Bhattacharya, Abhik

ObjectiveSpondyloarthritis (SpA) is the most common extraintestinal manifestation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The application of screening tools to detect SpA in patients with IBD may lead to earlier recognition of SpA and affect treatment decisions.MethodsA combination of two previously described SpA screening questionnaires, the Detection of Arthritis in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (DETAIL) and IBD Identification of Spondyloarthritis Questionnaire (IBIS‐Q), was administered to consecutive patients with IBD attending IBD specialty clinics in six US academic medical centers. Demographic data, IBD, and rheumatology history were extracted by chart review.ResultsA total of 669 patients were analyzed. The median age was 40 years (interquartile range [IQR] 30–54) with a median disease duration of 12 years (IQR 6–22) and moderate to severe IBD based on medication exposure and history of bowel surgery. A total of 81 patients (12%) carried a diagnosis of an inflammatory rheumatic disease, whereas 75 (11%) had consulted a rheumatologist during the previous year. Using published cutoffs, 180 out of 669 patients (27%) screened positive with DETAIL, 266 (40%) with IBIS‐Q, and 275 (41%) with either questionnaire. Axial symptoms were more frequently reported than peripheral musculoskeletal complaints. Notably, 189 out of 275 (69%) screen‐positive patients had neither a documented inflammatory rheumatic disease diagnosis nor a visit with a rheumatologist within the past year.ConclusionA substantial proportion of patients with IBD have symptoms suggestive of SpA, and many of these may have undiagnosed SpA. The IBIS‐Q questionnaire appears to identify more potential SpA cases than DETAIL. Strategies are needed to prioritize rheumatology consultations for those patients with IBD who are most likely to benefit.

Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)–associated peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA) decreases quality of life and remains poorly understood. Given the prevalence of this condition and its negative impact, it is surprising that evidence-based disease definitions and diagnostic strategies are lacking. This systematic review summarizes available data to facilitate development and validation of diagnostics, patient-reported outcomes, and imaging indices specific to this condition. Methods A literature search was conducted. Consensus or classification criteria, case series, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials related to diagnosis were included. Results A total of 44 studies reporting data on approximately 1500 patients with pSpA were eligible for analysis. Data quality across studies was only graded as fair to good. Due to large heterogeneity, meta-analysis was not possible. The majority of studies incorporated patient-reported outcomes and a physical examination. A total of 13 studies proposed or validated screening tools, consensus, classification, or consensus criteria. A total of 28 studies assessed the role of laboratory tests, none of which were considered sufficiently accurate for use in diagnosis. A total of 17 studies assessed the role of imaging, with the available literature insufficient to fully endorse any imaging modality as a robust diagnostic tool. Conclusions This review highlights existing inconsistency and lack of a clear diagnostic approach for IBD-associated pSpA. Given the absence of an evidence-based approach, a combination of existing criteria and physician assessment should be utilized. To address this issue comprehensively, our future efforts will be directed toward pursuit of a multidisciplinary approach aimed at standardizing evaluation and diagnosis of IBD-associated pSpA.

Abstract The multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test screens for colorectal cancer by analyzing DNA methylation/mutation and hemoglobin markers to algorithmically derive a qualitative result. A new panel of highly discriminant candidate methylated DNA markers (MDM) was recently developed. Performance of the novel MDM panel, with hemoglobin, was evaluated in a simulated screening population using archived stool samples weighted to early-stage colorectal cancer and prospectively collected advanced precancerous lesions (APL). Marker selection study (MSS) and separate preliminary independent verification studies (VS) were conducted utilizing samples from multi-center, case–control studies. Sample processing included targeted MDM capture, bisulfite conversion, and MDM quantitation. Fecal hemoglobin was quantified using ELISA. Samples were stratified into 75%/25% training-testing sets; model outcomes were cross-validated 1,000 times. All laboratory operators were blinded. The MSS included 232 cases (120 colorectal cancer/112 APLs) and 490 controls. The VS featured 210 cases (112 colorectal cancer/98 APLs) and 567 controls; APLs were 86.7% adenomas and 13.3% sessile serrated lesions (SSL). Average age was 65.5 (cases) and 63.2 (controls) years. Mean sensitivity in the VS from cross-validation was 95.2% for colorectal cancer and 57.2% for APLs, with specificities of 89.8% (no CRC/APLs) and 92.4% (no neoplasia). Subgroup analyses showed colorectal cancer sensitivities of 93.4% (stage I) and 94.2% (stage II). APL sensitivity was 82.9% for high-grade dysplasia, 73.4% for villous lesions, 49.8% for tubular lesions, and 30.2% for SSLs. These data support high sensitivity and specificity for a next-generation mt-sDNA test panel. Further evaluation of assay performance will be characterized in a prospective, multi-center clinical validation study (NCT04144738). Prevention Relevance: This study highlights performance of the next-generation mt-sDNA test, which exhibits high sensitivity and specificity for detecting colorectal cancer and APLs. This noninvasive option has potential to increase screening participation and clinical outcomes. A multi-center, clinical validation trial is underway. See related commentary by Bresalier, p. 93

SummaryBackground and aimsExtra‐intestinal manifestations (EIMs) are a common complication of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), affecting up to half of the patients. Despite their high prevalence, information on standardised definitions, diagnostic strategies, and treatment targets is limited.MethodsAs a starting point for a national EIM study network, an interdisciplinary expert panel of 12 gastroenterologists, 4 rheumatologists, 3 ophthalmologists, 6 dermatologists, and 4 patient representatives was assembled. Modified Delphi consensus methodology was used. Fifty‐four candidate items were derived from the literature review and expert opinion focusing on five major EIMs (erythema nodosum, pyoderma gangrenosum, uveitis, peripheral arthritis, and axial arthritis) were rated in three voting rounds.ResultsFor use in a clinical practice setting and as part of the creation of a prospective registry of patients with EIMs, the panel developed definitions for erythema nodosum, pyoderma gangrenosum, uveitis, peripheral arthritis, and axial arthritis; identified the appropriate and optimal subspecialists to diagnose and manage each; provided methods to monitor disease course; offered guidance regarding monitoring intervals; and defined resolution and recurrence.ConclusionsConsensus criteria for appropriate and optimal means of diagnosing and monitoring five EIMs have been developed as a starting point to inform clinical practice and future trial design. Key findings include straightforward diagnostic criteria, guidance regarding who can appropriately and optimally diagnose each, and monitoring options that include patient and physician‐reported outcomes. These findings will be used in a national multicenter study network to optimise the management of EIMs.

63 Background: Population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can reduce mortality by detecting and removing advanced precancerous lesions (APL) and early-stage invasive disease. One guideline-included strategy is the multi-target stool DNA test (mt-sDNA), which combines detection of methylation DNA markers (MDMs), KRAS mutations, and fecal hemoglobin. Since the mt-sDNA pivotal study was conducted, novel biomarkers have been discovered. A panel of highly discriminant MDMs ( LASS4, LRRC4, PPP2R5C, and reference marker ZDHHC1) was identified through a blinded, case-control study of archival specimens. Here, we evaluated the performance of this novel mt-sDNA panel, combined with fecal hemoglobin, in archival stool samples weighted to early-stage CRC and prospectively collected APL, simulating a screening population. Methods: The verification study featured 777 samples—210 cases (112 CRC [49 stage I, 38 stage II, 17 stage III, and 8 stage IV] and 98 APL) and 567 controls (176 non-APL and 391 colonoscopy-negative)—from three trials (NCT01397747, NCT01260168, and NCT02503631). Median APL size was 12 mm (interquartile range: 10 mm to 15 mm), with 86.7% adenomas (n = 85) and 13.3% sessile serrated polyps (SSPs; n = 13). The average age was 65.5 years for cases (57% men) and 63.2 for controls (47% men). Samples were processed through homogenization, targeted MDM capture, bisulfite conversion, and MDM quantitation using Long‐probe Quantitative Amplified Signal (LQAS). Fecal hemoglobin was quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Samples were split into stratified 75%/25% training-testing sets and model outcomes were cross-validated 1,000 times. Results: Mean performance from the cross-validation analysis is summarized in the table below. Overall sensitivity was 95.2% for CRC and 57.2% for APL, with specificities of 89.8% (no CRC/APL) and 92.4% (no neoplasia). Subgroup analyses showed high sensitivity for early-stage CRC, with 93.4% at stage I and 94.2% at stage II. By APL subtype, sensitivity was 82.9% for high-grade dysplasia, 73.4% for villous lesions, 49.8% for tubular lesions, and 30.2% for SSPs. Conclusions: These data support high sensitivity and specificity for a second-generation mt-sDNA panel. A multicenter pivotal trial evaluating the panel is underway (NCT04144738). [Table: see text]

4577 Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Though biannual ultrasound surveillance with or without alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) testing is recommended for at-risk patients, its sensitivity for early-stage HCC detection is suboptimal. We therefore evaluated performance of a biomarker panel incorporating methylated DNA markers (MDMs) and proteins for early HCC detection in at-risk patients with chronic liver disease. Methods: In an international, multicenter, case-control study, blood specimens were collected from patients with HCC per AASLD criteria and controls matched for age and liver disease etiology. All patients had underlying cirrhosis or chronic HBV infection. Whole blood was collected in cell-free DNA stabilizing and serum-separation tubes and shipped to a central laboratory for processing. The levels of 5 MDMs, AFP, and AFP-L3 were assessed along with age and sex. We used 537 samples in a 5-fold validation for developing a LASSO regression algorithm to classify samples as HCC positive or negative. Model robustness was tested by perturbing the data in silico and analyzing results with the predictive algorithm. Algorithm performance was compared to AFP alone and the GALAD score (Gender, Age, AFP-L3, AFP, and DCP). Results: The study included 136 HCC cases (81 early-stage—BCLC stage 0/A) and 401 controls. With specificity set at 89%, we developed a model using sex, AFP, and 3 MDMs (HOXA1, TSPYL5, B3GALT6) with higher sensitivity (70%) for early-stage HCC compared to GALAD (54%) or AFP (31% at 20 ng/mL or 52% at ≥7.7 ng/mL) (Table). The AUC for the HCC marker panel was 0.91 (95% CI 0.89 – 0.94) compared to GALAD (0.88; 95% CI 0.85 – 0.91) or AFP (0.84; 95% CI 0.81 – 0.87). The panel performed similarly in viral (AUC = 0.94) and non-viral (AUC = 0.89) etiologies. Conclusions: The robust algorithm based on novel blood-based biomarkers presented here provides higher sensitivity for early-stage HCC compared to other available blood-based biomarkers and, therefore, could significantly impact HCC clinical management and patient outcomes. Further clinical studies to validate the algorithm are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03628651 . [Table: see text]