Search

Background and Aims: Evidence is now available in support of using fecal biomarkers to monitor disease activity in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Patient adherence is often cited as a barrier to implementation. We assessed patient determinants for using stool tests to monitor disease activity., Methods: Prospective interview of IBD patients using an analytic hierarchy matrix survey built to understand preferences for choosing between stool testing or colonoscopy for monitoring disease activity, after considering different test criteria (accuracy, preparation, pain, complications). Theoretical thresholds of misclassification were posed to patients to see how they might consider shifting from colonoscopy to stool testing., Results: A total of 100 patients (n = 51 CD, n = 46 male) were interviewed with median age and disease duration of 44 years (IQR 27-63) and 9 years (IQR 5-21), respectively. Stool-based testing was preferred over colonoscopy by 60% initially; however, a majority of participants changed their choice to colonoscopy after learning more about the diagnostic performance of currently available stool tests for disease monitoring (p < 0.001). Across all sub-groups, accuracy was ranked as the top criterion when choosing between stool-based testing and colonoscopy for disease activity assessments. Most patients were willing to choose stool-based testing over colonoscopy for disease monitoring if the stool test was wrong at most 1 in 20 times (5% misclassification rate)., Discussion: Accuracy is the most important criteria for IBD patients when choosing monitoring strategies, and a high degree of confidence is required of stool test results for patients to choose this strategy., (© 2020. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Deep remission in patients with UC has relied on initial achievement of biochemical, endoscopic, and/or histological remission. We evaluated persistent symptomatic remission and endoscopic healing (EH: Mayo endoscopy score [MES] 0 or 1) on consecutive endoscopic examinations as a durable treatment endpoint., Methods: In a retrospective cohort study, we estimated and compared cumulative risk of clinical relapse in patients with persistent EH, with and without persistent histological remission and depth of EH, among adults with active UC treated-to-target of symptomatic remission and EH who achieved and maintained symptomatic remission and EH over two serial endoscopic assessments. We also explored risk of relapse in patients with persistent EH whose therapy was de-escalated., Results: Of 270 patients who initially achieved EH with treatment-to-target, 89 maintained symptomatic remission and EH on follow-up endoscopy [interval between EH1 and EH2, 16 months]. On follow-up after EH2 [median, 19 months], 1-year cumulative risk of relapse in patients with persistent EH was 11.5%, and with persistent histological remission was 9.5%. Seventeen patients with persistent EH, who underwent de-escalation of therapy, did not have an increased risk of relapse as compared with patients who continued index therapy [5.3% vs 14%, p = 0.16]., Conclusions: Patients with active UC treated-to-target of clinical remission, who achieve and maintain symptomatic remission and EH over consecutive endoscopies, have a low risk of relapse, particularly in a subset of patients who simultaneously achieve histological remission. Persistent EH should be examined as a treatment endpoint suggestive of deep remission., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background & Aims: Clinical remission, defined by a composite of patient reported outcomes and Mayo endoscopy subscore (MES) 0 or 1 is a recommended treatment target in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). We estimated whether incorporating more rigorous remission definitions, of endoscopic remission (MES 0) and histologic remission, affects risk of relapse., Methods: Through a systematic review, we identified cohort studies in adults with UC in clinical remission that reported a minimum 12-month risk of clinical relapse, based on MES (0 vs 1) and/or histologic disease activity, in patients with endoscopic remission. Using random effects meta-analysis, we calculated relative and absolute risk of clinical relapse in patients with UC achieving different treatment targets., Results: In a meta-analysis of 17 studies that included 2608 patients with UC in clinical remission, compared to patients achieving MES 1, patients achieving MES 0 had a 52% lower risk of clinical relapse (relative risk, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.37-0.62). The median 12-month risk of clinical relapse in patients with MES 1 was 28.7%; the estimated annual risk of clinical relapse in patients with MES 0 was 13.7% (95% CI, 10.6-17.9). In a meta-analysis of 10 studies in patients in endoscopic remission (MES 0), patients who achieved histologic remission had a 63% lower risk of clinical relapse vs patients with persistent histologic activity (relative risk, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.24-0.56). Estimated annual risk of clinical relapse in who achieved achieving histologic remission was 5.0% (95% CI, 3.3-7.7)., Conclusions: In a systematic review and meta-analysis of patients with UC in clinical remission, we observed that patients achieving more rigorous treatment endpoints (endoscopic and histologic remission) have a substantially lower risk of clinical relapse compared with patients achieving clinical remission., (Copyright © 2020 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinical remission is the recommended treatment target in ulcerative colitis. The predictors and outcomes of achieving histologic remission within a treat-to-target paradigm are not well established., Aim: To evaluate the predictors and outcomes of achieving histologic remission in patients with ulcerative colitis treated-to-target of endoscopic healing (modified Mayo endoscopy score 0 or 1)., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in adults with active ulcerative colitis (modified Mayo endoscopy score 2 or 3), whose treatment was iteratively optimised to achieve endoscopic healing. We identified predictors of achieving histologic remission, and outcomes (risk of symptomatic relapse, and ulcerative colitis-related hospitalisation and/or surgery) of achieving histologic remission vs persistent histologic activity, using Cox proportional hazard analysis., Results: Of the 411 patients with clinically active ulcerative colitis, 270 achieved endoscopic healing. Of the 270 patients, 55% simultaneously achieved histologic remission. Depth of endoscopic healing at final endoscopic assessment was the only independent determinant of histologic remission (modified Mayo endoscopy score 0 vs 1: odds ratio, 0.31 [95% confidence intervals, 0.18-0.52]). Over 28 months, achieving histologic remission was associated with a lower risk of clinical relapse (1-year cumulative risk: 18.7% vs 29.5%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.56 [0.37-0.85]), and lower risk of hospitalisation (hazard ratio, 0.44 [0.20-0.94]). The incremental benefit of achieving histologic remission was observed only in patients achieving Mayo endoscopy score 1, but not Mayo endoscopy score 0., Conclusions: In patients with active ulcerative colitis treated-to-target of endoscopic healing, 55% simultaneously achieved histologic remission. Histologic remission, particularly in patients achieving modified Mayo endoscopy score 1, was associated with favourable outcomes. Treating to a target of histologic remission over endoscopic healing requires prospective evaluation., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: We applied the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to evaluate the performance of fecal calprotectin (FC) as an alternative to endoscopy in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) treated with a biologic agent or tofacitinib., Methods: Individual participant data from the trials of infliximab, golimumab, vedolizumab, and tofacitinib for UC were pooled to generate prevalence of endoscopic activity (Mayo endoscopy score) across different combinations of the rectal bleeding score (RBS) and stool frequency score (SFS). These estimates were then combined with the data from an updated systematic review of the operating properties of FC to generate clinical scenario-specific assessments of the performance of FC as a predictor of endoscopic disease activity. A prespecified threshold of acceptability for false-negative (FN) and false-positive (FP) test results was set at 5%., Results: For patients with UC achieving RBS 0 + SFS 0/1, FC ≤ 50 μg/g may avoid endoscopy in 50% patients with a FN rate <5%. Similarly, for patients with RBS 2/3 + SFS 2/3, FC ≥ 250 μg/g potentially avoids endoscopy in approximately 50% patients with an FP rate <5%. The greatest uncertainty in the diagnostic performance for FC was observed in patients with UC achieving RBS 0 but having SFS 2/3, where FN and FP rates were consistently >10%, and endoscopic evaluation may be warranted., Discussion: Two clinical scenarios were identified where FC can be used with confidence for monitoring treatment response to biologics or tofacitinib in patients with UC without the requirement for endoscopy.

Background & Aims: Noninvasive tests to measure endoscopic activity in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) have limitations. We aimed to develop a test to identify patients in remission, based on endoscopic analysis, and monitor CD activity based on serum levels of proteins., Methods: We developed a test to measure 13 proteins in blood (ANG1, ANG2, CRP, SAA1, IL7, EMMPRIN, MMP1, MMP2, MMP3, MMP9, TGFA, CEACAM1, and VCAM1), called the endoscopic healing index [EHI], using samples from 278 patients with CD from a multinational training cohort. We validated the test using 2 independent cohorts of patients with CD: 116 biologic-naive patients with early-stage CD (validation cohort 1) and 195 biologic-exposed patients with chronic CD (validation cohort 2). The ability of the test to identify patients with active disease vs patients in remission (defined as a simple endoscopic score for CD of ≤2 and ≤1 in each segment, or a total CD endoscopic index of severity score <3) was assessed by using area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analysis. The diagnostic accuracy of the test was compared with that of measurement of serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and fecal calprotectin., Results: The EHI scores range from 0 to 100 units; higher scores indicate more severe CD activity, based on endoscopy findings. The EHI identified patients in remission with an AUROC of 0.962 in validation cohort 1 (95% confidence interval, 0.942-0.982) and an AUROC of 0.693 in validation cohort 2 (95% confidence interval, 0.619-0.767), regardless of CD location or phenotype. A cutoff value of 20 points identified patients in remission with the highest level of sensitivity (97.1% in validation cohort 1 and 83.2% in validation cohort 2), with specificity values of 69.0% and 36.6%, respectively. A cutoff value of 50 points identified patients in remission with the highest level of specificity (100% in validation cohort 1 and 87.8% in validation cohort 2), with sensitivity values of 37.3% and 30.0%, respectively. The EHI identified patients in remission with a significantly higher AUROC value than the test for CRP (0.876, P < .001 in validation cohort 1 and 0.624, P = .109 in validation cohort 2). In analysis of patients with available FC measurements, the AUROC value for the EHI did not differ significantly from that of measurement of FC (AUROC, 0.950 for EHI vs AUROC, 0.923 for FC; P = .147 in validation cohort 1 and AUROC, 0.803 for EHI vs AUROC, 0.854 for FC; P = .298 in validation cohort 2)., Conclusions: We developed an index called the EHI to identify patients with CD in endoscopic remission based on blood levels of 13 proteins. The EHI identified patients with resolution of endoscopic disease activity, with good overall accuracy, although with variation between the 2 cohorts assessed. The EHI AUROC values were comparable to measurement of FC and higher than measurement of serum CRP. The test might be used in practice to assess endoscopic activity in patients with CD., (Copyright © 2020 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: We assessed the comparative efficacy of different dysplasia detection techniques in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) through a network meta-analysis and rated the quality of evidence using GRADE approach., Methods: Through a systematic literature review of multiple databases through June 30, 2017, we identified parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with long-standing UC undergoing surveillance colonoscopy with standard definition-white light endoscopy (SD-WLE), high-definition WLE (HD-WLE), narrow band imaging (NBI), or dye-based chromoendoscopy. The primary outcome was the total number of dysplastic lesions. Pairwise and network meta-analysis was performed; ranking was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities., Results: Based on 8 parallel-group RCTs (924 patients), low-quality evidence supports chromoendoscopy over SD-WLE (odds ratio [OR], 2.37; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.81-6.94) for any dysplasia detection, whereas very low-quality evidence supports using HD-WLE or NBI over SD-WLE (HD-WLE [vs SD-WLE]: OR, 1.21; 95% CrI, 0.30-4.85; NBI: OR, 1.68; 95% CrI, 0.54-5.22). Very low-quality evidence from indirect comparative analysis supports the use of chromoendoscopy over HD-WLE (OR, 1.96; 95% CrI, 0.72-5.34) or NBI (OR, 1.41; 95% CrI, 0.70-2.84) for any dysplasia detection. The number of patients with advanced neoplasia was very small, precluding meaningful analysis., Conclusions: Although we did not find any single technique to be superior, chromoendoscopy is probably more effective than SD-WLE for detecting any dysplasia, and there is low confidence in estimates supporting its use over HD-WLE or NBI. There is very low-quality evidence to inform the comparative efficacy of these interventions in detecting advanced neoplasia or preventing future colorectal cancer. Pragmatic, parallel-group RCTs with longitudinal follow-up are warranted to inform optimal dysplasia surveillance techniques. 10.1093/ibd/izy188&#95;video1izy188.video15789702674001.