Standardizing Scoring Conventions for Crohn's Disease Endoscopy: An International RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic assessment of disease activity is integral for evaluating treatment response in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). We aimed to define appropriate items for evaluating endoscopic activity and conventions for consistent endoscopic scoring rules in CD. METHODS: A 2-round modified RAND/University of California at Los Angeles Appropriateness Method study was conducted. A panel of 15 gastroenterologists used a 9-point Likert scale to rate the appropriateness of statements pertaining to the Simple Endoscopic Score for CD, Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity, and additional items relevant to endoscopy scoring in CD. Each statement was voted as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate based on the median panel rating and presence of disagreement. RESULTS: Panelists voted that it is appropriate for all ulcers to contribute to endoscopic scoring in CD, including aphthous ulcers, ulcerations at a surgical anastomosis, and anal canal ulcers (scored in the rectum). Endoscopic healing should reflect an absence of ulcers. Narrowing should be defined as a clear decrease in luminal diameter; stenosis should be defined by an impassable narrowing, and if occurring at the junction of 2 segments, scored in the distal segment. Scarring and inflammatory polyps were considered inappropriate for including in the affected area score. The optimal method for defining ulcer depth remains uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: We outlined scoring conventions for the Simple Endoscopic Score for CD and Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity, noting that both scores have limitations. Therefore, we identified priorities for future research and steps for developing and validating a more representative endoscopic index in CD.

Endoscopic Assessment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Activity in Clinical Trials.

In patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, poor correlation between symptoms and active luminal inflammation has been well established. As a result, the field has moved towards the use of endoscopic assessment to evaluate inflammatory activity. Numerous endoscopic indices have been used for this purpose although none are completely validated. The Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease and the Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity have been used most frequently; however in addition to incomplete validation, they have important limitations for clinical use, including complexity of scoring and poor reliability of items such as stenosis. The Rutgeerts' score for postoperative Crohn's disease was developed primarily as a prognostic rather than evaluative tool and also requires additional validation. In ulcerative colitis, the Mayo endoscopic subscore has been used as the regulatory standard, although the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity may provide a more granular assessment of individual components of disease activity. The use of combined outcomes with patient reported outcomes (PROs) and endoscopic indices has received favor by regulatory bodies but require further validation. This review describes the indications for endoscopic assessment in trials, the indices most frequently utilized for these purposes, and potential future approaches to assessment of disease activity.

Patients With Low Drug Levels or Antibodies to a Prior Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Are More Likely to Develop Antibodies to a Subsequent Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) with measurement of serum drug and antidrug antibodies (ADAb) is used widely to confirm therapeutic exposure, rule out immunogenicity, and optimize treatment of biologics in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases.1 A recent genome-wide association study found the variant HLA-DQA1∗05 to increase the risk of development of antibodies against infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADM) 2-fold, regardless of concomitant immunomodulator use.2,3 However, there is currently limited evidence showing whether patients who develop antibodies to 1 anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) are prone to develop antibodies to the subsequent anti-TNF. Our aim was to investigate the risk of subsequent antibody development in cases (with ADAb to prior anti-TNF) versus control subjects (without ADAb to prior anti-TNF) using a large cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases who underwent TDM with a drug-tolerant assay.

Ustekinumab Therapeutic Drug Monitoring-Impact on Clinical Practice: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Observational Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The value of ustekinumab (UST) therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in clinical practice remains unclear. This study examined the impact of UST TDM on clinical decision making in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: A total of 110 consecutive UST-treated CD patients were enrolled in this multicenter, single-arm cross-sectional study. During a single study visit, clinical decisions, disease characteristics, and serum and fecal samples were obtained. The primary outcome was congruency of the actual and two hypothetical clinical decisions based on provision of UST TDM (with and without fecal calprotectin [FCP]) to participating clinicians. Decisions were compared against those of a review panel. A sub-study retrospectively measured the associations of clinical outcomes at the next follow-up visit with serum UST concentration [UST]. RESULTS: No differences in the pattern of decisions by clinicians were observed before and after provision of UST TDM (P = 1.0) or UST TDM + FCP (P = 0.86). However, 39% (TDM) and 50% (TDM + FCP) of hypothetical decisions differed from the initial decisions. The review panel's decisions differed with the addition of TDM + FCP (P = 0.0006), but not TDM alone (P = 0.16). The sub-study (n = 53) failed to detect an association between therapeutic serum [UST] at the initial study visit and clinical outcomes at the next visit. CONCLUSIONS: In consecutive CD patients treated with UST, the addition of TDM into routine clinical practice did not significantly impact clinical decisions and there was no association between short-term clinical outcomes and serum [UST]. Further studies are warranted before clinicians routinely implement UST TDM into clinical practice.

Prospective Evaluation of Endoscopic and Histologic Indices in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Using Centralized Review.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Ulcerative Colitis (UC) Endoscopic Index of Severity (UCEIS) and Mayo Endoscopy Score (MES) and to validate the Robarts Histopathology Index (RHI) and Nancy Index (NI) in pediatric UC. We examined rectosigmoid and pancolonic versions of each instrument. METHODS: Single-center cross-sectional study of 60 prospectively enrolled participants. Through central endoscopy review, 4 pediatric gastroenterologists assigned rectosigmoid and pancolonic (mean of 5 colonic segments) UCEIS and MES scores. Two blinded pathologists assigned rectosigmoid and pancolonic RHI and NI scores. We assessed reliability with intraclass correlation coefficients and weighted kappa statistics and explored construct validity with correlations, boxplots, and receiver operator characteristic curves. RESULTS: The UCEIS and MES displayed almost perfect intra-rater and inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient and weighted kappa ≥0.85), moderate-to-strong correlation with histologic/clinical activity and fecal calprotectin (FC), and very strong correlation with global endoscopic severity (r > 0.9). Rectosigmoid UCEIS and MES scores of 0 were highly specific (≥95%) for endoscopic and histologic remission throughout the colon. Pancolonic endoscopy scores correlated more strongly with histologic activity, clinical activity, and systemic inflammatory markers and better discriminated between degrees of active disease. RHI and NI showed moderate-to-strong correlation (r = 0.5-0.83) with endoscopic/clinical activity and FC. DISCUSSION: Our findings support the reliability and construct validity of the UCEIS and MES and the construct validity of the RHI and NI in pediatric UC. Normal rectosigmoid findings predicted pancolonic healing, but, given active disease, pancolonic endoscopic assessment more accurately captured global disease burden.

A More Severe Non-melanoma Skin Cancer Phenotype Is Seen in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Antagonists.

BACKGROUND: Limited data suggest that non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) risk is higher in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) particularly in those on a tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist (TNF antagonist). It remains unknown whether TNF antagonist exposure alters the clinical course of NMSC in patients with IBD or if this therapy should be discontinued. AIMS: To assess the impact of TNF antagonist exposure on NMSC severity, recurrence and need for ancillary treatments. METHODS: Patients with IBD seen at London Health Sciences Centre, London, Canada were assessed for a history of NMSC and pre-diagnosis TNF antagonist exposure. NMSC severity (low risk and high risk), ancillary NMSC therapies, including chemo or radiotherapy, and changes to IBD therapy were assessed. RESULTS: Eleven of 472 patients with IBD reviewed were diagnosed with NMSC. Sixty-four percent (7/11) were on a TNF antagonist at the time of NMSC diagnosis. All patients with TNF antagonist exposure, (7/7) presented with a high-risk lesion based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) clinical practice guidelines. The incidence of positive margins was 42.9% (3/7) and 14.3% (1/7) required ancillary therapy. No metastatic disease was seen. TNF antagonist therapy was discontinued in a single patient due to NMSC diagnosis. Recurrent NMSC lesions were not seen in any of the TNF antagonist exposed patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this case series, TNF antagonist exposure may be associated with a severe NMSC clinical course. Larger studies are needed to confirm whether TNF antagonist discontinuation should be considered in the setting of NMSC diagnosis in IBD.

Assessing National Trends and Disparities in Ambulatory, Emergency Department, and Inpatient Visits for Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the United States (2005-2016).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) require repeated health care encounters, although the focus of care differs when patients are seen in ambulatory, emergency department (ED), or inpatient settings. We examined contemporary trends and disparities in IBD-related health care visits. METHODS: We used data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, and the National Inpatient Sample to estimate the total number of annual IBD-related visits from 2005 through 2016. We performed logistic regression analyses to test temporal linear trends. Slope and differences in distributions of patient demographics were compared across time and treatment settings. RESULTS: From 2005 through 2016, approximately 2.2 million IBD-related ambulatory visits (95 CI, 1.9-2.5) occurred annually on average, increasing by 70.3% from the time period of 2005 to 2007 through the time period of 2008 to 2010, and decreasing by 19.8% from the time period of 2011 to 2013 through the time period of 2014 to 2016. An average of 115,934 IBD-related ED visits (95% CI, 113,758-118,111) and 89,111 IBD-related hospital discharges (95% CI, 87,416-90,807) occurred annually. Significant increases in the rate of IBD-related ED visits (3.2 visits/10,000 encounters; P < .0001) and hospital discharges (6.0 discharges/10,000 encounters; P < .0001) were observed from 2005 through 2016. The proportion of patients paying with private insurance decreased from 2005 through 2016, among all care settings. A greater proportion of young patients, patients with Crohn's disease, non-white patients, and patients with Medicare or Medicaid used hospital-based vs ambulatory services. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from 3 large databases, we found that although IBD-related ambulatory visits stabilized to decreased from 2005 through 2016, rates of ED use and admission to the hospital have continued to increase with changes in patient demographics, over time and among care settings.

Discordance Between Patient-Reported Outcomes and Mucosal Inflammation in Patients With Mild to Moderate Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Little is known about the association between rectal bleeding and increased stool frequency with endoscopic findings in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis (UC). We evaluated the associations between rectal bleeding or stool frequency and endoscopic remission in this population. METHODS: We performed a post-hoc analysis of data from a phase 3 non-inferiority trial of 817 adults with mild to moderate UC who received treatment with mesalazine. We obtained information on rectal bleeding, stool frequency, and Mayo endoscopic subscores (MESs) at weeks 0, 8, and 38. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values with which rectal bleeding and stool frequency identified patients with MESs of 0 and/or 1 were calculated at weeks 8 and 38 of treatment. The associations between change in rectal bleeding and stool frequency and change in MES after treatment were quantified using the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Among patients with a MES of 0, 7/82 patients (9%) had a rectal bleeding score of 1 or more and 40/82 patients (49%) had a stool frequency score of 1 or more at week 8; at week 38, 6/167 patients (4%) had a rectal bleeding score of 1 or more and 63/167 patients (38%) had a stool frequency score of 1 or more. Among patients with MESs of 0 or 1, 50/310 patients (16%) had a rectal bleeding score of 1 or more and 162/310 patients (52%) had had a stool frequency score of 1 or more at week 8; at week 38, 18/363 patients (5%) had a rectal bleeding score of 1 or more and 141/363 patients (39%) had a stool frequency score of 1 or more. The Spearman rank correlation coefficients for change in rectal bleeding and stool frequency with change in MES at week 8 were 0.39 (95% CI, 0.32-0.45) and 0.34 (95% CI, 0.27-0.40), respectively. In patients with reduced MESs at week 8, 39/389 patients (10%) had unchanged or worsening rectal bleeding and 81/389 patients (21%) had unchanged or increasing stool frequencies. CONCLUSIONS: In a post-hoc analysis of data from a phase 3 trial of adults with mild to moderate UC treated with mesalazine, we found absence of rectal bleeding to identify patients in endoscopic remission. However, many patients in remission still have increased stool frequency, indicating that it may not be a sensitive marker of disease activity in patients with mild to moderate UC.

Reliability of Endoscopic Evaluation of Postoperative Recurrent Crohn's Disease.

Endoscopic evaluation for postoperative recurrence of Crohn's disease (CD) is routinely integrated into clinical practice. The Rutgeerts score (RS) was developed to grade the severity of endoscopic postoperative CD recurrence and has been integrated into clinical practice guidelines and utilized as an endpoint in interventional trials.1,2 However, the operating properties of the RS have not been fully assessed. Furthermore, the RS i2 grade groups purely anastomotic ulcerations with those in the neoterminal ileum, whereas the modified Endoscopic Postoperative Recurrence Score (mEPRS) distinguishes lesions limited to the ileocolic anastomosis (i2a) from those in the neoterminal ileum (i2b). Accurate characterization of endoscopic recurrence is an important determinant for initiating postoperative medical therapy. Therefore, variability in endoscopic scoring may result in inappropriate therapeutic decisions.3 We evaluated the reliability of endoscopic assessment of postoperative CD recurrence among independent blinded central readers.

Response to Placebo, Measured by Endoscopic Evaluation of Crohn's Disease Activity, in a Pooled Analysis of Data From 5 Randomized Controlled Induction Trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopy is used to measure activity of Crohn's disease (CD) and determine eligibility and outcomes of participants in randomized controlled trials of therapeutic agents. We aimed to estimate the rate of response to placebo in trials, based on endoscopic evaluation of CD activity, and identify factors that affect this response. METHODS: We collected patient-level data from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of therapeutic agents for CD that included centrally-read endoscopic assessments with validated scoring indices. We analyzed data from induction trials of eldelumab, filgotinib, risankizumab, and ustekinumab (from 188 patients given placebo). The primary outcome was the rate of response to placebo, based on endoscopic assessment of CD activity (>50% reduction in the simple endoscopic score for CD). Rate of remission, based on endoscopic score, was a secondary outcome. Overall rates of response to placebo were calculated using the inverse variance-weighted average method and presented with 95% CIs. We performed a multi-variable meta-regression analysis to identify determinants of response to placebo, assessed endoscopically, using patient-level data from the filgotinib and ustekinumab trials. RESULTS: The pooled rate of response among patients given placebo was 16.2% (95% CI, 10.5%-22.0%) and the rate of remission in this group was 5.2% (95% CI, 1.7%-8.8%). Prior exposure to tumor necrosis factor antagonists (odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.10-0.93; P = .036) and increased concentration of C-reactive protein at baseline (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.98; P = .014 per 10 mg/L increase) were independently associated with lower rates of response to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of response and remission to placebo, determined by centrally-read endoscopy, in induction trials of therapies for CD are low. These estimates are important for sample size calculations for randomized placebo-controlled trials that use the Simple Endoscopic Score for CD as an endpoint. They also provide a benchmark to interpret findings from non-placebo controlled, prospective, randomized, unblinded trials.

Development and Validation of a Magnetic Resonance Index for Assessing Fistulas in Patients With Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is no validated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) index for assessment of perianal fistulas in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). We developed and internally validated a new instrument. METHODS: We used paired baseline and week-24 MRI scans from 160 participants in a randomized placebo-controlled trial of stem cell therapy for patients with perianal fistulizing CD. Four radiologists scored disease activity using index items identified during previous studies and exploratory items. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients. We developed an index using backward elimination linear regression analysis, in which potential independent variables were items having intraclass correlation coefficients of at least 0.4 and the dependent variable was perianal fistulizing disease activity, measured on a 100-mm visual analogue scale. The final model was internally validated using the .632 bootstrap method to correct model optimism and quantify calibration accuracy. We evaluated responsiveness of the index by assessing longitudinal validity and estimating standardized effect sizes. RESULTS: We developed the magnetic resonance novel index for fistula imaging in CD (MAGNIFI-CD) using 6 items. The optimism-corrected R2 of the model was 0.71, which was comparable to R2 for the original sample (0.74). The calibration slope for the model was 0.98. Compared with the original and modified versions of the Van Assche Index, the MAGNIFI-CD had improved operating characteristics. Estimates of intraclass correlation coefficients for MAGNIFI-CD, the modified Van Assche Index, and Van Assche Index were 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.90), 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74-0.86), and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71-0.86) for intra-rater reliability, and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.63-0.80), 0.67 (95% CI, 0.55-0.75) and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.56-0.77) for inter-rater reliability. Corresponding standardized effect size estimates were 1.02 (95% CI, 0.65-1.39), 0.84 (95% CI, 0.48-1.21), and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.33-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: We developed an index called the MAGNIFI-CD, which is based on 6 items. It assesses MRI data and determines perianal fistulizing CD activity with improved operating characteristics compared to previous indices. This index may be used as an outcome measure in clinical trials comparing treatment effects in patients with perianal fistulizing CD. Although the performance of the MAGNIFI-CD indicates its stability and reasonable external validity, external validation is needed.

Oral Janus kinase inhibitors for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor which blocks cytokine signaling involved in the pathogenesis of autoimmune diseases including ulcerative colitis (UC). The etiology of UC is poorly understood, however research suggests the development and progression of the disease is due to a dysregulated immune response leading to inflammation of the colonic mucosa in genetically predisposed individuals. Additional medications are currently required since some patients do not respond to the available medications and some medications are associated with serious adverse events (SAEs). JAK inhibitors have been widely studied in diseases including rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn's disease and may represent a promising and novel therapeutic option for the treatment of UC. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of oral JAK inhibitors for the maintenance of remission in participants with quiescent UC. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases from inception to 20 September 2019: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Register, WHO trials registry and clinicaltrials.gov. References and conference abstracts were searched to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized control trial (RCTs) in which an oral JAK inhibitor was compared with placebo or active comparator in the treatment of quiescent UC were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion and extraction. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who failed to maintain remission as defined by any included studies. Secondary outcomes included failure to maintain clinical response, failure to maintain endoscopic remission, failure to maintain endoscopic response, disease-specific quality of life, adverse events (AEs), withdrawal due to AEs and SAEs. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for each dichotomous outcome. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The overall certainty of the evidence supporting the outcomes was evaluated using the GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: One RCT (593 participants) including patients with moderately to severely active UC met the inclusion criteria. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive maintenance therapy with tofacitinib at 5 mg twice daily, 10 mg twice daily or placebo for 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was remission at 52 weeks and the secondary endpoints included mucosal healing at 52 weeks, sustained remission at 24 and 52 weeks and glucocorticosteroid-free remission. This study was rated as low risk of bias. The study reported on most of the pre-specified primary and secondary outcomes for this review including clinical remission, clinical response, endoscopic remission, AEs, SAEs and withdrawal due to AEs. However, the included study did not report on endoscopic response or disease-specific quality of life. Sixty-three per cent (247/395) of tofacitinib participants failed to maintain clinical remission at 52 weeks compared to 89% (176/198) of placebo participants (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.77; high-certainty evidence). Forty-three per cent (171/395) of tofacitinib participants failed to maintain clinical response at 52 weeks compared to 80% (158/198) of placebo participants (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.62; high-certainty evidence). Eighty-four per cent (333/395) of tofacitinib participants failed to maintain endoscopic remission at 52 weeks compared to 96% (190/198) of placebo participants (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.92; high-certainty evidence). AEs were reported in 76% (299/394) of tofacitinib participants compared with 75% (149/198) of placebo participants (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; high-certainty evidence). Commonly reported AEs included worsening UC, nasopharyngitis, arthralgia (joint pain)and headache. SAEs were reported in 5% (21/394) of tofacitinib participants compared with 7% (13/198) of placebo participants (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.59; low-certainty evidence). SAEs included non-melanoma skin cancers, cardiovascular events, cancer other than non-melanoma skin cancer, Bowen's disease, skin papilloma and uterine leiomyoma (a tumour in the uterus). There was a higher proportion of participants who withdrew due to an AE in the placebo group compared to the tofacitinib group. Nine per cent (37/394) of participants taking tofacitinib withdrew due to an AE compared to 19% (37/198) of participants taking placebo (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.77; moderate-certainty evidence). The most common reason for withdrawal due to an AE was worsening UC. The included study did not report on endoscopic response or on mean disease-specific quality of life scores. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: High-certainty evidence suggests that tofacitinib is superior to placebo for maintenance of clinical and endoscopic remission at 52 weeks in participants with moderate-to-severe UC in remission. The optimal dose of tofacitinib for maintenance therapy is unknown. High-certainty evidence suggests that there is no increased risk of AEs with tofacitinib compared to placebo. However, we are uncertain about the effect of tofacitinib on SAEs due to the low number of events. Further studies are required to look at the long-term effectiveness and safety of using tofacitinib and other oral JAK inhibitors as maintenance therapy in participants with moderate-to-severe UC in remission.

Adalimumab for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: Conventional medications for Crohn's disease (CD) include anti-inflammatory drugs, immunosuppressants and corticosteroids. If an individual does not respond, or loses response to first-line treatments, then biologic therapies such as tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) antagonists such as adalimumab are considered for treating CD. Maintenance of remission of CD is a clinically important goal, as disease relapse can negatively affect quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab for maintenance of remission in people with quiescent CD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to April 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered for inclusion randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing adalimumab to placebo or to an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We analyzed data on an intention-to-treat basis. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes. The primary outcome was failure to maintain clinical remission. We define clinical remission as a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of < 150. Secondary outcomes were failure to maintain clinical response, endoscopic remission, endoscopic response, histological remission and adverse events (AEs). We assessed biases using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We used GRADE to assess the overall certainty of evidence supporting the primary outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included six RCTs (1158 participants). We rated four trials at low risk of bias and two trials at unclear risk of bias. All participants had moderate-to-severe CD that was in clinical remission. Four studies were placebo-controlled (1012 participants). Two studies (70 participants) compared adalimumab to active medication (azathioprine, mesalamine or 6-mercaptopurine) in participants who had an ileocolic resection prior to study enrolment. Adalimumab versus placebo Fifty-nine per cent (252/430) of participants treated with adalimumab failed to maintain clinical remission at 52 to 56 weeks, compared with 86% (217/253) of participants receiving placebo (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.77; 3 studies, 683 participants; high-certainty evidence). Among those who received prior TNF-α antagonist therapy, 69% (129/186) of adalimumab participants failed to maintain clinical or endoscopic response at 52 to 56 weeks, compared with 93% (108/116) of participants who received placebo (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.85; 2 studies, 302 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Fifty-one per cent (192/374) of participants who received adalimumab failed to maintain clinical remission at 24 to 26 weeks, compared with 79% (149/188) of those who received placebo (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.83; 2 studies, 554 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Eighty-seven per cent (561/643) of participants who received adalimumab reported an AE compared with 85% (315/369) of participants who received placebo (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09; 4 studies, 1012 participants; high-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events were seen in 8% (52/643) of participants who received adalimumab and 14% (53/369) of participants who received placebo (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.80; 4 studies, 1012 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and withdrawal due to AEs was reported in 7% (45/643) of adalimumab participants compared to 13% (48/369) of placebo participants (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.91; 4 studies, 1012 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Commonly-reported AEs included CD aggravation, arthralgia, nasopharyngitis, urinary tract infections, headache, nausea, fatigue and abdominal pain. Adalimumab versus active comparators No studies reported failure to maintain clinical remission. One study reported on failure to maintain clinical response and endoscopic remission at 104 weeks in ileocolic resection participants who received either adalimumab, azathioprine or mesalamine as post-surgical maintenance therapy. Thirteen per cent (2/16) of adalimumab participants failed to maintain clinical response compared with 54% (19/35) of azathioprine or mesalamine participants (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.87; 51 participants). Six per cent (1/16) of participants who received adalimumab failed to maintain endoscopic remission, compared with 57% (20/35) of participants who received azathioprine or mesalamine (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.75; 51 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One study reported on failure to maintain endoscopic response at 24 weeks in ileocolic resection participants who received either adalimumab or 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) as post-surgical maintenance therapy. Nine per cent (1/11) of adalimumab participants failed to maintain endoscopic remission compared with 50% (4/8) of 6-MP participants (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.33; 19 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab is an effective therapy for maintenance of clinical remission in people with quiescent CD. Adalimumab is also effective in those who have previously been treated with TNF-α antagonists. The effect of adalimumab in the post-surgical setting is uncertain. More research is needed in people with recent bowel surgery for CD to better determine treatment plans following surgery. Future research should continue to explore factors that influence initial and subsequent biologic selection for people with moderate-to-severe CD. Studies comparing adalimumab to other active medications are needed, to help determine the optimal maintenance therapy for CD.

Responsiveness of histological disease activity indices in ulcerative colitis: a post hoc analysis using data from the TOUCHSTONE randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the reliability and responsiveness of available but incompletely validated UC histological disease activity indices using standardised rules for centralised assessment. DESIGN: Disease activity was assessed in biopsies collected in a phase II placebo-controlled ozanimod trial by four blinded pathologists using the Geboes (GS) and modified Riley (MRS) scores, the Robarts Histopathology (RHI) and Nancy Histological (NHI) indices and a Visual Analogue Scale. Reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Index responsiveness was evaluated by assessing longitudinal validity (Pearson correlations of changes in index scores and other disease measures), and effect size estimates (standardised effect size (SES)) using two criteria for change (treatment assignment and >2 point decrease in total Mayo Clinic score). Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve estimates evaluated the probability of the indices to discriminate between treatment and placebo. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability of the histological indices was substantial to almost perfect (ICC>0.61), and responsiveness was moderate to large (SES estimates>0.5); 0.81 (0.52, 1.10), 0.87 (0.58, 1.17), 0.57 (0.30, 0.84) and 0.81 (0.52, 1.09) when treatment assignment was the criterion for change and 1.05 (0.80, 1.31), 1.13 (0.87, 1.39), 0.88 (0.64, 1.12) and 1.06 (0.80, 1.31) for the change in Mayo score criterion for the GS, MRS, RHI and NHI, respectively. The indices had similar drisciminative ability based on AUROC estimates (range 0.608-0.649). CONCLUSION: All four existing histological indices were similarly reliable and responsive based on this dataset.

Identifying Outcomes in Clinical Trials of Fistulizing Crohn's Disease for the Development of a Core Outcome Set.

Fistulizing complications develop in approximately one third of patients with Crohn's disease (CD), resulting in morbidity and impaired quality of life.1 Sites of fistulae most commonly include perianal fistulae, but also enterocutaneous, enteroenteric, enterovesical, and rectovaginal. Its management requires combined medical and surgical strategies to prevent abscess formation and induce healing. Biologic agents have improved the medical treatment of CD-related fistulae, but many patients still require surgical intervention. Hence, there is considerable interest in the development of novel pharmaceutical agents to treat fistulizing CD.

Identifying Outcomes in Clinical Trials of Pouchitis for the Development of a Core Outcome Set.

Treatment targets in both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and daily practice have evolved for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), motivated by changing regulatory requirements and efforts to alter the disease's natural history. Substantial heterogeneity in outcome definitions has been identified in UC RCTs.1 To harmonize treatment outcomes that should be reported, we proposed the collaborative development of a core outcome set (COS).2 A COS is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials to facilitate reporting consistency, reduce selective reporting bias, and improve quality of evidence synthesis.3.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Luminal Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Crohn's disease (CD) is a lifelong illness with substantial morbidity, although new therapies and treatment paradigms have been developed. We provide guidance for treatment of ambulatory patients with mild to severe active luminal CD. METHODS: We performed a systematic review to identify published studies of the management of CD. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Statements were developed through an iterative online platform and then finalized and voted on by a group of specialists. RESULTS: The consensus includes 41 statements focused on 6 main drug classes: antibiotics, 5-aminosalicylate, corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, biologic therapies, and other therapies. The group suggested against the use of antibiotics or 5-aminosalicylate as induction or maintenance therapies. Corticosteroid therapies (including budesonide) can be used as induction, but not maintenance therapies. Among immunosuppressants, thiopurines should not be used for induction, but can be used for maintenance therapy for selected low-risk patients. Parenteral methotrexate was proposed for induction and maintenance therapy in patients with corticosteroid-dependent CD. Biologic agents, including tumor necrosis factor antagonists, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab, were recommended for patients failed by conventional induction therapies and as maintenance therapy. The consensus group was unable to clearly define the role of concomitant immunosuppressant therapies in initiation of treatment with a biologic agent. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal management of CD requires careful patient assessment, acknowledgement of patient preferences, evidence-based use of existing therapies, and thorough assessment to define treatment success.

Prokinetics for Functional Dyspepsia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials.

OBJECTIVES: Prokinetics are recommended for the treatment of functional dyspepsia (FD) but systematic reviews give conflicting results on the efficacy of these agents. We have therefore conducted an updated systematic review to support the 2017 joint ACG/CAG dyspepsia guidelines. METHODS: Electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL, were searched until September 2017 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing either prokinetics and placebo or two types of prokinetics to improve FD symptoms. The primary outcome was absence or improvement of dyspeptic symptoms at the end of treatment. Double-blind eligibility assessment and data extraction was performed. Pooled risk ratios of symptoms persisting or adverse events occurring, and standardized mean difference of quality-of-life (QoL) scores with 95% CI, using a random effects model, were calculated. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: The search identified 1388 citations; 38 studies in 35 papers were included. Of these, 29 trials comparing prokinetics with placebo were found. There was a statistically significant effect of prokinetic treatment in reducing global symptoms of FD (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.89; I2 91%; NNT 7), regardless of FD subtype or ethnicity. When comparing two types of prokinetic, the most commonly used comparator was domperidone. There was no difference in reducing global symptoms (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07). QoL was not improved with prokinetic treatment. The adverse events with individual prokinetics were not different from placebo, except for cisapride. The GRADE assessment rated the quality of the evidence in each outcome as very low. CONCLUSIONS: From the current evidence, prokinetics may be effective for the treatment in all subtypes of FD, with very low quality of evidence. There was no difference between prokinetics for dyspeptic symptom improvement. High-quality RCTs with large sample sizes of FD patients are needed to verify the efficacy of prokinetics.