Training and competence in Digestive Endoscopy: Statement Position Paper from the Spanish Society of Digestive Diseases.

Gastrointestinal (GI) Endoscopy is a basic competence for the management of gastrointestinal diseases. However, it should not be regarded as an independent training technique. Rather it is a part of a continuous and accredited process that requires clinical knowledge from the gastroenterologist to keep skills up-to-date in a constantly evolving medical subspecialty. Thus, the only official accredited way for training in GI endoscopy is through the Specialized Health Training program in the Management of the Digestive Diseases administered by the Spanish Ministry of Health.

Analysis of blood markers for early colorectal cancer diagnosis.

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a very common tumor worldwide. Its mortality can be limited by early diagnosis through screening programs. These programs are based on fecal occult blood testing and colonoscopy. Our objective was to find a model based on the determination of blood biomarkers that was efficacious enough to become part of the early diagnosis of CRC. Methods: In a total of 221 patients who underwent a colonoscopy, two types of markers were identified (I) classic: carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA19.9, α-fetoprotein, CA125, CA72.4, and ferritin; and (II) experimental: neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), estimated glomerular filtration rate (EGFR), 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine (8OHdG), calprotectin, and cysteine-rich 61 (Cyr61). We divided the patients into four groups according to colonoscopy results: a control group (n=83) with normal colonoscopy, a polyp group (n=56), a CRC group (n=45), and an inflammatory disease group (n=37). We built an algorithm based on multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 51.6% were males, and the median age was 63 years. We designed an algorithm based on the combination of several markers that discriminated CRC patients from the rest of the patients with a performance of 94%, a sensitivity of 95.6%, and a specificity of 80.6%. Discriminating by sex also resulted in two powerful algorithms, although it performed better in males (97% vs. 91%). Conclusions: Our study has devised a predictive model with high efficacy based on the determination of several biomarkers. We think that it could be incorporated into the set of methods used in CRC screening.

Initial experience with golimumab in clinical practice for ulcerative colitis

Background: Golimumab is a TNF-blocking agent indicated as a second-line therapy in ulcerative colitis. Purpose: To research the effectiveness and safety of golimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis in clinical practice. Methods: Retrospective study of the effectiveness and safety of golimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis. All patients received golimumab 200 mg subcutaneously at week 0, and golimumab 100 mg subcutaneously at week 2. After the induction treatment, each patient received 50 mg sc. every 4 weeks in patients with body weight less than 80 kg, and 100 mg every 4 weeks in patients with body weight greater than or equal to 80 kg. Results: Study of a group of 23 ulcerative colitis patients, 7 of whom were naive to any anti-TNF therapy, and 16 patients who had previously been treated with an anti-TNF agent other than golimumab (non-naive patients). The average treatment time with golimumab was 14.3 weeks. Globally, withdrawal of corticosteroids was observed in 74% of cases. Clinical response was observed in 85.5% of patients who had not received biological treatment previously, and in patients who had previously received biological treatment the response rate was 75%. Conclusions: In this short study, golimumab seems to be an alternative treatment in naive and non-naive anti-TNF ulcerative colitis patients. It is also a safe therapy, given that there were no adverse effects in the patients studied (AU)

No disponible

Initial experience with golimumab in clinical practice for ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: Golimumab is a TNF-blocking agent indicated as a second-line therapy in ulcerative colitis. PURPOSE: To research the effectiveness and safety of golimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis in clinical practice. METHODS: Retrospective study of the effectiveness and safety of golimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis. All patients received golimumab 200 mg subcutaneously at week 0, and golimumab 100 mg subcutaneously at week 2. After the induction treatment, each patient received 50 mg sc. every 4 weeks in patients with body weight less than 80 kg, and 100 mg every 4 weeks in patients with body weight greater than or equal to 80 kg. RESULTS: Study of a group of 23 ulcerative colitis patients, 7 of whom were naive to any anti-TNF therapy, and 16 patients who had previously been treated with an anti-TNF agent other than golimumab (non-naive patients). The average treatment time with golimumab was 14.3 weeks. Globally, withdrawal of corticosteroids was observed in 74% of cases. Clinical response was observed in 85.5% of patients who had not received biological treatment previously, and in patients who had previously received biological treatment the response rate was 75%. CONCLUSIONS: In this short study, golimumab seems to be an alternative treatment in naive and non-naive anti-TNF ulcerative colitis patients. It is also a safe therapy, given that there were no adverse effects in the patients studied.