Daily, Oral FMT for Long-Term Maintenance Therapy in Ulcerative Colitis: Results of a Single-Center, Prospective, Randomized Pilot Study.

This randomized study was designed to assess the safety and feasibility of long-term fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) in subjects with mild to moderate UC using frozen, encapsulated oral FMT (cFMT). FMT induction was implemented by colonoscopy, followed by 12 weeks of daily oral administration of frozen encapsulated cFMT. Ribosomal 16S bacterial sequencing was used to assess donor-induced changes in the gut microbiota. Changes in T regulatory (Treg) and mucosal associated invariant T (MAIT) cell populations were evaluated as an exploratory endpoint. Twelve subjects with active UC were randomized: 6 subjects completed the full 12-week course of FMT plus cFMT, and 6 subjects received sham treatment by colonic installation and longitudinal oral treatment. Chronic administration of cFMT was found to be safe and well-tolerated. Protocol adherence was high, and none of the study subjects experienced FMT-associated treatment emergent adverse events. While n-values were too small to draw firm conclusions, 3/6 subjects that received cFMT exhibited multiple signs of clinical improvement. These pilot data suggest that daily encapsulated cFMT may extend the durability of index FMT-induced changes in gut bacterial community structure and that an association between MAIT cell cytokine production and clinical response to FMT may exist in UC populations. Oral frozen encapsulated cFMT is a promising FMT delivery system and may be preferred for longterm treatment strategies in UC and other chronic diseases but further evaluations will have to address home storage concerns. Larger trials should be done to explore the benefits of cFMT and to determine its long-term impacts on the colonic microbiome. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02390726). Registered 17 March 2015, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02390726?term=NCT02390726&draw=2&rank=1.

Permanent Discontinuation of Glucocorticoids in Polymyalgia Rheumatica Is Uncommon but May Be Enhanced by Amino Bisphosphonates

Objective.The duration of treatment with glucocorticoids (GC) in polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) is often longterm. Amino bisphosphonates (N-BP) are used in PMR for the prevention of GC-induced osteoporosis, but they coulsd also have immunomodulatory properties. Whether they can be effective as an adjuvant treatment in PMR is unknown. We aimed to establish whether the use of N-BP in our PMR cohort may be associated with GC discontinuation.Methods.We conducted a retrospective review of all patients diagnosed with PMR recorded in our electronic medical notes. Cox regression analyses were used to examine the association between the use of N-BP and discontinuation of GC.Results.Data were retrieved for 385 patients (mean age 71 ± 10 yrs, 64% females, mean initial prednisone dose 19 ± 9 mg/day). The median followup time was 38 months (range 9–57); more than 60% of patients were exposed to N-BP. GC were discontinued in 47% of patients after a median time of 20 months (range 14–27), but subsequently restarted in 39%. Overall, 276/385 patients (72%) were actively treated at their last available evaluation (mean prednisone dose 4.9 ± 5.5 mg/day), while 123/205 (60%) were still receiving GC after 24 months of followup. The use of N-BP was associated with the discontinuation of GC (adjusted HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50–0.88), independent of age, initial GC dose, and osteoporosis.Conclusion.Unlike current guidelines, longterm treatment with GC is often necessary. These preliminary data suggest that N-BP may be involved in the management of PMR.

WED 241 Clinical relevance of regular blood monitoring in IG treatment

BackgroundABN immunoglobulin (Ig) guidelines advise routine FBC and U and E monitoring with every treatment episode and screening for IgA deficiency. AimsWe audited compliance in inflammatory neuropathy patients on longterm treatment in two UK Neurology departments. We looked for evidence of clinically relevant haematological or AKI Ig-related events.MethodsData was collected from Nov 2015 to Nov 2017. Accepted definitions for clinically and/or biochemically significant haemolysis, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and AKI were used.Results1919 treatment episodes in 90 patients were analysed. Mean age (SD)=57.6 (14.4)years, 69.1% male, 74% CIDP (26% MMN), 94% IVIg (6% SCIg). Mean dose=1.57 (0.74) g/kg/month or 97.1 (37.3) g/infusion. No clinically significant episodes of haemolysis, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia or AKI occurred in relation to Ig treatment. An asymptomatic drop of >10 g/L Hb occurred in 68/1919 episodes in 38 individuals (3.5%); mean reduction 17.7 g/L, lowest Hb 99 g/L. Two patients with CRF (stage 3) received 28 (IV) and 104 (SC) infusions respectively without impact on eGFR. Two individuals with relative IgA deficiency (0.38 g/L, 0.4 g/L) received 16 infusions over 1.5 years without complications.ConclusionsNo clinically significant Ig-related events were identified in this representative cohort. We suggest annual screening or clinically indicated testing as safe and more appropriate in longterm IVIg use.

Behavioral and/or Pharmacotherapy for Older Patients with Insomnia

This chapter provides a summary of a landmark study on short and longterm treatment of insomnia. Should older patients with insomnia be managed with cognitive behavioral therapy, benzodiazepines, or both? Starting with that question, it describes the basics of the study, including funding, study location, who was studied, how many patients, study design, study intervention, follow-up, endpoints, results, and criticism and limitations. The chapter briefly reviews other relevant studies and information, discusses implications, and concludes with a relevant clinical case. The study shows that bensodiazepines and cognitive behavioral therapy are equally effective for shorterm treatment of insomnia in otherwise healthy elderly participants but cognitive behavioral therapy is far more effective for longterm treatment of insomnia.

Longterm Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneous Abatacept in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: 5-year Results from a Phase IIIb Trial

Objective.To assess 5-year safety, tolerability, and efficacy of subcutaneous (SC) abatacept (ABA) in methotrexate (MTX)-refractory patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods.The Abatacept Comparison of sub[QU]cutaneous versus intravenous in Inadequate Responders to methotrexatE (ACQUIRE) phase IIIb, randomized, double-dummy, multinational trial compared efficacy and safety of SC and intravenous (IV) ABA in patients with RA. In the initial 6-month double-blind (DB) period, patients received IV or SC ABA, plus MTX, and in the subsequent open-label longterm extension (LTE) period, all patients received SC ABA (125 mg/wk). The final 5-year safety, tolerability, and efficacy analyses are reported.Results.Of 1385 patients who completed the DB period, 1372 entered LTE and 945 (68.8%) completed ≥ 5 years of treatment. During LTE, 97 (7.1%) patients discontinued treatment because of an adverse event (AE). Incidence rate (IR; event/100 patient-yrs of exposure; based on LTE data, 95% CI) for AE of interest were the following: serious AE 7.73 (6.96–8.58), infection 38.60 (36.24–41.12), serious infection 1.68 (1.35–2.07), malignancies 1.09 (0.84–1.42), and autoimmune disorders 1.33 (1.05–1.69), and were stable over time. No association between immunogenicity and either worsening of ABA safety or loss of efficacy was noted. Efficacy in the LTE was consistent with the DB period and was maintained to the end of the study.Conclusion.These 5-year data establish that SC ABA (125 mg/wk) has a consistent safety profile and durable efficacy for longterm treatment of patients with RA who had an inadequate response to MTX.

Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism

SummaryCancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at increased risk for both bleeding and VTE recurrence. Anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the standard of care during the initial and longterm treatment phase (i.e. during the first 3–6 months of therapy) based on its overall beneficial safety and efficacy profile compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran are approved for the treatment of acute VTE, and the combined six phase-3 trials have included > 1 500 patients with active cancer, as defined by variable selection criteria. Subgroup analyses of these patients, either pooled or separately reported, suggest that DOACs could be a safe and efficacious alternative to VKA therapy for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE. However, the populations of cancer patients included in the DOAC and LMWH trials are not comparable with regard to mortality and VTE risk, and no specific data from direct head-to-head comparisons of DOACs with LMWHs are currently available. The use of DOACs for the management of VTE in cancer is thus not recommended by clinical practice guidelines.

Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism

SummaryCancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at increased risk for both bleeding and VTE recurrence. Anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the standard of care during the initial and longterm treatment phase (i.e. during the first 3 – 6 months of therapy) based on its overall beneficial safety and efficacy profile compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran are approved for the treatment of acute VTE, and the combined six phase-3 trials have included > 1500 patients with active cancer, as defined by variable selection criteria. Subgroup analyses of these patients, either pooled or separately reported, suggest that DOACs could be a safe and efficacious alternative to VKA therapy for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE. However, the populations of cancer patients included in the DOAC and LMWH trials are not comparable with regard to mortality and VTE risk, and no specific data from direct head-to-head comparisons of DOACs with LMWHs are currently available. The use of DOACs for the management of VTE in cancer is thus not recommended by clinical practice guidelines.