Peyrin-Biroulet, Laurent

Abstract Background The expanding use of biologic and small-molecule therapies for ulcerative colitis (UC) has raised concerns regarding perioperative safety. We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare short-term postoperative complications associated with preoperative exposure to these agents in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Methods We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library through September 15, 2025, for cohort studies of adults with UC who were exposed to biologic or small-molecule therapy within 12 weeks prior to surgery. Interventions included biologic therapy, small-molecule therapy, and no biologic or small-molecule therapy (control). The primary outcome was overall postoperative complications at 30 and 90 days. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) was assessed as a key secondary outcome. Random-effects network meta-analysis was performed using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Sixteen retrospective cohort studies involving 3235 patients were included. At 30 days, ustekinumab and tofacitinib were associated with lower overall postoperative complication rates than control (RR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.09-0.96; and RR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.46-0.96, respectively). Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy was associated with higher complication rates compared with vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib at 30 days (RR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.00-1.63; RR: 3.67; 95% CI: 1.12-12.03; and RR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.14-2.27, respectively). At 90 days, anti-TNF therapy was associated with higher complication rates than control (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03-1.40), although the 90-day analysis was based on limited data. VTE rates were similar across treatments at both time points. Conclusion Preoperative ustekinumab and tofacitinib were associated with fewer 30-day postoperative complications than control or anti-TNF therapy, while vedolizumab was associated with fewer complications than anti-TNF therapy. At 90 days, anti-TNF therapy was associated with higher complication rates compared with control. These findings, particularly at 90 days based on limited data, should be interpreted with caution and require confirmation in well-designed prospective studies with rigorous adjustment for confounding factors.

Abstract Background & Aims Central reading of endoscopy and histopathology is the current standard for disease activity assessment in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) clinical trials but is limited by interreader and intrareader variability, operational delays, and cost. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) offer the potential to improve accuracy, efficiency, and reproducibility. The International Organization for the Study of IBD (IOIBD) developed consensus statements on AI/ML use for endoscopic and histologic endpoint assessment in IBD trials. Methods As part of the IOIBD endpoints cluster initiative, a narrative, evidence-informed review with literature searches of Medline and Embase (January 2018-February 2025) identified studies applying AI/ML to endoscopy or histology in IBD. Relevant evidence informed 36 survey statements formulated by a steering committee. Seventy-two IOIBD members were invited to vote online; consensus required ≥80% agreement (score: 7-10 on a 10-point scale). Results Forty-five members completed the survey. Consensus was reached for 28 statements related to endoscopy, pathology, and trial design. Experts agreed that AI-based central reading could improve diagnostic accuracy, expedite processes, reduce costs, and enhance reproducibility. Combining human and AI assessments was favored over AI replacement. The key limitations identified included insufficient validation, generalizability concerns, and dependence on human-annotated training datasets. Conclusions This IOIBD consensus supports the integration of AI/ML into central reading for IBD clinical trials to improve objectivity, efficiency, and consistency, while maintaining human oversight. Further research should address validation, regulatory frameworks, and multimodal integration to enable broader adoption in both trials and clinical practice.

ABSTRACTBackgroundPatients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who are hospitalised for acute severe flares represent a high‐risk orphan population.AimTo provide guidance for clinical trial design methodology in these patients.MethodsWe created a multi‐centre consortium to design and conduct a clinical trial for a novel therapeutic intervention (hyperbaric oxygen therapy) in patients with UC hospitalised for moderate–severe flares. During planning, we identified and addressed specific gaps for inclusion/exclusion criteria; disease activity measures; pragmatic trial design considerations within care pathways for hospitalised patients; standardisation of care delivery; primary and secondary outcomes; and sample size and statistical analysis approaches.ResultsThe Truelove‐Witt criteria should not be used in isolation. Endoscopy is critical for defining eligible populations. Patient‐reported outcomes should include rectal bleeding and stool frequency, with secondary measurement of urgency and nocturnal bowel movements. Trial design needs to be tailored to care pathways, with early intervention focused on replacing and/or optimising responsiveness to steroids and later interventions focused on testing novel rescue agents or strategies. The PRECIS‐2 framework offers a means of tailoring to local populations. We provide standardisation of baseline testing, venous thromboprophylaxis, steroid dosing, discharge criteria and post‐discharge follow‐up to avoid confounding by usual care variability. Statistical considerations are provided given the small clinical trial nature of this population.ConclusionWe provide an outline for framework decisions made for the hyperbaric oxygen trial in patients hospitalised for UC flares. Future research should focus on the remaining gaps identified.

SummaryBackgroundFilgotinib, an oral, once‐daily, Janus kinase 1 preferential inhibitor, is an approved treatment for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis.AimsThe aim of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of continued filgotinib therapy over ~4 years in the long‐term extension of the phase 2b/3 SELECTION trial (SELECTIONLTE; NCT02914535).MethodsIn this interim analysis of SELECTIONLTE, SELECTION completers (week 10 responders to filgotinib who completed the maintenance study) continued their assigned treatment (double‐blind filgotinib 200 mg [FIL200] or filgotinib 100 mg) and SELECTION week 10 non‐responders received open‐label FIL200. We assessed safety by adverse events (AEs), and efficacy by partial Mayo Clinic Score (pMCS), inflammatory biomarkers and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL). We compared safety and efficacy between achievers and non‐achievers of a multi‐component endpoint, comprehensive disease control (CDC), comprising symptomatic, endoscopic, inflammatory biomarker and HRQoL improvements.ResultsData for completers (n = 250) and non‐responders (n = 372) were reported for ≤202 weeks. AE occurrences were low and consistent with previous analyses. The as‐observed proportion of FIL200‐treated patients in pMCS, biomarker and HRQoL remission during SELECTIONLTE remained high among completers (week 144: 80.0%, 86.4% and 86.0%, respectively) and increased among non‐responders (week 192: 62.1%, 76.7% and 59.3%, respectively). Significantly higher proportions of CDC achievers at SELECTION week 58 achieved pMCS, IBDQ and corticosteroid‐free pMCS remission than non‐achievers, up to LTE week 96.ConclusionsFilgotinib induced and maintained symptomatic remission and improved HRQoL over 4 years. Safety results showed a proven long‐term benefit–risk profile. FIL200‐treated CDC achievers had better long‐term outcomes than non‐achievers.

Abstract The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]-causing coronavirus disease [COVID]-19 pandemic poses major challenges for patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] to be recruited and maintained in clinical trials. However, clinical trials offer patients who have failed multiple drugs access to study medications with alternative modes of action and the potential for relief from inflammation-mediated symptoms. Therefore, the continuation of clinical trials in IBD during the COVID-19 pandemic is important both for participants and for the community of IBD patients, due to the dire need for an expanded therapeutic armamentarium. As the safety of patients in clinical trials is the leading principle, we are providing ten specific rules to guide patients and principal investigators safely through the challenging time.

Objective We evaluated the reliability and responsiveness of available but incompletely validated UC histological disease activity indices using standardised rules for centralised assessment. Design Disease activity was assessed in biopsies collected in a phase II placebo-controlled ozanimod trial by four blinded pathologists using the Geboes (GS) and modified Riley (MRS) scores, the Robarts Histopathology (RHI) and Nancy Histological (NHI) indices and a Visual Analogue Scale. Reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Index responsiveness was evaluated by assessing longitudinal validity (Pearson correlations of changes in index scores and other disease measures), and effect size estimates (standardised effect size (SES)) using two criteria for change (treatment assignment and >2 point decrease in total Mayo Clinic score). Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve estimates evaluated the probability of the indices to discriminate between treatment and placebo. Results Inter-rater reliability of the histological indices was substantial to almost perfect (ICC>0.61), and responsiveness was moderate to large (SES estimates>0.5); 0.81 (0.52, 1.10), 0.87 (0.58, 1.17), 0.57 (0.30, 0.84) and 0.81 (0.52, 1.09) when treatment assignment was the criterion for change and 1.05 (0.80, 1.31), 1.13 (0.87, 1.39), 0.88 (0.64, 1.12) and 1.06 (0.80, 1.31) for the change in Mayo score criterion for the GS, MRS, RHI and NHI, respectively. The indices had similar drisciminative ability based on AUROC estimates (range 0.608–0.649). Conclusion All four existing histological indices were similarly reliable and responsive based on this dataset.

Background and aim Disease activity for Crohn's disease (CD) and UC is typically defined based on symptoms at a moment in time, and ignores the long-term burden of disease. The aims of this study were to select the attributes determining overall disease severity, to rank the importance of and to score these individual attributes for both CD and UC. Methods Using a modified Delphi panel, 14 members of the International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IOIBD) selected the most important attributes related to IBD. Eighteen IOIBD members then completed a statistical exercise (conjoint analysis) to create a relative ranking of these attributes. Adjusted utilities were developed by creating proportions for each level within an attribute. Results For CD, 15.8% of overall disease severity was attributed to the presence of mucosal lesions, 10.9% to history of a fistula, 9.7% to history of abscess and 7.4% to history of intestinal resection. For UC, 18.1% of overall disease severity was attributed to mucosal lesions, followed by 14.0% for impact on daily activities, 11.2% C reactive protein and 10.1% for prior experience with biologics. Overall disease severity indices were created on a 100-point scale by applying each attribute's average importance to the adjusted utilities. Conclusions Based on specialist opinion, overall CD severity was associated more with intestinal damage, in contrast to overall UC disease severity, which was more dependent on symptoms and impact on daily life. Once validated, disease severity indices may provide a useful tool for consistent assessment of overall disease severity in patients with IBD.

SummaryBackgroundReliable tools for patient selection are critical for clinical drug trials.AimTo evaluate a consensus‐based, standardised magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) protocol for selecting patients for inclusion in Crohn's disease (CD) multicenter clinical trials.MethodsThis study recruited 20 patients [Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) scores: <150 (n = 8); 150–220 (n = 4); 220–450 (n = 8)], to undergo ileocolonoscopy and two MREs (with and without colonic contrast) within a 14‐day period. Procedures were scored centrally using, Magnetic Resonance Index of Activity (MaRIA), and both Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) and Simplified Endoscopic Score (SES‐CD).Results37 MREs were acquired. Both MREs were evaluable in 16 patients for calculation of test–retest and inter‐reader reliability scores. The MaRIA scores for the terminal ileum had excellent test–retest and inter‐reader reliability, with correlations >0.9. The proximal ileum showed strong within‐reader agreement (0.90–0.96), and fair between‐reader agreement (0.59–0.72). MRE procedures were tolerable. MaRIA scores correlated with CDEIS and SES‐CD (0.63 and 0.71), but not with CDAI (0.34). MRE identified 3 patients with intra‐abdominal complications, who would otherwise have been included in clinical trials. Furthermore, both MRE and ileocolonoscopy identified active bowel wall inflammation in 2 patients with CDAI <150, and none in 1 patient with CDAI > 220. Data quality was good/excellent in 85% of scans, and fair or better in 96%.ConclusionsMagnetic resonance enterography of high‐quality and reproducibility was feasible in a global multi‐ centre setting, with evidence for improved selectivity over CDAI and ileocolonoscopy in identifying appropriate CD patients for inclusion in therapeutic intervention trials.