Zhao, Mirabella

Abstract Background Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), together known as inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), affect approximately seven million people globally. The continuous rise in IBD prevalence and the aging of populations will inevitably lead to an increasing use of health care resources. In parallel with these trends, continuing innovations in IBD therapeutics, diagnostics, and preventatives are creating more options for IBD patients seeking to reduce their disease burden. These trends pose an imminent burden on health care systems and require that we identify modifiable cost drivers in IBD care and develop strategies for delivering equitable and affordable care for all patients. Methods This Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology Commission, consisting of a diverse faculty of health care professionals with expertise in the field of IBD and health economists, was formed to deliver an extensive summary of the literature and discuss key topics on the costs and cost-effectiveness of treating IBD in the present, and how this is likely to look in the future. Furthermore, it offers suggestions for how to deliver affordable IBD care in the coming years. The report’s focus was on high-income countries in Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand, and Asia. Results The Commission drew together a wide range of expertise to discuss the current costs of IBD care, the drivers of increasing costs, as well as how to deliver affordable care for IBD in the future. The key conclusions are that (i) increases in health care costs must be evaluated against improved disease control and reductions in indirect costs, and (ii) that overarching systems for data interoperability, registries, and big data approaches must be established for continuous assessment of effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of care. International collaborations should be sought in order to evaluate novel models of care (such as value-based health care, including integrated health care and participatory health care models), as well as to improve the education and training of clinicians, patients, and policymakers. Measures to reduce the costs of IBD care are summarised in Table 1. Conclusion Increases in health care costs must be evaluated against improved disease control and reductions in indirect costs. Evaluations should be systematically aligned between countries and regions. Detailed analysis of the current epidemiology and the likely effects of changing IBD management on disease course and socioeconomic outcomes is essential; and will become even more imperative in the era of precision medicine, where complex biotechnologies will require expensive analyses, highly skilled personnel, and drug development for what may sometimes be relatively small patient groups.

Abstract Background MR elastography can determine organ‐related stiffness, which reflects the degree of fibrosis. Liver stiffness increases in cirrhosis, and stiffness increases further post‐prandially due to increased portal blood in‐flow. Non‐selective beta‐blockers (NSBB) reduce the portal venous inflow, but their effect on liver and spleen stiffness are disputed. Aims To assess whether MR elastography of the liver or spleen reflects the severity of cirrhosis, whether treatment with NSBB changes liver and spleen stiffness and whether changes in stiffness can predict the effect of NSBB on portal pressure. Methods Fifty‐two patients with cirrhosis underwent liver vein catheterization and two‐dimensional (2D) MR elastography on separate days. Thirty‐six of the patients had a hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) of ≥12 mmHg and were tested prior to, and after, intravenous infusion of NSBB using HVPG measurement and MR elastography. Results HVPG showed a strong, positive, linear relationship with liver stiffness ( r 2 = 0.92; P < .001) and spleen stiffness ( r 2 = 0.94; P < .001). The cut‐off points for identifying patients with a HVPG ≥ 12 mmHg were 7.7 kPa for liver stiffness (sensitivity 0.78, specificity 0.64) and 10.5 kPa for spleen stiffness (sensitivity 0.8, specificity 0.79). Intravenous administration of NSBB significantly decreased spleen stiffness by 6.9% (CI: 3.5‐10.4, P < .001), but NSBB had no consistent effect on liver stiffness. However, changes in spleen stiffness were not related to the HVPG response ( P = .75). Conclusions Two‐dimensional MR elastographic estimation of liver or spleen stiffness reflects the degree of portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis, but changes in stiffness after NSBB do not predict the effect on HVPG.