P975 Monitoring Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) by intestinal ultrasound decreases time to treatment change and time to remission in comparison to conventional management: Analysis of patients with IBD on multiple IBD therapies

Abstract

Abstract Background Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is a non-invasive, repeatable, and accurate disease monitoring modality that can provide real-time assessment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We previously demonstrated that IUS shortens time to treatment change and time to remission in patients receiving upadacitinib and monitored by IUS compared to conventional management (ACG 2023). Here, we aim to assess the impact of IUS on management and outcomes of our pts with IBD receiving any IBD therapy. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who completed induction therapy (per individual drug label) but have active disease as measured by SCCAI >2 or HBI >4 between October 2021 and October 2023. We assessed for the time to treatment change (time from a positive clinical index to the time of a medical decision made), and time to clinical remission (time from a positive clinical index to the time of normalization (SCCAI ≤2, HBI ≤4 of the clinical index) and compared those between patients monitored by IUS and those managed with a conventional approach. Patients were matched by their provider and disease type. Active disease by faecal calprotectin (FCP) (FCP >150 mcg/g) and endoscopy (Mayo endoscopic score (MES) >0) were assessed ± a month before a positive clinical index was collected. An abnormal IUS was considered bowel wall thickness (BWT) >3 mm in the colon or terminal ileum and any hyperemia by colour Doppler signal (CDS) (modified Limberg score >0). Chi square analysis was performed, with p<0.10 significance. Results 54 patients (63 encounters) were included in this analysis (33 in the IUS cohort, 30 in the conventional management cohort) from 3 different providers. At inclusion, 9 (27%) pts in the IUS group and 10 (33.3%) in the conventional group had elevated FCP, and 5 (15.2%) pts in the IUS group and 29 (96%) had endoscopic disease. In the IUS group, the average time-to-treatment change was 2.2 (±1.2) days compared to conventional management 25.6 (±14.5), p=0.050. A total of 44 patients achieved clinical remission (22 IUS; 22 conventional management). The average time to remission in the IUS group was 128.1 days (±22.3) vs 230.6 (±38.2) days in the conventional management group, p=0.035). Drug class did not affect time to treatment change or time to remission (Table 1). The most significant reason for delay in the conventional group compared to the IUS group was awaiting endoscopy and FCP results. Conclusion Using IUS to assess disease activity in IBD is associated with earlier treatment changes and shorter time to remission compared to conventional approaches to disease monitoring, independent of therapy choice. Ongoing dissemination and incorporation of IUS in the management of IBD are warranted.