how long patients can stay on it, and what factors are necessary for them to do so.”

Dr. Eswaran had no disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – For patients with diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome, avoiding FODMAPs (fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols) improved abdominal pain and bloating significantly more than following standard advice to eat smaller meals and limit caffeine and alcohol, researchers reported.

“Both diets provided adequate relief to about 40%-50% of patients, but the low-FODMAP diet led to significantly greater improvements in abdominal symptoms,” Dr. Shanti L. Eswaran of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, said at the annual Digestive Disease Week. Results from the randomized, controlled trial, the first of its kind in the United States, “support a role for the low-FODMAP diet in the treatment of patients with diarrhea-predominant IBS,” she added.

FODMAPs are poorly absorbed or indigestible fermentable carbohydrates that can cause bloating, flatulence, and diarrhea when eaten in excess. Hence, the low-FODMAP diet involves avoiding or limiting foods high in fructose (such as honey and dried fruit), lactose (dairy), fructans (wheat, garlic, and onions), galactans (legumes), and polyols (apples and stone fruits). Several smaller studies have linked a low-FODMAP diet to improvements in IBS, “but the existing data are limited and inconsistent, and there is no randomized, controlled trial data from adults in the United States,” Dr. Eswaran said.

To fill that gap, she and her associates randomly assigned 92 adults meeting Rome III criteria for diarrhea-predominant IBS to follow either a low-FODMAP diet or a control diet that was based on recommendations from the National Institute for Health Care and Excellence (NICE, in the United Kingdom). The modified NICE diet included eating smaller, more frequent meals, limiting caffeine and alcohol, and avoiding foods that patients knew worsened their symptoms. Both groups of patients worked with a dietitian.

At baseline, all patients reported having regular bouts of at least moderate abdominal pain and stool consistency of 5 or higher (that is, looser) on the Bristol Stool Form Scale. In all, 52% of patients on the low-FODMAP diet and 41% of patients on the control diet reported adequate symptom relief during at least one of the last 2 weeks of the study – a statistically similar level of improvement, Dr. Eswaran said. “We were really underpowered for our primary endpoint,” she added. “We had calculated a 30% difference, and we did not get anywhere near that.” In fact, enrollment in the trial ended early because many patients were already putting themselves on the low-FODMAP diet, she added.

But despite its limited power, the study uncovered significant differences in abdominal symptoms with the two diets. More than half of patients on the low-FODMAP diet reported a clinically meaningful improvement in abdominal pain, compared with only 23% of patients on the control diet (P = .008). Likewise, 52% of patients reported clinically meaningful improvement in bloating, compared with about a quarter of patients on the control diet (P = .013). Low-FODMAP patients also were more likely to report improvements in stool consistency (42%, versus 28% for control patients; P = .18). However, there was no evidence that the low-FODMAP diet improved stool consistency or urgency, Dr. Eswaran said.

“Both diets were safe and well tolerated, although dropouts were more common with the low-FODMAP diet,” the researchers noted. Dietary analyses showed that at 4 weeks, the low-FODMAP group was consuming significantly less total carbohydrates, but similar quantities of total calories, protein, fat, dietary fiber, and alcohol as the control group. “The low-FODMAP diet is not designed to be long term, because it is fairly restrictive,” Dr. Eswaran commented. “I think it would be a good idea for the next set of studies to see how long patients can stay on it, and what factors are necessary for them to do so.”

Dr. Eswaran had no disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – For patients with diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome, avoiding FODMAPs (fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols) improved abdominal pain and bloating significantly more than following standard advice to eat smaller meals and limit caffeine and alcohol, researchers reported.

“Both diets provided adequate relief to about 40%-50% of patients, but the low-FODMAP diet led to significantly greater improvements in abdominal symptoms,” Dr. Shanti L. Eswaran of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, said at the annual Digestive Disease Week. Results from the randomized, controlled trial, the first of its kind in the United States, “support a role for the low-FODMAP diet in the treatment of patients with diarrhea-predominant IBS,” she added.

FODMAPs are poorly absorbed or indigestible fermentable carbohydrates that can cause bloating, flatulence, and diarrhea when eaten in excess. Hence, the low-FODMAP diet involves avoiding or limiting foods high in fructose (such as honey and dried fruit), lactose (dairy), fructans (wheat, garlic, and onions), galactans (legumes), and polyols (apples and stone fruits). Several smaller studies have linked a low-FODMAP diet to improvements in IBS, “but the existing data are limited and inconsistent, and there is no randomized, controlled trial data from adults in the United States,” Dr. Eswaran said.

To fill that gap, she and her associates randomly assigned 92 adults meeting Rome III criteria for diarrhea-predominant IBS to follow either a low-FODMAP diet or a control diet that was based on recommendations from the National Institute for Health Care and Excellence (NICE, in the United Kingdom). The modified NICE diet included eating smaller, more frequent meals, limiting caffeine and alcohol, and avoiding foods that patients knew worsened their symptoms. Both groups of patients worked with a dietitian.

At baseline, all patients reported having regular bouts of at least moderate abdominal pain and stool consistency of 5 or higher (that is, looser) on the Bristol Stool Form Scale. In all, 52% of patients on the low-FODMAP diet and 41% of patients on the control diet reported adequate symptom relief during at least one of the last 2 weeks of the study – a statistically similar level of improvement, Dr. Eswaran said. “We were really underpowered for our primary endpoint,” she added. “We had calculated a 30% difference, and we did not get anywhere near that.” In fact, enrollment in the trial ended early because many patients were already putting themselves on the low-FODMAP diet, she added.

But despite its limited power, the study uncovered significant differences in abdominal symptoms with the two diets. More than half of patients on the low-FODMAP diet reported a clinically meaningful improvement in abdominal pain, compared with only 23% of patients on the control diet (P = .008). Likewise, 52% of patients reported clinically meaningful improvement in bloating, compared with about a quarter of patients on the control diet (P = .013). Low-FODMAP patients also were more likely to report improvements in stool consistency (42%, versus 28% for control patients; P = .18). However, there was no evidence that the low-FODMAP diet improved stool consistency or urgency, Dr. Eswaran said.

“Both diets were safe and well tolerated, although dropouts were more common with the low-FODMAP diet,” the researchers noted. Dietary analyses showed that at 4 weeks, the low-FODMAP group was consuming significantly less total carbohydrates, but similar quantities of total calories, protein, fat, dietary fiber, and alcohol as the control group. “The low-FODMAP diet is not designed to be long term, because it is fairly restrictive,” Dr. Eswaran commented. “I think it would be a good idea for the next set of studies to see how long patients can stay on it, and what factors are necessary for them to do so.”

Dr. Eswaran had no disclosures.

Women with high circulating levels of interleukin-6 and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein were at significantly greater risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) compared with those testing in the lowest quintiles, according to a prospective nested case-control study.

The findings point to a preclinical state in IBD, in which patients are not yet symptomatic but have positive serologic markers, as occurs in rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus, said Dr. Paul Lochhead at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and his associates. “To our knowledge, no previous study has examined prediagnostic inflammatory markers in relation to IBD risk,” the investigators added. “Characterizing preclinical inflammation in IBD could give insights into the natural history of [Crohn’s disease] and [ulcerative colitis], and might help identify potential windows for early therapeutic or preventive interventions in high-risk individuals.”

SOURCE: American Gastroenterological Society

The study included 83 patients with Crohn’s disease, 90 patients with ulcerative colitis, and 344 matched controls. Patients were from two national prospective cohort studies – the Nurses’ Health Study, which includes female nurses aged 35-55 years at enrollment, and the Nurses’ Health Study II, which includes female nurses aged 24-42 years at enrollment. Both studies are ongoing, with follow-up rates exceeding 90%. To assemble the cohort, the researchers extracted questionnaire data and then obtained medical records for blinded review. They confirmed diagnoses of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis using standard case definitions, they said (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 Feb 13. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.01.016).

Participants testing in the highest quintiles for circulating hs-CRP and IL-6 were at greater risk of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis than were those in the lowest quintiles, even after accounting for age, smoking status, body mass index, oral contraceptive use, and cumulative physical activity. For IL-6, odds ratios were 4.7 for Crohn’s disease (95% confidence interval; 1.9-11.5), and 3.4 for ulcerative colitis (95% CI; 1.4-8.2). For hs-CRP, odds ratios were 2.8 for Crohn’s disease (95% CI; 1.15-6.9) and 1.8 for ulcerative colitis (95% CI; 0.8-4.0). The longest interval between testing and diagnosis of IBD was 20 years, Crohn’s disease patients were diagnosed within 10 years, and patients testing in the upper quintile for the inflammatory markers were diagnosed an average of 10.6 years later, the researchers said.

Study participants tended to be in their early 50s when first tested, which exceeds the typical age of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis onset and might limit the generalizability of the findings, the investigators said. They tried to eliminate confounding from undiagnosed baseline IBD by excluding participants diagnosed within 2 years of blood collection, they added. “The differences in overall median inflammatory marker levels between cases and control subjects in our study were small; however, differences of similar magnitude have been reported between groups with disparate outcomes in studies of cardiovascular disease,” they noted. “Moreover, when comparing extreme quintiles of median inflammatory marker levels, where risk of [Crohn’s disease] or [ulcerative colitis] was most evident, the differences were more substantial.”

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America, and the American Gastroenterological Association. Dr. Lochhead had no disclosures. Two coinvestigators disclosed relationships with Exact Sciences, AbbVie, Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Healthcare, Pfizer, and Pozen.

Women with high circulating levels of interleukin-6 and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein were at significantly greater risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) compared with those testing in the lowest quintiles, according to a prospective nested case-control study.

The findings point to a preclinical state in IBD, in which patients are not yet symptomatic but have positive serologic markers, as occurs in rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus, said Dr. Paul Lochhead at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and his associates. “To our knowledge, no previous study has examined prediagnostic inflammatory markers in relation to IBD risk,” the investigators added. “Characterizing preclinical inflammation in IBD could give insights into the natural history of [Crohn’s disease] and [ulcerative colitis], and might help identify potential windows for early therapeutic or preventive interventions in high-risk individuals.”

SOURCE: American Gastroenterological Society

The study included 83 patients with Crohn’s disease, 90 patients with ulcerative colitis, and 344 matched controls. Patients were from two national prospective cohort studies – the Nurses’ Health Study, which includes female nurses aged 35-55 years at enrollment, and the Nurses’ Health Study II, which includes female nurses aged 24-42 years at enrollment. Both studies are ongoing, with follow-up rates exceeding 90%. To assemble the cohort, the researchers extracted questionnaire data and then obtained medical records for blinded review. They confirmed diagnoses of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis using standard case definitions, they said (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 Feb 13. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.01.016).

Participants testing in the highest quintiles for circulating hs-CRP and IL-6 were at greater risk of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis than were those in the lowest quintiles, even after accounting for age, smoking status, body mass index, oral contraceptive use, and cumulative physical activity. For IL-6, odds ratios were 4.7 for Crohn’s disease (95% confidence interval; 1.9-11.5), and 3.4 for ulcerative colitis (95% CI; 1.4-8.2). For hs-CRP, odds ratios were 2.8 for Crohn’s disease (95% CI; 1.15-6.9) and 1.8 for ulcerative colitis (95% CI; 0.8-4.0). The longest interval between testing and diagnosis of IBD was 20 years, Crohn’s disease patients were diagnosed within 10 years, and patients testing in the upper quintile for the inflammatory markers were diagnosed an average of 10.6 years later, the researchers said.

Study participants tended to be in their early 50s when first tested, which exceeds the typical age of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis onset and might limit the generalizability of the findings, the investigators said. They tried to eliminate confounding from undiagnosed baseline IBD by excluding participants diagnosed within 2 years of blood collection, they added. “The differences in overall median inflammatory marker levels between cases and control subjects in our study were small; however, differences of similar magnitude have been reported between groups with disparate outcomes in studies of cardiovascular disease,” they noted. “Moreover, when comparing extreme quintiles of median inflammatory marker levels, where risk of [Crohn’s disease] or [ulcerative colitis] was most evident, the differences were more substantial.”

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America, and the American Gastroenterological Association. Dr. Lochhead had no disclosures. Two coinvestigators disclosed relationships with Exact Sciences, AbbVie, Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Healthcare, Pfizer, and Pozen.

Women with high circulating levels of interleukin-6 and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein were at significantly greater risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) compared with those testing in the lowest quintiles, according to a prospective nested case-control study.

The findings point to a preclinical state in IBD, in which patients are not yet symptomatic but have positive serologic markers, as occurs in rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus, said Dr. Paul Lochhead at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and his associates. “To our knowledge, no previous study has examined prediagnostic inflammatory markers in relation to IBD risk,” the investigators added. “Characterizing preclinical inflammation in IBD could give insights into the natural history of [Crohn’s disease] and [ulcerative colitis], and might help identify potential windows for early therapeutic or preventive interventions in high-risk individuals.”

SOURCE: American Gastroenterological Society

The study included 83 patients with Crohn’s disease, 90 patients with ulcerative colitis, and 344 matched controls. Patients were from two national prospective cohort studies – the Nurses’ Health Study, which includes female nurses aged 35-55 years at enrollment, and the Nurses’ Health Study II, which includes female nurses aged 24-42 years at enrollment. Both studies are ongoing, with follow-up rates exceeding 90%. To assemble the cohort, the researchers extracted questionnaire data and then obtained medical records for blinded review. They confirmed diagnoses of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis using standard case definitions, they said (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 Feb 13. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.01.016).

Participants testing in the highest quintiles for circulating hs-CRP and IL-6 were at greater risk of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis than were those in the lowest quintiles, even after accounting for age, smoking status, body mass index, oral contraceptive use, and cumulative physical activity. For IL-6, odds ratios were 4.7 for Crohn’s disease (95% confidence interval; 1.9-11.5), and 3.4 for ulcerative colitis (95% CI; 1.4-8.2). For hs-CRP, odds ratios were 2.8 for Crohn’s disease (95% CI; 1.15-6.9) and 1.8 for ulcerative colitis (95% CI; 0.8-4.0). The longest interval between testing and diagnosis of IBD was 20 years, Crohn’s disease patients were diagnosed within 10 years, and patients testing in the upper quintile for the inflammatory markers were diagnosed an average of 10.6 years later, the researchers said.

Study participants tended to be in their early 50s when first tested, which exceeds the typical age of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis onset and might limit the generalizability of the findings, the investigators said. They tried to eliminate confounding from undiagnosed baseline IBD by excluding participants diagnosed within 2 years of blood collection, they added. “The differences in overall median inflammatory marker levels between cases and control subjects in our study were small; however, differences of similar magnitude have been reported between groups with disparate outcomes in studies of cardiovascular disease,” they noted. “Moreover, when comparing extreme quintiles of median inflammatory marker levels, where risk of [Crohn’s disease] or [ulcerative colitis] was most evident, the differences were more substantial.”

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America, and the American Gastroenterological Association. Dr. Lochhead had no disclosures. Two coinvestigators disclosed relationships with Exact Sciences, AbbVie, Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Healthcare, Pfizer, and Pozen.

Women with Crohn’s disease who were prescribed combination oral contraceptive pills for more than 3 years were 68% more likely to need gastrointestinal surgery than patients who did not use oral contraceptives, according to a national prospective cohort study reported in the June issue of Gastroenterology.

“Our data suggest the importance of carefully evaluating contraceptive options among women with established Crohn’s disease. Future studies should focus on mechanisms by which oral contraceptive use alters risk and progression,” said Dr. Hamed Khalili of Harvard Medical School in Boston and his associates at Harvard and Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.

©Thinkstock

Several studies have linked OC exposure to Crohn’s disease itself. But past studies of OCs and Crohn’s disease progression were small, retrospective, or did not adequately ascertain OC exposure, Dr. Khalili and his associates said. To help fill this gap, they identified 4,036 women with Crohn’s disease aged 16-51 years through the Swedish National Patient Register, and ascertained OC exposure by analyzing Sweden’s national prescription database (Gastroenterology. 2016 Feb 23. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.02.041).

During a median follow-up period of 58 months, 482 patients (12%) underwent surgery related to Crohn’s disease, the researchers said. Use of OCs was associated with surgery, but the link only reached statistical significance among women prescribed combination (estrogen-containing) regimens for more than 3 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.67) or for more than 900 doses (aHR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.1-2.34). For each additional year that combination OCs were prescribed, surgery risk rose by nearly 30% (aHR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.05-1.57). Thus, one extra surgery was needed for every 83 patients who received combination OCs for at least 1 year, said the investigators. Progestin-only prescriptions did not increase the likelihood of needing surgery, and there was no link between current or prior OC exposure and the chances of being prescribed steroids, they noted.

Only one other study has linked OC exposure with Crohn’s disease progression, and it included only 158 patients followed for just a year, Dr. Khalili and his associates said. Exactly how estrogen exposure might trigger Crohn’s disease progression is unclear, but OCs have been linked to changes in intestinal barrier function, increased humoral immunity, and modulation of testosterone levels, which in turn affects cytokine function, they added. “Regardless of the potential mechanism, the effect of OCs on Crohn’s disease progression appears to be related to consistent and long-term use of these medications. Similar patterns of associations have also been reported with other chronic illnesses, such as breast cancer and cardiovascular diseases,” said the researchers. Current OC use itself might not have predicted surgery in the study because about one in four women in Sweden stop taking OCs or switch to a nonhormonal form within 6 months of being prescribed them, they added.

The work was funded by the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the American Gastroenterological Association, and the American College of Gastroenterology. Dr. Khalili reported receiving consulting fees from Abbvie. One coinvestigator reported consulting relationships with Bayer Healthcare, Pfizer, and Pozen. The other investigators had no disclosures.

Women with Crohn’s disease who were prescribed combination oral contraceptive pills for more than 3 years were 68% more likely to need gastrointestinal surgery than patients who did not use oral contraceptives, according to a national prospective cohort study reported in the June issue of Gastroenterology.

“Our data suggest the importance of carefully evaluating contraceptive options among women with established Crohn’s disease. Future studies should focus on mechanisms by which oral contraceptive use alters risk and progression,” said Dr. Hamed Khalili of Harvard Medical School in Boston and his associates at Harvard and Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.

©Thinkstock

Several studies have linked OC exposure to Crohn’s disease itself. But past studies of OCs and Crohn’s disease progression were small, retrospective, or did not adequately ascertain OC exposure, Dr. Khalili and his associates said. To help fill this gap, they identified 4,036 women with Crohn’s disease aged 16-51 years through the Swedish National Patient Register, and ascertained OC exposure by analyzing Sweden’s national prescription database (Gastroenterology. 2016 Feb 23. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.02.041).

During a median follow-up period of 58 months, 482 patients (12%) underwent surgery related to Crohn’s disease, the researchers said. Use of OCs was associated with surgery, but the link only reached statistical significance among women prescribed combination (estrogen-containing) regimens for more than 3 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.67) or for more than 900 doses (aHR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.1-2.34). For each additional year that combination OCs were prescribed, surgery risk rose by nearly 30% (aHR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.05-1.57). Thus, one extra surgery was needed for every 83 patients who received combination OCs for at least 1 year, said the investigators. Progestin-only prescriptions did not increase the likelihood of needing surgery, and there was no link between current or prior OC exposure and the chances of being prescribed steroids, they noted.

Only one other study has linked OC exposure with Crohn’s disease progression, and it included only 158 patients followed for just a year, Dr. Khalili and his associates said. Exactly how estrogen exposure might trigger Crohn’s disease progression is unclear, but OCs have been linked to changes in intestinal barrier function, increased humoral immunity, and modulation of testosterone levels, which in turn affects cytokine function, they added. “Regardless of the potential mechanism, the effect of OCs on Crohn’s disease progression appears to be related to consistent and long-term use of these medications. Similar patterns of associations have also been reported with other chronic illnesses, such as breast cancer and cardiovascular diseases,” said the researchers. Current OC use itself might not have predicted surgery in the study because about one in four women in Sweden stop taking OCs or switch to a nonhormonal form within 6 months of being prescribed them, they added.

The work was funded by the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the American Gastroenterological Association, and the American College of Gastroenterology. Dr. Khalili reported receiving consulting fees from Abbvie. One coinvestigator reported consulting relationships with Bayer Healthcare, Pfizer, and Pozen. The other investigators had no disclosures.

Women with Crohn’s disease who were prescribed combination oral contraceptive pills for more than 3 years were 68% more likely to need gastrointestinal surgery than patients who did not use oral contraceptives, according to a national prospective cohort study reported in the June issue of Gastroenterology.

“Our data suggest the importance of carefully evaluating contraceptive options among women with established Crohn’s disease. Future studies should focus on mechanisms by which oral contraceptive use alters risk and progression,” said Dr. Hamed Khalili of Harvard Medical School in Boston and his associates at Harvard and Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.

©Thinkstock

Several studies have linked OC exposure to Crohn’s disease itself. But past studies of OCs and Crohn’s disease progression were small, retrospective, or did not adequately ascertain OC exposure, Dr. Khalili and his associates said. To help fill this gap, they identified 4,036 women with Crohn’s disease aged 16-51 years through the Swedish National Patient Register, and ascertained OC exposure by analyzing Sweden’s national prescription database (Gastroenterology. 2016 Feb 23. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.02.041).

During a median follow-up period of 58 months, 482 patients (12%) underwent surgery related to Crohn’s disease, the researchers said. Use of OCs was associated with surgery, but the link only reached statistical significance among women prescribed combination (estrogen-containing) regimens for more than 3 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.67) or for more than 900 doses (aHR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.1-2.34). For each additional year that combination OCs were prescribed, surgery risk rose by nearly 30% (aHR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.05-1.57). Thus, one extra surgery was needed for every 83 patients who received combination OCs for at least 1 year, said the investigators. Progestin-only prescriptions did not increase the likelihood of needing surgery, and there was no link between current or prior OC exposure and the chances of being prescribed steroids, they noted.

Only one other study has linked OC exposure with Crohn’s disease progression, and it included only 158 patients followed for just a year, Dr. Khalili and his associates said. Exactly how estrogen exposure might trigger Crohn’s disease progression is unclear, but OCs have been linked to changes in intestinal barrier function, increased humoral immunity, and modulation of testosterone levels, which in turn affects cytokine function, they added. “Regardless of the potential mechanism, the effect of OCs on Crohn’s disease progression appears to be related to consistent and long-term use of these medications. Similar patterns of associations have also been reported with other chronic illnesses, such as breast cancer and cardiovascular diseases,” said the researchers. Current OC use itself might not have predicted surgery in the study because about one in four women in Sweden stop taking OCs or switch to a nonhormonal form within 6 months of being prescribed them, they added.

The work was funded by the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the American Gastroenterological Association, and the American College of Gastroenterology. Dr. Khalili reported receiving consulting fees from Abbvie. One coinvestigator reported consulting relationships with Bayer Healthcare, Pfizer, and Pozen. The other investigators had no disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – Blood levels of infliximab rose during pregnancy, while adalimumab levels remained stable, even after researchers accounted for changes in albumin, body mass index, and C-reactive protein levels, according to a novel single-center study of 25 women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Furthermore, blood levels of both anti–tumor necrosis factor agents varied considerably among patients, reported Dr. Cynthia Seow, a gastroenterologist at the University of Calgary (Alta.). “We should consider therapeutic drug monitoring during the prepregnancy period in order to optimize the dose during pregnancy,” she said. “Therapeutic drug monitoring may also be considered for pregnant women receiving infliximab in the second trimester to guide third-trimester dosing.

Active IBD during pregnancy increases the risk of relapse and preterm birth, Dr. Seow noted at the annual Digestive Diseases Week. Thus, infliximab and adalimumab are used to keep IBD in check during pregnancy, even though they cross the placenta and reach higher levels in the cord blood and newborn (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013 March;11[3]:286-92) than in the mother. “However, it is not known how pregnancy itself influences the pharmacokinetics of anti-TNF agents, or the implications of this on prescribed dosing,” said Dr. Seow.

Therefore, she and her colleagues analyzed blood samples from 25 women receiving stable maintenance anti-TNF therapy for IBD, who attended a median of three prenatal visits at the University of Calgary IBD Pregnancy Clinic. Fifteen women received infliximab during 15 pregnancies, and 10 women received adalimumab during 11 pregnancies. Infliximab levels were drawn at trough times, while adalimumab levels were usually drawn 3 days before the next injection. Blood samples were tested only after delivery, and anti-TNF doses were not adjusted during pregnancy.

The infliximab group included eight women with Crohn’s disease and seven women with ulcerative colitis, and the adalimumab group included nine women with Crohn’s disease and one with ulcerative colitis, said Dr. Seow. The treatment groups were similar in terms of age at diagnosis and pregnancy, time on anti-TNF agents, and average gestational age at delivery, which was 39.2 weeks (range, 38.1-40.2 weeks) for the infliximab group and 38.4 weeks (range, 37.2-39.6 weeks) for the adalimumab patients.

Median infliximab concentrations rose from 8.5 mcg/mL in the first trimester to a peak of 21 mcg/mL during the middle of the third trimester (P = .04), and then dropped to nearly preconception levels after delivery, Dr. Seow reported. “This change persisted irrespective of disease phenotype,” she added. Albumin levels correlated inversely with infliximab levels. In contrast, median adalimumab levels ranged between 8.6 and 12.2 mcg/mL during pregnancy, dropped to 6.8 mcg/mL after birth, and were unrelated to albumin levels.

Body mass index and C-reactive protein levels did not affect blood levels of either drug, and the researchers found no differences in pharmacokinetics in subgroups of patients who had only two blood draws, subtherapeutic drug levels, or consistently absent drug levels, Dr. Seow said. Three patients had detectable antibodies during pregnancy, all of whom had a stable clinical course, she said. “The antibody levels appeared to decrease as the pregnancy progressed, and then appeared to increase again after delivery.” A third of infliximab patients and nearly half of adalimumab patients were receiving combination treatments for IBD, and their anti-TNF blood levels resembled those of patients on monotherapy, she also noted.

The researchers did not test cord blood or blood sample from the newborns, but based on past evidence, fetal anti-TNF exposure has implications for current live vaccination recommendations in infants, Dr. Seow emphasized. “The long-term consequences of anti-TNF exposure remain unknown,” she concluded.

Dr. Seow disclosed ties with Janssen, AbbVie, Takeda, Shire, and Actavis.

SAN DIEGO – Blood levels of infliximab rose during pregnancy, while adalimumab levels remained stable, even after researchers accounted for changes in albumin, body mass index, and C-reactive protein levels, according to a novel single-center study of 25 women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Furthermore, blood levels of both anti–tumor necrosis factor agents varied considerably among patients, reported Dr. Cynthia Seow, a gastroenterologist at the University of Calgary (Alta.). “We should consider therapeutic drug monitoring during the prepregnancy period in order to optimize the dose during pregnancy,” she said. “Therapeutic drug monitoring may also be considered for pregnant women receiving infliximab in the second trimester to guide third-trimester dosing.

Active IBD during pregnancy increases the risk of relapse and preterm birth, Dr. Seow noted at the annual Digestive Diseases Week. Thus, infliximab and adalimumab are used to keep IBD in check during pregnancy, even though they cross the placenta and reach higher levels in the cord blood and newborn (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013 March;11[3]:286-92) than in the mother. “However, it is not known how pregnancy itself influences the pharmacokinetics of anti-TNF agents, or the implications of this on prescribed dosing,” said Dr. Seow.

Therefore, she and her colleagues analyzed blood samples from 25 women receiving stable maintenance anti-TNF therapy for IBD, who attended a median of three prenatal visits at the University of Calgary IBD Pregnancy Clinic. Fifteen women received infliximab during 15 pregnancies, and 10 women received adalimumab during 11 pregnancies. Infliximab levels were drawn at trough times, while adalimumab levels were usually drawn 3 days before the next injection. Blood samples were tested only after delivery, and anti-TNF doses were not adjusted during pregnancy.

The infliximab group included eight women with Crohn’s disease and seven women with ulcerative colitis, and the adalimumab group included nine women with Crohn’s disease and one with ulcerative colitis, said Dr. Seow. The treatment groups were similar in terms of age at diagnosis and pregnancy, time on anti-TNF agents, and average gestational age at delivery, which was 39.2 weeks (range, 38.1-40.2 weeks) for the infliximab group and 38.4 weeks (range, 37.2-39.6 weeks) for the adalimumab patients.

Median infliximab concentrations rose from 8.5 mcg/mL in the first trimester to a peak of 21 mcg/mL during the middle of the third trimester (P = .04), and then dropped to nearly preconception levels after delivery, Dr. Seow reported. “This change persisted irrespective of disease phenotype,” she added. Albumin levels correlated inversely with infliximab levels. In contrast, median adalimumab levels ranged between 8.6 and 12.2 mcg/mL during pregnancy, dropped to 6.8 mcg/mL after birth, and were unrelated to albumin levels.

Body mass index and C-reactive protein levels did not affect blood levels of either drug, and the researchers found no differences in pharmacokinetics in subgroups of patients who had only two blood draws, subtherapeutic drug levels, or consistently absent drug levels, Dr. Seow said. Three patients had detectable antibodies during pregnancy, all of whom had a stable clinical course, she said. “The antibody levels appeared to decrease as the pregnancy progressed, and then appeared to increase again after delivery.” A third of infliximab patients and nearly half of adalimumab patients were receiving combination treatments for IBD, and their anti-TNF blood levels resembled those of patients on monotherapy, she also noted.

The researchers did not test cord blood or blood sample from the newborns, but based on past evidence, fetal anti-TNF exposure has implications for current live vaccination recommendations in infants, Dr. Seow emphasized. “The long-term consequences of anti-TNF exposure remain unknown,” she concluded.

Dr. Seow disclosed ties with Janssen, AbbVie, Takeda, Shire, and Actavis.

SAN DIEGO – Blood levels of infliximab rose during pregnancy, while adalimumab levels remained stable, even after researchers accounted for changes in albumin, body mass index, and C-reactive protein levels, according to a novel single-center study of 25 women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Furthermore, blood levels of both anti–tumor necrosis factor agents varied considerably among patients, reported Dr. Cynthia Seow, a gastroenterologist at the University of Calgary (Alta.). “We should consider therapeutic drug monitoring during the prepregnancy period in order to optimize the dose during pregnancy,” she said. “Therapeutic drug monitoring may also be considered for pregnant women receiving infliximab in the second trimester to guide third-trimester dosing.

Active IBD during pregnancy increases the risk of relapse and preterm birth, Dr. Seow noted at the annual Digestive Diseases Week. Thus, infliximab and adalimumab are used to keep IBD in check during pregnancy, even though they cross the placenta and reach higher levels in the cord blood and newborn (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013 March;11[3]:286-92) than in the mother. “However, it is not known how pregnancy itself influences the pharmacokinetics of anti-TNF agents, or the implications of this on prescribed dosing,” said Dr. Seow.

Therefore, she and her colleagues analyzed blood samples from 25 women receiving stable maintenance anti-TNF therapy for IBD, who attended a median of three prenatal visits at the University of Calgary IBD Pregnancy Clinic. Fifteen women received infliximab during 15 pregnancies, and 10 women received adalimumab during 11 pregnancies. Infliximab levels were drawn at trough times, while adalimumab levels were usually drawn 3 days before the next injection. Blood samples were tested only after delivery, and anti-TNF doses were not adjusted during pregnancy.

The infliximab group included eight women with Crohn’s disease and seven women with ulcerative colitis, and the adalimumab group included nine women with Crohn’s disease and one with ulcerative colitis, said Dr. Seow. The treatment groups were similar in terms of age at diagnosis and pregnancy, time on anti-TNF agents, and average gestational age at delivery, which was 39.2 weeks (range, 38.1-40.2 weeks) for the infliximab group and 38.4 weeks (range, 37.2-39.6 weeks) for the adalimumab patients.

Median infliximab concentrations rose from 8.5 mcg/mL in the first trimester to a peak of 21 mcg/mL during the middle of the third trimester (P = .04), and then dropped to nearly preconception levels after delivery, Dr. Seow reported. “This change persisted irrespective of disease phenotype,” she added. Albumin levels correlated inversely with infliximab levels. In contrast, median adalimumab levels ranged between 8.6 and 12.2 mcg/mL during pregnancy, dropped to 6.8 mcg/mL after birth, and were unrelated to albumin levels.

Body mass index and C-reactive protein levels did not affect blood levels of either drug, and the researchers found no differences in pharmacokinetics in subgroups of patients who had only two blood draws, subtherapeutic drug levels, or consistently absent drug levels, Dr. Seow said. Three patients had detectable antibodies during pregnancy, all of whom had a stable clinical course, she said. “The antibody levels appeared to decrease as the pregnancy progressed, and then appeared to increase again after delivery.” A third of infliximab patients and nearly half of adalimumab patients were receiving combination treatments for IBD, and their anti-TNF blood levels resembled those of patients on monotherapy, she also noted.

The researchers did not test cord blood or blood sample from the newborns, but based on past evidence, fetal anti-TNF exposure has implications for current live vaccination recommendations in infants, Dr. Seow emphasized. “The long-term consequences of anti-TNF exposure remain unknown,” she concluded.

Dr. Seow disclosed ties with Janssen, AbbVie, Takeda, Shire, and Actavis.

SAN DIEGO – The investigational oral drug, naldemedine, was found effective in treating opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in patients with noncancer chronic pain, according to results of two identically designed phase III trials (COMPOSE I and II). Naldemedine achieved durable efficacy and consistent safety, with a low incidence of gastrointestinal side effects, and importantly did not compromise or interfere with the analgesic effect of opioids.

In both studies, the drug met the primary endpoint and significantly improved all secondary endpoints. Improved frequency of spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) was observed for at least 9 weeks out of the 12 weeks (the primary endpoint) in 47.6% of naldemedine-treated patients, compared with 34.6% of placebo patients in COMPOSE I. In COMPOSE II, 52.5% versus 33.6%, respectively, had improved frequency of SMB for at least 9 out of 12 weeks.

“Improvement with naldemedine was seen early and was durable, with no evidence of opiate withdrawal. This is good news for patients with OIC, given the significant impact this condition can have and the difficulty they can have in finding a safe and effective treatment,” said presenting author Dr. Martin Hale, an orthopedic surgeon and pain management specialist. He presented results of both trials at the annual Digestive Disease Week.

Naldemedine is a naltrexone-based, once-daily, oral, peripherally acting mu-opioid–receptor antagonist being developed by Shionogi. The fact that it is not centrally acting suggests that its side effect profile would be acceptable. Opiates work on mu receptors, reducing GI motility and fluid secretion, resulting in OIC.

“Laxatives have limited efficacy for OIC and do not address the underlying problem,” Dr. Hale of Gold Coast Research, Plantation, Fla., said. Thus, better treatments are needed.

Study details

Both studies were 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies. COMPOSE I included 547 patients, and COMPOSE II, 553 patients. To be included, patients had to be on opioid therapy for at least 3 months and on a stable dose of opioids for at least 4 weeks. They had to have noncancer pain accompanied by OIC.

Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to oral naldemedine 0.2 mg with or without food versus placebo. “Being able to take the drug with food makes it more acceptable to patients,” Dr. Hale noted.

Responses were observed early in the course of the 12-week trial and remained durable. Naldemedine treatment significantly improved the frequency of SBMs per week, compared with placebo (P less than .0001 in both studies), and SBMs without straining per week from baseline to the last 2 weeks of the study (P = .0003 in COMPOSE I and P = .0011 in COMPOSE II).

Adverse events were similar across all four arms of both studies. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in about 48% of patients across both trials. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) of concern occurred in 1 patient in treated with naldemedine and 1 in the placebo group. “MACE is not relevant with this drug,” Dr Hale told listeners.

Abdominal pain and diarrhea were the only treatment-related adverse events reported in greater than 5% of patients treated with naldemedine versus placebo. Abdominal pain was reported in 6.3% of the treated groups in COMPOSE I and 5.2% of the treated group in COMPOSE II versus 1.8% and 2.9%, respectively, in the placebo groups. Diarrhea was reported in 6.6% of the naldemedine patients in COMPOSE I and in 8.9% in COMPOSE II, compared with 2.9% and 1.8%, respectively, on placebo. Nausea was reported in 4.8% of naldemedine-treated patients in both trials, compared with 2.6% and 3.3%, respectively, in the placebo arms.

“Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate. Back pain and flatulence were rare,” he commented.

Two scales were used to measure opiate withdrawal: Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) and Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Score (SOWS). The graph curves were superimposable for naldemedine and placebo at all time points, showing that naldemedine did not interfere with the analgesic effect of opioids.

The study was funded by Shionogi, Florham Park, N.J.

ginews@gastro.org

SAN DIEGO – The investigational oral drug, naldemedine, was found effective in treating opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in patients with noncancer chronic pain, according to results of two identically designed phase III trials (COMPOSE I and II). Naldemedine achieved durable efficacy and consistent safety, with a low incidence of gastrointestinal side effects, and importantly did not compromise or interfere with the analgesic effect of opioids.

In both studies, the drug met the primary endpoint and significantly improved all secondary endpoints. Improved frequency of spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) was observed for at least 9 weeks out of the 12 weeks (the primary endpoint) in 47.6% of naldemedine-treated patients, compared with 34.6% of placebo patients in COMPOSE I. In COMPOSE II, 52.5% versus 33.6%, respectively, had improved frequency of SMB for at least 9 out of 12 weeks.

“Improvement with naldemedine was seen early and was durable, with no evidence of opiate withdrawal. This is good news for patients with OIC, given the significant impact this condition can have and the difficulty they can have in finding a safe and effective treatment,” said presenting author Dr. Martin Hale, an orthopedic surgeon and pain management specialist. He presented results of both trials at the annual Digestive Disease Week.

Naldemedine is a naltrexone-based, once-daily, oral, peripherally acting mu-opioid–receptor antagonist being developed by Shionogi. The fact that it is not centrally acting suggests that its side effect profile would be acceptable. Opiates work on mu receptors, reducing GI motility and fluid secretion, resulting in OIC.

“Laxatives have limited efficacy for OIC and do not address the underlying problem,” Dr. Hale of Gold Coast Research, Plantation, Fla., said. Thus, better treatments are needed.

Study details

Both studies were 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies. COMPOSE I included 547 patients, and COMPOSE II, 553 patients. To be included, patients had to be on opioid therapy for at least 3 months and on a stable dose of opioids for at least 4 weeks. They had to have noncancer pain accompanied by OIC.

Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to oral naldemedine 0.2 mg with or without food versus placebo. “Being able to take the drug with food makes it more acceptable to patients,” Dr. Hale noted.

Responses were observed early in the course of the 12-week trial and remained durable. Naldemedine treatment significantly improved the frequency of SBMs per week, compared with placebo (P less than .0001 in both studies), and SBMs without straining per week from baseline to the last 2 weeks of the study (P = .0003 in COMPOSE I and P = .0011 in COMPOSE II).

Adverse events were similar across all four arms of both studies. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in about 48% of patients across both trials. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) of concern occurred in 1 patient in treated with naldemedine and 1 in the placebo group. “MACE is not relevant with this drug,” Dr Hale told listeners.

Abdominal pain and diarrhea were the only treatment-related adverse events reported in greater than 5% of patients treated with naldemedine versus placebo. Abdominal pain was reported in 6.3% of the treated groups in COMPOSE I and 5.2% of the treated group in COMPOSE II versus 1.8% and 2.9%, respectively, in the placebo groups. Diarrhea was reported in 6.6% of the naldemedine patients in COMPOSE I and in 8.9% in COMPOSE II, compared with 2.9% and 1.8%, respectively, on placebo. Nausea was reported in 4.8% of naldemedine-treated patients in both trials, compared with 2.6% and 3.3%, respectively, in the placebo arms.

“Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate. Back pain and flatulence were rare,” he commented.

Two scales were used to measure opiate withdrawal: Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) and Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Score (SOWS). The graph curves were superimposable for naldemedine and placebo at all time points, showing that naldemedine did not interfere with the analgesic effect of opioids.

The study was funded by Shionogi, Florham Park, N.J.

ginews@gastro.org

SAN DIEGO – The investigational oral drug, naldemedine, was found effective in treating opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in patients with noncancer chronic pain, according to results of two identically designed phase III trials (COMPOSE I and II). Naldemedine achieved durable efficacy and consistent safety, with a low incidence of gastrointestinal side effects, and importantly did not compromise or interfere with the analgesic effect of opioids.

In both studies, the drug met the primary endpoint and significantly improved all secondary endpoints. Improved frequency of spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) was observed for at least 9 weeks out of the 12 weeks (the primary endpoint) in 47.6% of naldemedine-treated patients, compared with 34.6% of placebo patients in COMPOSE I. In COMPOSE II, 52.5% versus 33.6%, respectively, had improved frequency of SMB for at least 9 out of 12 weeks.

“Improvement with naldemedine was seen early and was durable, with no evidence of opiate withdrawal. This is good news for patients with OIC, given the significant impact this condition can have and the difficulty they can have in finding a safe and effective treatment,” said presenting author Dr. Martin Hale, an orthopedic surgeon and pain management specialist. He presented results of both trials at the annual Digestive Disease Week.

Naldemedine is a naltrexone-based, once-daily, oral, peripherally acting mu-opioid–receptor antagonist being developed by Shionogi. The fact that it is not centrally acting suggests that its side effect profile would be acceptable. Opiates work on mu receptors, reducing GI motility and fluid secretion, resulting in OIC.

“Laxatives have limited efficacy for OIC and do not address the underlying problem,” Dr. Hale of Gold Coast Research, Plantation, Fla., said. Thus, better treatments are needed.

Study details

Both studies were 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies. COMPOSE I included 547 patients, and COMPOSE II, 553 patients. To be included, patients had to be on opioid therapy for at least 3 months and on a stable dose of opioids for at least 4 weeks. They had to have noncancer pain accompanied by OIC.

Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to oral naldemedine 0.2 mg with or without food versus placebo. “Being able to take the drug with food makes it more acceptable to patients,” Dr. Hale noted.

Responses were observed early in the course of the 12-week trial and remained durable. Naldemedine treatment significantly improved the frequency of SBMs per week, compared with placebo (P less than .0001 in both studies), and SBMs without straining per week from baseline to the last 2 weeks of the study (P = .0003 in COMPOSE I and P = .0011 in COMPOSE II).

Adverse events were similar across all four arms of both studies. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in about 48% of patients across both trials. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) of concern occurred in 1 patient in treated with naldemedine and 1 in the placebo group. “MACE is not relevant with this drug,” Dr Hale told listeners.

Abdominal pain and diarrhea were the only treatment-related adverse events reported in greater than 5% of patients treated with naldemedine versus placebo. Abdominal pain was reported in 6.3% of the treated groups in COMPOSE I and 5.2% of the treated group in COMPOSE II versus 1.8% and 2.9%, respectively, in the placebo groups. Diarrhea was reported in 6.6% of the naldemedine patients in COMPOSE I and in 8.9% in COMPOSE II, compared with 2.9% and 1.8%, respectively, on placebo. Nausea was reported in 4.8% of naldemedine-treated patients in both trials, compared with 2.6% and 3.3%, respectively, in the placebo arms.

“Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate. Back pain and flatulence were rare,” he commented.

Two scales were used to measure opiate withdrawal: Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) and Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Score (SOWS). The graph curves were superimposable for naldemedine and placebo at all time points, showing that naldemedine did not interfere with the analgesic effect of opioids.

The study was funded by Shionogi, Florham Park, N.J.

ginews@gastro.org

SAN DIEGO – Bile acid salts in the stool may be a potential biomarker for recurrent episodes of Clostridium difficile infection, a preliminary study suggests.

Although the finding needs to be validated in a prospective study, it could have therapeutic implications, the study investigators said.

“If our results are validated, we could take bile salt profiles of patients who come in with their first episode of C. difficile infection and, using this biomarker, adjust therapy accordingly,” said study lead author Dr. Jessica Allegretti, who presented the findings at the annual Digestive Disease Week. “A patient at high risk of recurrence could get fecal transplant earlier. Right now, fecal transplant is used for recurrent infection.”

Alice Goodman

C. difficile represents a major public health threat, and recurrent disease complicates 20%-30% of cases.

The disease is communicated by spores that are resistant to heat and antibiotics, and they germinate in the gastrointestinal tract. Bile acids are part of that process. Bile acids assist in the digestion of fat, and a small proportion pass into the colon where primary bile acids undergo transformation into secondary bile acids such as deoxycholate and lithocholate.

In vitro, primary acids can stimulate C. difficile, explained Dr. Allegretti of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Cambridge, Mass. “Antibiotic therapy may ablate critical members of the microbiota. We aimed to assess bile acid profiles in patients with C. difficile infection, compared with controls, to understand their role in pathogenesis and hopefully identify a biomarker for recurrence.”

The cross-sectional study collected serum and a single stool sample from three groups of 60 patients: patients with a first episode of C. difficile (fCDI) prior to antibiotics (20 patients), patients with a recurrent episode (rCDI) on treatment with chronic vancomycin at the time of sampling (19), and healthy controls who were fecal transplant donors (21).

The researchers sequenced stool microbial components and conducted bile salt metabolomic profiling. Significant differences were revealed in microbial analysis of the stool samples: Primary bile salts (which induce germination) were significantly elevated in rCDI, compared with fCDI and controls – while secondary bile salts in the stool (which are protective) such as deoxycholate and lithocholate were significantly elevated in controls, compared with fCDI and rCDI (P = .0002 and P = .0007, respectively).

“The same trends were seen in the plasma samples, but were less dramatic than in the stool,” Dr. Allegretti noted.

The median predicted bile salt hydrolase (BSH) gene abundance in rCDI was 20% of the median value in controls (P = .001), and it also was significantly lower than fCDI (P = .001). No significant difference was seen between predicted BSH gene abundance between controls and the fCDI groups.

“An association with reduced predicted bacterial bile salt hydrolase gene abundance may be associated with a diminished capacity to metabolize bile acids,” she said.

The difference in BSH gene abundance between controls and rCDI was largely due to changes in the abundance of 10 bacterial taxa, Dr. Allegretti said.

“This study reinforces the importance of bile salts in CDI and demonstrates for the first time in humans that this shift can be appreciated as early as the first episode of CDI in patients who are antibiotic naive,” Dr Allegretti said.

She noted that rCDI samples were collected in patients on chronic antibiotic therapy, and that may explain some of the decrease in biological microdiversity seen in the study.

In search of a biomarker, “secondary bile acids clearly seem to be the winner, and for now, stool seems to make more sense than blood for samples,” she stated.

Dr. Allegretti and her colleagues are conducting a prospective validation study.

The American College of Gastroenterology funded the study.

SAN DIEGO – Bile acid salts in the stool may be a potential biomarker for recurrent episodes of Clostridium difficile infection, a preliminary study suggests.

Although the finding needs to be validated in a prospective study, it could have therapeutic implications, the study investigators said.

“If our results are validated, we could take bile salt profiles of patients who come in with their first episode of C. difficile infection and, using this biomarker, adjust therapy accordingly,” said study lead author Dr. Jessica Allegretti, who presented the findings at the annual Digestive Disease Week. “A patient at high risk of recurrence could get fecal transplant earlier. Right now, fecal transplant is used for recurrent infection.”

Alice Goodman

C. difficile represents a major public health threat, and recurrent disease complicates 20%-30% of cases.

The disease is communicated by spores that are resistant to heat and antibiotics, and they germinate in the gastrointestinal tract. Bile acids are part of that process. Bile acids assist in the digestion of fat, and a small proportion pass into the colon where primary bile acids undergo transformation into secondary bile acids such as deoxycholate and lithocholate.

In vitro, primary acids can stimulate C. difficile, explained Dr. Allegretti of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Cambridge, Mass. “Antibiotic therapy may ablate critical members of the microbiota. We aimed to assess bile acid profiles in patients with C. difficile infection, compared with controls, to understand their role in pathogenesis and hopefully identify a biomarker for recurrence.”

The cross-sectional study collected serum and a single stool sample from three groups of 60 patients: patients with a first episode of C. difficile (fCDI) prior to antibiotics (20 patients), patients with a recurrent episode (rCDI) on treatment with chronic vancomycin at the time of sampling (19), and healthy controls who were fecal transplant donors (21).

The researchers sequenced stool microbial components and conducted bile salt metabolomic profiling. Significant differences were revealed in microbial analysis of the stool samples: Primary bile salts (which induce germination) were significantly elevated in rCDI, compared with fCDI and controls – while secondary bile salts in the stool (which are protective) such as deoxycholate and lithocholate were significantly elevated in controls, compared with fCDI and rCDI (P = .0002 and P = .0007, respectively).

“The same trends were seen in the plasma samples, but were less dramatic than in the stool,” Dr. Allegretti noted.

The median predicted bile salt hydrolase (BSH) gene abundance in rCDI was 20% of the median value in controls (P = .001), and it also was significantly lower than fCDI (P = .001). No significant difference was seen between predicted BSH gene abundance between controls and the fCDI groups.

“An association with reduced predicted bacterial bile salt hydrolase gene abundance may be associated with a diminished capacity to metabolize bile acids,” she said.

The difference in BSH gene abundance between controls and rCDI was largely due to changes in the abundance of 10 bacterial taxa, Dr. Allegretti said.

“This study reinforces the importance of bile salts in CDI and demonstrates for the first time in humans that this shift can be appreciated as early as the first episode of CDI in patients who are antibiotic naive,” Dr Allegretti said.

She noted that rCDI samples were collected in patients on chronic antibiotic therapy, and that may explain some of the decrease in biological microdiversity seen in the study.

In search of a biomarker, “secondary bile acids clearly seem to be the winner, and for now, stool seems to make more sense than blood for samples,” she stated.

Dr. Allegretti and her colleagues are conducting a prospective validation study.

The American College of Gastroenterology funded the study.

SAN DIEGO – Bile acid salts in the stool may be a potential biomarker for recurrent episodes of Clostridium difficile infection, a preliminary study suggests.

Although the finding needs to be validated in a prospective study, it could have therapeutic implications, the study investigators said.

“If our results are validated, we could take bile salt profiles of patients who come in with their first episode of C. difficile infection and, using this biomarker, adjust therapy accordingly,” said study lead author Dr. Jessica Allegretti, who presented the findings at the annual Digestive Disease Week. “A patient at high risk of recurrence could get fecal transplant earlier. Right now, fecal transplant is used for recurrent infection.”

Alice Goodman

C. difficile represents a major public health threat, and recurrent disease complicates 20%-30% of cases.

The disease is communicated by spores that are resistant to heat and antibiotics, and they germinate in the gastrointestinal tract. Bile acids are part of that process. Bile acids assist in the digestion of fat, and a small proportion pass into the colon where primary bile acids undergo transformation into secondary bile acids such as deoxycholate and lithocholate.

In vitro, primary acids can stimulate C. difficile, explained Dr. Allegretti of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Cambridge, Mass. “Antibiotic therapy may ablate critical members of the microbiota. We aimed to assess bile acid profiles in patients with C. difficile infection, compared with controls, to understand their role in pathogenesis and hopefully identify a biomarker for recurrence.”

The cross-sectional study collected serum and a single stool sample from three groups of 60 patients: patients with a first episode of C. difficile (fCDI) prior to antibiotics (20 patients), patients with a recurrent episode (rCDI) on treatment with chronic vancomycin at the time of sampling (19), and healthy controls who were fecal transplant donors (21).

The researchers sequenced stool microbial components and conducted bile salt metabolomic profiling. Significant differences were revealed in microbial analysis of the stool samples: Primary bile salts (which induce germination) were significantly elevated in rCDI, compared with fCDI and controls – while secondary bile salts in the stool (which are protective) such as deoxycholate and lithocholate were significantly elevated in controls, compared with fCDI and rCDI (P = .0002 and P = .0007, respectively).

“The same trends were seen in the plasma samples, but were less dramatic than in the stool,” Dr. Allegretti noted.

The median predicted bile salt hydrolase (BSH) gene abundance in rCDI was 20% of the median value in controls (P = .001), and it also was significantly lower than fCDI (P = .001). No significant difference was seen between predicted BSH gene abundance between controls and the fCDI groups.

“An association with reduced predicted bacterial bile salt hydrolase gene abundance may be associated with a diminished capacity to metabolize bile acids,” she said.

The difference in BSH gene abundance between controls and rCDI was largely due to changes in the abundance of 10 bacterial taxa, Dr. Allegretti said.

“This study reinforces the importance of bile salts in CDI and demonstrates for the first time in humans that this shift can be appreciated as early as the first episode of CDI in patients who are antibiotic naive,” Dr Allegretti said.

She noted that rCDI samples were collected in patients on chronic antibiotic therapy, and that may explain some of the decrease in biological microdiversity seen in the study.

In search of a biomarker, “secondary bile acids clearly seem to be the winner, and for now, stool seems to make more sense than blood for samples,” she stated.

Dr. Allegretti and her colleagues are conducting a prospective validation study.

The American College of Gastroenterology funded the study.

SAN DIEGO – Obesity is a risk factor for colonic diverticulosis among women but not men, while a low-fiber diet was not found to be a risk factor in a recent study reported at the annual Digestive Disease Week.

“The classic teaching in medical school is that a low-fiber diet increases constipation, which in turn increases the risk of diverticula,” explained lead author Dr. Anne Peery, assistant professor of medicine at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. “This is in textbooks and on your boards. But there is no association between low-fiber dietary intake and diverticula.

“There is, however, evidence from other studies that a high-fiber diet and increased physical activity decrease the risk of developing complications from diverticula,” Dr. Peery added. She noted that the study was designed to look at risk factors for developing diverticula, not at complications.

“The provocative findings from our study are twofold: We found that the prevalence of diverticula is higher in men and lower in women younger than age 50, and that obesity is a risk factor for diverticula in women but not in men,” Dr Peery said.

“The age-related gender differences we identified were quite surprising, and suggest that something is going on in women under the age of 50 that may be estrogen-related. This opens up an avenue of research,” she noted.

Colonic diverticula are common, and they are important because of complications such as hemorrhage, perforation, and inflammation. They also pose a substantial health burden, accounting for 2.5 million office visits and 4,500 deaths each year in the United States.

“Despite this, we know very little about risk factors for colonic diverticula,” Dr. Peery noted.

The prospective study recruited 624 patients between the ages of 30 years and 80 years undergoing a first screening colonoscopy between 2013 and 2015 at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. Prior to undergoing the procedure, each participant was interviewed using validated instruments to assess diet and physical activity. Each participant had a detailed examination for colonic diverticula, with a research assistant present during the entire colonoscopy.

“The presence or absence of diverticula reported in previous studies were extracted from colonoscopy reports. Our study assessed risk factors prior to undergoing colonoscopy,” she emphasized. “This is one of the study strengths.”

Not surprisingly, the study showed that the prevalence of diverticula (or “tics”) increased with age. Younger than age 50, the prevalence was higher in men than in women, after which prevalence equalized with age.

In the study population, 124 men had diverticula and 150 did not; 136 women had diverticula and 214 did not. Women with diverticula were more likely to be older, white, and have a higher body mass index (BMI).

The investigators looked at several measures of obesity, including BMI, waist circumference, and waist-to-height ratio. Women with greater BMI were at increased risk for diverticula, a risk relationship that was not seen in men. The risk of developing six or more diverticula was more than twofold greater in obese women.

Men with a greater waist circumference (more than 102 cm) had no increased risk for diverticula, while women with a greater waist circumference (more than 88 cm) were at increased risk of any diverticula, as well as having six or more diverticula.

A similar pattern was observed for waist-to-height ratio, which some experts believe is related to obesity, according to Dr. Peery. No association was found in men. But for women, a high-risk waist-to-height ratio increased the risk of diverticula, and the risk of having six or more diverticula was almost twice as great in these women, compared with men.

The investigators then measured the association between dietary fiber and physical activity with diverticula. No associations with diverticula were found in any quartile (lowest to highest) for both physical activity and dietary fiber intake.

In an interview, Dr. Peery speculated on why women have a lower prevalence of “tics,” compared with men younger than age 50. She said there are gender-related differences in the way fat is stored and metabolized.

“Obese women have more visceral adiposity that men, and they tend to eat more carbohydrates, while obese men have higher alcohol and meat intake. These differences will be studied in greater depth as they relate to diverticula and complications,” she noted.

SAN DIEGO – Obesity is a risk factor for colonic diverticulosis among women but not men, while a low-fiber diet was not found to be a risk factor in a recent study reported at the annual Digestive Disease Week.

“The classic teaching in medical school is that a low-fiber diet increases constipation, which in turn increases the risk of diverticula,” explained lead author Dr. Anne Peery, assistant professor of medicine at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. “This is in textbooks and on your boards. But there is no association between low-fiber dietary intake and diverticula.

“There is, however, evidence from other studies that a high-fiber diet and increased physical activity decrease the risk of developing complications from diverticula,” Dr. Peery added. She noted that the study was designed to look at risk factors for developing diverticula, not at complications.

“The provocative findings from our study are twofold: We found that the prevalence of diverticula is higher in men and lower in women younger than age 50, and that obesity is a risk factor for diverticula in women but not in men,” Dr Peery said.

“The age-related gender differences we identified were quite surprising, and suggest that something is going on in women under the age of 50 that may be estrogen-related. This opens up an avenue of research,” she noted.

Colonic diverticula are common, and they are important because of complications such as hemorrhage, perforation, and inflammation. They also pose a substantial health burden, accounting for 2.5 million office visits and 4,500 deaths each year in the United States.

“Despite this, we know very little about risk factors for colonic diverticula,” Dr. Peery noted.

The prospective study recruited 624 patients between the ages of 30 years and 80 years undergoing a first screening colonoscopy between 2013 and 2015 at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. Prior to undergoing the procedure, each participant was interviewed using validated instruments to assess diet and physical activity. Each participant had a detailed examination for colonic diverticula, with a research assistant present during the entire colonoscopy.

“The presence or absence of diverticula reported in previous studies were extracted from colonoscopy reports. Our study assessed risk factors prior to undergoing colonoscopy,” she emphasized. “This is one of the study strengths.”

Not surprisingly, the study showed that the prevalence of diverticula (or “tics”) increased with age. Younger than age 50, the prevalence was higher in men than in women, after which prevalence equalized with age.

In the study population, 124 men had diverticula and 150 did not; 136 women had diverticula and 214 did not. Women with diverticula were more likely to be older, white, and have a higher body mass index (BMI).

The investigators looked at several measures of obesity, including BMI, waist circumference, and waist-to-height ratio. Women with greater BMI were at increased risk for diverticula, a risk relationship that was not seen in men. The risk of developing six or more diverticula was more than twofold greater in obese women.

Men with a greater waist circumference (more than 102 cm) had no increased risk for diverticula, while women with a greater waist circumference (more than 88 cm) were at increased risk of any diverticula, as well as having six or more diverticula.

A similar pattern was observed for waist-to-height ratio, which some experts believe is related to obesity, according to Dr. Peery. No association was found in men. But for women, a high-risk waist-to-height ratio increased the risk of diverticula, and the risk of having six or more diverticula was almost twice as great in these women, compared with men.

The investigators then measured the association between dietary fiber and physical activity with diverticula. No associations with diverticula were found in any quartile (lowest to highest) for both physical activity and dietary fiber intake.

In an interview, Dr. Peery speculated on why women have a lower prevalence of “tics,” compared with men younger than age 50. She said there are gender-related differences in the way fat is stored and metabolized.

“Obese women have more visceral adiposity that men, and they tend to eat more carbohydrates, while obese men have higher alcohol and meat intake. These differences will be studied in greater depth as they relate to diverticula and complications,” she noted.

SAN DIEGO – Obesity is a risk factor for colonic diverticulosis among women but not men, while a low-fiber diet was not found to be a risk factor in a recent study reported at the annual Digestive Disease Week.

“The classic teaching in medical school is that a low-fiber diet increases constipation, which in turn increases the risk of diverticula,” explained lead author Dr. Anne Peery, assistant professor of medicine at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. “This is in textbooks and on your boards. But there is no association between low-fiber dietary intake and diverticula.

“There is, however, evidence from other studies that a high-fiber diet and increased physical activity decrease the risk of developing complications from diverticula,” Dr. Peery added. She noted that the study was designed to look at risk factors for developing diverticula, not at complications.

“The provocative findings from our study are twofold: We found that the prevalence of diverticula is higher in men and lower in women younger than age 50, and that obesity is a risk factor for diverticula in women but not in men,” Dr Peery said.

“The age-related gender differences we identified were quite surprising, and suggest that something is going on in women under the age of 50 that may be estrogen-related. This opens up an avenue of research,” she noted.

Colonic diverticula are common, and they are important because of complications such as hemorrhage, perforation, and inflammation. They also pose a substantial health burden, accounting for 2.5 million office visits and 4,500 deaths each year in the United States.

“Despite this, we know very little about risk factors for colonic diverticula,” Dr. Peery noted.

The prospective study recruited 624 patients between the ages of 30 years and 80 years undergoing a first screening colonoscopy between 2013 and 2015 at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. Prior to undergoing the procedure, each participant was interviewed using validated instruments to assess diet and physical activity. Each participant had a detailed examination for colonic diverticula, with a research assistant present during the entire colonoscopy.

“The presence or absence of diverticula reported in previous studies were extracted from colonoscopy reports. Our study assessed risk factors prior to undergoing colonoscopy,” she emphasized. “This is one of the study strengths.”

Not surprisingly, the study showed that the prevalence of diverticula (or “tics”) increased with age. Younger than age 50, the prevalence was higher in men than in women, after which prevalence equalized with age.

In the study population, 124 men had diverticula and 150 did not; 136 women had diverticula and 214 did not. Women with diverticula were more likely to be older, white, and have a higher body mass index (BMI).

The investigators looked at several measures of obesity, including BMI, waist circumference, and waist-to-height ratio. Women with greater BMI were at increased risk for diverticula, a risk relationship that was not seen in men. The risk of developing six or more diverticula was more than twofold greater in obese women.

Men with a greater waist circumference (more than 102 cm) had no increased risk for diverticula, while women with a greater waist circumference (more than 88 cm) were at increased risk of any diverticula, as well as having six or more diverticula.

A similar pattern was observed for waist-to-height ratio, which some experts believe is related to obesity, according to Dr. Peery. No association was found in men. But for women, a high-risk waist-to-height ratio increased the risk of diverticula, and the risk of having six or more diverticula was almost twice as great in these women, compared with men.

The investigators then measured the association between dietary fiber and physical activity with diverticula. No associations with diverticula were found in any quartile (lowest to highest) for both physical activity and dietary fiber intake.

In an interview, Dr. Peery speculated on why women have a lower prevalence of “tics,” compared with men younger than age 50. She said there are gender-related differences in the way fat is stored and metabolized.

“Obese women have more visceral adiposity that men, and they tend to eat more carbohydrates, while obese men have higher alcohol and meat intake. These differences will be studied in greater depth as they relate to diverticula and complications,” she noted.

In recent years federal laws have been enacted to help provide more treatment options and possibly lower costs to patients for therapeutic biological products. You have likely heard or read about “biosimilars” on the U.S. drug market. But are you ready to make informed treatment decisions and answer patients’ questions about these new drugs?

Biosimilars are not “generic biologics.” Although the shared goal of making biosimilars and generic drugs available is to provide more treatment options, there are important differences between the two approval pathways. For instance, unlike generic drugs, which are “bioequivalent” to their reference listed drug, biosimilar products can be either “biosimilar” to or “interchangeable” with their reference product. The differences may seem subtle based on the terminology, but the differences are important, and health care professionals who prescribe, dispense, or administer these products will need to understand them – as well as other aspects of these new therapies.

To help busy health care professionals better understand biosimilar and interchangeable products, the FDA has created a free 1.5-hour continuing education program titled, FDA Overview of Biosimilar Products. The course describes the important characteristics of biological products, particularly their complexity. For instance, a single molecule of a biological product, such as a monoclonal antibody, can easily be many hundreds of times larger and much more complex than that of a “small molecule” drug such as aspirin. Their increased complexity is one reason they are regulated differently than generics – and why, in the case of biosimilars, the law allows some differences from the reference product in clinically inactive components. The CE course discusses the “inherent variability” in the production of all biological products – both reference and biosimilar – and how the FDA accounts for these differences in assessing safety and efficacy of the products. The course also provides detailed definitions of important terms – such as “biosimilar” and “interchangeable” – and an overview of the standards the FDA has established for reviewing and approving biosimilar and interchangeable products. It also outlines the FDA review and approval standards for biosimilars and interchangeable products to help practitioners be assured that these products have been demonstrated to be safe and effective treatment options for their patients.

Some of our most important and expensive drugs are biological products used to treat patients who have serious medical conditions that are often life threatening and usually life altering. In April 2016, the Food and Drug Administration approved Inflectra (infliximab-dyyb) to help treat certain patients with certain gastrointestinal disorders, such as Crohn’s disease, and for other indications such as treatment of psoriasis and rheumatoid arthritis. The product is approved but not yet marketed in the United States. However, last year, Zarxio (filgrastim-sndz) became the first biosimilar actually available in the U.S. marketplace – approved to help boost white blood cell production for patients with severe neutropenia as well as for patients receiving various cancer therapies. These products are “biosimilar” to already-approved biological products called “reference products.” Inflectra is biosimilar to the reference product, Remicade (infliximab), and Zarxio is biosimilar to Neupogen (filgrastim).

Use of safe and effective biosimilar and interchangeable biological products can potentially make treatment more affordable for patients in need and improve public health. As patients begin to ask about the use of biosimilar and interchangeable products, the FDA hopes this course will help prepare health care practitioners to make informed decisions on behalf of their patients.

Dr. Christl is Associate Director for Therapeutic Biologics at the Office of New Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA.

In recent years federal laws have been enacted to help provide more treatment options and possibly lower costs to patients for therapeutic biological products. You have likely heard or read about “biosimilars” on the U.S. drug market. But are you ready to make informed treatment decisions and answer patients’ questions about these new drugs?

Biosimilars are not “generic biologics.” Although the shared goal of making biosimilars and generic drugs available is to provide more treatment options, there are important differences between the two approval pathways. For instance, unlike generic drugs, which are “bioequivalent” to their reference listed drug, biosimilar products can be either “biosimilar” to or “interchangeable” with their reference product. The differences may seem subtle based on the terminology, but the differences are important, and health care professionals who prescribe, dispense, or administer these products will need to understand them – as well as other aspects of these new therapies.

To help busy health care professionals better understand biosimilar and interchangeable products, the FDA has created a free 1.5-hour continuing education program titled, FDA Overview of Biosimilar Products. The course describes the important characteristics of biological products, particularly their complexity. For instance, a single molecule of a biological product, such as a monoclonal antibody, can easily be many hundreds of times larger and much more complex than that of a “small molecule” drug such as aspirin. Their increased complexity is one reason they are regulated differently than generics – and why, in the case of biosimilars, the law allows some differences from the reference product in clinically inactive components. The CE course discusses the “inherent variability” in the production of all biological products – both reference and biosimilar – and how the FDA accounts for these differences in assessing safety and efficacy of the products. The course also provides detailed definitions of important terms – such as “biosimilar” and “interchangeable” – and an overview of the standards the FDA has established for reviewing and approving biosimilar and interchangeable products. It also outlines the FDA review and approval standards for biosimilars and interchangeable products to help practitioners be assured that these products have been demonstrated to be safe and effective treatment options for their patients.

Some of our most important and expensive drugs are biological products used to treat patients who have serious medical conditions that are often life threatening and usually life altering. In April 2016, the Food and Drug Administration approved Inflectra (infliximab-dyyb) to help treat certain patients with certain gastrointestinal disorders, such as Crohn’s disease, and for other indications such as treatment of psoriasis and rheumatoid arthritis. The product is approved but not yet marketed in the United States. However, last year, Zarxio (filgrastim-sndz) became the first biosimilar actually available in the U.S. marketplace – approved to help boost white blood cell production for patients with severe neutropenia as well as for patients receiving various cancer therapies. These products are “biosimilar” to already-approved biological products called “reference products.” Inflectra is biosimilar to the reference product, Remicade (infliximab), and Zarxio is biosimilar to Neupogen (filgrastim).

Use of safe and effective biosimilar and interchangeable biological products can potentially make treatment more affordable for patients in need and improve public health. As patients begin to ask about the use of biosimilar and interchangeable products, the FDA hopes this course will help prepare health care practitioners to make informed decisions on behalf of their patients.

Dr. Christl is Associate Director for Therapeutic Biologics at the Office of New Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA.

In recent years federal laws have been enacted to help provide more treatment options and possibly lower costs to patients for therapeutic biological products. You have likely heard or read about “biosimilars” on the U.S. drug market. But are you ready to make informed treatment decisions and answer patients’ questions about these new drugs?

Biosimilars are not “generic biologics.” Although the shared goal of making biosimilars and generic drugs available is to provide more treatment options, there are important differences between the two approval pathways. For instance, unlike generic drugs, which are “bioequivalent” to their reference listed drug, biosimilar products can be either “biosimilar” to or “interchangeable” with their reference product. The differences may seem subtle based on the terminology, but the differences are important, and health care professionals who prescribe, dispense, or administer these products will need to understand them – as well as other aspects of these new therapies.

To help busy health care professionals better understand biosimilar and interchangeable products, the FDA has created a free 1.5-hour continuing education program titled, FDA Overview of Biosimilar Products. The course describes the important characteristics of biological products, particularly their complexity. For instance, a single molecule of a biological product, such as a monoclonal antibody, can easily be many hundreds of times larger and much more complex than that of a “small molecule” drug such as aspirin. Their increased complexity is one reason they are regulated differently than generics – and why, in the case of biosimilars, the law allows some differences from the reference product in clinically inactive components. The CE course discusses the “inherent variability” in the production of all biological products – both reference and biosimilar – and how the FDA accounts for these differences in assessing safety and efficacy of the products. The course also provides detailed definitions of important terms – such as “biosimilar” and “interchangeable” – and an overview of the standards the FDA has established for reviewing and approving biosimilar and interchangeable products. It also outlines the FDA review and approval standards for biosimilars and interchangeable products to help practitioners be assured that these products have been demonstrated to be safe and effective treatment options for their patients.

Some of our most important and expensive drugs are biological products used to treat patients who have serious medical conditions that are often life threatening and usually life altering. In April 2016, the Food and Drug Administration approved Inflectra (infliximab-dyyb) to help treat certain patients with certain gastrointestinal disorders, such as Crohn’s disease, and for other indications such as treatment of psoriasis and rheumatoid arthritis. The product is approved but not yet marketed in the United States. However, last year, Zarxio (filgrastim-sndz) became the first biosimilar actually available in the U.S. marketplace – approved to help boost white blood cell production for patients with severe neutropenia as well as for patients receiving various cancer therapies. These products are “biosimilar” to already-approved biological products called “reference products.” Inflectra is biosimilar to the reference product, Remicade (infliximab), and Zarxio is biosimilar to Neupogen (filgrastim).

Use of safe and effective biosimilar and interchangeable biological products can potentially make treatment more affordable for patients in need and improve public health. As patients begin to ask about the use of biosimilar and interchangeable products, the FDA hopes this course will help prepare health care practitioners to make informed decisions on behalf of their patients.

Dr. Christl is Associate Director for Therapeutic Biologics at the Office of New Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA.