A biomarker-stratified comparison of top-down versus accelerated step-up treatment strategies for patients with newly diagnosed Crohn's disease (PROFILE): a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Management strategies and clinical outcomes vary substantially in patients newly diagnosed with Crohn's disease. We evaluated the use of a putative prognostic biomarker to guide therapy by assessing outcomes in patients randomised to either top-down (ie, early combined immunosuppression with infliximab and immunomodulator) or accelerated step-up (conventional) treatment strategies. METHODS: PROFILE (PRedicting Outcomes For Crohn's disease using a moLecular biomarker) was a multicentre, open-label, biomarker-stratified, randomised controlled trial that enrolled adults with newly diagnosed active Crohn's disease (Harvey-Bradshaw Index ≥7, either elevated C-reactive protein or faecal calprotectin or both, and endoscopic evidence of active inflammation). Potential participants had blood drawn to be tested for a prognostic biomarker derived from T-cell transcriptional signatures (PredictSURE-IBD assay). Following testing, patients were randomly assigned, via a secure online platform, to top-down or accelerated step-up treatment stratified by biomarker subgroup (IBDhi or IBDlo), endoscopic inflammation (mild, moderate, or severe), and extent (colonic or other). Blinding to biomarker status was maintained throughout the trial. The primary endpoint was sustained steroid-free and surgery-free remission to week 48. Remission was defined by a composite of symptoms and inflammatory markers at all visits. Flare required active symptoms (HBI ≥5) plus raised inflammatory markers (CRP >upper limit of normal or faecal calprotectin ≥200 µg/g, or both), while remission was the converse-ie, quiescent symptoms (HBI <5) or resolved inflammatory markers (both CRP ≤ the upper limit of normal and calprotectin <200 µg/g) or both. Analyses were done in the full analysis (intention-to-treat) population. The trial has completed and is registered (ISRCTN11808228). FINDINGS: Between Dec 29, 2017, and Jan 5, 2022, 386 patients (mean age 33·6 years [SD 13·2]; 179 [46%] female, 207 [54%] male) were randomised: 193 to the top-down group and 193 to the accelerated step-up group. Median time from diagnosis to trial enrolment was 12 days (range 0-191). Primary outcome data were available for 379 participants (189 in the top-down group; 190 in the accelerated step-up group). There was no biomarker-treatment interaction effect (absolute difference 1 percentage points, 95% CI -15 to 15; p=0·944). Sustained steroid-free and surgery-free remission was significantly more frequent in the top-down group than in the accelerated step-up group (149 [79%] of 189 patients vs 29 [15%] of 190 patients, absolute difference 64 percentage points, 95% CI 57 to 72; p<0·0001). There were fewer adverse events (including disease flares) and serious adverse events in the top-down group than in the accelerated step-up group (adverse events: 168 vs 315; serious adverse events: 15 vs 42), with fewer complications requiring abdominal surgery (one vs ten) and no difference in serious infections (three vs eight). INTERPRETATION: Top-down treatment with combination infliximab plus immunomodulator achieved substantially better outcomes at 1 year than accelerated step-up treatment. The biomarker did not show clinical utility. Top-down treatment should be considered standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed active Crohn's disease. FUNDING: Wellcome and PredictImmune Ltd.

Implications for sequencing of biologic therapy and choice of second anti-TNF in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: results from the IMmunogenicity to Second Anti-TNF therapy (IMSAT) therapeutic drug monitoring study.

BACKGROUND: Anti-drug antibodies are associated with treatment failure to anti-TNF agents in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). AIM: To assess whether immunogenicity to a patient's first anti-TNF agent would be associated with immunogenicity to the second, irrespective of drug sequence METHODS: We conducted a UK-wide, multicentre, retrospective cohort study to report rates of immunogenicity and treatment failure of second anti-TNF therapies in 1058 patients with IBD who underwent therapeutic drug monitoring for both infliximab and adalimumab. The primary outcome was immunogenicity to the second anti-TNF agent, defined at any timepoint as an anti-TNF antibody concentration ≥9 AU/ml for infliximab and ≥6 AU/ml for adalimumab. RESULTS: In patients treated with infliximab and then adalimumab, those who developed antibodies to infliximab were more likely to develop antibodies to adalimumab, than patients who did not develop antibodies to infliximab (OR 1.99, 95%CI 1.27-3.20, p = 0.002). Similarly, in patients treated with adalimumab and then infliximab, immunogenicity to adalimumab was associated with subsequent immunogenicity to infliximab (OR 2.63, 95%CI 1.46-4.80, p < 0.001). For each 10-fold increase in anti-infliximab and anti-adalimumab antibody concentration, the odds of subsequently developing antibodies to adalimumab and infliximab increased by 1.73 (95% CI 1.38-2.17, p < 0.001) and 1.99 (95%CI 1.34-2.99, p < 0.001), respectively. Patients who developed immunogenicity with undetectable drug levels to infliximab were more likely to develop immunogenicity with undetectable drug levels to adalimumab (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.39-4.19, p < 0.001). Commencing an immunomodulator at the time of switching to the second anti-TNF was associated with improved drug persistence in patients with immunogenic, but not pharmacodynamic failure. CONCLUSION: Irrespective of drug sequence, immunogenicity to the first anti-TNF agent was associated with immunogenicity to the second, which was mitigated by the introduction of an immunomodulator in patients with immunogenic, but not pharmacodynamic treatment failure.

Epstein-Barr Virus-Positive Mucocutaneous Ulcers Complicate Colitis Caused by Immune Checkpoint Regulator Therapy and Associate With Colon Perforation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Cancer therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors can cause colitis and colon perforation. We investigated whether infection with Epstein Barr virus (EBV) associates with development and severity of colitis in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of fixed colon tissues from 16 patients (12 men, 4 women, median age, 69.5 y) with colitis after immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy (9 patients treated with anti-CTLA4, 3 patients treated with anti-PD1, and 4 patients received a combination). Ten tissue samples were biopsies and 6 were collected during resection (4 surgeries for colon perforation). Patients were treated between 2010 and 2018 in the United Kingdom. The tissues were analyzed by pathology, in situ hybridization (to detect EBV-encoded small RNAs [EBERs]), and immunohistochemistry. Clinical data were also collected. RESULTS: Colon tissues from 4 of the 13 patients who received anti-CTLA4 (alone or in combination, 4 with colon perforation) had EBV-positive lymphoproliferations that manifested as florid ulcers associated with polymorphous infiltrates containing EBV-positive blasts (CD30+ or CD30-negative, CD20+, CD3-negative, and EBER+), plasma cells (CD138+, CD20-negative, and EBER+ or EBER-negative), and small B cells (CD20+, CD3-negative, and EBER+ or EBER-negative), consistent with EBV-positive mucocutaneous ulcers (EBVMCUs). In analyses of biopsies collected from 2 patients with EBVMCUs over multiple time points, we found that earlier biopsies had no or only a few EBV-positive cells, whereas 1 later biopsy had EBVMCU and co-infection with cytomegalovirus. EBVMCUs were associated with steroid-refractory colitis (100% of EBV-positive patients vs 12.5% of EBV-negative patients; P = .008) and colon perforation (100% of EBV-positive patients vs no EBV-negative patients; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: We found that colon tissues from 4/13 patients with colitis after anti-CTLA4 therapy (4/6 patients who underwent resection and 4/4 patients with colon perforation) contained EBVMCUs. EBVMCUs seem to arise secondarily in areas of inflamed colon due to immunosuppressive treatment for colitis. EBVMCUs are associated with steroid-refractory colitis and colon perforation.

The Ussing chamber system for measuring intestinal permeability in health and disease.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between intestinal epithelial integrity and the development of intestinal disease is of increasing interest. A reduction in mucosal integrity has been associated with ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease and potentially could have links with colorectal cancer development. The Ussing chamber system can be utilised as a valuable tool for measuring gut integrity. Here we describe step-by-step methodology required to measure intestinal permeability of both mouse and human colonic tissue samples ex vivo, using the latest equipment and software. This system can be modified to accommodate other tissues. METHODS: An Ussing chamber was constructed and adapted to support both mouse and human tissue to measure intestinal permeability, using paracellular flux and electrical measurements. Two mouse models of intestinal inflammation (dextran sodium sulphate treatment and T regulatory cell depletion using C57BL/6-FoxP3DTR mice) were used to validate the system along with human colonic biopsy samples. RESULTS: Distinct regional differences in permeability were consistently identified within mouse and healthy human colon. In particular, mice showed increased permeability in the mid colonic region. In humans the left colon is more permeable than the right. Furthermore, inflammatory conditions induced chemically or due to autoimmunity reduced intestinal integrity, validating the use of the system. CONCLUSIONS: The Ussing chamber has been used for many years to measure barrier function. However, a clear and informative methods paper describing the setup of modern equipment and step-by-step procedure to measure mouse and human intestinal permeability isn't available. The Ussing chamber system methodology we describe provides such detail to guide investigation of gut integrity.

Multiple venous malformations in the left colon and rectum: a long-standing case managed conservatively and an update of current literature.

Venous or cavernous malformations of the colon or rectum are a rare cause of lower gastrointestinal bleeds. It has been previously described as a diffuse cavernous haemangioma which was thought to be a benign vascular tumour. It mainly affects the rectosigmoid area of the gastrointestinal tract and is most common in children and young adults. Misdiagnosis is common with patients averaging a total of 19 years delay to this final diagnosis. We report a case of a 65-year-old patient who presented with occult, painless rectal bleeding and prior to this presentation, had been managed variously as colitis and angiodysplasia. This article aims to delineate the updated classification of this disease, principal clinical clues to aid the diagnosis while discussing patient treatment options and potential challenges faced in patient management.

Successful development and testing of a Method for Aggregating The Reporting of Interventions in Complex Studies (MATRICS).

OBJECTIVES: To develop a tool for the accurate reporting and aggregation of findings from each of the multiple methods used in a complex evaluation in an unbiased way. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We developed a Method for Aggregating The Reporting of Interventions in Complex Studies (MATRICS) within a gastroenterology study [Evaluating New Innovations in (the delivery and organisation of) Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy services by the NHS Modernisation Agency (ENIGMA)]. We subsequently tested it on a different gastroenterology trial [Multi-Institutional Nurse Endoscopy Trial (MINuET)]. We created three layers to define the effects, methods, and findings from ENIGMA. We assigned numbers to each effect in layer 1 and letters to each method in layer 2. We used an alphanumeric code based on layers 1 and 2 to every finding in layer 3 to link the aims, methods, and findings. We illustrated analogous findings by assigning more than one alphanumeric code to a finding. We also showed that more than one effect or method could report the same finding. We presented contradictory findings by listing them in adjacent rows of the MATRICS. RESULTS: MATRICS was useful for the effective synthesis and presentation of findings of the multiple methods from ENIGMA. We subsequently successfully tested it by applying it to the MINuET trial. CONCLUSION: MATRICS is effective for synthesizing the findings of complex, multiple-method studies.

Zinc in denture adhesive: a rare cause of copper deficiency in a patient on home parenteral nutrition.

A 65-year-old woman with Crohn's disease, who had been on home parenteral nutrition for many years, presented with perioral paraesthesia and a burning sensation in the mouth. Initial blood tests including serum ferritin, vitamin B12 and folate, were normal apart from mild pancytopaenia. Serum copper was low, in spite of receiving regular copper in her parenteral feeds. The copper in her parenteral feeds was increased initially, but when it did not improve, she was started on weekly intravenous copper infusions. She was using dental adhesive, which had zinc in it, and a possibility that this was causing her copper deficiency was raised. Serum zinc levels were normal, but urinary zinc was very high. The patient was advised to use zinc-free dental adhesive and her copper level returned to normal within a few months with normalisation of her pancytopaenia, and partial resolution of her oral paraesthesia.

Development and validation of the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (GESQ).

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Patient satisfaction is a key indicator of the quality of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a specific patient satisfaction questionnaire for patients undergoing GI endoscopy--the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (GESQ). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We developed and validated the GESQ within the context of a national multi-institution nurse endoscopy trial, based in secondary care, in three stages: (1) item generation with a panel of patients and professionals following a detailed literature review to identify the most relevant items from existing scales; (2) development and piloting of a draft questionnaire on a sample of patients referred for GI endoscopy; and (3) testing of the questionnaire within a large multicenter pragmatic randomized trial. We undertook psychometric analysis of the questionnaire to identify the underlying dimensions and assessed the questionnaire for reliability and validity. RESULTS: The final version of the GESQ contains 21 items. Principal components analysis revealed four subscales with high internal consistency: skills and hospital (seven items; Cronbach's alpha 0.83), pain and discomfort during and after endoscopy (four items; Cronbach's alpha 0.84), information before endoscopy (five items; Cronbach's alpha 0.80), and information after endoscopy (five items; Cronbach's alpha 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: The four identified subscales are clinically relevant and correspond to domains of patient satisfaction identified in previous studies. Our development and validation of the GESQ confirmed that it is a valid, reliable, interpretable, and acceptable tool to measure satisfaction in patients who have undergone a GI endoscopy.

Psychometric development of the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Questionnaire (GSRQ) demonstrated good validity.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a gastrointestinal (GI) symptom rating questionnaire for patients with luminal GI symptoms including where no diagnosis has been made. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We developed and validated the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Questionnaire (GSRQ) in three stages: (1) item generation to identify the relevant items for scale inclusion; (2) development and piloting on patients with a known GI disorder; and (3) testing in a sample of trial patients. We examined the underlying dimensions of the scale, internal consistency, validity, reproducibility, and responsiveness. RESULTS: We identified four interpretable factors on the GSRQ. The GSRQ had good internal consistency (corrected item-subscale correlations between 0.4 and 0.8) and Cronbach's alpha greater than 0.7 for each subscale. Construct validity was demonstrated by modest but significant correlations with the Short Form 36 and the EQ5D index value. We demonstrated good reproducibility with intraclass correlations for test-retest scores between 0.71 and 0.77, and significant responsiveness ratios for all subscales in patients who had improved, and in two of the subscales in patients who had deteriorated. CONCLUSION: The GSRQ could be a useful tool to monitor quality of life in various luminal GI conditions and where a formal diagnosis has not been made.

Effectiveness of nurse delivered endoscopy: findings from randomised multi-institution nurse endoscopy trial (MINuET).

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of doctors and nurses in undertaking upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. DESIGN: Pragmatic trial with Zelen's randomisation before consent to minimise distortion of existing practice. SETTING: 23 hospitals in the United Kingdom. In six hospitals, nurses undertook both upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy, yielding a total of 29 centres. PARTICIPANTS: 67 doctors and 30 nurses. Of 4964 potentially eligible patients, we randomised 4128 (83%) and recruited 1888 (38%) from July 2002 to June 2003. INTERVENTIONS: Diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy, undertaken with or without sedation, with the standard preparation, techniques, and protocols of participating hospitals. After referral for either procedure, patients were randomised between doctors and nurses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Gastrointestinal symptom rating questionnaire (primary outcome), gastrointestinal endoscopy satisfaction questionnaire and state-trait anxiety inventory (all analysed by intention to treat); immediate and delayed complications; quality of examination and corresponding report; patients' preferences for operator; and new diagnoses at one year (all analysed according to who carried out the procedure). RESULTS: There was no significant difference between groups in outcome at one day, one month, or one year after endoscopy, except that patients were more satisfied with nurses after one day. Nurses were also more thorough than doctors in examining the stomach and oesophagus. While quality of life scores were slightly better in patients the doctor group, this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic endoscopy can be undertaken safely and effectively by nurses. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International standard RCT 82765705.

Cost effectiveness of nurse delivered endoscopy: findings from randomised multi-institution nurse endoscopy trial (MINuET).

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost effectiveness of nurses and doctors in performing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy. DESIGN: As part of a pragmatic randomised trial, the economic analysis calculated incremental cost effectiveness ratios, and generated cost effectiveness acceptability curves to address uncertainty. SETTING: 23 hospitals in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 67 doctors and 30 nurses, with a total of 1888 patients, from July 2002 to June 2003. INTERVENTION: Diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy carried out by doctors or nurses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Estimated health gains in QALYs measured with EQ-5D. Probability of cost effectiveness over a range of decision makers' willingness to pay for an additional quality adjusted life year (QALY). RESULTS: Although differences did not reach traditional levels of significance, patients in the doctor group gained 0.015 QALYs more than those in the nurse group, at an increased cost of about pound56 (euro59, $78) per patient. This yields an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of pound3660 (euro3876, $5097) per QALY. Though there is uncertainty around these results, doctors are probably more cost effective than nurses for plausible values of a QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Though upper gastrointestinal endoscopies and flexible sigmoidoscopies carried out by doctors cost slightly more than those by nurses and improved health outcomes only slightly, our analysis favours endoscopies by doctors. For plausible values of decision makers' willingness to pay for an extra QALY, endoscopy delivered by nurses is unlikely to be cost effective compared with endoscopy delivered by doctors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International standard RCT 82765705.