Dulai, Parambir S

INTRODUCTION: Safety and effectiveness of treating to target mucosal healing in older patients with Crohn's disease (CD) is unknown. METHODS: We analyzed CD-related complications by 24 months in the randomized evaluation of an algorithm for Crohn's treatment—study 2-2 trial that randomized practices to an enhanced-care or step-care algorithm to determine whether patient age modifies the effect of treatment. Data were analyzed using marginal Cox regression and modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: There was no difference in treatment between younger and older patients in at 24 months. DISCUSSION: Enhanced-care was effective and not associated with increased risk compared with step-care in older patients with CD.

SummaryBackgroundThe optimal ulcerative colitis biopsy protocol is unclear.AimTo evaluate the number of biopsies required to accurately assess microscopic disease activity in ulcerative colitisMethodsBiopsies from patients with ≥4 rectosigmoid samples, and clinical and endoscopic data, were retrospectively obtained from a prospective biobank. Histology and endoscopic videos were read blindly. A 4‐biopsy Robarts Histopathology Index (RHI) reference score, consisting of the worst item‐level ratings from four biopsies, was compared to 1‐, 2‐ and 3‐biopsy estimates. Agreement was determined using bivariate errors‐in‐variable regression analysis (acceptance interval: ±8.25). Endoscopic activity and disease location subgroup analyses were also performed.ResultsForty‐six patients had ≥4 rectosigmoid biopsies available (N = 287). The 2‐biopsy (tolerance interval: −7.66, 4.79) and 3‐biopsy (tolerance interval: −4.86, 3.46) RHI scores demonstrated acceptable agreement with 4‐biopsy scores. One‐biopsy scores demonstrated unacceptable agreement (tolerance interval: −13.99, 7.78). Mean RHI scores using the 2‐, 3‐ and 4‐biopsy approaches were similar (6.1 ± 9.6 P = 0.36; 6.8 ± 10.5, P = 0.7; 7.5 ± 11.2), whereas the 1‐biopsy estimate was lower (4.4 ± 8.1, P = 0.06). Histological remission rates were identical for the 2‐, 3‐ and 4‐biopsy methods (65.2%, P = 1.0). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that three biopsies were required in patients with endoscopically active disease. Sampling additional colonic locations yielded lower histological remission rates compared to rectosigmoid sampling alone (33.3% vs 61.9%, P = 0.1).ConclusionsA minimum of two — conservatively, three — biopsies are required to reliably assess disease activity in a single colonic segment using the RHI. Further studies are needed of endoscopically active patients and sampling locations. These results have implications for biopsy strategies in clinical trials and practice.

SummaryBackgroundThere is limited real‐world data on comparative effectiveness of different biologic or small molecule agents as second‐line therapies in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior exposure to a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using TriNetX, a multi‐institutional database to assess the efficacy of tofacitinib, vedolizumab and ustekinumab in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior exposure to a TNFi. Failure of medical therapy was defined as a composite outcome of intravenous steroids or colectomy within 2 years. One‐to‐one propensity score matching was performed for demographics, disease extent, mean haemoglobin, C‐reactive protein, albumin and calprotectin, prior IBD medications and steroid use between cohorts.ResultsAmong 2141 patients with UC and prior exposure to TNFi, 348 (16.2%), 716 (33.4%) and 1077 (50.3%) were switched to tofacitinib, ustekinumab and vedolizumab, respectively. After propensity‐score matching, there was no difference in the composite outcome (aOR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.55–1.07) but higher risk of colectomy (aOR: 2.69, 95% CI: 1.31–5.50) in the tofacitinib cohort than the vedolizumab cohort. There was no difference in the risk of composite outcome (aOR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.89–1.86) but higher risk of colectomy (aOR: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.24–5.58) in the tofacitinib cohort than the ustekinumab cohort. The vedolizumab cohort had a higher risk of composite outcome (aOR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.29–2.16) than the ustekinumab cohort.ConclusionUstekinumab might be the preferred second‐line therapy over tofacitinib and vedolizumab in patients with UC that were previously exposed to a TNFi.

SummaryBackgroundAn association between bariatric surgery and development of de‐novo inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been observed.AimTo evaluate further the association among bariatric surgery, weight loss medications, obesity and new‐onset IBD.MethodsUsing Explorys, a population‐based Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliant database, we estimated the prevalence of de‐novo IBD among patients treated with bariatric surgery (Roux‐en‐Y gastrojejunostomy, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or gastric banding) (n = 60 870) or weight loss medications (orlistat, phentermine/topiramate, lorcaserin, bupropion/naltrexone and liraglutide) (n = 193 790) compared with obese controls (n = 5 021 210), between 1999 and 2018.ResultsThe prevalence of de‐novo IBD was lower among obese patients exposed to bariatric surgery (7.72 per 1000 patients) or weight loss medications (7.22 per 1000 patients) compared with patients with persistent obesity not exposed to these interventions (11.66 per 1000 patients, P < 0.0001). The risk reduction for de‐novo IBD was consistent across bariatric surgeries and weight loss medications with the exception of orlistat which was not associated with a reduction in risk for de‐novo IBD compared with the persistent obese control cohort.ConclusionObese patients undergoing treatment with bariatric surgery or weight loss medications are at a lower risk for developing de‐novo IBD compared with persistently obese controls not exposed to these interventions. These data suggest that obesity and ineffective management of obesity are risk factors for de‐novo IBD. Further research is needed to confirm these observations and understand potential mechanisms.