Utilization of Treat-to-Target Monitoring Colonoscopy After Treatment Initiation in the US-Based Study of a Prospective Adult Research Cohort With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Introduction: Endoscopic healing has been associated with improved long-term clinical outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and is a recommended target for treatment. Evidence is limited regarding real-world uptake and patterns of treat-to-target monitoring to assess endoscopic healing after treatment initiation. We aimed to estimate the proportion of patients in the Study of a Prospective Adult Research Cohort with IBD (SPARC IBD) who received colonoscopy in the 3-15 months after starting a new IBD treatment.

Methods: We identified SPARC IBD patients who initiated a new biologic (infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, golimumab, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab) or tofacitinib. We estimated the proportion of patients who received colonoscopies in the 3-15 months after IBD treatment initiation and described use by patient subgroups.

Results: Among 1,708 eligible initiations from 2017 to 2022, the most common medications were ustekinumab (32%), infliximab (22%), vedolizumab (20%), and adalimumab (16%). The median patient age was 38 years, with 66% Crohn's disease; 55% were female, and 12% were non-White. In the 3-15 months after medication initiation, 49.3% (95% confidence interval 46.2%-52.5%) of initiations were followed by a colonoscopy. Colonoscopy use was similar between ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, but was higher among male patients, those older than 40 years, and those who received colonoscopy within 3 months of initiation. Colonoscopy use varied between study sites, from 26.6% (15.0%-38.3%) to 63.2% (54.5%-72.0%).

Discussion: Approximately half of SPARC IBD patients received colonoscopy in the 3-15 months after initiation to a new IBD treatment, suggesting a low uptake of treat-to-target colonoscopy for the assessment of mucosal healing in real-world clinical practice. The variation in colonoscopy use between study sites suggests a lack of consensus and a need for more robust evidence around whether or not the practice of routine monitoring colonoscopy is associated with improved patient outcomes.