Interobserver agreement of current and new proposed endoscopic scores for postoperative recurrence in Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The modified Rutgeerts score (mRS) is widely used for the assessment of endoscopic postoperative recurrence (ePOR) in Crohn's disease (CD) after ileocolic resection to guide therapeutic decisions. To improve the validity and prognostic value of this endoscopic assessment, 2 new scores have been proposed. This study assessed the interobserver agreement of the current score (mRS) and the new endoscopic score for ePOR in CD. METHODS: Sixteen Dutch academic and nonacademic inflammatory bowel disease specialists assessed endoscopic videos (n = 71) of postoperative CD patients (n = 66) retrieved from 9 Dutch centers. Each video was assessed for degree of inflammation by 4 gastroenterologists using the mRS and the new proposed endoscopic score: the REMIND score (separate score of anastomosis and neoterminal ileum) and the updated Rutgeerts score (assessment of lesions at the anastomotic line, ileal inlet, ileal body, and neoterminal ileum). In addition, lesions at the ileal body, ileal inlet, neoterminal ileum, and colonic and/or ileal blind loop were separately assessed. Interobserver agreement was assessed by using Fleiss' weighted kappa. RESULTS: Fleiss' weighted kappa for the mRS was .67 (95% confidence interval [CI], .59-.74). The weighted kappa for the REMIND score was .73 (95% CI, .65-.80) for lesions in the neoterminal ileum and .46 (95% CI, .35-.58) for anastomotic lesions. The weighted kappa for the updated Rutgeerts score was .69 (95% CI, .62-.77). The weighted kappa for lesions in the ileal body, ileal inlet, neoterminal ileum, and colonic and ileal blind loop was .61 (95% CI, .49-.73), .63 (95% CI, .54-.72), .61 (95% CI, .49-.74), .83 (95% CI, .62-1.00) and .68 (95% CI, .46-.89), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The interobserver agreement of the mRS is substantial. Similarly, the interobserver agreement is substantial for the updated Rutgeerts score. According to the REMIND score, the interobserver agreement was substantial for lesions in the neoterminal ileum, although only moderate for anastomotic lesions. Because therapeutic decisions in clinical practice are based on these assessments, and these scores are used as outcome measure in clinical studies, further improvement of the interobserver agreement is essential.

Infliximab desensitization in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases: a safe therapeutic alternative.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) to the administration of infliximab (IFX) in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) patients are not rare and usually lead to drug discontinuation. We report data on safety and effectiveness of desensitization to IFX in patients with previous HSR. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective monocentric observational study. Patients for whom a desensitization protocol to IFX was realized after a previous HSR were included. Anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and IFX trough levels at both inclusion and six months after desensitization were collected. Clinical outcomes, including recurrence of HSR were evaluated. RESULTS: From 2005 to 2020, 27 patients (Crohn's Disease: 26 (96%) were included). Desensitization after HSR was performed after a median time of 10.4 months (2.9-33.1). Nineteen (70%) patients received immunosuppressants at time of desensitization. Eight (30%) patients presented HSR at first (n = 2), second (n = 4) or third (n = 2) IFX perfusion after desensitization. None led to intensive care unit transfer or death. Thirteen (48%) had clinical response at 6 months and 8 (29%) were still under IFX treatment two years after desensitization. IFX trough levels and ADA were available for 14 patients at time of desensitization. Most patients (12 out of 14) had ADA at a high level. At 6 months, among the 7 patients with long term response to IFX, 4 presented a decrease of ADA titers and 2 had a significant trough level of IFX. CONCLUSION: IFX desensitization in patients with IBD is a safe therapeutic alternative and represents a potential option for patients refractory to multiple biologics.What is already known? Hypersensitivity reactions to the administration of infliximab is frequent. Occurrence of hypersensitivity reaction, either immediate or delayed, usually leads to permanent drug discontinuation.What is new here? Infliximab desensitization is well tolerated with no hypersensitivity reaction recurrence in 70% of patients. Clinical success at 6 months was of 48% and around a third of patients remained under infliximab therapy two years after desensitization. Antidrug antibodies decreased and infliximab trough levels increased in these patients showing the impact of desensitization on immunogenicity.How can this study help patient care? Infliximab desensitization represents a potential option for patients refractory to multiple biologics who presented hypersensitivity reaction to the drug.

Systematic review: Patient-related, microbial, surgical, and histopathological risk factors for endoscopic post-operative recurrence in patients with Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification for endoscopic post-operative recurrence (ePOR) in Crohn's disease (CD) is required to identify patients who would benefit most from initiation of prophylactic medication and intensive monitoring of recurrence. AIMS: To assess the current evidence on patient-related, microbial, surgical and histopathological risk factors for ePOR in patients with CD after ileocolic (re-)resection. METHODS: Multiple online databases (Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library) were searched up to March 2024. Studies with reported associations of patient-related, microbial, surgical and/or histopathological factors for ePOR (i.e., Rutgeerts' score ≥i2 or modified Rutgeerts' score ≥i2a) were included. The risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational cohort studies and case-control studies. RESULTS: In total, 47 studies were included (four RCTs, 29 cohort studies, 12 case-control studies, one cross-sectional study and one individual participant data meta-analysis) including 6006 patients (median sample size 87 patients [interquartile range 46-170]). Risk of bias assessment revealed a poor quality in 41% of the studies. An association was reported in multiple studies of ePOR with active smoking at and post-surgery, male sex and prior bowel resection. A heterogeneous association with ePOR was reported for other risk factors included in the current guidelines (penetrating disease, perianal disease, younger age, extensive small bowel disease and presence of granulomas in the resection specimen or myenteric plexitis in the resection margin), and other patient-related, microbial, surgical and histopathological factors. CONCLUSION: Risk factors for ePOR in international guidelines are not consistently reported as risk factors in current literature except for active smoking and prior bowel resection. To develop evidence-based, personalised strategies, large prospective studies are warranted to identify risk factors for ePOR. Validation studies of promising (bio)markers are also required.

Outcomes and Endpoints of Postoperative Recurrence in Crohn's Disease: Systematic Review and Consensus Conference.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes after ileocolonic resection in Crohn's disease [CD] are heterogeneous, and a clear definition of postoperative recurrence remains to be determined. Our Endpoints Working Group of the International Organization for the study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease [IOIBD] aimed to standardise postoperative outcomes, to discuss which endpoints should be used for postoperative clinical trials, and to define those which could be used in trials or registries. METHODS: Based on a systematic review of the literature, recommendations and statements were drafted and sent to all IOIBD members for a first round of voting. Recommendations and statements were revised based on the voters' comments during a consensus hybrid conference open to all IOIBD members. If no agreement was reached after two rounds of voting, the statement was excluded. RESULTS: In the systematic review, 3071 manuscripts were screened of which 434 were included. Sixteen recommendations were identified, of which 11 were endorsed. Recommendations and statements include that endoscopy remains the gold standard and should be used as a short-term primary endpoint in both observational cohorts and randomised controlled trials. Clinical symptoms classically used in clinical trials for luminal CD are not reliable in this specific situation. For that reason, longer-term endpoints should be based on the evidence of macroscopic inflammation assessed by imaging techniques, endoscopy, or as reflected by the presence of complications. CONCLUSIONS: Agencies recommend the use of clinical evaluations, as in the case of luminal CD, and do not recognise primary endpoints based solely on endoscopy. This consensus has led to agreement on the need to define postoperative endoscopy-based and/or imaging-based endpoints.