Search

Biologics have revolutionized the therapeutic approach in infl ammatory bowel disease (IBD). Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents infl iximab and adalimumab currently constitute the major biological therapy in IBD. Additional anti-TNFs such as golimumab and other new biologics are currently being developed for both anti-TNF-naive and -resistant patients. these include anti-integrins (vedolizumab and etrolizumab), a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib) and an anti-anti-interleukin (IL)-23 and IL-12 antibody (ustekinumab), among additional drugs in development. the following review discusses the indications, effi cacy and safety issues for these novel medications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors and thiopurines are among the most important classes of medications utilized in the clinical management of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. A significant proportion of patients loses response to these agents or develops adverse effects during the course of the treatment. Monitoring of drug levels and anti-drug antibodies (for TNF-α inhibitors) and metabolite levels (for thiopurines) can provide valuable insight into the possible etiology of unfavorable outcomes and allow for an appropriate management strategy for these patients. Th is review summarizes the current knowledge on the clinical implications of therapeutic drug monitoring in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with TNF-α inhibitors and thiopurines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatment options, such as anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents and thiopurines, are associated with an increased risk of certain malignancies. However, the management of IBD patients with prior malignancy is not well defined and the literature is scarce. The main aim of this study was to describe the outcome of IBD patients with prior malignancy, or malignancy before first exposure to IBD-related biologic or immunosuppressive treatment. Methods The study cohort included adult IBD patients followed in a tertiary academic center, with at least one malignancy diagnosed before IBD diagnosis or before initiation of IBD-related treatment. The main outcome of interest was a relapse of the previous malignancy or development of a second malignancy. Results Our database included 1112 patients with both IBD and malignancy. Of these, 86 (9%) who had their malignancy diagnosed before IBD-related treatment initiation were identified, while 10/86 patients (9%) were further diagnosed with a second primary malignancy. Twenty patients, (20/86, 23%) had recurrence of a previous malignancy, most commonly non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), found in 9/20 patients (45%). Treatment with infliximab was found to be significantly associated with recurrence of NMSC (P=0.003). Conclusions Anti-TNF treatment may be associated with an increased risk of NMSC recurrence. This underscores the importance of rigorous dermatological follow up in IBD patients with previous NMSC treated with anti-TNFs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) has been suggested as a potential screening tool for small-bowel capsule endoscopy (CE). We conducted a meta-analysis of studies correlating FOBT and CE fi ndings to examine the predictive value of positive FOBT for CE fi ndings. Methods PubMed and Embase search. Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) were calculated. Results Six studies were identified. Four used fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), one used FIT and guaiac FOBT, one used hemoglobin/haptoglobin complex testing (Hb/Hpt). Five of the 6 studies were suitable for statistical analysis. For all positive FOBT, sensitivity for small-bowel fi ndings was 0.60 (95%CI 0.50-0.69), specificity was 0.72 (95%CI 0.52-0.86), and DOR was 3.96 (95%CI 1.50-10.4). For the 4 studies using only FIT, sensitivity was 0.48 (95%CI 0.36-0.61), specificity was 0.60 (95%CI 0.42-0.76), and DOR was 1.41 (95%CI 0.72-2.75). Conclusions Although a number of modalities have been suggested for screening small-bowel CE referrals, none of them, including FOBT, offer a comprehensive solution. Further work is required to refine screening methods for small-bowel CE referrals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is an established diagnostic tool for the investigation of small bowel (SB) pathology. Bowel preparation prior to VCE may improve visualization, transit time, and diagnostic yield. We aimed to evaluate the "real-life" experience comparing two different preparation protocols in patients undergoing SB VCE. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from SB VCE procedures, performed in two tertiary care medical centers in Israel. VCE procedures performed at "Sheba Medical Center" used a 2-L polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparation (n=360) while VCEs performed at "Rambam Health Care campus" used a clear liquid diet plus 12-h fast protocol (n=500). A dichotomous preparation scale (adequate, inadequate) was used to classify cleansing quality. Data collection included patient and procedural details. The proportion of VCE procedures with adequate bowel preparation and the overall positive SB findings in the two different bowel preparation protocols were evaluated. Results SB completion rates were higher in the PEG protocol (96% vs. 83%, P<0.001) and SB passage time was significantly faster in the PEG protocol (mean 217±73 vs. 238±77 min, P<0.001). Bowel preparation quality was similar between groups (8% vs. 7% inadequate preparation, P=0.591). Overall positive SB findings were similar between the two groups (57% clear liquid fasting only vs. 51% PEG protocol, P=0.119). Conclusion In this large cohort, a 2-L PEG protocol had similar preparation quality and diagnostic yield compared with clear liquid fasting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]