The main therapeutic goal of ulcerative colitis (UC) is to induce and maintain remission to prevent long-term disease progression. Treat-to-target strategies, first introduced by the STRIDE consensus and updated in 2021, have shifted focus from symptomatic control toward more stringent objective endpoints. Today, patient monitoring should be based on a combination of biomarkers and clinical scores, while patient-reported outcomes could be used as short-term targets in monitoring disease activity and therapeutic response. In addition, endoscopic healing was the preferred long-term goal in UC. A Mayo endoscopic score (MES) ≤ 1 can be recommended as a minimum target. However, recent evidence suggests that more stringent endoscopic goals (MES of 0) are associated with superior outcomes. Recently, emerging data support that histological remission (HR) is a superior prognostic factor to endoscopic healing in predicting long-term remission. Despite not yet being recommended as a target, HR may become an important potential therapeutic goal in UC. However, it remains questionable if histological healing should be used as a routine assessment in addition to clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic targets in all patients. Therefore, in this review, our aim was to discuss the current evidence for the different treatment targets and their value in everyday clinical practice.

Background and Aim: Newer biologics appeared safer in landmark clinical trials, but their safety is understudied in vulnerable populations. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety of available biologicals in the elderly IBD population. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed/Medline and conference proceedings between 1 April 1969 and 1 June 2021 to identify eligible studies that examined the safety of biologics in elderly patients with IBD. Of the 2885 articles and 12 congress abstracts identified, 12 peer reviewed papers and 3 abstracts were included after independent evaluation by two reviewers. The identified studies collected safety data on anti-TNF, vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST). Results: Rates of AE and infections were not different among the biologics (AE mean rate: 11.3 (CI 95% 9.9–12.7)/100 pts-years; p = 0.11, infection mean rate: 9.5 (CI 95% 8.4–10.6)/100 pts-years; p = 0.56) in elderly IBD patients on anti-TNF, VDZ or UST. Infusion/injection reaction rates were more common on anti-TNFs (mean rate: 2.51 (CI 95% 1.7–3.4/100 pts-years; p = 0.02). and malignancy rates were higher on VDZ/UST (mean rate: 2.14 (CI 95% 1.6–2.8)/100 pts-years; p = 0.01). Conclusions: Rates of AEs and infections were not different among biologicals. Infusion/injection reactions were more common on anti-TNFs. Current data are insufficient to suggest the sequencing of biologicals in elderly patients based on safety.

Background and Aims. The impact of COVID‐19 has been of great concern in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) worldwide, including an increased risk of severe outcomes and/or possible flare of IBD. This study aims to evaluate prevalence, outcomes, the impact of COVID‐19 in patients with IBD, and risk factors associated with severe COVID‐19 or flare of IBD activity. Methods. A consecutive cohort of IBD patients who were diagnosed with COVID‐19 infection and followed up at the McGill University Health Care Centre was obtained between March 1, 2020, and April 30, 2021. Demographics, comorbidities, IBD (type, treatments, pre‐ and post‐COVID‐19 clinical activity, biomarkers, and endoscopic activity), and COVID‐19‐related outcomes (pneumonia, hospitalization, death, and flare of IBD disease) were analyzed. Results. A cohort of 3,516 IBD patients was included. 82 patients (2.3%) were diagnosed with COVID‐19 infection (median age: 39.0 (IQR 27.8–48.0), 77% with Crohn’s disease, 50% were female). The prevalence of COVID‐19 infection in IBD patients was significantly lower compared to the general population in Canada and Quebec (3.5% versus 4.3%, p < 0.001). Severe COVID‐19 occurred in 6 patients (7.3%); 2 patients (2.4%) died. A flare of IBD post‐COVID‐19 infection was reported in 8 patients (9.8%) within 3 months. Biologic therapy was held during active COVID‐19 infection in 37% of patients. Age ≥55 years (odds ratio (OR): 11.1, 95% CI: 1.8–68.0), systemic corticosteroid use (OR: 4.6, 95% CI: 0.7–30.1), active IBD (OR: 3.8, 95% CI: 0.7–20.8), and comorbidity (OR: 4.9, 95% CI: 0.8–28.6) were factors associated with severe COVID‐19. After initial infection, 61% of IBD patients received COVID‐19 vaccinations. Conclusion. The prevalence of COVID‐19 infection among patients with IBD was lower than that in the general population in Canada. Severe COVID‐19, mortality, and flare of IBD were relatively rare, while a large proportion of patients received COVID‐19 vaccination. Older age, comorbidities, active IBD disease, and systemic corticosteroid, but not immunosuppressive or biological therapy, were associated with severe COVID‐19 infection.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) aid therapeutic decision making in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who lose response to anti-TNF therapy. Our aim was to evaluate the frequency and predictive factors of loss of response (LOR) to adalimumab using TDM in IBD patients. One hundred twelve IBD patients (with 214 TDM measurements, CD/UC 84/28, male/female 50/62, mean age CD/UC: 36/35 years) were enrolled in this consecutive cohort from two referral centres in Hungary. Demographic data were comprehensively collected and harmonized monitoring strategy was applied. Previous and current therapy, laboratory data and clinical activity were recorded at the time of TDM. Patients were evaluated either at the time of suspected LOR or during follow-up. TDM measurements were determined by commercial ELISA (LISA TRACKER, Theradiag, France). Among 112 IBD patients, LOR/drug persistence was 25.9%/74.1%. The cumulative ADA positivity (>10 ng/mL) and low TL (<5.0 μg/mL) was 12.1% and 17.8% after 1 year and 17.3% and 29.5% after 2 years of adalimumab therapy. Dose intensification was needed in 29.5% of the patients. Female gender and ADA positivity were associated with LOR (female gender: p < 0.001, OR:7.8 CI 95%: 2.5–24.3, ADA positivity: p = 0.007 OR:3.6 CI 95%: 1.4–9.5). ADA development, low TL and need for dose intensification were frequent during adalimumab therapy and support the selective use of TDM in IBD patients treated with adalimumab. ADA positivity and gender were predictors of LOR.