Challenges in IBD Research 2024: Preclinical Human IBD Mechanisms.

Preclinical human inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) mechanisms is one of 5 focus areas of the Challenges in IBD Research 2024 document, which also includes environmental triggers, novel technologies, precision medicine, and pragmatic clinical research. Herein, we provide a comprehensive overview of current gaps in inflammatory bowel diseases research that relate to preclinical research and deliver actionable approaches to address them with a focus on how these gaps can lead to advancements in IBD interception, remission, and restoration. The document is the result of multidisciplinary input from scientists, clinicians, patients, and funders and represents a valuable resource for patient-centric research prioritization. This preclinical human IBD mechanisms section identifies major research gaps whose investigation will elucidate pathways and mechanisms that can be targeted to address unmet medical needs in IBD. Research gaps were identified in the following areas: genetics, risk alleles, and epigenetics; the microbiome; cell states and interactions; barrier function; IBD complications (specifically fibrosis and stricturing); and extraintestinal manifestations. To address these gaps, we share specific opportunities for investigation for basic and translational scientists and identify priority actions.

To address the unmet medical needs of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and move toward cures, preclinical human-relevant research must center on mechanistic questions pertinent to patients with IBD in the 3 areas of disease interception, remission, and restoration.

Challenges in IBD Research 2024: Pragmatic Clinical Research.

Pragmatic clinical research is 1 of the 5 focus areas of the Challenges in IBD Research 2024, a multidisciplinary effort by scientists, clinicians, patients, and funders to identify priorities for patient-centric research. This summary provides a comprehensive overview of current gaps in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) clinical research and actionable approaches to address them. This review is focused on identifying research that is needed to achieve the best outcomes for patients in clinical practice. Research gaps include understanding the needs of understudied patient groups and addressing barriers to care so all patients receive optimal care, validating and using biomarkers to enable early diagnosis and result in better outcomes for adults and children with IBD, and determining the optimal sequencing of treatments (medical, surgical, adjunct) in children and adults. Inclusive pragmatic research is needed to address these gaps and lead to improvements in patient care and outcomes for all populations of patients with IBD.

Pragmatic clinical research focuses on improving evidence for how to best treat patients to improve quality of life and disease outcomes in real-world practice. This includes evaluating and improving healthcare delivery and decreasing barriers for all patients.

Challenges in IBD Research 2024: Novel Technologies.

Novel technology is one of the five focus areas of the Challenges in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Research 2024 document. Building off the Challenges in IBD Research 2019 document, the Foundation aims to provide a comprehensive overview of current gaps in IBD research and deliver actionable approaches to address them with a focus on how these gaps can lead to advancements in interception, remission, and restoration for these diseases. The document is the result of a multidisciplinary collaboration from scientists, clinicians, patients, and funders and represents a valuable resource for patient-centric research prioritization. Specifically, the Novel Technologies section focuses on addressing key research gaps to enable interception and improve remission rates in IBD. This includes testing predictions of disease onset and progression, developing novel technologies tailored to specific phenotypes, and facilitating collaborative translation of science into diagnostics, devices, and therapeutics. Proposed priority actions outlined in the document include real-time measurement of biological changes preceding disease onset, more effective quantification of fibrosis, exploration of technologies for local treatment of fistulas, and the development of drug delivery platforms for precise, location-restricted therapies. Additionally, there is a strong emphasis on fostering collaboration between various stakeholders to accelerate progress in IBD research and treatment. Addressing these research gaps necessitates the exploration and implementation of bio-engineered novel technologies spanning a spectrum from materials to systems. By harnessing innovative ideas and technologies, there's a collective effort to enhance patient care and outcomes for individuals affected by IBD.

Technology drives medical progress, solving clinical challenges and enhancing patient care in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Collaborative efforts focus on addressing research gaps to improve interception, restoration, and remission rates, utilizing innovative technologies for better patient outcomes.

Mental Health Costs of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

BACKGROUND: Mental health diagnoses (MHDs) were identified as significant drivers of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-related costs in an analysis titled "Cost of Care Initiative" supported by the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation. In this subanalysis, we sought to characterize and compare IBD patients with and without MHDs based on insurance claims data in terms of demographic traits, medical utilization, and annualized costs of care. METHODS: We analyzed the Optum Research Database of administrative claims from years 2007 to 2016 representing commercially insured and Medicare Advantage insured IBD patients in the United States. Inflammatory bowel disease patients with and without an MHD were compared in terms of demographics (age, gender, race), insurance type, IBD-related medical utilization (ambulatory visits, emergency department [ED] visits, and inpatient hospitalizations), and total IBD-related costs. Only patients with costs >$0 in each of the utilization categories were included in the cost estimates. RESULTS: Of the total IBD study cohort of 52,782 patients representing 179,314 person-years of data, 22,483 (42.6%) patients had at least 1 MHD coded in their claims data with a total of 46,510 person-years in which a patient had a coded MHD. The most commonly coded diagnostic categories were depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, adjustment disorders, substance use disorders, and bipolar and related disorders. Compared with patients without an MHD, a significantly greater percentage of IBD patients with MHDs were female (61.59% vs 48.63%), older than 75 years of age (9.59% vs 6.32%), white (73.80% vs 70.17%), and significantly less likely to be younger than 25 years of age (9.18% vs 11.39%) compared with those without mental illness (P < 0.001). Patients with MHDs had significantly more ED visits (14.34% vs 7.62%, P < 0.001) and inpatient stays (19.65% vs 8.63%, P < 0.001) compared with those without an MHD. Concomitantly, patients with MHDs had significantly higher ED costs ($970 vs $754, P < 0.001) and inpatient costs ($39,205 vs $29,550, P < 0.001) compared with IBD patients without MHDs. Patients with MHDs also had significantly higher total annual IBD-related surgical costs ($55,693 vs $40,486, P < 0.001) and nonsurgical costs (medical and pharmacy) ($17,220 vs $11,073, P < 0.001), and paid a larger portion of the total out-of-pocket cost for IBD services ($1017 vs $905, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients whose claims data contained both IBD-related and MHD-related diagnoses generated significantly higher costs compared with IBD patients without an MHD diagnosis. Based on these data, we speculate that health care costs might be reduced and the course of patients IBD might be improved if the IBD-treating provider recognized this link and implemented effective behavioral health screening and intervention as soon as an MHD was suspected during management of IBD patients. Studies investigating best screening and intervention strategies for MHDs are needed.

Opioid Use Associated With Higher Costs Among Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Background: Opioid use by patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been associated with poorer health outcomes. This study describes socioeconomic characteristics; health utilization trends; and costs of patients with IBD and either no opioid prescriptions, or in 1 of 3 opioid duration categories based on Center for Disease Control guidelines: acute (0-30 days), moderate (31-90 days), or chronic (>90 days). We utilized the Cost of IBD Care Optum research database results for this study. Methods: The Optum Research Database from years 2007 to 2016 including IBD patients with commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance in the United States was used. Additional inclusion criteria included continuous enrollment with medical and pharmacy benefit coverage for at least 24 months (12 months before and 12 months after the index date of IBD diagnosis). The association between costs and patient characteristics were assessed across a no opioid use group during this period and the 3 opioid duration groups. Results: Among 51,178 IBD patients, 33,229 (64.93%) were part of the no opioid use group, while 13,635 (26.64%) were in acute, 1698 (3.32%) were in moderate, and 2616 (5.11%) were in chronic use groups, as determined by pharmacy claims data. Patients in the chronic group were more likely to be white (75.38%) compared to all the other groups (no opioid use, acute, and moderate), have attained less education (only high school diploma), have had lower incomes, and have had Medicare instead of commercial insurance. Patients across all opioid prescription groups were more likely to have had diagnoses associated with pain in the prior year, with rates increasing by the length of opioid prescription (63.68%, 80.17%, and 86.11% for acute, moderate, and chronic groups). Compared to the no-use group, the acute group had more ambulatory (outpatient) visits, while the chronic group had fewer. Emergency department visits and inpatient hospitalizations were higher in all 3 opioid groups compared to the no opioid use group. Ambulatory, emergency department, inpatient, and total (medical + pharmacy) costs were higher in all 3 opioid groups, compared to the no opioid use group, even after adjusting for demographic and clinical patient characteristics. Conclusions: Among patients with IBD, increasing opioid use was associated with higher healthcare resource utilization and, concomitantly, higher healthcare costs during this period.

The Cost of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Initiative From the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation.

BACKGROUND: The Crohn's & Colitis Foundation's Cost of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Care Initiative seeks to quantify the wide-ranging health care costs affecting patients living with IBD. We aimed to (1) describe the annualized direct and indirect costs of care for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC), (2) determine the longitudinal drivers of these costs, and (3) characterize the cost of care for newly diagnosed patients. METHODS: We analyzed the Optum Research Database from the years 2007 to 2016, representing commercially insured and Medicare Advantage-insured patients in the United States. Inclusion for the study was limited to those who had continuous enrollment with medical and pharmacy benefit coverage for at least 24 months (12 months before through 12 months after the index date of diagnosis). The value of patient time spent on health care was calculated as number of workplace hours lost due to health care encounters multiplied by the patients' estimated average wage derived from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Comparisons between IBD patients and non-IBD patients were analyzed based on demographics, health plan type, and length of follow-up. We used generalized linear models to estimate the association between total annual costs and various patient variables. RESULTS: There were 52,782 IBD patients (29,062 UC; 23,720 CD) included in the analysis (54.1% females). On a per-annual basis, patients with IBD incurred a greater than 3-fold higher direct cost of care compared with non-IBD controls ($22,987 vs $6956 per-member per-year paid claims) and more than twice the out-of-pocket costs ($2213 vs $979 per-year reported costs), with all-cause IBD costs rising after 2013. Patients with IBD also experienced significantly higher costs associated with time spent on health care as compared with controls. The burden of costs was most notable in the first year after initial IBD diagnosis (mean = $26,555). The study identified several key drivers of cost for IBD patients: treatment with specific therapeutics (biologics, opioids, or steroids); ED use; and health care services associated with relapsing disease, anemia, or mental health comorbidity. CONCLUSION: The costs of care for IBD have increased in the last 5 years and are driven by specific therapeutics and disease features. In addition, compared with non-IBD controls, IBD patients are increasingly incurring higher costs associated with health care utilization, out-of-pocket expenditures, and workplace productivity losses. There is a pressing need for cost-effective strategies to address these burdens on patients and families affected by IBD.

Challenges in IBD Research: Precision Medicine.

Precision medicine is part of five focus areas of the Challenges in IBD research document, which also includes preclinical human IBD mechanisms, environmental triggers, novel technologies, and pragmatic clinical research. The Challenges in IBD Research document provides a comprehensive overview of current gaps in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) research and delivers actionable approaches to address them. It is the result of a multidisciplinary input from scientists, clinicians, patients, and funders, and represents a valuable resource for patient centric research prioritization. In particular, the precision medicine section is focused on highlighting the main gap areas that must be addressed to get closer to treatments tailored to the biological and clinical characteristics of each patient, which is the aim of precision medicine. The main gaps were identified in: 1) understanding and predicting the natural history of IBD: disease susceptibility, activity, and behavior; 2) predicting disease course and treatment response; and 3) optimizing current and developing new molecular technologies. Suggested approaches to bridge these gaps include prospective longitudinal cohort studies to identify and validate precision biomarkers for prognostication of disease course, and prediction and monitoring of treatment response. To achieve this, harmonization across studies is key as well as development of standardized methods and infrastructure. The implementation of state-of-the-art molecular technologies, systems biology and machine learning approaches for multi-omics and clinical data integration and analysis will be also fundamental. Finally, randomized biomarker-stratified trials will be critical to evaluate the clinical utility of validated signatures and biomarkers in improving patient outcomes and cost-effective care.

Challenges in IBD Research: Pragmatic Clinical Research.

Pragmatic clinical research is part of five focus areas of the Challenges in IBD research document, which also includes preclinical human IBD mechanisms, environmental triggers, novel technologies, and precision medicine. The Challenges in IBD research document provides a comprehensive overview of current gaps in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) research and delivers actionable approaches to address them. It is the result of multidisciplinary input from scientists, clinicians, patients, and funders, and represents a valuable resource for patient centric research prioritization. In particular, the pragmatic clinical research section is focused on highlighting gaps that need to be addressed in order to optimize and standardize IBD care. Identified gaps include: 1) understanding the incidence and prevalence of IBD; 2) evaluating medication positioning to increase therapeutic effectiveness; 3) understanding the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM); 4) studying pain management; and 5) understanding healthcare economics and resources utilization. To address these gaps, there is a need to emphasize the use of emerging data sources and real-world evidence to better understand epidemiologic and therapeutic trends in IBD, expanding on existing data to better understand how and where we should improve care. Proposed approaches include epidemiological studies in ethnically and geographically diverse cohorts to estimate incidence and prevalence of IBD and impact of diversity on treatment patterns and outcomes. The implementation of new clinical trial design and methodologies will be essential to evaluate optimal medication positioning, appropriate use of TDM in adults and children, and multidisciplinary approaches to IBD pain management and its impact on healthcare resources.

Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinical Innovations Meeting of the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation: Charting the Future of Pediatric IBD.

The Crohn's & Colitis Foundation has facilitated transformational research in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), through the RISK and PROTECT studies, that has laid the groundwork for a comprehensive understanding of molecular mechanisms of disease and predictors of therapeutic response in children. Despite these advances, children have lacked timely and informed access to the latest therapeutic advancements in IBD. The Crohn's & Colitis Foundation convened a Pediatric Resource Organization for Kids with Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases (PRO-KIIDS) Clinical Innovations Meeting at the inaugural Crohn's and Colitis Congress in January 2018 to devise how to advance the care of children with IBD. The working group selected 2 priorities: (1) accelerating therapies to children with IBD and (2) stimulating investigator-initiated research while fostering sustainable collaboration; and proposed 2 actions: (a) the convening of a task force to specifically address how to accelerate pharmacotherapies to children with IBD and (b) the funding of a multicenter clinical and translational research study that incorporates the building of critical research infrastructure.10.1093/ibd/izy205_video1izy205.video15799266615001.

Diversity efforts, admissions, and national rankings: can we align priorities?

BACKGROUND: Increasing student body diversity is a priority for national health education and professional organizations and for many medical schools. However, national rankings of medical schools, such as those published by U.S. News & World Report, place a heavy emphasis on grade point average (GPA) and Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT) scores, without considering student body diversity. These rankings affect organizational reputation and admissions outcomes, even though there is considerable controversy surrounding the predictive value of GPA and MCAT scores. SUMMARY: Our aim in this article was to explore the relationship between standard admissions practices, which typically aim to attract students with the highest academic scores, and student body diversity. We examined how changes in GPA and MCAT scores over 5 years correlated with the percentage of enrolled students who are underrepresented in medicine. In a majority of medical schools in the United States from 2005 to 2009, average GPA and MCAT scores of applicants increased, whereas the percentage of enrolled students who are underrepresented in medicine decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that efforts to increase the diversity of medical school student bodies may be complicated by a desire to maintain high average GPA and MCAT scores. We propose that U.S. News revise its ranking methodology by incorporating a new diversity score into its student selectivity score and by reducing the weight placed on GPA and MCAT scores.

Forging successful interdisciplinary research collaborations: a nationwide survey of departments of surgery.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to estimate the prevalence of academic surgeons engaged in interdisciplinary collaborations and identify success factors and challenges to establishing these collaborations. METHODS: Chairs of surgery at US medical schools and selected hospitals and research institutes were surveyed in 2009 to determine the frequency, types, outcomes, and value of interdisciplinary collaborations; National Institutes of Health funding for these collaborations; major barriers and success factors; and departmental and institutional activities to promote collaborations. RESULTS: Eighty-two department chairs (58%) completed the survey. Ninety-three percent answered that their faculty engaged in interdisciplinary collaborations, and 71% stated that it was critical for their research success. On average, 27% of full-time MDs/MD-PhDs were involved in collaborations compared to 81% of PhDs within their departments. The most frequent collaborators included other clinical (43%) and basic science (24%) departments. Only 5% indicated that their most frequent collaborators were with other university programs, primarily with bioengineering or biomedical engineering. Collaborations resulted most often in publications, research opportunities for surgical residents, and National Institutes of Health funding. Pilot funding and active networking were key success factors. Longer chair tenure was statistically significantly associated with more success factors and fewer barriers to collaborations. Surgeons were much less likely to participate in institution-wide efforts than in departmental activities, although these activities were ongoing in more than two-thirds of institutions. CONCLUSION: Surgeons value collaborations as critical for their research success. Our survey indicates the potential for additional collaborations through more involvement with institutional efforts and with other university faculty. Stable, supportive department chairs are critical to establishing these activities.