Search

BACKGROUND: Anti-TNF agents are the only effective biological agents for the prevention of postoperative recurrence (POR) in Crohn's disease (CD). However, they are contraindicated or have been shown to fail in some patients. Although ustekinumab and vedolizumab were licensed for CD some years ago, data in this setting are scarce.; METHODS: All CD patients in whom ustekinumab or vedolizumab was prescribed for the prevention of POR within three months of ileocolonic resection with anastomosis were identified from the ENEIDA registry. The development of endoscopic, clinical and surgical POR was registered.; RESULTS: Forty patients were treated for the prevention of POR with ustekinumab and 25 were treated with vedolizumab. Eighty per cent had at least one risk factor for POR (prior resections, active smoking, perianal disease or penetrating disease behaviour). All the patients had been exposed to anti-TNF therapy. After a median follow-up of 17 and 26 months, the cumulative probability of clinical POR at 12 months after surgery was 32% and 30% for ustekinumab and vedolizumab, respectively. Endoscopic assessment within the first 18 months after surgery was available for 80% of the patients on ustekinumab and 70% for those on vedolizumab. The rate of endoscopic POR was 42% for ustekinumab and 40% for vedolizumab. One patient treated with ustekinumab and two with vedolizumab underwent a new intestinal resection.; CONCLUSIONS: Ustekinumab and vedolizumab seem to be effective in the prevention of POR in patients at high risk. Our results warrant controlled trials comparing these drugs with conventional therapies. Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Background Studies to evaluate the use of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are limited after the appearance of biological treatments. Aims Our primary objective was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of MMF in IBD. Methods IBD patients who had received MMF were retrieved from the ENEIDA registry. Clinical activity as per the Harvey‐Bradshaw Index (HBI), partial Mayo score (pMS), physician global assessment (PGA) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were reviewed at baseline, at 3 and 6 months, and at final follow-up. Adverse events and causes of treatment discontinuation were documented. Results A total of 83 patients were included (66 Crohn's disease, 17 ulcerative colitis), 90% of whom had previously received other immunosuppressants. In 61% of patients systemic steroids were used at initiation of MMF, and in 27.3% biological agents were co-administered with MMF. Overall clinical effectiveness was observed in 64.7% of the population. At the end of treatment, 45.6% and 19.1% of subjects showed remission and clinical response, respectively. MMF treatment was maintained for a median of 28.9 months (IQR: 20.4–37.5). Conclusion Our study suggests, in the largest cohort to date, that MMF may be an effective alternative to thiopurines and methotrexate in IBD.

Introducción: Diferentes vacunas frente a SARS-CoV-2 están actualmente en el mercado y se recomiendan en pacientes con Enfermedad Inflamatoria Intestinal (EII). No tenemos suficiente evidencia sobre la aceptación de este tipo de vacunas. El objetivo del estudio fue evaluar la aceptación de la vacuna frente a SARS-CoV-2 por parte de gastroenterólogos y pacientes con EII. Métodos: Se realizó una encuesta online a 8000 pacientes de ACCU-España y 1000 miembros de GETECCU. Se enviaron tres invitaciones entre Octubre-Diciembre 2020. Se realizó un análisis descriptivo, comparando las respuestas de médicos y pacientes. Resultados: 144 gastroenterólogos [63% mujeres, edad media 43 años (DE 9,5)], y1302 pacientes [72% mujeres, edad media 43 años (DE 12)] respondieron a la encuesta. 95% de los médicos recomendaban la vacuna frente a SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes con EII, 87% consideraron que su estrategia de vacunación frente a diferentes vacunas no había cambiado tras la pandemia frente al 12% que consideraban que actualmente remitían más pacientes a vacunación. En cuanto a los pacientes con EII, sólo 43% aceptaban la vacunación frente a SARS-CoV-2, frente a 43% que no estaban seguros. El sexo masculino (p

Background. Insulin resistance (IR) has been linked to inflammatory states. The aim of this study was to determine whether IR is increased in a cohort of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients with low disease activity. We additionally intended to establish which factors were the determinants of IR in this population, including the presence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Methods. Cross-sectional study encompassing 151 IBD patients and 174 non-diabetic controls. Insulin and C-peptide serum levels and IR and beta cell function (%B) indices based on homoeostatic model assessment (HOMA2) were assessed in patients and controls. Liver stiffness as measured by transient elastography, and the presence of NAFLD detected via ultrasound were additionally assessed. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to evaluate the differences in IR indexes between patients and controls, and to determine which predictor factors were associated with IR in IBD patients. Results. Neither HOMA2-IR (beta coef. −0.26 {95%CI −0.64–0.13}, p = 0.19) nor HOMA2-%B (beta coef. 15 {95%CI −14–44}, p = 0.31) indexes differed between patients and controls after fully multivariable analysis. Among classic IR risk factors, obesity, abdominal circumference, and triglycerides significantly and positively correlated with IR indexes in IBD patients. However, most features related to IBD, such as disease patterns, disease activity, and inflammatory markers, were not associated with IR. The presence of NAFLD was independently and significantly associated with beta cell dysfunction in patients with IBD (HOMA2—B grade 4, 251 ± 40 vs. grade 1, 107 ± 37, p = &lt, 0.001). Conclusions. IR is not increased in IBD patients with low disease activity compared to controls. However, the presence of NAFLD favors the development of IR in patients with IBD.

Methods: a retrospective multicenter cohort study was performed of all endoscopic procedures performed between April 27 and June 15, 2020. A screening questionnaire (SQ) was performed with patients three days prior to the procedure and 14 days after. Furthermore, a serologic SARS-CoV-2 test was performed 48 hours before. Results: two hundred and eleven consecutive patients with endoscopic procedures were included. No patients had a positive SQ, either on entry to the study or 14 days later. Only four patients (1.9 % [95 % CI: 0.07-4.8 %]) were positive for antibodies. Conclusion: the pre-endoscopy seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 is low in this cohort. Pre-procedural SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing does not add any benefit over clinical SQ to identify active COVID-19 patients.

Background Post-marketing data are required to confirm the durability and the long-term benefit and safety of UST in CD in clinical practice. Our aims were: (1) to evaluate the retention rate of UST in CD patients and to identify predictive factors of UST discontinuation; (2) to assess UST short-term effectiveness; (3) to analyse the durability of the response to UST in the long-term; and (4) to evaluate the safety of UST in clinical practice. Methods Retrospective, multicentre study (>60 centres). Patients with active CD [(Harvey–Bradshaw (HBI) >4)] that received at least one dose of UST intravenously before July 2018 were included. Clinical activity plus biochemical parameters were assessed at every UST administration. Clinical remission was defined as HBI score ≤4, and clinical response as a decrease in HBI ≥3 points. Loss of efficacy was defined as reappearance of symptoms that led to intensify the treatment dose, add another medication to control CD, switching or surgery in patients with short-term remission. The retention rate of UST treatment and the cumulative incidence of loss of efficacy were evaluated by survival curves, and predictive factors were assessed by Cox-regression. The short-term response was evaluated at week 8 and after the induction (week 16). Factors associated with short-term remission were assessed by multivariate analysis. Adverse events were recorded. Data quality was assured by remote monitoring. Results 331 CD patients have been included up to date (Table 1). The incidence rate of UST discontinuation was 15% per patient-year of follow-up: 8%, 13% and 20% at 6, 12 and 18 months (Figure 1). Previous surgery was the only factor associated with a higher risk of UST discontinuation [Hazard ratio (HR) = 2.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.1–3.6]. Short-term efficacy is shown in Figure 2. Previous surgery (OR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.2–0.6) and higher HBI score at baseline (OR = 0.8, 95% CI=0.8–0.9) were associated with an impaired response to UST at week 16. The cumulative incidence of loss of response was 32% per-patient-year of follow-up (Figure 3); A higher HBI score at baseline was associated with a higher risk of losing response (HR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.1–1.3). Neither the concomitant treatment with immunosuppressants nor the number of previous biologics were associated with UST short- and long-term benefit. Thirty adverse events were reported in 25 (7%) patients (Table 2). Conclusion Sustain is the largest real clinical practice study of UST to treat CD patients with the longest follow-up reported to date. UST was demonstrated to be effective in real-world use in the short and long run. Safety was consistent with the known profile of UST.

Aim To assess the likelihood of detecting latent tuberculosis infection [LTBI] by the positive conversion of a serial tuberculin skin test [TST] at 1 year in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients with negative baseline two-step TST. Methods In this multicentre prospective cohort study, we evaluated rate and predictors of conversion of TST at 1 year in patients with negative baseline TST. We also evaluated management of patients who had a positive TST at baseline or a conversion at 1 year. In all patients we assessed TB cases occurring during follow-up. Results Of the 192 IBD patients receiving anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] and 220 IBD controls not receiving anti-TNF, 35 [8.5%, 95% CI 5.7-11.3] had positive conversion (median TST induration 13 mm, interquartile range [IQR] 9-16). Ten anti-TNF cohort patients [5.2%, 95% CI 2.5-9.5] versus 25 controls [11.4%, 95% CI 7.5-16.3] had TST conversion [p = 0.029]. In multivariate analysis, conversion was associated with smoking habit (odds ratio [OR] 2.19, 95% CI 1.08-3.97; p = 0.028). Anti-TNF-treated patients had a lower conversion rate [OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.20-0.83; p = 0.013]. The likelihood of conversion correlates with fewer immunosuppressive therapies between baseline TST and TST at 1 year [p = 0.042]. One case of active TB [isoniazid-resistant strain] occurred in a patient with positive baseline TST receiving anti-TNF [0.05 events/100 patient-years]. Conclusions Serial TST at 1 year can detect LTBI in IBD patients receiving anti-TNF therapy with negative baseline TST. Serial TST seems to be advisable to reduce the risk of TB cases associated with inability to detect LTBI in pre-treatment screening.

Background The exhaustive registry of COVID-19 cases in patients with IBD is a unique opportunity to learn how to deal with this infection, especially in reference to the management of immunosuppressive treatment, isolation measures or if the disease is more severe in IBD patients due to immunosuppression. With these premises, the aims of this study were to know the incidence and characteristics of COVID-19 in the ENEIDA cohort during the first wave of the pandemic; the outcomes among those under immunosuppressants/biologics for IBD; the risk factors for contracting the infection and poor outcomes; and the impact of the infection after three-month follow-up. Methods Prospective observational cohort study of all IBD patients with COVID-19 included in the ENEIDA registry (with 60.512 patients in that period) between March and July 2020, with at least 3 months of follow-up. Any patient with a confirmed (by PCR or SARS-CoV-2 serology) or probable (suggestive clinical picture) infection was considered as a case. Results A total of 484 patients with COVID-19 from 63 centres were included: 247 Crohn’s disease, 223 ulcerative colitis and 14 unclassified colitis; median age 52 years (IQR: 42–61), 48% women and 44% ≥1 comorbidity. Diagnosis was made by PCR: 63% and serology: 35%. The most frequent symptoms: fever (69%), followed by cough (63%) and asthenia (38%). During lockdown 78% followed strict isolation. 35% required hospital admission (ICU: 2.7%) and 12% fulfilled criteria for SIRS upon admission. 16 patients died from COVID-19 (mortality:3.3%). 12% stop IBD medication during COVID-19. At 3 months, taken into account all included cases, 76% were in remission of IBD. Male gender (OR 1.56; 95%CI:1–2.4, p=0.05), ≥40 years of age (OR 2.55; 95% CI:1.4–4.8; p=0.004), Charlson score ≥1 (OR 2.1; 95% CI:1.3–3.5; p=0.004), and systemic steroids Conclusion IBD does not seem to worsen the prognosis of COVID-19, even when immunosuppressants and biological drugs are used. Age and comorbidity are the most important prognostic factors for more severe COVID-19 in IBD patients. The use of aminosalicylates and the risk of a worse outcome deserves a deeper analysis. Funded by the Carlos III Health Institute (COV20 / 00227).

Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is considered a chronic inflammatory state that has been associated with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Insulin resistance (IR) has been linked to NAFLD and inflammation. Whether if IR is prevalent in IBD and increases the risk of NAFLD in these patients is unknown. We aimed to study if IR is prevalent in a cohort of patients with IBD and associated risk factors. Methods This multicentric cross-sectional study compared 151 IBD patients with 174 age matched non-diabetic controls. Insulin and C-peptide serum levels and IR and beta cell function (%B) indices by homoeostatic model assessment (HOMA2) were evaluated. In the IBD patients fatty liver disease (FLD) was assessed by ultrasound (Grade I-IV) and Transition elastography (Fibroscan ®, values were correlated to liver fibrosis as: 14KPa =F4). .Anthropometric, IBD characteristics, biochemical parameters and concomitant diseases were registered as predictive factors for having IR among IBD patients and assessed by multivariable regression analysis. Results IBD patients (57% female, mean age 48 years(SD 10)), compared to matched controls (68% female, mean age 50 years(SD 16)) exhibited similar HOMA2-IR (0.97 ± 0.64 vs 1.31 ± 0.80, p=0.19) and HOMA2-%B indexes (126 ± 49 vs 134 ± 47, p=0.31) after adjusting by confounders. Obesity, abdominal circumference and triglycerides were associated with the presence of IR in IBD patients, whereas IBD disease patterns, disease activity and inflammatory markers were not related to IR. Mild and moderate FLD was present in 26% and 13 % of IBD patients, respectively. FLD grades correlated with a higher insulin and C-peptide and IR indices as observed in the univariable analysis for HOM2-IR (0.06 (0.01–0.11)) and for HOM2-%B 6(3–10) indices. Patients with severe fat infiltration had higher serum levels of insulin and C-peptide and a superior HOM2-IR (2.4 ± 1.6, p=0.01) and HOMA2-%B (251 ± 40, p Conclusion IBD patients show a similar prevalence of IR compared to controls. However, likewise in the general population, metabolic syndrome factors are associated with IR and FLD, so metabolic syndrome assessment is mandatory among IBD patients.

The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classification of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has proved useful in the management of HCC patients. However, BCLC-recommended first-line treatment is not always applicable in clinical practice.We performed a multicentre retrospective analysis of reasons for deviation from first-line treatment in 2008-2012.One to three-year survival data were analysed using Kaplan-Meier method.A total of 407 consecutive HCC patients (66.6 ± 3 years, 83% male) with cirrhosis were included. Tumours were detected during surveillance in 53% of patients, grouped as Child-Pugh A (67%), B (25%) and C (8%); and BCLC A (including stage 0, 44%), B (26%), C (15%) and D (15%). In 31% of patients, first-line treatment was not feasible (51% in early stages) due to: technical reasons (74%); patient non-conformity (20%); medical decision (3%); and disease progression (3%). One to three-year survival of patients not receiving the recommended first-line treatment was similar to that of patients treated according to BCLC recommendations (log-rank, p = 0.229).In real-life practice one-third of HCC patients could not receive first-line BCLC treatment. In our cohort of patients, similar short and medium-term survival was observed. Long-term prospective studies are required to determine the best alternative treatment option when BCLC first-line treatment is not feasible.