Becky McCall

A test that uses a single drop of dried blood to detect HIV, hepatitis B virus, and HCV has been validated and is now in use in some high-risk settings in Denmark, according to research presented at the annual European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases.

Molecular biologist Stephen Nilsson-Møller, MSc, and colleagues at the department of clinical microbiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, developed and validated the test, known as the Dried Blood Spot (DBS), for HIV, HBV, and HCV.

The “test that can detect low viral loads for all three viruses from a single drop of blood, and can be done using existing hospital equipment,” Mr. Nilsson-Møller said in an interview. “Importantly, it does not require venipuncture, but can be done from a drop of dried blood from the finger.”

He highlighted the utility of the new test in more challenging settings. “This method is particularly useful in high-risk settings such as homeless shelters, drug rehabilitation centers, and prisons, where needles might be misused, and it can be difficult to convince people to have the more invasive test.”

“Also, in some places – such as in low- and middle-income settings – there is a distinct risk of ruining blood samples before analysis due to limited refrigeration for transit and storage,” he added. “[Standard] blood samples need to be analyzed within 6 hours when kept at room temperature, while dried blood spots can last for 9 months at room temperature and can be mailed to a laboratory with the right equipment to analyze it.” 
 

Tiny amounts of virus detected

Mr. Nilsson-Møller was tasked with developing a test for use by the university’s department of infectious diseases to screen people in high-risk settings in the capital region of Copenhagen. The work forms part of a PhD project by Jonas Demant at the University of Copenhagen, for which he is screening for HIV, HBV, and HCV in drug rehabilitation centers, prisons, and homeless shelters. 

The study is the first to use the Hologic Panther system (a nucleic acid amplification test) combining all three viruses, Mr. Nilsson-Møller pointed out. “A tiny amount of virus can be detected because it is a very sensitive platform using transcription-mediated amplification.”

“If it detects low amounts of virus, it will create many copies very quickly, creating a signal that tells us that the sample is positive,” he explained.

The researchers collected whole blood from a finger prick, dried it out on a protein saver card (filter paper), and cut out a 1.2-cm diameter dry blood spot which was then prepared for analysis.

Twenty blood samples with known amounts of HIV, HBV, and HCV were analyzed via the DBS method (60 in total) and the viruses were detected in all of the samples.

To validate the method, the researchers used plasma with a known viral load, and a series of dilutions were performed to determine the lower limit for positive detection of all three viruses.

“Untreated patients typically have above 1 million IU/mL of viral loads in their plasma, and we found that we can detect much lower levels,” said Mr. Nilsson-Møller. “Ideally, 40 mcL of blood is good, but less should be sufficient if the test is on untreated patients.”
 

Early testing and treatment reduces morbidity and mortality

Elimination of HBV, HCV, and HIV by 2030 is a global health strategy set by the World Health Organization, but to meet this goal, new approaches for diagnostic testing are required. The DBS test for HIV, HBV, and HCV promises to make a significant contribution toward this goal.

“One in two people currently living with HIV is diagnosed late in the course of their infection, and an even larger proportion of the estimated 6 million Europeans living with chronic hepatitis B or C are not aware that they are infected,” said Anastasia Pharris, PhD, from the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control Principal Expert Infectious Diseases.

“Increasing testing coverage and uptake, especially for those most at risk, is an essential element of any strategy to eliminate HBV, HCV, and HIV in the European Union and European Economic Area,” she pointed out.

Dr. Pharris also highlighted that, while HIV, and often HBV infection, require lifelong treatment, HCV infection is now curable within a few weeks. “To maximize the benefits of individual treatment for all three infections, it is critical to test and diagnose people as soon as possible – in itself a challenge given that these infections can typically be asymptomatic for years.

“Early diagnosis of HBV, HCV, or HIV is vital as it allows people to access treatment, which significantly reduces associated long-term morbidity and mortality.

“In many cases, those most at risk of one of these infections are also more vulnerable to infection with one or both of the other viruses, making the argument for integrated testing even stronger,” she said in an interview.

Mr. Nilsson-Møller and Dr. Pharris reported no relevant financial relationships. Aptima kits for validation were provided by Hologic.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A test that uses a single drop of dried blood to detect HIV, hepatitis B virus, and HCV has been validated and is now in use in some high-risk settings in Denmark, according to research presented at the annual European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases.

Molecular biologist Stephen Nilsson-Møller, MSc, and colleagues at the department of clinical microbiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, developed and validated the test, known as the Dried Blood Spot (DBS), for HIV, HBV, and HCV.

The “test that can detect low viral loads for all three viruses from a single drop of blood, and can be done using existing hospital equipment,” Mr. Nilsson-Møller said in an interview. “Importantly, it does not require venipuncture, but can be done from a drop of dried blood from the finger.”

He highlighted the utility of the new test in more challenging settings. “This method is particularly useful in high-risk settings such as homeless shelters, drug rehabilitation centers, and prisons, where needles might be misused, and it can be difficult to convince people to have the more invasive test.”

“Also, in some places – such as in low- and middle-income settings – there is a distinct risk of ruining blood samples before analysis due to limited refrigeration for transit and storage,” he added. “[Standard] blood samples need to be analyzed within 6 hours when kept at room temperature, while dried blood spots can last for 9 months at room temperature and can be mailed to a laboratory with the right equipment to analyze it.” 
 

Tiny amounts of virus detected

Mr. Nilsson-Møller was tasked with developing a test for use by the university’s department of infectious diseases to screen people in high-risk settings in the capital region of Copenhagen. The work forms part of a PhD project by Jonas Demant at the University of Copenhagen, for which he is screening for HIV, HBV, and HCV in drug rehabilitation centers, prisons, and homeless shelters. 

The study is the first to use the Hologic Panther system (a nucleic acid amplification test) combining all three viruses, Mr. Nilsson-Møller pointed out. “A tiny amount of virus can be detected because it is a very sensitive platform using transcription-mediated amplification.”

“If it detects low amounts of virus, it will create many copies very quickly, creating a signal that tells us that the sample is positive,” he explained.

The researchers collected whole blood from a finger prick, dried it out on a protein saver card (filter paper), and cut out a 1.2-cm diameter dry blood spot which was then prepared for analysis.

Twenty blood samples with known amounts of HIV, HBV, and HCV were analyzed via the DBS method (60 in total) and the viruses were detected in all of the samples.

To validate the method, the researchers used plasma with a known viral load, and a series of dilutions were performed to determine the lower limit for positive detection of all three viruses.

“Untreated patients typically have above 1 million IU/mL of viral loads in their plasma, and we found that we can detect much lower levels,” said Mr. Nilsson-Møller. “Ideally, 40 mcL of blood is good, but less should be sufficient if the test is on untreated patients.”
 

Early testing and treatment reduces morbidity and mortality

Elimination of HBV, HCV, and HIV by 2030 is a global health strategy set by the World Health Organization, but to meet this goal, new approaches for diagnostic testing are required. The DBS test for HIV, HBV, and HCV promises to make a significant contribution toward this goal.

“One in two people currently living with HIV is diagnosed late in the course of their infection, and an even larger proportion of the estimated 6 million Europeans living with chronic hepatitis B or C are not aware that they are infected,” said Anastasia Pharris, PhD, from the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control Principal Expert Infectious Diseases.

“Increasing testing coverage and uptake, especially for those most at risk, is an essential element of any strategy to eliminate HBV, HCV, and HIV in the European Union and European Economic Area,” she pointed out.

Dr. Pharris also highlighted that, while HIV, and often HBV infection, require lifelong treatment, HCV infection is now curable within a few weeks. “To maximize the benefits of individual treatment for all three infections, it is critical to test and diagnose people as soon as possible – in itself a challenge given that these infections can typically be asymptomatic for years.

“Early diagnosis of HBV, HCV, or HIV is vital as it allows people to access treatment, which significantly reduces associated long-term morbidity and mortality.

“In many cases, those most at risk of one of these infections are also more vulnerable to infection with one or both of the other viruses, making the argument for integrated testing even stronger,” she said in an interview.

Mr. Nilsson-Møller and Dr. Pharris reported no relevant financial relationships. Aptima kits for validation were provided by Hologic.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A test that uses a single drop of dried blood to detect HIV, hepatitis B virus, and HCV has been validated and is now in use in some high-risk settings in Denmark, according to research presented at the annual European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases.

Molecular biologist Stephen Nilsson-Møller, MSc, and colleagues at the department of clinical microbiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, developed and validated the test, known as the Dried Blood Spot (DBS), for HIV, HBV, and HCV.

The “test that can detect low viral loads for all three viruses from a single drop of blood, and can be done using existing hospital equipment,” Mr. Nilsson-Møller said in an interview. “Importantly, it does not require venipuncture, but can be done from a drop of dried blood from the finger.”

He highlighted the utility of the new test in more challenging settings. “This method is particularly useful in high-risk settings such as homeless shelters, drug rehabilitation centers, and prisons, where needles might be misused, and it can be difficult to convince people to have the more invasive test.”

“Also, in some places – such as in low- and middle-income settings – there is a distinct risk of ruining blood samples before analysis due to limited refrigeration for transit and storage,” he added. “[Standard] blood samples need to be analyzed within 6 hours when kept at room temperature, while dried blood spots can last for 9 months at room temperature and can be mailed to a laboratory with the right equipment to analyze it.” 
 

Tiny amounts of virus detected

Mr. Nilsson-Møller was tasked with developing a test for use by the university’s department of infectious diseases to screen people in high-risk settings in the capital region of Copenhagen. The work forms part of a PhD project by Jonas Demant at the University of Copenhagen, for which he is screening for HIV, HBV, and HCV in drug rehabilitation centers, prisons, and homeless shelters. 

The study is the first to use the Hologic Panther system (a nucleic acid amplification test) combining all three viruses, Mr. Nilsson-Møller pointed out. “A tiny amount of virus can be detected because it is a very sensitive platform using transcription-mediated amplification.”

“If it detects low amounts of virus, it will create many copies very quickly, creating a signal that tells us that the sample is positive,” he explained.

The researchers collected whole blood from a finger prick, dried it out on a protein saver card (filter paper), and cut out a 1.2-cm diameter dry blood spot which was then prepared for analysis.

Twenty blood samples with known amounts of HIV, HBV, and HCV were analyzed via the DBS method (60 in total) and the viruses were detected in all of the samples.

To validate the method, the researchers used plasma with a known viral load, and a series of dilutions were performed to determine the lower limit for positive detection of all three viruses.

“Untreated patients typically have above 1 million IU/mL of viral loads in their plasma, and we found that we can detect much lower levels,” said Mr. Nilsson-Møller. “Ideally, 40 mcL of blood is good, but less should be sufficient if the test is on untreated patients.”
 

Early testing and treatment reduces morbidity and mortality

Elimination of HBV, HCV, and HIV by 2030 is a global health strategy set by the World Health Organization, but to meet this goal, new approaches for diagnostic testing are required. The DBS test for HIV, HBV, and HCV promises to make a significant contribution toward this goal.

“One in two people currently living with HIV is diagnosed late in the course of their infection, and an even larger proportion of the estimated 6 million Europeans living with chronic hepatitis B or C are not aware that they are infected,” said Anastasia Pharris, PhD, from the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control Principal Expert Infectious Diseases.

“Increasing testing coverage and uptake, especially for those most at risk, is an essential element of any strategy to eliminate HBV, HCV, and HIV in the European Union and European Economic Area,” she pointed out.

Dr. Pharris also highlighted that, while HIV, and often HBV infection, require lifelong treatment, HCV infection is now curable within a few weeks. “To maximize the benefits of individual treatment for all three infections, it is critical to test and diagnose people as soon as possible – in itself a challenge given that these infections can typically be asymptomatic for years.

“Early diagnosis of HBV, HCV, or HIV is vital as it allows people to access treatment, which significantly reduces associated long-term morbidity and mortality.

“In many cases, those most at risk of one of these infections are also more vulnerable to infection with one or both of the other viruses, making the argument for integrated testing even stronger,” she said in an interview.

Mr. Nilsson-Møller and Dr. Pharris reported no relevant financial relationships. Aptima kits for validation were provided by Hologic.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Poor-quality sleep and irregular sleep could be important drivers of breathlessness in patients who were previously hospitalized for COVID-19, according to data from the U.K.’s CircCOVID study.

The researchers, led by John Blaikley, MRCP, PhD, respiratory physician and clinical scientist from the University of Manchester (England), found that sleep disturbance is a common problem after hospital admission for COVID-19 and may last for at least 1 year.

The study also showed that sleep disturbance after COVID hospitalization was associated with dyspnea and lower lung function. Further in-depth analysis revealed that the effects of sleep disturbance on dyspnea were partially mediated through both anxiety and muscle weakness; however, “this does not fully explain the association, suggesting other pathways are involved,” said Dr. Blaikley.

The study was jointly conducted by researchers from the University of Leicester (England), as well as 20 other U.K. institutes and the University of Helsinki. It was presented at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases and was simultaneously published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine.

“Sleep disturbance is a common problem after hospitalization for COVID-19 and is associated with several symptoms in the post-COVID syndrome,” said Dr. Blaikley. “Clinicians should be aware of this association in their post-COVID syndrome clinics.”

He added that further work needs to be done to define the mechanism and to see whether the links are causal. “However, if they are, then treating sleep disturbance could have beneficial effects beyond improving sleep quality,” he said in an interview.

A large study recently showed that 4 in 10 people with post-COVID syndrome had moderate to severe sleep problems. Black people were at least three times more likely than White people to experience sleep problems. A total of 59% of all participants with long COVID reported having normal sleep or mild sleep disturbances, and 41% reported having moderate to severe sleep disturbances.

Unlike prior studies that evaluated sleep quality after COVID-19, which used either objective or subjective measures of sleep disturbance, the current study used both. “Using both measures revealed previously poorly described associations between sleep disturbance, breathlessness, reduced lung function, anxiety, and muscle weakness,” Dr. Blaikley pointed out.

Subjective and objective measures of sleep

The multicenter CircCOVID cohort study aimed to shed light on the prevalence and nature of sleep disturbance after patients are discharged from hospital for COVID-19 and to assess whether this was associated with dyspnea.

The study recruited a total of 2,320 participants who were part of a larger parent PHOSP-COVID study. After attending an early follow-up visit (at a median of 5 months after discharge from 83 U.K. hospitals for COVID-19), 638 participants provided data for analysis as measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (a subjective measure of sleep quality); 729 participants provided data for analysis as measured by actigraphy (an objective, wrist-worn, device-based measure of sleep quality) at a median of 7 months.

Breathlessness, the primary outcome, was assessed using the Dyspnea-12 validated questionnaire.

Actigraphy measurements were compared with an age-matched, sex-matched, body mass index (BMI)–matched, and time from discharge–matched cohort from the UK Biobank (a prepandemic comparator longitudinal cohort of 502,540 individuals, one-fifth of whom wore actigraphy devices). Sleep regularity was found to be 19% less in previously hospitalized patients with post-COVID syndrome, compared with matched controls who had been hospitalized for other reasons.

This “revealed that the actigraphy changes may be, in part, due to COVID-19 rather than hospitalization alone,” said Dr. Blaikley.

Data were collected at two time points after hospital discharge: 2-7 months (early), and 10-14 months (late). At the early time point, participants were clinically assessed with respect to anxiety, muscle function, and dyspnea, and lung function.

After discharge from hospital, the majority (62%) of post–COVID-19 participants reported poor sleep quality on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index questionnaire. A “comparable” proportion (53%) felt that their quality of sleep had deteriorated following hospital discharge according to the numerical rating scale (subjective measure).

Also, sleep disturbance was found likely to persist for at least 12 months, since subjective sleep quality hardly changed between the early and late time points after hospital discharge.

Both subjective metrics (sleep quality and sleep quality deterioration after hospital discharge) and objective, device-based metrics (sleep regularity) were found to be associated with dyspnea and reduced lung function in patients with post-COVID syndrome.

“One of the striking findings in our study is the consistency with breathlessness and reduced lung function across different methods used to evaluate sleep,” highlighted Dr. Blaikley.

“The other striking finding was that participants following COVID-19 hospitalization actually slept longer [65 min; 95% confidence interval, 59-71 min] than participants hospitalized for non-COVID; however, their bedtimes were irregular, and it was this irregularity that was associated with breathlessness,” he added.

In comparison with nonhospitalized controls, also from the UK Biobank, study participants with lower sleep regularity had higher Dyspnea-12 scores (unadjusted effect estimate, 4.38; 95%: CI, 2.10-6.65). Those with poor sleep quality overall also had higher Dyspnea-12 scores (unadjusted effect estimate, 3.94; 95% CI, 2.78-5.10), and those who reported sleep quality deterioration had higher Dyspnea-12 scores (unadjusted effect estimate, 3,00; 95% CI, 1.82-4.28).

In comparison with hospitalized controls, CircCOVID participants had lower sleep regularity index (–19%; 95% CI, –20 to –16) and lower sleep efficiency (3.83 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.40-4.26).

Sleep disturbance after COVID hospitalization was also associated with lower lung function, from a 7% to a 14% reduction in predicted forced vital capacity, depending on which sleep measure used.

In an analysis of mediating factors active in the relationship between sleep disturbance and dyspnea/decreased lung function, the researchers found that reduced muscle function and anxiety, which are both recognized causes of dyspnea, could partially contribute to the association.

Regarding anxiety, and depending on the sleep metric, anxiety mediated 18%-39% of the effect of sleep disturbance on dyspnea, while muscle weakness mediated 27%-41% of this effect, reported Dr. Blaikley. Those with poor sleep quality were more likely to have mild, moderate, or severe anxiety, compared with participants who reported good-quality sleep.

A similar association was observed between anxiety and sleep quality deterioration.

“Two key questions are raised by our study: Do sleep interventions have a beneficial effect in post–COVID-19 syndrome, and are the associations causal?” asked Dr. Blaikley. “We hope to do a sleep intervention trial to answer these questions to explore if this is an effective treatment for post–COVID-19 syndrome.”

‘Underlying mechanisms remain unclear’

Amitava Banerjee, MD, professor of clinical data science and honorary consultant cardiologist, Institute of Health Informatics, UCL, London, welcomed the study but noted that it did not include nonhospitalized post-COVID patients.

“The majority of people with long COVID were not hospitalized for COVID, so the results may not be generalizable to this larger group,” she said in an interview. “Good-quality sleep is important for health and reduces risk of chronic diseases; quality of sleep is therefore likely to be important for those with long COVID in reducing their risk of chronic disease, but the role of sleep in the mechanism of long COVID needs further research.”

In a commentary also published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, W. Cameron McGuire, MD, pulmonary and critical care specialist from San Diego, California, and colleagues wrote: “These findings suggest that sleep disturbance, dyspnea, and anxiety are common after COVID-19 and are associated with one another, although the underlying mechanisms remain unclear.”

The commentators “applauded” the work overall but noted that the findings represent correlation rather than causation. “It is unclear whether sleep disturbance is causing anxiety or whether anxiety is contributing to poor sleep. ... For the sleep disturbances, increased BMI in the cohort reporting poor sleep, compared with those reporting good sleep might suggest underlying obstructive sleep apnea,” they wrote.

Dr. McGuire and colleagues added that many questions remain for researchers and clinicians, including “whether anxiety and dyspnoea are contributing to a low arousal threshold [disrupting sleep] ... whether the observed abnormalities (e.g., in dyspnea score) are clinically significant,” and “whether therapies such as glucocorticoids, anticoagulants, or previous vaccinations mitigate the observed abnormalities during COVID-19 recovery.”

Dr. Blaikley has received support to his institute from an MRC Transition Fellowship, Asthma + Lung UK, NIHR Manchester BRC, and UKRI; grants to his institution from the Small Business Research Initiative Home Spirometer and the National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia; and support from TEVA and Therakos for attending meetings. He is a committee member of the Royal Society of Medicine. A coauthor received funding from the National Institutes of Health and income for medical education from Zoll, Livanova, Jazz, and Eli Lilly. Dr. Banerjee is the chief investigator of STIMULATE-ICP (an NIHR-funded study) and has received research funding from AstraZeneca.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Poor-quality sleep and irregular sleep could be important drivers of breathlessness in patients who were previously hospitalized for COVID-19, according to data from the U.K.’s CircCOVID study.

The researchers, led by John Blaikley, MRCP, PhD, respiratory physician and clinical scientist from the University of Manchester (England), found that sleep disturbance is a common problem after hospital admission for COVID-19 and may last for at least 1 year.

The study also showed that sleep disturbance after COVID hospitalization was associated with dyspnea and lower lung function. Further in-depth analysis revealed that the effects of sleep disturbance on dyspnea were partially mediated through both anxiety and muscle weakness; however, “this does not fully explain the association, suggesting other pathways are involved,” said Dr. Blaikley.

The study was jointly conducted by researchers from the University of Leicester (England), as well as 20 other U.K. institutes and the University of Helsinki. It was presented at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases and was simultaneously published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine.

“Sleep disturbance is a common problem after hospitalization for COVID-19 and is associated with several symptoms in the post-COVID syndrome,” said Dr. Blaikley. “Clinicians should be aware of this association in their post-COVID syndrome clinics.”

He added that further work needs to be done to define the mechanism and to see whether the links are causal. “However, if they are, then treating sleep disturbance could have beneficial effects beyond improving sleep quality,” he said in an interview.

A large study recently showed that 4 in 10 people with post-COVID syndrome had moderate to severe sleep problems. Black people were at least three times more likely than White people to experience sleep problems. A total of 59% of all participants with long COVID reported having normal sleep or mild sleep disturbances, and 41% reported having moderate to severe sleep disturbances.

Unlike prior studies that evaluated sleep quality after COVID-19, which used either objective or subjective measures of sleep disturbance, the current study used both. “Using both measures revealed previously poorly described associations between sleep disturbance, breathlessness, reduced lung function, anxiety, and muscle weakness,” Dr. Blaikley pointed out.

Subjective and objective measures of sleep

The multicenter CircCOVID cohort study aimed to shed light on the prevalence and nature of sleep disturbance after patients are discharged from hospital for COVID-19 and to assess whether this was associated with dyspnea.

The study recruited a total of 2,320 participants who were part of a larger parent PHOSP-COVID study. After attending an early follow-up visit (at a median of 5 months after discharge from 83 U.K. hospitals for COVID-19), 638 participants provided data for analysis as measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (a subjective measure of sleep quality); 729 participants provided data for analysis as measured by actigraphy (an objective, wrist-worn, device-based measure of sleep quality) at a median of 7 months.

Breathlessness, the primary outcome, was assessed using the Dyspnea-12 validated questionnaire.

Actigraphy measurements were compared with an age-matched, sex-matched, body mass index (BMI)–matched, and time from discharge–matched cohort from the UK Biobank (a prepandemic comparator longitudinal cohort of 502,540 individuals, one-fifth of whom wore actigraphy devices). Sleep regularity was found to be 19% less in previously hospitalized patients with post-COVID syndrome, compared with matched controls who had been hospitalized for other reasons.

This “revealed that the actigraphy changes may be, in part, due to COVID-19 rather than hospitalization alone,” said Dr. Blaikley.

Data were collected at two time points after hospital discharge: 2-7 months (early), and 10-14 months (late). At the early time point, participants were clinically assessed with respect to anxiety, muscle function, and dyspnea, and lung function.

After discharge from hospital, the majority (62%) of post–COVID-19 participants reported poor sleep quality on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index questionnaire. A “comparable” proportion (53%) felt that their quality of sleep had deteriorated following hospital discharge according to the numerical rating scale (subjective measure).

Also, sleep disturbance was found likely to persist for at least 12 months, since subjective sleep quality hardly changed between the early and late time points after hospital discharge.

Both subjective metrics (sleep quality and sleep quality deterioration after hospital discharge) and objective, device-based metrics (sleep regularity) were found to be associated with dyspnea and reduced lung function in patients with post-COVID syndrome.

“One of the striking findings in our study is the consistency with breathlessness and reduced lung function across different methods used to evaluate sleep,” highlighted Dr. Blaikley.

“The other striking finding was that participants following COVID-19 hospitalization actually slept longer [65 min; 95% confidence interval, 59-71 min] than participants hospitalized for non-COVID; however, their bedtimes were irregular, and it was this irregularity that was associated with breathlessness,” he added.

In comparison with nonhospitalized controls, also from the UK Biobank, study participants with lower sleep regularity had higher Dyspnea-12 scores (unadjusted effect estimate, 4.38; 95%: CI, 2.10-6.65). Those with poor sleep quality overall also had higher Dyspnea-12 scores (unadjusted effect estimate, 3.94; 95% CI, 2.78-5.10), and those who reported sleep quality deterioration had higher Dyspnea-12 scores (unadjusted effect estimate, 3,00; 95% CI, 1.82-4.28).

In comparison with hospitalized controls, CircCOVID participants had lower sleep regularity index (–19%; 95% CI, –20 to –16) and lower sleep efficiency (3.83 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.40-4.26).

Sleep disturbance after COVID hospitalization was also associated with lower lung function, from a 7% to a 14% reduction in predicted forced vital capacity, depending on which sleep measure used.

In an analysis of mediating factors active in the relationship between sleep disturbance and dyspnea/decreased lung function, the researchers found that reduced muscle function and anxiety, which are both recognized causes of dyspnea, could partially contribute to the association.

Regarding anxiety, and depending on the sleep metric, anxiety mediated 18%-39% of the effect of sleep disturbance on dyspnea, while muscle weakness mediated 27%-41% of this effect, reported Dr. Blaikley. Those with poor sleep quality were more likely to have mild, moderate, or severe anxiety, compared with participants who reported good-quality sleep.

A similar association was observed between anxiety and sleep quality deterioration.

“Two key questions are raised by our study: Do sleep interventions have a beneficial effect in post–COVID-19 syndrome, and are the associations causal?” asked Dr. Blaikley. “We hope to do a sleep intervention trial to answer these questions to explore if this is an effective treatment for post–COVID-19 syndrome.”

‘Underlying mechanisms remain unclear’

Amitava Banerjee, MD, professor of clinical data science and honorary consultant cardiologist, Institute of Health Informatics, UCL, London, welcomed the study but noted that it did not include nonhospitalized post-COVID patients.

“The majority of people with long COVID were not hospitalized for COVID, so the results may not be generalizable to this larger group,” she said in an interview. “Good-quality sleep is important for health and reduces risk of chronic diseases; quality of sleep is therefore likely to be important for those with long COVID in reducing their risk of chronic disease, but the role of sleep in the mechanism of long COVID needs further research.”

In a commentary also published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, W. Cameron McGuire, MD, pulmonary and critical care specialist from San Diego, California, and colleagues wrote: “These findings suggest that sleep disturbance, dyspnea, and anxiety are common after COVID-19 and are associated with one another, although the underlying mechanisms remain unclear.”

The commentators “applauded” the work overall but noted that the findings represent correlation rather than causation. “It is unclear whether sleep disturbance is causing anxiety or whether anxiety is contributing to poor sleep. ... For the sleep disturbances, increased BMI in the cohort reporting poor sleep, compared with those reporting good sleep might suggest underlying obstructive sleep apnea,” they wrote.

Dr. McGuire and colleagues added that many questions remain for researchers and clinicians, including “whether anxiety and dyspnoea are contributing to a low arousal threshold [disrupting sleep] ... whether the observed abnormalities (e.g., in dyspnea score) are clinically significant,” and “whether therapies such as glucocorticoids, anticoagulants, or previous vaccinations mitigate the observed abnormalities during COVID-19 recovery.”

Dr. Blaikley has received support to his institute from an MRC Transition Fellowship, Asthma + Lung UK, NIHR Manchester BRC, and UKRI; grants to his institution from the Small Business Research Initiative Home Spirometer and the National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia; and support from TEVA and Therakos for attending meetings. He is a committee member of the Royal Society of Medicine. A coauthor received funding from the National Institutes of Health and income for medical education from Zoll, Livanova, Jazz, and Eli Lilly. Dr. Banerjee is the chief investigator of STIMULATE-ICP (an NIHR-funded study) and has received research funding from AstraZeneca.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Poor-quality sleep and irregular sleep could be important drivers of breathlessness in patients who were previously hospitalized for COVID-19, according to data from the U.K.’s CircCOVID study.

The researchers, led by John Blaikley, MRCP, PhD, respiratory physician and clinical scientist from the University of Manchester (England), found that sleep disturbance is a common problem after hospital admission for COVID-19 and may last for at least 1 year.

The study also showed that sleep disturbance after COVID hospitalization was associated with dyspnea and lower lung function. Further in-depth analysis revealed that the effects of sleep disturbance on dyspnea were partially mediated through both anxiety and muscle weakness; however, “this does not fully explain the association, suggesting other pathways are involved,” said Dr. Blaikley.

The study was jointly conducted by researchers from the University of Leicester (England), as well as 20 other U.K. institutes and the University of Helsinki. It was presented at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases and was simultaneously published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine.

“Sleep disturbance is a common problem after hospitalization for COVID-19 and is associated with several symptoms in the post-COVID syndrome,” said Dr. Blaikley. “Clinicians should be aware of this association in their post-COVID syndrome clinics.”

He added that further work needs to be done to define the mechanism and to see whether the links are causal. “However, if they are, then treating sleep disturbance could have beneficial effects beyond improving sleep quality,” he said in an interview.

A large study recently showed that 4 in 10 people with post-COVID syndrome had moderate to severe sleep problems. Black people were at least three times more likely than White people to experience sleep problems. A total of 59% of all participants with long COVID reported having normal sleep or mild sleep disturbances, and 41% reported having moderate to severe sleep disturbances.

Unlike prior studies that evaluated sleep quality after COVID-19, which used either objective or subjective measures of sleep disturbance, the current study used both. “Using both measures revealed previously poorly described associations between sleep disturbance, breathlessness, reduced lung function, anxiety, and muscle weakness,” Dr. Blaikley pointed out.

Subjective and objective measures of sleep

The multicenter CircCOVID cohort study aimed to shed light on the prevalence and nature of sleep disturbance after patients are discharged from hospital for COVID-19 and to assess whether this was associated with dyspnea.

The study recruited a total of 2,320 participants who were part of a larger parent PHOSP-COVID study. After attending an early follow-up visit (at a median of 5 months after discharge from 83 U.K. hospitals for COVID-19), 638 participants provided data for analysis as measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (a subjective measure of sleep quality); 729 participants provided data for analysis as measured by actigraphy (an objective, wrist-worn, device-based measure of sleep quality) at a median of 7 months.

Breathlessness, the primary outcome, was assessed using the Dyspnea-12 validated questionnaire.

Actigraphy measurements were compared with an age-matched, sex-matched, body mass index (BMI)–matched, and time from discharge–matched cohort from the UK Biobank (a prepandemic comparator longitudinal cohort of 502,540 individuals, one-fifth of whom wore actigraphy devices). Sleep regularity was found to be 19% less in previously hospitalized patients with post-COVID syndrome, compared with matched controls who had been hospitalized for other reasons.

This “revealed that the actigraphy changes may be, in part, due to COVID-19 rather than hospitalization alone,” said Dr. Blaikley.

Data were collected at two time points after hospital discharge: 2-7 months (early), and 10-14 months (late). At the early time point, participants were clinically assessed with respect to anxiety, muscle function, and dyspnea, and lung function.

After discharge from hospital, the majority (62%) of post–COVID-19 participants reported poor sleep quality on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index questionnaire. A “comparable” proportion (53%) felt that their quality of sleep had deteriorated following hospital discharge according to the numerical rating scale (subjective measure).

Also, sleep disturbance was found likely to persist for at least 12 months, since subjective sleep quality hardly changed between the early and late time points after hospital discharge.

Both subjective metrics (sleep quality and sleep quality deterioration after hospital discharge) and objective, device-based metrics (sleep regularity) were found to be associated with dyspnea and reduced lung function in patients with post-COVID syndrome.

“One of the striking findings in our study is the consistency with breathlessness and reduced lung function across different methods used to evaluate sleep,” highlighted Dr. Blaikley.

“The other striking finding was that participants following COVID-19 hospitalization actually slept longer [65 min; 95% confidence interval, 59-71 min] than participants hospitalized for non-COVID; however, their bedtimes were irregular, and it was this irregularity that was associated with breathlessness,” he added.

In comparison with nonhospitalized controls, also from the UK Biobank, study participants with lower sleep regularity had higher Dyspnea-12 scores (unadjusted effect estimate, 4.38; 95%: CI, 2.10-6.65). Those with poor sleep quality overall also had higher Dyspnea-12 scores (unadjusted effect estimate, 3.94; 95% CI, 2.78-5.10), and those who reported sleep quality deterioration had higher Dyspnea-12 scores (unadjusted effect estimate, 3,00; 95% CI, 1.82-4.28).

In comparison with hospitalized controls, CircCOVID participants had lower sleep regularity index (–19%; 95% CI, –20 to –16) and lower sleep efficiency (3.83 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.40-4.26).

Sleep disturbance after COVID hospitalization was also associated with lower lung function, from a 7% to a 14% reduction in predicted forced vital capacity, depending on which sleep measure used.

In an analysis of mediating factors active in the relationship between sleep disturbance and dyspnea/decreased lung function, the researchers found that reduced muscle function and anxiety, which are both recognized causes of dyspnea, could partially contribute to the association.

Regarding anxiety, and depending on the sleep metric, anxiety mediated 18%-39% of the effect of sleep disturbance on dyspnea, while muscle weakness mediated 27%-41% of this effect, reported Dr. Blaikley. Those with poor sleep quality were more likely to have mild, moderate, or severe anxiety, compared with participants who reported good-quality sleep.

A similar association was observed between anxiety and sleep quality deterioration.

“Two key questions are raised by our study: Do sleep interventions have a beneficial effect in post–COVID-19 syndrome, and are the associations causal?” asked Dr. Blaikley. “We hope to do a sleep intervention trial to answer these questions to explore if this is an effective treatment for post–COVID-19 syndrome.”

‘Underlying mechanisms remain unclear’

Amitava Banerjee, MD, professor of clinical data science and honorary consultant cardiologist, Institute of Health Informatics, UCL, London, welcomed the study but noted that it did not include nonhospitalized post-COVID patients.

“The majority of people with long COVID were not hospitalized for COVID, so the results may not be generalizable to this larger group,” she said in an interview. “Good-quality sleep is important for health and reduces risk of chronic diseases; quality of sleep is therefore likely to be important for those with long COVID in reducing their risk of chronic disease, but the role of sleep in the mechanism of long COVID needs further research.”

In a commentary also published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, W. Cameron McGuire, MD, pulmonary and critical care specialist from San Diego, California, and colleagues wrote: “These findings suggest that sleep disturbance, dyspnea, and anxiety are common after COVID-19 and are associated with one another, although the underlying mechanisms remain unclear.”

The commentators “applauded” the work overall but noted that the findings represent correlation rather than causation. “It is unclear whether sleep disturbance is causing anxiety or whether anxiety is contributing to poor sleep. ... For the sleep disturbances, increased BMI in the cohort reporting poor sleep, compared with those reporting good sleep might suggest underlying obstructive sleep apnea,” they wrote.

Dr. McGuire and colleagues added that many questions remain for researchers and clinicians, including “whether anxiety and dyspnoea are contributing to a low arousal threshold [disrupting sleep] ... whether the observed abnormalities (e.g., in dyspnea score) are clinically significant,” and “whether therapies such as glucocorticoids, anticoagulants, or previous vaccinations mitigate the observed abnormalities during COVID-19 recovery.”

Dr. Blaikley has received support to his institute from an MRC Transition Fellowship, Asthma + Lung UK, NIHR Manchester BRC, and UKRI; grants to his institution from the Small Business Research Initiative Home Spirometer and the National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia; and support from TEVA and Therakos for attending meetings. He is a committee member of the Royal Society of Medicine. A coauthor received funding from the National Institutes of Health and income for medical education from Zoll, Livanova, Jazz, and Eli Lilly. Dr. Banerjee is the chief investigator of STIMULATE-ICP (an NIHR-funded study) and has received research funding from AstraZeneca.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Over-the-scope clips (OTSC) may prevent further bleeding more so than standard endoscopic treatment when used as primary treatment in patients with high-risk nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal lesions, shows a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

However, noted the investigators, writing in Annals of Internal Medicine, and physicians who wrote an accompanying editorial, reservations remain about first-line use of OTSCs, but mostly relate to method, technique, and cost.

“The absolute difference in the rate of further bleeding was 11.4 percentage points. We should however be cautious in our recommendation of using OTSC as first-line treatment,” wrote researchers who were led by James Y.W. Lau, MD, from Prince of Wales Hospital, Chinese University of Hong Kong.

“The primary use of OTSCs may find a role in the treatment of ulcers predicted to fail standard endoscopic treatment,” the authors wrote.  However, they emphasized that, “We are not advocating routine primary use of OTSCs. These clips are costly, and a formal cost analysis is not available in the literature. The use of OTSCs involves scope withdrawal, mounting of the OTSCs, and scope reinsertion, which increase the procedure time. Endoscopists also require training before using OTSCs.”

Alan N. Barkun, MD, gastroenterologist and professor of medicine with McGill University, Montreal, who cowrote the editorial accompanying the research paper, said the study investigators were highly experienced surgeon-scientists, pointing out that, overall, first-line use of OTSC in this patient group improved patient outcomes.

“The main message here is that if you can position the clip properly, then it is likely to stay in place, better than standard approaches,” he said, adding that, “I support it fully for second-line use but there currently still exists uncertainty for routine first-line adoption in nonvariceal bleeding. Clinicians fail to position the clip properly in around 5% of patients which is higher than standard endoscopic approaches, and nobody has yet clearly defined the lesions that are difficult to clip with the OTSC.

“If you’re going to tell people to use it, then you need to tell them with which particular lesions OTSC works best as first-line approach,” he added.

Lesions of concern include upon leaving the stomach and entering the duodenum, and in passing from the first to the second stage of the duodenum. “These are tight areas, and these larger full-thickness bite OTSC may create pseudo-polyps, even possibly causing obstruction. Perforation is also a risk.” One of each of these complications were noted in this study.

The study included 190 adult patients with active bleeding or a nonbleeding visible vessel from a nonvariceal cause on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Of these, 97 patients received standard hemostatic treatment and 93 received OTSC. The primary endpoint of a 30-day probability of further bleeding was 14.6% in the standard treatment and 3.2% in the OTSC group (risk difference, 11.4 percentage points [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.3-20.0 percentage points]; P = .006). Failure to control bleeding after assigned endoscopic treatment in the standard treatment and OTSC groups was 6 versus 1 in the standard treatment and OTSC groups, respectively. Thirty-day recurrent bleeding was 8 versus 2 in the standard treatment and OTSC groups, respectively. Eight patients in the standard treatment group needed further intervention compared with two in the OTSC group. Thirty-day mortality was four versus two, respectively.

“First-line OTSC has a role to play but whether it is the best approach is hard to say due to methodological limitations that were seen in this and earlier studies, however if you can position the clip properly it likely does well,” Dr. Barkun said.

Dr. Lau declares that he received honorarium for a lecture from OVESCO. Dr. Li has no disclosures. Dr. Barkun has no relevant disclosures.  

Over-the-scope clips (OTSC) may prevent further bleeding more so than standard endoscopic treatment when used as primary treatment in patients with high-risk nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal lesions, shows a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

However, noted the investigators, writing in Annals of Internal Medicine, and physicians who wrote an accompanying editorial, reservations remain about first-line use of OTSCs, but mostly relate to method, technique, and cost.

“The absolute difference in the rate of further bleeding was 11.4 percentage points. We should however be cautious in our recommendation of using OTSC as first-line treatment,” wrote researchers who were led by James Y.W. Lau, MD, from Prince of Wales Hospital, Chinese University of Hong Kong.

“The primary use of OTSCs may find a role in the treatment of ulcers predicted to fail standard endoscopic treatment,” the authors wrote.  However, they emphasized that, “We are not advocating routine primary use of OTSCs. These clips are costly, and a formal cost analysis is not available in the literature. The use of OTSCs involves scope withdrawal, mounting of the OTSCs, and scope reinsertion, which increase the procedure time. Endoscopists also require training before using OTSCs.”

Alan N. Barkun, MD, gastroenterologist and professor of medicine with McGill University, Montreal, who cowrote the editorial accompanying the research paper, said the study investigators were highly experienced surgeon-scientists, pointing out that, overall, first-line use of OTSC in this patient group improved patient outcomes.

“The main message here is that if you can position the clip properly, then it is likely to stay in place, better than standard approaches,” he said, adding that, “I support it fully for second-line use but there currently still exists uncertainty for routine first-line adoption in nonvariceal bleeding. Clinicians fail to position the clip properly in around 5% of patients which is higher than standard endoscopic approaches, and nobody has yet clearly defined the lesions that are difficult to clip with the OTSC.

“If you’re going to tell people to use it, then you need to tell them with which particular lesions OTSC works best as first-line approach,” he added.

Lesions of concern include upon leaving the stomach and entering the duodenum, and in passing from the first to the second stage of the duodenum. “These are tight areas, and these larger full-thickness bite OTSC may create pseudo-polyps, even possibly causing obstruction. Perforation is also a risk.” One of each of these complications were noted in this study.

The study included 190 adult patients with active bleeding or a nonbleeding visible vessel from a nonvariceal cause on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Of these, 97 patients received standard hemostatic treatment and 93 received OTSC. The primary endpoint of a 30-day probability of further bleeding was 14.6% in the standard treatment and 3.2% in the OTSC group (risk difference, 11.4 percentage points [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.3-20.0 percentage points]; P = .006). Failure to control bleeding after assigned endoscopic treatment in the standard treatment and OTSC groups was 6 versus 1 in the standard treatment and OTSC groups, respectively. Thirty-day recurrent bleeding was 8 versus 2 in the standard treatment and OTSC groups, respectively. Eight patients in the standard treatment group needed further intervention compared with two in the OTSC group. Thirty-day mortality was four versus two, respectively.

“First-line OTSC has a role to play but whether it is the best approach is hard to say due to methodological limitations that were seen in this and earlier studies, however if you can position the clip properly it likely does well,” Dr. Barkun said.

Dr. Lau declares that he received honorarium for a lecture from OVESCO. Dr. Li has no disclosures. Dr. Barkun has no relevant disclosures.  

Over-the-scope clips (OTSC) may prevent further bleeding more so than standard endoscopic treatment when used as primary treatment in patients with high-risk nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal lesions, shows a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

However, noted the investigators, writing in Annals of Internal Medicine, and physicians who wrote an accompanying editorial, reservations remain about first-line use of OTSCs, but mostly relate to method, technique, and cost.

“The absolute difference in the rate of further bleeding was 11.4 percentage points. We should however be cautious in our recommendation of using OTSC as first-line treatment,” wrote researchers who were led by James Y.W. Lau, MD, from Prince of Wales Hospital, Chinese University of Hong Kong.

“The primary use of OTSCs may find a role in the treatment of ulcers predicted to fail standard endoscopic treatment,” the authors wrote.  However, they emphasized that, “We are not advocating routine primary use of OTSCs. These clips are costly, and a formal cost analysis is not available in the literature. The use of OTSCs involves scope withdrawal, mounting of the OTSCs, and scope reinsertion, which increase the procedure time. Endoscopists also require training before using OTSCs.”

Alan N. Barkun, MD, gastroenterologist and professor of medicine with McGill University, Montreal, who cowrote the editorial accompanying the research paper, said the study investigators were highly experienced surgeon-scientists, pointing out that, overall, first-line use of OTSC in this patient group improved patient outcomes.

“The main message here is that if you can position the clip properly, then it is likely to stay in place, better than standard approaches,” he said, adding that, “I support it fully for second-line use but there currently still exists uncertainty for routine first-line adoption in nonvariceal bleeding. Clinicians fail to position the clip properly in around 5% of patients which is higher than standard endoscopic approaches, and nobody has yet clearly defined the lesions that are difficult to clip with the OTSC.

“If you’re going to tell people to use it, then you need to tell them with which particular lesions OTSC works best as first-line approach,” he added.

Lesions of concern include upon leaving the stomach and entering the duodenum, and in passing from the first to the second stage of the duodenum. “These are tight areas, and these larger full-thickness bite OTSC may create pseudo-polyps, even possibly causing obstruction. Perforation is also a risk.” One of each of these complications were noted in this study.

The study included 190 adult patients with active bleeding or a nonbleeding visible vessel from a nonvariceal cause on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Of these, 97 patients received standard hemostatic treatment and 93 received OTSC. The primary endpoint of a 30-day probability of further bleeding was 14.6% in the standard treatment and 3.2% in the OTSC group (risk difference, 11.4 percentage points [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.3-20.0 percentage points]; P = .006). Failure to control bleeding after assigned endoscopic treatment in the standard treatment and OTSC groups was 6 versus 1 in the standard treatment and OTSC groups, respectively. Thirty-day recurrent bleeding was 8 versus 2 in the standard treatment and OTSC groups, respectively. Eight patients in the standard treatment group needed further intervention compared with two in the OTSC group. Thirty-day mortality was four versus two, respectively.

“First-line OTSC has a role to play but whether it is the best approach is hard to say due to methodological limitations that were seen in this and earlier studies, however if you can position the clip properly it likely does well,” Dr. Barkun said.

Dr. Lau declares that he received honorarium for a lecture from OVESCO. Dr. Li has no disclosures. Dr. Barkun has no relevant disclosures.  

Microbial biomarkers for type 1 diabetes may be present in infants as young as 12 months old, suggesting the potential to mitigate disease onset by nurturing a healthy gut microbiome early, show data from the Swedish general population.

“Our findings indicate that the gut of infants who go on to develop type 1 diabetes is notably different from healthy babies,” said Malin Bélteky, MD, from the Crown Princess Victoria’s Children’s Hospital, Linköping, Sweden, who jointly led the work, which was recently published in Diabetologia, alongside Patricia L. Milletich, PhD candidate, from the University of Florida, Gainesville.

“This discovery could be used to help identity infants at [the] highest risk of developing type 1 diabetes before or during the first stage of disease and could offer the opportunity to bolster a healthy gut microbiome to prevent the disease from becoming established,” added Dr. Bélteky.

Currently, beta-cell autoantibodies are used to predict disease, which are usually only identifiable between 9 and 36 months of age.

Marian Rewers, MD, PhD, professor of pediatrics & medicine, University of Colorado, Denver, and principal investigator of The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study, welcomed the findings, saying it is a well-designed study from a strong group of investigators.

“While the effective number of cases was very small [n = 16], the results were apparently adjusted for multiple comparisons, and significant differences were noted in the microbiome of cases versus controls at 1 year of age. This was 12 years prior to the average age of type 1 diabetes diagnosis in the cases,” he said.

“The differences in diversity and abundances of specific bacteria need to be interpreted with caution; however, the study results are consistent with several previous reports,” he noted.
 

Differences in microbial diversity and function

Data were drawn from children participating in the longitudinal, general population All Babies In Southeast Sweden (ABIS) study. Microbiota from stool samples, taken at age 1 year, were sequenced and analyzed to establish diversity, abundance, and functional status of the component bacteria. Questionnaires were completed at birth and at 1 year of age, allowing for the study of environmental factors that might influence the microbiota or type 1 diabetes risk independently. Parent diaries provided information on pregnancy, nutrition, and lifestyle factors.

Of the cohort of 167 children who developed type 1 diabetes by 2020, stool samples were available for 16 of these participants, which were compared with 268 healthy controls. The microbiomes of the 16 infants who later developed type 1 diabetes were compared with 100 iterations of 32 matched control infants (matched by geographical region, siblings at birth, residence type, duration of breastfeeding, and month of stool collection) who didn’t develop type 1 diabetes by the age of 20.

Specific bacteria found in greater abundance in children who later developed type 1 diabetes, compared with those who didn’t, included Firmicutes (Enterococcus, Gemella, and Hungatella), as well as Bacteroides (Bacteroides and Porphyromonas), known to promote inflammation and be involved in the immune response.

Bacteria with greater abundance in children who didn’t develop type 1 diabetes, compared with those who did, were Firmicutes (Anaerostipes, Flavonifractor, and Ruminococcaceae UBA1819, and Eubacterium). These species help maintain metabolic and immune health and produce butyrate, an important short-chain fatty acid that helps prevent inflammation and fuels the cells of the gut lining.

Alistipes were more abundant in infants who didn’t develop type 1 diabetes, and various abundances of Fusicatenibacter were the strongest factors for differentiating future type 1 diabetes, reported the researchers.

“Gut microbial biomarkers at 12 months would benefit the prediction opportunity well before the onset of multiple autoantibodies,” write the authors.

The youngest age at type 1 diabetes diagnosis was aged 1 year, 4 months, and the oldest was aged 21 years, 4 months. The mean age at diagnosis was 13.3 years.

The microbial differences found between infants who go on to develop type 1 diabetes and those who don’t also shed light on interactions between the developing immune system and short-chain fatty acid production and metabolism in childhood autoimmunity, write the authors.

Prior studies have found fewer short-chain fatty acid–producing microbiota in the gut of children with early-onset autoantibody development. This study confirmed these data, finding a decrease in butyrate-producing bacteria (Anaerostipes, Flavonifractor, Ruminococcaceae UBA1819, and Eubacterium) in infants who went on to develop type 1 diabetes. Likewise, a reduction in pyruvate fermentation was found in those infants with future disease.

According to coauthor Eric Triplett, PhD, from the University of Florida, Gainesville: “The autoimmune processes usually begin long before any clinical signs of disease appear, highlighting how differences in the makeup of the infant gut microbiome could shed important light on the complex interaction between the developing immune system, environmental exposures in childhood, and autoimmunity. Studies with much larger cohorts of prospectively traced individuals will be required to establish which are the strongest biomarkers and how effectively they can predict disease.”

The authors and Dr. Rewers have reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Microbial biomarkers for type 1 diabetes may be present in infants as young as 12 months old, suggesting the potential to mitigate disease onset by nurturing a healthy gut microbiome early, show data from the Swedish general population.

“Our findings indicate that the gut of infants who go on to develop type 1 diabetes is notably different from healthy babies,” said Malin Bélteky, MD, from the Crown Princess Victoria’s Children’s Hospital, Linköping, Sweden, who jointly led the work, which was recently published in Diabetologia, alongside Patricia L. Milletich, PhD candidate, from the University of Florida, Gainesville.

“This discovery could be used to help identity infants at [the] highest risk of developing type 1 diabetes before or during the first stage of disease and could offer the opportunity to bolster a healthy gut microbiome to prevent the disease from becoming established,” added Dr. Bélteky.

Currently, beta-cell autoantibodies are used to predict disease, which are usually only identifiable between 9 and 36 months of age.

Marian Rewers, MD, PhD, professor of pediatrics & medicine, University of Colorado, Denver, and principal investigator of The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study, welcomed the findings, saying it is a well-designed study from a strong group of investigators.

“While the effective number of cases was very small [n = 16], the results were apparently adjusted for multiple comparisons, and significant differences were noted in the microbiome of cases versus controls at 1 year of age. This was 12 years prior to the average age of type 1 diabetes diagnosis in the cases,” he said.

“The differences in diversity and abundances of specific bacteria need to be interpreted with caution; however, the study results are consistent with several previous reports,” he noted.
 

Differences in microbial diversity and function

Data were drawn from children participating in the longitudinal, general population All Babies In Southeast Sweden (ABIS) study. Microbiota from stool samples, taken at age 1 year, were sequenced and analyzed to establish diversity, abundance, and functional status of the component bacteria. Questionnaires were completed at birth and at 1 year of age, allowing for the study of environmental factors that might influence the microbiota or type 1 diabetes risk independently. Parent diaries provided information on pregnancy, nutrition, and lifestyle factors.

Of the cohort of 167 children who developed type 1 diabetes by 2020, stool samples were available for 16 of these participants, which were compared with 268 healthy controls. The microbiomes of the 16 infants who later developed type 1 diabetes were compared with 100 iterations of 32 matched control infants (matched by geographical region, siblings at birth, residence type, duration of breastfeeding, and month of stool collection) who didn’t develop type 1 diabetes by the age of 20.

Specific bacteria found in greater abundance in children who later developed type 1 diabetes, compared with those who didn’t, included Firmicutes (Enterococcus, Gemella, and Hungatella), as well as Bacteroides (Bacteroides and Porphyromonas), known to promote inflammation and be involved in the immune response.

Bacteria with greater abundance in children who didn’t develop type 1 diabetes, compared with those who did, were Firmicutes (Anaerostipes, Flavonifractor, and Ruminococcaceae UBA1819, and Eubacterium). These species help maintain metabolic and immune health and produce butyrate, an important short-chain fatty acid that helps prevent inflammation and fuels the cells of the gut lining.

Alistipes were more abundant in infants who didn’t develop type 1 diabetes, and various abundances of Fusicatenibacter were the strongest factors for differentiating future type 1 diabetes, reported the researchers.

“Gut microbial biomarkers at 12 months would benefit the prediction opportunity well before the onset of multiple autoantibodies,” write the authors.

The youngest age at type 1 diabetes diagnosis was aged 1 year, 4 months, and the oldest was aged 21 years, 4 months. The mean age at diagnosis was 13.3 years.

The microbial differences found between infants who go on to develop type 1 diabetes and those who don’t also shed light on interactions between the developing immune system and short-chain fatty acid production and metabolism in childhood autoimmunity, write the authors.

Prior studies have found fewer short-chain fatty acid–producing microbiota in the gut of children with early-onset autoantibody development. This study confirmed these data, finding a decrease in butyrate-producing bacteria (Anaerostipes, Flavonifractor, Ruminococcaceae UBA1819, and Eubacterium) in infants who went on to develop type 1 diabetes. Likewise, a reduction in pyruvate fermentation was found in those infants with future disease.

According to coauthor Eric Triplett, PhD, from the University of Florida, Gainesville: “The autoimmune processes usually begin long before any clinical signs of disease appear, highlighting how differences in the makeup of the infant gut microbiome could shed important light on the complex interaction between the developing immune system, environmental exposures in childhood, and autoimmunity. Studies with much larger cohorts of prospectively traced individuals will be required to establish which are the strongest biomarkers and how effectively they can predict disease.”

The authors and Dr. Rewers have reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Microbial biomarkers for type 1 diabetes may be present in infants as young as 12 months old, suggesting the potential to mitigate disease onset by nurturing a healthy gut microbiome early, show data from the Swedish general population.

“Our findings indicate that the gut of infants who go on to develop type 1 diabetes is notably different from healthy babies,” said Malin Bélteky, MD, from the Crown Princess Victoria’s Children’s Hospital, Linköping, Sweden, who jointly led the work, which was recently published in Diabetologia, alongside Patricia L. Milletich, PhD candidate, from the University of Florida, Gainesville.

“This discovery could be used to help identity infants at [the] highest risk of developing type 1 diabetes before or during the first stage of disease and could offer the opportunity to bolster a healthy gut microbiome to prevent the disease from becoming established,” added Dr. Bélteky.

Currently, beta-cell autoantibodies are used to predict disease, which are usually only identifiable between 9 and 36 months of age.

Marian Rewers, MD, PhD, professor of pediatrics & medicine, University of Colorado, Denver, and principal investigator of The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study, welcomed the findings, saying it is a well-designed study from a strong group of investigators.

“While the effective number of cases was very small [n = 16], the results were apparently adjusted for multiple comparisons, and significant differences were noted in the microbiome of cases versus controls at 1 year of age. This was 12 years prior to the average age of type 1 diabetes diagnosis in the cases,” he said.

“The differences in diversity and abundances of specific bacteria need to be interpreted with caution; however, the study results are consistent with several previous reports,” he noted.
 

Differences in microbial diversity and function

Data were drawn from children participating in the longitudinal, general population All Babies In Southeast Sweden (ABIS) study. Microbiota from stool samples, taken at age 1 year, were sequenced and analyzed to establish diversity, abundance, and functional status of the component bacteria. Questionnaires were completed at birth and at 1 year of age, allowing for the study of environmental factors that might influence the microbiota or type 1 diabetes risk independently. Parent diaries provided information on pregnancy, nutrition, and lifestyle factors.

Of the cohort of 167 children who developed type 1 diabetes by 2020, stool samples were available for 16 of these participants, which were compared with 268 healthy controls. The microbiomes of the 16 infants who later developed type 1 diabetes were compared with 100 iterations of 32 matched control infants (matched by geographical region, siblings at birth, residence type, duration of breastfeeding, and month of stool collection) who didn’t develop type 1 diabetes by the age of 20.

Specific bacteria found in greater abundance in children who later developed type 1 diabetes, compared with those who didn’t, included Firmicutes (Enterococcus, Gemella, and Hungatella), as well as Bacteroides (Bacteroides and Porphyromonas), known to promote inflammation and be involved in the immune response.

Bacteria with greater abundance in children who didn’t develop type 1 diabetes, compared with those who did, were Firmicutes (Anaerostipes, Flavonifractor, and Ruminococcaceae UBA1819, and Eubacterium). These species help maintain metabolic and immune health and produce butyrate, an important short-chain fatty acid that helps prevent inflammation and fuels the cells of the gut lining.

Alistipes were more abundant in infants who didn’t develop type 1 diabetes, and various abundances of Fusicatenibacter were the strongest factors for differentiating future type 1 diabetes, reported the researchers.

“Gut microbial biomarkers at 12 months would benefit the prediction opportunity well before the onset of multiple autoantibodies,” write the authors.

The youngest age at type 1 diabetes diagnosis was aged 1 year, 4 months, and the oldest was aged 21 years, 4 months. The mean age at diagnosis was 13.3 years.

The microbial differences found between infants who go on to develop type 1 diabetes and those who don’t also shed light on interactions between the developing immune system and short-chain fatty acid production and metabolism in childhood autoimmunity, write the authors.

Prior studies have found fewer short-chain fatty acid–producing microbiota in the gut of children with early-onset autoantibody development. This study confirmed these data, finding a decrease in butyrate-producing bacteria (Anaerostipes, Flavonifractor, Ruminococcaceae UBA1819, and Eubacterium) in infants who went on to develop type 1 diabetes. Likewise, a reduction in pyruvate fermentation was found in those infants with future disease.

According to coauthor Eric Triplett, PhD, from the University of Florida, Gainesville: “The autoimmune processes usually begin long before any clinical signs of disease appear, highlighting how differences in the makeup of the infant gut microbiome could shed important light on the complex interaction between the developing immune system, environmental exposures in childhood, and autoimmunity. Studies with much larger cohorts of prospectively traced individuals will be required to establish which are the strongest biomarkers and how effectively they can predict disease.”

The authors and Dr. Rewers have reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

COPENHAGEN – A study of 260 patients with Crohn’s disease finds that vedolizumab led to significantly better clinical remission rates as compared with patients who were treated with anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy.

The study was presented at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization by Wolfgang Mohl, MD, of the Center for Gastroenterology in Saarbrucken, Germany, who suggested this biologic, which is a monoclonal antibody, could possibly be used as a first-line treatment instead of as a second or third choice. Currently, TNF inhibitors are generally prescribed first.

“Compared to previous research clinical trials, this prospective 2-year real-world study comparing vedolizumab with anti-TNF showed that, in biologic-naive Crohn’s disease patients, remission rates at 2 years with vedolizumab were remarkably higher than with anti-TNF [therapy],” Dr. Mohl and colleagues wrote in the study abstract.

“Now we know vedolizumab is a good first-line drug and that patients can stay on it for a long time,” he said in an interview. “These data also suggest that we are wrong in thinking TNF inhibitors should be standard. I don’t think this belief holds true anymore.”

The study included 63 biologic-naive patients who were treated with vedolizumab and 197 patients who were treated with anti-TNF agents adalimumab (58.4%) and infliximab (41.6%).

After 2 years, approximately 83% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were still receiving treatment, but only 56% of patients who received anti-TNF therapy were still undergoing therapy with either adalimumab or infliximab. After 2 years of treatment, 64.2% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were in clinical remission, compared with 44.7% of patients who were treated with anti-TNF therapy. And, 62.5% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were not receiving steroid treatment, compared with 41.6% of patients in the anti-TNF therapy group. This, Dr. Mohl said, was a statistically significant difference (P < .05).

“It is clinically relevant to achieve remission without steroids because this is hard to obtain,” he said. “Patients really don’t want to have to take steroids because they can experience lots of side effects including osteoporosis. It’s good to be in remission, but to be in steroid-free remission is so much better.”

Vedolizumab is a relatively new drug, compared with infliximab and adalimumab, which were approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1998 and 2008, respectively. “We wanted real-world data to help us understand the pattern of outcomes outside of the clinical trial environment,” Dr. Mohl said.

From 45 treatment centers across Germany, researchers prospectively enrolled 1,200 biologic-naive and biologic-experienced patients with either Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis between 2017 and 2020 into the VEDOIBD study. This analysis was limited to 260 patients with Crohn’s disease.

In addition to a higher proportion of patients on vedolizumab continuing on treatment, compared with patients on anti–TNF inhibitor therapy, there was a significantly higher clinical remission rate with vedolizumab (64.2%), compared with anti-TNFi therapy (44.7%) after 2 years (P < .05). Researchers used a statistical method to determine the effect of 2-year maintenance in only those patients who responded to a 3-month induction, and they found a significantly better response in terms of clinical remission in patients on vedolizumab (88.6%), compared with anti-TNF inhibitors (45.8%) (P = .0001), and likewise in steroid-free remission with 86.8% for vedolizumab, compared with 44.1% for anti-TNF inhibitors (P < .001).

Dr. Mohl described his experience with vedolizumab in clinical practice. “Vedolizumab may take a little longer to work but then we don’t lose patients due to side effects, which we see more often with anti-TNF therapy,” he said, adding that around 60% of patients experience side effects but around 10% actually stop anti-TNF because of side effects.

“We often lose patients because they develop antidrug antibodies, but also due to escape mechanisms, as well as dermatological side effects including psoriasis which is really annoying for patients. We also find that anti-TNF drugs just stop working after 12-18 months, and then we need to use steroids which patients dislike,” he said.

Andreas Stallmach, MD, director of gastroenterology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena (Germany), described the findings as important.

“I see this as a really important real-world data study and to summarize, vedolizumab in Crohn’s disease is better than expected. The main explanation for the difference is due to loss of response in the anti-TNF group and this could be explained by the development of autoantibodies against anti-TNF drugs. Now, vedolizumab could be a first-line treatment in patients with Crohn’s disease, especially patients with risk factors for, or history of infections, of comorbidities,” he said.

As a modern monoclonal antibody, vedolizumab uses fewer autoantibodies, compared with infliximab, which is much older, Dr. Stallmach said. “If we combine infliximab with an immunosuppressant agent, such as azathioprine, then we can prevent autoantibody development and increase the efficacy and adherence rate, but with this comes the increased risk of infections and malignancies.”

Dr. Mohl receives research support from companies involved in making biologics for inflammatory bowel disease. Dr. Stallmach is on the advisory boards of most companies that make biologics, including Takeda, which sponsored this study.

* This article was updated March 10, 2023.

COPENHAGEN – A study of 260 patients with Crohn’s disease finds that vedolizumab led to significantly better clinical remission rates as compared with patients who were treated with anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy.

The study was presented at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization by Wolfgang Mohl, MD, of the Center for Gastroenterology in Saarbrucken, Germany, who suggested this biologic, which is a monoclonal antibody, could possibly be used as a first-line treatment instead of as a second or third choice. Currently, TNF inhibitors are generally prescribed first.

“Compared to previous research clinical trials, this prospective 2-year real-world study comparing vedolizumab with anti-TNF showed that, in biologic-naive Crohn’s disease patients, remission rates at 2 years with vedolizumab were remarkably higher than with anti-TNF [therapy],” Dr. Mohl and colleagues wrote in the study abstract.

“Now we know vedolizumab is a good first-line drug and that patients can stay on it for a long time,” he said in an interview. “These data also suggest that we are wrong in thinking TNF inhibitors should be standard. I don’t think this belief holds true anymore.”

The study included 63 biologic-naive patients who were treated with vedolizumab and 197 patients who were treated with anti-TNF agents adalimumab (58.4%) and infliximab (41.6%).

After 2 years, approximately 83% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were still receiving treatment, but only 56% of patients who received anti-TNF therapy were still undergoing therapy with either adalimumab or infliximab. After 2 years of treatment, 64.2% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were in clinical remission, compared with 44.7% of patients who were treated with anti-TNF therapy. And, 62.5% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were not receiving steroid treatment, compared with 41.6% of patients in the anti-TNF therapy group. This, Dr. Mohl said, was a statistically significant difference (P < .05).

“It is clinically relevant to achieve remission without steroids because this is hard to obtain,” he said. “Patients really don’t want to have to take steroids because they can experience lots of side effects including osteoporosis. It’s good to be in remission, but to be in steroid-free remission is so much better.”

Vedolizumab is a relatively new drug, compared with infliximab and adalimumab, which were approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1998 and 2008, respectively. “We wanted real-world data to help us understand the pattern of outcomes outside of the clinical trial environment,” Dr. Mohl said.

From 45 treatment centers across Germany, researchers prospectively enrolled 1,200 biologic-naive and biologic-experienced patients with either Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis between 2017 and 2020 into the VEDOIBD study. This analysis was limited to 260 patients with Crohn’s disease.

In addition to a higher proportion of patients on vedolizumab continuing on treatment, compared with patients on anti–TNF inhibitor therapy, there was a significantly higher clinical remission rate with vedolizumab (64.2%), compared with anti-TNFi therapy (44.7%) after 2 years (P < .05). Researchers used a statistical method to determine the effect of 2-year maintenance in only those patients who responded to a 3-month induction, and they found a significantly better response in terms of clinical remission in patients on vedolizumab (88.6%), compared with anti-TNF inhibitors (45.8%) (P = .0001), and likewise in steroid-free remission with 86.8% for vedolizumab, compared with 44.1% for anti-TNF inhibitors (P < .001).

Dr. Mohl described his experience with vedolizumab in clinical practice. “Vedolizumab may take a little longer to work but then we don’t lose patients due to side effects, which we see more often with anti-TNF therapy,” he said, adding that around 60% of patients experience side effects but around 10% actually stop anti-TNF because of side effects.

“We often lose patients because they develop antidrug antibodies, but also due to escape mechanisms, as well as dermatological side effects including psoriasis which is really annoying for patients. We also find that anti-TNF drugs just stop working after 12-18 months, and then we need to use steroids which patients dislike,” he said.

Andreas Stallmach, MD, director of gastroenterology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena (Germany), described the findings as important.

“I see this as a really important real-world data study and to summarize, vedolizumab in Crohn’s disease is better than expected. The main explanation for the difference is due to loss of response in the anti-TNF group and this could be explained by the development of autoantibodies against anti-TNF drugs. Now, vedolizumab could be a first-line treatment in patients with Crohn’s disease, especially patients with risk factors for, or history of infections, of comorbidities,” he said.

As a modern monoclonal antibody, vedolizumab uses fewer autoantibodies, compared with infliximab, which is much older, Dr. Stallmach said. “If we combine infliximab with an immunosuppressant agent, such as azathioprine, then we can prevent autoantibody development and increase the efficacy and adherence rate, but with this comes the increased risk of infections and malignancies.”

Dr. Mohl receives research support from companies involved in making biologics for inflammatory bowel disease. Dr. Stallmach is on the advisory boards of most companies that make biologics, including Takeda, which sponsored this study.

* This article was updated March 10, 2023.

COPENHAGEN – A study of 260 patients with Crohn’s disease finds that vedolizumab led to significantly better clinical remission rates as compared with patients who were treated with anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy.

The study was presented at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization by Wolfgang Mohl, MD, of the Center for Gastroenterology in Saarbrucken, Germany, who suggested this biologic, which is a monoclonal antibody, could possibly be used as a first-line treatment instead of as a second or third choice. Currently, TNF inhibitors are generally prescribed first.

“Compared to previous research clinical trials, this prospective 2-year real-world study comparing vedolizumab with anti-TNF showed that, in biologic-naive Crohn’s disease patients, remission rates at 2 years with vedolizumab were remarkably higher than with anti-TNF [therapy],” Dr. Mohl and colleagues wrote in the study abstract.

“Now we know vedolizumab is a good first-line drug and that patients can stay on it for a long time,” he said in an interview. “These data also suggest that we are wrong in thinking TNF inhibitors should be standard. I don’t think this belief holds true anymore.”

The study included 63 biologic-naive patients who were treated with vedolizumab and 197 patients who were treated with anti-TNF agents adalimumab (58.4%) and infliximab (41.6%).

After 2 years, approximately 83% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were still receiving treatment, but only 56% of patients who received anti-TNF therapy were still undergoing therapy with either adalimumab or infliximab. After 2 years of treatment, 64.2% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were in clinical remission, compared with 44.7% of patients who were treated with anti-TNF therapy. And, 62.5% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were not receiving steroid treatment, compared with 41.6% of patients in the anti-TNF therapy group. This, Dr. Mohl said, was a statistically significant difference (P < .05).

“It is clinically relevant to achieve remission without steroids because this is hard to obtain,” he said. “Patients really don’t want to have to take steroids because they can experience lots of side effects including osteoporosis. It’s good to be in remission, but to be in steroid-free remission is so much better.”

Vedolizumab is a relatively new drug, compared with infliximab and adalimumab, which were approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1998 and 2008, respectively. “We wanted real-world data to help us understand the pattern of outcomes outside of the clinical trial environment,” Dr. Mohl said.

From 45 treatment centers across Germany, researchers prospectively enrolled 1,200 biologic-naive and biologic-experienced patients with either Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis between 2017 and 2020 into the VEDOIBD study. This analysis was limited to 260 patients with Crohn’s disease.

In addition to a higher proportion of patients on vedolizumab continuing on treatment, compared with patients on anti–TNF inhibitor therapy, there was a significantly higher clinical remission rate with vedolizumab (64.2%), compared with anti-TNFi therapy (44.7%) after 2 years (P < .05). Researchers used a statistical method to determine the effect of 2-year maintenance in only those patients who responded to a 3-month induction, and they found a significantly better response in terms of clinical remission in patients on vedolizumab (88.6%), compared with anti-TNF inhibitors (45.8%) (P = .0001), and likewise in steroid-free remission with 86.8% for vedolizumab, compared with 44.1% for anti-TNF inhibitors (P < .001).

Dr. Mohl described his experience with vedolizumab in clinical practice. “Vedolizumab may take a little longer to work but then we don’t lose patients due to side effects, which we see more often with anti-TNF therapy,” he said, adding that around 60% of patients experience side effects but around 10% actually stop anti-TNF because of side effects.

“We often lose patients because they develop antidrug antibodies, but also due to escape mechanisms, as well as dermatological side effects including psoriasis which is really annoying for patients. We also find that anti-TNF drugs just stop working after 12-18 months, and then we need to use steroids which patients dislike,” he said.

Andreas Stallmach, MD, director of gastroenterology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena (Germany), described the findings as important.

“I see this as a really important real-world data study and to summarize, vedolizumab in Crohn’s disease is better than expected. The main explanation for the difference is due to loss of response in the anti-TNF group and this could be explained by the development of autoantibodies against anti-TNF drugs. Now, vedolizumab could be a first-line treatment in patients with Crohn’s disease, especially patients with risk factors for, or history of infections, of comorbidities,” he said.

As a modern monoclonal antibody, vedolizumab uses fewer autoantibodies, compared with infliximab, which is much older, Dr. Stallmach said. “If we combine infliximab with an immunosuppressant agent, such as azathioprine, then we can prevent autoantibody development and increase the efficacy and adherence rate, but with this comes the increased risk of infections and malignancies.”

Dr. Mohl receives research support from companies involved in making biologics for inflammatory bowel disease. Dr. Stallmach is on the advisory boards of most companies that make biologics, including Takeda, which sponsored this study.

* This article was updated March 10, 2023.

COPENHAGEN – Half of patients with ileocecal Crohn’s disease who undergo ileocecal resection within a year of diagnosis remain off drug treatment 5 years post procedure, challenging the current paradigm of reserving surgery for complicated Crohn’s disease, show real-world data comparing outcomes of surgery with anti–tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) therapy.

“These data show that resection of inflamed bowel in early ileocecal Crohn’s disease effectively resets the clock,” said Manasi Agrawal, MD, of the department of gastroenterology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, and a research associate with the Center for Molecular Prediction of Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Aalborg University, Copenhagen, who presented the findings at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. “These data are in accordance with the LIR!C study data and suggest that ileocecal resection could be a first-line therapeutic option in early ileal or ileocecal Crohn’s disease that could be discussed with our patients.”

While ileocecal resection is accepted as a therapeutic option in early Crohn’s disease, most clinicians reserve it for complicated disease that is refractory or intolerant to medication.

A radical shift in approach might be justified, said Jean-Frederic Colombel, MD, a study coinvestigator and gastroenterologist at Mount Sinai Hospital.

“These data can be transforming. It confirms that there may be a subset of patients with limited ileal Crohn’s disease that is uncomplicated and in whom surgery may be almost ‘curative’ because after follow-up there was no need for drug therapy. We need to reposition surgery as one possible option at diagnosis in patients with limited Crohn’s disease,” he said.

The 2017 LIR!C trial demonstrated comparable 1-year outcomes with ileocecal resection and anti-TNFi therapy in limited, nonstricturing ileocecal Crohn’s disease. A retrospective analysis of 5-year data from this trial, further reinforced ileocecal resection as a first-line option for limited Crohn’s disease, such that of those patients who underwent resection, 26% continued on anti-TNFi therapy, compared with 38% in those patients who took anti-TNFi therapy only. In addition, no patient in the resection group underwent subsequent surgery, whereas 48% of patients on anti-TNF underwent surgery.

Dr. Agrawal and coinvestigators decided that more conclusive, real-world data were needed and would help to determine whether ileocecal resection offered better patient outcomes than staying on anti-TNFi therapy.

The new findings are based on an analysis of 16,443 adults living with ileal Crohn’s disease and were diagnosed between 2003 and 2018. The data is based on an analysis of nationwide Danish registries. It included individuals who underwent

Ileocecal resection or received anti-TNF drugs within 1 year of diagnosis. Of the 16,443 patients diagnosed with Crohn’s disease over the study period, 1,279 had ileal or ileocecal disease and were included with 581 (3.5%) undergoing resection and 698 (4.2%) anti-TNFi index therapy.

Outcomes were compared between the two groups, and the proportions of individuals initiated on immunomodulator, anti-TNFi therapy, or no therapy at 5 years after their ileocecal resection were determined.

The primary outcome was CD-related hospitalization, systemic corticosteroid exposure, CD-related surgery, and perianal CD diagnosis. Crohn’s disease–related hospitalization, systemic corticosteroid use, Crohn’s disease–related surgery or perianal Crohn’s disease occurred in 273 versus 318 people in the ileocecal resection and anti-TNFi therapy groups respectively, equating to a 33% lower risk in the resection group. Of those patients who underwent ileocecal resection, 50.3% were on no treatment 5 years later; 47.5% and 17.1% were on immunomodulators and on anti-TNFi therapy respectively.

Resection was found to be associated with a statistically significant reduced risk of systemic corticosteroid use with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.92). No statistically significant reduced risk was found for Crohn’s disease-related hospitalization (aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.01) or perianal Crohn’s disease diagnosis (aHR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.38-1.30). Adjustments were made for demographic and clinical variables, for example, age, sex, year of treatment, number of hospital contacts for an indication all in the year prior to index treatment.

In comparison with the proportion of resection patients at 5 years who were on no treatment, immunomodulators or anti-TNFi therapy, there are no data on the 5-year outcomes of those patients who began on anti-TNFi therapy, but patients typically continue unless they become intolerant or response starts to fail, Dr. Agrawal said.

Willem Bemelmen, MD, a colorectal surgeon from the University of Amsterdam who served as a moderator after the presentation said: “These results could lead to a paradigm shift in the management of patients with Crohn’s disease. Prior studies gave us early signals that surgery in Crohn’s disease might benefit the patients, but now with these larger scale data, with many patients, we might finally convince gastroenterologists to send patients in for early surgery.”

Dr. Agrawal, Dr. Bemelmen, and Dr. Colombel declared no relevant conflicts of interest.

This article was updated 3/7/23.

COPENHAGEN – Half of patients with ileocecal Crohn’s disease who undergo ileocecal resection within a year of diagnosis remain off drug treatment 5 years post procedure, challenging the current paradigm of reserving surgery for complicated Crohn’s disease, show real-world data comparing outcomes of surgery with anti–tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) therapy.

“These data show that resection of inflamed bowel in early ileocecal Crohn’s disease effectively resets the clock,” said Manasi Agrawal, MD, of the department of gastroenterology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, and a research associate with the Center for Molecular Prediction of Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Aalborg University, Copenhagen, who presented the findings at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. “These data are in accordance with the LIR!C study data and suggest that ileocecal resection could be a first-line therapeutic option in early ileal or ileocecal Crohn’s disease that could be discussed with our patients.”

While ileocecal resection is accepted as a therapeutic option in early Crohn’s disease, most clinicians reserve it for complicated disease that is refractory or intolerant to medication.

A radical shift in approach might be justified, said Jean-Frederic Colombel, MD, a study coinvestigator and gastroenterologist at Mount Sinai Hospital.

“These data can be transforming. It confirms that there may be a subset of patients with limited ileal Crohn’s disease that is uncomplicated and in whom surgery may be almost ‘curative’ because after follow-up there was no need for drug therapy. We need to reposition surgery as one possible option at diagnosis in patients with limited Crohn’s disease,” he said.

The 2017 LIR!C trial demonstrated comparable 1-year outcomes with ileocecal resection and anti-TNFi therapy in limited, nonstricturing ileocecal Crohn’s disease. A retrospective analysis of 5-year data from this trial, further reinforced ileocecal resection as a first-line option for limited Crohn’s disease, such that of those patients who underwent resection, 26% continued on anti-TNFi therapy, compared with 38% in those patients who took anti-TNFi therapy only. In addition, no patient in the resection group underwent subsequent surgery, whereas 48% of patients on anti-TNF underwent surgery.

Dr. Agrawal and coinvestigators decided that more conclusive, real-world data were needed and would help to determine whether ileocecal resection offered better patient outcomes than staying on anti-TNFi therapy.

The new findings are based on an analysis of 16,443 adults living with ileal Crohn’s disease and were diagnosed between 2003 and 2018. The data is based on an analysis of nationwide Danish registries. It included individuals who underwent

Ileocecal resection or received anti-TNF drugs within 1 year of diagnosis. Of the 16,443 patients diagnosed with Crohn’s disease over the study period, 1,279 had ileal or ileocecal disease and were included with 581 (3.5%) undergoing resection and 698 (4.2%) anti-TNFi index therapy.

Outcomes were compared between the two groups, and the proportions of individuals initiated on immunomodulator, anti-TNFi therapy, or no therapy at 5 years after their ileocecal resection were determined.

The primary outcome was CD-related hospitalization, systemic corticosteroid exposure, CD-related surgery, and perianal CD diagnosis. Crohn’s disease–related hospitalization, systemic corticosteroid use, Crohn’s disease–related surgery or perianal Crohn’s disease occurred in 273 versus 318 people in the ileocecal resection and anti-TNFi therapy groups respectively, equating to a 33% lower risk in the resection group. Of those patients who underwent ileocecal resection, 50.3% were on no treatment 5 years later; 47.5% and 17.1% were on immunomodulators and on anti-TNFi therapy respectively.

Resection was found to be associated with a statistically significant reduced risk of systemic corticosteroid use with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.92). No statistically significant reduced risk was found for Crohn’s disease-related hospitalization (aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.01) or perianal Crohn’s disease diagnosis (aHR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.38-1.30). Adjustments were made for demographic and clinical variables, for example, age, sex, year of treatment, number of hospital contacts for an indication all in the year prior to index treatment.

In comparison with the proportion of resection patients at 5 years who were on no treatment, immunomodulators or anti-TNFi therapy, there are no data on the 5-year outcomes of those patients who began on anti-TNFi therapy, but patients typically continue unless they become intolerant or response starts to fail, Dr. Agrawal said.

Willem Bemelmen, MD, a colorectal surgeon from the University of Amsterdam who served as a moderator after the presentation said: “These results could lead to a paradigm shift in the management of patients with Crohn’s disease. Prior studies gave us early signals that surgery in Crohn’s disease might benefit the patients, but now with these larger scale data, with many patients, we might finally convince gastroenterologists to send patients in for early surgery.”

Dr. Agrawal, Dr. Bemelmen, and Dr. Colombel declared no relevant conflicts of interest.

This article was updated 3/7/23.

COPENHAGEN – Half of patients with ileocecal Crohn’s disease who undergo ileocecal resection within a year of diagnosis remain off drug treatment 5 years post procedure, challenging the current paradigm of reserving surgery for complicated Crohn’s disease, show real-world data comparing outcomes of surgery with anti–tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) therapy.

“These data show that resection of inflamed bowel in early ileocecal Crohn’s disease effectively resets the clock,” said Manasi Agrawal, MD, of the department of gastroenterology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, and a research associate with the Center for Molecular Prediction of Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Aalborg University, Copenhagen, who presented the findings at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. “These data are in accordance with the LIR!C study data and suggest that ileocecal resection could be a first-line therapeutic option in early ileal or ileocecal Crohn’s disease that could be discussed with our patients.”

While ileocecal resection is accepted as a therapeutic option in early Crohn’s disease, most clinicians reserve it for complicated disease that is refractory or intolerant to medication.

A radical shift in approach might be justified, said Jean-Frederic Colombel, MD, a study coinvestigator and gastroenterologist at Mount Sinai Hospital.

“These data can be transforming. It confirms that there may be a subset of patients with limited ileal Crohn’s disease that is uncomplicated and in whom surgery may be almost ‘curative’ because after follow-up there was no need for drug therapy. We need to reposition surgery as one possible option at diagnosis in patients with limited Crohn’s disease,” he said.

The 2017 LIR!C trial demonstrated comparable 1-year outcomes with ileocecal resection and anti-TNFi therapy in limited, nonstricturing ileocecal Crohn’s disease. A retrospective analysis of 5-year data from this trial, further reinforced ileocecal resection as a first-line option for limited Crohn’s disease, such that of those patients who underwent resection, 26% continued on anti-TNFi therapy, compared with 38% in those patients who took anti-TNFi therapy only. In addition, no patient in the resection group underwent subsequent surgery, whereas 48% of patients on anti-TNF underwent surgery.

Dr. Agrawal and coinvestigators decided that more conclusive, real-world data were needed and would help to determine whether ileocecal resection offered better patient outcomes than staying on anti-TNFi therapy.

The new findings are based on an analysis of 16,443 adults living with ileal Crohn’s disease and were diagnosed between 2003 and 2018. The data is based on an analysis of nationwide Danish registries. It included individuals who underwent

Ileocecal resection or received anti-TNF drugs within 1 year of diagnosis. Of the 16,443 patients diagnosed with Crohn’s disease over the study period, 1,279 had ileal or ileocecal disease and were included with 581 (3.5%) undergoing resection and 698 (4.2%) anti-TNFi index therapy.

Outcomes were compared between the two groups, and the proportions of individuals initiated on immunomodulator, anti-TNFi therapy, or no therapy at 5 years after their ileocecal resection were determined.

The primary outcome was CD-related hospitalization, systemic corticosteroid exposure, CD-related surgery, and perianal CD diagnosis. Crohn’s disease–related hospitalization, systemic corticosteroid use, Crohn’s disease–related surgery or perianal Crohn’s disease occurred in 273 versus 318 people in the ileocecal resection and anti-TNFi therapy groups respectively, equating to a 33% lower risk in the resection group. Of those patients who underwent ileocecal resection, 50.3% were on no treatment 5 years later; 47.5% and 17.1% were on immunomodulators and on anti-TNFi therapy respectively.

Resection was found to be associated with a statistically significant reduced risk of systemic corticosteroid use with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.92). No statistically significant reduced risk was found for Crohn’s disease-related hospitalization (aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.01) or perianal Crohn’s disease diagnosis (aHR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.38-1.30). Adjustments were made for demographic and clinical variables, for example, age, sex, year of treatment, number of hospital contacts for an indication all in the year prior to index treatment.

In comparison with the proportion of resection patients at 5 years who were on no treatment, immunomodulators or anti-TNFi therapy, there are no data on the 5-year outcomes of those patients who began on anti-TNFi therapy, but patients typically continue unless they become intolerant or response starts to fail, Dr. Agrawal said.

Willem Bemelmen, MD, a colorectal surgeon from the University of Amsterdam who served as a moderator after the presentation said: “These results could lead to a paradigm shift in the management of patients with Crohn’s disease. Prior studies gave us early signals that surgery in Crohn’s disease might benefit the patients, but now with these larger scale data, with many patients, we might finally convince gastroenterologists to send patients in for early surgery.”

Dr. Agrawal, Dr. Bemelmen, and Dr. Colombel declared no relevant conflicts of interest.

This article was updated 3/7/23.

COPENHAGEN – Chronic pain in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is not associated with disease activity but has a significant impact on quality of life, including emotional well-being and social functioning, shows a study on chronic pain in children with IBD.

“A major finding of our small study was the impact of chronic pain on well-being and emotional health which was particularly significant in vulnerable children moving through adolescence towards adulthood,” said Dhamyanthi Thangarajah, MD, a consultant pediatric gastroenterologist at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, in a presentation at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation.

In the study of 41 children between 10 and 17 years old, chronic pain was found in 80% of participants who had established and extensive disease. Most participants had markers for fecal calprotectin, a sensitive marker for inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract, and others had Crohn’s disease and were prescribed biologics.

No relationship was found between chronic pain and IBD activity, but quality of life scores were negatively impacted in children with chronic pain.

“Moving forward, strategies should target screening for chronic pain in children with IBD and provide psychosocial interventions early on,” Dr. Thangarajah said. “We also need to understand more about internalizing pain and explore mood disorders.”

Many children with IBD also present with chronic abdominal pain, which was the impetus for conducting the study. “Essentially, we wondered whether this was a symptom of active disease, or were we missing something? In adult patients, chronic pain is prevalent, but in children we don’t necessarily screen for chronic pain, although it is part of active disease,” she said.

There is considerable patient and parental anxiety around the nature and origins of the chronic pain, Dr. Thangarajah said.

“We need to understand the prevalence and impact of chronic pain in children and adolescents, and as such we wanted to understand and characterize our cohort,” she said.

Dr. Thangarajah said clinicians tend to be very focused on disease activity and that screening for chronic pain is not usually carried out. “When we look at their clinical indices, the patients seem better, but the fact that it affects emotional health, and we don’t screen for it, means we need psychological help for these pediatric patients,” she said. “Patients need to be able to talk about their pain, and we need to understand if these children are having IBD-type symptoms, and this just isn’t asked about. It would be good to extend this study with a psychologist to understand more about this pain.”
 

How the study was conducted

The findings are based on the IMPACT III quality of life questionnaire for IBD. Chronic pain was defined as mild, moderate, or severe according to the van Korff scale.

“Patients had extensive and established disease, as expected in a pediatric cohort, the majority of whom were on immunosuppressant biologic drugs [64%-89%]. Among these patients, analgesic use was low, which is part of the education we give parents, and there was no opiate use in children, which differs from adults with IBD,” Dr. Thangarajah said.

A total of 33/41 (80%) of patients had chronic pain, and of these, abdominal chronic pain was most common in 30/33 (90%), joint pain was present in 2/33 (6%), and headache in 1/33, (3%). The majority 26/33 (79%) were on biologic agents, and analgesia use was low at 15/33 (45%). A total of 42% of children across the spectrum of chronic pain severity were on immunomodulators. Comorbidities were present in 42%-57% of patients with mild, and moderate-severe chronic pain respectively.

IBD disease activity in children with chronic pain was compared with those without chronic pain, as defined by Pediatric Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (PCDAI), Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (PUCAI), C-reactive protein (CRP), and faecal calprotectin. No difference was found.

Dr. Thangarajah highlighted the significantly lower quality of life score in children with chronic pain (69 and 51 in mild, and moderate-severe pain subgroups respectively, compared with 81 in those children without chronic pain, P < .05). Specifically, body image showed no difference between children with and without chronic pain (59-65 points across no pain, mild, moderate and severe chronic pain).

Chronic pain patients also commonly reported sleep disturbance with around 66% of patients with chronic pain, compared with around 11% in those without. Anemia was reported in 30% versus 21% respectively. However, nearly half of children with chronic pain had comorbidities 16/33 (48%), and 5/16 (31%) had diagnoses that may be associated with comorbid pain.
 

Psychosocial support within gastroenterology unavailable

Christine Norton, PhD, professor of nursing at Kings College London, also spoke at the conference on abdominal pain and the well-being of patients with IBD. She said that pain can still be a problem for some patients in remission from IBD.

“In adults we find pain is related to disease activity, however, 40%-50% of patients with IBD remission still report pain. Abdominal pain is dominant but it can be anywhere in the body. This is really poorly addressed in clinical consultations. It’s a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ situation where the nurse or doctor would do something if they could, but they just don’t ask the patients,” she said.

If patients volunteer the information that they still have pain during remission, it might get dismissed as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), Dr. Norton said. “Some patients do fulfill these criteria for IBS, but it still needs to be managed. Here at ECCO, the focus is on getting patients into deep remission and inflammation under tight control, but what do we do with the jangling pain nerves although there’s nothing apparently triggering them, the gut-brain sensitivity – it’s so hard to live with it. They need support,” she said.

Dr. Norton said clinicians need a better way to validate chronic pain. “Sometimes people don’t feel believed, but even if the doctor believes them, they don’t know what to do anyway. There’s very few places with psychological support within the field of gastroenterology. Do we educate the gastroenterologist in this aspect? Do we develop the skills of IBD nurses?”

Dr. Thangarajah and Dr. Norton have no disclosures to declare.

COPENHAGEN – Chronic pain in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is not associated with disease activity but has a significant impact on quality of life, including emotional well-being and social functioning, shows a study on chronic pain in children with IBD.

“A major finding of our small study was the impact of chronic pain on well-being and emotional health which was particularly significant in vulnerable children moving through adolescence towards adulthood,” said Dhamyanthi Thangarajah, MD, a consultant pediatric gastroenterologist at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, in a presentation at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation.

In the study of 41 children between 10 and 17 years old, chronic pain was found in 80% of participants who had established and extensive disease. Most participants had markers for fecal calprotectin, a sensitive marker for inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract, and others had Crohn’s disease and were prescribed biologics.

No relationship was found between chronic pain and IBD activity, but quality of life scores were negatively impacted in children with chronic pain.

“Moving forward, strategies should target screening for chronic pain in children with IBD and provide psychosocial interventions early on,” Dr. Thangarajah said. “We also need to understand more about internalizing pain and explore mood disorders.”

Many children with IBD also present with chronic abdominal pain, which was the impetus for conducting the study. “Essentially, we wondered whether this was a symptom of active disease, or were we missing something? In adult patients, chronic pain is prevalent, but in children we don’t necessarily screen for chronic pain, although it is part of active disease,” she said.

There is considerable patient and parental anxiety around the nature and origins of the chronic pain, Dr. Thangarajah said.

“We need to understand the prevalence and impact of chronic pain in children and adolescents, and as such we wanted to understand and characterize our cohort,” she said.

Dr. Thangarajah said clinicians tend to be very focused on disease activity and that screening for chronic pain is not usually carried out. “When we look at their clinical indices, the patients seem better, but the fact that it affects emotional health, and we don’t screen for it, means we need psychological help for these pediatric patients,” she said. “Patients need to be able to talk about their pain, and we need to understand if these children are having IBD-type symptoms, and this just isn’t asked about. It would be good to extend this study with a psychologist to understand more about this pain.”
 

How the study was conducted

The findings are based on the IMPACT III quality of life questionnaire for IBD. Chronic pain was defined as mild, moderate, or severe according to the van Korff scale.

“Patients had extensive and established disease, as expected in a pediatric cohort, the majority of whom were on immunosuppressant biologic drugs [64%-89%]. Among these patients, analgesic use was low, which is part of the education we give parents, and there was no opiate use in children, which differs from adults with IBD,” Dr. Thangarajah said.

A total of 33/41 (80%) of patients had chronic pain, and of these, abdominal chronic pain was most common in 30/33 (90%), joint pain was present in 2/33 (6%), and headache in 1/33, (3%). The majority 26/33 (79%) were on biologic agents, and analgesia use was low at 15/33 (45%). A total of 42% of children across the spectrum of chronic pain severity were on immunomodulators. Comorbidities were present in 42%-57% of patients with mild, and moderate-severe chronic pain respectively.

IBD disease activity in children with chronic pain was compared with those without chronic pain, as defined by Pediatric Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (PCDAI), Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (PUCAI), C-reactive protein (CRP), and faecal calprotectin. No difference was found.

Dr. Thangarajah highlighted the significantly lower quality of life score in children with chronic pain (69 and 51 in mild, and moderate-severe pain subgroups respectively, compared with 81 in those children without chronic pain, P < .05). Specifically, body image showed no difference between children with and without chronic pain (59-65 points across no pain, mild, moderate and severe chronic pain).

Chronic pain patients also commonly reported sleep disturbance with around 66% of patients with chronic pain, compared with around 11% in those without. Anemia was reported in 30% versus 21% respectively. However, nearly half of children with chronic pain had comorbidities 16/33 (48%), and 5/16 (31%) had diagnoses that may be associated with comorbid pain.
 

Psychosocial support within gastroenterology unavailable

Christine Norton, PhD, professor of nursing at Kings College London, also spoke at the conference on abdominal pain and the well-being of patients with IBD. She said that pain can still be a problem for some patients in remission from IBD.

“In adults we find pain is related to disease activity, however, 40%-50% of patients with IBD remission still report pain. Abdominal pain is dominant but it can be anywhere in the body. This is really poorly addressed in clinical consultations. It’s a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ situation where the nurse or doctor would do something if they could, but they just don’t ask the patients,” she said.

If patients volunteer the information that they still have pain during remission, it might get dismissed as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), Dr. Norton said. “Some patients do fulfill these criteria for IBS, but it still needs to be managed. Here at ECCO, the focus is on getting patients into deep remission and inflammation under tight control, but what do we do with the jangling pain nerves although there’s nothing apparently triggering them, the gut-brain sensitivity – it’s so hard to live with it. They need support,” she said.

Dr. Norton said clinicians need a better way to validate chronic pain. “Sometimes people don’t feel believed, but even if the doctor believes them, they don’t know what to do anyway. There’s very few places with psychological support within the field of gastroenterology. Do we educate the gastroenterologist in this aspect? Do we develop the skills of IBD nurses?”

Dr. Thangarajah and Dr. Norton have no disclosures to declare.

COPENHAGEN – Chronic pain in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is not associated with disease activity but has a significant impact on quality of life, including emotional well-being and social functioning, shows a study on chronic pain in children with IBD.

“A major finding of our small study was the impact of chronic pain on well-being and emotional health which was particularly significant in vulnerable children moving through adolescence towards adulthood,” said Dhamyanthi Thangarajah, MD, a consultant pediatric gastroenterologist at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, in a presentation at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation.

In the study of 41 children between 10 and 17 years old, chronic pain was found in 80% of participants who had established and extensive disease. Most participants had markers for fecal calprotectin, a sensitive marker for inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract, and others had Crohn’s disease and were prescribed biologics.

No relationship was found between chronic pain and IBD activity, but quality of life scores were negatively impacted in children with chronic pain.

“Moving forward, strategies should target screening for chronic pain in children with IBD and provide psychosocial interventions early on,” Dr. Thangarajah said. “We also need to understand more about internalizing pain and explore mood disorders.”

Many children with IBD also present with chronic abdominal pain, which was the impetus for conducting the study. “Essentially, we wondered whether this was a symptom of active disease, or were we missing something? In adult patients, chronic pain is prevalent, but in children we don’t necessarily screen for chronic pain, although it is part of active disease,” she said.

There is considerable patient and parental anxiety around the nature and origins of the chronic pain, Dr. Thangarajah said.

“We need to understand the prevalence and impact of chronic pain in children and adolescents, and as such we wanted to understand and characterize our cohort,” she said.

Dr. Thangarajah said clinicians tend to be very focused on disease activity and that screening for chronic pain is not usually carried out. “When we look at their clinical indices, the patients seem better, but the fact that it affects emotional health, and we don’t screen for it, means we need psychological help for these pediatric patients,” she said. “Patients need to be able to talk about their pain, and we need to understand if these children are having IBD-type symptoms, and this just isn’t asked about. It would be good to extend this study with a psychologist to understand more about this pain.”
 

How the study was conducted

The findings are based on the IMPACT III quality of life questionnaire for IBD. Chronic pain was defined as mild, moderate, or severe according to the van Korff scale.

“Patients had extensive and established disease, as expected in a pediatric cohort, the majority of whom were on immunosuppressant biologic drugs [64%-89%]. Among these patients, analgesic use was low, which is part of the education we give parents, and there was no opiate use in children, which differs from adults with IBD,” Dr. Thangarajah said.

A total of 33/41 (80%) of patients had chronic pain, and of these, abdominal chronic pain was most common in 30/33 (90%), joint pain was present in 2/33 (6%), and headache in 1/33, (3%). The majority 26/33 (79%) were on biologic agents, and analgesia use was low at 15/33 (45%). A total of 42% of children across the spectrum of chronic pain severity were on immunomodulators. Comorbidities were present in 42%-57% of patients with mild, and moderate-severe chronic pain respectively.

IBD disease activity in children with chronic pain was compared with those without chronic pain, as defined by Pediatric Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (PCDAI), Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (PUCAI), C-reactive protein (CRP), and faecal calprotectin. No difference was found.

Dr. Thangarajah highlighted the significantly lower quality of life score in children with chronic pain (69 and 51 in mild, and moderate-severe pain subgroups respectively, compared with 81 in those children without chronic pain, P < .05). Specifically, body image showed no difference between children with and without chronic pain (59-65 points across no pain, mild, moderate and severe chronic pain).

Chronic pain patients also commonly reported sleep disturbance with around 66% of patients with chronic pain, compared with around 11% in those without. Anemia was reported in 30% versus 21% respectively. However, nearly half of children with chronic pain had comorbidities 16/33 (48%), and 5/16 (31%) had diagnoses that may be associated with comorbid pain.
 

Psychosocial support within gastroenterology unavailable

Christine Norton, PhD, professor of nursing at Kings College London, also spoke at the conference on abdominal pain and the well-being of patients with IBD. She said that pain can still be a problem for some patients in remission from IBD.

“In adults we find pain is related to disease activity, however, 40%-50% of patients with IBD remission still report pain. Abdominal pain is dominant but it can be anywhere in the body. This is really poorly addressed in clinical consultations. It’s a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ situation where the nurse or doctor would do something if they could, but they just don’t ask the patients,” she said.

If patients volunteer the information that they still have pain during remission, it might get dismissed as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), Dr. Norton said. “Some patients do fulfill these criteria for IBS, but it still needs to be managed. Here at ECCO, the focus is on getting patients into deep remission and inflammation under tight control, but what do we do with the jangling pain nerves although there’s nothing apparently triggering them, the gut-brain sensitivity – it’s so hard to live with it. They need support,” she said.

Dr. Norton said clinicians need a better way to validate chronic pain. “Sometimes people don’t feel believed, but even if the doctor believes them, they don’t know what to do anyway. There’s very few places with psychological support within the field of gastroenterology. Do we educate the gastroenterologist in this aspect? Do we develop the skills of IBD nurses?”

Dr. Thangarajah and Dr. Norton have no disclosures to declare.

COPENHAGEN – Vedolizumab (ENTYVIO) a monoclonal antibody drug, shows a higher overall 1- and 2-year persistence of use – the overall time that a patient stays on a medication – compared with two anti–tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (anti-TNFi) in both Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, according to the first meta-analysis of their real-world effectiveness.

The results mostly applied to bionaive subjects, and the benefit of vedolizumab over both TNFi’s – infliximab (Remicade) and adalimumab (Humira), was more evident in ulcerative colitis, compared with Crohn’s disease, noted the researchers, led by Tsz Hong Yiu, MD, a clinician and researcher at the University of Sydney.

“It appears that patients are more likely to stay on vedolizumab than either infliximab or adalimumab, especially in bionaive patients, which could suggest either a better tolerance to the treatment or a better response,” Dr. Yiu said in an interview at the annual Congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation.

The 2-year follow up data were particularly encouraging, noted Dr. Yiu, with more patients persisting on vedolizumab than both anti-TNF alpha drugs overall with respect to both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease.

In a head-to-head comparison, 15% more patients stayed on vedolizumab than anti-TNF alpha drugs overall, at 1-year follow-up for both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease (risk ratio, 1.15). At 2 years of follow-up, 12% more patients remained on vedolizumab in comparison with anti-TNF alpha drugs overall (RR, 1.12), again for both forms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

“This may provide early evidence that supports vedolizumab as a first-line biologic agent for inpatients with inflammatory bowel disease,” said Dr. Yiu, noting that further research was required to validate the correlation of persistence with clinical effectiveness.

Adding comment on the motivation for the study, senior author Rupert Leong, MD, a gastroenterologist at Concord RepatriaKon General Hospital, Sydney, said, “We wanted to identify the drug with the highest effectiveness, which is the real-world benefit of the drug to patients, rather than efficacy, which refers to clinical trial data.”

“Importantly, clinical trial data are usually only 1 year, whereas persistence collects data often for several years. This is relevant in chronic diseases that can affect patients over several decades, because the true benefit of a drug cannot be implied from a short-term clinical trial,” he explained.  

Persistence was chosen as the primary end-point because it is a measure that incorporates a drug’s efficacy and side-effect profile but also the patient’s perspective, added Dr. Yiu. “So, a patient may value mild side effects over treatment effectiveness and decide to cease treatment.”   

A prior meta-analysis looking at loss of response found that 33% of people taking infliximab and 41% of people taking adalimumab became resistant to the biologics after a median follow up of 1 year. “The most common cause of loss of response to anti-TNF inhibitors is due to immunogenicity,” remarked Dr. Yiu.  “These findings suggested that alternative biologics with high effectiveness should be considered.”

Data from the 2019 VARSITY study also informed the researchers’ decision to conduct a real-world study. VARSITY investigators found vedolizumab had increased efficacy over adalimumab in ulcerative colitis, however, data on the real-world effectiveness of vedolizumab, compared with adalimumab and infliximab, in both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease remained unknown.

Dr. Leong pointed out the difficulty in selecting the correct treatment given the increasing numbers of biological agents available. “The paucity of head-to-head studies meant use of cohort studies is considered both relevant and informative, not least because long-term follow-up data can reveal secondary loss of response of these monoclonal antibodies, while pooling data further increases the statistical power and determines consistency.”

As such, the researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of six observational studies evaluating persistence, as a surrogate marker for clinical response, of vedolizumab versus infliximab and adalimumab among participants aged over 18 years with a diagnosis of either ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease from 2017 to July 2022.

Overall, the study found that 1-year persistence of vedolizumab was 71.2% in ulcerative colitis and 76% in Crohn’s disease, which was significantly higher than with infliximab (56.4% in ulcerative colitis, 53.7% in Crohn’s disease), and likewise with adalimumab (53.7% in ulcerative colitis, 55.6% in Crohn’s disease).

Results of 2-year persistence were pooled from four studies and found that vedolizumab had a 2-year persistence of 66% in ulcerative colitis and 61% in Crohn’s disease. By comparison, infliximab had a persistence of 49.7% for ulcerative colitis and 59.1% for Crohn’s disease, and adalimumab had a persistence of 31.4% for ulcerative colitis and 56% for Crohn’s disease).

In ulcerative colitis specifically, vedolizumab performed better than both adalimumab and infliximab with an RR of 1.41 (95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.74) and 1.15 (95% CI, 1.06-1.25) respectively, and an RR of 1.23 (95% CI, 1.14-1.33) was generated when adalimumab and infliximab results were combined after 1 year of follow-up.

In Crohn’s disease specifically, vedolizumab had a slightly higher 1-year persistence over anti-TNF inhibitors combined (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.19), but there were insufficient data to support individual analysis.

In a subgroup of bionaive patients, vedolizumab had a higher 1-year persistence (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.07-1.22) but did not show a statistically significant advantage in bioexperienced patients (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.35), compared with anti-TNF inhibitors.

Dr. Yiu remarked that they were unable to identify any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) directly comparing infliximab versus vedolizumab in IBD at the time of their systematic review. However, he drew attention to a recent research article that compared the effectiveness, persistence, and side-effect profile of vedolizumab and infliximab in a small cohort of ulcerative colitis patients. “ In this study, vedolizumab showed overall superiority over infliximab, which is in keeping with our study’s findings.”  

Commenting on the study, Viraj Kariyawasam, MD, gastroenterologist and head of IBD at Blacktown and Mount Druitt hospital in Sydney, said the findings were “very important in defining the place of vedolizumab in the treatment of ulcerative colitis, and more so in Crohn’s disease.”

“Despite vedolizumab being considered a lower-efficacy drug, compared to infliximab, in Crohn’s disease by most practicing clinicians, and still favoring anti-TNF in the treatment of Crohn’s disease, the study highlights the superior persistence of vedolizumab,” he said in an interview.

“This is likely associated with efficacy over the two most used anti-TNF agents. With the knowledge we have about reduced efficacy of vedolizumab after the use of anti-TNF, or as a second- or third-line agent, and its superior persistence as a first-line biologic with already published safety data, vedolizumab should be considered and preferred as a first-line agent in the treatment of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease.” 

Dr. Yiu has declared no conflicts of interest. Dr. Leong declares he is an advisory board member of AbbVie, Aspen, BMS, Celgene, Celltrion, Chiesi, Ferring, Glutagen, Hospira, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Takeda; research grant recipient of Celltrion, Shire, Janssen, Takeda, Gastroenterological Society of Australia, NHMRC, Gutsy Group, Pfizer, Joanna Tiddy grant University of Sydney. One coauthor is an advisory board member of AbbVie and has received speaker fees from AbbVie and Takeda. Dr. Kariyawasam has educational grants and/or speaker fees from Janssen, AbbVie, and Takeda.
 

COPENHAGEN – Vedolizumab (ENTYVIO) a monoclonal antibody drug, shows a higher overall 1- and 2-year persistence of use – the overall time that a patient stays on a medication – compared with two anti–tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (anti-TNFi) in both Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, according to the first meta-analysis of their real-world effectiveness.

The results mostly applied to bionaive subjects, and the benefit of vedolizumab over both TNFi’s – infliximab (Remicade) and adalimumab (Humira), was more evident in ulcerative colitis, compared with Crohn’s disease, noted the researchers, led by Tsz Hong Yiu, MD, a clinician and researcher at the University of Sydney.

“It appears that patients are more likely to stay on vedolizumab than either infliximab or adalimumab, especially in bionaive patients, which could suggest either a better tolerance to the treatment or a better response,” Dr. Yiu said in an interview at the annual Congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation.

The 2-year follow up data were particularly encouraging, noted Dr. Yiu, with more patients persisting on vedolizumab than both anti-TNF alpha drugs overall with respect to both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease.

In a head-to-head comparison, 15% more patients stayed on vedolizumab than anti-TNF alpha drugs overall, at 1-year follow-up for both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease (risk ratio, 1.15). At 2 years of follow-up, 12% more patients remained on vedolizumab in comparison with anti-TNF alpha drugs overall (RR, 1.12), again for both forms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

“This may provide early evidence that supports vedolizumab as a first-line biologic agent for inpatients with inflammatory bowel disease,” said Dr. Yiu, noting that further research was required to validate the correlation of persistence with clinical effectiveness.

Adding comment on the motivation for the study, senior author Rupert Leong, MD, a gastroenterologist at Concord RepatriaKon General Hospital, Sydney, said, “We wanted to identify the drug with the highest effectiveness, which is the real-world benefit of the drug to patients, rather than efficacy, which refers to clinical trial data.”

“Importantly, clinical trial data are usually only 1 year, whereas persistence collects data often for several years. This is relevant in chronic diseases that can affect patients over several decades, because the true benefit of a drug cannot be implied from a short-term clinical trial,” he explained.  

Persistence was chosen as the primary end-point because it is a measure that incorporates a drug’s efficacy and side-effect profile but also the patient’s perspective, added Dr. Yiu. “So, a patient may value mild side effects over treatment effectiveness and decide to cease treatment.”   

A prior meta-analysis looking at loss of response found that 33% of people taking infliximab and 41% of people taking adalimumab became resistant to the biologics after a median follow up of 1 year. “The most common cause of loss of response to anti-TNF inhibitors is due to immunogenicity,” remarked Dr. Yiu.  “These findings suggested that alternative biologics with high effectiveness should be considered.”

Data from the 2019 VARSITY study also informed the researchers’ decision to conduct a real-world study. VARSITY investigators found vedolizumab had increased efficacy over adalimumab in ulcerative colitis, however, data on the real-world effectiveness of vedolizumab, compared with adalimumab and infliximab, in both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease remained unknown.

Dr. Leong pointed out the difficulty in selecting the correct treatment given the increasing numbers of biological agents available. “The paucity of head-to-head studies meant use of cohort studies is considered both relevant and informative, not least because long-term follow-up data can reveal secondary loss of response of these monoclonal antibodies, while pooling data further increases the statistical power and determines consistency.”

As such, the researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of six observational studies evaluating persistence, as a surrogate marker for clinical response, of vedolizumab versus infliximab and adalimumab among participants aged over 18 years with a diagnosis of either ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease from 2017 to July 2022.

Overall, the study found that 1-year persistence of vedolizumab was 71.2% in ulcerative colitis and 76% in Crohn’s disease, which was significantly higher than with infliximab (56.4% in ulcerative colitis, 53.7% in Crohn’s disease), and likewise with adalimumab (53.7% in ulcerative colitis, 55.6% in Crohn’s disease).

Results of 2-year persistence were pooled from four studies and found that vedolizumab had a 2-year persistence of 66% in ulcerative colitis and 61% in Crohn’s disease. By comparison, infliximab had a persistence of 49.7% for ulcerative colitis and 59.1% for Crohn’s disease, and adalimumab had a persistence of 31.4% for ulcerative colitis and 56% for Crohn’s disease).

In ulcerative colitis specifically, vedolizumab performed better than both adalimumab and infliximab with an RR of 1.41 (95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.74) and 1.15 (95% CI, 1.06-1.25) respectively, and an RR of 1.23 (95% CI, 1.14-1.33) was generated when adalimumab and infliximab results were combined after 1 year of follow-up.

In Crohn’s disease specifically, vedolizumab had a slightly higher 1-year persistence over anti-TNF inhibitors combined (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.19), but there were insufficient data to support individual analysis.

In a subgroup of bionaive patients, vedolizumab had a higher 1-year persistence (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.07-1.22) but did not show a statistically significant advantage in bioexperienced patients (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.35), compared with anti-TNF inhibitors.

Dr. Yiu remarked that they were unable to identify any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) directly comparing infliximab versus vedolizumab in IBD at the time of their systematic review. However, he drew attention to a recent research article that compared the effectiveness, persistence, and side-effect profile of vedolizumab and infliximab in a small cohort of ulcerative colitis patients. “ In this study, vedolizumab showed overall superiority over infliximab, which is in keeping with our study’s findings.”  

Commenting on the study, Viraj Kariyawasam, MD, gastroenterologist and head of IBD at Blacktown and Mount Druitt hospital in Sydney, said the findings were “very important in defining the place of vedolizumab in the treatment of ulcerative colitis, and more so in Crohn’s disease.”

“Despite vedolizumab being considered a lower-efficacy drug, compared to infliximab, in Crohn’s disease by most practicing clinicians, and still favoring anti-TNF in the treatment of Crohn’s disease, the study highlights the superior persistence of vedolizumab,” he said in an interview.

“This is likely associated with efficacy over the two most used anti-TNF agents. With the knowledge we have about reduced efficacy of vedolizumab after the use of anti-TNF, or as a second- or third-line agent, and its superior persistence as a first-line biologic with already published safety data, vedolizumab should be considered and preferred as a first-line agent in the treatment of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease.” 

Dr. Yiu has declared no conflicts of interest. Dr. Leong declares he is an advisory board member of AbbVie, Aspen, BMS, Celgene, Celltrion, Chiesi, Ferring, Glutagen, Hospira, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Takeda; research grant recipient of Celltrion, Shire, Janssen, Takeda, Gastroenterological Society of Australia, NHMRC, Gutsy Group, Pfizer, Joanna Tiddy grant University of Sydney. One coauthor is an advisory board member of AbbVie and has received speaker fees from AbbVie and Takeda. Dr. Kariyawasam has educational grants and/or speaker fees from Janssen, AbbVie, and Takeda.
 

COPENHAGEN – Vedolizumab (ENTYVIO) a monoclonal antibody drug, shows a higher overall 1- and 2-year persistence of use – the overall time that a patient stays on a medication – compared with two anti–tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (anti-TNFi) in both Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, according to the first meta-analysis of their real-world effectiveness.

The results mostly applied to bionaive subjects, and the benefit of vedolizumab over both TNFi’s – infliximab (Remicade) and adalimumab (Humira), was more evident in ulcerative colitis, compared with Crohn’s disease, noted the researchers, led by Tsz Hong Yiu, MD, a clinician and researcher at the University of Sydney.

“It appears that patients are more likely to stay on vedolizumab than either infliximab or adalimumab, especially in bionaive patients, which could suggest either a better tolerance to the treatment or a better response,” Dr. Yiu said in an interview at the annual Congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation.

The 2-year follow up data were particularly encouraging, noted Dr. Yiu, with more patients persisting on vedolizumab than both anti-TNF alpha drugs overall with respect to both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease.

In a head-to-head comparison, 15% more patients stayed on vedolizumab than anti-TNF alpha drugs overall, at 1-year follow-up for both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease (risk ratio, 1.15). At 2 years of follow-up, 12% more patients remained on vedolizumab in comparison with anti-TNF alpha drugs overall (RR, 1.12), again for both forms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

“This may provide early evidence that supports vedolizumab as a first-line biologic agent for inpatients with inflammatory bowel disease,” said Dr. Yiu, noting that further research was required to validate the correlation of persistence with clinical effectiveness.

Adding comment on the motivation for the study, senior author Rupert Leong, MD, a gastroenterologist at Concord RepatriaKon General Hospital, Sydney, said, “We wanted to identify the drug with the highest effectiveness, which is the real-world benefit of the drug to patients, rather than efficacy, which refers to clinical trial data.”

“Importantly, clinical trial data are usually only 1 year, whereas persistence collects data often for several years. This is relevant in chronic diseases that can affect patients over several decades, because the true benefit of a drug cannot be implied from a short-term clinical trial,” he explained.  

Persistence was chosen as the primary end-point because it is a measure that incorporates a drug’s efficacy and side-effect profile but also the patient’s perspective, added Dr. Yiu. “So, a patient may value mild side effects over treatment effectiveness and decide to cease treatment.”   

A prior meta-analysis looking at loss of response found that 33% of people taking infliximab and 41% of people taking adalimumab became resistant to the biologics after a median follow up of 1 year. “The most common cause of loss of response to anti-TNF inhibitors is due to immunogenicity,” remarked Dr. Yiu.  “These findings suggested that alternative biologics with high effectiveness should be considered.”

Data from the 2019 VARSITY study also informed the researchers’ decision to conduct a real-world study. VARSITY investigators found vedolizumab had increased efficacy over adalimumab in ulcerative colitis, however, data on the real-world effectiveness of vedolizumab, compared with adalimumab and infliximab, in both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease remained unknown.

Dr. Leong pointed out the difficulty in selecting the correct treatment given the increasing numbers of biological agents available. “The paucity of head-to-head studies meant use of cohort studies is considered both relevant and informative, not least because long-term follow-up data can reveal secondary loss of response of these monoclonal antibodies, while pooling data further increases the statistical power and determines consistency.”

As such, the researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of six observational studies evaluating persistence, as a surrogate marker for clinical response, of vedolizumab versus infliximab and adalimumab among participants aged over 18 years with a diagnosis of either ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease from 2017 to July 2022.

Overall, the study found that 1-year persistence of vedolizumab was 71.2% in ulcerative colitis and 76% in Crohn’s disease, which was significantly higher than with infliximab (56.4% in ulcerative colitis, 53.7% in Crohn’s disease), and likewise with adalimumab (53.7% in ulcerative colitis, 55.6% in Crohn’s disease).

Results of 2-year persistence were pooled from four studies and found that vedolizumab had a 2-year persistence of 66% in ulcerative colitis and 61% in Crohn’s disease. By comparison, infliximab had a persistence of 49.7% for ulcerative colitis and 59.1% for Crohn’s disease, and adalimumab had a persistence of 31.4% for ulcerative colitis and 56% for Crohn’s disease).

In ulcerative colitis specifically, vedolizumab performed better than both adalimumab and infliximab with an RR of 1.41 (95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.74) and 1.15 (95% CI, 1.06-1.25) respectively, and an RR of 1.23 (95% CI, 1.14-1.33) was generated when adalimumab and infliximab results were combined after 1 year of follow-up.

In Crohn’s disease specifically, vedolizumab had a slightly higher 1-year persistence over anti-TNF inhibitors combined (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.19), but there were insufficient data to support individual analysis.

In a subgroup of bionaive patients, vedolizumab had a higher 1-year persistence (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.07-1.22) but did not show a statistically significant advantage in bioexperienced patients (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.35), compared with anti-TNF inhibitors.

Dr. Yiu remarked that they were unable to identify any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) directly comparing infliximab versus vedolizumab in IBD at the time of their systematic review. However, he drew attention to a recent research article that compared the effectiveness, persistence, and side-effect profile of vedolizumab and infliximab in a small cohort of ulcerative colitis patients. “ In this study, vedolizumab showed overall superiority over infliximab, which is in keeping with our study’s findings.”  

Commenting on the study, Viraj Kariyawasam, MD, gastroenterologist and head of IBD at Blacktown and Mount Druitt hospital in Sydney, said the findings were “very important in defining the place of vedolizumab in the treatment of ulcerative colitis, and more so in Crohn’s disease.”

“Despite vedolizumab being considered a lower-efficacy drug, compared to infliximab, in Crohn’s disease by most practicing clinicians, and still favoring anti-TNF in the treatment of Crohn’s disease, the study highlights the superior persistence of vedolizumab,” he said in an interview.

“This is likely associated with efficacy over the two most used anti-TNF agents. With the knowledge we have about reduced efficacy of vedolizumab after the use of anti-TNF, or as a second- or third-line agent, and its superior persistence as a first-line biologic with already published safety data, vedolizumab should be considered and preferred as a first-line agent in the treatment of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease.” 

Dr. Yiu has declared no conflicts of interest. Dr. Leong declares he is an advisory board member of AbbVie, Aspen, BMS, Celgene, Celltrion, Chiesi, Ferring, Glutagen, Hospira, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Takeda; research grant recipient of Celltrion, Shire, Janssen, Takeda, Gastroenterological Society of Australia, NHMRC, Gutsy Group, Pfizer, Joanna Tiddy grant University of Sydney. One coauthor is an advisory board member of AbbVie and has received speaker fees from AbbVie and Takeda. Dr. Kariyawasam has educational grants and/or speaker fees from Janssen, AbbVie, and Takeda.
 

COPENHAGEN – Mortality rate, length of hospital stay, and cost of hospitalization all drop significantly in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) concurrently using cannabis, shows a study that supports wider availability of the substance for specified medical use.

Inpatient mortality dropped by more than 70% in those patients concurrently using cannabis for another indication, compared with those not taking the drug, while total cost of hospitalization dropped by more than $11,000.

The findings were presented as a poster by Neethi Dasu, DO, PGY 6 Gastroenterology Fellow, at Jefferson Health Hospital, N.J., at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization. Dr. Dasu worked with coinvestigator Brian Blair, DO, FACOI, Gastroenterology Program Director, IBD specialist, at the same hospital.

“This study reveals substantial benefits of cannabis in the management of patients with IBD,” Dr. Dasu said. “Not only do patients spend less time in hospital, but they also have a decrease in mortality and hospital cost, which can be significant for patients with IBD, a chronic condition, that often burdens them with high health care spend.”

The researcher also highlighted that with annual U.S. health care spending on IBD having increased significantly in recent years, getting patients well and out of the hospital in a timely manner is key and that “cannabis might help in this aim.”

Cannabis use is legalized in some U.S. states for medical treatment of several chronic, debilitating disorders, especially cancer. Currently, there is no direct Food and Drug Administration approval for use for IBD. “Utilizing it would be considered off-label and investigational,” Dr. Dasu pointed out.

Patients report cannabis, as a pain control treatment, is effective for acute flares and chronic IBD, said Dr. Dasu. “It is an excellent agent for pain control that is not a narcotic, as with opioids, which can cause dependence and addiction. These could ultimately harm patients in the long term,” she addedin an interview. “Opioids can also cause drowsiness and side effects, which harm a person’s quality of life.”
 

Patients with IBD using cannabis concurrently

Dr. Dasu and her coresearchers aimed to see if outcomes including mortality and pain could be modified with “a very accessible and cost-efficient agent that does not cause long term addiction or adverse events.”

She added that previous studies had evaluated the clinical response in patients with IBD and concomitant cannabis use, but that their study was novel because it looked at inpatient outcomes as well as overall hospital cost.

Dr. Dasu and colleagues analyzed data over the years 2015-2019, from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), a large publicly available all-payer inpatient care database, which encompasses approximately 7 million inpatient hospitalizations annually in the United States.

All included patients had IBD, either ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease, were aged 18 years and over, and used cannabis for a concurrent indication.

Odds ratios were calculated for in-hospital mortality, average length of hospital stay, and hospital charges, after adjusting for age, gender, race, primary insurance payer status, hospital type and size (number of beds), hospital region, hospital teaching status, and other demographic characteristics.

Of the 1,198,839 patients with IBD, 29,445 used cannabis for a different indication. Participants had an average age of 38.7 years.
 

Highly significant drop in mortality and hospital costs

Inpatient mortality shows a significant decrease of 72% (odds ratio, 0.28; confidence interval, 0.19-0.41, P < .0001) in those who concurrently used cannabis, compared with those who did not. Hospital length of stay also dropped by –0.17 days (95% CI, –0.35 to –0.01; P < .041), and this translated into a significant drop in the total cost of hospitalization from $39,309.00 (IBD without cannabis use) to $28,254.30 (IBD with cannabis use), resulting in an $11,054.70 savings (95% CI, –$13,681.15 to –$8,427.24; P < .0001).

As a chronic inflammatory disease, IBD involves immune dysregulation leading to symptoms of nausea, vomiting, bleeding, and abdominal pain; however, the pathophysiologic mechanism is not fully understood. She added that studies in mice had shown that cannabis acts via cannabinoid 1 and 2 receptors, located in the nervous system, to decrease pain, nausea, and vomiting. “Mechanisms of cannabis’s analgesic effect also involves inhibition of the release of neurotransmitters involved in pain and inflammation.”

Asked how she felt about the future for cannabis treatment in IBD, Dr. Dasu remarked that it would most likely require decriminalizing marijuana use on a federal level, although individual states currently offer exemptions.

“Further research should be done to evaluate the medical benefits of cannabis use in patients with IBD, with studies warranted to investigate the factors that may be driving these differences, as well warranted to investigations into the effect of cannabis on remission rates, rates of hospitalization, potential complications, and quality of life,” concluded Dr. Dasu.

Commenting on the study, Mary-Jane Williams, MD, a gastroenterology fellow at East Carolina University Health Medical Center, Greenville, N.C., told this news organization that the study was “a pleasant breath of information on the topic of cannabis use in IBD,” adding that providers often face questions about cannabis use from patients.

“Modulation of the endocannabinoid system ... plays a key role in the pathogenesis of IBD including pain control, limiting intestinal inflammation, and decreasing intestinal motility,” Dr. Williams said, adding that, “Its use in IBD has promising improvement in the therapeutic effect and overall quality of life.”

“This study highlights and supports substantial therapeutic effects of cannabis in the management of IBD patients, be it their pain control, improving nausea, appetite and sleep, remission rates, earlier time to recovery, shortened hospitalization and faster endoscopic improvement,” she pointed out, noting the need for further studies, but also that most organizations, including the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation, support policies that facilitate the conduct of clinical research using objective parameters and the potential development of cannabinoid-based medications in the management of our patients with IBD.

Dr. Dasu, Dr. Blair, and Dr. Williams have declared no financial disclosures.

COPENHAGEN – Mortality rate, length of hospital stay, and cost of hospitalization all drop significantly in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) concurrently using cannabis, shows a study that supports wider availability of the substance for specified medical use.

Inpatient mortality dropped by more than 70% in those patients concurrently using cannabis for another indication, compared with those not taking the drug, while total cost of hospitalization dropped by more than $11,000.

The findings were presented as a poster by Neethi Dasu, DO, PGY 6 Gastroenterology Fellow, at Jefferson Health Hospital, N.J., at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization. Dr. Dasu worked with coinvestigator Brian Blair, DO, FACOI, Gastroenterology Program Director, IBD specialist, at the same hospital.

“This study reveals substantial benefits of cannabis in the management of patients with IBD,” Dr. Dasu said. “Not only do patients spend less time in hospital, but they also have a decrease in mortality and hospital cost, which can be significant for patients with IBD, a chronic condition, that often burdens them with high health care spend.”

The researcher also highlighted that with annual U.S. health care spending on IBD having increased significantly in recent years, getting patients well and out of the hospital in a timely manner is key and that “cannabis might help in this aim.”

Cannabis use is legalized in some U.S. states for medical treatment of several chronic, debilitating disorders, especially cancer. Currently, there is no direct Food and Drug Administration approval for use for IBD. “Utilizing it would be considered off-label and investigational,” Dr. Dasu pointed out.

Patients report cannabis, as a pain control treatment, is effective for acute flares and chronic IBD, said Dr. Dasu. “It is an excellent agent for pain control that is not a narcotic, as with opioids, which can cause dependence and addiction. These could ultimately harm patients in the long term,” she addedin an interview. “Opioids can also cause drowsiness and side effects, which harm a person’s quality of life.”
 

Patients with IBD using cannabis concurrently

Dr. Dasu and her coresearchers aimed to see if outcomes including mortality and pain could be modified with “a very accessible and cost-efficient agent that does not cause long term addiction or adverse events.”

She added that previous studies had evaluated the clinical response in patients with IBD and concomitant cannabis use, but that their study was novel because it looked at inpatient outcomes as well as overall hospital cost.

Dr. Dasu and colleagues analyzed data over the years 2015-2019, from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), a large publicly available all-payer inpatient care database, which encompasses approximately 7 million inpatient hospitalizations annually in the United States.

All included patients had IBD, either ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease, were aged 18 years and over, and used cannabis for a concurrent indication.

Odds ratios were calculated for in-hospital mortality, average length of hospital stay, and hospital charges, after adjusting for age, gender, race, primary insurance payer status, hospital type and size (number of beds), hospital region, hospital teaching status, and other demographic characteristics.

Of the 1,198,839 patients with IBD, 29,445 used cannabis for a different indication. Participants had an average age of 38.7 years.
 

Highly significant drop in mortality and hospital costs

Inpatient mortality shows a significant decrease of 72% (odds ratio, 0.28; confidence interval, 0.19-0.41, P < .0001) in those who concurrently used cannabis, compared with those who did not. Hospital length of stay also dropped by –0.17 days (95% CI, –0.35 to –0.01; P < .041), and this translated into a significant drop in the total cost of hospitalization from $39,309.00 (IBD without cannabis use) to $28,254.30 (IBD with cannabis use), resulting in an $11,054.70 savings (95% CI, –$13,681.15 to –$8,427.24; P < .0001).

As a chronic inflammatory disease, IBD involves immune dysregulation leading to symptoms of nausea, vomiting, bleeding, and abdominal pain; however, the pathophysiologic mechanism is not fully understood. She added that studies in mice had shown that cannabis acts via cannabinoid 1 and 2 receptors, located in the nervous system, to decrease pain, nausea, and vomiting. “Mechanisms of cannabis’s analgesic effect also involves inhibition of the release of neurotransmitters involved in pain and inflammation.”

Asked how she felt about the future for cannabis treatment in IBD, Dr. Dasu remarked that it would most likely require decriminalizing marijuana use on a federal level, although individual states currently offer exemptions.

“Further research should be done to evaluate the medical benefits of cannabis use in patients with IBD, with studies warranted to investigate the factors that may be driving these differences, as well warranted to investigations into the effect of cannabis on remission rates, rates of hospitalization, potential complications, and quality of life,” concluded Dr. Dasu.

Commenting on the study, Mary-Jane Williams, MD, a gastroenterology fellow at East Carolina University Health Medical Center, Greenville, N.C., told this news organization that the study was “a pleasant breath of information on the topic of cannabis use in IBD,” adding that providers often face questions about cannabis use from patients.

“Modulation of the endocannabinoid system ... plays a key role in the pathogenesis of IBD including pain control, limiting intestinal inflammation, and decreasing intestinal motility,” Dr. Williams said, adding that, “Its use in IBD has promising improvement in the therapeutic effect and overall quality of life.”

“This study highlights and supports substantial therapeutic effects of cannabis in the management of IBD patients, be it their pain control, improving nausea, appetite and sleep, remission rates, earlier time to recovery, shortened hospitalization and faster endoscopic improvement,” she pointed out, noting the need for further studies, but also that most organizations, including the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation, support policies that facilitate the conduct of clinical research using objective parameters and the potential development of cannabinoid-based medications in the management of our patients with IBD.

Dr. Dasu, Dr. Blair, and Dr. Williams have declared no financial disclosures.

COPENHAGEN – Mortality rate, length of hospital stay, and cost of hospitalization all drop significantly in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) concurrently using cannabis, shows a study that supports wider availability of the substance for specified medical use.

Inpatient mortality dropped by more than 70% in those patients concurrently using cannabis for another indication, compared with those not taking the drug, while total cost of hospitalization dropped by more than $11,000.

The findings were presented as a poster by Neethi Dasu, DO, PGY 6 Gastroenterology Fellow, at Jefferson Health Hospital, N.J., at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization. Dr. Dasu worked with coinvestigator Brian Blair, DO, FACOI, Gastroenterology Program Director, IBD specialist, at the same hospital.

“This study reveals substantial benefits of cannabis in the management of patients with IBD,” Dr. Dasu said. “Not only do patients spend less time in hospital, but they also have a decrease in mortality and hospital cost, which can be significant for patients with IBD, a chronic condition, that often burdens them with high health care spend.”

The researcher also highlighted that with annual U.S. health care spending on IBD having increased significantly in recent years, getting patients well and out of the hospital in a timely manner is key and that “cannabis might help in this aim.”

Cannabis use is legalized in some U.S. states for medical treatment of several chronic, debilitating disorders, especially cancer. Currently, there is no direct Food and Drug Administration approval for use for IBD. “Utilizing it would be considered off-label and investigational,” Dr. Dasu pointed out.

Patients report cannabis, as a pain control treatment, is effective for acute flares and chronic IBD, said Dr. Dasu. “It is an excellent agent for pain control that is not a narcotic, as with opioids, which can cause dependence and addiction. These could ultimately harm patients in the long term,” she addedin an interview. “Opioids can also cause drowsiness and side effects, which harm a person’s quality of life.”
 

Patients with IBD using cannabis concurrently

Dr. Dasu and her coresearchers aimed to see if outcomes including mortality and pain could be modified with “a very accessible and cost-efficient agent that does not cause long term addiction or adverse events.”

She added that previous studies had evaluated the clinical response in patients with IBD and concomitant cannabis use, but that their study was novel because it looked at inpatient outcomes as well as overall hospital cost.

Dr. Dasu and colleagues analyzed data over the years 2015-2019, from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), a large publicly available all-payer inpatient care database, which encompasses approximately 7 million inpatient hospitalizations annually in the United States.

All included patients had IBD, either ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease, were aged 18 years and over, and used cannabis for a concurrent indication.

Odds ratios were calculated for in-hospital mortality, average length of hospital stay, and hospital charges, after adjusting for age, gender, race, primary insurance payer status, hospital type and size (number of beds), hospital region, hospital teaching status, and other demographic characteristics.

Of the 1,198,839 patients with IBD, 29,445 used cannabis for a different indication. Participants had an average age of 38.7 years.
 

Highly significant drop in mortality and hospital costs

Inpatient mortality shows a significant decrease of 72% (odds ratio, 0.28; confidence interval, 0.19-0.41, P < .0001) in those who concurrently used cannabis, compared with those who did not. Hospital length of stay also dropped by –0.17 days (95% CI, –0.35 to –0.01; P < .041), and this translated into a significant drop in the total cost of hospitalization from $39,309.00 (IBD without cannabis use) to $28,254.30 (IBD with cannabis use), resulting in an $11,054.70 savings (95% CI, –$13,681.15 to –$8,427.24; P < .0001).

As a chronic inflammatory disease, IBD involves immune dysregulation leading to symptoms of nausea, vomiting, bleeding, and abdominal pain; however, the pathophysiologic mechanism is not fully understood. She added that studies in mice had shown that cannabis acts via cannabinoid 1 and 2 receptors, located in the nervous system, to decrease pain, nausea, and vomiting. “Mechanisms of cannabis’s analgesic effect also involves inhibition of the release of neurotransmitters involved in pain and inflammation.”

Asked how she felt about the future for cannabis treatment in IBD, Dr. Dasu remarked that it would most likely require decriminalizing marijuana use on a federal level, although individual states currently offer exemptions.

“Further research should be done to evaluate the medical benefits of cannabis use in patients with IBD, with studies warranted to investigate the factors that may be driving these differences, as well warranted to investigations into the effect of cannabis on remission rates, rates of hospitalization, potential complications, and quality of life,” concluded Dr. Dasu.

Commenting on the study, Mary-Jane Williams, MD, a gastroenterology fellow at East Carolina University Health Medical Center, Greenville, N.C., told this news organization that the study was “a pleasant breath of information on the topic of cannabis use in IBD,” adding that providers often face questions about cannabis use from patients.

“Modulation of the endocannabinoid system ... plays a key role in the pathogenesis of IBD including pain control, limiting intestinal inflammation, and decreasing intestinal motility,” Dr. Williams said, adding that, “Its use in IBD has promising improvement in the therapeutic effect and overall quality of life.”

“This study highlights and supports substantial therapeutic effects of cannabis in the management of IBD patients, be it their pain control, improving nausea, appetite and sleep, remission rates, earlier time to recovery, shortened hospitalization and faster endoscopic improvement,” she pointed out, noting the need for further studies, but also that most organizations, including the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation, support policies that facilitate the conduct of clinical research using objective parameters and the potential development of cannabinoid-based medications in the management of our patients with IBD.

Dr. Dasu, Dr. Blair, and Dr. Williams have declared no financial disclosures.

Gout-associated genetic factors increase the risk of gout by nearly two and a half times among people with a close family history of the disease. The risk is approximately three times higher among people with a family history of gout who are also heavy drinkers; for people with a family history of gout who are also overweight, the risk is four times higher, according to a large population-based study from South Korea.

The increased familial risk of gout (hazard ratio, 2.42) dropped only slightly after adjustment for lifestyle and biological risk factors (HR, 2.29), suggesting that genes are the key drivers for the risk of gout among first-degree relatives.

Robert Kirk/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Risk was highest among individuals with an affected brother (HR, 3.00), followed by father (HR, 2.33), sister (HR, 1.97), and mother (HR, 1.68).

“Although the familial aggregation of gout [where a first-degree relative has the disease] is influenced by both genetic and lifestyle/biological factors, our findings suggest that a genetic predisposition is the predominant driver of familial aggregation,” first author Kyoung-Hoon Kim, PhD, from Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, Wonju-si, South Korea, and colleagues wrote in Arthritis Care and Research.

However, lifestyle is still important, as suggested by comparisons with members of the general population who do not have a family history of gout or a high body mass index (BMI). The risk increased for persons with a family history of gout who were also overweight (HR, 4.39), and it increased further for people with obesity (HR, 6.62), suggesting a dose-response interaction, the authors wrote.

When family history was combined with heavy alcohol consumption, the risk rose (HR, 2.95) in comparison with the general population who had neither risk factor.

The study fills a gap in evidence on “familial risk of gout as opposed to hereditary risk of gout, which has long been recognized,” the researchers wrote.

In addition, the findings suggest the possibility of a dose-dependent gene-environment interaction, “as the combination of both a family history of gout and either high BMI or heavy alcohol consumption was associated with a markedly increased risk of disease, which was even further elevated among obese individuals.”

Abhishek Abhishek, MD, professor of rheumatology and honorary consultant rheumatologist at Nottingham (England) University Hospitals NHS Trust, reflected on the minimal attenuation after adjustment for lifestyle and demographic factors. “This suggests that most of the familial impact is, in fact, genetic rather than due to shared environmental factors and is an important finding.”

He said in an interview that the findings also confirmed the synergistic effect of genetic and lifestyle factors in causing gout. “Lifestyle factors such as alcohol excess and obesity should be addressed more aggressively in those with a first-degree relative with gout.

“Although not directly evaluated in this study, aggressive management of excess weight and high alcohol consumption may prevent the onset of gout or improve its outcomes in those who already have this condition,” he added.
 

Study of over 5 million individuals with familial aggregation of gout

The researchers drew on data from the government-operated mandatory insurance service that provides for South Korea’s entire population of over 50 million people (the National Health Insurance database), as well as the National Health Screening Program database. Information on familial relationships and risk factor data were identified for 5,524,403 individuals from 2002 to 2018 who had a blood-related first-degree relative.

Familial risk was calculated by comparing the risk of individuals with and those without affected first-degree relatives. Interactions between family history and obesity or alcohol consumption were assessed using a scale that measured gout risk due to interaction of two factors.

Initially, adjustments to familial risk were made with respect to age and sex. Subsequently, possible risk factors included smoking, BMI, hypertension, and hyperglycemia.

Alcohol consumption levels were noted and categorized as nondrinker, moderate drinker, or heavy drinker, with different consumption levels for men and women. For men, heavy drinking was defined as having at least two drinks per week and at least five drinks on any day; for women, heavy drinking was defined as having at least two drinks per week and at least four drinks on any day.

Overweight and obesity were determined on the basis of BMI, using standard categories: overweight was defined as BMI of 25 to less than 30 kg/m2, and obesity was defined as BMI of 30 or higher.

Dr. Kim and coauthors noted that both high BMI and heavy drinking were associated with an increased risk of gout, regardless of whether there was a family history of the disease, and that the findings suggest “a dose-dependent interactive relationship in which genetic factors and obesity potentiate each other rather than operating independently.”

People who are both overweight and have a family history of disease had a combined risk of gout that was significantly higher than the sum of their individual risk factors (HR, 4.39 vs. 3.43). This risk was accentuated among people with obesity (HR, 6.62 vs. 4.74) and was more pronounced in men than in women.

In other risk analyses in which familial and nonfamilial gout risk groups were compared, the risk associated with obesity was higher in the familial, compared with the nonfamilial group (HR, 5.50 vs. 5.36).

Bruce Rothschild, MD, a rheumatologist with Indiana University Health, Muncie, and research associate at Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, shared his thoughts on the study in an interview and noted some limitations. “The findings of this study do not conflict with what is generally believed, but there are several issues that complicate interpretation,” he began. “The first is how gout is diagnosed. Since crystal presence confirmation is rare in clinical practice, and by assumption of the database used, diagnosis is based on fulfillment of a certain number of criteria, one of which is hyperuricemia – this is not actual confirmation of diagnosis.”

He pointed out that the incidence of gout depends on who received treatment, and the study excluded those who were not receiving treatment and those who were not prescribed allopurinol or febuxostat. “Single parents were also excluded, and this may also have affected results.

“Overweight and obesity were not adjusted for age, and the interpretation is age dependent,” he added. “It really comes down to the way gout is diagnosed, and this is a worldwide problem because the diagnosis has been so dumbed down that we don’t really know what is claimed as gout.”

Dr. Kim and coauthors disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Abhishek has received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca and Oxford Immunotech and personal fees from UpToDate, Springer, Cadilla Pharmaceuticals, NGM Bio, Limbic, and Inflazome. Dr. Rothschild disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Gout-associated genetic factors increase the risk of gout by nearly two and a half times among people with a close family history of the disease. The risk is approximately three times higher among people with a family history of gout who are also heavy drinkers; for people with a family history of gout who are also overweight, the risk is four times higher, according to a large population-based study from South Korea.

The increased familial risk of gout (hazard ratio, 2.42) dropped only slightly after adjustment for lifestyle and biological risk factors (HR, 2.29), suggesting that genes are the key drivers for the risk of gout among first-degree relatives.

Robert Kirk/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Risk was highest among individuals with an affected brother (HR, 3.00), followed by father (HR, 2.33), sister (HR, 1.97), and mother (HR, 1.68).

“Although the familial aggregation of gout [where a first-degree relative has the disease] is influenced by both genetic and lifestyle/biological factors, our findings suggest that a genetic predisposition is the predominant driver of familial aggregation,” first author Kyoung-Hoon Kim, PhD, from Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, Wonju-si, South Korea, and colleagues wrote in Arthritis Care and Research.

However, lifestyle is still important, as suggested by comparisons with members of the general population who do not have a family history of gout or a high body mass index (BMI). The risk increased for persons with a family history of gout who were also overweight (HR, 4.39), and it increased further for people with obesity (HR, 6.62), suggesting a dose-response interaction, the authors wrote.

When family history was combined with heavy alcohol consumption, the risk rose (HR, 2.95) in comparison with the general population who had neither risk factor.

The study fills a gap in evidence on “familial risk of gout as opposed to hereditary risk of gout, which has long been recognized,” the researchers wrote.

In addition, the findings suggest the possibility of a dose-dependent gene-environment interaction, “as the combination of both a family history of gout and either high BMI or heavy alcohol consumption was associated with a markedly increased risk of disease, which was even further elevated among obese individuals.”

Abhishek Abhishek, MD, professor of rheumatology and honorary consultant rheumatologist at Nottingham (England) University Hospitals NHS Trust, reflected on the minimal attenuation after adjustment for lifestyle and demographic factors. “This suggests that most of the familial impact is, in fact, genetic rather than due to shared environmental factors and is an important finding.”

He said in an interview that the findings also confirmed the synergistic effect of genetic and lifestyle factors in causing gout. “Lifestyle factors such as alcohol excess and obesity should be addressed more aggressively in those with a first-degree relative with gout.

“Although not directly evaluated in this study, aggressive management of excess weight and high alcohol consumption may prevent the onset of gout or improve its outcomes in those who already have this condition,” he added.
 

Study of over 5 million individuals with familial aggregation of gout

The researchers drew on data from the government-operated mandatory insurance service that provides for South Korea’s entire population of over 50 million people (the National Health Insurance database), as well as the National Health Screening Program database. Information on familial relationships and risk factor data were identified for 5,524,403 individuals from 2002 to 2018 who had a blood-related first-degree relative.

Familial risk was calculated by comparing the risk of individuals with and those without affected first-degree relatives. Interactions between family history and obesity or alcohol consumption were assessed using a scale that measured gout risk due to interaction of two factors.

Initially, adjustments to familial risk were made with respect to age and sex. Subsequently, possible risk factors included smoking, BMI, hypertension, and hyperglycemia.

Alcohol consumption levels were noted and categorized as nondrinker, moderate drinker, or heavy drinker, with different consumption levels for men and women. For men, heavy drinking was defined as having at least two drinks per week and at least five drinks on any day; for women, heavy drinking was defined as having at least two drinks per week and at least four drinks on any day.

Overweight and obesity were determined on the basis of BMI, using standard categories: overweight was defined as BMI of 25 to less than 30 kg/m2, and obesity was defined as BMI of 30 or higher.

Dr. Kim and coauthors noted that both high BMI and heavy drinking were associated with an increased risk of gout, regardless of whether there was a family history of the disease, and that the findings suggest “a dose-dependent interactive relationship in which genetic factors and obesity potentiate each other rather than operating independently.”

People who are both overweight and have a family history of disease had a combined risk of gout that was significantly higher than the sum of their individual risk factors (HR, 4.39 vs. 3.43). This risk was accentuated among people with obesity (HR, 6.62 vs. 4.74) and was more pronounced in men than in women.

In other risk analyses in which familial and nonfamilial gout risk groups were compared, the risk associated with obesity was higher in the familial, compared with the nonfamilial group (HR, 5.50 vs. 5.36).

Bruce Rothschild, MD, a rheumatologist with Indiana University Health, Muncie, and research associate at Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, shared his thoughts on the study in an interview and noted some limitations. “The findings of this study do not conflict with what is generally believed, but there are several issues that complicate interpretation,” he began. “The first is how gout is diagnosed. Since crystal presence confirmation is rare in clinical practice, and by assumption of the database used, diagnosis is based on fulfillment of a certain number of criteria, one of which is hyperuricemia – this is not actual confirmation of diagnosis.”

He pointed out that the incidence of gout depends on who received treatment, and the study excluded those who were not receiving treatment and those who were not prescribed allopurinol or febuxostat. “Single parents were also excluded, and this may also have affected results.

“Overweight and obesity were not adjusted for age, and the interpretation is age dependent,” he added. “It really comes down to the way gout is diagnosed, and this is a worldwide problem because the diagnosis has been so dumbed down that we don’t really know what is claimed as gout.”

Dr. Kim and coauthors disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Abhishek has received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca and Oxford Immunotech and personal fees from UpToDate, Springer, Cadilla Pharmaceuticals, NGM Bio, Limbic, and Inflazome. Dr. Rothschild disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Gout-associated genetic factors increase the risk of gout by nearly two and a half times among people with a close family history of the disease. The risk is approximately three times higher among people with a family history of gout who are also heavy drinkers; for people with a family history of gout who are also overweight, the risk is four times higher, according to a large population-based study from South Korea.

The increased familial risk of gout (hazard ratio, 2.42) dropped only slightly after adjustment for lifestyle and biological risk factors (HR, 2.29), suggesting that genes are the key drivers for the risk of gout among first-degree relatives.

Robert Kirk/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Risk was highest among individuals with an affected brother (HR, 3.00), followed by father (HR, 2.33), sister (HR, 1.97), and mother (HR, 1.68).

“Although the familial aggregation of gout [where a first-degree relative has the disease] is influenced by both genetic and lifestyle/biological factors, our findings suggest that a genetic predisposition is the predominant driver of familial aggregation,” first author Kyoung-Hoon Kim, PhD, from Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, Wonju-si, South Korea, and colleagues wrote in Arthritis Care and Research.

However, lifestyle is still important, as suggested by comparisons with members of the general population who do not have a family history of gout or a high body mass index (BMI). The risk increased for persons with a family history of gout who were also overweight (HR, 4.39), and it increased further for people with obesity (HR, 6.62), suggesting a dose-response interaction, the authors wrote.

When family history was combined with heavy alcohol consumption, the risk rose (HR, 2.95) in comparison with the general population who had neither risk factor.

The study fills a gap in evidence on “familial risk of gout as opposed to hereditary risk of gout, which has long been recognized,” the researchers wrote.

In addition, the findings suggest the possibility of a dose-dependent gene-environment interaction, “as the combination of both a family history of gout and either high BMI or heavy alcohol consumption was associated with a markedly increased risk of disease, which was even further elevated among obese individuals.”

Abhishek Abhishek, MD, professor of rheumatology and honorary consultant rheumatologist at Nottingham (England) University Hospitals NHS Trust, reflected on the minimal attenuation after adjustment for lifestyle and demographic factors. “This suggests that most of the familial impact is, in fact, genetic rather than due to shared environmental factors and is an important finding.”

He said in an interview that the findings also confirmed the synergistic effect of genetic and lifestyle factors in causing gout. “Lifestyle factors such as alcohol excess and obesity should be addressed more aggressively in those with a first-degree relative with gout.

“Although not directly evaluated in this study, aggressive management of excess weight and high alcohol consumption may prevent the onset of gout or improve its outcomes in those who already have this condition,” he added.
 

Study of over 5 million individuals with familial aggregation of gout

The researchers drew on data from the government-operated mandatory insurance service that provides for South Korea’s entire population of over 50 million people (the National Health Insurance database), as well as the National Health Screening Program database. Information on familial relationships and risk factor data were identified for 5,524,403 individuals from 2002 to 2018 who had a blood-related first-degree relative.

Familial risk was calculated by comparing the risk of individuals with and those without affected first-degree relatives. Interactions between family history and obesity or alcohol consumption were assessed using a scale that measured gout risk due to interaction of two factors.

Initially, adjustments to familial risk were made with respect to age and sex. Subsequently, possible risk factors included smoking, BMI, hypertension, and hyperglycemia.

Alcohol consumption levels were noted and categorized as nondrinker, moderate drinker, or heavy drinker, with different consumption levels for men and women. For men, heavy drinking was defined as having at least two drinks per week and at least five drinks on any day; for women, heavy drinking was defined as having at least two drinks per week and at least four drinks on any day.

Overweight and obesity were determined on the basis of BMI, using standard categories: overweight was defined as BMI of 25 to less than 30 kg/m2, and obesity was defined as BMI of 30 or higher.

Dr. Kim and coauthors noted that both high BMI and heavy drinking were associated with an increased risk of gout, regardless of whether there was a family history of the disease, and that the findings suggest “a dose-dependent interactive relationship in which genetic factors and obesity potentiate each other rather than operating independently.”

People who are both overweight and have a family history of disease had a combined risk of gout that was significantly higher than the sum of their individual risk factors (HR, 4.39 vs. 3.43). This risk was accentuated among people with obesity (HR, 6.62 vs. 4.74) and was more pronounced in men than in women.

In other risk analyses in which familial and nonfamilial gout risk groups were compared, the risk associated with obesity was higher in the familial, compared with the nonfamilial group (HR, 5.50 vs. 5.36).

Bruce Rothschild, MD, a rheumatologist with Indiana University Health, Muncie, and research associate at Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, shared his thoughts on the study in an interview and noted some limitations. “The findings of this study do not conflict with what is generally believed, but there are several issues that complicate interpretation,” he began. “The first is how gout is diagnosed. Since crystal presence confirmation is rare in clinical practice, and by assumption of the database used, diagnosis is based on fulfillment of a certain number of criteria, one of which is hyperuricemia – this is not actual confirmation of diagnosis.”

He pointed out that the incidence of gout depends on who received treatment, and the study excluded those who were not receiving treatment and those who were not prescribed allopurinol or febuxostat. “Single parents were also excluded, and this may also have affected results.

“Overweight and obesity were not adjusted for age, and the interpretation is age dependent,” he added. “It really comes down to the way gout is diagnosed, and this is a worldwide problem because the diagnosis has been so dumbed down that we don’t really know what is claimed as gout.”

Dr. Kim and coauthors disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Abhishek has received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca and Oxford Immunotech and personal fees from UpToDate, Springer, Cadilla Pharmaceuticals, NGM Bio, Limbic, and Inflazome. Dr. Rothschild disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.