Search

Background and Aims Pragmatic studies designed to test interventions in everyday clinical settings can successfully complement the evidence from registration and explanatory clinical trials. The European consensus project PRACTICE-IBD was developed to identify essential criteria and address key methodological issues needed to design valid, comparative, pragmatic studies in inflammatory bowel diseases [BDs]. Methods Statements were issued by a panel of 11 European experts in IBD management and trial methodology, on four main topics: [I] study design; [II] eligibility, recruitment and organisation, flexibility; [III] outcomes; [IV] analysis. The consensus process followed a modified Delphi approach, involving two rounds of assessment and rating of the level of agreement [1 to 9; cut-off ≥7 for approval] with the statements by 18 additional European experts in IBD. Results At the first voting round, 25 out of the 26 statements reached a mean score ≥7. Following the discussion that preceded the second round of voting, it was decided to eliminate two statements and to split one into two. At the second voting round, 25 final statements were approved: seven for study design; six for eligibility, recruitment and organisation, flexibility; eight for outcomes; and four for analysis. Conclusions Pragmatic, randomised, clinical trials can address important questions in IBD clinical practice, and may provide complementary, high-level evidence, as long as they follow a methodologically rigorous approach. These 25 statements intend to offer practical guidance in the design of high-quality, pragmatic, clinical trials that can aid decision making in choosing a management strategy for IBDs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: Older age and comorbidities are the main risk factors for adverse COVID‐19 outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The impact of IBD medications is still under investigation. Aims: To assess risk factors for adverse outcomes of COVID‐19 in IBD patients and use the identified risk factors to build risk indices. Methods: Observational cohort study. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors associated with pneumonia, hospitalisation, need for ventilatory support, and death. Results: Of the 937 patients (446 with ulcerative colitis [UC]) evaluated, 128 (13.7%) had asymptomatic SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, 664 (70.8%) had a favourable course, and 135 (15.5%) had moderate or severe COVID‐19. In UC patients, obesity, active disease and comorbidities were significantly associated with adverse outcomes. In patients with Crohn's disease (CD), age, obesity, comorbidities and an additional immune‐mediated inflammatory disease were identified as risk factors. These risk factors were incorporated into two indices to identify patients with UC or CD with a higher risk of adverse COVID‐19 outcomes. In multivariable analyses, no single IBD medication was associated with poor COVID‐19 outcomes, but anti‐TNF agents were associated with a lower risk of pneumonia in UC, and lower risks of hospitalisation and severe COVID‐19 in CD. Conclusion: The course of COVID‐19 in patients with IBD is similar to that in the general population. IBD patients with active disease and comorbidities are at greater risk of adverse COVID‐19 outcomes. IBD medications do not pose additional risks. The risk indices may help to identify patients who should be prioritised for COVID‐19 re‐vaccination or for therapies for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]