Sebastian Shaji, Lisle Jessica, Subramanian Sreedhar, Dhar Anjan, Shenoy Achut, Limdi Jimmy, Butterworth Jeffrey, Allen Patrick B, Samuel Sunil, Moran Gordon, Shenderey Richard, Parkes Gareth, Raine Tim, Lobo Alan J, Kennedy Nicholas A
IBD Unit, Department of Gastroenterology, Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, UK.
Hull York Medical School, Hull, UK.
Frontline Gastroenterol. 2019 Aug 17;11(4):272-279. doi: 10.1136/flgastro-2019-101277. eCollection 2020.
Lack of comparative trial data on dosing regimens of infliximab in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) failing intravenous corticosteroids has resulted in variability of rescue regimes in ASUC with potential impact on clinical outcomes. We aimed to evaluate practice variability and physician perspectives in decision-making with rescue therapy.
An internet-based survey of members of the inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) section of the British Society of Gastroenterology was conducted. The survey evaluated provider characteristics and general practice in the setting of ASUC, followed by a vignette with linked questions.
The response rate of the survey was 31% (209/682 IBD section members). 134 (78%) reported they would use standard infliximab dose (5 mg/kg) while 37 (22%) favoured a higher front-loading dose of 10 mg/kg citing low albumin, high C-reactive protein as their reason for their preference. IBD specialists chose the higher front-loading dose more often compared with other gastroenterologists (p=0.01) In the specific case vignette, accelerated induction (AI) was favoured by 51% of the respondents while 25% used the standard induction regime and 19% favoured colectomy. IBD specialists more often favoured AI compared with other gastroenterologists (p=0.03) with the main reason being presence of predictors of low infliximab levels (74%). The reasons cited for favouring standard induction (n=57) included lack of evidence for AI (18), their usual practice (11), unlicensed regime (7), and safety concerns (4).
There are significant variations in practice in the use of infliximab rescue therapies with an urgent need for development of care pathways to standardise practice.
对于静脉注射皮质类固醇治疗失败的急性重症溃疡性结肠炎(ASUC)患者,英夫利昔单抗给药方案缺乏对比试验数据,导致ASUC抢救方案存在差异,可能影响临床结局。我们旨在评估抢救治疗决策中的实践差异和医生观点。
对英国胃肠病学会炎症性肠病(IBD)分会成员进行了一项基于互联网的调查。该调查评估了ASUC背景下的医疗服务提供者特征和常规做法,随后是一个带有相关问题的案例。
调查的回复率为31%(209/682名IBD分会成员)。134名(78%)报告他们会使用标准英夫利昔单抗剂量(5mg/kg),而37名(22%)倾向于更高的初始剂量10mg/kg,理由是白蛋白水平低、C反应蛋白水平高。与其他胃肠病学家相比,IBD专家更常选择更高的初始剂量(p=0.01)。在特定的案例中,51%的受访者倾向于加速诱导(AI),而25%使用标准诱导方案,19%倾向于结肠切除术。与其他胃肠病学家相比,IBD专家更常倾向于AI(p=0.03),主要原因是存在英夫利昔单抗水平低的预测因素(74%)。支持标准诱导(n=57)的理由包括缺乏AI的证据(18)、他们的常规做法(11)、未获许可的方案(7)和安全担忧(4)。
英夫利昔单抗抢救治疗的使用存在显著的实践差异,迫切需要制定护理路径以规范实践。