Search

Background: Inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] is associated with an increased risk of developing lymphoma. Although recent data have clarified the epidemiology of lymphoma in IBD patients, the clinical and pathological characteristics of lymphoma in IBD remain poorly known. Methods: Patients with IBD and lymphoma were retrospectively identified in the framework of a national collaborative study including the Groupe d’Étude Thérapeutique des Affections Inflammatoires du Tube Digestif [GETAID] and the Lymphoma Study Association [LYSA]. We characterized clinical and prognostic features for the three most frequent lymphoma subtypes occurring in IBD. We performed a multicentre case-control study. Controls [lymphoma de novo] were matched [5:1] to cases on gender, age at diagnosis, lymphoma subtype, year of diagnosis, and IPI/FLIPI indexes. Overall survival and progression-free survival were compared between cases and controls. Results: In total, 133 IBD patients with lymphoma were included [males = 62.4%, median age at lymphoma diagnosis = 49 years in males; 42 years in females]. Most had Crohn’s disease [73.7%] and were exposed to thiopurines [59.4%]. The most frequent lymphoma subtypes were diffuse large B cell lymphoma [DLBCL, 45.1%], Hodgkin lymphoma [HL, 18.8%], and follicular lymphoma [FL, 10.5%]. When matched with 365 controls, prognosis was improved in IBD patients with DLBCL compared to controls [p = 0.0064, hazard ratio = 0.36] or similar [HL and FL]. Conclusions: Lymphomas occurring in IBD patients do not seem to have a worse outcome than in patients without IBD. Due to the rarity of this situation, such patients should be managed in expert centres., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Patients' experience with healthcare professionals could influence their clinical outcomes. To assess inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients' experience with their disease, their treatment and their relationship with their physician. A one-week cross-sectional study was conducted in 42 IBD centres. 2011 consecutive outpatients with IBD completed an anonymous self-report questionnaire assessing their experience with and knowledge of IBD. A quantitative assessment of the doctor-patient relationship revealed that patients' knowledge of IBD and IBD treatment ranged from 7.4 to 8.3 out of 10. In addition to IBD physicians, other sources of information about IBD and current treatment mainly included the internet (80% and 63%, respectively) and general practitioners (61% and 54%). Knowledge about education programmes (28%) was poor, resulting in a lack of willingness to further use these resources (25%). Concerns about IBD treatment were raised in 76% of patients, mostly related to the fear of adverse events (47%) and a lack of efficacy (33%). The need of alternative healthcare professionals was reported by 89% of the sample. In a large cohort of patients, we highlighted gaps in the management of patients with IBD regarding the need for higher-quality information and the implementation of alternative healthcare professionals.

The inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]-disk is a 10-item self-questionnaire that is used to assess IBD-related disability. The aim of the present study was to evaluate this tool in the assessment of IBD daily-life burden. A 1-week cross-sectional study was conducted in 42 centres affiliated in France and Belgium. Patients were asked to complete the IBD-disk [best score: 0, worst score: 100] and a visual analogue scale [VAS] of IBD daily-life burden [best score: 0, worst score: 10]. Analyses included internal consistency, correlation analysis, and diagnostic performance assessment. Among the 2011 IBD outpatients who responded to the survey [67.8% of the patients had Crohn's disease], 49.9% were in clinical remission. The IBD-disk completion rate was 73.8%. The final analysis was conducted in this population [n = 1455 patients]. The mean IBD-disk score and IBD daily-life burden VAS were 39.0 ± 23.2 and 5.2 ± 2.9, respectively. The IBD-disk score was well correlated with the IBD daily-life burden VAS [r = 0.67; p <0.001]. At an optimal IBD-disk cut-off of 40, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] for high IBD daily-life burden [VAS >5] was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-0.83; p <0.001). In a large cohort of patients, the IBD-disk score was well correlated with IBD daily-life burden, and it could be used in clinical practice.

Iron deficiency without anemia and iron deficiency anemia are common and frequently overlooked complications of inflammatory bowel disease. Despite the frequency and impact of iron deficiency in inflammatory bowel disease, there are gaps in our understanding about its incidence, prevalence and natural history and, consequently, patients may be undertreated. Medical registries have a key role in collecting data on the disease's natural history, the safety and effectiveness of drugs in routine clinical practice, and the quality of care delivered by healthcare services. Even though iron deficiency impacts inflammatory bowel disease patients and healthcare systems substantially, none of the established European inflammatory bowel disease registries systematically collects information on iron parameters and related outcomes. Collection of robust iron parameter data from patient registries is one way to heighten awareness about the importance of iron deficiency in this disease and to generate data to improve the quality of patient care, patient outcomes, and thus quality of life. This objective could be achieved through collection of specific laboratory, clinical, and patient-reported measurements that could be incorporated into existing registries. This review describes the status of current European inflammatory bowel disease registries and the data they generate, in order to highlight their potential role in collecting iron data, to discuss how such information gathering could contribute to our understanding of iron deficiency anemia, and to provide practical information in regard to the incorporation of accumulated iron parameter data into registries., Funding Agency:Vifor Pharma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Anal fistula plug [AFP] is a bioabsorbable bioprosthesis used in ano-perineal fistula treatment. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of AFP in fistulising ano-perineal Crohn's disease [FAP-CD]. METHODS: In a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial we compared seton removal alone [control group] with AFP insertion [AFP group] in 106 Crohn's disease patients with non- or mildly active disease having at least one ano-perineal fistula tract drained for more than 1 month. Patients with abscess [collection ≥ 3mm on magnetic resonance imaging or recto-vaginal fistulas were excluded. Randomisation was stratified in simple or complex fistulas according to AGA classification. Primary end point was fistula closure at Week 12. RESULTS: In all, 54 patients were randomised to AFP group [control group 52]. Median fistula duration was 23 [10-53] months. Median Crohn's Disease Activity Index at baseline was 81 [45-135]. Fistula closure at Week 12 was achieved in 31.5% patients in the AFP group and in 23.1 % in the control group (relative risk [RR] stratified on AGA classification: 1.31; 95% confidence interval: 0.59-4.02; p = 0.19). No interaction in treatment effect with complexity stratum was found; 33.3% of patients with complex fistula and 30.8% of patients with simple fistula closed the tracts after AFP, as compared with 15.4% and 25.6% in controls, respectively [RR of success = 2.17 in complex fistula vs RR = 1.20 in simple fistula; p = 0.45]. Concerning safety, at Week 12, 17 patients developed at least one adverse event in the AFP group vs 8 in the controls [p = 0.07]. CONCLUSION: AFP is not more effective than seton removal alone to achieve FAP-CD closure.

Crohn's disease (CD) is associated with an increased risk of small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA). However, there are no guidelines for the screening and early diagnosis of SBA. Colorectal cancer associated with chronic colitis arises from dysplasia. High-risk patients benefit from surveillance colonoscopies aimed to detect dysplasia. The dysplasia-carcinoma sequence remains poorly documented in CD-associated SBA. Moreover, molecular data about SBA complicating CD and associated dysplasia are very limited. We therefore assessed dysplasia and several key molecular markers of carcinogenesis in SBA and dysplasia developed in patients with CD.

BACKGROUND: Ciclosporin and infliximab are potential rescue treatments to avoid colectomy in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis refractory to intravenous corticosteroids. We compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs for this indication. METHODS: In this parallel, open-label, randomised controlled trial, patients were aged at least 18 years, had an acute severe flare of ulcerative colitis defined by a Lichtiger score greater than 10 points, and had been given an unsuccessful course of high-dose intravenous steroids. None of the patients had previously received ciclosporin or infliximab. Between June 1, 2007, and Aug 31, 2010, patients at 27 European centres were randomly assigned (via computer-derived permutation tables; 1:1) to receive either intravenous ciclosporin (2 mg/kg per day for 1 week, followed by oral drug until day 98) or infliximab (5 mg/kg on days 0, 14, and 42). In both groups, azathioprine was started at day 7 in patients with a clinical response. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to study treatment. The primary efficacy outcome was treatment failure defined by absence of a clinical response at day 7, a relapse between day 7 and day 98, absence of steroid-free remission at day 98, a severe adverse event leading to treatment interruption, colectomy, or death. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2006-005299-42) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00542152). FINDINGS: 115 patients were randomly assigned; 58 patients were allocated to receive ciclosporin and 57 to receive infliximab. Treatment failure occurred in 35 (60%) patients given ciclosporin and 31 (54%) given infliximab (absolute risk difference 6%; 95% CI -7 to 19; p=0·52). Nine (16%) patients in the ciclosporin group and 14 (25%) in the infliximab group had severe adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Ciclosporin was not more effective than infliximab in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis refractory to intravenous steroids. In clin

Background Ciclosporin and infliximab are potential rescue treatments to avoid colectomy in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis refractory to intravenous corticosteroids. We compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs for this indication. Methods In this parallel, open-label, randomised controlled trial, patients were aged at least 18 years, had an acute severe flare of ulcerative colitis defined by a Lichtiger score greater than 10 points, and had been given an unsuccessful course of high-dose intravenous steroids. None of the patients had previously received ciclosporin or infliximab. Between June 1, 2007, and Aug 31, 2010, patients at 27 European centres were randomly assigned (via computerderived permutation tables; 1:1) to receive either intravenous ciclosporin (2 mg/kg per day for 1 week, followed by oral drug until day 98) or infliximab (5 mg/kg on days 0, 14, and 42). In both groups, azathioprine was started at day 7 in patients with a clinical response. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to study treatment. The primary efficacy outcome was treatment failure defined by absence of a clinical response at day 7, a relapse between day 7 and day 98, absence of steroid-free remission at day 98, a severe adverse event leading to treatment interruption, colectomy, or death. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2006-005299-42) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00542152). Findings 115 patients were randomly assigned; 58 patients were allocated to receive ciclosporin and 57 to receive infliximab. Treatment failure occurred in 35 (60%) patients given ciclosporin and 31 (54%) given infliximab (absolute risk difference 6%; 95% CI -7 to 19; p=0·52). Nine (16%) patients in the ciclosporin group and 14 (25%) in the infliximab group had severe adverse events. Interpretation Ciclosporin was not more effective than infliximab in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis refractory to intravenous steroids. In clinical, SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Background Ciclosporin and infliximab are potential rescue treatments to avoid colectomy in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis refractory to intravenous corticosteroids. We compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs for this indication. Methods In this parallel, open-label, randomised controlled trial, patients were aged at least 18 years, had an acute severe flare of ulcerative colitis defined by a Lichtiger score greater than 10 points, and had been given an unsuccessful course of high-dose intravenous steroids. None of the patients had previously received ciclosporin or infliximab. Between June 1, 2007, and Aug 31, 2010, patients at 27 European centres were randomly assigned (via computerderived permutation tables; 1:1) to receive either intravenous ciclosporin (2 mg/kg per day for 1 week, followed by oral drug until day 98) or infliximab (5 mg/kg on days 0, 14, and 42). In both groups, azathioprine was started at day 7 in patients with a clinical response. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to study treatment. The primary efficacy outcome was treatment failure defined by absence of a clinical response at day 7, a relapse between day 7 and day 98, absence of steroid-free remission at day 98, a severe adverse event leading to treatment interruption, colectomy, or death. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2006-005299-42) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00542152). Findings 115 patients were randomly assigned; 58 patients were allocated to receive ciclosporin and 57 to receive infliximab. Treatment failure occurred in 35 (60%) patients given ciclosporin and 31 (54%) given infliximab (absolute risk difference 6%; 95% CI -7 to 19; p=0·52). Nine (16%) patients in the ciclosporin group and 14 (25%) in the infliximab group had severe adverse events. Interpretation Ciclosporin was not more effective than infliximab in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis refractory to intravenous steroids. In clinical, SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published