FIT negative clinic as a safety net for low-risk patients with colorectal cancer: impact on endoscopy and radiology utilisation-a retrospective cohort study.

Background: Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to triage symptomatic primary care patients who have unexplained symptoms but do not meet the criteria for a suspected lower gastrointestinal cancer pathway. During the COVID-19 pandemic, FIT was used to triage patients referred with urgent 2-week wait (2ww) cancer referrals instead of a direct-to-test strategy. FIT-negative patients were assessed and safety netted in a FIT negative clinic. Methods: We reviewed case notes for 622 patients referred on a 2ww pathway and seen in a FIT negative clinic between June 2020 and April 2021 in a tertiary care hospital. We collected information on demographics, indication for referral, dates for referral, clinic visit, investigations and long-term outcomes. Results: The average age of the patients was 71.5 years with 54% female, and a median follow-up of 2.5 years. Indications for referrals included: anaemia (11%), iron deficiency (24%), weight loss (9%), bleeding per rectum (5%) and change in bowel habits (61%). Of the cases, 28% (95% CI 24% to 31%) had endoscopic (15%, 95% CI 12% to 18%) and/or radiological (20%, 95% CI 17% to 23%) investigations requested after clinic review, and among those investigated, malignancy rate was 1.7%, with rectosigmoid neuroendocrine tumour, oesophageal cancer and lung adenocarcinoma. Conclusion: A FIT negative clinic provides a safety net for patients with unexplained symptoms but low risk of colorectal cancer. These real-world data demonstrate significantly reduced demand on endoscopy and radiology services for FIT-negative patients referred via the 2ww pathway.

Attitudes, perceptions and barriers in implementing therapeutic drug monitoring for anti-TNFs in inflammatory bowel disease: a survey from the Middle East.

Background: A growing body of evidence underscores the beneficial impact of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Objectives: We surveyed clinician attitudes, perceptions and barriers related to TDM in IBD in the Middle East. Design: A 15-question survey was distributed through national gastroenterological societies in five Middle Eastern countries (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Lebanon and Egypt). Methods: Data on clinician characteristics, demographics, utilization patterns and obstacles related to the adoption of TDM with anti-TNFs were gathered. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict factors influencing the utilization of TDM. Results: Among 211 respondents (82% male), 82% were consultants, 8% were physicians with an interest in gastroenterology (GI), and 6% were GI trainees. Of these, 152 met inclusion criteria, treating >5 IBD patients per month and ⩾1 with an anti-TNF per month. TDM was used in clinical practice by 78% (95% CI: 71-85) of respondents. TDM was utilized following the loss of response (LOR) in 93%, for primary non-response (PNR) in 40% and before restarting anti-TNF therapy after a drug holiday in 33% of respondents, while 34% used TDM proactively. No specific factors were associated with the use of TDM. Barriers to TDM use included cost (85%), time lag to results (71%) and lack of insurance reimbursement (65%). Overall knowledge of TDM (70%), interpretation and actioning of results (76%) or awareness of clinical guidelines (57%) were not perceived as barriers. If barriers were removed, 95% would use TDM more frequently; 93% for LOR, 60% for PNR, 50% when restarting after a drug holiday, and 54% would use TDM proactively. Conclusion: Most gastroenterologists use TDM for LOR, with cost, time lag and insurance reimbursement being significant barriers. Addressing these barriers would increase the judicious use of reactive and proactive TDM to optimize anti-TNF therapy in IBD.

Attitudes, perceptions, and barriers in implementing therapeutic drug monitoring for anti-TNFs in inflammatory bowel disease: a survey from Middle East Anti-TNF therapies are perhaps the most widely used and available biological therapies for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease globally even though other agents have been licensed in recent years. The role of therapeutic drug monitoring to optimise outcomes and mitigate against immunogenicity with anti-TNF agents are now being appreciated. Our study investigates clinician attitudes, perceptions, and barriers related to therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in the context of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) through a comprehensive survey distributed from five Middle Eastern countries. Among 211 respondents (82% male), 82% were consultants, 8% physicians with an interest in gastroenterology (GI), and 6% GI trainees. TDM was utilised following loss of response (LOR) in 93%, for primary non-response (PNR) in 40%, and before restarting anti-TNF therapy after a drug holiday by 33% of respondents, while 34% used TDM proactively. No specific factors were associated with the use of TDM. Barriers to TDM use included cost (85%), time lag to result (71%), and lack of insurance reimbursement (65%). Overall knowledge of TDM (70%), interpretation and actioning of results (76%), or awareness of clinical guidelines (57%) were not perceived as barriers. If barriers were removed, 95% would use TDM more frequently; 93% for LOR, 60% for PNR, 50% when restarting after a drug holiday and 54% would use TDM proactively. Most gastroenterologists use TDM for LOR, with cost, time lag, and insurance reimbursement being significant barriers. Addressing these barriers would increase judicious use of reactive and proactive TDM to optimise anti-TNF therapy in IBD.

Fecal Urgency in Ulcerative Colitis: Impact on Quality of Life and Psychological Well-Being in Active and Inactive Disease States.

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic, relapsing-and-remitting, potentially progressive form of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with multidimensional and often negative effects on patients' lives. Fecal urgency, the sudden and compelling desire to defecate, often accompanied by impaired bowel control leading to frequent and urgent trips to the bathroom, is a distressing symptom, experienced by more than 50% of patients with UC.1 Physicians frequently underestimate the burden of fecal urgency on patients' lives, with ramifications ranging from disruption in daily activities, social interactions, and emotional distress with resultant impairment in quality of life (QoL).2,3.

The prevalence and burden of Rome IV faecal incontinence in ulcerative colitis: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in ulcerative colitis (UC) therapies, a relatively undefined proportion of patients experience faecal incontinence (FI) in the absence of active inflammation. For this group, there remains a significant unmet need with a limited evidence base. AIMS: We aimed to estimate the prevalence and impact of FI in UC. METHODS: In a prospective cross-sectional study, patients with UC completed a series of validated questionnaires, including Rome IV FI criteria, an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-specific FI questionnaire (ICIQ-IBD), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and IBD-Control. UC remission was defined as faecal calprotectin (FCP) ≤250 µg/g, or IBD-control 8 score ≥13 and IBD-Control-VAS ≥ 85. RESULTS: Of 255 patients with UC, overall, 20.4% fulfilled Rome IV criteria for FI. Rome IV FI prevalence did not differ between active and quiescent UC regardless of whether disease activity was defined by IBD-Control scores ± FCP (p = 0.25), or objectively with FCP thresholds of 250 µg/g (p = 0.86) and 100 µg/g (p = 0.95). Most patients (75.2%) reported FI when in 'remission' and during 'relapse' (90.6%) according to ICIQ-IBD. Those who reported FI according to both ICIQ-IBD and Rome IV definitions had higher anxiety, depression and worse quality-of-life (QoL) scores (p < 0.05). In those with Rome IV FI, there was a strong correlation between FI symptom severity and impaired QoL (r = 0.809, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of FI in UC is high, even in remission, and associated with significant psychological distress, symptom burden and impaired QoL. These findings highlight the urgent need for further research and development of evidence-based treatments for FI in UC.

Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Using E-health Technologies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Technological advances have provided innovative, adaptive, and responsive models of care for inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD]. We conducted a systematic review to compare e-health interventions with standard care in management of IBD. METHODS: We searched electronic databases for randomised, controlled trials [RCT] comparing e-health interventions with standard care for patients with IBD. Effect measures were standardised mean difference [SMD], odds ratio [OR], or rate ratio [RR], calculated using the inverse variance or Mantel-Haenszel statistical method and random-effects models. Version 2 of the Cochrane tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The certainty of evidence was appraised with the GRADE framework. RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs [n = 3111; 1754 e-health and 1357 controls] were identified. The difference in disease activity scores (SMD 0.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.09-0.28) and clinical remission (odds ratio [OR] 1.12, 95% CI: 0.78-1.61) between e-health interventions and standard care were not statistically significant. Higher quality of life [QoL] [SMD 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.35) and IBD knowledge [SMD 0.23, 95% CI: 0.10-0.36] scores were noted in the e-health group, and self-efficacy levels [SMD -0.09, 95% CI: -0.22-0.05] were comparable. E-health patients had fewer office [RR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.78-0.93] and emergency [RR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.51- 0.95] visits, with no statistically significant difference in endoscopic procedures, total health care encounters, corticosteroid use, and IBD related hospitalisation or surgery. The trials were judged to be at high risk of bias or to have some concerns for disease remission. The certainty of evidence was moderate or low. CONCLUSION: E-health technologies may have a role in value-based care in IBD.

Curriculum review : investigation and management of dysphagia.

Dysphagia is a common presentation in gastroenterology practice and the diagnosis and management requires a comprehensive knowledge of diverse range of aetiologies, with a systematic approach for assessment of symptoms, selection of investigations and appropriate treatment to relieve symptoms. In this curriculum review, the suggested diagnostic approach highlights the importance of thorough clinical assessment in order to guide the selection of investigations. This article discusses the utility of endoscopic, histopathology, fluoroscopic and motility investigations for dysphagia, and their interpretation, in order to guide targeted treatments ranging from dietary, pharmacological, endoscopic and surgical interventions.

An update on the role of anti-IL-12/IL23 agents in the management of inflammatory bowel disease.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of treatment in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is to control symptoms and suppress gut inflammation with minimal systemic side effects. A large proportion of patients are either primary non-responders or lose response to currently licensed therapies. The development of monoclonal antibodies, blocking interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 pathways are a promising therapeutic advance. We review the data on IL12/23 inhibitors and emerging data on IL-23 inhibition in IBD treatment. SOURCES OF DATA: This review is based on data published in peer-reviewed journals and clinical trials registry. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Ustekinumab is currently approved for managing corticosteroid and biologic refractory IBD patients with a favourable safety profile. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: Despite a growing therapeutic armamentarium and convergence on the role of biological therapies in patients with greater disease severity, there remains considerable uncertainty with selection and positioning of treatment. GROWING POINTS: Efficacy data from clinical trials and a growing body of real-world data have established a role for IL12/23 inhibitor Ustekinumab in IBD. There is resurgent interest in IL-23 specificity and the potential for incremental benefit. The potential for IL-22 to act as a biomarker for IL-23 inhibitors has exciting implications for personalized medicine. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: Head-to-head trials exploring efficacy and combination with other biologics with the potential for synergistic benefit are under investigation. Results of phase 3 trials with IL-23 inhibitors incorporating clinical, biochemical and endoscopic parameters and also exploring biomarkers as predictors of response are urgently needed.

UK National Survey of Gastroenterologists' attitudes and barriers toward therapeutic drug monitoring of anti-TNF therapy in inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supports use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in improving efficacy and cost-effectiveness of anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Our objective was to assess attitudes and barriers towards TDM use with anti-TNF's in the UK. METHODS: A 17-question survey was distributed to members of the British Society of Gastroenterology by email. RESULTS: Of 243 respondents (51.6% male), 237 respondents met inclusion criteria. Of these, 46% were consultants (gastroenterologist, GI), 39.2% IBD nurse specialists (clinical nurse specialists, CNS), 14.8% registrars. TDM is used by 96.9% for secondary loss of response; 72.5% for primary non-response and 54.1% used TDM proactively. Barriers were time lag in receiving results (49.8%), lack of awareness of guidelines (46.4%) and cost (29.9%). Clinicians working at a teaching hospital (OR 2.6, 95% CI 0.71 to 9.8), IBD CNS and GI registrars (OR 2.6, 95% CI 0.7 to 10 and OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.3 to 7.2, respectively) were more likely to use TDM. Clinicians practising for >20 years (OR 4.1, 95% CI 0.4 to 41.8) and a large volume IBD practice (>50% IBD patients per month) were more likely to use TDM (OR 45.7, 95% CI 7.5 to 275). Proactive TDM, was more likely to be used in tertiary care (OR 2.25, 95% CI 0.84 to 6.1), IBD CNS (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.7 to 2.1) and clinicians managing >50% IBD patients per month (OR 10.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 90.3). Clinicians with 5-9 years of experience in practice were more likely to use proactive TDM (OR 2.6 and CI 1.04 to 6.4). CONCLUSION: Validation of point of care and lower cost assays, reduced time lag from test to result, lower cost of testing and dissemination of current recommendations may further optimise treatment strategies.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of dermatological reactions in patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy.

AIM: The role of anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) medications in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is now established. Recent studies have reported the incidence of dermatological adverse events with use of anti-TNFs in IBD. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of dermatological reactions in patients on anti-TNF therapy for IBD. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library and EMBASE to identify studies reporting any dermatological reaction in patients exposed to anti-TNF for treatment of IBD. The incidence of dermatological complications in the entire review population was pooled by meta-analysis of data from individual studies using the random effects model. Pooled estimates in male and female patients and in patients treated with different anti-TNF agents were also calculated. We applied mixed effects (methods of moments) regression models to investigate between-study heterogeneity. RESULTS: Forty-eight studies reporting a total of 29 776 patients treated with anti-TNF medications for IBD were identified. Gender distribution was available for 18 960 participants with 45.3% females. Data on type of disease were available for 20 226 patients: 74.9% (n = 15 154) Crohn's disease, 24.2% (n = 4901) ulcerative colitis and 0.9% (n = 171) IBD-unclassified. The type of anti-TNF used was mentioned for 17 085 individuals: 67.5% (n = 11 530) infliximab (IFX), 30.5% (n = 5203) adalimumab (ADA), 1.7% (n = 296) certolizumab and 0.3% (n = 56) golimumab. The pooled incidence of any dermatological reaction from 26 studies was 19.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 15.2-24.4]. The pooled incidence for IFX and ADA was 23.7% (95% CI: 17.8-30.8) from 12 studies and 33.3% (95% CI 18.8-51.1) from seven studies, respectively. We found a trend of increased event rate with increasing percentage of male population (P = 0.08). The commonest reported event (39 studies) was psoriasis/psoriasiform rash with a pooled incidence of 5.6% (95% CI: 4.2-7.4). The incidence of psoriasis/psoriasiform rashes for IFX and ADA was 6.1% (95% CI 3.4-10.6) from 15 studies and 5.9% (95% CI: 2.5-13.5) from seven studies, respectively. Other reactions reported included eczema with a pooled incidence of 5.5% (95% CI: 3.3-8.9) from 17 studies and skin infections with pooled incidence of 7.9% (95% CI: 5.5-11.2) from 11 studies. CONCLUSION: The incidence of dermatological events in patients with IBD treated with anti-TNF medications is high. The most commonly reported reaction is psoriasis/psoriasiform reaction. Clinicians should be vigilant to dermatological side effects following treatment of IBD with anti-TNF.

An Indian national survey of therapeutic drug monitoring with anti-tumor necrosis (TNF) medications in inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supports therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in improving efficacy and cost-effectiveness of anti-TNF therapy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Data on perceptions and barriers to TDM use are limited and no data are available from India. Our objective was to assess clinicians' attitudes and barriers to TDM use in IBD. METHODS: A 16-question survey was distributed to members of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology. Information on clinician characteristics, demographics, use and barriers towards TDM with anti-TNFs was collected. Logistic regression was used to predict factors influencing TDM use. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-two respondents participated (92.5% male); 83% were consultant gastroenterologists. Of 104 respondents meeting inclusion criteria (treating > 5 IBD patients and at least 1 with an anti-TNF per month), complete responses were available for 101 participants. TDM was utilized by 20% (n = 20) of respondents. Of them, 89.5% (n = 17) used TDM for secondary loss of response; 73.7% (n = 14) for primary non-response and 5.3% (n = 1) proactively. Barriers to TDM use were cost (71.2%), availability (67.8%), time lag in results (58.7%) and the perception that TDM is time-consuming (45.7%). Clinicians treating > 30 IBD patients were more likely to check TDM (OR = 4.9, p = 0.02). Of 81 respondents not using TDM, 97.5% (n = 79) would do so if all the barriers were removed. CONCLUSION: Significant barriers to TDM use were availability, cost and time lag for results. If these barriers were removed, almost all the clinicians would use TDM at least reactively and 25% would use proactively. There is an urgent need to address these barriers and optimize anti-TNF therapy for optimal outcomes.

Current perspectives on the diagnosis and management of functional anorectal disorders in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Despite advances in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) therapies, a significant proportion of patients with quiescent disease experience persistent, debilitating symptoms of faecal incontinence (FI), urgency and defaecatory disorders due to anorectal dysfunction. Such symptoms are often underreported or misdiagnosed and can lead to potentially premature treatment 'escalation' and under-utilisation of pelvic floor investigations. In this review article, we consider putative pathophysiological post-inflammatory changes resulting in altered anorectal sensitivity, motility and neuromuscular coordination and how this may drive symptoms in quiescent IBD. Finally, we discuss a pragmatic approach to investigating and managing anorectal dysfunction and highlight areas for future research for this often-neglected group of patients.