Increased incidence of systemic serious viral infections in patients with inflammatory bowel disease associates with active disease and use of thiopurines.

Background: The magnitude and drivers of the risk of serious viral infections in Inflammatory Bowel diseases (IBD) are unclear. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the incidence and risk factors for systemic serious viral infections in IBD patients. Methods: Using MICISTA, a database detailing prospective characteristics and complications of IBD, we identified patients that were followed for IBD in 2005-2014 outside the context of organ transplantation, HIV infection or chronic viral hepatitis. We estimated incidences of systemic serious viral infections, defined by the need for hospitalization or permanent organ damage. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated using the French hospital database. We performed a case-control study nested in MICISTA for assessing the role of exposure to IBD drugs and IBD clinical activity in the risk of developing infection. Results: We identified 31 patients with serious viral infections among 2645 patients followed for 15,383 person-years. We observed 13 cases of cytomegalovirus, 10 Epstein-Barr virus, 5 varicella zoster virus and 3 herpes simplex virus infections. No deaths occurred. The incidence rate of infections in patients with IBD was 2.02/1000 person-years, and the SIR was 3.09 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.98-4.20; p = 0.0002) in the study population. By multivariate analysis, increased risk of infection was associated with exposure to thiopurines (odds ratio (OR), 3.48; 95% CI, 1.36-8.90; p = 0.009), and clinically active IBD at onset of infection (OR, 3.35; 95% CI, 1.23-9.23; p = 0.02). Conclusions: The incidence of systemic serious viral infections in patients with IBD is tripled compared to general population. Clinically active IBD and exposure to thiopurines are the main drivers of the risk.

Development and validation of a computed assessment of cleansing score for evaluation of quality of small-bowel visualization in capsule endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: An objective and reliable scoring system is needed to assess quality of visualization in small bowel (SB) capsule endoscopy (CE), for both clinical practice and research purposes. The aim of this study was to establish and to validate a SB-computed assessment of cleansing (SB-CAC) score. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-three SB-CE were selected. A CAC score, defined as the ratio of the red over green pixels (R/G ratio), was calculated for each frame. Intervals were then determined, ranging from the lowest to the highest ratio among the extracted frames. Twelve frames were randomly selected in each of these intervals. Two hundred eighty-eight frames were shuffled and analyzed twice in random order by two experienced CE readers who were blinded to the CAC scores. Once an "adequately cleansed" or "inadequately cleansed" qualification was allotted to every still frame, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was created. In case of discrepancy between the two readers, the still frames were excluded. A second dataset of 288 different SB still frames was generated and read twice in random order by two other experienced SB-CE readers, using the same methodology. RESULTS: A SB-CAC score threshold of 1.6 best achieved discrimination of adequately from inadequately cleansed frames, with a sensitivity of 92.7 % (95 %CI [89.7 - 95.8]) and a specificity of 92.9 % (95 %CI [89.9 - 95.9]). This threshold was validated using the second dataset, yielding the following performances: sensitivity 91.3 % (95 %CI [87.9 - 94.6]), specificity 94.7 % (95 %CI [92.1 - 97.3]). CONCLUSION: An SB-CAC score of 1.6 has the highest sensitivity and specificity to discriminate "adequately cleansed" from "inadequately cleansed" SB-CE still frames. This constitutes an objective, reproducible, reliable, and automated cleansing score for SB-CE.

Costs of Crohn's Disease According to Severity States in France: A Prospective Observational Study and Statistical Modeling over 10 Years.

BACKGROUND: To describe the medico-economic characteristics of Crohn's disease (CD), we implemented a multicenter study in France. METHODS: From 2004 to 2006, disease severity states, direct (hospital and extra hospital) and indirect costs were prospectively collected over 1 year in patients with CD naive from anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (infliximab) at inclusion. Economic valorization was performed from the French Social Insurance perspective, and a statistical modeling over 10 years was performed. RESULTS: In 341 patients, the mean total costs of management were &OV0556;6024 per year (&OV0556;4675 for direct costs). As compared to patients in remission, costs were 4 to 6 times higher in patients in an active period and 19 times higher for patients requiring surgery (SURG). The most important expense items were medical and surgical hospitalizations (56% of total costs), including cost of infliximab (36% of hospitalization costs, i.e., 20% of total costs), indirect costs (22%), and drugs (11%). The statistical modeling over 10 years showed that most of the clinical course was spent in drug-responsive state (54%) with 26% of costs or in remission (32%) with 11% of costs; time spent in a SURG state was small (3.2%) but generated 48% of total costs. CONCLUSIONS: Before the introduction of self-injectable anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha, the most important expenses were supported by hospitalizations, explaining why the most costly states were for patients requiring SURG or dependent on inhospital administrated drugs. Projected data show that most time is spent in a stabilized state with appropriate treatments or in remission, and that costs associated with SURG are high.

Interobserver Variation Study of the Rutgeerts Score to Assess Endoscopic Recurrence after Surgery for Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: After resection surgery for Crohn's disease, recurrence of endoscopic lesions at the site of the anastomosis or in the neoterminal ileum is graded according to the Rutgeerts score (RS). The goal of this study was to test the interobserver variability for RS. METHODS: Thirteen trained endoscopists evaluated the RS on 39 videotapes of patients who had undergone resection for Crohn's disease with an ileocolonic anastomosis 6 months earlier. Videotapes were randomly assigned to endoscopists through a balanced incomplete block design. Each videotape was scored independently by four endoscopists, and each endoscopist evaluated 12 videotapes, making a total of 156 videotape assessments. Reproducibility levels of the RS were assessed through unweighted kappa estimates among multiple raters. The proportion of inappropriate therapeutic initiation was estimated by randomly selecting one endoscopist for each videorecording, assuming that the majority of endoscopists correctly classified endoscopic recurrence. RESULTS: The kappa estimates were 0.43 (95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.52) for the RS on a 5-grade scale, 0.47 (0.28-0.66) for RS < i2 vs. ≥ i2, and 0.64 (0.42-0.85) for RS ≤ i2 vs. > i2. The percentages of inappropriate therapeutic initiation were 12.8% (3.8-21.9) when initiation was triggered by a RS ≥ i2 and 8.3% (1.1-15.6) when initiation was triggered by a RS > i2 (p = 0.41). CONCLUSION: The reproducibility of the RS was moderate, especially when differentiating 10% of patients.

The Impact of Clinical Information on the Assessment of Endoscopic Activity: Characteristics of the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index Of Severity [UCEIS].

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To determine whether clinical information influences endoscopic scoring by central readers using the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity [UCEIS; comprising 'vascular pattern', 'bleeding', 'erosions and ulcers']. METHODS: Forty central readers performed 28 evaluations, including 2 repeats, from a library of 44 video sigmoidoscopies stratified by Mayo Clinic Score. Following training, readers were randomised to scoring with ['unblinded', n = 20, including 4 control videos with misleading information] or without ['blinded', n 20] clinical information. A total of 21 virtual Central Reader Groups [CRGs], of three blinded readers, were created. Agreement criteria were pre-specified. Kappa [κ] statistics quantified intra- and inter-reader variability. RESULTS: Mean UCEIS scores did not differ between blinded and unblinded readers for any of the 40 main videos. UCEIS standard deviations [SD] were similar [median blinded 0.94, unblinded 0.93; p = 0.97]. Correlation between UCEIS and visual analogue scale [VAS] assessment of overall severity was high [r blinded = 0.90, unblinded = 0.93; p = 0.02]. Scores for control videos were similar [UCEIS: p ≥ 0.55; VAS: p ≥ 0.07]. Intra- [κ 0.47-0.74] and inter-reader [κ 0.40-0.53] variability for items and full UCEIS was 'moderate'-to-'substantial', with no significant differences except for intra-reader variability for erosions and ulcers [κ blinded: 0.47 vs unblinded: 0.74; p 0.047]. The SD of CRGs was lower than for individual central readers [0.54 vs 0.95; p < 0.001]. Correlation between blinded UCEIS and patient-reported symptoms was high [stool frequency: 0.76; rectal bleeding: 0.82; both: 0.81]. CONCLUSIONS: The UCEIS is minimally affected by knowledge of clinical details, strongly correlates with patient-reported symptoms, and is a suitable instrument for trials. CRGs performed better than individuals.

Health benefits and health claims of probiotics: bridging science and marketing.

Health claims for probiotics are evaluated by the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies of the European Food Safety Authority. Despite a substantial amount of basic and clinical research on the beneficial effects of probiotics, all of the evaluated claim applications thus far have received a negative opinion. With the restrictions on the use of clinical endpoints, validated biomarkers for gut health and immune health in relation to reduction in disease risk are needed. Clear-cut criteria for design as well as evaluation of future studies are needed. An open dialogue between basic and clinical scientists, regulatory authorities, food and nutrition industry, and consumers could bridge the gap between science and marketing of probiotics.

A comparison of physician-rated disease severity and patient reported outcomes in mild to moderately active ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim was to derive health state utility scores in ulcerative colitis (UC) by establishing the relationship between the physician-rated ulcerative colitis disease activity index (UCDAI) and a patient reported EQ-5D by statistically mapping the two instruments. METHODS: In a randomised controlled trial comparing oral plus enema mesalazine treatment with oral mesalazine treatment alone (PINCE), UCDAI and EQ-5D scores were collected in parallel from patients with active UC. From these data, multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate response probabilities to each of the five domains of the EQ-5D index from assessment of UC disease severity using original and abbreviated (no endoscopy) versions of the UCDAI. Predicted EQ-5D responses were converted by Monte Carlo simulation to the EQ-5D index for predicting health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The reliability of the algorithm was tested using UCDAI scores from a second mesalazine RCT (PODIUM). RESULTS: The abbreviated-UCDAI showed comparable explanatory performance to the full UCDAI. For patients in remission, mean utility was 0.939, 0.944, and 0.940U for PINCE(estimated), PINCE(observed), and PODIUM, respectively. Mild/moderate and relapsing cases showed mean utilities of 0.801, 0.811, and 0.775, respectively; whilst for those in severe relapse, the mean utilities were 0.630, 0.700 and 0.660 units, respectively. The mean squared error between actual and predicted utilities from observations in PINCE was 0.019. CONCLUSION: Response mapping of UC activity to EQ-5D domains produced reliable estimates of patient-rated health state utility consistent with UCDAI rated severity. Comparing abbreviated-UCDAI and full UCDAI suggests that inclusion of endoscopy scores has limited predictive value in estimating patient HRQoL.

Best practice in the management of mild-to-moderately active ulcerative colitis and achieving maintenance of remission using mesalazine.

Optimizing treatment goals in ulcerative colitis requires recognizing the needs of patients. It is increasingly recognized that adapting treatment strategies aligned with patient needs can improve patient compliance and consequently minimize relapse rates. Tailoring of treatment strategies can improve not only patient quality of life, and decrease the number harmed by adverse events from more potent drugs, but can also save valuable healthcare costs by avoiding high-cost treatment interventions associated with acute ulcerative colitis. This review will consider several elements of mesalazine management from the patient perspective based on a range of clinical and patient-focused evidence. By highlighting patient preferences in disease management it is envisaged that this review will aid physicians to optimize treatment decisions with the different mesalazine preparations available.

An economic evaluation comparing concomitant oral and topical mesalazine versus oral mesalazine alone in mild-to-moderately active ulcerative colitis based on results from randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: A previous randomised controlled trial has demonstrated that oral plus topical mesalazine enema is more effective than oral mesalazine alone for achieving clinical remission in mild-to-moderately active extensive ulcerative colitis (UC). To evaluate whether this strategy is cost-effective we conducted an economic evaluation comparing 1 g topical mesalazine in combination with 4 g oral mesalazine compared to 4 g mesalazine monotherapy in mild-to-moderately active UC. METHODS: The economic evaluation was based on the ability to achieve remission using changes from baseline in the ulcerative colitis disease activity instrument (UCDAI). A cost-utility analysis was used where the main outcome was quality-adjusted life years to reflect improved quality of life associated with achieving remission compared with active disease. A simulated Markov model with five health states was constructed to model cost and outcome changes over time: (1) active UC; (2) mesalazine-refractory active UC; (3) steroid-refractory active UC; (4) infliximab-responsive active UC; and (5) remission. To reflect parameter uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness analysis probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted by varying relevant clinical parameters. RESULTS: Average treatment costs required to transition a patient from active UC to remission using oral and topical mesalazine compared with oral alone were £1812 and £2390, respectively. Improved remission rates attributed to oral and topical mesalazine resulted in moderate improvements in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared to oral mesalazine alone. Disaggregation of medical costs indicated that medical consultations and diagnostic costs were similar for both treatment arms. An abbreviated analysis which considered costs up to steroid-refractory patients in subacute UC indicated that combination therapy offered a cost-savings of £285 over 16 weeks of therapy compared with monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that the addition of 1 g topical mesalazine results in significant cost-savings and moderate quality of life improvements. We have also shown that irrespective of which treatment modality is used in steroid-refractory patients (eg, infliximab, azathioprine, ciclosporine) that topical mesalazine is cost-saving.