Digital pathology for reporting histopathology samples, including cancer screening samples - definitive evidence from a multisite study.

AIMS: To conduct a definitive multicentre comparison of digital pathology (DP) with light microscopy (LM) for reporting histopathology slides including breast and bowel cancer screening samples. METHODS: A total of 2024 cases (608 breast, 607 GI, 609 skin, 200 renal) were studied, including 207 breast and 250 bowel cancer screening samples. Cases were examined by four pathologists (16 study pathologists across the four speciality groups), using both LM and DP, with the order randomly assigned and 6 weeks between viewings. Reports were compared for clinical management concordance (CMC), meaning identical diagnoses plus differences which do not affect patient management. Percentage CMCs were computed using logistic regression models with crossed random-effects terms for case and pathologist. The obtained percentage CMCs were referenced to 98.3% calculated from previous studies. RESULTS: For all cases LM versus DP comparisons showed the CMC rates were 99.95% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 99.90-99.97] and 98.96 (95% CI = 98.42-99.32) for cancer screening samples. In speciality groups CMC for LM versus DP showed: breast 99.40% (99.06-99.62) overall and 96.27% (94.63-97.43) for cancer screening samples; [gastrointestinal (GI) = 99.96% (99.89-99.99)] overall and 99.93% (99.68-99.98) for bowel cancer screening samples; skin 99.99% (99.92-100.0); renal 99.99% (99.57-100.0). Analysis of clinically significant differences revealed discrepancies in areas where interobserver variability is known to be high, in reads performed with both modalities and without apparent trends to either. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing LM and DP CMC, overall rates exceed the reference 98.3%, providing compelling evidence that pathologists provide equivalent results for both routine and cancer screening samples irrespective of the modality used.

Substantial cost savings of ultrasound-based management over magnetic resonance imaging-based management in an inflammatory bowel disease service.

BACKGROUND: Imaging is used to monitor disease activity in small bowel Crohn's disease (CD). Magnetic Resonance Enterography is often employed as a first modality in the United Kingdom for assessment and monitoring; however, waiting times, cost, patient burden and limited access are significant. It is as yet uncertain if small bowel intestinal ultrasound (IUS) may be a quicker, more acceptable, and cheaper alternative for monitoring patients with CD. METHODS: A clinical service evaluation of imaging pathways was undertaken at a single NHS site in England, United Kingdom. Data were collected about patients who were referred and underwent an imaging analysis for their IBD. Only patients who underwent a therapy change were included in the analysis. Data were collected from care episodes between 01 January 2021-30 March 2022. RESULTS: A combined total of 193 patient care episodes were reviewed, 107 from the IUS pathway and 86 from the MRE pathway. Estimated costs per patient in the IUS pathway was £78.86, and £375.35 per patient in the MRE pathway. The MRE pathway had an average time from referral to treatment initiation of 91 days (SD= ±61) with patients in the IUS pathway waiting an average of 46 days (SD= ±17). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this work indicate that IUS is a potential cost-saving option when compared to MRE when used in the management of CD. This is in addition to the cost difference of the radiological modalities. A large, multicentre, prospective study is needed to validate these initial findings.

What is already known on this topic ­ Ultrasound is a quick and accurate imaging investigation for patients living with Crohn's disease. Its effect on the cost utility of an Inflammatory Bowel Disease service is unknown.What this study adds ­ This work provides initial data suggesting that an ultrasound-based service may provide significant cost savings when compared to a magnetic resonance imaging-based service.How this study might affect research, practice, or policy ­ This work is part of a larger programme of work to investigate the barriers to wider ultrasound implementation in UK IBD services. This work will contribute to the design of an implementation and training package for intestinal ultrasound in the UK.

Infliximab for maintenance of medically-induced remission in Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab is a monoclonal antibody that binds and neutralises tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) which is present in high levels in the blood serum, mucosa and stool of patients with Crohn's disease. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of infliximab for maintaining remission in patients with Crohn's disease. SEARCH METHODS: On 31 August, 2021 and 23 June, 2023, we searched CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which infliximab was compared to placebo or another active comparator for maintenance, remission, or response in patients with Crohn's disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of review authors independently selected studies and conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment. We expressed outcomes as risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Our primary outcome was clinical relapse. Secondary outcomes were loss of clinical response, endoscopic relapse, and withdrawal due to serious and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: Nine RCTs with 1257 participants were included. They were conducted between 1999 and 2022; seven RCTs included biologically-naive patients, and the remaining two included a mix of naive/not naive patients. Three studies included patients in clinical remission, five included patients with a mix of activity scores, and one study included biologic responders with active disease at baseline. All studies allowed some form of concomitant medication during their duration. One study exclusively included patients with fistulating disease. The age of the participants ranged from 18 to 69 years old. All but one single-centre RCT were multicentre RCTs. Four studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies, two had a mix of commercial and public funding, and two had public funding. Infliximab is probably superior to placebo in preventing clinical relapse in patients who have mixed levels of clinical disease activity at baseline, and are not naive to biologics (56% vs 75%, RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.84, NNTB = 5, moderate-certainty evidence). We cannot draw any conclusions on loss of clinical response (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.96), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.19), or serious adverse events (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.00) because the evidence is very low certainty. Infliximab combined with purine analogues is probably superior to purine analogues for clinical relapse (12% vs 59%, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.42, NNTB = 2, moderate-certainty evidence), for patients in remission, and who are not naive to biologics. We cannot draw any conclusions on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.49), and serious adverse events (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.64) because the evidence is very low certainty. We cannot draw any conclusions about the effects of infliximab on serious adverse events compared to purine analogues (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.68) for a population in remission at baseline because the evidence is very low certainty. There was no evidence available for the outcomes of clinical relapse, loss of clinical response, and withdrawal due to adverse events. Infliximab may be equivalent to biosimilar for clinical relapse (47% vs 40% RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.69), and it may be slightly less effective in averting loss of clinical response (49% vs 32%, RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.23, low-certainty evidence), for a population with mixed/low disease activity at baseline. Infliximab may be less effective than biosimilar in averting withdrawals due to adverse events (27% vs 0%, RR 20.73, 95% CI 2.86 to 150.33, low-certainty evidence). Infliximab may be equivalent to biosimilar for serious adverse events (10% vs 10%, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.39 to 2.50, low-certainty evidence). We cannot draw any conclusions on the effects of subcutaneous biosimilar compared with intravenous biosimilar on clinical relapse (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.57), loss of clinical response (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.25), and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.97) for an active disease population with clinical response at baseline because the evidence is of very low certainty. We cannot draw any conclusions on the effects of infliximab compared to adalimumab on loss of clinical response (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.59), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.72), serious adverse events (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.54) for an active disease population with clinical response at baseline because the evidence is of very low certainty. There was no evidence available for the outcome of clinical relapse. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Infliximab is probably more effective in preventing clinical relapse than placebo (moderate-certainty evidence). Infliximab in combination with purine analogues is probably more effective in preventing clinical and endoscopic relapse than purine analogues alone (moderate-certainty evidence). No conclusions can be drawn regarding prevention of loss of clinical response, occurrence of withdrawals due to adverse events, or total adverse events due to very low-certainty evidence for both of these comparisons. There may be little or no difference in prevention of clinical relapse, withdrawal due to adverse events or total adverse events between infliximab and a biosimilar (low-certainty evidence). Infliximab may lead to more loss of clinical response than a biosimilar (low-certainty evidence). We were unable to draw meaningful conclusions about other comparisons and outcomes related to missing data or very low-certainty evidence due to serious concerns about imprecision and risk of bias. Further research should focus on comparisons with other active therapies for maintaining remission, as well as ensuring adequate power calculations and reporting of methods.

Infliximab for medical induction of remission in Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab is a monoclonal antibody that binds and neutralises tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), which is present in high levels in the blood serum, mucosa and stool of people with Crohn's disease. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of infliximab alone or in combination with another agent for induction of remission in Crohn's disease compared to placebo or active medical therapies. SEARCH METHODS: On 31 August 2021 and 4 March 2023, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization ICTRP. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised control trials (RCTs) comparing infliximab alone or in combination with another agent to placebo or another active comparator in adults with active Crohn's disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of review authors independently selected studies and conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment. We expressed outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Our primary outcomes were clinical remission, clinical response and withdrawals due to adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were endoscopic remission, histological remission, endoscopic response, and serious and total adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: The search identified 10 RCTs with 1101 participants. They were conducted between 1999 and 2019, and 7/10 RCTs included biologically naive participants. All but one RCT, which did not provide information, were multicentre and funded by pharmaceutical companies, and their authors declared conflicts. The age of the participants ranged from 26 to 65 years. Results were based on one study unless otherwise stated. Infliximab 5 mg/kg to 10 mg/kg may be more effective than placebo at week four for clinical remission (30/55 versus 3/25; RR 4.55, 95% CI 1.53 to 13.50; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 3) and response (36/55 versus 4/25; RR 4.09, 95% CI 1.63 to 10.25, NNTB 3). The evidence was low certainty. The study did not report withdrawals due to adverse events. We could not draw conclusions on the effects of infliximab 5 mg/kg to 10 mg/kg compared to placebo for fistulating participants for clinical remission (29/63 versus 4/31; RR 3.57, 95% CI 1.38 to 9.25; NNTB 4), response (48/106 versus 15/75; RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.41; NNTB 6; 2 studies) or withdrawals due to adverse events (2/63 versus 0/31; RR 2.50, 95% CI 0.12 to 50.54). The evidence was very low certainty. Infliximab used in combination with purine analogues is probably more effective than purine analogues alone for clinical remission at weeks 24 to 26 (182/301 versus 95/302; RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.59 to 2.32, NNTB 4; 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and clinical response at week 26 (107/177 versus 66/178; RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.05; NNTB 5; 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events at week 26 (62/302 versus 53/301; RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.21; 4 studies; low-certainty evidence). Infliximab alone may be more effective than purine analogues alone at week 26 for clinical remission (85/177 versus 57/178; RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.95; NNTB 7; 2 studies) and response (94/177 versus 66/178; RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.82; NNTB 7; 2 studies). There may be little or no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events (30/177 versus 43/178; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.06; 4 studies). The evidence was low certainty. We could not draw any conclusions on the effects of infliximab 5 mg/kg compared to 10 mg/kg for clinical remission (19/27 versus 11/28; RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.02) and response (22/27 versus 24/28; RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.46). The evidence was very low certainty. Withdrawals due to adverse events were not reported. We could not draw any conclusions on the effects of infliximab 5 mg/kg compared to 10 mg/kg in an exclusively fistulating population for clinical remission (17/31 versus 12/32; RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.53), response (21/31 versus 18/32; RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.78), or withdrawals due to adverse events (1/31 versus 1/32; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.07 to 15.79). The evidence was very low certainty. We could not draw any conclusions on the effects of infliximab 5 mg/kg compared to 20 mg/kg for clinical remission (19/27 versus 11/28; RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.02) or response (22/27 versus 18/28; RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.76). The evidence was very low certainty. Withdrawals due to adverse events were not reported. We could not draw any conclusions on the effects of infliximab 10 mg/kg compared to 20 mg/kg for clinical remission (11/28 versus 11/28; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.92) or response (14/28 versus 18/28; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.23). The evidence was very low certainty. Withdrawals due to adverse events were not reported. There may be little or no difference between infliximab and a CT-P13 biosimilar at week six for clinical remission (47/109 versus 49/111; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.32), response (67/109 versus 70/111; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.20) and withdrawals due to adverse events (21/109 versus 17/111; RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.25). The evidence was low certainty. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Infliximab in combination with purine analogues is probably more effective than purine analogues alone in inducing clinical remission and clinical response. Infliximab alone may be more effective in inducing clinical remission and response than purine analogues alone or placebo. Infliximab may be similar in efficacy to a CT-P13 biosimilar and there may be little or no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events. We were unable to draw meaningful conclusions as to whether infliximab alone is effective when used for exclusively fistulating populations. There was evidence that there may be little or no difference in withdrawal due to adverse events between infliximab plus purines compared with purines alone, as well as infliximab alone compared with purines alone. Meaningful conclusions cannot be drawn on all other outcomes related to adverse events due to very low certainty evidence.

Tacrolimus (FK506) for induction of remission in corticosteroid-refractory ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: There are a limited number of treatment options for people with corticosteroid-refractory ulcerative colitis. Animal models of inflammatory bowel disease and uncontrolled studies in humans suggest that tacrolimus may be an effective treatment for ulcerative colitis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus for induction of remission in people with corticosteroid-refractory ulcerative colitis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gut group specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov and WHO ICTRP from inception to October 2021 to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCT). SELECTION CRITERIA: Two review authors independently selected potentially relevant studies to determine eligibility based on the prespecified criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and analysed them using Review Manager Web. The primary outcomes were induction of remission and clinical improvement, as defined by the studies and expressed as a percentage of the participants randomised (intention-to-treat analysis). MAIN RESULTS: This review included five RCTs with 347 participants who had active ulcerative colitis or ulcerative proctitis. The duration of intervention varied between two weeks and eight weeks. Tacrolimus versus placebo Tacrolimus (oral and rectal) may be superior in achieving clinical remission compared to placebo (oral and rectal) (14/87 participants with tacrolimus versus 1/61 participants with placebo; risk ratio (RR) 3.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 13.73; 3 studies). These results are of low certainty due to imprecision and risk of bias. Tacrolimus (oral and rectal) may be superior for clinical improvement compared to placebo (oral and rectal) (45/87 participants with tacrolimus versus 7/61 participants with placebo; RR 4.47, 95% CI 2.15 to 9.29; 3 studies). These results are of low certainty due to imprecision and risk of bias. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of tacrolimus (oral and rectal) on serious adverse events compared to placebo (oral and rectal) (2/87 participants with tacrolimus versus 0/61 participants with placebo; RR 2.44, 95% CI 0.12 to 48.77; 3 studies). These results are of very low certainty due to high imprecision and risk of bias. Tacrolimus versus ciclosporin One study compared oral tacrolimus to intravenous ciclosporin, with an intervention lasting two weeks and 113 randomised participants. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of tacrolimus on achievement of clinical remission compared to ciclosporin (15/33 participants with tacrolimus versus 24/80 participants with ciclosporin; RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.50). The results are of very low certainty due to risk of bias and high imprecision. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of tacrolimus on clinical improvement compared to intravenous ciclosporin (23/33 participants with tacrolimus versus 62/80 participants with ciclosporin; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.16). The results are of very low certainty due to risk of bias and imprecision. Tacrolimus versus beclometasone One study compared tacrolimus suppositories with beclometasone suppositories in an intervention lasting four weeks with 88 randomised participants. There may be little to no difference in achievement of clinical remission (16/44 participants with tacrolimus versus 15/44 participants with beclometasone; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.88). The results are of low certainty due to high imprecision. There may be little to no difference in clinical improvement when comparing tacrolimus suppositories to beclometasone suppositories (22/44 participants with tacrolimus versus 22/44 with beclometasone; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.52). The results are of low certainty due to high imprecision. There may be little to no difference in serious adverse events when comparing tacrolimus suppositories to beclometasone suppositories (1/44 participants with tacrolimus versus 0/44 with beclometasone; RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 71.70). These results are of low certainty due to high imprecision. There may be little to no difference in total adverse events when comparing tacrolimus suppositories to beclometasone suppositories (21/44 participants with tacrolimus versus 14/44 participants with beclometasone; RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.55). These results are of low certainty due to high imprecision. No secondary outcomes were reported for people requiring rescue medication or to undergo surgery. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is low-certainty evidence that tacrolimus may be superior to placebo for achievement of clinical remission and clinical improvement in corticosteroid-refractory colitis or corticosteroid-refractory proctitis. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of tacrolimus compared to ciclosporin for achievement of clinical remission or clinical improvement. There may be no difference between tacrolimus and beclometasone for inducing clinical remission or clinical improvement. The cohorts studied to date were small, with missing data sets, offered short follow-up and the clinical endpoints used were not in line with those suggested by regulatory bodies. Therefore, no clinical practice conclusions can be made. This review highlights the need for further research that targets the relevant clinical questions, uses appropriate trial methodology and reports key findings in a systematic manner that facilitates future integration of findings with current evidence to better inform clinicians and patients. Future studies need to be adequately powered and of pertinent duration so as to capture the efficacy and effectiveness of tacrolimus in the medium to long term. Well-structured efficacy studies need to be followed up by long-term phase 4 extensions to provide key outputs and inform in a real-world setting.

MR Measures of Small Bowel Wall T2 Are Associated With Increased Permeability.

BACKGROUND: Increased small bowel permeability leads to bacterial translocation, associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Biomarkers are needed to evaluate these changes in vivo, stratify an individual's risk, and evaluate the efficacy of interventions. MRI is an established biomarker of small bowel inflammation. PURPOSE: To characterize changes in the small bowel with quantitative MRI measures associated with increased permeability induced by indomethacin. STUDY TYPE: Prospective single-center, double-blind, two-way crossover provocation study. SUBJECTS: A provocation cohort (22 healthy volunteers) and intrasubject reproducibility cohort (8 healthy volunteers). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 2D balanced turbo field echo sequences to measure small bowel wall thickness, T2 , and motility acquired at 3T. ASSESSMENT: Participants were randomized to receive indomethacin or placebo prior to assessment. After a minimum 2-week washout, measures were repeated with the alternative allocation. MR measures (wall thickness, T2 , motility) at each study visit were compared to the reference standard 2-hour lactulose/mannitol urinary excretion ratio (LMR) test performed by a lab technician. All analyses were performed blind. STATISTICAL TESTS: Normality was tested (Shapiro-Wilk's test). Paired testing (Student's t-test or Wilcoxon) determined the significance of paired differences with indomethacin provocation. Pearson's correlation coefficient compared significant measures with indomethacin provocation to LMR. Intrasubject (intraclass correlation) and interrater variability (Bland-Altman) were assessed. RESULTS: Indomethacin provocation induced a significant increase in LMR compared to placebo (P < 0.05) and a significant increase in small bowel T2 (0.12 seconds compared to placebo 0.07 seconds, P < 0.05). Small bowel wall thickness (P = 0.17) and motility (P = 0.149) showed no significant change. T2 and LMR were positively correlated (r = 0.68, P < 0.05). T2 measurements were robust to interobserver (intraclass correlation 0.89) and intrasubject variability (Bland-Altman bias of 0.005 seconds, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.04 to +0.05 seconds, and 0.0006 seconds, 95% CI -0.05 to +0.06 seconds). DATA CONCLUSION: MR measures of small bowel wall T2 were significantly increased following indomethacin provocation and correlated with 2-hour LMR test results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 2.

Test-retest assessment of non-contrast MRI sequences to characterise and quantify the small bowel wall in healthy participants.

OBJECTIVE: Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging sequences have been investigated as objective imaging biomarkers of fibrosis and inflammation in Crohn's disease. AIM: To determine the repeatability and inter- and intra-observer agreement of these measures in the prepared small bowel wall. METHODS: Ten healthy participants were scanned at 3 T on 2 separate occasions using T1 and T2 relaxometry, IVIM-DWI and MT sequences. Test-retest repeatability was assessed using the coefficient of variation (CoV) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to evaluate the intra- and inter-observer agreement RESULTS: Test-retest repeatability in the bowel wall was excellent for apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), magnetisation transfer ratio (MTR), T1, and diffusion coefficient D (CoV 5%, 7%, 8%, and 10%, respectively), good for perfusion fraction (PF) (CoV 20%) and acceptable for T2 (CoV 21%). Inter-observer agreement was good for the T2, D and ADC (ICC = 0.89, 0.86, 0.76, respectively) and moderate for T1 (ICC = 0.55). Intra-observer agreement was similar to inter-observer agreement. DISCUSSION: This study showed variable results between the different parameters measured. Test-retest repeatability was at least acceptable for all parameters except pseudo-diffusion coefficient D*. Good inter- and intra-observer agreement was obtained for T2, ADC and D, with these parameters performing best in this technical validation study.

Experiences of using vedolizumab in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease in the East Midlands UK - a retrospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials have demonstrated efficacy of vedolizumab in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). Further real-world data is needed to inform clinical practice. The primary outcome was to assess corticosteroid-free and clinical remission after vedolizumab initiation. Secondary outcomes included effect on disease activity scores, biochemical markers, concomitant drug use, endoscopic remission, surgical intervention, hospital admissions and adverse events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multi-centre retrospective observational study was conducted with patients initiated on vedolizumab across seven UK hospitals 1/11/14-30/11/16. Clinical disease activity was assessed using the partial Mayo Scores (pMS) and Harvey Bradshaw Index (HBI). Clinical remission was defined as HBI ≤4 or pMS <2 with a combined stool frequency and rectal bleeding sub score of ≤1. Clinical response was defined as ≥2-point decrease from baseline in pMS and ≥3-point decrease from baseline in HBI. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two patients were included in the final analysis. 45% of UC and 10% of CD patients were anti-TNF naive. Over the observation period corticosteroid-free remission rates for UC and CD were 46% and 45%, while clinical remission rates were 52% and 44%, respectively. Time to corticosteroid free remission for UC and CD was 17.6 [IQR: 8.7-29.6] and 14.1 [QR: 6.0-21.7] weeks, respectively. Time to clinical response for UC was 9.4 [IQR: 5.7-15.4] and CD was 9.5 [IQR: 6.1-18.2] weeks. There was a substantial decrease in the concomitant use of immunomodulators and a similar decrease in concomitant corticosteroid use over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Results in this predominately anti-TNF experienced population mirror other published real-world data, demonstrating good clinical effectiveness and a comparable safety profile.

Corrigendum: Surgical Rates for Crohn's Disease Are Decreasing: A Population-Based Time Trend Analysis and Validation Study.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2017.394.

Acetarsol Suppositories: Effective Treatment for Refractory Proctitis in a Cohort of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Management of proctitis refractory to conventional therapies presents a common clinical problem. The use of acetarsol suppositories, which are derived from organic arsenic, was first described in 1965. Data concerning clinical efficacy and tolerability are very limited. AIM: To examine the efficacy of acetarsol suppositories for the treatment of refractory proctitis. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with acetarsol suppositories between 2008 and 2014 at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Clinical response was defined as resolution of symptoms back to baseline at the time of next clinic review. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were prescribed acetarsol suppositories between March 2008 and July 2014 (29 patients with ulcerative colitis, nine with Crohn's disease, and one with indeterminate colitis). Thirty-eight were included for analysis. The standard dose of acetarsol was 250 mg twice daily per rectum for 4 weeks. Clinical response was observed in 26 patients (68%). Of the 11 patients who had endoscopic assessment before and after treatment, nine (82%) showed endoscopic improvement and five (45%) were in complete remission (Wilcoxon signed-rank test p = 0.006). One patient developed a macular skin rash 1 week after commencing acetarsol, which resolved within 4 weeks of drug cessation. CONCLUSION: Acetarsol was effective for two out of every three patients with refractory proctitis. This cohort had failed a broad range of topical and systemic treatments, including anti-TNFα therapy. Clinical efficacy was reflected in significant endoscopic improvement. Adverse effects of acetarsol were rare.

Surgical Rates for Crohn's Disease are Decreasing: A Population-Based Time Trend Analysis and Validation Study.

OBJECTIVES: Temporal changes for intestinal resections for Crohn's disease (CD) are controversial. We validated administrative database codes for CD diagnosis and surgery in hospitalized patients and then evaluated temporal trends in CD surgical resection rates. METHODS: First, we validated International Classification of Disease (ICD)-10-CM coding for CD diagnosis in hospitalized patients and Canadian Classification of Health Intervention coding for surgical resections. Second, we used these validated codes to conduct population-based surveillance between fiscal years 2002 and 2010 to identify adult CD patients undergoing intestinal resection (n=981). Annual surgical rate was calculated by dividing incident surgeries by estimated CD prevalence. Time trend analysis was performed and annual percent change (APC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) in surgical resection rates were calculated using a generalized linear model assuming a Poisson distribution. RESULTS: In the validation cohort, 101/104 (97.1%) patients undergoing surgery and 191/200 (95.5%) patients admitted without surgery were confirmed to have CD on chart review. Among the 116 administrative database codes for surgical resection, 97.4% were confirmed intestinal resections on chart review. From 2002 to 2010, the overall CD surgical resection rate was 3.8 resections per 100 person-years. During the study period, rate of surgery decreased by 3.5% per year (95% CI: -1.1%, -5.8%), driven by decreasing emergent operations (-10.1% per year (95% CI: -13.4%, -6.7%)) whereas elective surgeries increased by 3.7% per year (95% CI: 0.1%, 7.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Overall surgical resection rates in CD are decreasing, but a paradigm shift has occurred whereby elective operations are now more commonly performed than emergent surgeries.

Phenotypic features of Crohn's disease associated with failure of medical treatment.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is conflicting evidence on the effects of thiopurines (azathioprine or mercaptopurine) and anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapies on rates of surgery among patients with Crohn's disease (CD). We aimed to identify factors that identify patients who are unlikely to respond to medical therapy and will therefore require surgery. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study using the Alberta Inflammatory Bowel Disease Consortium registry to identify 425 patients diagnosed with CD who received a prescription of a thiopurine and/or an anti-TNF agent from a referral center, from July 1, 1975, through September 13, 2012. We collected data on CD-related abdominal surgery after therapy and disease features when therapy was instituted. Cox proportional regression models were used to associate disease features with outcomes after adjusting for potential confounders. Risk estimates were presented as hazard rate ratios (HRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Among patients given thiopurines, stricturing disease (adjusted HR, 4.63; 95% CI, 2.00-10.71), ileal location (adjusted HR, 6.20; 95% CI, 1.64-23.42), and ileocolonic location (adjusted HR, 3.71; 95% CI, 1.08-12.74) at the time of prescription were associated significantly with the need for surgery. Prescription of an anti-TNF agent after prescription of a thiopurine reduced the risk for surgery, compared with patients prescribed only a thiopurine (adjusted HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.75). Among patients given anti-TNF agents, stricturing (adjusted HR, 6.17; 95% CI, 2.81-13.54) and penetrating disease (adjusted HR, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.45-7.92) at the time of prescription were associated significantly with surgery. Older age at diagnosis (17-40 y) reduced the risk for abdominal surgery (adjusted HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.80) compared with a younger age group (≤16 y). Surgery before drug prescription reduced the risk for further surgeries among patients who received thiopurines (adjusted HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.68) or anti-TNF agents (adjusted HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.96). Terminal ileal disease location was not associated with a stricturing phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a retrospective database analysis, patients prescribed thiopurine or anti-TNF therapy when they have a complicated stage of CD are more likely to require surgery. Better patient outcomes are achieved by treating CD at early inflammation stages; delayed treatment increases rates of treatment failure.

Association between body mass index and age of disease onset with clinical outcomes in paediatric-onset Crohn's Disease (CD): a UK nation-wide analyses using the NIHR-IBD BioResource.

BACKGROUND: The evidence on the relationship between adiposity and disease outcomes in paediatric Crohn's disease (CD) is limited and lacks consensus. AIM: To investigate the relationship between (a) body mass index (BMI) and clinical CD outcomes (hospitalisation, surgery, disease behaviour, biologic use, extra-intestinal manifestations (EIMs)) and (b) the age of CD onset with clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Clinical outcomes were examined in CD patients diagnosed at age <17 years and enroled in the National Institute for Health Research IBD-UK BioResource at a median age of 24 years. All outcomes and BMI were recorded at the time of enrolment. Participants were categorised into normal (<25 kg/m2) and high (≥25 kg/m2) BMI. Age at disease diagnosis was categorised into pre-puberty/early puberty (<11 years), puberty (11-14 years) and post-puberty (15-17 years). Spearman rank correlation was used to test the associations between continuous variables and chi-square test to compare categorical variables. RESULTS: 848 participants with CD were included (51.8% males) and median age at diagnosis was 14 years. Participants with high BMI experienced a greater frequency of EIMs (P = 0.05) than those with low BMI (1 type of EIM: 18.5% vs. 13.2%, respectively; ≥2 types of EIMs: 7.8% vs. 5.6%, respectively). Age at diagnosis and BMI showed weak correlations with corticosteroid use (ρ = 0.08, P = 0.03 and ρ = -0.09, P = 0.01; respectively). An early diagnosis (<11 years) was associated with higher occurrence of stenosing and penetrating disease behaviour (P = 0.01) and hospitalisations (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A higher BMI and an earlier age of disease onset are associated with worse CD clinical presentation.

Prepublication abstract-only reports compared with full-text manuscripts for randomised controlled trials in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of key therapies in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are often presented and available as abstracts for significant periods of time prior to full publication, often being employed to make strategic and clinical prescribing decisions. We compared the concordance of prepublication abstract-only reports and their respective full-text manuscripts. METHODS: Pairs of full-text manuscripts and their respective prepublication abstract-only reports for the same RCT outcomes, at the same time point of analysis were included. The RCTs were on treatments for IBD with full-text manuscripts published between 2010 and 2023. RESULTS: We found 77 pairs of full-text manuscripts and their prepublication abstract-only reports. There were significant mismatches in the reporting of stated planned outcomes (65/77 matched, p<0.001) and primary outcomes reported in their results sections (67/77, p<0.001); trial registrations (34/65, p<0.001); the number of randomised participants (49/77, p=0.18); participants reaching end of study (21/71, p<0.001) and primary outcome data (40/73, p<0.001). Authors conclusions matched (75/77, p=0.157). Authors did not provide explicit or implied justifications for the absence or non-concordance for any of the above items. CONCLUSIONS: Abstract-only reports have consistent issues with both limited reporting of key information and significant differences in data when compared with their later full-text publications. These are not related to further recruitment of patients or word count limitations and are never explained. As abstracts are often used in guidelines, reviews and stakeholder decision-making on prescribing, caution in their use is strongly suggested. Further work is needed to enhance minimum reporting standards in abstract-only works and ensure consistency with final published papers.

Determining the optimal treatment target in patients with ulcerative colitis: rationale, design, protocol and interim analysis for the randomised controlled VERDICT trial.

INTRODUCTION: Symptoms, endoscopy and histology have been proposed as therapeutic targets in ulcerative colitis (UC). Observational studies suggest that the achievement of histologic remission may be associated with a lower risk of complications, compared with the achievement of endoscopic remission alone. The actiVE ulcerative colitis, a RanDomIsed Controlled Trial (VERDICT) aims to determine the optimal treatment target in patients with UC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this multicentre, prospective randomised study, 660 patients with moderate to severe UC (Mayo rectal bleeding subscore [RBS] ≥1; Mayo endoscopic score [MES] ≥2) are randomly assigned to three treatment targets: corticosteroid-free symptomatic remission (Mayo RBS=0) (group 1); corticosteroid-free endoscopic remission (MES ≤1) and symptomatic remission (group 2); or corticosteroid-free histologic remission (Geboes score <2B.0), endoscopic remission and symptomatic remission (group 3). Treatment is escalated using vedolizumab according to a treatment algorithm that is dependent on the patient's baseline UC therapy until the target is achieved at weeks 16, 32 or 48. The primary outcome, the time from target achievement to a UC-related complication, will be compared between groups 1 and 3 using a Cox proportional hazards model. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by ethics committees at the country level or at individual sites as per individual country requirements. A full list of ethics committees is available on request. Study results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT: 2019-002485-12; NCT04259138.

Safety and efficacy of autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation with low-dose cyclophosphamide mobilisation and reduced intensity conditioning versus standard of care in refractory Crohn's disease (ASTIClite): an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A previous controlled trial of autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with refractory Crohn's disease did not meet its primary endpoint and reported high toxicity. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of HSCT with an immune-ablative regimen of reduced intensity versus standard of care in this patient population. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial was conducted in nine National Health Service hospital trusts across the UK. Adults (aged 18-60 years) with active Crohn's disease on endoscopy (Simplified Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease [SES-CD] ulcer sub-score of ≥2) refractory to two or more classes of biological therapy, with no perianal or intra-abdominal sepsis or clinically significant comorbidity, were recruited. Participants were centrally randomly assigned (2:1) to either HSCT with a reduced dose of cyclophosphamide (intervention group) or standard care (control group). Randomisation was stratified by trial site by use of random permuted blocks of size 3 and 6. Patients in the intervention group underwent stem-cell mobilisation (cyclophosphamide 1 g/m2 with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 5 µg/kg) and stem-cell harvest (minimum 2·0 × 106 CD34+ cells per kg), before conditioning (fludarabine 125 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 120 mg/kg, and rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin [thymoglobulin] 7·5 mg/kg in total) and subsequent stem-cell reinfusion supported by G-CSF. Patients in the control group continued any available conventional, biological, or nutritional therapy. The primary outcome was absence of endoscopic ulceration (SES-CD ulcer sub-score of 0) without surgery or death at week 48, analysed in the intention-to-treat population by central reading. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 17160440. FINDINGS: Between Oct 18, 2018, and Nov 8, 2019, 49 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 23 (47%) were randomly assigned: 13 (57%) to the intervention group and ten (43%) to the control group. In the intervention group, ten (77%) participants underwent HSCT and nine (69%) reached 48-week follow-up; in the control group, nine (90%) reached 48-week follow-up. The trial was halted in response to nine reported suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions in six (46%) patients in the intervention group, including renal failure due to proven thrombotic microangiopathy in three participants and one death due to pulmonary veno-occlusive disease. At week 48, absence of endoscopic ulceration without surgery or death was reported in three (43%) of seven participants in the intervention group and in none of six participants in the control group with available data. Serious adverse events were more frequent in the intervention group (38 in 13 [100%] patients) than in the control group (16 in four [40%] patients). A second patient in the intervention group died after week 48 of respiratory and renal failure. INTERPRETATION: Although HSCT with an immune-ablative regimen of reduced intensity decreased endoscopic disease activity, significant adverse events deem this regimen unsuitable for future clinical use in patients with refractory Crohn's disease. FUNDING: Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership.

ECCO Guidelines on Therapeutics in Crohn's Disease: Surgical Treatment.

This article is the second in a series of two publications on the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] evidence-based consensus on the management of Crohn's disease. The first article covers medical management; the present article addresses surgical management, including preoperative aspects and drug management before surgery. It also provides technical advice for a variety of common clinical situations. Both articles together represent the evidence-based recommendations of the ECCO for Crohn's disease and an update of prior ECCO guidelines.

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.

Delphi consensus survey: the opinions of patients living with refractory ulcerative proctitis and the health care professionals who care for them.

BACKGROUND: Refractory ulcerative proctitis presents a huge clinical challenge not only for the patients living with this chronic, progressive condition but also for the professionals who care for them. Currently, there is limited research and evidence-based guidance, resulting in many patients living with the symptomatic burden of disease and reduced quality of life. The aim of this study was to establish a consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis disease burden and best practice for management. METHODS: A three-round Delphi consensus survey was conducted among patients living with refractory proctitis and the healthcare experts with knowledge on this disease from the UK. A brainstorming stage involving a focus group where the participants came up with an initial list of statements was completed. Following this, there were three rounds of Delphi surveys in which the participants were asked to rank the importance of the statements and provide any additional comments or clarifications. Calculation of mean scores, analysis of comments and revisions were performed to produce a final list of statements. RESULTS: In total, 14 statements were suggested by the focus group at the initial brainstorming stage. Following completion of three Delphi survey rounds, all 14 statements reached consensus following appropriate revision. CONCLUSIONS: We established consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis from both the experts who manage this disease and the patients living with it. This represents the first step towards developing clinical research data and ultimately the evidence needed for best practice management guidance of this condition.