Dataset Information

Primary Failure to an Anti-TNF Agent in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Switch (to a Second Anti-TNF Agent) or Swap (for Another Mechanism of Action)?

ABSTRACT: About a third of patients with inflammatory bowel disease do not respond to anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy, which is challenging. To review the current data on the two main strategies when facing primary non-response to an anti-TNF agent in inflammatory bowel disease: changing to a second anti-TNF (switching) or to a drug with another mechanisms of action (swapping). We performed a bibliographic search to identify studies reporting on efficacy of any biologic treatment after primary anti-TNF non-response. The efficacy of a second anti-TNF is lower when the reason to withdraw the first one is primary failure. Nevertheless, switching to another anti-TNF even after primary failure may still be effective in some patients. Both vedolizumab and ustekinumab have generally been shown to be less effective in anti-TNF exposed patients. However, despite primary anti-TNF failure, patients may respond to vedolizumab or ustekinumab in a limited but considerable number of cases. The cause for swapping (primary vs. secondary anti-TNF failure) seems to have limited effect on vedolizumab efficacy. Primary anti-TNF non-response seems to be a clearer predictor of treatment failure for ustekinumab. Unfortunately, the two main strategies to treat specifically a patient with primary non-response to an anti-TNF agent-switching to a second anti-TNF or swapping for vedolizumab/ustekinumab-have not been properly compared. The data reviewed in the present study clearly emphasise the imperative need to carry out head-to-head randomised trials in patients exposed to anti-TNF agents in general, and specifically in those with primary non-response to these agents.

SUBMITTER: Gisbert JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8625924 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Primary Failure to an Anti-TNF Agent in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Switch (to a Second Anti-TNF Agent) or Swap (for Another Mechanism of Action)?

Gisbert Javier P JP Chaparro María M

Journal of clinical medicine 20211115 22

<h4>Background</h4>About a third of patients with inflammatory bowel disease do not respond to anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy, which is challenging.<h4>Aim</h4>To review the current data on the two main strategies when facing primary non-response to an anti-TNF agent in inflammatory bowel disease: changing to a second anti-TNF (switching) or to a drug with another mechanisms of action (swapping).<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a bibliographic search to identify studies reporting on ...[more]

PMID: 34830595

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAnti-drug antibodies are associated with treatment failure to anti-TNF agents in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).AimTo assess whether immunogenicity to a patient's first anti-TNF agent would be associated with immunogenicity to the second, irrespective of drug sequence METHODS: We conducted a UK-wide, multicentre, retrospective cohort study to report rates of immunogenicity and treatment failure of second anti-TNF therapies in 1058 patients with IBD who underwent therapeutic drug monitoring for both infliximab and adalimumab. The primary outcome was immunogenicity to the second anti-TNF agent, defined at any timepoint as an anti-TNF antibody concentration ≥9 AU/ml for infliximab and ≥6 AU/ml for adalimumab.ResultsIn patients treated with infliximab and then adalimumab, those who developed antibodies to infliximab were more likely to develop antibodies to adalimumab, than patients who did not develop antibodies to infliximab (OR 1.99, 95%CI 1.27-3.20, p = 0.002). Similarly, in patients treated with adalimumab and then infliximab, immunogenicity to adalimumab was associated with subsequent immunogenicity to infliximab (OR 2.63, 95%CI 1.46-4.80, p < 0.001). For each 10-fold increase in anti-infliximab and anti-adalimumab antibody concentration, the odds of subsequently developing antibodies to adalimumab and infliximab increased by 1.73 (95% CI 1.38-2.17, p < 0.001) and 1.99 (95%CI 1.34-2.99, p < 0.001), respectively. Patients who developed immunogenicity with undetectable drug levels to infliximab were more likely to develop immunogenicity with undetectable drug levels to adalimumab (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.39-4.19, p < 0.001). Commencing an immunomodulator at the time of switching to the second anti-TNF was associated with improved drug persistence in patients with immunogenic, but not pharmacodynamic failure.ConclusionIrrespective of drug sequence, immunogenicity to the first anti-TNF agent was associated with immunogenicity to the second, which was mitigated by the introduction of an immunomodulator in patients with immunogenic, but not pharmacodynamic treatment failure.

Project description:BackgroundPersonalised medicine, including biomarkers for treatment selection, may provide new algorithms for more effective treatment of patients. Genetic variation may impact drug response and genetic markers could help selecting the best treatment strategy for the individual patient.AimTo identify polymorphisms and candidate genes from the literature that are associated with anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) treatment response in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis.MethodsWe performed a PubMed literature search and retrieved studies reporting original data on association between polymorphisms and anti-TNF treatment response and conducted a meta-analysis.ResultsA functional polymorphism in FCGR3A was significantly associated with anti-TNF treatment response among CD patients using biological response criterion (decrease in C-reactive protein, levels). Meta-analyses showed that polymorphisms in TLR2 (rs3804099, OR (95% CI) = 2.17 (1.35-3.47)], rs11938228 [OR = 0.64 (0.43-0.96)], TLR4 (rs5030728) [OR = 3.18 (1.63-6.21)], TLR9 (rs352139) [OR = 0.43 (0.21-0.88)], TNFRSF1A (rs4149570) [OR = 2.06 (1.02-4.17)], IFNG (rs2430561) [OR = 1.66 (1.05-2.63)], IL6 (rs10499563) [OR = 1.65 (1.04-2.63)] and IL1B (rs4848306) [OR = 1.88 (1.05-3.35)] were significantly associated with response among IBD patients using clinical response criteria. A positive predictive value of 0.96 was achieved by combining five genetic markers in an explorative analysis.ConclusionsThere are no genetic markers currently available which are adequately predictive of anti-TNF response for use in the clinic. Genetic markers bear the advantage that they do not change over time. Therefore, hypothesis-free approaches, testing a large number of polymorphisms in large, well-characterised cohorts, are required in order to identify genetic profiles with larger effect sizes, which could be employed as biomarkers for treatment selection in clinical settings.

Dataset Information

Primary Failure to an Anti-TNF Agent in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Switch (to a Second Anti-TNF Agent) or Swap (for Another Mechanism of Action)?

Publications

Primary Failure to an Anti-TNF Agent in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Switch (to a Second Anti-TNF Agent) or Swap (for Another Mechanism of Action)?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets