Failure to Achieve Target Drug Concentrations During Induction and Not HLA-DQA1*05 Carriage is Associated with Anti-Drug Antibody Formation in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Spencer ◽  
Jordan Stachelski ◽  
Thierry Dervieux ◽  
Marla C. Dubinsky
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 162-163
Author(s):  
M Mikail ◽  
A Wilson

Abstract Background The utility of therapeutic drug monitoring for guiding the dosing of tumor necrosis factor-α antagonists (TNFAs) in luminal inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is well-established and well-accepted. TNFAs, specifically infliximab and adalimumab, have become integral to the management of the rare, neutrophilic dermatosis, pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) in IBD. Little is known regarding the target serum TNFA concentrations to guide dosing to achieve resolution of PG in IBD. Aims To describe the serum TNFA concentrations (infliximab or adalimumab) associated with the resolution of PG lesions in patients with IBD. Methods Patients with IBD and associated PG treated with one of infliximab or adalimumab (collectively known as TNFAs) seen at two academic hospitals affiliated with Western University were identified. Serum TNFA concentrations were assessed at the time of PG treatment. Results Nine patients were identified. All patients had IBD-associated PG. Seven patients were treated with infliximab and 2 patients were treated with adalimumab. All patients received standard dosing. Eight patients had complete resolution of their PG, while one had near complete resolution at the time of last follow-up. A median serum infliximab concentration of 3.00 (IQR, 3.52) µg/ml at week 14 and a median serum adalimumab concentration of 2.02 (IQR, 0.98) µg/ml at week 12 were seen at the time of PG treatment. Conclusions Herein, we report low serum TNFA concentrations despite PG healing in a cohort of IBD patients. This is lower than what is in patients for successful TNFA treatment in luminal and fistulising IBD. Funding Agencies NoneNone.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S435-S436
Author(s):  
J Guardiola ◽  
L Rodriguez Alonso ◽  
E Santacana ◽  
A Padró ◽  
K Serra ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Argüelles Arias

Currently, Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is considered an immune-mediated disease. The most widely accepted etiopathogenic hypothesis is that it is due to an inadequate interaction between the immune system and the microorganisms that form the normal intestinal flora. This abnormal interaction occurs in genetically predisposed subjects under the influence of various environmental factors (such as tobacco, diet, stress, or recurrent bacterial infections), which could act as triggers for alterations in the intestinal epithelial barrier. This would lead to an increase in the permeability of barrier, allowing the translocation of microbial products to the wall of the digestive tract, which would activate an acute cell-mediated immune response[1]. The failure of the anti-inflammatory regulatory mechanisms, together with an excess in the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, would promote an aberrant immune response that would be self-perpetuating over time, thus giving rise to the chronic inflammation that characterizes IBD[2]. Since the first descriptions of Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and Crohn's Disease (CD), many treatments have been developed, with varying degrees of safety and efficacy. At the end of the 20th century, the first biological, called Infliximab, began to be used. A biological drug is one that has a biotechnological origin and arises from proteins derived from DNA and hybridization processes, which require living organisms as a fundamental part of the production process[3]. Undoubtedly, the appearance of biologics in the therapeutic arsenal of IBD was a very important advance in the treatment of these patients, a true revolution. Until that date, many of the patients who began to be treated with this biologic could only do with corticosteroids or by surgery. These drugs have been shown to be effective in reducing intestinal damage caused by chronic inflammation, the need for surgery and hospital admissions and, consequently, have improved the quality of life of many patients[4]. The demonstrated benefit of these drugs, especially when administered early, as well as their favorable safety profile, have led to their increasingly frequent use in the treatment of patients with IBD. They can be divided into - anti-TNF drugs (blocking the cytokine TNF-α), - Vedolizumab (blocking the integrin α4β7) and - Ustekinumab (blocking Interleukin 12 and 23). Recently, and only for use in UC, Tofacitinib (an inhibitor of the JAK-kinase pathway) has been approved and has demonstrated its efficacy in the treatment of moderate-severe active UC[5]. The management of all these drugs represents a challenge for the digestive specialist who must know their mechanisms of action and use them appropriately in patients with IBD. Anti-TNF drugs, being the oldest, are the ones with which we have the most experience and, therefore, they are usually used in the first line in those cases in which conventional drugs (corticosteroids and / or immunosuppressants) have failed. There are three currently marketed in Spain: Infliximab (for intravenous administration), Adalimumab (for subcutaneous administration) and Golimumab (for subcutaneous administration). Vedolizumab (administered intravenously), and Ustekinumab (administered subcutaneously, after a first intravenous administration) are characterized by having an excellent safety profile and a very low immunogenic potential compared to anti-TNF drugs. There are many lines of research currently underway to try to identify the clinical factors of the patient that would make one drug or another more useful in the first line. Other lines seek to identify genetic factors (it seems that mutations in the HLA DQA1 * 05 haplotype could increase immunogenicity to anti-TNF drugs[6]) and also molecular factors[7]. References: [1] Neurath MF. Cytokines in inflammatory bowel disease. Nat Rev Immunol. 2014; 14(5): 329-342. [2] Zhang YZ, Li YY. Inflammatory bowel disease: Pathogenesis. World J Gastroenterol. 2014; 20(1): 91-99. [3] Pithadia AB, Jain S. Treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Pharmacol Rep. 2011; 63(3): 629-42. [4] Weisshof R, El Jurdi K, Zmeter N, Rubin DT. Emerging Therapies for Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Adv Ther. 2018; 35(11): 1746-1762. [5] Boland BS, Vermeire S. Janus Kinase Antagonists and Other Novel Small Molecules for the Treatment of Crohn’s Disease. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2017; 46(3): 627-644. [6] Sazonovs A, Kennedy NA, Moutsianas L, et al. HLA-DQA1*05 Carriage Associated With Development of Anti-Drug Antibodies to Infliximab and Adalimumab in Patients With Crohn's Disease. Gastroenterology. 2020; 158(1): 189-199. [7] Atreya R, Neurath MF. Mechanisms of molecular resistance and predictors of response to biological therapy in inflammatory bowel disease. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018; 3(11): 790-802.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 80-81
Author(s):  
C Peel ◽  
Q Wang ◽  
A Pananos ◽  
R Kim ◽  
A Wilson

Abstract Background The underlying mechanism for immunogenicity in anti-TNFa-exposed patients with inflammatory bowel disease is poorly understood. Anti-drug antibodies are a leading contributor to infliximab loss of response and adverse drug events. Currently, it is not feasible to identify patients at risk of antibody formation prior to initiating infliximab. The genetic variation HLADQA1*05(rs2097432) has been linked to infliximab antibody formation in a cohort of patients with Crohn’s disease. Aims Due to the wide variation in the frequency of HLADQA1* 05 across ethnic groups, we aim to independently evaluate the association between HLADQA1*05and infliximab antibody formation, infliximab loss of response, treatment discontinuation and adverse drug events, in a Canadian inflammatory bowel disease cohort. Methods In a retrospective cohort study, infliximab-exposed patients with inflammatory bowel disease (n=262) were screened for the genetic variation, HLADQA1*05A>G(rs2097432). The risk of infliximab anti-drug antibody formation, infliximab loss of response, adverse events, and discontinuation were assessed in wild type (GG) and variant-carrying (AG or AA) individuals. Results Forty percent of all participants were HLADQA1*05A>Gvariant carriers, with 79% of participants with infliximab antibodies carrying at least one variant allele. The risk of infliximab antibody formation was higher in HLADQA1*05A>Gvariant carriers in an IBD population (adjusted HR=7.29, 95%CI=2.97–17.191, p=1.46x10-5) independent of age, sex, weight, dose and co-immunosuppression with an immunomodulator. Variant carrier status was associated with an increased risk of infliximab loss of response (adjusted HR=2.34, 95%CI=1.41–3.88, p=0.001) and discontinuation (adjusted HR=2.27, 95%CI=1.46–3.43, p=2.53x10-4) though not with infliximab-associated adverse drug events. Conclusions HLADQA1*05 is independently associated with a high risk of infliximab antibody formation in addition to infliximab loss of response and treatment discontinuation. As a result, we propose that pre-emptive genetic screening for the HLADQA1* 05A>Gvariant would be useful in order to predict individuals at risk of developing immunogenicity. There may be a role for genotype-guided application of combination therapy in inflammatory bowel disease. Funding Agencies NoneWolfe Medical Research Chair in Pharmacogenomics (MOP-89753 to RBK), the Academic Medical Organization of Southwestern Ontario (INN18-005 to RBK and AW; S17-004 to AW), and Lawson Health Research Institute (IRF-05-19 to AW)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document