Prophylactic versus endoscopy-driven treatment of Crohn's postoperative recurrence: A retrospective, multicentric European study (PORCSE study).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: No consensus exists on optimal strategy to prevent postoperative recurrence (POR) after ileocecal resection (ICR) for Crohn's disease (CD).We compared early medical prophylaxis versus expectant management with treatment driven by findings at elective endoscopy 6-12 months after ICR. METHODS: A retrospective, multicentric, observational study was performed. CD-patients undergoing first ICR were assigned to cohort1 if a biologic or immunomodulator was (re)started prophylactically after ICR, or to cohort2 if no postoperative prophylaxis was given and treatment was started as reaction to elective endoscopic findings. Primary endpoint was rate of endoscopic POR (Rutgeerts>i1). Secondary endpoints were severe endoscopic POR (Rutgeerts i3/i4), clinical POR, surgical POR and treatment burden during follow-up. RESULTS: Of 346 included patients, 47.4% received prophylactic postoperative treatment (proactive/cohort1) and 52.6% did not (reactive/cohort2).Endoscopic POR (Rutgeerts>i1) rate was significantly higher in cohort2 (41.5% vs 53.8%, OR1.81, P=0.039) at endoscopy 6-12 months after surgery. No significant difference in severe endoscopic POR was found (OR1.29, P=0.517). Cohort2 had significantly higher clinical POR rates (17.7% vs 35.7%, OR3.05, P=0.002) and numerically higher surgical recurrence rates (6.7% vs 13.2%, OR2.59, P=0.051). Cox proportional hazards regression analysis showed no significant difference in time to surgical POR of proactive versus expectant/reactive approach (HR2.50, P=0.057). Quasi-Poisson regression revealed a significantly lower treatment burden for immunomodulator use in cohort2 (mean ratio 0.53, P=0.002), but no difference in burden of biologics or combination treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The PORCSE study showed lower rates of endoscopic POR with early postoperative medical treatment compared to expectant management after first ileocecal resection for Crohn's disease.

Narrow Band Imaging versus White Light for the Detection of Sessile Serrated Colorectal Lesions: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer. The detection of pre-malignant lesions by colonoscopy is associated with reduced CRC incidence and mortality. Narrow band imaging has shown promising but conflicting results for the detection of serrated lesions. Methods: We performed a randomized clinical trial to compare the mean detection of serrated lesions and hyperplastic polyps ≥10 mm with NBI or high-definition white light (HD-WL) withdrawal. We also compared all sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), adenoma, and polyp prevalence and rates. Results: Overall, 782 patients were randomized (WL group 392 patients; NBI group 390 patients). The average number of serrated lesions and hyperplastic polyps ≥10 mm detected per colonoscopy (primary endpoint) was similar between the HD-WL and NBI group (0.118 vs. 0.156, p = 0.44). Likewise, the adenoma detection rate (55.2% vs. 53.2%, p = 0.58) and SSL detection rate (6.8% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.502) were not different between the two study groups. Withdrawal time was higher in the NBI group (10.88 vs. 9.47 min, p = 0.004), with a statistically nonsignificant higher total procedure time (20.97 vs. 19.30 min, p = 0.052). Conclusions: The routine utilization of narrow band imaging does not improve the detection of serrated class lesions or any pre-malignant lesion and increases the withdrawal time.

Introdução: O cancro do cólon e reto é a neoplasia mais frequente considerando os dois géneros. . A deteção de lesões pré-malignas por colonoscopia está associada a uma redução da incidência e da mortalidade. Estudos sobre a utilização da luz de banda estreita (NBI) na deteção de lesões serreadas tiveram resultados promissores, mas heterogéneos. Métodos: Realizámos um ensaio clínico randomizado para comparar o número médio de lesões serreadas e lesões hiperplásicas ≥10 mm com NBI ou luz branca de alta-definição (HD-WL). Como resultados secundários comparámos a prevalência e as taxas de deteção de lesões serreadas sésseis, adenomas e todas as lesões. Resultados: Foram randomizados 782 doentes (392 no grupo HD-WL e 390 no grupo NBI). O número médio de lesões serreadas e hiperplásicas ≥10 mm não apresentou diferença estatisticamente significativa entre dois grupos (0.118 vs. 0.156, p = 0.44). A taxa de deteção de adenomas (55.2% vs. 53.2%, p = 0.58) e a taxa de deteção de lesões serreadas sésseis (6.8% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.502) também não foram diferentes. O tempo de retirada foi maior no grupo NBI (10.88 vs. 9.47 min, p = 0.004) e o tempo total de procedimento teve um ligeiro aumento não atingindo significância estatística (20.97 vs. 19.30 min, p = 0.052). Conclusão: A utilização da luz NBI por rotina não aumenta a deteção de lesões serreadas nem de qualquer lesão pré-maligna e aumenta o tempo de retirada na colonoscopia.

Early intervention with biologic therapy in Crohn´s disease: how early is early?

BACKGROUND: Early biologic therapy within the first 18-24 months after diagnosis is associated with improved clinical outcomes in Crohn's disease [CD]. However, the definition of the best time to initiate biologic therapy remains unclear. We aimed to assess if there is an optimal timing for early biologic therapy initiation. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective cohort study including newly diagnosed CD patients who started anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] therapy within 24 months from diagnosis. The timing of initiation of biologic therapy was categorised as ≤6, 7-12, 13-18, and 19-24 months. The primary outcome was CD-related complications defined as a composite of progression of Montreal disease behaviour, CD-related hospitalisations, or CD-related intestinal surgeries. Secondary outcomes included clinical, laboratory, endoscopic, and transmural remission. RESULTS: We included 141 patients where 54%, 26%, 11%, and 9% started biologic therapy at ≤6, 7-12, 13-18, and 19-24 months after diagnosis, respectively. A total of 34 patients [24%] reached the primary outcome: 8% had progression of disease behaviour, 15% were hospitalised, and 9% required surgery. There was no difference in the time to a CD-related complication according to the time of initiation of biologic therapy within the first 24 months. Clinical, endoscopic, and transmural remission was achieved in 85%, 50%, and 29%, respectively, but no differences were found according to the time of initiation of biologic therapy. CONCLUSION: Starting anti-TNF therapy within the first 24 months after diagnosis was associated with a low rate of CD-related complications and high rates of clinical and endoscopic remission, although we found no differences with earlier initiation within this window of opportunity.

Endoscopic Postoperative Recurrence in Crohn's Disease After Curative Ileocecal Resection with Early Prophylaxis by Anti-TNF, Vedolizumab or Ustekinumab: A Real-World Multicentre European Study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic-post-operative-recurrence [ePOR] in Crohn's disease [CD] after ileocecal resection [ICR] is a major concern. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of early prophylaxis with biologics and to compare anti-tumour necrosis factor [anti-TNF] therapy to vedolizumab [VDZ] and ustekinumab [UST] in a real-world setting. METHODS: A retrospective multicentre study of CD-adults after curative ICR on early prophylaxis was undertaken. ePOR was defined as a Rutgeerts score [RS] ≥ i2 or colonic-segmental-SES-CD ≥ 6. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate risk factors, and inverse probability treatment weighting [IPTW] was applied to compare the effectiveness between agents. RESULTS: The study included 297 patients (53.9% males, age at diagnosis 24 years [19-32], age at ICR 34 years [26-43], 18.5% smokers, 27.6% biologic-naïve, 65.7% anti-TNF experienced, 28.6% two or more biologics and 17.2% previous surgery). Overall, 224, 39 and 34 patients received anti-TNF, VDZ or UST, respectively. Patients treated with VDZ and UST were more biologic experienced with higher rates of previous surgery. ePOR rates within 1 year were 41.8%. ePOR rates by treatment groups were: anti-TNF 40.2%, VDZ 33% and UST 61.8%. Risk factors for ePOR at 1 year were: past-infliximab (adjusted odds ratio [adj.OR] = 1.73 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.01-2.97]), past-adalimumab [adj.OR = 2.32 [95% CI: 1.35-4.01] and surgical aspects. After IPTW, the risk of ePOR within 1 year of VDZ vs anti-TNF or UST vs anti-TNF was comparable (OR = 0.55 [95% CI: 0.25-1.19], OR = 1.86 [95% CI: 0.79-4.38]), respectively. CONCLUSION: Prevention of ePOR within 1 year after surgery was successful in ~60% of patients. Patients treated with VDZ or UST consisted of a more refractory group. After controlling for confounders, no differences in ePOR risk were seen between anti-TNF prophylaxis and other groups.