P1149 Risk of Clostridioides difficile infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease
H Martinez Lozano,P Saralegui Gonzalez,P R Fueyo Peláez,A García García,J Miranda-Bautista,E Reigadas Ramírez,L Alcalá Hernández,P Muñoz García,I Marín-Jiménez,L Menchén
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.1279
2024-01-01
Journal of Crohn's and Colitis
Abstract:Abstract Background Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). CDI in IBD patients has been associated with poor clinical outcomes including higher morbidity and mortality. Immunosuppressant therapy has been proposed as a risk factor for CDI. However, the particular relationship between biologic therapy and CDI is controversial. We aimed to assess whether biologic therapy increased the risk of developing CDI in three cohorts of patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IBD and rheumatic diseases). Methods We conducted a retrospective study including three cohorts: IBD patients receiving biologic therapies (IBD-Bio), IBD patients treated with non-biologic therapies (IBD-Bio-naïve), and patients with rheumatic diseases receiving biologics (RHEUMA-Bio). Different biologic agents were considered for IBD-Bio cohort: infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, certolizumab, ustekinumab, and vedolizumab. For RHEUMA-Bio, the biologics included were infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, certolizumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, etanercept, abatacept, tocilizumab, rituximab, guselkumab and ixekizumab. We estimated the incidence rate (IR) of CDI episodes between 2015 and 2021 among the three cohorts. Risk factors of CDI were assessed using logistic regression model. Furthermore, we performed subgroup analysis to identify risk factors of CDI in the IBD cohorts (IBD-Bio and IBD-Bio-naïve) and within the IBD-Bio cohort. We used R software for data analysis. Results Overall, we included 1868 patients, 603 in IBD-Bio, 440 in IBD-Bio-naïve, and 825 in the RHEUMA-Bio cohort. The number of CDI episodes was 3, 42, and 25 for the RHEUMA-Bio, IBD-Bio, and IBD-Bio-naïve cohorts, respectively. The IR for CDI was 1.27 100 person-years (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.91-1.71) for IBD-Bio, followed by 0.95 100 person-years (95% CI 0.61-1.40) for IBD-Bio-naïve and declined to 0.07 100 person-years (95% CI 0.01-0.20) for RHEUMA-Bio cohort. We identified having IBD (odds ratio [OR]:18.98, CI 95% 5.82- 61.92, p<0.001) as the major risk factor for developing CDI after adjusting for age, sex, need for biologics, and comorbidities in the three cohorts. Among IBD patients, there were no differences in CDI between biologic and naive cohorts. Within the IBD-Bio cohort, the number of biologics received (OR: 1.56, CI 95% 1.22- 2.01, P<0.001) and short disease duration (1.08, CI 95% 1.04- 1.13, P<0.001) were associated with a higher risk of CDI. Conclusion The major risk factor associated with CDI development was the diagnosis of IBD. Biologic therapy was not associated with a higher risk of CDI. In IBD patients on biologic therapy, the number of biologics received increased the risk of CDI.
gastroenterology & hepatology