DOP70 Anti-TNF withdrawal according to a risk-stratified protocol does not reduce the risk of relapse in patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in endoscopic remission: A prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Discontinuation of anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha agents (anti-TNF) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in remission may reduce side effects and costs, but this has to be weighed against the risk of relapse. We developed a risk-stratified protocol for anti-TNF withdrawal, and aimed to assess the risk of relapse after risk-stratified anti-TNF withdrawal. Methods This was a single arm prospective observational cohort study. Patients were recruited between September 2018–2020 in 13 hospitals in the Netherlands. Inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of IBD, age >18 years, elective anti-TNF withdrawal in a patient with quiescent disease (according to the treating physician), no current or planned use of vedolizumab, ustekinumab or tofacitinib, no hospitalization, and no active or planned pregnancy. According to the protocol, patients were recommended to withdraw anti-TNF only when in endoscopic remission either without high-risk criteria (age at diagnosis <18 years, and for Crohn’s disease [CD]: smoking, stricturing/penetrating disease behaviour, small bowel resection >50cm), or when trough levels were undetectable. We constructed Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank test to compare the risk of relapse in patients who discontinued anti-TNF in accordance with, versus against, the protocol. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of relapse. Results We enrolled 115 patients (CD: n=61, 53%), with a median follow-up time of 1.9 (IQR 1.8 – 2.1) years. Baseline endoscopic remission was confirmed in 103 (89.6%) patients, and 35 (30.4%) patients continued an immunomodulator. During follow-up, 57 (49.6%) patients relapsed (Figure 1). The relapse rate was similar in patients in endoscopic remission who withdrew anti-TNF in according with, versus against, the protocol (50.7% versus 44.4%, p=0.65), and in patients with versus without an immunomodulator (hazard rate [HR] 0.89, 95%CI 0.50 – 1.59), but was lower in patients with subtherapeutic anti-TNF trough levels (adjusted HR: 0.55, 95%CI: 0.31 – 0.99), and in patients with UC/IBD-unclassified (IBDU) who were treated with mesalamine maintenance therapy (HR: 0.35, 95%CI 0.13 – 0.94). Anti-TNF was reintroduced in 41 (71.9%) patients, with remission rates of 64.5% and 81.8% at 3 and 12 months, respectively. In 6 (15.0%) patients anti-TNF therapy was discontinued again due to primary non-response or loss of response. Conclusion The risk of relapse after anti-TNF withdrawal remains high in a strictly selected group of patients with uncomplicated IBD in endoscopic remission. Therapeutic drug monitoring prior to anti-TNF withdrawal, and mesalamine therapy for patients with UC or IBDU, may reduce the risk of relapse.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".