Therapy for Crohn’s Disease: a Review of Recent Developments

  • Gregory J. Eustace
  • Gil Y. Melmed
Large Intestine (B Cash, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Large Intestine


Purpose of Review

To review recent advances in the treatment of Crohn’s disease.

Recent Findings

Several key advances are highlighted, including the increasing role of treatment algorithms and where new therapies can be used most effectively, the appropriate use of therapeutic drug monitoring, optimal management of post-surgical patients, and the role of multi-disciplinary clinics.


The last several years have seen a number of exciting developments in the field of Crohn’s therapy. This review covers research advances including updated treatment algorithms focusing on identifying patient risk as well as the role of drug monitoring in managing the disease. We also review the optimal management of post-surgical patients as well as new biologics and biosimilars. Finally, we describe innovations in care delivery including multi-disciplinary clinics and emerging evidence from developing therapeutics.


Crohn’s IBD Therapy Treatment Management 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Gil Melmed reports personal fees from Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Takeda for consultation and service on advisory boards, outside the submitted work. Gregory Eustace declares no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. 1.
    Abraham C, Cho JH. Inflammatory bowel disease. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(21):2066–78.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vavricka SR, Schoepfer A, Scharl M, Lakatos PL, Navarini A, Rogler G. Extraintestinal manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2015;21(8):1982–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cosnes J, Gower–Rousseau C, Seksik P, Cortot A. Epidemiology and natural history of inflammatory bowel diseases. Gastroenterology. 2011;140(6):1785–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yapp TR, Stenson R, Thomas GAO, Lawrie BW, Williams GT, Hawthorne BM. Crohn’s disease incidence in Cardiff from 1930: an update for 1991-1995. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2000;12(8):907–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vind I, Riis L, Jess T, Knudsen E, Pedersen N, Elkjaer M, et al. Increasing incidences of inflammatory bowel disease and decreasing surgery rates in Copenhagen City and County, 2003-2005: a population-based study from the Danish Crohn colitis database. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101(6):1274–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schwartz DA, Pemberton JH, Sandborn WJ. Diagnosis and treatment of perianal fistulas in Crohn disease. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135(10):906–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peyrin-Biroulet L, et al. The natural history of adult Crohn’s disease in population-based cohorts. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;105:289.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sandborn WJ. Crohn’s disease evaluation and treatment: clinical decision tool. Gastroenterology. 2014;147(3):702–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Colombel JF, et al. Infliximab, azathioprine, or combination therapy for Crohn’s disease. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(15):1383–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D'Haens G, Baert F, van Assche G, Caenepeel P, Vergauwe P, Tuynman H, et al. Early combined immunosuppression or conventional management in patients with newly diagnosed Crohn’s disease: an open randomised trial. Lancet. 2008;371(9613):660–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khanna R, Bressler B, Levesque BG, Zou G, Stitt LW, Greenberg GR, et al. Early combined immunosuppression for the management of Crohn’s disease (REACT): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;386(10006):1825–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    • Colombel, J.-F., et al., Effect of tight control management on Crohn’s disease (CALM): a multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. The Lancet, 2017. Demonstrated significantly higher rates of endoscopic healing in patients randomized to therapeutic escalation with adalimumab based on clinical symptoms plus biomarkers compared to those escalated based on clinical symptoms alone. Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cosnes, J., et al., Early administration of azathioprine vs conventional management of Crohn’s Disease: a randomized controlled trial. Gastroenterology, 2013. 145(4): p. 758–65.e2; quiz e14–5.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    • Panes J, et al. Early azathioprine therapy is no more effective than placebo for newly diagnosed Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology. 2013;145(4):766–74.e1. Demonstrated no difference between azathioprine and placebo in achieving steroid-free remission (CDAI < 150 and no requirement for steroids);however, the azathioprine group did have lower relapse rates (CDAI > 220). CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Feuerstein JD, et al. American Gastroenterological Association Institute guideline on therapeutic drug monitoring in inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology. 153(3):827–34.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vande Casteele N, Ferrante M, van Assche G, Ballet V, Compernolle G, van Steen K, et al. Trough concentrations of infliximab guide dosing for patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology. 2015;148(7):1320–1329.e3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vaughn BP, Martinez-Vazquez M, Patwardhan VR, Moss AC, Sandborn WJ, Cheifetz AS. Proactive therapeutic concentration monitoring of infliximab may improve outcomes for patients with inflammatory bowel disease: results from a pilot observational study. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2014;20(11):1996–2003.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    • Sandborn WJ, et al. Vedolizumab as induction and maintenance therapy for Crohn's disease. New England Journal of Medicine. 2013;369(8):711–21. Demonstrated higher rates of clinical remission at week six as well as higher rates of maintained remission at week 52 among initial responders to vedolizumab. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vermeire S, Loftus EV Jr, Colombel JF, Feagan BG, Sandborn WJ, Sands BE, et al. Long-term efficacy of vedolizumab for Crohn’s disease. J Crohn's Colitis. 2017;11(4):412–24.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sands BE, Sandborn WJ, van Assche G, Lukas M, Xu J, James A, et al. Vedolizumab as induction and maintenance therapy for Crohn’s disease in patients naïve to or who have failed tumor necrosis factor antagonist therapy. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2017;23(1):97–106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    • Feagan BG, et al. Ustekinumab as induction and maintenance therapy for Crohn’s disease. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(20):1946–60. Positive trial for clinical response to ustekinumab in both TNF experienced and naïve arms by week six. Rates of continued remission at week 44 were significantly higher in the treatment arm. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cholapranee A, Hazlewood GS, Kaplan GG, Peyrin-Biroulet L, Ananthakrishnan AN. Systematic review with meta-analysis: comparative efficacy of biologics for induction and maintenance of mucosal healing in Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis controlled trials. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2017;45(10):1291–302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Singh S, Garg SK, Pardi DS, Wang Z, Hassan Murad M, Loftus EV Jr. Comparative efficacy of biologic therapy in biologic-naïve patients with Crohn disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014;89(12):1621–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stidham RW, Lee TCH, Higgins PDR, Deshpande AR, Sussman DA, Singal AG, et al. Systematic review with network meta-analysis: the efficacy of anti-TNF agents for the treatment of Crohn’s disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2014;39(12):1349–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hazlewood, G.S., et al., Comparative effectiveness of immunosuppressants and biologics for inducing and maintaining remission in Crohn’s disease: a network meta-analysis. Gastroenterology, 2015. 148(2): p. 344–54 e5; quiz e14–5.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Louis E, et al. Maintenance of remission among patients with Crohn’s disease on antimetabolite therapy after infliximab therapy is stopped. Gastroenterology. 2012;142(1):63–70.e5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reenaers, C., et al., Outcomes 7 years after infliximab withdrawal for patients with Crohn’s disease in sustained remission. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2017.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Torres, J., et al., Systematic review of effects of withdrawal of immunomodulators or biologic agents from patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology. 149(7): p. 1716-1730.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Peyrin Biroulet L, et al. Increased risk for nonmelanoma skin cancers in patients who receive thiopurines for inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology. 2011;141(5):1621–1628.e5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kotlyar DS, et al. Risk of lymphoma in patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine: a meta-analysis. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 2015;13(5):847–858.e4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shale M, Kanfer E, Panaccione R, Ghosh S. Hepatosplenic T cell lymphoma in inflammatory bowel disease. Gut. 2008;57(12):1639–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Drobne D, Bossuyt P, Breynaert C, Cattaert T, Vande Casteele N, Compernolle G, et al. Withdrawal of immunomodulators after co-treatment does not reduce trough level of infliximab in patients with Crohn’s disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13(3):514–521.e4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Regueiro M, Feagan BG, Zou B, Johanns J, Blank MA, Chevrier M, et al. Infliximab reduces endoscopic, but not clinical, recurrence of Crohn’s disease after ileocolonic resection. Gastroenterology. 2016;150(7):1568–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    • De Cruz, P., et al., Crohn’s disease management after intestinal resection: a randomised trial. Lancet, 2015. 385(9976): p. 1406–17. Showed a significantly lower proportion of patients who had appropriate therapy escalation at a six month post-operative colonoscopy had evidence of endoscopic recurrence at 18 months than patients who were not re-evaluated at six months. Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rinaudo-Gaujous M, Paul S, Tedesco ED, Genin C, Roblin X, Peyrin-Biroulet L. Review article: biosimilars are the next generation of drugs for liver and gastrointestinal diseases. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013;38(8):914–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schellekens H. Bioequivalence and the immunogenicity of biopharmaceuticals. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2002;1(6):457–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Martin M. Biosimilars. ESMO Open. 2018;3(1):e000321.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yoo DH, Hrycaj P, Miranda P, Ramiterre E, Piotrowski M, Shevchuk S, et al. A randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study to demonstrate equivalence in efficacy and safety of CT-P13 compared with innovator infliximab when coadministered with methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: the PLANETRA study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(10):1613–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pentek, M., Z. Zrubka, and L. Gulacsi, The economic impact of biosimilars on chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Curr Pharm Des, 2017.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Komaki Y, Yamada A, Komaki F, Micic D, Ido A, Sakuraba A. Systematic review with meta-analysis: the efficacy and safety of CT-P13, a biosimilar of anti-tumour necrosis factor-α agent (infliximab), in inflammatory bowel diseases. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2017;45(8):1043–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Jørgensen KK, Olsen IC, Goll GL, Lorentzen M, Bolstad N, Haavardsholm EA, et al. Switching from originator infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 compared with maintained treatment with originator infliximab (NOR-SWITCH): a 52-week, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2017;389(10086):2304–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kim, Y.H., Ye B.D., Pesegova M., Alexeeva O., Osipenko M., Lahat A., Dorofeyev A., Salamon A., Fishman S., Levchenko O., Cheon J.H., Scribano M.L., Mateescu R.B., Lee K.M., Eun C.S., Lee S.J., Lee S.Y., DOP061 phase III randomised, double-blind, controlled trial to compare biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) with innovator infliximab in patients with active Crohn’s disease: early efficacy and safety results. J Crohn's Colitis, 2017. 11(suppl_1): p. S62-S62.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ben-Horin, S., et al., Cross-immunogenicity: antibodies to infliximab in Remicade-treated patients with IBD similarly recognise the biosimilar Remsima. Gut, 2015.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lee CK, Melmed GY. Multidisciplinary team-based approaches to IBD management: how might “one-stop shopping” work for complex IBD care? Am J Gastroenterol. 2017;112:825–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Feagan BG, Sandborn WJ, D’Haens G, Panés J, Kaser A, Ferrante M, et al. Induction therapy with the selective interleukin-23 inhibitor risankizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 study. Lancet. 2017;389(10080):1699–709.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sandborn WJ, Su C, Sands BE, D'Haens GR, Vermeire S, Schreiber S, et al. Tofacitinib as induction and maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(18):1723–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Panes J, et al. Tofacitinib for induction and maintenance therapy of Crohn’s disease: results of two phase IIb randomised placebo-controlled trials. Gut. 2017;66(6):1049–59.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Vermeire S, Schreiber S, Petryka R, Kuehbacher T, Hebuterne X, Roblin X, et al. Clinical remission in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease treated with filgotinib (the FITZROY study): results from a phase 2, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2017;389(10066):266–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.F Widjaja Inflammatory Bowel and Immunobiology Research Institute, Division of GastroenterologyDepartment of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical CenterLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations