B cells display several immunoregulatory mechanisms including the production of interleukin-10. Ectonucleotidases like CD39 and CD73 influence immune homeostasis by metabolizing eATP and generating immunosuppressive adenosine. The major objective was to examine the expression of those immunoregulatory molecules on B-cell subsets, and, more specifically, to determine their association with an infliximab (IFX) treatment in a pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) cohort. 42 IBD patients were assessed for IFX response after 12 mo of therapy and compared against 14 healthy controls (HC). Although IL10-producing plasmablasts were decreased in IFX nonresponders (NRS), we detected an up-regulation of CD39 on plasmablasts and increased fractions of CD39/CD73-co-expressing naïve and memory B cells in responding patients (RS). In addition, B cells of responders proved to have superior ATP degradation capacities and adenosine production before therapy initiation compared with NRS and HC. Moreover, IFX nonresponders had a marked deficiency of α4β7hi plasmablasts, whereas both cohorts had fewer CCR9-expressing plasmablasts. Consequently, CD39+ plasmablasts were decreased in biopsies of inflamed mucosal tissues, especially in IFX nonresponders. Our results highlight the regulatory potential of CD39/CD73-expressing B cells in pediatric IBD and suggest CD39+ plasmablasts as a potential determinant of a successful immunosuppressive therapy with IFX.

Vedolizumab is a gut-selective monoclonal anti-α4β7 integrin antibody treatment for Crohn's disease (CD). A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (NCT03234907) assessed vedolizumab efficacy and safety in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe CD and inadequate/loss of response/intolerance to previous conventional or anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy.

Eligible patients aged ≥18 to ≤80 years with moderate-to-severe CD (CD Activity Index [CDAI] total score 220-400) were randomized 2:1 to vedolizumab 300 mg intravenous infusion or placebo at Weeks 0, 2, 6 of induction, and every 4/8 weeks during Week 14-58 maintenance treatment. Primary and secondary endpoints at Week 10 were enhanced clinical response (≥100-point decrease from baseline CDAI score), and clinical remission (CDAI score ≤150), respectively. Additional Week 10 and/or Week 60 assessments included endoscopic and biomarker (C-reactive protein and fecal calprotectin) measurements.

The study was conducted at 30 centers (August 2017 through August 2020). Enrolled patients (n = 215) were randomized to vedolizumab (n =144) or placebo (n = 71). By Week 10, 19.4% vedolizumab-treated versus 24.3% placebo-treated patients achieved an enhanced clinical response. The Cui-Hung-Wang-adjusted p-value for the primary endpoint was 0.347. After maintenance treatment at Week 60, rates of enhanced clinical response, clinical remission, endoscopic response, mucosal healing, and biomarker improvements appeared greater for vedolizumab-treated than placebo-treated patients.

There were no new safety findings for vedolizumab treatment of Chinese patients with CD. Although the primary endpoint was not met, vedolizumab-treated patients showed improvements in other disease activity measures at Weeks 10 and 60.

We utilized patient samples from the large, phase 2b/3 SELECTION trial to identify circulating biomarkers of ulcerative colitis (UC) and potential early mediators of filgotinib treatment effects.

Samples were collected at baseline and during the induction phase of the SELECTION trial. Evaluated biomarkers comprised serum and stool proteins (measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay), whole-blood cell counts, and whole-blood RNA-seq-derived gene-expression factors identified via exploratory factor analysis. Biomarker levels were assessed by baseline disease severity (endoscopy/bleeding/stool and Mayo Clinic Score) and biologic status (naive vs experienced). Effects of filgotinib on biomarker levels, including week 4 biomarker changes that may mediate week 10 clinical improvements, were assessed.

The biomarker analysis set included 598 biologic-naive patients and 592 biologic-experienced patients. Systemic inflammatory biomarkers (C-reactive protein [CRP], interleukin-6 [IL-6], serum amyloid A [SAA], and platelet cell counts) had the strongest positive correlations with baseline UC disease severity. CRP, IL-6, SAA, and neutrophil activation biomarkers (including neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin [NGAL], tumor necrosis factor ɑ, and oncostatin M [OSM]), as well as platelet, neutrophil, and monocyte cell counts were increased in biologic-experienced versus biologic-naive patients. Gene-expression-derived plasmablast and cell proliferation factors were positively correlated with disease severity; B cell, T-cell activation, and plasmacytoid dendritic cell factors were negatively correlated. Filgotinib reduced nearly all proinflammatory biomarkers correlated with baseline UC disease activity; reduced SAA, CRP, IL-6, NGAL, and OSM at week 4 were identified as mediators of improved week 10 clinical scores.

Filgotinib significantly impacted circulating biomarkers related to UC pathology. Several proinflammatory and neutrophil activation biomarkers may be early mediators of filgotinib treatment effects.

NCT02914522.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) trials often stratify patients by prior biologic exposure, including prior biologic failure or intolerance. This study aimed to assess clinical outcomes in IBD patients with prior biologic failure vs intolerance treated with ustekinumab or vedolizumab.

A post-hoc analysis of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) clinical trials for ustekinumab (UNITI and UNIFI) and vedolizumab (GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2) was performed. Clinical response, clinical remission, and endoscopic improvement (for UC) were compared among biologic naïve, biologic failure, and biologic intolerant patients. Statistical analyses, including chi-square tests and logistic regression, were performed.

A total of 1178 UC and 1439 CD patients received either ustekinumab or vedolizumab. In UC, biologic intolerant patients exhibited higher clinical response (54.7% vs 38.8%, aOR 1.87 [95% CI, 0.93-3.73]), clinical remission (25.0% vs 11.0%, aOR 2.84 [95% CI, 1.47-5.49]), and endoscopic improvement (40.6% vs 24.8%, aOR 2.76 [95% CI, 1.28-5.94]) compared to biologic failure, with outcomes similar to biologic naïve patients. In biologic intolerant CD patients, clinical response was similar between prior biologic failure and intolerance (34.2% vs 32.8%), but after adjustment for potential confounders, biologic intolerance was associated with higher odds of clinical response (aOR: 1.67, 95% CI, 1.09-2.55), with no significant difference observed for clinical remission (aOR: 1.48, 95% CI, 0.88-2.49).

Improved treatment outcomes were generally observed in patients with biologic intolerance compared to failure, especially in UC, where outcomes were similar to biologic naïve patients. Future clinical trials should meticulously differentiate prior biologic failure vs intolerance to mitigate potential bias.

Infliximab and adalimumab are the only biologics thus far approved for paediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), so other biologics, such as vedolizumab, are prescribed off-label. Despite its frequent use, prospective data for vedolizumab treatment in children are available only for short-term induction outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of maintenance therapy with vedolizumab in paediatric patients with IBD.

In this multicentre, prospective, cohort study (VEDOKIDS), children younger than 18 years with Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, or IBD unclassified (analysed with the ulcerative colitis group) who had initiated intravenous vedolizumab were enrolled from 17 centres in six countries (Israel, the USA, Italy, Ireland, Denmark, and Slovenia). Patients initiating vedolizumab to prevent postoperative recurrence were excluded. Vedolizumab dose or schedule were not standardised, and concomitant treatment with any other medication was permitted. Patients were prospectively followed up for 54 weeks, with repeated biosampling. The primary outcome was complete remission at week 54, defined as clinical remission (weighted Paediatric Crohn's Disease Activity Index [wPCDAI] of <12·5 points in Crohn's disease and Paediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index [PUCAI] of <10 in ulcerative colitis) without the need for surgery, exclusive enteral nutrition for children with Crohn's disease, or steroids (steroid-free and exclusive enteral nutrition-free clinical remission) plus CRP concentration lower than 1·5 times the upper limit of normal (ULN) of 0·5 mg/dL. In cases of missing data on CRP, ESR was used instead (concentrations <1·5 times the ULN, which was 25 mm/h). Data were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02862132.

Between May 19, 2016, and April 1, 2022, we enrolled 142 patients. Five children who had received only one or two infusions of their three-infusion induction before switching drugs due to COVID-19 pandemic-related reasons were excluded, leaving 137 children (64 [47%] with Crohn's disease, 64 [47%] with ulcerative colitis, and nine [7%] with IBD unclassified; 63 [46%] male and 74 [54%] female; age range of 0·7-17·6 years) in the intention-to-treat population. The median wPCDAI score in children with Crohn's disease decreased from 35 (IQR 18 to 49) at baseline to 13 (0 to 25; median of differences -14 [95% CI -33 to 0]) at week 54, and the median PUCAI score in children with ulcerative colitis decreased from 25 (IQR 15 to 50) at baseline to 5 (0 to 25) at week 54 (median of difference -10 [-30 to 0]). Improvements in disease activity were significant by week 6, with no further significant changes between visits. At week 54, 16 (25%) of 64 children with Crohn's disease and 34 (47%) of 73 with ulcerative colitis or IBD unclassified were in complete remission. 38 vedolizumab-related adverse events were recorded in 29 (21%) of 137 children, the most common being headache (n=7), myalgia (n=4), and fever (n=4), and none were serious.

Vedolizumab maintenance seems safe and efficacious in children, with a higher efficacy in those with ulcerative colitis than in those with Crohn's disease.

The European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation, the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition, and Takeda.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) refers to a group of chronic, recurrent intestinal inflammatory conditions with a complex cause and unclear underlying mechanisms. It includes two main types: Ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). The conventional treatment of IBD mainly includes 5-aminosalicylates, glucocorticoids, and immunosuppressive drugs, which have their limitations. Recent advancements in IBD research have expanded treatment options, with biological agents playing a key role. Anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha has emerged as the first-line therapy for moderate to severe IBD. Anti-integrin antibodies have also become important for the treatment, and vedolizumab is often used in cases of anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha failure and intolerance to other treatments. Other biological agents are being tested in clinical trials at different stages. This article reviews the efficacy and safety of the primary biological therapies for IBD and provides a comprehensive analysis of the current clinical challenges associated with the disease.

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC).

To investigate potential predictors of efficacy in RIVETING.

This post hoc analysis included patients with UC in stable remission (⩾6 months) on tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily (BID) maintenance therapy (⩾2 years of treatment), who received tofacitinib 5/10 mg BID in RIVETING.

Achievement of modified Mayo (mMayo) remission, remission (based on total Mayo score), partial Mayo score (PMS) remission, and modified PMS (mPMS) remission at month (M)6 was analyzed by baseline characteristics, duration of PMS remission at RIVETING entry, biomarkers, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to identify factors associated with achieving/maintaining efficacy outcomes, including following dose reduction.

Seventy patients received tofacitinib 5 mg BID. At M6, PMS remission was maintained in 66.7%, 60.0%, 82.4%, 75.0%, and 90.0% of patients with baseline PMS remission durations of 6 to ⩽12, >12 to ⩽24, >24 to ⩽36, >36 to ⩽48, and >48 months, respectively. Patients in mMayo remission at M6 had smaller increases in PMS at M1 compared with those not in mMayo remission at M6, while numerically higher proportions of patients with a stool frequency subscore/rectal bleeding subscore/mPMS of 0 at M1/M3 achieved most efficacy endpoints at M6 compared with patients with respective subscores >0. Maintenance of mMayo remission was independent of the number of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors failed and/or prior corticosteroid use. In multivariable models (which included tofacitinib 10 mg BID data), endoscopic subscores (1 vs 0) at RIVETING baseline were significantly associated with lower odds of mMayo remission at M6 (odds ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.94; p = 0.0379).

Prior duration of remission/baseline endoscopic subscore may help guide tofacitinib dose reduction, while PROs may be useful early indicators of efficacy. Close monitoring of patients following dose reduction could identify those unlikely to achieve/maintain efficacy. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03281304.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), encompassing ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, is a group of chronic, immune-mediated disorders of the gastrointestinal tract that present substantial clinical challenges owing to their complex pathophysiology and tendency to relapse. A treat-to-target approach is recommended, involving iterative treatment adjustments to achieve clinical response, reduce inflammatory markers and achieve long-term goals such as mucosal healing. Lifelong medication is often necessary to manage the disease, maintain remission and prevent complications. The therapeutic landscape for IBD has evolved substantially; however, a ceiling on therapeutic efficacy remains and surgery is sometimes required (owing to uncontrolled disease activity or complications). Effective IBD management involves comprehensive care, including medication adherence and a collaborative clinician-patient relationship. This Review discusses current therapeutic options for IBD, detailing mechanisms of action, efficacy, safety profiles and guidelines for use of each drug class. We also explore emerging therapies and the role of surgery. Additionally, the importance of a multidisciplinary team and personalized care in managing IBD is emphasized, advocating for patient empowerment and involvement in treatment decisions. By synthesizing current knowledge and emerging trends, this Review aims to equip healthcare professionals with a thorough understanding of therapeutic options for IBD, enhancing informed, evidence-based decisions in clinical practice.

Treating ulcerative colitis (UC) in patients with prior advanced therapy (AT) exposure may be challenging. We report the efficacy and safety of risankizumab, a monoclonal interleukin 23p19 antibody, in patients with UC and prior inadequate response or intolerance to AT (AT-IR).

In the 12-week phase 3 INSPIRE induction study, patients were randomized to intravenous risankizumab 1200 mg or placebo. Clinical responders were randomized to subcutaneous risankizumab 180 mg, risankizumab 360 mg, or placebo (risankizumab withdrawal) in the 52-week phase 3 COMMAND maintenance study. This post hoc analysis assessed outcomes by AT-IR status, number, and mechanism of action. AT included biologics, Janus kinase inhibitors, and sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators.

Efficacy analyses included 472 non-AT-IR and 503 AT-IR patients (induction), and 137 non-AT-IR and 411 AT-IR patients (maintenance). More patients achieved clinical remission per Adapted Mayo score with risankizumab 1200 mg versus placebo at induction week 12 (non-AT-IR, 29.7% versus 8.4%, nominal P < .0001; AT-IR, 11.4% versus 4.3%, nominal P = .0083); consistent with risankizumab 180 mg or risankizumab 360 mg versus placebo (withdrawal) at maintenance week 52 (non-AT-IR, 50.9% or 61.7% versus 31.1%, nominal P = .057 or P = .0033, respectively; AT-IR, 36.6% or 29.5% versus 23.2%, nominal P = .0159 or P = .2334, respectively). Risankizumab had increased efficacy over placebo, regardless of AT-IR number or mechanism of action, with higher efficacy rates for non-AT-IR compared to AT-IR. Safety results in non-AT-IR and AT-IR patients were generally comparable in both induction and maintenance.

Risankizumab was effective and well tolerated, regardless of prior AT-IR status.

INSPIRE [NCT03398148], COMMAND [NCT03398135].

Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is an emerging modality in monitoring disease activity in ulcerative colitis (UC). Here, we aimed to identify early IUS predictors of treatment response as evaluated by endoscopy and assessed the kinetics of IUS changes.

This prospective, longitudinal study included UC patients with endoscopic disease activity (endoscopic Mayo score [EMS] ≥2) starting anti-inflammatory treatment. Clinical scores, biochemical parameters and IUS were assessed at baseline (W0), at week 2 (W2), at W6(W6), and at the time of second endoscopy (W8-W26). Per colonic segment, endoscopic remission (EMS = 0), improvement (EMS ≤1), response (decrease in EMS ≥1), and clinical remission (Lichtiger score ≤3) were assessed and correlated with common IUS parameters. Additionally, drug-specific responsiveness of bowel wall thickness (BWT) was assessed.

A total of 51 patients were included and followed, and 33 patients underwent second endoscopy. BWT was lower from W6 onward for patients reaching endoscopic improvement (3.0 ± 1.2 mm vs 4.1 ± 1.3 mm; P = .026), remission (2.5 ± 1.2 mm vs 4.1 ± 1.1 mm; P = .002), and clinical remission (3.01 ± 1.34 mm vs 3.85 ± 1.20 mm; P = .035). Decrease in BWT was more pronounced in endoscopic responders (-40 ± 25% vs -4 ± 28%; P = .001) at W8 to W26. At W6, BWT ≤3.0 mm (odds ratio [OR], 25.13; 95% confidence interval, 2.01-3.14; P = .012) and color Doppler signal (OR, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.88; P = .026) predicted endoscopic remission and improvement, respectively. Submucosal layer thickness at W6 predicted endoscopic remission (OR, 0.09; P = .018) and improvement (OR, 0.14; P = .02). Furthermore, BWT decreased significantly at W2 for infliximab and tofacitinib and at W6 for vedolizumab.

BWT and color Doppler signal predicted endoscopic targets already after 6 weeks of treatment and response was drug specific. IUS allows close monitoring of treatment in UC and is a surrogate marker of endoscopy.

Etrasimod is an oral, once daily, selective, sphingosine 1-phosphate [S1P]1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis [UC]. This subgroup analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of etrasimod 2 mg once daily vs placebo by prior biologic/Janus kinase inhibitor [bio/JAKi] exposure in ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12.

Pre-defined efficacy endpoints were assessed at Weeks 12 and 52 in ELEVATE UC 52 and Week 12 in ELEVATE UC 12 in bio/JAKi-naïve and -experienced patients, and at Week 12 [pooled] based on prior advanced therapy exposure mechanism.

In the ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 analysis populations, 80/274 [29.2%] and 74/222 [33.3%] patients receiving etrasimod and 42/135 [31.1%] and 38/112 [33.9%] patients receiving placebo, respectively, were bio/JAKi-experienced. In both bio/JAKi-naïve and -experienced patients, a significantly greater proportion receiving etrasimod vs placebo achieved clinical remission [p < 0.05] in ELEVATE UC 52 at Weeks 12 [naïve: 30.9% vs 9.7%; experienced: 17.5% vs 2.4%] and 52 [naïve: 36.6% vs 7.5%; experienced: 21.3% vs 4.8%]; in ELEVATE UC 12, this was observed only for bio/JAKi-naïve patients [naïve: 27.7% vs 16.2%, p = 0.033; experienced: 18.9% vs 13.2%, p = 0.349]. Similar patterns were observed for most efficacy endpoints. Among patients with prior anti-integrin exposure [N = 90], a significantly greater proportion achieved clinical response [54.1% vs 27.6%, p = 0.030], but not clinical remission [9.8% vs 3.4%, p = 0.248], with etrasimod vs placebo.

Bio/JAKi-naïve and -experienced patients had clinically meaningful induction and maintenance treatment benefits with etrasimod vs placebo.

NCT03945188; NCT03996369.

This chapter presents an overview of the emerging strategies to address the unmet needs in the management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). IBD poses significant challenges, as over half of patients experience disease progression despite interventions, leading to irreversible complications, and a substantial proportion do not respond to existing therapies, such as biologics. To overcome these limitations, we describe a diverse array of novel therapeutic approaches. In the area of immune homeostasis restoration, the focus is on targeting cytokine networks, leukocyte trafficking, novel immune pathways, and cell therapies involving regulatory T cells and mesenchymal stem cells (MSC). Recognizing the critical role of impaired intestinal barrier integrity in IBD, we highlight therapies aimed at restoring barrier function and promoting mucosal healing, such as those targeting cell proliferation, tight junctions, and lipid mediators. Addressing the challenges posed by fibrosis and fistulas, we describe emerging targets for reversing fibrosis like kinase and cytokine inhibitors and nuclear receptor agonists, as well as the potential of MSC for fistulas. The restoration of a healthy gut microbiome, through strategies like fecal microbiota transplantation, rationally defined bacterial consortia, and targeted antimicrobials, is also highlighted. We also describe innovative approaches to gut-targeted drug delivery to enhance efficacy and minimize side effects. Reinforcing these advancements is the critical role of precision medicine, which emphasizes the use of multiomics analysis for the discovery of biomarkers to enable personalized IBD care. Overall, the emerging landscape of therapeutic opportunities for IBD holds great potential to surpass the therapeutic ceiling of current treatments.

Few studies have compared the efficacy and safety of second-line biological therapies in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients with prior exposure to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy. We aim to compare the efficacy and safety between ustekinumab, vedolizumab, and tofacitinib, a current option as second-line biological therapy with different mechanisms in those patients.

This retrospective multi-center study was conducted across five institutions from 2011 to 2022. We enrolled patients with moderate to severe UC who failed anti-TNF therapy and subsequently received ustekinumab, vedolizumab, or tofacitinib as second-line biological therapy. The outcomes were analyzed for clinical response/remission and endoscopic improvement/remission rates after induction therapy, drug persistency, and adverse events.

A total of 70 UC patients were included and grouped into ustekinumab (11 patients), vedolizumab (40 patients), and tofacitinib (19 patients) treatments. The clinical response/remission rates after induction therapy were similar between ustekinumab (90.9/81.8%), vedolizumab (92.5/65.0%), and tofacitinib (94.7/73.7%). There were no significant differences in the endoscopic improvement/remission rates between the three groups: 90.9/18.2% for ustekinumab, 72.5/12.5% for vedolizumab, and 84.2/26.3% for tofacitinib. Drug persistence was similar across the three agents (p = 0.130). Three patients of the tofacitinib group experienced adverse events (herpes zoster and hypertriglyceridemia).

Based on real-world data, second-line biological therapy with ustekinumab, vedolizumab, and tofacitinib showed comparable efficacy in patients with moderate to severe UC with prior exposure to anti-TNF therapy.

The therapeutic landscape for ulcerative colitis (UC) has recently broadened to include anti-TNFα, anti-integrin, and anti-IL-12/23p40 antibody agents. These biological agents are tailored to individual patient profiles. However, some patients cease biological treatment. This study investigates factors influencing the discontinuation of biological treatment in UC patients.

This retrospective single-cohort study encompasses UC patients who commenced treatment with biological agents like infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab from April 2019 to March 2022. Patients were categorized into continuation and discontinuation groups based on their one-year treatment status. Baseline characteristics were compared between the groups.

Of the 116 UC patients, 102 were included in the study. Among these, 74 (72.5%) continued and 28 (27.5%) discontinued biological therapy. Discontinuation rates for infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab were 33.3%, 25.0%, 50.0%, 30.2%, and 15.6%, respectively. The primary discontinuation reason was lack of efficacy (85.7%), followed by adverse events (7.1%), pregnancy (3.6%), and death (3.6%). The discontinuation group had a significantly lower rate of concomitant thiopurine compared to the continuation group (28.6% vs. 56.8%, p = 0.0132). Multivariable analysis revealed that concomitant thiopurine was independently associated with therapy continuation (p = 0.0075).

The study indicates that concomitant thiopurine significantly correlates with the continuation of biological therapies in UC patients, underscoring the importance of concomitant thiopurine in sustaining biological therapy. Further studies are warranted to assess the efficacy of combination therapy.

The clinical effects of risankizumab (a monoclonal antibody that selectively targets the p19 subunit of IL-23) for the treatment of ulcerative colitis are unknown.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of risankizumab when administered as an induction and a maintenance therapy for patients with ulcerative colitis.

Two phase 3 randomized clinical trials were conducted. The induction trial was conducted at 261 clinical centers (in 41 countries) and enrolled 977 patients from November 5, 2020, to August 4, 2022 (final follow-up on May 16, 2023). The maintenance trial was conducted at 238 clinical centers (in 37 countries) and enrolled 754 patients from August 28, 2018, to March 30, 2022 (final follow-up on April 11, 2023). Eligible patients had moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis; a history of intolerance or inadequate response to 1 or more conventional therapies, advanced therapies, or both types of therapies; and no prior exposure to risankizumab.

For the induction trial, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive 1200 mg of risankizumab or placebo administered intravenously at weeks 0, 4, and 8. For the maintenance trial, patients with a clinical response (determined using the adapted Mayo score) after intravenous treatment with risankizumab were randomized 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous treatment with 180 mg or 360 mg of risankizumab or placebo (no longer receiving risankizumab) every 8 weeks for 52 weeks.

The primary outcome was clinical remission (stool frequency score ≤1 and not greater than baseline, rectal bleeding score of 0, and endoscopic subscore ≤1 without friability) at week 12 for the induction trial and at week 52 for the maintenance trial.

Among the 975 patients analyzed in the induction trial (aged 42.1 [SD, 13.8] years; 586/973 [60.1%] were male; and 677 [69.6%] were White), the clinical remission rates at week 12 were 132/650 (20.3%) for 1200 mg of risankizumab and 20/325 (6.2%) for placebo (adjusted between-group difference, 14.0% [95% CI, 10.0%-18.0%], P < .001). Among the 548 patients analyzed in the maintenance trial (aged 40.9 [SD, 14.0] years; 313 [57.1%] were male; and 407 [74.3%] were White), the clinical remission rates at week 52 were 72/179 (40.2%) for 180 mg of risankizumab, 70/186 (37.6%) for 360 mg of risankizumab, and 46/183 (25.1%) for placebo (adjusted between-group difference for 180 mg of risankizumab vs placebo, 16.3% [97.5% CI, 6.1%-26.6%], P < .001; adjusted between-group difference for 360 mg of risankizumab vs placebo, 14.2% [97.5% CI, 4.0%-24.5%], P = .002). No new safety risks were detected in the treatment groups.

Compared with placebo, risankizumab improved clinical remission rates in an induction trial and in a maintenance trial for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. Further study is needed to identify benefits beyond the 52-week follow-up.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03398148 and NCT03398135.

Recently, novel biologics or small molecular drugs have been introduced for overcoming the unmet needs associated with anti-tumor necrosis factor α agents for inflammtory bowel disease (IBD) treatment. Among these novel drugs, anti integrin agents block leukocyte trafficking to the intestine by blocking the interaction between integrin and cell adhesion molecules. Vedolizumab (anti-α4β7) is most widely used anti-integrin approved in both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease .It has been shown to be effective in both induction and maintenance therapy with a favorable safety profile due to gut selectivity. Several models incorporating clinical, genetic, immune and gut microbial markers to predict response to vedolizumab in IBD have been developed. Etrolizumab (anti-β7) blocks leukocyte trafficking via α4β7 and cell adhesion via αEβ7 integrins. In addition, the introduction of subcutaneous vedolizumab showed similar efficacy and safety with improved patients' convenience. Other investigational anti-integrin therapies include abrilumab (anti-α4β7 IgG2), PN-943 (orally administered and gut-restricted α4β7 antagonist peptide), AJM300 (orally active small molecule inhibitor of α4), and ontamalimab (anti-MAdCAM-1 IgG).

Acute interstitial nephritis (AIN) is a complication of drugs that may cause permanent kidney injury. AIN has been reported in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with the integrin inhibitor vedolizumab. Through systematic review of existing literature, we aimed to identify and describe cases of AIN in patients with IBD treated with vedolizumab.

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science Core Collection between 1 January 2009 and 25 April 2023. The search yielded 1473 publications. Titles and abstracts were screened by two independent reviewers. Seventy publications were reviewed in full-text. Eight met the inclusion criteria. Clinical characteristics of AIN cases were extracted. Case causality assessment was performed according to two international adverse drug reaction probability assessment scales. Results were reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

Nine biopsy-confirmed cases of AIN were reported in six patients with ulcerative colitis and three with Crohn's disease. Mean age at AIN onset was 36 years (range = 19-58) and the majority of patients were females (n = 6/9). Time from vedolizumab treatment initiation to AIN onset spanned from hours to 12 months. Common symptoms were fever and malaise. Creatinine levels were elevated in all patients. Five patients sustained permanent kidney injury.

Our findings suggest that vedolizumab, although rarely, could cause AIN in patients with IBD. Awareness of laboratory findings and symptoms consistent with AIN, along with monitoring of the kidney function, could be warranted in patients with IBD treated with vedolizumab.

Remarkable progress over the last decade has equipped clinicians with many options in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Clinicians now have the unique opportunity to provide individualized treatment that can achieve and sustain remission in many patients. However, issues of primary non-response (PNR) and secondary loss of response (SLOR) to non-tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) therapies remains a common problem. Specific issues include the choice of optimization of therapy, identifying when dose optimization will recapture response, establishing optimal dose for escalation and when to switch therapy.

To explores the issues of PNR and SLOR to non-TNFi therapies.

This review explores the current evidence and literature to elucidate management options in cases of PNR/SLOR. It will also explore potential predictors for response following SLOR/PNR to therapies including the role of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM).

In the setting of PNR and loss of response to alpha-beta7-integrin inhibitors and interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 inhibitors dose optimization is a reasonable option to capture response. For Janus kinase inhibitors dose optimization can be utilized to recapture response with loss of response.

The role of TDM in the setting of advanced non-TNFi therapies to identify patients who require dose optimization and as a predictor for clinical remission is not yet established and this remains an area that should be addressed in the future.

We aimed to validate clinical decision support tools (CDSTs) to predict real-life effectiveness of vedolizumab (VDZ) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

We retrospectively enrolled patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) treated with VDZ at 10 tertiary referral centres in Korea between January 2017 and November 2021. We assessed clinical remission (CREM) and response (CRES), corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CSF-CREM) and response (CSF-CRES), biochemical response based on C-reactive protein (BioRES[CRP]) and faecal calprotectin (BioRES[FC]), endoscopic healing (EH), and the need to optimise or switch drugs based on CDST-defined response groups. Additionally, the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for the CDSTs was calculated.

We included 143 patients with CD and 219 with UC. We observed incremental trends on CSF-CRES at week 14 (W14) (ptrend = 0.004) and decreasing trends for the need to optimise or switch drugs (ptrend = 0.016) in CD from the low to high probability groups. Except for CSF-CREM at W54, we noticed incremental trends for all clinical responses at W14, W26 and W54 (ptrend <0.001) in UC. W26 and W54 BioRES[CRP] and W14 EH also showed increasing trends (ptrend <0.05) in UC. With increasing probabilities of response, drug optimisation or switching was less frequently required in UC (ptrend = 0.013). With 26 points cut-off, CDSTs effectively identified W14 CSF-CRES, W26 BioRES[CRP], BioRES[FC] and W54 BioRES[CRP] in UC, all with AUCs >0.600, whereas CDSTs showed poor accuracy in CD.

CDSTs for VDZ had acceptable accuracy in predicting effectiveness outcomes including clinical and biochemical outcomes in UC. However, their utility in CD was limited.

Vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST) are second-line treatments in pediatric patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) refractory to antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy. Pediatric studies comparing the effectiveness of these medications are lacking. Using a registry from ImproveCareNow (ICN), a global research network in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease, we compared the effectiveness of UST and VDZ in anti-TNF refractory UC.

We performed a propensity-score weighted regression analysis to compare corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CFCR) at 6 months from starting second-line therapy. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of our findings to different ways of handling missing outcome data. Secondary analyses evaluated alternative proxies of response and infection risk.

Our cohort included 262 patients on VDZ and 74 patients on UST. At baseline, the two groups differed on their mean pediatric UC activity index (PUCAI) (p = 0.03) but were otherwise similar. At Month 6, 28.3% of patients on VDZ and 25.8% of those on UST achieved CFCR (p = 0.76). Our primary model showed no difference in CFCR (odds ratio: 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-1.59) (p = 0.54). The time to biologic discontinuation was similar in both groups (hazard ratio: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.76-2.08) (p = 0.36), with the reference group being VDZ, and we found no differences in clinical response, growth parameters, hospitalizations, surgeries, infections, or malignancy risk. Sensitivity analyses supported these findings of similar effectiveness.

UST and VDZ are similarly effective for inducing clinical remission in anti-TNF refractory UC in pediatric patients. Providers should consider safety, tolerability, cost, and comorbidities when deciding between these therapies.

Infliximab and vedolizumab are widely used to treat Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC).

This systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluated comparative efficacy of various regimens for intravenous or subcutaneous infliximab and vedolizumab during maintenance treatment in CD and UC.

Parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by a systematic literature review (CRD42022383401) and included if they evaluated therapeutics of interest for maintenance treatment of adults with moderate-to-severe luminal CD or UC and assessed clinical remission between Weeks 30 and 60. Clinical remission rates in CD or UC and mucosal healing rates in UC were analyzed in a Bayesian network meta-analysis model. Endoscopic outcomes in CD were synthesized by proportional meta-analysis.

Overall, 13 RCTs were included in the analyses. All vedolizumab studies randomized induction responders to maintenance treatment; infliximab studies used a treat-through design. Subcutaneous infliximab 120 mg every 2 weeks had the highest odds ratio (OR) [95% credible interval] versus placebo for clinical remission during the maintenance phase (CD: 5.90 [1.90-18.2]; UC: 5.45 [1.94-15.3]), with surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values of 0.91 and 0.82, respectively. For mucosal healing in UC, subcutaneous infliximab 120 mg every 2 weeks showed the highest OR (4.90 [1.63-14.1]), with SUCRA value of 0.73, followed by intravenous vedolizumab 300 mg every 4 weeks (SUCRA value, 0.70). Endoscopic outcomes in CD were better with subcutaneous infliximab 120 mg every 2 weeks than intravenous infliximab 5 mg/kg every 8 weeks.

Subcutaneous infliximab showed a favorable efficacy profile for achieving clinical remission and endoscopic outcomes during maintenance treatment in CD or UC.

Few studies have shown the effects of prompt outpatient follow-up in relation to reducing readmission rates in patients hospitalized with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Our study evaluated whether postdischarge follow-up was associated with fewer IBD-related readmissions.

This single-center retrospective study included 477 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) who were readmitted to our tertiary care hospital from January 1, 2016, to June 1, 2022. Rehospitalization admissions were defined as admissions that occurred within 90 days after discharge date. We used a chi-square or Fisher's exact test to test for bivariate comparisons to determine if there was an association in patients readmitted for IBD and primary care or gastroenterology follow-up at 1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks versus no follow-up.

In UC patients, there were 118 admissions from 2016 to 2022; 36/118 (31%) and 41/118 (34.7%) of the patients were readmitted at 30 days and 90 days, respectively. In the CD group, there were 101 (36.73%) readmissions among 277 patients, with 174 nonreadmissions (63.27%).

Gastroenterology follow-up within 1 month was associated with reduced rates of admission in both groups (P < 0.05). This study highlights the importance of close gastroenterology follow-up for IBD-related hospitalizations.

Advancements in murine modeling systems for ulcerative colitis have diversified our understanding of the pathophysiological factors involved in disease onset and progression. This has fueled the identification of molecular targets, resulting in a rapidly expanding therapeutic armamentarium. Subsequently, management strategies have evolved from symptomatic resolution to well-defined objective endpoints, including clinical remission, endoscopic remission and mucosal healing. While the incorporation of these assessment modalities has permitted targeted intervention in the context of a natural disease history and the prevention of complications, studies have consistently depicted discrepancies associated with ascertaining disease status through clinical and endoscopic measures. Current recommendations lack consideration of histological healing. The simultaneous achievement of clinical, endoscopic, and histologic remission has not been fully investigated. This has laid the groundwork for a novel therapeutic outcome termed disease clearance (DC). This article summarizes the concept of DC and its current evidence.

Antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) inhibitors are first-line treatment among patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). With time, patients tend to lose response or become intolerant, necessitating switching to small cell biologics such as tofacitinib or vedolizumab. In this real-world study of a large, geographically diverse US population of TNF-experienced patients with UC, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of newly initiating treatment with tofacitinib vs vedolizumab.

We conducted a cohort study using secondary data from a large US insurer (Anthem, Inc.). Our cohort included patients with UC newly initiating treatment with tofacitinib or vedolizumab. Patients were required to have evidence of treatment with anti-TNF inhibitors in the 6 months prior to cohort entry. The primary outcome was treatment persistence >52 weeks. Additionally, we evaluated the following secondary outcomes as additional measures of effectiveness and safety: (1) all-cause hospitalization; (2) total abdominal colectomy; (3) hospitalization for infection; (4) hospitalization for malignancy; (5) hospitalization for cardiac events; and (6) hospitalization for thromboembolic events. We used fine stratification by propensity scores to control for confounding by demographics, clinical factors, and treatment history at baseline.

Our primary cohort included 168 new users of tofacitinib and 568 new users of vedolizumab. Tofacitinib was associated with lower treatment persistence (adjusted risked ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60 -0.99). Differences in secondary measures of effectiveness or safety between tofacitinib initiators vs vedolizumab initiators were not statistically significant (all-cause hospitalization, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.83-1.84; total abdominal colectomy, adjusted HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 0.93-3.44;and hospitalization for any infection, adjusted HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 0.83-4.52).

Ulcerative colitis patients with prior anti-TNF experience initiating tofacitinib demonstrated lower treatment persistence compared with those initiating vedolizumab. This finding is in contrast to other recent studies suggesting superior effectiveness of tofacitinib. Ultimately, head-to-head randomized, controlled trials that focus on directly measured end points may be needed to best inform clinical practice.

In patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), no biomarker is available to help the physician to choose the most suitable biotherapy. The primary objective of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility of identification of α4β7- and TNF-expressing cells, to predict the response to vedolizumab using confocal laser endoscopy (CLE).

Patients with moderate-to-severe UC, naïve of biotherapy, received vedolizumab. Clinical evaluation was performed at each infusion. Endoscopic evaluation was performed before inclusion and at week 22. Fresh colonic biopsies were stained using FITC-labelled vedolizumab and Alexa fluor-labelled adalimumab and ex vivo dual-band CLE images were acquired. Blood samples were collected to measure trough concentrations of vedolizumab and to determine absolute counts of T and B cells subpopulations, NK cells and monocytes.

Nineteen patients were enrolled in the study and received at least one dose of vedolizumab. Clinical remission and endoscopic improvement were observed in 58% of whom 5 patients (45%) had an endoscopic subscore of 0. In terms of clinical response and remission, endoscopic improvement and histologic response, FITC-conjugated vedolizumab staining tended to be higher in responder patients compared to non-responders at week 22. A threshold value of 6 positive FITC-vedolizumab staining areas detected by CLE seemed informative to discriminate the responders and non-responders. The results were similar in terms of clinical remission and endoscopic improvement with a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 85% (p = 0.05). Trough concentrations and blood immune cells were not associated with responses to vedolizumab.

This pilot study demonstrate that dual-band CLE is feasible to detect α4β7- and TNF-expressing cells. Positive α4β7 staining seems to be associated with clinical and endoscopic remission in UC patients treated by anti-α4β7-integrin, subject to validation by larger-scale studies. Clinical-trial.gov: NCT02878083.

Vedolizumab is an anti-α4β7 integrin antibody used to treat moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). This post hoc analysis of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the VISIBLE 1 (NCT02611830) and 2 (NCT02611817) phase 3 studies evaluated onset of treatment effect on patient-reported symptoms during 6-week vedolizumab induction.

Patient-reported stool frequency (SF) and rectal bleeding (RB) (UC Mayo score), and SF and abdominal pain (AP) in CD were collected via electronic diary from VISIBLE patients receiving one or more open-label intravenous (IV) vedolizumab induction doses (weeks 0 and 2). PRO data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Data from 994 patients (UC 383, CD 611) showed mean ratings for all PROs declined consistently week-on-week from baseline through week 6, with early onset of improvement. By week 2, 22% of patients with UC reported RB improvement (≥1-point reduction in RB subscore, 7-day mean), rising to 45% by week 6. By week 6, 18% of patients with UC achieved SF improvement (SF subscore 0; 21% antitumor necrosis factor alpha [anti-TNFα] naive, 13% anti-TNFα experienced). SF improvement in patients with CD (reduction of ≥3 stools, 7-day mean) was achieved by 32% at week 6 (34% anti-TNFα naive, 30% anti-TNFα experienced). Fewer patients with CD reported severe/moderate AP at week 6 (5.1%/28.5%) than baseline (14.6%/61.5%). SF decline appeared greater and faster for anti-TNFα-naive vs. anti-TNFα-experienced patients (UC and CD).

Results indicate early onset of patient-reported UC and CD symptom improvement during vedolizumab IV induction in VISIBLE 1 and 2.

Optimizing second-line biologic therapies for adult ulcerative colitis (UC) post first-line failure is essential.

Compare second-line biologic therapy efficacy in adult UC patients with prior treatment failure.

A comprehensive search of electronic databases up to May 2023 was conducted to assess second-line biologic therapy efficacy using a random effects model. Parameters analyzed included clinical remission rate, clinical response rate, mucosal healing rate, annual discontinuation rate, and colectomy rates.

Forty-three research papers were analyzed. Clinical remission rates for second-line biologics were ranked at 6-14 weeks: Infliximab (30%) was followed by Vedolizumab (29%), Ustekinumab (27%), and Adalimumab (19%). At 52-54 weeks, the order shifted, with Vedolizumab (35%) followed by Infliximab (32%), Ustekinumab (31%), and Adalimumab (26%). The mucosal healing rate was 21%, ranked as: Infliximab (31%), Vedolizumab (21%), Adalimumab (21%), and Ustekinumab (14%). The annual discontinuation rate stood at 20%, with Adalimumab (25%), Vedolizumab (18%), Infliximab (17%), and Ustekinumab (16%). Discontinuation rates due to primary failure (PF), secondary failure (SF), and adverse events (AE) were 6%, 12%, and 3%, respectively. The annual colectomy rate was 9%, with Adalimumab (15%) followed by Vedolizumab (10%), Ustekinumab (9%), and Infliximab (5%), and colectomy rates of 10% due to PF, 12% due to SF, and 4% due to AE.

For UC patients with first-line treatment failure, it is recommended to prioritize infliximab or vedolizumab as second-line biologic therapies, while avoiding adalimumab as the primary choice. Further clinical trials are necessary to assess ustekinumab efficacy accurately.

While indirect comparison of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in adults with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) shows that IFX has better effectiveness during induction, and comparable efficacy during maintenance treatment, comparative data specific to subcutaneous (SC) IFX (i.e., CT-P13 SC) versus VDZ are limited.

Pooled analysis of randomised studies to compare efficacy and safety with IFX SC and VDZ in moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease.

Parallel-group, randomised studies evaluating IFX SC and VDZ in patients with moderate-to-severe CD or UC were identified. Eligible studies reported ≥ 1 prespecified outcome of interest at Week 6 (reflecting treatment during the induction phase) and/or at 1 year (Weeks 50-54; reflecting treatment during the maintenance phase). Prespecified efficacy and safety outcomes considered in this pooled analysis included the proportions of patients achieving disease-specific clinical responses, clinical remission, or discontinuing due to lack of efficacy, and the proportions of patients experiencing adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, infections, serious infections, or discontinuing due to AEs. Data from multiple studies or study arms were extracted and pooled using a random-effect model; comparative analyses were performed separately for patients with CD and UC.

We identified three eligible CD trials and four eligible UC trials that assigned over 1200 participants per disease cohort to either IFX SC or VDZ. In patients with CD, intravenous induction therapy with IFX demonstrated better efficacy (non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) compared with VDZ; during the maintenance phase, IFX SC showed numerically better efficacy (overlapping 95% CIs) than VDZ. A lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year. In patients with UC, efficacy profiles were similar with IFX SC and VDZ during the induction and maintenance phases, and a lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year. In both cohorts, safety profiles for IFX SC and VDZ were generally comparable during 1 year.

IFX SC demonstrated better efficacy than VDZ in patients with CD, and similar efficacy to VDZ in patients with UC; 1-year safety was comparable with IFX SC and VDZ.

Background: About a third of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) do not respond to anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy. In our study, we evaluated the effectiveness of vedolizumab and ustekinumab in achieving clinical and endoscopic outcomes in anti-TNF-experienced patients with IBD. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study. Electronic medical records of patients with moderate to severe IBD, who were previously received anti-TNF therapies, were reviewed and evaluated retrospectively in a gastroenterology center. Outcomes of patients treated with ustekinumab or vedolizumab after failing one anti-TNF agent were evaluated. The primary outcomes were the percentage of hospitalization, surgery, mucosal healing and steroid-free remission. Mucosal healing was defined as a Mayo endoscopic score of 0 or 1 in ulcerative colitis (UC) and an SES-CD score of less than 3 in Crohn's disease (CD). Outcomes were quantified using descriptive analysis. Results: A total of 207 (130 CD: 77 UC) patients with IBD who had previously received one anti-TNF agent were included in the study. Of the total cohort, 62 (30.0%) patients were receiving vedolizumab, and 145 (70.0%) patients were on ustekinumab. 101 (77.6%) patients with CD who failed one anti-TNF therapy were on ustekinumab. Of these patients, 26 (19.7%) patients were hospitalized, and 12 (11.9%) patients had IBD-related surgery. 16 (16.1%) patients had at least one corticosteroid course. 60 (59.0%) patients with CD on ustekinumab achieved mucosal healing. 29 (22.3%) patients with CD who failed one anti-TNF therapy were receiving vedolizumab. Of those, 7 (25%) patients were hospitalized, and 11 (37.9%) patients had IBD-related surgery. 15 (51.0%) patients achieved mucosal healing. 44 (57.1%) patients with UC who failed one anti-TNF therapy were on ustekinumab. Of these 6 (14.1%) patients were hospitalized, 3 (7.0%) patients had IBD-related surgery and 13 (30%) patients had at least 1 corticosteroid course. 25 (57.0%) patients achieved mucosal healing. 33 (42.8%) patients with UC who failed one anti-TNF therapy were receiving vedolizumab. Of those, 6 (18.6%) patients were hospitalized, and 16 (49.6%) patients had at least 1 corticosteroid course. 17 (53.2%) patients achieved mucosal healing. Conclusion: Ustekinumab and vedolizumab were both effective in achieving clinical outcomes in patients with IBD after failing an anti-TNF agent. However, patients receiving ustekinumab had numerically higher percentages of reaching target outcomes than patients receiving vedolizumab. A prospective head-to-head trial is warranted to confirm these findings.

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) including Crohn's disease (CD), ulcerative colitis (UC) and inflammatory bowel disease unclassified (IBD-U) are chronic inflammatory disorders which can affect the gastrointestinal tract. Anti-tumor necrosis factors antibodies (anti-TNFα) such as infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADA) are the first line biological therapy for severe or complicated IBDs in pediatric age. Second line therapeutic options as vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST) are currently used off-label in pediatric age. Furthermore, despite optimization of biologics, a great proportion of patients may fail to respond to biologic agents (up to 30%) or lose response over the time (around 50%) hence these patients may be left without another valid therapeutic option. Consequently, several efforts have been made in the last years in order to develop new drugs and to contrive new therapeutic strategies. Small molecule drugs (SMDs) and combination therapy with either two biologic agents or with a SMD and a biological agent have recently been proposed. Data on safety and efficacy of these new therapeutic options are limited. The objective of the present review is to summarize the most up-to-date available literature in pediatric IBD.

Biological agents known as anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) drugs are frequently utilized in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In this study, we analyzed the shared processes of pyroptosis in Ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD), as well as explored the correlation between the burden of pyroptosis and the results of anti-TNF treatment based on bioinformatics analyses. We identified CAPS1, CASP5, GSDMD, AIM2, and NLRP3 as the hub genes, with AIM2 being the most effective indicator for predicting the response to anti-TNF therapy. We also noticed that non-responders received anti-TNF therapy exhibited elevated AIM2 protein expression. Subsequently, we conducted a cluster analysis based on AIM2-inflammasome-related genes and discovered that patients with a higher burden of AIM2 inflammasome displayed stronger immune function and a poor response to anti-TNF therapy. Overall, our study elucidates the pathway of pyroptosis in IBD and reveals AIM2 expression level as a potential biomarker for predicting the effectiveness of anti-TNF therapy.