Ustekinumab safety and effectiveness in patients with ulcerative colitis: results from a large real-life study.

BACKGROUND: Ustekinumab (UST) is an interleukin-12/interleukin-23 receptor antagonist recently approved for treating ulcerative colitis (UC) but with limited real-world data. Therefore, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of UST in patients with UC in a real-world setting. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study. The primary endpoints were the clinical remission rate (partial Mayo score, PMS, ≤1) and the safety of UST. Other endpoints were corticosteroid-free remission (CSFR) rate, clinical response rate (PMS reduction of at least 2 points), and fecal calprotectin (FC) reduction at week 24. RESULTS: We included 256 consecutive patients with UC (M/F 139/117, median age 52). The clinical remission and clinical response rates at eight weeks were 18.7% (44/235) and 53.2% (125/235), respectively, and 27.6% (42/152) and 61.8% (94/152) at 24 weeks, respectively. At 24 weeks, CSFR was 20.3% (31/152), and FC significantly dropped at week 12 (p = 0.0004) and 24 (p = 0.038). At eight weeks, patients naïve or with one previous biologic treatment showed higher remission (p = 0.002) and clinical >response rates (p = 0.018) than patients previously treated with ≥ 2. Adverse events occurred in six patients (2.3%), whereas four patients (1.6%) underwent colectomy. CONCLUSION: This real-world study shows that UST effectively and safely treats patients with UC.

The Earlier You Find, the Better You Treat: Red Flags for Early Diagnosis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Delayed diagnosis is a challenge in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Several studies show a significant association between diagnostic delay and disease progression to complications and surgery, especially in Crohn's disease (CD). What risk factors are associated with diagnostic delay in IBD remains unclear. In order to reduce diagnostic delay, the Red Flags Index has been developed and validated. The combination of the Red Flags Index score and non-invasive biomarkers such as fecal calprotectin seems to be highly accurate in screening patients with underlying IBD to be referred for further diagnostic workup and eventual early effective treatment strategies. Our literature review aims to obtain a comprehensive overview of the impacts of diagnostic delay in IBD on the potential risk factors associated with IBD, how diagnostic tools may be effective in reducing diagnostic delay, and future perspectives in this field.

Use of tofacitinib as first or second-line therapy is associated with better outcomes in patients with ulcerative colitis: data from a real-world study.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding the real-world (RW) use of tofacitinib (TOF) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are limited. We aimed to investigate TOF's RW efficacy and safety in Italian UC patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective assessment of clinical and endoscopic activity was performed according to the Mayo score. The primary endpoints were to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of TOF. RESULTS: We enrolled 166 patients with a median follow-up of 24 (IQR 8-36) weeks. Clinical remission was achieved in 61/166 (36.7%) and 75/166 (45.2%) patients at 8-week and 24-week follow-ups, respectively. The optimization was requested in 27 (16.3%) patients. Clinical remission was achieved more frequently when TOF was used as a first/second line rather than a third/fourth line treatment (p = 0.007). Mucosal healing was reported in 46% of patients at the median follow-up time. Colectomy occurred in 8 (4.8%) patients. Adverse events occurred in 12 (5.4%) patients and severe in 3 (1.8%). One case of simple Herpes Zoster and one of renal vein thrombosis were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Our RW data confirm that TOF is effective and safe in UC patients. It performs remarkably better when used as the first/second line of treatment.

Real-world efficacy and safety of vedolizumab in managing ulcerative colitis versus Crohn's disease: results from an Italian multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Vedolizumab (VDZ) can be used to treat refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). We assessed whether there are differences in treating UC vs CD with VDZ. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Mayo score in UC and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) in CD scored the clinical activity. Achievement and maintenance of clinical remission during the follow-up, and safety were the primary endpoints. RESULTS: 729 patients (475 with UC and 254 with CD), median follow-up of 18 (IQR 6-36) months, were enrolled. Clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment was achieved in 488 (66.9%) patients (74.4% in CD vs 62.9% in UC, p<0.002) while, during the follow-up, no difference was found (81.5% in the UC group and 81.5% pts in the CD group; p=0.537). The clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment (p=0.001) and being naïve to biologics (p<0.0001) were significantly associated with prolonged clinical remission. The clinical response was significantly higher in UC (90.1%) vs CD (84.3%) (p=0.023), and surgery occurred more frequently in CD (1.9% in UC vs 5.1% in CD, p=0.016). CONCLUSION: We found differences when using VDZ in UC vs CD in real life. These parameters can help the physician predict this drug's longterm efficacy.

Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce.We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.

We treated 533 IBD patients with adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022. No differences between these 4 ADA biosimilars were found for reaching remission in naive patients, maintaining remission for nonmedical switching, clinical response, steroid-free remission, surgery rate, mucosal healing, or safety.

Replacement of Adalimumab Originator to Adalimumab Biosimilar for a Non-Medical Reason in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Real-life Comparison of Adalimumab Biosimilars Currently Available in Italy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have been included into the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the different ADA biosimilars after replacing the ADA originator for a non-medical reason remains scarce. We aimed to compare in a real-life setting the efficacy and safety of four ADA biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in IBD patients after replacing the originator for a non-medical reason. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was performed on consecutive IBD patients, analyzing clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. The primary endpoints of the study were maintenance of clinical remission and safety of the different biosimilars. RESULTS: 153 patients were enrolled, 26 with UC and 127 with CD. Clinical remission was maintained in 124 out of 153 (81%) patients after a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-24) months, without any significant difference between the four ADA biosimilars. ADA biosimilars dosage was optimized in five patients (3.3%). Loss of remission was significantly higher in UC patients (10/26 patients, 38.5%) than in CD patients (19/127 patients, 14.9%, p<0.025). Adverse events occurred in 12 (7.9%) patients; the large majority were mild. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars when used to replace the ADA originator for a non-medical reason. However, in UC patients the replacement of ADA originator for this reason should be carefully assessed.

Effectiveness of ustekinumab in patients with refractory Crohn's disease: a multicentre real-life study in Italy.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of ustekinumab in patients with refractory Crohn's disease (CD) has been investigated in several real-world studies. However, very few data concerning the real-life experience in Italy have been reported. Therefore, this study assessed the effectiveness of ustekinumab in a large cohort of Italian patients with refractory CD. METHODS: All patients who had started on ustekinumab after failure of or intolerance to antitumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) treatment at five tertiary centres between November 2018 and February 2020 were retrospectively enrolled. The coprimary outcome was corticosteroid-free clinical remission, defined as a Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) score of ⩽4, at weeks 26 and 52. The secondary outcomes were changes in the HBI and C-reactive protein (CRP) values at weeks 8, 26, and 52 from baseline and the normalization of CRP in patients with initially abnormal values. RESULTS: Totally, 140 patients who had previously received at least one anti-TNF-α agent were enrolled; 40.0% received two anti-TNF-α agents and 20.0% received vedolizumab. At baseline, 108 patients (77.1%) had HBI scores of >4; of these, 56.5% and 58.3% achieved corticosteroid-free clinical remission at weeks 26 and 52, respectively. Significant decreases in HBI and CRP values were observed at weeks 8, 26, and 52 in the entire study cohort (all p < 0.0001). The CRP values were normalized in 34.9%, 37.8%, and 49.3% of the patients by weeks 8, 26, and 52, respectively. The baseline HBI score of ⩾8 was a negative predictor of corticosteroid-free clinical remission at week 52 (odds ratio: 0.21, 95% confidence interval: 0.08-0.56, p = 0.002). The probability of remaining on ustekinumab after 52 weeks was 92.1%. Eleven (7.9%) patients discontinued ustekinumab (three for adverse events). CONCLUSION: Our study findings confirm the effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in patients with CD after failure of or intolerance to anti-TNF-α therapy.

Comparison of performances of infliximab biosimilars CT-P13 versus SB2 in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases: a real-life multicenter, observational study in Italy.

BACKGROUND: To compare the performances of Infliximab (IFX) biosimilar CT-P13 and SB2 in the treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) outpatients in Italy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Three hundred and eighty IBD outpatients were retrospectively evaluated. The primary endpoint was to compare the two IFX biosimilars in terms of reaching and maintenance of remission at any timepoint. RESULTS: 197 patients with Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and 183 patients with Crohn's Disease (CD) treated with CT-P13 or SB2 and having a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-36) months were compared: 230 (60.5%) were naïve to anti-TNFα, 20 (5.26%) were switched from IFX originator or from IFX CT-P13 to IFX SB2. Clinical remission was achieved in 133 (67.5%) UC patients and in 164 (89.6%) CD patients (p < 0.000), with no differences between CT-P13 and SB2 in the rate of remission in UC (p = 0.667) and CD (p = 0.286). Clinical response, steroid-free remission, rate of surgery, mucosal healing (MH) in UC, switching from IFX originator or from other biosimilar, and safety were similar. Higher MH rate was obtained in CD patients treated with CT-P13 (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: This first comparative study found that both IFX biosimilars CT-P13 and SB2 are effective and safe in managing IBD outpatients.

Long-term, Real-life, Observational Study in Treating Outpatient Ulcerative Colitis with Golimumab.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several studies have found Golimumab (GOL) effective and safe in the short-term treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC), but few long-term data are currently available from real world. Our aim was to assess the long-term real-life efficacy and safety of GOL in managing UC outpatients in Italy. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study assessing consecutive UC outpatients treated with GOL for at least 3-month of follow-up was made. Primary endpoints were the induction and maintenance of remission in UC, defined as Mayo score ≤2. Several secondary endpoints, including clinical response, colectomy rate, steroid free remission and mucosal healing, were also assessed during the follow-up. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-eight patients were enrolled and followed up for a median (IQR) time of 9 (3-18) months (mean time follow-up: 33.1±13 months). Clinical remission was achieved in 57 (32.1%) patients: these patients continued with GOL, but only 6 patients (3.4%) were still under clinical remission with GOL at the 42nd month of follow-up. Clinical response occurred in 64 (36.4%) patients; colectomy was performed in 8 (7.8%) patients, all of them having primary failure. Steroid-free remission occurred in 23 (12.9%) patients, and mucosal healing was achieved in 29/89 (32.6%) patients. Adverse events occurred in 14 (7.9%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Golimumab does not seem able to maintain long-term remission in UC in real life. The safety profile was good.

A prospective study on quality in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP): trend in Italy from the REQUEST study.

Background and study aims Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a complex procedure with a relatively high rate of adverse events. Data on training of operators and fulfillment of quality indicators in Italy are scarce. The goal of this study was to assess the overall quality of ERCP in Italy compared to international standards. Patients and methods This was a prospective, observational study from different Italian centers performing ERCP. Operators answered a questionnaire, then recorded data on ERCPs over a 1-to 3-month period. Results Nineteen Italian centers participated in the study. The most common concern of operators about training was the lack of structured programs. Seven/19 centers routinely used conscious sedation for ERCP. Forty-one experienced operators and 21 trainees performed 766 ERCPs: a successful deep biliary cannulation in native-papilla patients was achieved in 95.1 % of cases; the post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) rate was 5.4 % in native-papilla patients; cholangitis rate was 1.0 %; bleeding and perforation occurred in 2.7 % and 0.4 % of the patients, respectively. Conclusions This study revealed that, overall, ERCP is performed in the participating Italian centers meeting good quality standards, but structured training and sedation practice are still subpar. The bleeding and perforation rate slightly exceeded the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy indicator targets but they are comparable to the reported rates from other international surveys.

Long-term real-life efficacy and safety of infliximab and adalimumab in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab and adalimumab are widely used for the treatment of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. AIM: To compare the long-term efficacy and safety of infliximab and adalimumab in a large cohort of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis patients reflecting real-life clinical practice. METHODS: Seven hundred twelve patients were retrospectively reviewed, 410 with Crohn's disease (268 treated with adalimumab and 142 with infliximab; median follow-up 60 months, range, 36-72) and 302 with ulcerative colitis (118 treated with adalimumab and 184 with infliximab; median follow-up 48 months, range, 36-84). RESULTS: In Crohn's disease, clinical remission was maintained in 75.0% of adalimumab vs. in 72.5% of infliximab patients (P = 0.699); mucosal healing and steroid-free remission were maintained in 49.5% of adalimumab vs. 63.9% of infliximab patients (P = 0.077) and in 77.7% of adalimumab vs. 77.3% in infliximab group (P = 0.957), respectively. In ulcerative colitis, clinical remission was maintained in 50.0% of adalimumab vs. 65.8% of infliximab patients (P < 0.000); mucosal healing and steroid-free remission were maintained in 80.6% of adalimumab vs. 77.0% of infliximab patients (P = 0.494) and in 90.2% of adalimumab vs. 87.5% of infliximab patients (P = 0.662), respectively. At the multivariate analysis, ileocolonic location and simple endoscopic score for Crohn's disease >10 were predictors of failure in Crohn's disease; treatment with adalimumab, BMI ≥30 and Mayo score >10 were predictors of failure in ulcerative colitis. infliximab was more likely to cause adverse events than adalimumab (16.6 vs. 6.2%, P < 0.000). CONCLUSION: Both adalimumab and infliximab are effective in long-term outpatients management of inflammatory bowel diseases. Adalimumab had a lower rate of adverse events.

Infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 is effective and safe in treating inflammatory bowel diseases: a real-life multicenter, observational study in Italian primary inflammatory bowel disease centers.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of biosimilar infliximab (IFX) CT-P13 in treating outpatients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Italian primary gastroenterology centers. METHODS: Consecutive IBD outpatients who completed the induction treatment were evaluated retrospectively. Clinical activity was scored according to the Mayo score for ulcerative colitis (UC) and to the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) for Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoint was the achievement of clinical remission (Mayo score ≤2 in UC and HBI ≤5 in CD). Secondary endpoints were clinical response to treatment, achievement of mucosal healing, and safety. RESULTS: One hundred forty-one patients (96 UC and 45 CD) were enrolled. Previous treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)α had been provided to 26% of UC patients and 28.9% of CD patients. Remission was achieved in 57.3% UC patients and in 75.6% CD patients during a median (interquartile range) follow up of 24 (6-24) months. Clinical response and mucosal healing were achieved in 87.5% and 75.0% of UC patients and in 84.4% and 84.2% of CD patients, respectively. By both univariate and multivariate analysis, age >40 years, presence of comorbidities, and naivety to anti-TNFα were significantly related to remission. Only one (0.7%) adverse event was reported in the CD group. Surgery was performed in 2.1% of UC patients and 6.7% of CD patients. Switching from IFX originator to biosimilar did not influence the maintenance of the clinical remission. CONCLUSION: This study confirmed the long-term efficacy and safety of CT-P13 therapy in IBD, in both naïve patients and those switching from IFX originator.

Vedolizumab is effective and safe in real-life treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases outpatients: A multicenter, observational study in primary inflammatory bowel disease centers.

BACKGROUND: Italian data currently available in managing ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) patients with vedolizumab (VDZ) are coming just from secondary and tertiary centers. The present study aimed to assess the real-life efficacy and safety of VDZ to achieve remission in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) outpatients in primary gastroenterology centers. METHODS: Clinical activity was scored according to the Mayo score in UC and to the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) in CD. The primary endpoints were the achievement of clinical remission and safety. Secondary endpoints were clinical response to treatment, achievement of mucosal healing (MH), and steroid discontinuation. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-six pts. were enrolled (91 UC and 45 CD pts). During an 18-month median follow-up, clinical remission was present in 63 (46.3%) pts.: in particular, it occurred in 48 (52.7%) patients in UC group and in 15 (33.3%) patients in CD group (p = 0.003). more in UC group. Fecal calprotectin ≥400 µg/g and presence of comorbidities were factors significantly related to the failure of remission in UC and CD, respectively. Ten (7.3%) cases of adverse events were recorded (2 required suspension of treatment). Clinical response was present in 105 (72.2%) pts.: 71 (78.0%) in UC and 34 (75.5%) in CD group. MH occurred in 47 (62.7%) UC and in 9 (50.0%) CD patients. Steroids discontinuation occurred in 92 (67.6%) pts.; 61 (67.0%) UC and 31 (68.9%) CD pts. CONCLUSION: VDZ is effective and safe in IBD outpatients, especially in UC patients.

Effectiveness and safety of adalimumab to treat outpatient ulcerative colitis: A real-life multicenter, observational study in primary inflammatory bowel disease centers.

Adalimumab (ADA) was approved in Italy for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) unresponsive to standard treatments in 2014, but no data from real life are currently available. The aim of the present study was to assess the real-life efficacy and safety of ADA in managing UC outpatients in some Italian primary inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) centers after approval of ADA reimbursement.Consecutive UC outpatients with at least 3-month follow-up were retrospectively evaluated. The primary end point was the induction and maintenance of remission in UC, defined as Mayo score ≤2.One hundred seven patients were included. At 3-month follow-up, obtained in 102 (95.3%) patients, 56 (54.9%) patients achieved a clinical remission. At univariate analysis, both Mayo partial score >7 and Mayo subscore for endoscopy = 3 at entry showed to be significantly associated with the lack of remission induction.During a median (95% confidence interval [CI]) follow-up of 18 (12-24) months, 56.6% of patients were under clinical remission; clinical response was achieved in 89.2% of cases. Mucosal healing was achieved in 66 (76.7%) patients, and colectomy occurred in 3 (2.8%) patients. Both C-reactive protein and fecal calprotectin values significantly decreased during follow-up. Steroids discontinuation occurred in 67 (66.7%) patients, and ADA dose escalation was adopted in 9 (16.1%) patients under remission. No factor was significantly related to the maintenance of clinical remission.This first Italian experience found ADA safe and effective to induce and maintain remission in real-life UC outpatients.

Effectiveness and Safety of Golimumab in Treating Outpatient Ulcerative Colitis: A Real-Life Prospective, Multicentre, Observational Study in Primary Inflammatory Bowel Diseases Centers.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Golimumab (GOL) has been recently approved in Italy for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) unresponsive to standard treatments. Our aims were to assess the real-life efficacy and safety of GOL in managing UC outpatients in Italian primary Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) centres. METHODS: Consecutive UC outpatients with at least 3-months follow-up were enrolled. Primary end-point was the induction and maintenance of remission in UC, defined as Mayo score

Predictive value of the Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) endoscopic classification on the outcome of diverticular disease of the colon: An international study.

BACKGROUND: Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) endoscopic classification has been recently developed for patients suffering from diverticulosis and diverticular disease. AIMS: We assessed retrospectively the predictive value of DICA in patients for whom endoscopic data and clinical follow-up were available. METHODS: For each patient, we recorded: age, severity of DICA, presence of abdominal pain, C-reactive protein and faecal calprotectin test (if available) at the time of diagnosis; months of follow-up; therapy taken during the follow-up to maintain remission (if any); occurrence/recurrence of diverticulitis; need of surgery. RESULTS: We enrolled 1651 patients (793 M, 858 F, mean age 66.6 ± 11.1 years): 939 (56.9%) patients were classified as DICA 1, 501 (30.3%) patients as DICA 2 and 211 (12.8%) patients as DICA 3. The median follow-up was 24 (9-38) months. Acute diverticulitis (AD) occurred/recurred in 263 (15.9%) patients; surgery was necessary in 57 (21.7%) cases. DICA was the only factor significantly associated to the occurrence/recurrence of diverticulitis and surgery either at univariate (χ(2 )= 405.029; p < 0.0001) or multivariate analysis (hazard ratio = 4.319, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.639-5.126; p < 0.0001). Only in DICA 2 patients was therapy effective for prevention of AD occurrence/recurrence with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.598 (0.391-0.914) (p = 0.006, log rank test). Mesalazine-based therapies reduced the risk of AD occurrence/recurrence and needs of surgery with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.2103 (0.122-0.364) and 0.459 (0.258-0.818), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DICA classification is a valid parameter to predict the risk of diverticulitis occurrence/recurrence in patients suffering from diverticular disease of the colon.

Development and validation of an endoscopic classification of diverticular disease of the colon: the DICA classification.

BACKGROUND: A validated endoscopic classification of diverticular disease (DD) of the colon is lacking at present. Our aim was to develop a simple endoscopic score of DD: the Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) score. METHODS: The DICA score for DD resulted in the sum of the scores for the extension of diverticulosis, the number of diverticula per region, the presence and type of inflammation, and the presence and type of complications: DICA 1 (≤ 3), DICA 2 (4-7) and DICA 3 (>7). A comparison with abdominal pain and inflammatory marker expression was also performed. A total of 50 videos of DD patients were reassessed in order to investigate the predictive role of DICA on the outcome of the disease. RESULTS: Overall agreement in using DICA was 0.847 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.812-0.893): 0.878 (95% CI 0.832-0.895) for DICA 1, 0.765 (95% CI 0.735-0.786) for DICA 2 and 0.891 (95% CI 0.845-0.7923) for DICA 3. Intra-observer agreement (kappa) was 0.91 (95% CI 0.886-0.947). A significant correlation was found between the DICA score and C-reactive protein values (p = 0.0001), as well as between the median pain score and the DICA score (p = 0.0001). With respect to the 50 patients retrospectively reassessed, occurrence/recurrence of disease complications was recorded in 29 patients (58%): 10 (34.5%) were classified as DICA 1 and 19 (65.5%) as DICA 2 (p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The DICA score is a simple, reproducible, validated and easy-to-use endoscopic scoring system for DD of the colon.

Effectiveness of adalimumab for ambulatory ulcerative colitis patients after failure of infliximab treatment: a first "real-life" experience in primary gastroenterology centers in Italy.

BACKGROUND: Adalimumab (ADA) is the key treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC) unresponsive or intolerant to standard treatments. Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of ADA in treating ambulatory UC patients in primary gastroenterology centers. METHODS: Fifteen patients (6 male, median age 29.9 years, range 22.8-39.9 years) were enrolled. All were previously treated with infliximab (IFX). Clinical activity and endoscopic severity were scored according to the Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI) score and Mayo subscore for endoscopy, respectively. Patients were clinically assessed at weeks 4, 8, and thereafter at weeks 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 54. Colonoscopy was performed before starting treatment, at weeks 24 and 54. The co-primary endpoints were clinical remission at 24 and 54 weeks. The secondary endpoints included: 1) sustained clinical remission; 2) steroid-sparing effect; 3) mucosal healing; 4) need for colectomy. Induction dose of ADA was 160 mg at week 0, and then 80 mg at week 2, while ADA maintenance treatment was 40 mg every two weeks. RESULTS: Clinical remission was obtained in 11 (73.3%) and 15 (100%) patients at weeks 24 and 54 respectively. Ten patients (66.7%) were able to discontinue steroids and were under corticosteroid-free remission at week 54. No patients underwent to colectomy. Eight patients (53.33%) at week 24 and 9 patients (60%) at week 54 achieved complete mucosal healing (Mayo endoscopic score 0). Side effects were reported in 2 of 15 patients (13.3%); none of those patients stopped treatment. CONCLUSION: ADA seems to be effective and safe in UC outpatients affected by UC, and previously treated with IFX.

Managing ambulatory ulcerative colitis patients with infliximab: a long term follow-up study in primary gastroenterology centers.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab (IFX) is the key treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC) unresponsive to standard treatments. The aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy and safety of IFX in treating ambulatory UC patients in primary gastroenterology centers. METHODS: One hundred and eighteen patients (65 M, 63 F, median age 34 years, range 19-71 years), affected by UC, were treated with IFX. Clinical efficacy, safety, mucosal healing (MH), and histological healing (HH) were assessed at a scheduled follow-up of 42 months. RESULTS: Percentage of patients with clinical remission persistence at 42-month follow-up was 70.4%. Colectomy occurred in only 3 patients (2.7%). At 42-month follow-up percentage of patients with MH was 44.6%, and percentage of patients with HH was 24.3%. HH at 6-month follow-up occurred in 13 out of 34 patients (38.2%) with C-reactive protein (CRP) <3 and in 8 out of 76 patients (10.5%) with CRP ≥ 3 (p=0.002). Side effects were reported in 16 patients (13.6%): infusion reactions occurred in 7 patients, other severe side-effects occurred in 3 patients, and opportunistic infections occurred in 3 patients (2.5%). Finally, 3 cancers (2.5%) occurred during the follow-up period (1 breast, 1 kidney and 1 rectal cancer). Both univariate and multivariate analyses showed Hb <11.5 g/dL and HH at 6-month follow-up to be significantly associated with treatment failure during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: IFX seems to be effective and safe in long-term treatment of outpatients affected by UC.

Effectiveness and safety of infliximab and adalimumab for ambulatory Crohn's disease patients in primary gastroenterology centres.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADA) are the key treatments for Crohn's Disease (CD), unresponsive to standard treatments. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of IFX and ADA in treating CD in clinical practice. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-six patients (61 M, 65 F, mean age 36.2 years, range 19-67 years), affected by CD, were treated with infliximab (IFX, 59 patients) or adalimumab (ADA, 66 patients). Clinical efficacy, mucosal healing (MH), histological healing (HH), and safety were assessed. MH was defined complicated if healing of ulcers occurred with deformation of bowel profile and/or complete colonoscopy was impossible because of scars. RESULTS: Patients were followed-up for 36 months. No difference was found between IFX and ADA in maintaining long-term clinical remission, MH and HH. Complicated MH was present in 17 (28.8%) patients in IFX group and in 7 (10.6%) patients in ADA group (p=0.012). In 9 (15.2%) patients in IFX group and 2 (3.0%) patients in ADA group colonoscopy was incomplete without cecal intubation or terminal ileum exploration (p=0.024). Side effects were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both IFX and ADA seem to be effective and safe in long-term outpatient treatment of CD in clinical practice.