DOP11 Early intestinal ultrasound predicts endoscopic response to anti-inflammatory treatment and shows drug-specific response to biologicals and tofacitinib in Ulcerative Colitis. (21st January 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: de Voogd, F; Bots, S; Van Wassenaer, E; De Jong, M; Pruijt, M; Löwenberg, M; D'Haens, G; Gecse, K
• Is Part Of: Journal of Crohn's and colitis. Volume 16(2022)Supplement 1
• Page Start: i060
• Page End: i062
• Publication Date: 2022-01-21
• Subjects: Inflammatory bowel diseases -- Periodicals; 616.344005
• DOI: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab232.050
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1873-9946

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Objective evaluation of treatment response is the gold standard in ulcerative colitis (UC). In this setting, intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is a non-invasive alternative to endoscopy. Recent studies showed change in IUS parameters after treatment initiation but studies with an endoscopic reference standard are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate early change of IUS parameters and determine cut-off values for endoscopic endpoints in UC patients starting anti-inflammatory treatment. Methods: In this longitudinal prospective study consecutive patients with moderate-severe UC (baseline endoscopic Mayo score (EMS)≥2) starting an anti-inflammatory treatment were included. Clinical scores, biochemical parameters and IUS parameters were collected at baseline, after 2 (T1), 6 (T2) and 8–26 weeks (T3) around time of the second sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy. IUS parameters were measured as previously established 1 . Endoscopic remission (ER) and mucosal healing (MH) were evaluated in the sigmoid and defined as EMS=0 and EMS≤1, respectively. The ultrasonographist and endoscopist were blinded for the outcomes of endoscopy and IUS, respectively. Results: 51 consecutive patients were included (Table 1) of whom 31 underwent a second endoscopy (MH: n=15 (45%), ER: n=9 (27%)). Two additional patients underwent colectomy and were considered non-responders. 18 patients did not undergo second endoscopy due to the COVID-19 pandemic (n=2), refusal (n=5), loss to follow-up (n=1) or treatment escalation because of clinical deterioration confirmed by IUS and biomarkers before second endoscopy was performed (n=10). Bowel wall thickness (BWT) was significantly lower from T2 onwards in patients reaching MH (p=0.026) and ER (p=0.002) at T3 (Fig 1). A significant decrease in BWT was already visible at T1 in patients receiving infliximab (p=0.001) or tofacitinib (p=0.007), but not in patients treated with vedolizumab (p=0.11) (Fig 2). Most accurate BWT cut-off values at T3 to determine MH and ER were 3.52 mm (AUROC: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.86–1.00, p<0.0001, sens: 91%, spec: 91%) and 2.98 mm (AUROC: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.85–1.00, p=0.001, sens: 87%, spec: 100%), respectively. Other IUS parameters at T3 did not improve association with MH or ER. IUS parameters at T2 that predict MH and ER are demonstrated in Table 2. Table 1 Fig 1 Fig 2 Table 2 Conclusion: BWT and Colour Doppler Signal 6 weeks after start of treatment are associated with and could predict MH and ER. In addition, treatment response patterns at IUS are drug-specific. Furthermore, we have provided accurate BWT cut-off values for endoscopic outcomes. In a point-of-care setting, (early) treatment evaluation with IUS could guide treatment decision in UC in order to optimize treatment response. Reference: 1. Bots et al, JCC, 2021