Clinical Case Summary

Aims: We report 3 cases of new inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) which occurred in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients undergoing ocrelizumab therapy over last year in Irish Teaching Hospital setting.
Background: Ocrelizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CD20-positive B cells, is an established treatment for MS. While it is generally well-tolerated, emerging reports suggest a possible link to gastrointestinal complications, including IBD.
Methods: Three MS patients presented after starting ocrelizumab with gastrointestinal symptoms suggestive of inflammatory bowel disease. They were fast-tracked for endoscopic evaluation by an experienced gastroenterologist specializing in IBD. Diagnosis was based on clinical presentation, endoscopic findings, and histological analysis. Data regarding symptom onset, disease severity, colitis grade, inflammation distribution, and treatment response were assessed.
Results: A temporal relationship was observed between ocrelizumab initiation and IBD onset in all three cases, with symptoms emerging after 4-6 infusions. Reported symptoms included diarrhoea, nausea, urgency, and abdominal pain. Faecal calprotectin levels at time of referral ranged from 900 to 1800 µg/g. Endoscopy confirmed mild colitis and terminal ileitis, while histology revealed active colitis with cryptitis, acute terminal ileitis, or normal colon findings. Treatment with steroids, Mesalazine, and antibiotics led to symptom resolution in all cases. Discontinuing ocrelizumab resulted in recovery within 4-6 weeks, with no relapse over an average follow-up of two months.
Conclusion: These cases suggest a potential association between ocrelizumab and IBD onset or exacerbation in MS patients. Symptom resolution upon drug withdrawal supports a possible causal relationship. Clinicians should be aware of this risk to facilitate early detection, management, and patient education.

References

https://journals.lww.com/acgcr/Fulltext/2022/01000/Severe_Ocrelizumab_Induced_Enterocolitis_Treated.31.aspx
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32198886/

Disclosure

No Conflict of Interest

Introduction

Long-term data on bowel urgency (BU) in Crohn’s disease (CD) are limited, and the associations with other efficacy outcomes are not well studied.

Aims & Methods

Our aims were to examine the long-term efficacy of mirikizumab (MIRI) on BU remission and the associations between BU remission and clinical remission, endoscopic remission, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) improvement at week (W) 104 in patients with moderately to severely active CD who were randomized to MIRI in the Phase 3 study VIVID-1 and continued into the long-term extension study VIVID-2. In VIVID-1, the MIRI group received induction with 900 mg intravenously (IV) at W0, W4, and W8, then 300 mg subcutaneously (SC) every 4W. W52 endoscopic responders (≥50% reduction from baseline in Simple Endoscopic Score for CD [SES-CD]) continued MIRI SC dosing in VIVID-2. Endoscopic non-responders received reinduction with MIRI IV (3x Q4W) at the start of VIVID-2 followed by SC dosing (IV-SC) as described. Patients that had an Urgency Numeric Rating Scale (UNRS) ≥3 (least to worst range 0-10) at baseline were included in these analyses. BU remission was defined as an UNRS score of ≤2. Associations between BU remission with clinical remission by Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI), endoscopic remission, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue (range 0-52, higher is better), and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) remission, were assessed at W104, within the VIVID-1 W52 endoscopic response subgroups as well as the MIRI total group. Discontinuations or missing data were handled using modified non-responder imputation (mNRI) for categorical data. Missing values were imputed by multiple imputation and modified baseline observation carried forward for FACIT-Fatigue change from baseline.

Results

Over 50% of the MIRI total group, 56% of MIRI W52 endoscopic responders, and 43% of the MIRI W52 endoscopic non-responders achieved BU remission at W104. In the MIRI total group, a significantly higher percentage of patients achieved clinical remission, endoscopic remission and IBDQ remission at W104 in the BU remission group compared to those without BU remission. The improvement in fatigue by FACIT-Fatigue score was significantly more in the group with BU remission versus those without BU remission (p<0.0001). In both MIRI W52 endoscopic responders and non-responders, patients who achieved BU remission at W104, compared to those who did not, achieved significantly higher rates of clinical remission, greater improvements in FACIT-Fatigue, and higher rates of quality of life improvement measured by IBDQ remission (Table 1).

Table 1

Conclusion

Over 50% of patients with CD achieved BU remission at 2 years of treatment with MIRI. These results highlight that the achievement of BU remission corresponded with improvements to outcomes important to patients with CD, underscoring the importance of long-term management of BU in improving overall patient outcomes.

Disclosure

SRV: has received consulting fees, speaker’s honoraria and unrestricted research grants from Abbott, Alfasigma, Amgen, Arenapharm, BMS, Falk Pharma GmbH, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Gilead, iQuone, Janssen, MSD, Permamed, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, Schwabe Pharma, Takeda, Tillotts, UCB and Vifor
DTR: receives grants or contracts from Takeda, and discloses consultancy fees with AbbVie, Altrubio, Apex, Avalo Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Buhlmann Diagnostics Corp, Celgene, Connect BioPharma, Intouch Group, Iterative Health, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Lilly, Pfizer, Samsung Neurologica, and Takeda. He serves on the Board of Directors for Cornerstones Health.
JW, GY, AV, REM, and RRH: Employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly.
GD-H: Has received research grants from: Alimentiv BV, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer, and Takeda; and consulting fees from: AbbVie, Alimentiv, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly and Company, GSK, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Sorriso Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, Tillotts Pharma AG, and Ventyx Biosciences
ST: has received grants from: AbbVie, BUHLMANN Diagnostics, ECCO, Eli Lilly and Company, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Norman Collison Foundation, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Schering-Plough, Takeda, UCB Pharma, Vifor Pharma, and Warner Chilcott; and reports other disclosures from: Abacus Pharma, AbbVie, Actial Farmaceutica, ai4gi, Alcimed, Allergan, Amgen, Aptel, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Aspen Pharmacare, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Atlantic Pharmaceuticals, Barco, Biocare Medical, Biogen, BL Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, BUHLMANN Diagnostics, Calcico Therapeutics, Celgene, Cellerix, Cerimon Pharmaceuticals, ChemoCentryx, Chiesi, Cisbio, Comcast, Coronado Biosciences, Cosmo Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Falk Pharma, Ducentis BioTherapeutics, Dynavax Technologies, Elan Pharma, Eli Lilly and Company, Enterome, Equillium, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Galapagos NV, Genentech/Roche, Genzyme, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Grünenthal, GW Pharmaceuticals, Immunocore, Indigo Biosciences, Janssen, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Medarex, MedTrix, Merck, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Mestag Therapeutics, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Neovacs, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, NPS Pharmaceuticals/Nycomed, Ocera Therapeutics, OPTIMA Pharma, Origin Pharma, Otsuka, Palau Pharma, Pentax Medical, Pfizer, PharmaVentures, Phesi, Phillips Pharma Group, Procter & Gamble, Pronota, Proximagen, Resolute Pharma, Robarts Clinical Trials, Sandoz, Santarus, Satisfai Health, Sensyne Health, Shire, Sigmoid Pharma, Sorriso Pharmaceuticals, Souffinez, SynDermix, Synthon, Takeda, Theravance Biopharma, TiGenix, Tillotts Pharma AG, Topivert, Trino Therapeutics with Wellcome Trust, TxCell SA, UCB Pharma, Vertex Pharma, VHsquared, Vifor Pharma, Warner Chilcott, and Zeria Pharmaceutical
AW: reports consulting and/or speaking fees from Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ferring, Galapagos, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda.

Introduction

A large proportion of people with DGBI in the general population, including irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and functional dyspepsia (FD), do not seek healthcare (HC) for their condition, but their reasons are poorly understood. We aimed to develop a questionnaire to assess different reasons an individual may not consult a doctor for current gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms.

Aims & Methods

The Reasons for Not Seeking Healthcare (RNSH) questionnaire was created from content derived from 8 focus groups with 23 DGBI patients in the United States and Australia and guided by author experience. Participants rated how important each of 21 items is in causing them not to see a doctor for current (within the last 3 months) GI symptoms on a 4-point Likert scale (Not at all, A Little, Moderately, Very). Adults in 9 countries (Canada, China, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Poland, Romania, Spain, United States) completed an online survey including the RNSH, the Rome IV Diagnostic questions for IBS and FD, and questions about medical history, HC utilization, and demographics. Respondents who experienced gastroduodenal or bowel symptoms in the past 3 months but had not sought care for those symptoms were included in Exploratory Principal Component Factor Analysis (PCFA) with Promax rotation evaluating the structure and potential sub-scales of RNSH. Items for each factor were summed and transformed into equal 0-100 sub-scales. Reliability of the RNSH was also assessed.

Results

A total of 17,663 adults completed the online survey and 12,666 (80%) of those had GI symptoms in the last 3 months but had not sought care for them: 51% female; mean age 45.5 years (SD=16.3); 5.7% had Rome IV IBS and 10.7% had FD. Of these, 73.7% had never sought care for digestive problems. The RNSH questionnaire demonstrated very good internal consistency (Cronbach α= 0.88) and split-half reliability (Guttman λ²= 0.89). PCFA yielded 3 factors; 4 items were removed due to poor loading. Reasons for not seeking care include: “negative HC expectations”, “prefer non-medical alternatives”, and “prefer a wait-and-see approach”. The 3 factors collectively accounted for 48% of the variance (Adjusted R²) in RNSH score. The strongest factor keeping people from seeking HC for GI symptoms (highest standardized mean subscale score) was adopting a “wait and see” approach (Table). People meeting Rome IV criteria for IBS or FD were markedly more likely to avoid seeking care due to negative HC expectations than those who did not meet Rome criteria (p<.001) with a medium effect size (d=0.48) and to prefer using non-medical alternatives (p<.001) with a small effect size (d=0.29). No differences existed between the two groups for preferring a wait-and-see approach (p=.087).

Table. Factor Structure with Mean Adjusted Scores for the Three Sub-Scales of the RNSH

Conclusion

This study identified, and showed the relative importance of, three distinct factors that keep people from seeing a doctor for their current digestive symptoms. Specifically, people with IBS or FD may avoid seeking HC based on negative expectations for such care or prefer to use alternative methods such as diet modification or stress reduction techniques. The RNSH may be useful for identifying and helping to overcome specific barriers to timely DGBI treatment that may lead to poorer outcomes.