Explore the vast range of titles available.

The chronic inflammation of Crohn's disease is caused, at least in part, by repression of TGF-β1 signaling, which is caused by high levels of SMAD7. This trial shows that mongersen, an antisense inhibitor of SMAD7 mRNA, induces disease remission in some persons. Crohn’s disease is a chronic inflammatory illness that primarily affects the terminal ileum and right colon. Crohn’s disease–related inflammation is segmental and transmural, leading to various degrees of tissue damage. 1 At disease onset, most patients have inflammatory lesions, which become predominantly strictures or penetrating lesions over time. 2 , 3 Mucosal healing can be promoted with the use of immunosuppressive drugs and anti–tumor necrosis factor α (TNF- α ) antibodies; however, more than one third of patients do not have a response to these therapies. The efficacy of these drugs may also diminish over time, and they can increase a patient’s risk . . .

The use of ustekinumab and vedolizumab as second-line therapies in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) in which tumour necrosis factor alpha inhibitors (TNFi) failed is still debated. The aim of this study was to compare, in a large multicenter observational retrospective cohort, the effectiveness of ustekinumab and vedolizumab as second-line therapies, as assessed by clinical and objective outcomes including endoscopy and gastrointestinal imaging. Clinical response, remission, and steroid-free remission at weeks 26 and 52 were evaluated in a retrospective propensity score-weighted and propensity score-matched cohort of patients in which TNFi failed. Objective response and remission were evaluated by 1 or more techniques among endoscopy, magnetic resonance/computed tomography enteroclysis, and small bowel ultrasound. A total of 470 patients with CD (239 treated with ustekinumab and 231 treated with vedolizumab) were included in the study. At week 26, clinical outcomes were similar between the 2 groups. At week 52, clinical remission (ustekinumab 42.5% vs vedolizumab 55.5%, P = 0.01) and steroid-free remission (ustekinumab 40.6% vs vedolizumab 51.1%, P = 0.038) rates were significantly higher in vedolizumab-treated patients. Three hundred two patients (hundred thirty-five treated with ustekinumab and hundred sixty-seven treated with vedolizumab) had an objective evaluation of disease activity at baseline and week 52. At week 52, objective response and remission rates were similar between the 2 groups. Clinical response at week 26 predicted steroid-free remission at week 52 in both ustekinumab-treated and vedolizumab-treated patients. Safety profiles were similar between the 2 groups. In patients with CD in which TNFi failed, both ustekinumab and vedolizumab showed similar clinical effectiveness after 26 weeks of treatment. At 1 year, vedolizumab was associated with a higher rate of clinical remission when compared with ustekinumab. However, no difference was observed between the 2 groups when objective outcomes were investigated at this time point.

During past years, the increasing knowledge of molecular mechanisms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have led to the development of several targeted biological therapies. This great expansion of available medical options has prompted the need for comparative data between drugs. For years, given that most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were performed only versus placebo, this demand has clashed with the absence of head-to-head trials comparing two or more treatments. The quality of evidence coming from real-world experience was low overall, so it was extremely difficult to clarify the correct positioning of the biologicals inside the therapeutic algorithms for IBD. Fortunately, times are changing: head-to-head comparative RCTs have been conducted or are ongoing, and the methodological quality of real-world studies is gradually increasing, mainly thanks to a higher rate of application of statistical methods capable of reducing the selection bias, such as the propensity score. In this evolving scenario, the increasing number of comparative RCTs is providing high-quality data for a correct drug positioning in IBD. In parallel, real-world observational studies are supporting the data coming from RCTs, and covering those comparisons not performed in the RCT setting. We believe that there is moderate evidence already available to support clinicians in the correct choice between different biologicals, and data will certainly be more robust in the near future.

Background: The efficacy of tofacitinib (TOFA) in various rheumatic diseases has generated interest in its potential benefits for treating spondyloarthritis (SpA) associated with ulcerative colitis (UC). Objectives: RETUCAS (Real-world Effectiveness of Tofacitinib on Ulcerative Colitis-Associated Spondyloarthropathy) is the first study designed to evaluate the effectiveness of TOFA in UC-associated SpA. Design: This was a prospective, multicentre, single-arm, observational study promoted by the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Effectiveness was assessed using standardized rheumatologic scores. Methods: Patients with UC and a confirmed diagnosis of active axial or peripheral SpA at baseline were enrolled. The primary endpoint was steroid-free joint response (SFJR) at weeks 8 and 52, defined as a decrease of ⩾1.1 units in Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score-C-Reactive Protein (CRP) for axial SpA, or a decrease of >0.6 units in Disease Activity Score 28-CRP for peripheral SpA, without the use of corticosteroids. Results: A total of 44 patients were enrolled: axial SpA: 9.1%; peripheral SpA: 70.4%; mixed axial and peripheral SpA: 20.5% All but two patients had previous exposure to biologic therapies, with more than half having failed two or more biologics. At week 8, SFJR was achieved in 52.3% of patients, with a significant difference between those with peripheral SpA and those with axial or mixed forms (67.7% vs 15.4%; p = 0.001). At week 52, SFJR was maintained in 59.1% of patients overall, again with better outcomes in peripheral SpA compared to axial/mixed SpA (71.0% vs 30.8%; p = 0.01). Conclusion: This is the first prospective study specifically designed to assess Inflammatory Bowel Diseases-associated SpA. In patients with UC and refractory SpA—many of whom had previously failed multiple biologic therapies—TOFA demonstrated effectiveness, particularly in those with peripheral SpA. Plain language summary Tofacitinib helps control joint symptoms in people with ulcerative colitis: Results from a real-world Italian study People with ulcerative colitis (UC) often experience joint inflammation, a condition known as spondyloarthritis (SpA). This study looked at whether a medication called tofacitinib, already used for UC and some joint diseases, could also help manage joint problems linked to UC. Researchers across multiple centers in Italy followed 44 patients with UC and active joint symptoms (either in the spine, limbs, or both) who started taking tofacitinib. They checked whether the patients’ joint symptoms improved without needing steroids after 8 weeks and again after 1 year. After 8 weeks, about half of the patients showed improvement without using steroids. The results were more positive in patients with joint problems in the limbs (called peripheral SpA) compared to those with spinal involvement (axial SpA). After 1 year, around 6 in 10 patients had improved, again with better results seen in peripheral SpA. This is the first study focused specifically on UC-related joint inflammation using rheumatology-specific tools. It suggests that tofacitinib can be effective for joint symptoms, especially in the limbs, in patients with UC who have not responded to other treatments.

Crohn’s disease (CD) is an immune-mediated inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with a multifactorial pathogenesis involving genetic predisposition, immune dysregulation, and environmental triggers. Dietary patterns have recently garnered growing attention for their potential benefits and risks in patients with IBD. Nutritional therapy has been established as an effective option in pediatric populations, but its role in adults remains less defined. The available studies indicate that while no single diet can be universally recommended, adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with multiple health benefits. Nutritional therapy appears promising in inducing clinical remission in adults with mild to moderate CD, particularly when partial enteral nutrition is combined with food-based modifications. Tailoring these strategies to cultural contexts and providing support from qualified dietitians may improve adherence, clinical outcomes, and overall quality of life. This review highlights the growing role of nutritional therapy in adult CD and its potential integration into routine management alongside conventional treatments.

Introduction: The risk of new or recurrent cancer in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients with a history of cancer treated with immunomodulators (IMMs), including conventional immunosuppressors (ISSs), biologics or small molecules is undefined. The primary aim was to assess the frequency of new or recurrent cancer in IBD patients treated with IMMs after first cancer. The secondary aim was to evaluate risk factors for new/recurrent cancer in the same IBD population. Methods: In a retrospective multicenter study, all IBD patients using any IMM after first (index) cancer were enrolled. Inclusion criteria: Crohn’s disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC), history of any cancer, detailed clinical history, and follow-up after cancer of ≥6 months. Exclusion criteria: IMM use for ≤3 months. Results: In total, 122 IBD patients (84 CD, 38 UC) treated with IMMs after first cancer were enrolled (age 59.5 [26–89] years). Index cancer included (n = [%]) genitourinary tract cancer (18 [14.8]), non-melanotic skin cancer (NMSC) (17 [13.9]), breast cancer (15 [12.3]), thyroid cancer (13 [10.7]), melanoma (14 [11.4]), colorectal cancer (CRC) (11 [9.0]), hematopoietic cancer (9 [7.4]), prostatic cancer (8 [6.6]), neuroendocrine cancer (4 [3.3]), head and neck cancer (3 [2.5]), liver cancer (3 [2.5]), endometrium cancer (2 [1.6]), lung cancer (1 [0.8]) and others (3 [2.5]). ISSs after cancer included (n = [%]) thiopurines (10 [37]), methotrexate (MTX) (14 [51.9]) and others (3 [11.1]) Biologics included (n = [%]) TNF-inhibitors (36 [32.4]), vedolizumab (60 [53.6]), ustekinumab (45 [40.2]), small molecules (9 [7.3]) and others (6 [5.4]). In a median follow-up of 8 [1–45] years after index cancer, 12/122 (9.8%) patients using IMMs after cancer developed new or recurrent cancer. No risk factors for new/recurrent cancer (i.e., age at diagnosis of cancer, smoke, gender, IBD type, IMM use, duration before or after cancer) were identified. Conclusions: In a multicenter study, ISSs or biologics after cancer were not identified as risk factors for new or recurrent cancer in IBD. However, IMMs were used after a long-term interval from index cancer.

Background In Italy, the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection peaked in April and November 2020, defining two pandemic waves of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study compared the characteristics and outcomes of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and SARS-CoV-2 infections between pandemic waves. Methods Observational longitudinal study of IBD patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with established diagnoses of IBD and of SARS-CoV-2 infection were consecutively enrolled in two periods: (i) first wave, from 1 March 2020 to 31 May 2020; and (ii) second wave, from 15 September to 15 December 2020. Results We enrolled 937 IBD patients (219 in the first wave, 718 in the second wave). Patients of the first wave were older (mean ± SD: 46.3 ± 16.2 vs. 44.1 ± 15.4 years, p  = 0.06), more likely to have ulcerative colitis (58.0% vs. 44.4%, p  < 0.001) and comorbidities (48.9% vs. 38.9%; p < 0.01), and more frequently residing in Northern Italy (73.1% vs. 46.0%, p  < 0.001) than patients of the second wave. There were no significant differences between pandemic waves in sex (male: 54.3% vs. 53.3%, p  = 0.82) or frequency of active IBD (44.3% vs. 39.0%, p  = 0.18). The rates of negative outcomes were significantly higher in the first than second wave: pneumonia (27.8% vs. 11.7%, p  < 0.001), hospital admission (27.4% vs. 9.7%, p  < 0.001), ventilatory support (11.9% vs. 5.4%, p  < 0.003) and death (5.5% vs. 1.8%, p  < 0.007). Conclusion Between the first and second SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves, demographic, clinical and geographical features of IBD patients were different as were the symptoms and outcomes of infection. These differences are likely due to the different epidemiological situations and diagnostic possibilities between the two waves.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which includes Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), is a complex, immune-mediated, disorder which leads to several gastrointestinal and systemic manifestations determining a poor quality of life, disability, and other negative health outcomes. Our knowledge of this condition has greatly improved over the last few decades, and a comprehensive management should take into account both biological (i.e., disease-related, patient-related) and non-biological (i.e., socioeconomic, cultural, environmental, behavioral) factors which contribute to the disease phenotype. From this point of view, the so called 4P medicine framework, including personalization, prediction, prevention, and participation could be useful for tailoring ad hoc interventions in IBD patients. In this review, we discuss the cutting-edge issues regarding personalization in special settings (i.e., pregnancy, oncology, infectious diseases), patient participation (i.e., how to communicate, disability, tackling stigma and resilience, quality of care), disease prediction (i.e., faecal markers, response to treatments), and prevention (i.e., dysplasia through endoscopy, infections through vaccinations, and post-surgical recurrence). Finally, we provide an outlook discussing the unmet needs for implementing this conceptual framework in clinical practice.