Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Of Biologics Research Articles

Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Pregnancy

Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Pregnancy

P467 Therapeutic drug monitoring of biologics in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Nordic survey on implementation and barriers in clinical practice

Abstract Background Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is a useful tool to optimise biologic treatments of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Albeit broadly recommended by gastrointestinal societies, it is, however, currently unknown how TDM has been adopted and is being used in everyday clinical practice. The aim of the study was to investigate how TDM has been taken up by physicians including barriers for implementation. Methods A web-based survey on TDM was distributed to all gastroenterology consultants in the Nordic countries via national gastroenterology- and IBD societies. Results Out of 377 physicians responding, 297 handled IBD patients on biologic therapies and were thus eligible for inclusion (NO 118 (40%), DK 86 (29%), SE 50 (17%), FI 33 (11%), IS 10 (3%)). The vast majority were consultant gastroenterologists (n=252, 85%), 152 (51%) were employed at university hospitals, 136 (46%) at community hospitals, and 9 (3%) in private practice. Overall, 257 (87%) used TDM during biologic therapies; 231 (90%) used reactive TDM and 163 (63%) proactive TDM. Common indications were to improve efficacy (70%), aid treatment decisions (62%), improve safety (36%), and improve cost-effectiveness (32%). Notably, Danish physicians used TDM to a significantly lesser extent than all others (58% vs 98%; odds ratio (OR) 0.03 [95%CI 0.01- 0.09], p<0.001); in particular outside the capital region (OR 0.15 [0.05–0.46], p=0.001). Reactive TDM was applied both at primary (74%) and secondary treatment failure (99%) and predominantly for TNF-inhibitors (90–98%) (vedolizumab 63%, ustekinumab 46%). Proactive TDM was used by 80% during maintenance therapy and 56% during induction, and mostly for TNF-inhibitors (79–97%) (vedolizumab 70%, ustekinumab 54%). Proactive TDM was more commonly used in NO, SE, and FI (p<0.001), and by physicians managing >10 IBD patients per week (OR 2.71 [1.34–5.48], p=0.005), but was not associated with employment at university hospital, size of hospital catchment area, or seniority. Main barriers to the use of TDM were lack of guidelines (51%), long response time from the laboratory (49%), lack of knowledge regarding how to use and interpret test results (42%), costs (38%), and currently available evidence (31%). Among physicians using TDM, only 66% reported awareness of TDM guidelines or recommendations. Conclusion TDM, and in particular reactive TDM of TNF-inhibitors, has been broadly adopted into clinical practice in the Nordic countries to improve efficacy and assist treatment decisions. Across the Nordic countries, IBD physicians call for improved test response times and, notably, TDM guidelines detailing indications for TDM and interpretation of test results.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Biologics in IBD: Essentials for the Surgical Patient.

Despite significant development in the pharmacological treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) along with the evolution of therapeutic targets and treatment strategies, a significant subset of patients still requires surgery during the course of the disease. As IBD patients are frequently exposed to biologics at the time of abdominal and perianal surgery, it is crucial to identify any potential impact of biological agents in the perioperative period. Even though detectable serum concentrations of biologics do not seem to increase postoperative complications after abdominal procedures in IBD, there is increasing evidence on the role of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in the perioperative setting. This review aims to provide a comprehensive summary of published studies reporting the association of drug concentrations and postoperative outcomes, postoperative recurrence (POR) after an ileocolonic resection for Crohn’s disease (CD), colectomy rates in ulcerative colitis (UC), and perianal fistulizing CD outcomes in patients treated with biologics. Current data suggest that serum concentrations of biologics are not associated with an increased risk in postoperative complications following abdominal procedures in IBD. Moreover, higher concentrations of anti-TNF agents are associated with a reduction in colectomy rates in UC. Finally, higher serum drug concentrations are associated with reduced rates of POR after ileocolonic resections and increased rates of perianal fistula healing in CD. TDM is being increasingly used to guide clinical decision making with favorable outcomes in many clinical scenarios. However, given the lack of high quality data deriving mostly from retrospective studies, the evidence supporting the systematic application of TDM in the perioperative setting is still inconclusive.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Biologics for Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: How, When, and for Whom?

During the past decade, we have entered an era of biologics for the treatment of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. The therapeutic goal of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management has evolved from symptom control and clinical remission to mucosal healing or even deep remission. Histological remission for ulcerative colitis and transmural healing of Crohn’s disease are potential future goals. With the adoption of the treat-to-target concept, and given the need for tight control of IBD activity, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is an important element of precision medicine. TDM involves the measurement of serum biologics and anti-drug antibodies levels, to confirm whether the right drug with the right dosage was prescribed to reach the right serum levels. TDM may help clinicians adjust biologics based on objective biomarkers instead of using empirical dosage escalation or making symptom-based therapeutic adjustments. Well-established reactive TDM algorithms have been proposed, and emerging evidence supports the clinical application of a proactive TDM strategy to enhance the duration of effective biologics and improve clinical outcomes. Recently, the proactive TDM strategy was shown to avoid the secondary loss of response to biologics, and improve long-term clinical outcomes in IBD patients. This review summarizes data from trials, and practice guidelines, on the clinical application of proactive and reactive TDM strategies for the daily care of biologic-treated IBD patients.

A Comprehensive Literature Review and Expert Consensus Statement on Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Biologics in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biologics is a rapidly evolving field. We aimed to provide a consensus statement regarding the clinical utility of TDM for biologics in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). A modified Delphi method was applied to develop consensus statements. A comprehensive literature review was performed regarding TDM of biologic therapies in IBD, and 45 statements were subsequently formulated on the potential application of TDM in IBD. The statements, along with literature, were then presented to a panel of 10 gastroenterologists with expertise in IBD and TDM who anonymously rated them on a scale of 1-10 (1 = strongly disagree and 10 = strongly agree). An expert consensus development meeting was held virtually to review, discuss, refine, and reformulate statements that did not meet criteria for agreement or that were ambiguous. During the meeting, additional statements were proposed. Panelists then confidentially revoted, and statements rated ≥7 by 80% or more of the participants were accepted. During the virtual meeting, 8 statements were reworded, 7 new statements were proposed, and 19 statements were rerated. Consensus was finally reached in 48/49 statements. The panel agreed that reactive TDM should be used for all biologics for both primary nonresponse and secondary loss of response. It was recommended that treatment discontinuation should not be considered for infliximab or adalimumab until a drug concentration of at least 10-15 μg/mL was achieved. Consensus was also achieved regarding the utility of proactive TDM for anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. It was recommended to perform proactive TDM after induction and at least once during maintenance. Consensus was achieved in most cases regarding the utility of TDM of biologics in IBD, specifically for reactive and proactive TDM of anti-tumor necrosis factors.

Dermatologists on the medical need for therapeutic drug monitoring of biologics in psoriasis: results of a structured survey

Background Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) may lead to more rational use of biologics. Still, TDM is largely underexplored in psoriasis. Little is known about the dosing behavior of biologics by dermatologists, and their attitude toward TDM. Objective Exploration of the awareness and need for the concept of TDM in psoriasis amongst (inter)national dermatologists. Method A survey was distributed at the Belgian Dermatology Days 2019 and Skin Inflammation & Psoriasis International Network (SPIN) Congress 2019. Next, an online survey version was launched amongst the SPIN Scientific Committee members. We collected physician’s characteristics, prescription behavior of biologics, data regarding clinical response to biologics and attitude toward TDM. Results A total of 107 surveys were included for analysis. Most dermatologists were Belgium-based (54.2%), others from European (23.4%) or non-European countries (19.6%). Seventy percent performed either dose increase (64.8%), time interval shortening (74.6%), dose lowering (16.9%) or time interval extension (33.8%). The majority who performed dose adaptations acknowledged the need for TDM. Conclusion This study showed most dermatologists perform dose adaptations empirically. The need for TDM was indicated by the majority, implying the need for effective communication regarding availability, utility and implementation of TDM assays in daily dermatology practice.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Biologics During Induction to Prevent Primary Non-Response.

Biologic therapies have revolutionized the management of inflammatory bowel disease [IBD], but primary and secondary non-responses occur in a significant proportion of patients. Therapeutic drug monitoring [TDM] now has an established role in the treatment algorithm for managing secondary loss of response to anti-tumour necrosis factor [anti-TNF] agents during maintenance therapy. Data to support the use of TDM in the management of secondary loss of response to vedolizumab and ustekinumab are emerging. The potential to prevent primary non-response to biologic agents during induction is of equal, and potentially greater, clinical importance. Again, most data supporting the use of 'proactive' TDM during induction pertains to the use of anti-TNF agents, but signals of efficacy for the use of TDM during induction with other biologic classes are now appearing. This review aims to summarize data on the use of TDM during induction to prevent pharmacokinetic primary non-response to all three classes of biologic therapy currently available for the treatment of IBD.

Wide variation in the use and understanding of therapeutic drug monitoring for anti-TNF agents in inflammatory bowel disease: an inexact science?

ABSTRACTBackground: We aimed to understand the way in which therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is used, understood and interpreted for anti-TNF agents in IBD.Research design and methods: We designed an 18-question survey that included 5 TDM-based clinical scenarios, for which the ‘most appropriate’ responses were based on the BRIDGe groups ‘Anti-TNF Optimizer’. This resource combines TDM evidence with expert consensus.Results: We received 110 complete responses: 50 (45%) consultants, 30 (27%) trainees, 25 (23%) IBD nurse specialists and 5 (5%) gastroenterology pharmacists. Over half (61, 55%) only carry out TDM in non-response. The remainder use TDM routinely, including during stable maintenance therapy for patients in remission. Lower therapeutic thresholds used were variable. Most (82, 75%) were unsure whether their laboratory uses a drug-tolerant or drug-sensitive antidrug antibody assay and few (15, 14%) understand the difference. Consultants, high-frequency users (> 3requests/month) and clinicians with larger anti-TNF cohorts (> 100) were significantly more likely to select the ‘most appropriate’ answer to at least 1 of the 5 TDM-based clinical scenarios.Conclusions: There exists marked heterogeneity in the practical use, understanding and interpretation of biologic TDM. Biologic decision-making, informed by TDM, should involve consultation with experienced clinicians who are frequent TDM users, ideally, as part of a multidisciplinary, biologics-focused IBD meeting.Abbreviations: TDM: therapeutic drug monitoring; CNS: clinical nurse specialist; ELISA: enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; RIA: radioimmunoassays; HMSA: homogenous mobility shift assays; BSG: British Society of Gastroenterology.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Biologics for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Answer to Optimized Treatment?

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), or the measurement of drug concentrations in blood and antidrug antibodies, for biologic therapies used to treat inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an area of growing interest within the IBD community. When there is a definable relationship between drug concentration and clinical effect, blood concentration of biologics (and antidrug antibodies assessment) could be used to predict patient response and to titrate the biologics to maximize therapeutic benefit. This dose individualization has been proven to be more efficacious and cost-effective than empiric dose adjustment and can better guide therapeutic decisions regarding therapy withdrawal or switch. Appropriate implementation and interpretation of drug concentration measurement in TDM are essential to ensure full clinical benefit. Factors that need to be considered include sources of variability, timing of blood sampling, dosing history, analytical performance, immunogenicity, comedications, and clinical status of the patients. Desired target concentrations for biologics used in IBD have not been clearly determined yet. Published concentration thresholds differed widely for a given biologic, indicating a lack of consistent information. Factors other than drug concentration that may contribute to the dose-response variation are largely missing in the current TDM setting. A target range is likely preferable to a single value for TDM of biologics in IBD, and additional prospective research needs to be conducted in order to establish these ranges. Moving forward, TDM may be combined with pharmacodynamic end points and modeling and simulation tools for improved therapeutic benefit in IBD.

Biologic Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Australia.

Biologic Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Australia.

Dose de-escalation strategies and role of therapeutic drug monitoring of biologics in RA

Dose de-escalation strategies and role of therapeutic drug monitoring of biologics in RA