Ustekinumab is an effective therapy for adult Crohn's disease (CD), but data in paediatric CD patients are scarce. The aim of the study was to describe the real-life effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in paediatric CD. This is a multicentre review of children with Crohn's disease treated with ustekinumab. The aim of our study was to describe the effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in paediatric real-life practice. This is a study of the Paediatric IBD (inflammatory bowel disease) Porto group of ESPGHAN. Corticosteroid (CS)- and exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN)-free remission, defined as weighted Paediatric Crohn's Disease Activity Index (wPCDAI) < 12.5, and physician global assessment (PGA) were determined at weeks 12 and 52. A total of 101 children were included at a median age of 15.4 years (IQR 12.7-17.2) with a median follow-up of 7.4 months (IQR 5.6-11.8). Ninety-nine percent had received prior anti-TNF, 63% ≥ 2 anti-TNFα therapies and 22% vedolizumab. Baseline median wPCDAI was 39 (IQR 25-57.5) (71 (70%) patients with moderate-severe activity). Weeks 12 and 52 CS- and EEN-free remission were both 40.5%. Clinical response at week 6, iv induction route and older age at onset of ustekinumab treatment were predictive factors associated with clinical remission at week 12. Seven minor adverse events probably related to ustekinumab were reported. One patient died from an unrelated cause. Conclusion: Our results suggest that ustekinumab is effective and safe in children with chronically active or refractory CD. What is Known: • Ustekinumab is an effective therapy for adult moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD). • Off-label use of ustekinumab in children is increasing especially in anti-TNF refractory CD. What is New: • Is the largest cohort of real-world use of ustekinumab in paediatric CD to date. • Clinical response at week 6, iv induction and older age at onset of ustekinumab were predictive factors associated with clinical response at week 12.
- MeSH
- Crohnova nemoc * farmakoterapie MeSH
- dítě MeSH
- indukce remise MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- stupeň závažnosti nemoci MeSH
- ustekinumab * terapeutické užití MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- dítě MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
OBJECTIVES: Adult studies suggest that patients with isolated colonic Crohn disease (L2 CD) exhibit unique characteristics differentiating them from patients with ileo-caecal (L1) CD and ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to characterize clinical features and outcomes of paediatric patients with L2. METHODS: Retrospective data was collected through the Porto Inflammatory Bowel Disease group of the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) on Paediatric patients with L2, L1 or UC at different time-points. Outcome measures included time to first flare, hospital admissions, initiation of anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) drug, stricture and surgery. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were included: 102 L1, 94 L2 and 104 UC. Rates of hematochezia at presentation were 14.7%, 44.7% and 95.2%, while rates of fever were 12.7%, 26.6% and 2.9%, for patients with L1, L2 and UC, respectively (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Skip lesions were identified in 65% of patients with L2, and granulomas in 36%, similar to L1 patients. Rates of anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibodies (ASCA) and perinuclear antineutrophil cytoplasmic (pANCA) positivity significantly differed between the three groups: 25.4% and 16.7% for patients with L2, compared with 55.2% and 2.3%, and 1.8% and 52.9% for patients with L1 and UC, respectively. Response rates to exclusive enteral nutrition were comparable between L1 and L2 (78.3-82.4%), as was the response to oral steroids (70.4-76.5%) in the three groups. While times to first flare and admission were similar between groups, patients with L1 were commenced on anti-TNFα earlier. Moreover, stricturing phenotype and need for colectomy were very rare in patients with L2. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences are observed in the clinical presentation and outcomes of Paediatric patients with L2, compared to patients with L1 and UC.
- MeSH
- Crohnova nemoc * diagnóza terapie MeSH
- diferenciální diagnóza MeSH
- dítě MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- protilátky fungální MeSH
- protilátky proti cytoplazmě neutrofilů MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- Saccharomyces cerevisiae MeSH
- ulcerózní kolitida * diagnóza MeSH
- Check Tag
- dítě MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Thromboprophylaxis use in paediatric inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] is inconsistent. Current guidelines only support treating children with acute severe colitis with risk factors. We convened an international RAND panel to explore thromboprophylaxis in paediatric IBD inpatients in the context of new evidence. METHODS: We convened a geographically diverse 14-person panel of paediatric gastroenterologists alongside supporting experts. An online survey was sent before an online meeting. Panellists were asked to rate the appropriateness of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised paediatric IBD patients via 27 scenarios of varying ages, gender, and phenotype, with and without thrombotic risk factors. Anonymised results were presented at the meeting. A second modified survey was distributed to all panellists present at the meeting. Results from the second survey constitute the RAND panel results. The validated RAND disagreement index defined disagreement when ≥ 1. RESULTS: The combined outcome of thromboprophylaxis being considered appropriate until discharge and inappropriate to withhold was seen in 20 of 27 scenarios, including: all patients with new-onset acute severe colitis; all flares of known ulcerative colitis, irrespective of risk factors except in pre-pubescent patients with limited disease and no risk factors; and all Crohn's patients with risk factors. Disagreement was seen in five scenarios regarding Crohn's without risk factors, where outcomes were already uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: RAND panels are an established method to assess expert opinion in areas of limited evidence. This work therefore constitutes neither a guideline nor a consensus; however, the findings suggest a need to re-evaluate the role of thromboprophylaxis in future guidelines.
