Recommendations for Broadening Eligibility Criteria in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trial recruitment for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has become more challenging over time. We aimed to develop recommendations for broadening IBD clinical trial eligibility to improve the inclusion of a more representative patient population in a more efficient timeline. METHODS: We applied the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method focused on broadening IBD clinical trial eligibility. A literature review was performed for 7 domains, each representing a different area related to trial recruitment. Based on these domains, 32 statements were developed. A questionnaire was sent to IBD specialists to anonymously vote on each statement with regards to its appropriateness and feasibility. After the first round of voting, participants met for a moderated discussion to review all statements. At the end of the discussion a second round of anonymous voting led to the final recommendations. RESULTS: The final round of voting resulted in 26 statements. All were rated as feasible and 25 of 26 rated as appropriate. Recommendations generally are to be more inclusive of complicated disease phenotypes, more liberal around safety criteria, to recognize the importance of non-invasive imaging and biomarkers, to minimize the washout period and to not enforce a minimum or maximum number of prior medications, to allow a recently recorded colonoscopy to count as a baseline study, and to be less restrictive of age. CONCLUSION: Recommendations to broaden clinical trial eligibility were found to be both appropriate and feasible with a high degree of agreement amongst an international group of IBD specialists.

The clinical features of polymerase proof-reading associated polyposis (PPAP) and recommendations for patient management.

Pathogenic germline exonuclease domain (ED) variants of POLE and POLD1 cause the Mendelian dominant condition polymerase proof-reading associated polyposis (PPAP). We aimed to describe the clinical features of all PPAP patients with probably pathogenic variants. We identified patients with a variants mapping to the EDs of POLE or POLD1 from cancer genetics clinics, a colorectal cancer (CRC) clinical trial, and systematic review of the literature. We used multiple evidence sources to separate ED variants into those with strong evidence of pathogenicity and those of uncertain importance. We performed quantitative analysis of the risk of CRC, colorectal adenomas, endometrial cancer or any cancer in the former group. 132 individuals carried a probably pathogenic ED variant (105 POLE, 27 POLD1). The earliest malignancy was colorectal cancer at 14. The most common tumour types were colorectal, followed by endometrial in POLD1 heterozygotes and duodenal in POLE heterozygotes. POLD1-mutant cases were at a significantly higher risk of endometrial cancer than POLE heterozygotes. Five individuals with a POLE pathogenic variant, but none with a POLD1 pathogenic variant, developed ovarian cancer. Nine patients with POLE pathogenic variants and one with a POLD1 pathogenic variant developed brain tumours. Our data provide important evidence for PPAP management. Colonoscopic surveillance is recommended from age 14 and upper-gastrointestinal surveillance from age 25. The management of other tumour risks remains uncertain, but surveillance should be considered. In the absence of strong genotype-phenotype associations, these recommendations should apply to all PPAP patients.