OP06 5-aminosalicylates are not associated with adverse outcomes in Inflammatory Bowel Disease patients with COVID-19: Analysis from an international registry

Background Prior data have suggested that 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) may be associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19 among inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. We aimed to evaluate the association of 5-ASA with severe COVID-19 in a large cohort of IBD patients. Methods We analyzed data from the Surveillance Epidemiology of Coronavirus Under Research Exclusion for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SECURE-IBD) registry, a large, international database of IBD patients with confirmed COVID-19. The primary outcome was severe COVID-19, defined as intensive care unit admission, ventilator use, and/or death. Hospitalization due to COVID-19 was a secondary outcome. We performed multivariable regression modeling with a generalized estimating equation accounting for country as a random effect to analyze the association of 5-ASA with severe COVID-19. Models a priori included age, sex, race, disease phenotype (CD or UC/IBD-U), corticosteroid use, azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine use, TNF antagonist use, disease activity by physician global assessment, number of comorbidities, and days from SECURE-IBD inception to reporting. We constructed three models examining 5-ASA use as binary covariate using 1) all patients, 2) only patients on any biologic, and 3) only patients on TNF antagonists. Results 5,174 patients were included with 212 (4.1%) severe COVID-19 events. At the time of COVID-19 infection, 1,504 patients were taking 5-ASA. 5-ASA patients were older (mean age 44 vs. 38.3 years, p<0.001), more likely to have UC (70.7% vs. 27.7%, p<0.001), less likely to be in remission (49.6% vs. 57.2%, p<0.001), and more likely to have at least one comorbidity (33.6% vs. 26.7%, p<0.001) compared to patients not on 5-ASA. 3,325 patients were on any biologic and 2,216 were on a TNF antagonist. Among all patients, 5-ASA was not associated with severe COVID-19 (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86–1.52) (Table 1). Prior associations of age, comorbidities, TNF antagonists, and corticosteroids with severe COVID-19 were similar to prior analyses (Table 1). In analyses restricting to those on any biologic or only TNF antagonists, there was also no significant association between 5-ASA and severe COVID-19 (aOR 0.76, 95% CI 0.38–1.50 and aOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.43–2.32, respectively). Use of 5-ASA was not associated with risk of COVID-19 related hospitalization in any analysis. Conclusion In an analysis of updated data from the SECURE-IBD registry, 5-ASA use was not associated with worse outcomes among IBD patients with COVID-19.

Patient-Preferences Favoring Treatment Discontinuation Are Reduced With Vedolizumab and Ustekinumab Compared With TNF Antagonists in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Background Nonadherence to biologic therapy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with risk of relapse, immunogenicity, and disease complications. Significant nonadherence prevalence is reported with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists but the risk of nonadherence with newer biologics with better safety profiles is unknown. This study aimed to investigate if IBD patient-preferences favoring biologic discontinuation vary by biologic class and analyze factors associated with such preferences. Methods A convenience sample of 200 adults with IBD on biologic therapy treated at an academic outpatient center was surveyed using a 22-point questionnaire. Patient-preference favoring treatment discontinuation between TNF-antagonist and non-TNF-antagonist biologics [vedolizumab (VDZ)/ustekinumab (UST)] was compared using χ 2 test. Risk factors associated with a preference to discontinue biologic therapy were evaluated using univariable and multivariable logistic regression, and Spearman rank correlation analyses. Results A total of 190 questionnaires were analyzed that contained data on preferences regarding biologic discontinuation (median age 36 years, 62% were females; 63% had Crohn disease; 56% were receiving a TNF antagonist, 31% VDZ, and 14% UST). Overall, 32% patients reported a preference to discontinue biologic treatment with a higher proportion among those receiving a TNF antagonist compared with VDZ/UST (39.6% vs 21.4%; P < 0.01). Current VDZ/UST use was independently associated with a reduced odds of patient-preference favoring biologic discontinuation [adjusted odds ratio: 2.67 (1.42–5.01); P < 0.01]. The most concerning factor to patients was the perceived risk of side effects. Patients on VDZ/UST perceived their therapy to be safer than those receiving a TNF antagonist (r = 0.2, P = 0.04). Conclusions Patient-preference favoring treatment discontinuation is improved with VDZ/UST compared with TNF-antagonist biologic therapy.

Success and failure of additional immunosuppressants in steroid-refractory pneumonitis related to immune checkpoint blockade.

3078 Background: Severe immune related adverse events (irAEs) with immune checkpoint blockade are uncommon but can be fatal. Steroids are the most common initial treatment for most non-endocrine irAEs, but some patients are or become refractory to steroids. When steroids are not effective, there is limited data to guide management strategies, particularly in the context of pneumonitis. Methods: All patients at MSK treated with immune checkpoint blockade from 2013-2020 were queried for receipt of an immunosuppressant (e.g. TNF antagonists, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclophosphamide) beyond steroids. Patient records were then manually reviewed to identify patients who received such therapy for management of immunotherapy-related pneumonitis. Results: Among 5363 patients treated with immune checkpoint blockade, 364 (6.8%) received an additional immunosuppressant for an irAE, including 28 (0.5% of all patients treated) patients treated for pneumonitis. Most of these pneumonitis events (19/28, 68%) were grade 3 or higher. Agents used included mycophenolate mofetil (7/28; 25%), TNF antagonists (23/28; 82%), and cyclophosphamide (1/28; 3.5%); more than one medication was used in 3 patients (11%). The indications were primary non-response to steroids (n = 16, 57%) and recrudescence after initial response to steroids (n = 12, 43%). At 90 days from initiation of the additional immunosuppressant, 13/28 (46%) patients were alive with improvement or resolution of pneumonitis while 15/28 (54%) had died. Survival with resolution/improvement was more common in patients treated for recrudescence vs primary non-response (67% vs 25%, p = 0.05). Conclusions: Outcomes with additional immunosuppressants in the setting of steroid-refractory immune-related pneumonitis are poor, but resolution can occur in some cases. A deeper understanding of the mechanistic underpinnings of irAEs is needed to more effectively tailor immunosuppressant therapies, particularly in severe pneumonitis events.