Patient self-reported symptoms using visual analog scales are useful to estimate endoscopic activity in ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: In clinical practice, colonoscopy has been regarded as the gold standard for the evaluation of disease severity as well as mucosal healing in ulcerative colitis (UC). Some activity indices incorporating patient symptoms as parameters have been shown to reflect the endoscopic activity of UC. The aim of this study was to examine whether self-reported symptoms with visual analog scales (VAS) can predict endoscopic activity. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 150 UC patients who underwent colonoscopy with submission of VAS scores of 4 symptoms: general condition, bloody stools, stool form, and abdominal pain (0: no symptoms, 10: the most severe symptoms). Each VAS score was compared with colonoscopic activity assessed with the Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES). RESULTS: All VAS scores were significantly correlated with the endoscopic severity (Spearman correlation coefficients of general condition, bloody stools, stool form, and abdominal pain: 0.63, 0.64, 0.58, and 0.43, respectively). Mucosal healing defined as MES 0 alone was predicted by VAS score <1.5 on general condition or 0 on bloody stools with sensitivity of 0.84 and 0.76 and specificity of 0.66 and 0.76, respectively. Additionally, VAS score <2.5 on stool form predicted active lesions in distal colorectum alone with sensitivity of 0.67 and specificity of 0.66, suggesting that this item could predict the indication of topical therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported VAS scores on symptoms were correlated with endoscopic activity of UC. To clarify the relationship between VAS and mucosal healing, further validation studies are needed.

Short- and long-term efficacy of adalimumab salvage therapy after failure of calcineurin inhibitors in steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis.

OBJECTIVE: Calcineurin inhibitors are highly effective in patients with corticosteroid-refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). When therapy with calcineurin inhibitors fails, adalimumab can be considered to avoid colectomy. The efficacy and safety of this sequential alternative salvage therapy remain unknown. Therefore, the present study was performed to investigate the short- and long-term efficacy and safety of adalimumab after failure of calcineurin inhibitors in corticosteroid-refractory UC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a corticosteroid-refractory flare of UC who did not respond to calcineurin inhibitors and received continuing salvage therapy with adalimumab were included in this retrospective, observational, single-centre study. The cumulative rates of colectomy were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Clinical remission and response were evaluated based on the Rachmilewitz index. The cumulative rates of colectomy were calculated. Predictive factors for clinical remission and colectomy were identified. In the safety evaluation, any adverse event occurring after the administration of adalimumab was considered. RESULTS: Forty-one patients were enrolled; 78% had extensive colitis and 87% had moderate to severe colitis. Seventeen patients (41%) underwent colectomy during the follow-up period. At week 8, 26, and 52 after adalimumab injection, 27%, 39%, and 32% of patients achieved clinical remission, respectively. The adverse event rate was 17%, including one case of tuberculosis. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of adalimumab for calcineurin inhibitor-refractory UC was examined for the first time. Treatment with adalimumab avoided the need for colectomy in two-thirds of patients with corticosteroid-refractory UC in whom calcineurin inhibitors had failed. However, attention is needed to avoid adverse events, especially infection.

Blood biomarkers reflect integration of severity and extent of endoscopic inflammation in ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Blood markers are not always regarded as satisfactory surrogate biomarkers for predicting endoscopic activity in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, those biomarkers have been evaluated solely based on endoscopic activity at the most severe colorectal location, taking no account of the extent of inflammation. This study aimed to examine whether integrated evaluation of severity and extent of endoscopic activity improves the performance of blood biomarkers for UC. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of UC patients who underwent colonoscopy and blood tests in our hospital. Blood tests were C-reactive protein (CRP), serum albumin (ALB), and platelet count (PLT). We compared blood markers with two versions of endoscopic activity assessed by Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES): the maximum score of MES in the colorectum (mMES, range: 0-3) and the cumulative score of MES of six colorectal regions (cMES, range: 0-18). RESULTS: All three blood markers correlated well with both mMES and cMES, and each marker showed better correlation with cMES than mMES (Spearman rank correlation coefficient: PLT: 0.54 vs 0.47, ALB: -0.65 vs -0.52, and CRP: 0.52 vs 0.38, respectively). The predictability, including sensitivity and specificity, of each marker for endoscopic activity was also better for cMES, resulting in higher degrees of area under the curve (mMES vs cMES: PLT: 0.75 vs 0.83, ALB: 0.77 vs 0.90, and CRP: 0.75 vs 0.90, respectively). CONCLUSION: When incorporating the extent of inflammation, blood markers are better at predicting endoscopic activity of UC than previously considered and could be used as a reliable biomarker in clinical practice.