Is there a standardized practice for the development of international ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease treatment guidelines?

BACKGROUND: Guidelines are published by international gastroenterology societies regarding the management of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) to help clinicians to provide high-quality patient care. We examined the guidelines for the quality and strength of evidence used to develop the recommendations, methods for grading evidence, differences in disease-specific recommendations, conflicts of interest, and plans for guideline updates. METHODS: A systematic search was performed on PubMed using "ulcerative colitis," "Crohn's disease," and "guidelines" in April 2019. International gastroenterology society websites were searched for UC- and CD-specific guidelines. Guidelines from 12 societies were examined by two authors. Chi-squared tests were used for comparing evidence-level grades, strength of recommendations, and reported conflicts of interest. Linear-regression modeling was used to evaluate the relationship between the number of authors and the number of recommendations in a given guideline. RESULTS: Of 28 guidelines reviewed, 25 (89%) used a total of three different systems to grade the level of evidence and 2 (7%) used an unknown system. Three (11%) reviewed guidelines did not provide a conflict-of-interest statement, while three (11%) provided a timeline for guideline updates. Of 1,265 total statements examined, 246 (19%) reported no grade of evidence quality or explicitly stated that the recommendation was based on "expert opinion." One hundred and thirty-five (22%) UC recommendations were noted to be "weak/conditional" and 95 (16%) did not have a recommendation strength. Two hundred and forty-two (37%) CD recommendations were noted to be "weak/conditional" and 151 (23%) did not have a recommendation strength. CONCLUSION: The majority of UC and CD guidelines are based on a low/very low quality of evidence and are further weakened due to the lack of homogeneity in specific aspects of management recommendations as well as conflicts of interest.

Intake of artificial sweeteners among adults is associated with reduced odds of gastrointestinal luminal cancers: a meta-analysis of cohort and case-control studies.

The association between artificial sweetener (AS) consumption and the risk of organ-specific cancers has been debated for decades. We hypothesized that AS consumption is associated with reduced risk of gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. We aimed to test this hypothesis by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between AS and GI cancers. We searched 4 databases for comparative studies of AS consumption (exposed) versus no consumption (nonexposed) and the odds or risk of GI luminal or non-luminal cancer (primary outcome). Estimates were pooled using a random-effects model. Studies were evaluated for quality, bias, and heterogeneity. We analyzed 8 (4 prospective, 4 case-control) studies comprising data on 1,043,496 individuals, among whom 3271 pancreatic, 395 gastric, 304 esophageal, 3008 colorectal, and 598 oropharyngeal cancers occurred. While there was no significant association between AS consumption and odds of GI cancer overall, AS consumption was associated with 19% reduced likelihood of luminal GI cancer (OR 0.81, 95% CI:0.68-0.97). There was no association between AS consumption and non-luminal GI cancer. Meta-regression demonstrated no difference in effect estimates based on study type. Based on this first meta-analysis of AS and GI cancer, we demonstrated that AS consumption is associated with a significantly lower likelihood of luminal, but not non-luminal, GI cancer.

Improving All-Cause Inpatient Mortality After Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Percutaneous gastrostomy (PEG) is a common inpatient procedure. Prior data from National Inpatient Sample (NIS) in 2006 reported a mortality rate of 10.8% and recommended more careful selection of PEG candidates. This study assessed for improvement in the last 10 years in mortality rate and complications for hospitalized patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of all adult inpatients in the NIS from 2006 to 2016 undergoing PEG placement compared demographics and indication for PEG placement per ICD coding. Survey-based means and proportions were compared to 2006, and rates of change in mortality and complication rates were trended from 2006 through 2016 and compared with linear regression. Multivariable survey-adjusted logistic regression was used to determine predictors of mortality and complications in the 2016 sample. RESULTS: A total of 155,550 patients underwent PEG placement in 2016, compared with 174,228 in 2006. Mortality decreased from 10.8 to 6.6% without decreased comorbidities (p < 0.001). This trend was gradual and persistent over 10 years in contrast to a stable overall inpatient mortality rate (p = 0.113). Stroke remained the most common indication (29.7%). The majority of patients (64.6%) had Medicare. Indications for placement were stable. Complication rates were stable from 2006 (4.4%) to 2016 (5.1%) (p = 0.201). CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient PEG placement remains common. Despite similar patient characteristics, mortality has decreased by approximately 40% over the last 10 years without a decrease in complications likely reflecting improved patient selection.

Is Therapeutic Drug Monitoring for Anti-tumour Necrosis Factor Agents in Adults With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Ready for Standard of Care? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Using therapeutic drug monitoring [TDM] in adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to answer four clinical PICO [Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome] questions. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central from inception to June 30, 2019. Remission was defined by the manuscripts' definitions of clinical remission. Data were analysed using RevMan 5.3. Quality of evidence was assessed with GRADE methodology. RESULTS: We identified and screened 3365 abstracts and 11 articles. PICO 1 Reactive vs No TDM: six studies pooled showed 57.1% [257/450] failed to achieve remission following reactive TDM vs 44.7% [268/600] in the no TDM group (risk ratio [RR]: 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-1.47). PICO 2 Proactive vs no TDM: five studies pooled showed 19.5% [75/384] failed to maintain remission in the proactive TDM group vs 33.4% [248/742] in the no TDM group [RR: 0.60; 95% CI 0.35-1.04]. PICO 3 Proactive vs Reactive TDM: two retrospective studies pooled showed 14.2% [26/183] failure to maintain remission in the proactive TDM group and 64.7% [119/184] in the reactive TDM group [RR: 0.22; 95% CI 0.15-0.32]. PICO 4 TDM [proactive/reactive] vs No TDM: we pooled 10 studies showing 39.7% [332/837] failed to achieve remission in the TDM [proactive/reactive] cohort vs 40.3% [428/1063] in the no TDM cohort [RR: 0.94; 95% CI 0.77-1.14]. Overall, the quality of evidence in each PICO was very low when using GRADE. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that data supporting use of TDM in adults are limited and of very low quality. Further well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the place of TDM in clinical practice.

Safety of Endoscopy for Hospitalized Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: A National Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients hospitalized with myocardial infarction (MI) are at risk of gastrointestinal bleeding because of the need for antiplatelet agents and/or anticoagulation. The data regarding the safety of endoscopy after MI are limited. This study sought to assess mortality rates of patients hospitalized with acute MI who require esophagogastroduodenoscopy or colonoscopy using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of all adult inpatients in the NIS from 2016 admitted for ST-elevation infarction myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI, or type II non-STEMI was conducted. Data were collected including patient demographics and indication for endoscopy per ICD-10 coding. HCUPnet was used to query NIS to obtain all inpatient mortality. The primary methods included adjusted χ for categorical outcomes, adjusted linear regression for continuous outcomes, and adjusted logistic regression for multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1,281,749 patients were admitted for acute coronary syndrome in 2016, and 55,035 of these patients underwent endoscopy In the multivariable regression analysis, those who underwent a GI procedure (odds ratio [OR] 0.80, P value < 0.002) and angiogram (OR 0.48, P value < 0.001) had lower in-hospital mortality, after adjusting for age, Elixhauser index, need for angiogram, sex, race, and hospital type. Endoscopy postcatheterization was not associated with a difference in mortality compared with preangiogram (OR = 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.60-1.19). DISCUSSION: Patients who underwent endoscopy are sicker and have higher mortality rates than those who do not undergo endoscopy, but after adjusting for comorbidities, mortality is actually lower. This suggests that endoscopy is safe and should be performed when clinically indicated despite recent cardiac ischemia.

Risk of New or Recurrent Cancer in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Previous Cancer Exposed to Immunosuppressive and Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Agents.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Our understanding of malignancy associated with immunosuppression in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) comes from studies of individuals with no history of cancer. We investigated whether patients with IBD and a history of cancer who were subsequently immunosuppressed have an increased risk of developing incident cancer. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 333 patients with IBD treated at 8 academic medical centers who developed cancer and subsequently received treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF), anti-TNF with an antimetabolite (thiopurines, methotrexate), antimetabolites, or no subsequent exposure to immunosuppressive agents (controls). We collected data on their primary outcomes of incident cancers (new or recurrent). Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated by using Cox proportional hazards and Kaplan-Meier survival curves; study groups were compared by using the log-rank test. RESULTS: During the follow-up period, 90 patients (27%) developed an incident cancer. Patient characteristics between groups differed, but matching was not possible because of the relatively small sample sizes. There was no difference in time to incident cancer (P = .14) or type of incident cancer (P = .61) among the 4 groups. After adjusting for recurrence risk for type of prior cancer, there was no difference in risk of incident cancer (HR for anti-TNF, 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09-1.09; HR for anti-TNF with an antimetabolite, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.26-1.59; HR for an antimetabolite, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.54-2.15) or time to subsequent cancer between study arms (P = .22). CONCLUSION: On the basis of a retrospective study, in patients with IBD and a history of cancer, exposure to an anti-TNF agent or an antimetabolite after cancer was not associated with an increased risk of incident cancer, compared with patients who did not receive immunosuppression. Larger, matched, prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.