Search

Background and Aim: Suboptimal disease control (SDC) and its contributing factors in IBD according to STRIDE-II criteria is unclear. IBD-PODCAST was a non-interventional, international, multicenter real-world study to assess this., Methods: Data from the Italian IBD cohort (N=220) are presented here. Participants aged ≥19 with confirmed IBD diagnosis of ≥1 year were consecutively enrolled. A retrospective chart review and cross-sectional assessment by physicians and patients within the past 12 months were performed. SDC or optimal disease control was assessed using adapted STRIDE-II criteria., Results: At the index date, 53.4 % of 116 CD patients and 49.0 % of 104 UC patients had SDC, mainly attributed to a Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire score <50, failure to achieve endoscopic remission, and the presence of active extra-intestinal manifestations in both diseases. Disease monitoring with imaging and/or endoscopy during the previous year was conducted in ∼50 % of patients, with endoscopy performed in ∼40 %. Potential therapeutic adjustments were reported for half of the patients., Conclusions: This study highlights SDC in a significant portion of IBD Italian patients. These results emphasize the need for more proactive management strategies in both CD and UC patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests, (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The present document constitutes Part 2 of the EoETALY Consensus Statements guideline on the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) developed by experts in the field of EoE across Italy (i.e., EoETALY Consensus Group). Part 1 was published as a different document, and included three chapters discussing 1) definition, epidemiology, and pathogenesis; 2) clinical presentation and natural history and 3) diagnosis of EoE. The present work provides guidelines on the management of EoE in two final chapters: 4) treatment and 5) monitoring and follow-up, and also includes considerations on knowledge gaps and a proposed research agenda for the coming years. The guideline was developed through a Delphi process, with grading of the strength and quality of the evidence of the recommendations performed according to accepted GRADE criteria.This document has received the endorsement of three Italian national societies including the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE), the Italian Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (SINGEM), and the Italian Society of Allergology, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC). The guidelines also involved the contribution of members of ESEO Italia, the Italian Association of Families Against EoE., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic type 2-mediated inflammatory disease of the esophagus that represents the most common eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease. Experts in the field of EoE across Italy (i.e., EoETALY Consensus Group) including gastroenterologists, endoscopists, allergologists/immunologists, and paediatricians conducted a Delphi process to develop updated consensus statements for the management of patients with EoE and update the previous position paper of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE) in light of recent evidence. Grading of the strength and quality of the evidence of the recommendations was performed using accepted GRADE criteria. The guideline is divided in two documents: Part 1 includes three chapters, namely 1) definition, epidemiology, and pathogenesis; 2) clinical presentation and natural history, and 3) diagnosis, while Part 2 includes two chapters: 4) treatment and 5) monitoring and follow-up. This document has received the endorsement of three Italian national societies including the SIGE, the Italian Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (SINGEM), and the Italian Society of Allergology, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC). With regards to patients' involvement, these guidelines involved the contribution of members of ESEO Italia, the Italian Association of Families Against EoE., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Nicola de Bortoli: Advisory board member for: AlfaSigma, Sanofi Genzyme, Dr Falk; Lecture grants from Reckitt-Benkiser, Malesci, Dr. Flak, Sofar, Alfa-Sigma, Pharma-Line. Pierfrancesco Visaggi: Has served as speaker for Dr Falk, JB Pharmaceuticals, Malesci. Roberto Penagini: Has served as speaker for Dr Falk, Sanofi. Edda Battaglia: has served as consultant for NZP, GUNA Gaia Pellegatta has served as speaker for Dr Falk, Sanofi Genzyme, Malesci. Paola Iovino: Has served as consultant for Dr Falk Giovanni Marasco: Served as an advisory board member for AlfaSigma, EG Pharma, Monteresearch srl, Recordati, Cineca. Received lecture grants from Agave, AlfaSigma, Bromatech, Clorofilla, Echosens, Ferring, Mayoly Spindler, Menarini and Schwabe Pharma. Salvatore Oliva: Has served as speaker for Sanofi, Medtronic; Has served as consultant for: Sanofi, Medtronic, Brystol; Has received research support from Alfa Sigma, Medtronic. Francesca Racca: has served as speaker for Sanofi; has served as consultant for Dr Falk, Sanofi, GSK Erminia Ridolo: has served as consultant for Dr Falk Edoardo Vincenzo Savarino: has served as speaker for Abbvie, Agave, AGPharma, Alfasigma, Aurora Pharma, CaDiGroup, Celltrion, Dr Falk, EG Stada Group, Fenix Pharma, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Janssen, JB Pharmaceuticals, Innovamedica/Adacyte, Malesci, Mayoly Biohealth, Omega Pharma, Pfizer, Reckitt Benckiser, Sandoz, SILA, Sofar, Takeda, Tillots, Unifarco; has served as consultant for Abbvie, Agave, Alfasigma, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Diadema Farmaceutici, Dr. Falk, Fenix Pharma, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, JB Pharmaceuticals, Merck & Co, Nestlè, Reckitt Benckiser, Regeneron, Sanofi, SILA, Sofar, Synformulas GmbH, Tssakeda, Unifarco; he received research support from Pfizer, Reckitt Benckiser, SILA, Sofar, Unifarco, Zeta Farmaceutici. Bruno Annibale, Federica Baiano Svizzero, Giovanni Barbara, Brigida Barberio, Ottavia Bartolo, Antonio Di Sabatino, Ludovico Docimo, Marzio Frazzoni, Manuele Furnari, Matteo Ghisa, Andrea Iori, Marco Vincenzo Lenti, Elisa Marabotto, Aurelio Mauro, Marcella Pesce, Antonino Carlo Privitera, Ilaria Puxeddu, Mentore Ribolsi, Salvatore Russo, Giovanni Sarnelli, Salvatore Tolone, Patrizia Zentilin, Fabiana Zingone: None., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: In recent years, improvement of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in Ulcerative colitis (UC) has become a relevant measure for treatment efficacy., Methods: We report results from a multicenter prospective study in Italy investigating HRQoL in adult patients with UC treated with golimumab (GLM). Patients who had shown clinical response after a 6-week induction phase (w0), were followed for an additional 48 weeks (w48) (total 54-week treatment)., Results: Of the 159 patients enrolled 90 completed the study. Compared to values at the beginning of treatment (n = 137), significant improvements were observed for mean total Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) scores at w0 (168.5) and w48 (181.7). Patients with baseline PMS above the median tended to have greater improvements in IBDQ at w0 (OR 2.037, p = 0.033) and w48 (OR 3.292, p = 0.027). Compared to beginning of GLM treatment, the mean Full Mayo Score (FMS) decreased by 5.9 points at w48, while mean Partial Mayo Score (PMS) decreased by 3.9 points at w0 and by 4.9 points at w48., Conclusions: GLM improved HRQoL, disease activity and inflammatory biomarkers in UC patients with moderate-to-severely active disease. The greater the burden of disease activity at baseline, the greater the improvement of HRQoL after 24 and 48 weeks of treatment., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest Armuzzi A.: Consultant: AbbVie, Allergan, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Eli-Lilly, Ferring, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Mylan, Pfizer, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Takeda. Lecture fees: AbbVie, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli-Lilly, Falk, Ferring, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Takeda, Tigenix Research grants: MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Biogen Saibeni S.: Advisory board, lecture fees, consultancy for: AbbVie, Arena, Janssen, Ferring, Gilead, MSD, Takeda Scaldaferri F.: MSD, Jansen, Takeda, Sandoz, Ferring, Pfizer Geccherle A.: Served as a speaker, and/or advisory board member for the following organisations: AbbVie, Takeda, Janssen. Soriano A.: served as speaker and/or consultant and/or advisory board member and/or received fees from Janssen, Takeda, Pfizer, Novartis. Orlando A.: AO received lecture grants and/or served as an advisory board member for: AbbVie, Biogen, Chiesi, Janssen-Cilag MSD, Galapagos, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sofar, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals. Principi M.B.: Advisory boards, lectures fee, for Abbvie, Janssen, Pfizer, MDS,Takeda. Sarpi L.: MSD Cappello M: consultant for Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, Galapagos, Ferring, Biogen, speaker for Takeda, Biogen, Janssen-Cilag, Galapagos, Ferring D'Incà R.: Advisor for MSD, Takeda, Janssen, Biogen Lecture fees: Galapagos Bossa F.: Advisory board per Janssen; Pfizer; Celgene; Galapagos; Takeda Bezzio C.: received lecture fees and served as a consultant for Takeda, MSD, Ferring, Galapagos and Janssen., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background and Aim: Postoperative recurrence (POR) following ileocolonic resection is a major concern in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). The role of ustekinumab (UST) in this setting is poorly known., Methods: All consecutive CD patients with a baseline colonoscopy at 6-12 months from ileocolonic resection showing POR (Rutgeerts score ≥ i2) who were treated with UST after the baseline colonoscopy and with an available post-treatment endoscopy, were extracted from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (SN-IBD). The primary outcome was endoscopic success, defined as reduction of at least one point of Rutgeerts score. The secondary outcome was clinical success, assessed at the end of follow-up. Reasons for clinical failure included mild clinical relapse (Harvey-Bradshaw index 5-7), clinically relevant relapse (Harvey-Bradshaw index > 7), and need for new resection., Results: Forty-four patients were included (mean follow-up: 17.8 ± 8.4 months). The baseline postoperative colonoscopy showed severe POR (Rutgeerts score i3 or i4) in 75.0% of patients. The post-treatment colonoscopy was performed after a mean of 14.5 ± 5.5 months following initiation of UST. Endoscopic success was reported in 22 out of 44 (50.0%) patients, of whom 12 (27.3%) achieved a Rutgeerts score i0 or i1. Clinical success at the end of follow-up was reported in 32 out of 44 patients (72.7%); none of the 12 patients with clinical failure had achieved endoscopic success at post-treatment colonoscopy., Conclusions: Ustekinumab could be a promising option for the treatment of POR of CD., (© 2023 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background: The effectiveness of Ustekinumab (UST) and Vedolizumab (VDZ) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) as third-line biologic therapies is unclear., Aims: We performed a multicentre, real-world assessment of the effectiveness of UST and VDZ among highly-refractory patients with CD., Methods: Data of consecutive patients with CD treated with UST and VDZ as third-line biologic therapy until December 2021 were extracted from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SN-IBD)., Results: 143 patients (UST: n = 113; VDZ: n = 30) were included. At the end of induction, the rates of clinical response (CR) were 61.9% for UST and 60.0% for VDZ (p = 1.00), with steroid-free clinical remission (SFCR) achieved in 38.1% of patients in the UST group and 43.3% of patients in the VDZ group (p = 0.75). After 52 weeks of observation, the rates of CR were 65.9% for UST and 71.4% for VDZ (p = 0.77), while the rates of SFCR were 51.8% for UST and 57.1% for VDZ (p = 0.78). At multiple Cox proportional hazard regression model, age (HR 0.98; p = 0.04) and need for systemic steroids at baseline (HR 3.29; p = 0.003) were found to be independent predictors of treatment discontinuation., Conclusions: Both VDZ and UST showed high effectiveness as third-line biologic therapy in CD, without significant differences between them., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Data from the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic suggested that patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are not at higher risk of being infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) than the general population and that a worse prognosis is not associated with immunomodulatory drugs, with the possible exception of systemic steroids., Methods: This retrospective, observational study included consecutive IBD patients from the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SN-IBD) cohort who had a SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis (polymerase chain reaction-confirmed presence of the viral genome in a nasopharyngeal swab) during the second COVID-19 pandemic wave (September 2020 to December 2020). Data regarding demographics, IBD features and treatments, and comorbidities were analyzed in correlation with COVID-19 clinical outcomes., Results: Data on 122 patients (mean age, 43.9 ± 16.7 years; males, 50.0%; Crohn's disease, 62.3%; ulcerative colitis, 37.7%) were reported. Twelve patients developed COVID-19-related pneumonia (9.8%), 4 (3.3%) required respiratory assistance (nonmechanical ventilation or orotracheal intubation), and 4 died (case fatality rate, 3.3%). In a multivariable analysis, age (odds ratio [OR], 1.034; 95% CI, 1.006-1.147; P = .032) and severe IBD activity (OR, 13.465; 95% CI, 1.104-164.182; P = .042) were independent predictors of COVID-19-related pneumonia, while severe IBD activity (OR, 15.359; 95% CI, 1.320-178.677; P = .030) was the only independent predictor of severe COVID-19, a composite endpoint defined as the need for respiratory assistance or death. A trend towards a protective role of tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors on pneumonia development was reported (P = .076)., Conclusions: In this cohort of patients with IBD and SARS-CoV-2 infection, severe IBD activity was the only independent risk factor for severe COVID-19., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The role of Vedolizumab (VDZ) as therapeutic option for the postoperative recurrence of Crohn's disease (CD) following ileocolonic resection is unknown., Aims: To assess the effectiveness of VDZ in this setting., Methods: All consecutive CD patients with a baseline colonoscopy at 6-12 months from the ileocolonic resection showing postoperative recurrence (Rutgeerts score ≥i2) and treated with VDZ after the baseline colonoscopy were extracted from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (SN-IBD). The primary outcome was endoscopic success, assessed at the first colonoscopy following initiation of VDZ and defined as reduction of at least one point of Rutgeerts score. The secondary outcome was clinical failure, assessed at one year and at the end of follow-up., Results: Fifty-eight patients were included (mean follow-up: 24.8 ± 13.1 months). Endoscopic success was reported in 47.6% of patients. Clinical failure was reported in 19.0% of patients at one year, and in 32.8% of patients at the end of follow-up. A new resection was required in 7 patients (12.1%)., Conclusions: VDZ may be an effective option for the treatment of postoperative recurrence of CD., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest None declared., (Copyright © 2021 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Adalimumab is used to treat ulcerative colitis, but additional effectiveness and safety data are needed., Patients and Methods: This retrospective study considered adults with ulcerative colitis treated with adalimumab at 19 hospitals. Clinical data were collected from the start of treatment, after 2, 6 and 12 months, and at the last visit. Outcome measures of effectiveness were treatment duration, reasons for discontinuation and colectomy., Results: We studied 381 patients treated with adalimumab for a median of 12.1 months. Disease activity at the start of treatment was moderate to severe in 262 cases (68.8%) and endoscopic activity was moderate to severe in 339 cases (89.0%). At week 8, clinical responses were observed in 177 cases (46.5%) and clinical remission in 136 cases (35.7%). At 12 months, remission was observed in 128 cases (33.6%). Overall, 44 patients required colectomy, and 170 patients (44.6%) were still taking adalimumab when data were collected. Variables associated with adalimumab discontinuation were concomitant steroid treatment, severe clinical-endoscopic activity at baseline, need for adalimumab intensification and drug-related adverse events. Variables associated with colectomy were concomitant steroid treatment and high baseline C-reactive protein., Conclusion: Adalimumab is safe and effective for the treatment of ulcerative colitis., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest None declared., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background and Aim: There are few clinical data on Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease. We aimed to perform a multicenter, observational, prospective study on safety and effectiveness of ADA biosimilar ABP 501 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease., Methods: All consecutive patients from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease treated with ADA biosimilar ABP 501 from February 2019 to February 2020 were enrolled. Patients were divided into three groups: group A, naïve to ADA and naïve to anti-tumor necrosis factors; group B, naïve to ADA and previously exposed to anti-tumor necrosis factors; and group C: switched from ADA originator to ABP 501., Results: A total of 559 patients (median age 39 years; Crohn's disease 88.0%, ulcerative colitis 12.0%) were included, with a follow-up time of 403.4 patient-years. Thirty-six serious adverse events occurred in 36 patients (6.4%; incidence rate [IR]: 8.9 per 100 person-years [PY]). The IR of serious adverse events was higher among patients in group A compared with group C (17.4 vs 4.8 per 100 PY; IR ratio = 3.61; P < 0.001) and among patients in group B compared with group C (16.4 vs 4.8 per 100 PY; IR ratio = 3.42; P = 0.041). Among ADA-naïve patients (group A + B), 188 (85.8%) had a clinical response after 12 weeks, including 165 (75.3%) who achieved steroid-free remission. Higher treatment persistence estimates were reported for patients in group C compared with groups A and B (log-rank P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Safety and effectiveness of ABP 501 seem to be overall similar to those reported for ADA originator. Switching from originator to ABP 501 was safe and effective., (© 2021 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background and Aim: Ustekinumab is approved in Europe for the treatment of moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD). Italian real-life data are scarce, so the aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in an Italian cohort of CD patients., Methods: Data of patients with CD who started using ustekinumab were extracted from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Primary end-points were steroid-free clinical remission at 8, 24, and 52 weeks of therapy and reduction of C-reactive protein. Secondary end-points were treatment response, treatment persistence at 12 months, and safety., Results: A total of 131 patients (males 56%; mean age 46 years ± 15) were included. All patients were biologics experienced except for one. At 24 and 52 weeks, 40% and 43% of patients achieved steroid-free clinical remission, and 64% and 62% had clinical response, respectively. At the end of follow-up, there was a significant reduction of steroid use ( P = 0.012) and of the Harvey-Bradshaw Index ( P = 0.001). The probability of persistence in therapy with ustekinumab after 12 months of treatment was 89%. The only factor associated with discontinuation was older age., Conclusions: Data from our real-life cohort of treatment-refractory CD patients suggest the satisfactory effectiveness and safety profile of ustekinumab., (© 2021 The Authors. JGH Open: An open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background: Few data exist regarding the long-term effectiveness of golimumab in ulcerative colitis. No data have been reported on real-world continuous clinical response., Objective: This study aimed to describe the long-term outcomes in a large cohort of patients on golimumab who had ulcerative colitis., Methods: Consecutive patients with active ulcerative colitis, started on golimumab, were enrolled and prospectively followed up. The primary end point was to evaluate the long-term persistence on golimumab therapy., Results: A total of 173 patients with ulcerative colitis were studied. Of these, 79.2% were steroid dependent, and 46.3% were naïve to anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha agents. The median duration of golimumab therapy was 52 weeks (range: 4-142 weeks). The cumulative probability of maintaining golimumab treatment was 47.3% and 22.5% at 54 and 108 weeks, respectively. Biological-naïve status (odds ratio [OR] = 3.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.44-6.29; p = 0.003) and being able to discontinue steroids at Week 8 (OR = 3.32, 95% CI: 1.34-8.30; p = 0.010) and Week 14 (OR = 2.94, 95% CI: 1.08-8.02; p = 0.036) were associated with longer persistence on therapy. At Week 54, 65/124 (52.4%) postinduction responders were in continuous clinical response. A continuous clinical response was associated with a lower likelihood of golimumab discontinuation throughout the subsequent year of therapy (p < 0.01). Overall, 40 (23.1%) patients were in clinical remission at the last follow-up visit. Twenty-six adverse events were recorded, leading to golimumab withdrawal in 9.2% of patients., Conclusions: Biological-naïve status and not requiring steroids at Weeks 8 and 14 seem to be associated with a longer persistence on golimumab therapy in ulcerative colitis., (© 2020 The Authors. United European Gastroenterology Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of United European Gastroenterology.)

Background: No data on the recently introduced infliximab (IFX) biosimilar SB2 in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are available., Methods: The Sicilian Prospective Observational Study of Patients With IBD Treated With Infliximab Biosimilar SB2 is a multicenter, observational, prospective study performed among the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease. All consecutive IBD patients starting the IFX biosimilar SB2 from its introduction in Sicily (March 2018) to September 2019 (18 months) were enrolled., Results: Two hundred seventy-six patients (Crohn disease: 49.3%, ulcerative colitis: 50.7%) were included: 127 (46.0%) were naïve to IFX and naïve to anti-tumor necrosis factor medications (anti-TNFs), 65 (23.5%) were naïve to IFX and previously exposed to anti-TNFs, 17 (6.2%) were switched from an IFX originator to SB2, 43 (15.6%) were switched from the biosimilar CT-P13 to SB2, and 24 (8.7%) were multiply switched (from IFX originator to CT-P13 to SB2). The cumulative number of infusions of SB2 was 1798, and the total follow-up time was 182.7 patient-years. Sixty-seven serious adverse events occurred in 57 patients (20.7%; incidence rate: 36.7 per 100 patient-year), and 31 of these events caused the withdrawal of the drug. The effectiveness after 8 weeks of treatment was evaluated in patients naïve to IFX (n = 192): 110 patients (57.3%) had steroid-free remission, while 56 patients had no response (29.2%). At the end of follow-up, 72 patients (26.1%) interrupted the treatment, without significant differences in treatment persistency estimations between the five groups (log-rank P = 0.15)., Conclusions: The safety and effectiveness of SB2 seem to be overall similar to those reported for the IFX originator and CT-P13., (© 2020 Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background and Aim: There are no head-to-head randomized controlled trials between biologics in Crohn's disease (CD). We aimed to perform a multicenter, real-life comparison of the effectiveness of vedolizumab (VDZ) and adalimumab (ADA) in CD., Methods: Data of consecutive patients with CD treated with VDZ and ADA from January 2016 to April 2019 were extracted from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease. The effectiveness was evaluated at 12, 52 weeks, and as failure-free survival at the end of follow up. Propensity score analysis was performed using the inverse probability of treatment weighting method., Results: Five hundred eighty-five treatments (VDZ: n = 277; ADA: n = 308) were included (median follow-up: 56.0 weeks). After 12 weeks, a clinical response was achieved in 64.3% patients treated with VDZ and in 83.1% patients treated with ADA (odds ratio [OR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-1.10, P = 0.107), while at 52 weeks, a clinical response was observed in 54.0% patients treated with VDZ and in 69.1% patients treated with ADA (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.45-1.31, P = 0.336). Cox survival analysis weighted for propensity score showed no significant difference in the probability of failure-free survival between the two drugs (hazard ratio = 1.20, 95% CI 0.83-1.74, P = 0.340). Post-treatment endoscopic response and mucosal healing rates were similar between the two groups (endoscopic response: 35.3% for VDZ and 25.5% for ADA, P = 0.15; mucosal healing: 31.8% for VDZ and 33.8% for ADA, P = 0.85)., Conclusions: In the first study comparing VDZ and ADA in CD via propensity score analysis, the drugs showed comparable effectiveness and a similar safety profile., (© 2020 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background and Aims: Restructuring activities have been necessary during the lockdown phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Few data are available on the post-lockdown phase in terms of health-care procedures in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care, and no data are available specifically from IBD units. We aimed to investigate how IBD management was restructured during the lockdown phase, the impact of the restructuring on standards of care and how Italian IBD units have managed post-lockdown activities., Methods: A web-based online survey was conducted in two phases (April and June 2020) among the Italian Group for IBD affiliated units within the entire country. We investigated preventive measures, the possibility of continuing scheduled visits/procedures/therapies because of COVID-19 and how units resumed activities in the post-lockdown phase., Results: Forty-two referral centres participated from all over Italy. During the COVID-19 lockdown, 36% of first visits and 7% of follow-up visits were regularly done, while >70% of follow-up scheduled visits and 5% of first visits were done virtually. About 25% of scheduled endoscopies and bowel ultrasound scans were done. More than 80% of biological therapies were done as scheduled. Compared to the pre-lockdown situation, 95% of centres modified management of outpatient activity, 93% of endoscopies, 59% of gastrointestinal ultrasounds and 33% of biological therapies. Resumption of activities after the lockdown phase may take three to six months to normalize. Virtual clinics, implementation of IBD pathways and facilities seem to be the main factors to improve care in the future., Conclusion: Italian IBD unit restructuring allowed quality standards of care during the COVID-19 pandemic to be maintained. A return to normal appears to be feasible and achievable relatively quickly. Some approaches, such as virtual clinics and identified IBD pathways, represent a valid starting point to improve IBD care in the post-COVID-19 era.

Background: Biologically naïve patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with vedolizumab (VDZ) are largely underrepresented in real-world cohorts. A multi-centre, observational cohort study was performed on the effectiveness and safety of VDZ in biologically naïve subjects with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)., Methods: Data of consecutive biologically naïve patients with CD and UC treated with VDZ from July 2016 to December 2019 were extracted from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease., Results: A total of 172 consecutive patients (CD: N  = 88; UC: N  = 84; median age 66.0 years) were included, with a median follow-up of 58.8 weeks. After 14 weeks, a clinical response was reported in 68.2% of patients with CD and 67.9% of patients with UC treated with VDZ, including 45.5% patients in the CD group and 46.4% patients in the UC group who achieved steroid-free remission. After 52 weeks, a clinical response was reported in 77.4% of CD and in 73.8% of UC patients treated with VDZ, including 59.7% patients in the CD group and 60.7% patients in the UC group who achieved steroid-free remission., Conclusions: This study demonstrates the effectiveness and safety of VDZ as a first-line biological, particularly among elderly patients.

Background: The effectiveness of Ustekinumab (UST) on Crohn's disease (CD)-associated spondyloarthropathy (SpA) is currently unknown., Research Design and Methods: All consecutive CD patients with active SpA at the initiation of the treatment with UST were extracted from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (SN-IBD). The primary outcome was the articular response at 8 and 24 weeks, defined as the disappearance of objective signs of arthritis (swelling and/or articular stiffness) and resolution of pain., Results: Thirty CD patients with active SpA at the initiation of the treatment with UST were assessed. At 24 weeks, 13 patients (43.3%) had an articular response, including 10/18 patients (55.5%) with peripheral SpA and 3/9 patients (33.3%) with axial and peripheral SpA. No patient with axial SpA experienced an articular response. The drop of mean as Harvey-Bradshaw Index values from baseline to week 24 was higher in patients with articular response compared with non-responders (3.8 ± 2.4 vs. 1.3 ± 2.8, p = 0.02)., Conclusions: Our real-world, multicentre experience showed that UST was able to obtain a response on articular symptoms in nearly half of the patients with CD and active SpA after 24 weeks of treatment.

Background: Golimumab is a new anti-TNF-alpha monoclonal antibody for patients with ulcerative colitis., Aims: To assess the short- and long-term effectiveness and safety of golimumab in daily clinical practice and to identify predictors of response., Methods: Consecutive patients treated with golimumab in 22 Italian centers were enrolled. Clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data were prospectively collected before and during treatment. A subgroup of patients completed a questionnaire to assess personal satisfaction with a golimumab autoinjector system., Results: A total of 196 patients were included. After 3 months, 130 patients were responders (66.3%) and showed significant reductions in mean partial, total, and endoscopic Mayo scores and in mean ESR, C-reactive protein, and fecal calprotectin levels (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that a higher total Mayo score (p < 0.001, OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.8) and naïve status to anti-TNF-alpha (p = 0.015, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.5) were predictive of a favorable response. Seventy-seven (39.3%) of the 130 responders maintained a response at month 12 of therapy. There were 17 adverse events, 28 patients needed hospitalization, and 15 patients underwent surgery. Self-administration of the drug was appreciated by most patients., Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of golimumab in daily clinical practice were confirmed for the short- and long-term treatment of patients with active ulcerative colitis. Patients naïve to the anti-TNF-alpha monoclonal antibody and those with a higher total Mayo score were more likely to respond to golimumab.

Background and Objective: Older people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) appear to have a lower response to anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy, with more frequent complications than younger patients. The objective of this study was to assess persistence on therapy and the safety of anti-TNF therapy in older patients (aged ≥ 60 years)., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the database of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (SN-IBD), extracting data regarding IBD patients aged ≥ 60 years and controls < 60 years of age at their first course of anti-TNF treatment. Data concerning persistence on therapy over the first year of treatment (primary objective) together with data on reasons for treatment withdrawal, concomitant diseases and treatments were collected., Results: We identified 114 anti-TNF-naϊve patients aged ≥ 60 years (median age 64 years, range 60-80 years; 47 males) compared with 330 younger controls aged < 60 years (median age 39 years, range 18-59 years; 57 males). Older patients with Crohn's disease (n = 73) showed a significantly lower persistence with every kind of anti-TNF therapy (whether analysed together [p < 0.001] or separately for intravenous and subcutaneous [SC] therapy) than younger controls, whereas older patients with ulcerative colitis (n = 41) showed a lower persistence when combining all kinds of anti-TNF treatment (p = 0.004) and for SC therapy. Secondary failures, infections, and neoplasias, but not primary failure, occurred more frequently in older IBD patients than in younger controls., Conclusion: Despite a comparable number of primary failures, older IBD patients treated for the first time with anti-TNF agents showed lower treatment persistence due to higher rates of secondary failure, adverse events, infections, and tumours than younger patients in the first year of follow-up. The reasons for this difference still remain unclear.

Background: Disease phenotype and outcome of late-onset Crohn's disease are still poorly defined., Methods: In this Italian nationwide multicentre retrospective study, patients diagnosed ≥65 years (late-onset) were compared with young adult-onset with 16-39 years and adult-onset Crohn's disease 40-64 years. Data were collected for 3 years following diagnosis., Results: A total of 631 patients (late-onset 153, adult-onset 161, young adult-onset 317) were included. Colonic disease was more frequent in late-onset (P < 0005), stenosing behaviour was more frequent than in adult-onset (P < 0003), but fistulising disease was uncommon. Surgery rates were not different between the three age groups. Systemic steroids were prescribed more frequently in young adult-onset in the first year, but low bioavailability steroids were used more frequently in late-onset in the first 2 years after diagnosis (P < 0.036, P < 0.041, respectively). The use of immunomodulators and anti-TNF's even in patients with more complicated disease, that is, B2 or B3 behaviour (Montreal classification), remained significantly inferior (P < 0.0001) in late-onset compared to young adult-onset. Age at diagnosis, Charlson comorbidity index, and steroid used in the first year were negatively associated with the use of immunomodulators and biologics. Comorbidities, related medications and hospitalizations were more frequent in late-onset. Polypharmacy was present in 56% of elderly Crohn's disease patients., Conclusion: Thirty-two percent of late-onset Crohn's disease presented with complicated disease behaviour. Despite a comparable use of steroids and surgery, immunomodulators and biologics were used in a small number of patients.

Background and Aims: There is an unmet need to better understand the effectiveness of different biologics in inflammatory bowel diseases. We aimed at performing a multicentre, real-life comparison of the effectiveness of infliximab [IFX] and adalimumab [ADA] in Crohn's disease [CD]., Methods: Data of consecutive patients with CD treated with IFX and ADA from January 2013 to May 2017 were extracted from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease. We used propensity score-matching accounting for the main baseline characteristics in TNF-α inhibitor-naïve and non-naïve patients., Results: A total of 632 patients [735 total treatments] were included. Among naïve patients, a clinical benefit [the sum of steroid-free remission plus clinical response] was achieved in 81.8% patients treated with ADA and in 77.6% patients treated with IFX (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.23, 95% CI 0.63-2-44, p = 0.547] at 12 weeks; after 1 year, a clinical benefit was achieved in 69.2% of patients treated with ADA and in 64.5% patients treated with IFX [adjusted OR: 1.10, 95% CI 0.61-1.96, p = 0.766]. Among non-naïve patients, a clinical benefit was achieved in 61.7% of patients treated with ADA and in 68.1% of patients treated with IFX [adjusted OR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.21-2.44, p = 0.600] at 12 weeks; after 1 year, a clinical benefit was achieved in 48.9% of patients treated with ADA and in 40.4% patients treated with IFX [adjusted OR: 1.23, 95% CI 0.54-2.86, p = 0.620]., Conclusions: In this propensity score-matched comparison of ADA and IFX in CD, both drugs showed high rates of clinical benefit, without significant differences between them.

Background: Adalimumab and golimumab are effective in the treatment of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis., Aims: We reported the comparative effectiveness of adalimumab and golimumab in ulcerative colitis., Methods: 118 patients treated with adalimumab and 79 treated with golimumab were included and evaluated at 8 weeks and at the end of follow up., Results: Overall clinical benefit was 72.6% at 8 weeks and 58.9% at the end of follow up. Patients with longer disease duration and those treated with adalimumab had a better outcome. Clinical benefit was 78.8% in adalimumab patients and 63.3% in golimumab patients (p = 0.026) after 8 weeks; it was 66.9% in adalimumab patients and 46.8% in golimumab patients (p = 0.008) at the end of follow up. These data were confirmed by propensity score analysis. A further analysis considering adalimumab optimization as treatment failure showed that the difference between adalimumab and golimumab was not significant., Conclusion: Adalimumab and golimumab are effective in the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Adalimumab seems to be more effective than golimumab. This difference is probably affected by the impossibility of golimumab to be optimized in Italy while adalimumab is., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The effectiveness of vedolizumab in real-world practice is under evaluation, while its role in inflammatory bowel disease-associated spondyloarthritis is still unclear., Aims: To report real-world data about the effectiveness of vedolizumab on intestinal and articular symptoms after 10 and 22 weeks of treatment., Methods: Web-based data from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SN-IBD) were extracted to perform a prospective multicentre observational study., Results: 163 patients (84 with Crohn's disease and 79 with ulcerative colitis) were included. At week 10, a steroid-free remission was achieved in 71 patients (43.6%), while at week 22 a steroid-free remission was obtained in 40.8% of patients. A response on articular symptoms was reported after 10 weeks of treatment in 17 out of 43 (39.5%) patients with active spondyloarthritis at baseline, and in 10 out of 22 (45.4%) patients at week 22. The only factor associated with articular response was the coexistence of clinical benefit on intestinal symptoms (at week 10: OR 8.471, p = 0.05; at week 22: OR 5.600, p = 0.08)., Conclusions: Vedolizumab showed good effectiveness after 10 and 22 weeks of treatment. A subset of patients reported improvement also on articular symptoms, probably as a consequence of the concomitant control of gut inflammation., (Copyright © 2018 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To assess the impact of short infliximab (IFX) infusion on hospital resource utilization and costs., Methods: All inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) patients who received IFX 1 h infusion from March 2007 to September 2014 in eight centers from Southern Italy were included in the analysis. Demographic, clinical and infusion related data were collected. The potential benefits related to the short infusion protocol were assessed both in terms of time saving and increased infusion unit capacity. In addition, indirect patient-related cost savings were evaluated., Results: One hundred and twenty-five patients were recruited (64 with ulcerative colitis and 61 with Crohn's disease). Median duration of disease was of 53 mo and mean age of pts at diagnosis was of 34 years (SD: ± 13). Adverse infusion reactions were reported in less than 4% both before and after short infusion. The total number of infusions across the selected centers was of 2501 (30.5% short infusions). In the analyzed cohort, 1143 h were saved (762 in the infusion and 381 in observation phases) through the rapid IFX infusion protocol. This time saving (-15% compared to the standard protocol in infusion phase) represents, from the hospital perspective, an opportunity to optimize infusion unit capacity by allocating the saved time in alternative cost-effective treatments. This is the case of opportunity cost that represents the value of forgone benefit which could be obtained from a resource in its next-best alternative use. Hence, an extra hour of infusion in the case of standard 2-h IFX represents a loss in opportunity to provide other cost effective services. The analysis showed that the short infusion increased the infusion units capacity up to 50% on days when the IFX infusions were scheduled (infusion phase). Furthermore, the analysis showed that the short IFX infusion protocol leads to time savings also in the post-infusion phase (observation) leading to a time saving of 10% on average among the analyzed centers. Finally, the short infusion protocol has been demonstrated to lead to indirect cost savings of €138/patient (average -€17.300 on the whole cohort)., Conclusion: A short IFX infusion protocol can be considered time and cost saving in comparison to the standard infusion protocol both from the hospital's perspective, as it contributes to increase infusion units capacity, and the patients' perspective, as it reduces indirect costs and the impact of treatment on everyday life and work productivity., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interests. None of the authors have any financial or other relations that could lead to a conflict of interest.

Background: Late-onset UC represents an important issue for the near future, but its outcomes and relative therapeutic strategies are yet poorly studied., Aim: To better define the natural history of late-onset ulcerative colitis., Methods: In a multicenter retrospective study, we investigated the disease presentation and course in the first 3 years in 1091 UC patients divided into 3 age-groups: diagnosis ≥65years, 40-64 years, and <40years. Disease patterns, medical and surgical therapies, and risk factors for disease outcomes were analyzed., Results: Chronic active or relapsing disease accounts for 44% of patients with late-onset UC. Across all age-groups, these disease patterns require 3-6 times more steroids than remitting disease, but immunomodulators and, to a lesser extent, biologics are less frequently prescribed in the elderly. Advanced age, concomitant diseases and related therapies were found to be inversely associated with the use of immunomodulators or biologics, but not with surgery., Conclusions: The conclusion that late-onset UC follows a mild course may apply only to a subset of patients. an important percentage of elderly patients present with more aggressive disease. Since steroid use and surgery rates did not differ in this subgroup, lower use of immunosuppressive therapy and biologics may reflect concerns in prescribing these therapies in the elderly., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Parastomal hernia is an incisional hernia related to an abdominal wall stoma. The incidence ranges from 5 to 50% and only 10% of these require surgical treatment. The authors propose an innovative surgical technique for treatment of parastomal hernia. Many kinds of repair for paracolostomal hernias have been proposed: simple fascia repair, stoma relocation and repair with prosthetic devices. We describe a successful local repair and a new approach to treat this defect using a polypropylene mesh.

Biofeedback is an important therapeutic option in patients with outlet dysfunction. A total of 75 patients referred to our proctological division from March 2004 to June 2008 and complaining of chronic constipation were studied by history, physical examination, anorectal functional tests and a structured questionnaire. Patients were treated with biofeedback plus electrical stimulation or both biofeedback plus electrical stimulation and surgery. Sixty of the 75 patients were treated with biofeedback only; and 15 with both treatments. All patients underwent, on average, twice weekly 15-minute EMG-biofeedback training sessions followed by 5 minutes of electrical stimulation. At 6 months' follow-up all physiological parameters with the exception of anal squeeze pressure showed a significant improvement (p < 0.05); there were reductions in sensation of incomplete evacuation (from 72 to 29.3 percent), in difficult stool passage (from 76 to 18.7 percent), and in the use of laxatives, enemas or digital manoeuvres (from 88 to 40 percent). At a telephone follow-up at 1 year, an improvement in satisfaction was reported by 77.3% of patients (58/75). The results of this study confirm that biofeedback plus electrical stimulation produces an improvement in bowel symptoms in patients with outlet dysfunction, as well as underlining the importance of anorectal functional tests as a guide to the most appropriate treatment.

Biofeedback combined with electrical stimulation is an appealing conservative therapeutic option in patients with faecal incontinence. A total of 51 patients with faecal incontinence referred to our proctological division from March 2004 to June 2008 were studied. All patients were treated with biofeedback plus electrical stimulation. All patients underwent, on average, twice-weekly 15-minute electromyography-biofeedback training sessions followed by 5 minutes of electrical stimulation. Patients satisfaction, physiological data, clinical symptoms and a modified Wexner score were used to assess improvement. At 6 months' follow-up, nearly all physiological parameters showed a significant improvement (p < 0.05) and there was a reduction in the loss of solid stool (from 78.4 to 27.5 percent), in the loss of liquid stool (from 100 to 29.4 percent), and in pad usage (from 74.5 to 17.6 percent). At 1-year follow-up, an improvement in satisfaction was reported by 41/51 of patients (80.4%). This study suggests that biofeedback plus electrical stimulation leads to a substantial improvement in faecal incontinence symptoms and underlines the importance of anorectal functional tests to examine and guide the management of patients with faecal incontinence.

This article describes and discusses a successfully treated case of a primary posterior perineal hernia which is a rare cause of outlet dysfunction. A 46-year-old female patient had a 6 cm left para-anal protrusion and a 7-year history of outlet dysfunction. The perineal hernia orifice was closed via an abdominal approach using both a polypropylene mesh and a Parietex Composite Net. A rectopexy to the promontory of the sacrum was then performed. Moreover, after 6 months' follow-up, the patient presented a sense of incomplete evacuation and underwent a prolassectomy to treat a hidden rectal prolapse. This clinical case shows that the surgical treatment of a pelvic pathology can be successful for the correction of a serious functional defect such as outlet dysfunction.

Outlet dysfunction is responsible for 25% of all cases of chronic constipation. The aim of this article was to report our outcomes and investigate the efficacy of the different treatments that we have adopted to solve it. One hundred and twenty-six patients were treated with either surgery and/or biofeedback therapy. Ninety-seven of the 126 patients underwent surgery; 48 with hidden rectal prolapse: 44 underwent a stapled transanal rectal resection using a double stapler PPH-01 and 4 a single stapler PPH-01; 31 with rectocele and 18 with both hidden rectal prolapse and rectocele, respectively, underwent a stapled transanal rectal resection using a double stapler PPH-01. Thirteen of 97 patients showing outlet dysfunction in spite of surgery progressed to biofeedback therapy. 29 of the 126 patients were treated with biofeedback training only. Surgery helped 51.6% of treated for rectocele, 75% of those treated for hidden rectal prolapse, and 78% of patients treated for both rectocele and hidden rectal prolapse, respectively. Approximately 80% of patients treated with biofeedback alone and 67.8% of those treated with both surgery and biofeedback reported an improvement, respectively. Treatment of the outlet dysfunction can be difficult. The therapeutic option chosen for each subject in spite of a careful functional patient examination may not prove to be the most appropriate one. Our experience suggests that the surgery of the obstructed defecation could achieve better outcomes if a course of biofeedback therapy precedes it, above all in patients with both organic and functional disorders, and the repair of rectocele with stapled transanal rectal resection fails to resolve the outlet dysfunction in several cases.