BACKGROUND: Intensifying infliximab therapy is often practiced in Crohn's disease (CD) patients losing response to the drug but there are no data if halving the interval is superior to doubling the dose. We aimed to assess the efficacy of infliximab dose intensification by interval-halving compared with dose-doubling. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study of CD patients losing response to infliximab was undertaken. The clinical outcome of patients whose infusion intervals were halved (5 mg/kg/4 weeks) was compared with patients treated by dose-doubling (10 mg/kg/8 weeks). RESULTS: In all, 168 patients were included from 18 centers in Europe, USA, and Israel. Of these, 112 were intensified by dose-doubling and 56 received interval-halving strategy. Early response to dose-escalation was experienced by 86/112 (77%) patients in the dose-doubling group compared with 37/56 patients (66%) in the interval-halving group (odds ratio [OR] 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8-3.4, P = 0.14). Sustained clinical response at 12 months postescalation was maintained in 50% of patients in the dose-doubling group compared with 39% in the interval-halving group (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.8-2.9, P = 0.2). On multivariate analysis, predictors of long-term response to escalation were a nonsmoking status, CD diagnosis between 16-40 years of age, and normal C-reactive protein (CRP). CONCLUSIONS: Dose intensification leads to a sustained regained response in 47% of CD patients who lost response to standard infliximab dose, but halving the infusion intervals is probably not superior to dose-doubling. Given the costs and patient inconvenience incurred by an additional infusion visit, the dose-doubling strategy may be preferable to the interval-halving strategy.
BACKGROUND: Intensifying infliximab therapy is often practiced in Crohn's disease (CD) patients losing response to the drug but there are no data if halving the interval is superior to doubling the dose. We aimed to assess the efficacy of infliximab dose intensification by interval-halving compared with dose-doubling. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study of CDpatients losing response to infliximab was undertaken. The clinical outcome of patients whose infusion intervals were halved (5 mg/kg/4 weeks) was compared with patients treated by dose-doubling (10 mg/kg/8 weeks). RESULTS: In all, 168 patients were included from 18 centers in Europe, USA, and Israel. Of these, 112 were intensified by dose-doubling and 56 received interval-halving strategy. Early response to dose-escalation was experienced by 86/112 (77%) patients in the dose-doubling group compared with 37/56 patients (66%) in the interval-halving group (odds ratio [OR] 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8-3.4, P = 0.14). Sustained clinical response at 12 months postescalation was maintained in 50% of patients in the dose-doubling group compared with 39% in the interval-halving group (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.8-2.9, P = 0.2). On multivariate analysis, predictors of long-term response to escalation were a nonsmoking status, CD diagnosis between 16-40 years of age, and normal C-reactive protein (CRP). CONCLUSIONS: Dose intensification leads to a sustained regained response in 47% of CDpatients who lost response to standard infliximab dose, but halving the infusion intervals is probably not superior to dose-doubling. Given the costs and patient inconvenience incurred by an additional infusion visit, the dose-doubling strategy may be preferable to the interval-halving strategy.
Authors: Carlos Taxonera; Manuel Barreiro-de Acosta; Marta Calvo; Cristina Saro; Guillermo Bastida; María D Martín-Arranz; Javier P Gisbert; Valle García-Sánchez; Ignacio Marín-Jiménez; Fernando Bermejo; María Chaparro; Ángel Ponferrada; María P Martínez-Montiel; Ramón Pajares; Celia de Gracia; David Olivares; Cristina Alba; Juan L Mendoza; Ignacio Fernández-Blanco Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: E G Quetglas; A Armuzzi; S Wigge; G Fiorino; L Barnscheid; M Froelich; Silvio Danese Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Christopher Andrew Lamb; Nicholas A Kennedy; Tim Raine; Philip Anthony Hendy; Philip J Smith; Jimmy K Limdi; Bu'Hussain Hayee; Miranda C E Lomer; Gareth C Parkes; Christian Selinger; Kevin J Barrett; R Justin Davies; Cathy Bennett; Stuart Gittens; Malcolm G Dunlop; Omar Faiz; Aileen Fraser; Vikki Garrick; Paul D Johnston; Miles Parkes; Jeremy Sanderson; Helen Terry; Daniel R Gaya; Tariq H Iqbal; Stuart A Taylor; Melissa Smith; Matthew Brookes; Richard Hansen; A Barney Hawthorne Journal: Gut Date: 2019-09-27 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Phillip Minar; Kimberly Jackson; Yi-Ting Tsai; Michael J Rosen; Michael Northcutt; Marat Khodoun; Fred D Finkelman; Lee A Denson Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 5.325
Authors: Carlos Taxonera; David Olivares; Juan L Mendoza; Manuel Díaz-Rubio; Enrique Rey Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-07-21 Impact factor: 5.742