Prevalence, Pathogenesis and Management of Anemia in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An IG-IBD Multicenter, Prospective, and Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Anemia is a common extraintestinal manifestation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), with a 6% to 74% prevalence and a negative impact on patient survival and quality of life, although the prevalence is apparently declining due to improved disease treatment. We aimed to investigate the prevalence, pathogenesis, and clinical correlates of anemia in Italian patients with IBD. METHODS: A multicenter, prospective, observational study, involving 28 Italian gastroenterology centers, was conducted to investigate the epidemiology and consequences of IBD-associated anemia. Clinical and laboratory data of anemic patients were obtained at study enrolment. RESULTS: Anemia was diagnosed in 737 of 5416 adult IBD outpatients (prevalence 13.6%); females were more commonly affected than males (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-1.7) and had more severe anemia. In the majority of cases, anemia was due to iron deficiency (62.5% of cases; 95% CI, 58.3%-66.6%), either isolated or in association with inflammation and/or vitamin deficiencies; anemia of inflammation accounted for only 8.3% of cases. More severe anemia was associated with increasing fatigue and worse quality of life. Only 68.9% of anemic patients with iron deficiency (95% CI, 63.4%-73.8%) and 34.6% of those with vitamin deficiencies (95% CI, 26.2%-44.2%) were properly treated with supplementation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In Italy, the prevalence of IBD-associated anemia is lower than previously reported. Anemia of IBD is most commonly due to iron deficiency and contributes to fatigue and poor quality of life, but remains untreated in a large proportion of patients with iron and/or vitamin deficiencies. This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02872376.

The prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease­associated anemia is 13.6%. The prevalence is higher among females younger than 50. Anemia is usually due to iron deficiency and adversely affects fatigue and quality of life. Many patients with iron or vitamin deficiency (31% and 65%, respectively) remain untreated.

Appropriateness of proton pump inhibitors treatment in clinical practice: Prospective evaluation in outpatients and perspective assessment of drug optimisation.

BACKGROUND: High rates of inappropriate proton pump inhibitor (PPI) prescriptions have been reported in retrospective database analyses. Assessing the appropriateness of long-term PPIs in outpatients, with a proactive approach at drug optimisation may enhance treatment adequacy. AIMS: To describe the characteristics of outpatients who are on long-term PPIs, to assess the magnitude of inappropriate PPI prescriptions, and to evaluate the rate of drug optimisation following specialist recommendations. METHODS: Appropriateness of long-term (>8weeks) PPI prescription was prospectively assessed in 249 consecutive patients referred to a Gastroenterology outpatient clinic. We recorded reason for prescription, dose, modality, duration of therapy, and attempts at PPI optimisation. RESULTS: PPIs were inappropriately prescribed in 96/249 patients (38.6%). Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (50/143, 35.0%) and prophylaxis of anti-platelet/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (5/49, 10.2%) were the most common PPI indications and those with the lowest rate of inappropriateness, while the highest rates were observed for treatment of dyspepsia (10/12, 83.3%) and anti-coagulant therapy (21/21, 100%). PPI treatment was optimised in 112 patients (45.0%). CONCLUSIONS: PPIs are inappropriately used in about 40% of outpatients, reflecting scant attention to guidelines. A proactive approach may improve therapeutic adequacy in approximately half of patients. Educational efforts to guide PPI prescription should be further pursued.

The appropriate use of proton-pump inhibitors.

The introduction of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) into clinical practice since about thirty years has greatly improved our therapeutic approach to acid-related diseases for their well recognized efficacy and safety. Accordingly, the role of surgery has been enormously reduced in this field. The main indications for PPI use are universally acknowledged by many scientific societies and are the following: treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease in its various forms and complications, eradication of H. pylori infection in combination with two or more antibiotics, therapy of H. pylori-negative peptic ulcers, healing and prevention of NSAID-associated gastric ulcers, co-therapy with endoscopic procedures to control upper digestive bleeding and medical treatment of Zollinger-Ellison Syndrome. Despite the above well-defined indications, however, the use of PPIs continues to grow every year in both Western and Eastern countries and this phenomenon poses serious queries about the appropriate prescription of these drugs worldwide. In fact, the endless expansion of PPI market has created important problems for many regulatory authorities for two relevant features: the progressive and irreversible increase of the costs of therapy with this class of drugs and the greater potential harms for the patients. So, there is the need for a reappraisal of PPI correct indications for both general practitioners and various specialists in order to re-establish a correct use of these effective drugs in daily clinical practice, according to the best evidence-based guidelines.

Treatment of early stage chronic hepatitis C virus infection.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) with direct acting antivirals (DAAs) is able to achieve the cure of infection in almost the totality of patients, independently of the characteristics of the individual and the virus, using short treatment schedules, and without the need of ribavirin. The high cost of DAAs is the main limiting factor for universal treatment of HCV. However, there is a strong evidence that treatment of infection at the early stage of disease may be the most rewarding approach. Areas covered: This review evaluates the aspects underlying the benefit of treating chronic HCV infection at the early stage of disease. It outlines the considerations that have to be taken into account when planning treatment in patients with HCV and minimal liver disease, assessing the positive reflex of viral eradication on several HCV-associated extra-hepatic conditions such as the risk of lymphoma, insulin-resistance and glycaemic control, and renal function. Lastly, it also covers the improvement of patients' quality of life and the pharmaco-economic aspects associated with early treatment. Expert commentary: Treatment of patients with HCV and minimal liver disease is associated with a beneficial, pleiotropic effect of viral eradication that goes beyond the simplistic consideration of the improvement in liver disease-related outcomes.