Risk factors for tuberculosis in inflammatory bowel disease: anti-tumor necrosis factor and hospitalization

Aims: To determine risk factors for active tuberculosis in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases. Methods: Retrospective, case-control study at 4 referral hospitals in Spain. Cases developed tuberculosis after a diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease. Controls were inflammatory bowel disease patients who did not develop tuberculosis. For each case, we randomly selected 3 controls matched for sex, age (within 5 years) and time of inflammatory bowel disease diagnosis (within 3 years). Inflammatory bowel disease characteristics, candidate risk factors for tuberculosis and information about the tuberculosis episode were recorded. Multivariate analysis and a Chi-squared automatic interaction detector were used. Results: Thirty-four cases and 102 controls were included. Nine of the 34 cases developed active tuberculosis between 1989 and 1999, and 25 became ill between 2000 and 2012. Multivariate regression showed an association between active tuberculosis and anti-TNF (tumor necrosis factor) therapy in the previous 12 months (OR 7.45; 95% CI, 2.39-23.12; p = 0.001); hospitalization in the previous 6 months (OR 4.38; 95% CI, 1.18-16.20; p = 0.027); and albumin levels (OR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81-0.95; p = 0.001). The median time between the start of biologic therapy and the onset of active tuberculosis was 13 (interquartile range, 1-58) months. Tuberculosis developed after a year of anti-TNF therapy in 53%, and late reactivation occurred in at least 3 of 8 patients. Conclusions: The main risks factors for developing tuberculosis were anti-TNF therapy and hospitalization. Over half the cases related to anti-TNF treatment occurred after a year (AU)

No disponible

Continuous reporting of new cases in Spain supports the relationship between Herbalife® products and liver injury.

PURPOSE: Previous publications have linked Herbalife® products to hepatotoxicity. The identification of earlier cases in which the culprit agent could not be established raised the hypothesis of a possible contamination of some specific batches of Herbalife products. METHODS: We searched the Spanish Pharmacovigilance Centres' database of adverse reactions for reports of liver injury associated with the use of Herbalife products from 2003, when the first case was submitted, through September 2010. RESULTS: The search resulted in 20 reports of liver damage (mean age, 49 years; 16 women), with 12 patients (60%) requiring hospitalization. Hepatocellular damage predominated, and nine (53%) of the hepatocellular cases with bilirubin values were jaundiced, fulfilling the Hy's law criteria, which increases the risk for serious outcomes. Two patients experienced a positive rechallenge. One patient developed cirrhosis, whereas all the others recovered. Causality assessment by the Karch and Lasagna modified algorithm showed a category of definite in 1 case, probable in 14, and possible in 5. Analysis of the different Herbalife products that each patient had taken did not enable us to identify any commonly known hepatotoxic ingredient. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the relationship between the consumption of Herbalife products and hepatotoxicity, underscore the concern regarding the liver-related safety of this dietary supplement, and emphasize the need to establish further regulatory measures.

Performance of different microsatellite marker panels for detection of mismatch repair-deficient colorectal tumors.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal tumors caused by failure of the DNA mismatch repair system commonly show microsatellite instability. Our goals were to compare the performance of two panels of markers (a panel previously recommended by the National Cancer Institute [NCI] and a pentaplex of mononucleotide repeats) and to devise the simplest diagnostic strategy for identification of patients with colorectal cancer characterized by defects in mismatch repair. METHODS: We recruited 1058 patients who were newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer. DNA from fresh-frozen and paraffin-embedded tumors was tested for microsatellite instability, using the NCI-recommended panel of microsatellite markers and the pentaplex panel of mononucleotide repeats, respectively, as templates for polymerase chain reactions (PCRs). Microsatellite instability in fresh-frozen tumors was also assessed using the pentaplex panel of mononucleotides in a crossover analysis. The expression of mismatch repair proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2) in the tumors was determined immunohistochemically. The sensitivity and specificity with which the marker panels identified tumors with deficiencies in the expression of mismatch repair proteins were calculated. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: The sensitivity and positive predictive value of the NCI panel were 76.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 61% to 92%) and 65.0% (95% CI = 49% to 81%), respectively; corresponding values for the mononucleotide pentaplex panel were 95.8% (95% CI = 89% to 103%) and 88.5% (95% CI = 79% to 98%), respectively. A panel consisting of the mononucleotide repeat markers BAT26 and NR24 alone had the same predictive value as the pentaplex panel of mononucleotide repeats. CONCLUSIONS: The pentaplex panel of mononucleotide repeats performs better than the NCI panel for the detection of mismatch repair-deficient tumors. Simultaneous assessment of the instability of BAT26 and NR24 is as effective as use of the pentaplex panel for diagnosing mismatch repair deficiency.

Diagnostic value of distal colonic polyps for prediction of advanced proximal neoplasia in an average-risk population undergoing screening colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: For colorectal cancer screening, the predictive value of distal findings in the ascertainment of proximal lesions is not fully established. The aims of this study were to assess distal findings as predictors of advanced proximal neoplasia and to compare the predictive value of endoscopy alone vs. combined endoscopic and histopathologic data. METHODS: Primary colonoscopy screening was performed in 2210 consecutive, average-risk adults. Age, gender, endoscopic (size, number of polyps), and histopathologic distal findings were used as potential predictors of advanced proximal neoplasms (i.e., any adenoma > or =1 cm in size, and/or with villous histology, and/or with severe dysplasia or invasive cancer). Polyps were defined as distal if located in the descending colon, the sigmoid colon, or the rectum. Those in other locations were designated proximal. RESULTS: Neoplastic lesions, including 11 invasive cancers, were found in 617 (27.9%) patients. Advanced proximal neoplasms without any distal adenoma were present in 1.3% of patients. Of the advanced proximal lesions, 39% were not associated with any distal polyp. Older age, male gender, and distal adenoma were independent predictors of advanced proximal neoplasms. The predictive ability of a model with endoscopic data alone did not improve after inclusion of histopathologic data. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the predictive ability of models that use age, gender, and any combination of distal findings was relatively low. The proportion of advanced proximal neoplasms identified if any distal polyp was an indication for colonoscopy was only 62%. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy in which colonoscopy is performed solely in patients with distal colonic findings is not effective screening for the detection of advanced proximal neoplasms in an average-risk population.

Use of colonoscopy as a primary screening test for colorectal cancer in average risk people.

OBJECTIVE: The use of colonoscopy as a primary screening test for colorectal cancer (CRC) in average risk adults is a subject of controversy. Our primary objective was to build a predictive model based on a few simple variables that could be used as a guide for identifying average risk adults more suitable for examination with colonoscopy as a primary screening test. METHODS: The prevalence of advanced adenomas was assessed by primary screening colonoscopy in 2210 consecutive adults at least 40 yr old, without known risk factors for CRC. Age, gender, and clinical and biochemical data were compared among people without adenomas, those with non-advanced adenomas, and those with any advanced neoplasm. A combined score to assess the risk of advanced adenomas was built with the variables selected by multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Neoplastic lesions were found in 617 subjects (27.9%), including 259 with at least one neoplasm that was 10 mm or larger, villous, or with moderate-to-severe dysplasia, and 11 with invasive cancers. Advanced lesions were more frequent among men, older people, and those with a higher body mass index (BMI). These three variables were independent predictors of advanced adenomas in multivariate analysis. A score combining age, sex, and BMI was developed as a guide for identifying individuals more suitable for screening colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Age, gender, and BMI can be used to build a simple score to select those average risk adults who might be candidates for primary screening colonoscopy.