Rationalizing polyp matching criteria in colon capsule endoscopy: an international expert consensus through RAND (modified DELPHI) process.

Background: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has gained momentum as an alternative modality for the investigation of the lower gastrointestinal tract. Of the few challenges that remain, the comparison and - eventually - matching of polyps at different timestamps leads to the potential for double reporting and can contribute to false-positive findings and inaccuracies. With the impending artificial intelligence integration, the risk of double reporting the same polyp due to the lack of information on spatial orientation underscores the necessity for establishing criteria for polyp matching. Objectives: This RAND/University of California, Los Angeles (modified Delphi) process aims to identify the key factors or components used to match polyps within a CCE video. This involves exploring the attributes of each factor to create comprehensive polyp-matching criteria based on international expert consensus. Design: A systematic qualitative study using surveys. Methods: A panel of 11 international CCE experts convened to assess a survey comprised of 60 statements. Participants anonymously rated statement appropriateness on a 1-9 scale (1-3: inappropriate, 4-6: uncertain and 7-9: appropriate). Following a virtual group discussion of the Round 1 results, a Round 2 survey was developed and completed before the final analysis. Results: The factors that were agreed to be essential for polyp matching include (1) timestamp, (2) polyp localization, (3) polyp vascular pattern, (4) polyp size, (5) time interval of the polyp appearance between the green and yellow camera, (6) surrounding tissue, (7) polyp morphology and (8) polyp surface and contour. When five or more factors are satisfied, it was agreed that the comparing polyps are likely the same polyp. Conclusion: This study has established the first complete criteria for polyp matching in CCE. While it might not provide a definitive solution for matching difficult, small and common polyps, these criteria serve as a framework to guide and facilitate the process of polyp-matching.

Creating criteria and standards for matching polyps (abnormal growth in the bowels) on colon capsule video analysis: an international expert agreement using the RAND (modified Delphi process) process Background: Doctors often use colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), a high-tech capsule with two cameras, to record and check for diseases in the small and large bowels as the capsule travels through the intestines. One of the most common conditions in the large bowel is polyps, which are abnormal growths in the lining of the bowel. Comparing and matching polyps in the same video from the capsule can be tricky as they look very similar, leading to the possibility of incorrectly reporting the same polyp twice or more. This can lead to wrong results and inaccuracies. The literature did not have any criteria or standards for matching polyps in CCE before. Aim: Using the RAND/UCLA (modified Delphi) process, this study aims to identify the key factors or components used to match polyps within a CCE video. The goal is to explore each factor and create complete criteria for polyp matching based on the agreement from international experts. Method: A group of 11 international CCE experts came together to evaluate a survey with 60 statements. They anonymously rated each statement on a scale from 1 to 9 (1-3: inappropriate, 4-6: uncertain, and 7-9: appropriate). After discussing the Round 1 results virtually, a Round 2 survey with the same but revised questions was created and completed before the final analysis of their agreement. Results: The main factors for matching polyps are 1) the timing when the polyp was seen, 2) where it is in the bowel, 3) its blood vessel pattern, 4) size, 5) the timing of its appearance between cameras, 6) surrounding tissue features, 7) its shape, and 8) surface features. If five or more of these factors match, the compared polyps are likely the same. Conclusion: This study establishes the first complete criteria for matching polyps in CCE. While it may not provide a definitive solution for matching challenging and small polyps, these criteria serve as a guide to help and make the process of polyp matching easier.

Two-year real-world outcome data from a single tertiary centre shows reduced ustekinumab persistence in a non-bio-naïve Crohn's disease cohort with penetrating disease, -ostomies and sarcopenia.

Background: Ustekinumab was approved in 2016 for the treatment of moderate-severe Crohn's disease (CD). Clinical trials and real-world studies have suggested ustekinumab to be a safe and effective treatment; however, studies to date infrequently use imaging techniques to predict response to biologics in CD. Objectives: We assessed the 2-year real-world effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in a tertiary CD cohort with the use of novel imaging techniques. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Methods: Retrospective data were collected between 2016 and 2021. Study end points included ustekinumab persistence, biological and/or clinical response and remission at 12, 18 and 24 months. Statistical analysis included demographic and inferential analyses. Results: In all, 131 CD patients [57.3% female, median age of 26.0 (21.0-37.0)] were included. Patients were non-bio naïve, and the majority received ustekinumab as third- or fourth-line treatment. At 24 months, 61.0% (80/131) persisted with ustekinumab [52.7% (69/131) steroid free]. Clinical response was reported in 55.2% (37/67), clinical remission in 85.7% (57/67), biological response in 46.8% (22/47) and biological remission in 31.9% (15/47) of patients at 24 months. The low outcome numbers were attributable to missing data. Improvements in routine disease markers, including C-reactive protein and Harvey-Bradshaw Index, were also reflected in magnetic resonance imaging-derived disease scores. The presence of penetrating CD, an -ostomy and sarcopenia were all predictors of poorer ustekinumab outcomes (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Ustekinumab is effective in non-bio-naïve CD patients with non-stricturing, non-penetrating disease with an unremarkable safety profile but may be less effective in those with penetrating disease, -ostomies and sarcopenia.

Comparative effectiveness of a second-line biologic in patients with ulcerative colitis: vedolizumab followed by an anti-TNF versus anti-TNF followed by vedolizumab.

Background: Sequential drug treatment with biological agents in ulcerative colitis (UC) is becoming increasingly complex. There are few studies comparing head-to-head outcomes in second-line treatments. The study assesses whether using anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF)-α therapy following the α4ß7 integrin blocker vedolizumab (VDZ) or VDZ after an anti-TNF has more favourable clinical outcomes in UC in a real-world outpatient setting. Methods: Patients with UC who were exposed to first-line anti-TNF (adalimumab or infliximab) or VDZ who subsequently switched to the alternate class between May 2013 and August 2020 were identified by reviewing patient databases at 10 hospitals. Data were collected retrospectively using patient records. Baseline demographics, disease activity indices, biochemical markers, endoscopic Mayo score, colectomy rates, treatment persistence and urgent hospital utilisation composite endpoint (UHUC) rates were examined over a 52-week period. Results: Second-line week 52 treatment persistence was higher in the VDZ group (71/81, 89%) versus the anti-TNF group (15/34, 44%; p=0.0001), as were week 52 colectomy-free survival (VDZ: 77/80, 96%, vs anti-TNF: 26/32, 81%; p=0.009), week 52 UHUC survival (VDZ: 68/84, 81%, vs anti-TNF: 20/34, 59%; p=0.002) and week 52 corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CFCR) rates (VDZ: 22/34, 65%, vs anti-TNF: 4/20, 20%; p=0.001). Conclusion: Compared with second-line anti TNF usage, the VDZ second-line cohort had significantly higher 52-week treatment persistence, UHUC survival, higher colectomy-free survival rates and higher week 52 CFCR. These data suggest that VDZ is an effective biologic in UC as a second-line therapy after anti-TNF exposure. It highlights the effect of biological order on clinically important outcomes.

Assessment of steroid use as a key performance indicator in inflammatory bowel disease-analysis of data from 2385 UK patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with IBD are at risk of excess corticosteroids. AIMS: To assess steroid excess in a large IBD cohort and test associations with quality improvement and prescribing. METHODS: Steroid exposure was recorded for outpatients attending 19 centres and associated factors analysed. Measures taken to avoid excess were assessed. RESULTS: Of 2385 patients, 28% received steroids in the preceding 12 months. 14.8% had steroid excess or dependency. Steroid use was significantly lower at 'intervention centres' which participated in a quality improvement programme (exposure: 23.8% vs 31.0%, P < .001; excess 11.5% vs 17.1%, P < .001). At intervention centres, steroid use fell from 2015 to 2017 (steroid exposure 30.0%-23.8%, P = .003; steroid excess 13.8%-11.5%, P = .17). Steroid excess was judged avoidable in 50.7%. Factors independently associated with reduced steroid excess in Crohn's disease included maintenance with anti-TNF agents (OR 0.61 [95% CI 0.24-0.95]), treatment in a centre with a multi-disciplinary team (OR 0.54 [95% CI 0.20-0.86]) and treatment at an intervention centre (OR 0.72 [95% CI 0.46-0.97]). Treatment with 5-ASA in CD was associated with higher rates of steroid excess (OR 1.72 [95% CI 1.24-2.09]). In ulcerative colitis (UC), thiopurine monotherapy was associated with steroid excess (OR 1.97 [95% CI 1.19-3.01]) and treatment at an intervention centre with less steroid excess (OR 0.72 [95% CI 0.45-0.95]). CONCLUSIONS: This study validates steroid assessment as a meaningful quality measure and provides a benchmark for this performance indicator in a large cohort. A programme of quality improvement was associated with lower steroid use.

Elevated liver enzymes in inflammatory bowel disease: the role and safety of infliximab.

BACKGROUND: Abnormal liver enzymes are frequently encountered in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Infliximab has been implicated in inducing drug-induced liver injury, autoimmune hepatitis or reactivation of hepatitis B virus. We aimed to clarify the role of infliximab in liver impairment in an IBD cohort. STUDY: A total of 305 patients with IBD, without evidence of chronic liver disease, were included in the study and retrospectively evaluated. Laboratory and clinical data were retrieved from a prospectively acquired database. In all, 176 consecutive patients treated with infliximab during the last 5 years were compared with a matched population of 129 patients who did not receive any antitumour necrosis factor treatment. RESULTS: Elevation of alanine transaminase (ALT) was frequent in the entire population (36.4%) and it was not significantly associated with the use of infliximab (P=0.284). Elevations more than 3 upper limit of normal were observed in 7.9% and these resolved spontaneously in 83%. The use of immunomodulators was the only factor that was significantly associated with liver enzyme abnormalities in multivariate analysis [odds ratio (OR) 2.666, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.576-4.511, P<0.005]. Overall, 39% of patients on infliximab had elevated liver enzymes and this was associated with increased ALT before starting infliximab (OR 3.854, 95% CI 1.800-8.251, P=0.001) and with longer duration of infliximab treatment (OR 1.030, 95% CI 1.013-1.047, P=0.001). CONCLUSION: Elevated liver enzymes are frequently found in IBD patients and they usually resolve spontaneously. The use of immunomodulators was independently associated with increased ALT. Infliximab is relatively safe in terms of liver impairment and discontinuation of treatment is rarely required in the setting of modest elevations of ALT.

Incidence and Severity of Prepouch Ileitis: A Distinct Disease Entity or a Manifestation of Refractory Pouchitis?

BACKGROUND: Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the operation of choice for patients with treatment-refractory ulcerative colitis. However, after this intervention, up to 50% of patients develop pouchitis. Moreover, a subgroup will also develop inflammation in the afferent ileum proximal to the pouch, a condition named prepouch ileitis (PI). METHODS: Data on 546 patients who underwent ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis were retrospectively collected from 3 tertiary inflammatory bowel disease referral centers in the Netherlands, Belgium, and England. PI was considered present if there was endoscopic and histological inflammation in the afferent limb proximal to the pouch. Crohn's disease was excluded by reviewing the histology of colectomy resection specimens. RESULTS: PI was present in 33/546 (6%) patients and all of these had concurrent pouchitis. One hundred forty-four (26%) patients had pouchitis without PI and 369 (68%) patients did not have inflammatory pouch disease. Of the 33 patients with PI, 6 (18%) received no specific treatment, 9 (27%) responded to antibiotics, and 18 (54%) required escalation in therapy to steroids/immunomodulators or anti-tumor necrosis factor agents. Potent immunosuppressive treatment was required more frequently in patients with PI than those with pouchitis alone. CONCLUSIONS: PI is less common and more treatment refractory than pouchitis alone. Once PI is diagnosed, clinicians should be aware that response to antibiotic therapy is less likely than in pouchitis alone. Immunomodulatory therapy and escalation to anti-tumor necrosis factor agents should be considered early in cases of nonresponse. The suggestion that PI represents misdiagnosed Crohn's disease could not be substantiated in our cohort.

Anti-tumour necrosis factor agent and liver injury: literature review, recommendations for management.

Abnormalities in liver function tests, including transient and self-limiting hypertransaminasemia, cholestatic disease and hepatitis, can develop during treatment with anti-tumour-necrosis-factor (TNF) therapy. The optimal management of liver injury related to anti-TNF therapy is still a matter of debate. Although some authors recommend discontinuing treatment in case of both a rise of alanine aminotransferase more than 5 times the upper limit of normal, or the occurrence of jaundice, there are no standard guidelines for the management of anti-TNF-related liver injury. Bibliographical searches were performed in PubMed, using the following key words: inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); TNF inhibitors; hypertransaminasemia; drug-related liver injury; infliximab. According to published data, elevation of transaminases in patients with IBD treated with anti-TNF is a common finding, but resolution appears to be the usual outcome. Anti-TNF agents seem to be safe with a low risk of causing severe drug-related liver injury. According to our centre experience, we found that hypertransaminasemia was a common, mainly self-limiting finding in our IBD cohort and was not correlated to infliximab treatment on both univariate and multivariate analyses. An algorithm for the management of liver impairment occurring during anti-TNF treatment is also proposed and this highlights the need of a multidisciplinary approach and suggests liver biopsy as a key-point in the management decision in case of severe rise of transaminases. However, hepatic injury is generally self-limiting and drug withdrawal seems to be an exception.

Inflammation-based scores do not predict post-transplant recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients within Milan criteria.

Increased preoperative inflammation scores, such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and inflammation-based index (IBI) have been related to post-transplant HCC recurrence. We evaluated the association between inflammation-based scores (NLR, PLR, IBI) and post-LT HCC recurrence as well as tumor necrosis after transarterial embolization. 150 consecutive patients who underwent transplantation for HCC within the Milan criteria between 1996 and 2010 were included; data regarding inflammatory markers, patient and tumor characteristics were analyzed. NLR, PLR, and IBI were not significantly associated with post-LT HCC recurrence or worse overall survival. Increased NLR and PLR were associated with complete tumor necrosis in the subset of patients who received preoperative transarterial embolization (P < 0.05). Cox regression analysis revealed that absence of neoadjuvant transarterial therapy (OR = 4.33, 95% CI = 1.28-14.64; P = 0.02) and no fulfillment of the Milan criteria in the explanted liver (OR = 3.34, 95% CI = 1.08-10.35; P = 0.04) were independently associated with post-LT HCC recurrence inflammation-based scores did not predict HCC recurrence post-LT in our group of patients. NLR and PLR were associated with better response to TAE, as this was recorded histologically in the explanted liver. Histological fulfillment of the Milan criteria and absence of neoadjuvant transarterial treatment were significantly associated with post-LT HCC recurrence.