Dulai, Parambir S.

SummaryBackgroundAccurate estimates for the risk of COVID‐19 in IBD, and an understanding of the impact of COVID‐19 on IBD course and the risk of incident post‐infectious IBD are needed.AimsTo estimate the risk of COVID‐19 in IBD and study its impact on IBD course and the risk of incident post‐infectious IBD.MethodsA retrospective propensity score matched cohort study utilising multi‐institutional research network TriNetX. COVID‐19 patients with and without IBD were identified to quantify the risk of COVID‐19 in patients with IBD, COVID‐19 outcomes in patients with IBD and the impact of COVID‐19 on IBD disease course. The risk of incident post‐infectious IBD in COVID‐19 patients was compared to the population not infected with COVID‐19 during a similar time period.ResultsIncidence rate ratio for COVID‐19 was lower in IBD patients compared to the non‐IBD population (0.79, 95% CI: 0.72‐0.86). COVID‐19‐infected patients with IBD were at increased risk for requiring hospitalisation compared to non‐IBD population (RR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.02‐1.34) with no differences in need for mechanical ventilation or mortality. Patients with IBD on steroids were at an increased risk for critical care need (RR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.29‐3.82). Up to 7% of patients with IBD infected with COVID‐19 suffered an IBD flare 3‐months post‐infection. Risk for incident IBD post‐COVID was lower than that seen in the non‐COVID population (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.54‐0.65).ConclusionWe observed no increase in risk for COVID‐19 amongst patients with IBD or risk for de novo IBD after COVID‐19 infection. We confirmed prior observations regarding the impact of steroid use on COVID‐19 severity in patients with IBD.

Abstract Background Data on efficacy of hepatitis-B vaccine (HBV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is limited. Our aim was to review the literature and perform meta-analysis of available studies to quantify efficacy of HBV in patients with IBD. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (inception to July 2020) to identify studies evaluating efficacy of HBV in patients with IBD. Random effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and I2 percentage values were used to assess the heterogeneity. Results A total of 14 studies (2375 patients) were included. Four data sets were available from 2 studies that compared HBV response in patients with IBD against healthy controls. The pooled odds ratio of HBV response in IBD patients was 0.13 (95% CI, 0.05–0.33, P = 0.001). The pooled proportion of adequate immune response (AIR) was 64% (95% CI, 55–72.1, P = 0.003) from 13 data sets, and effective immune response (EIR) was 39.7% (95% CI, 30.7–49.5, P = 0.04) from 10 data sets. Conclusion Patients with IBD on immunosuppression demonstrated significantly reduced HBV response as compared with general population.

Abstract Background and study aims Recently, a growing body of evidence has been amassed on evaluation of artificial intelligence (AI) known as deep learning in computer-aided diagnosis of gastrointestinal lesions by means of convolutional neural networks (CNN). We conducted this meta-analysis to study pooled rates of performance for CNN-based AI in diagnosis of gastrointestinal neoplasia from endoscopic images. Methods Multiple databases were searched (from inception to November 2019) and studies that reported on the performance of AI by means of CNN in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal tumors were selected. A random effects model was used and pooled accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated. Pooled rates were categorized based on the gastrointestinal location of lesion (esophagus, stomach and colorectum). Results Nineteen studies were included in our final analysis. The pooled accuracy of CNN in esophageal neoplasia was 87.2 % (76–93.6) and NPV was 92.1 % (85.9–95.7); the accuracy in lesions of stomach was 85.8 % (79.8–90.3) and NPV was 92.1 % (85.9–95.7); and in colorectal neoplasia the accuracy was 89.9 % (82–94.7) and NPV was 94.3 % (86.4–97.7). Conclusions Based on our meta-analysis, CNN-based AI achieved high accuracy in diagnosis of lesions in esophagus, stomach, and colorectum.

SummaryBackgroundHyperbaric oxygen has been reported to improve disease activity in hospitalised ulcerative colitis (UC) patients.AimTo evaluate dosing strategies with hyperbaric oxygen for hospitalised UC patients.MethodsWe enrolled UC patients hospitalised for acute flares (Mayo score 6‐12). Initially, all patients received 3 days of hyperbaric oxygen at 2.4 atmospheres (90 minutes with two air breaks) in addition to intravenous steroids. Day 3 responders (reduction of partial Mayo score ≥ 2 points and rectal bleeding score ≥ 1 point) were randomised to receive a total of 5 days vs 3 days of hyperbaric oxygen.ResultsWe treated 20 patients with hyperbaric oxygen (75% prior biologic failure). Day 3 response was achieved in 55% (n = 11/20), with significant reductions in stool frequency, rectal bleeding and CRP (P < 0.01). A more significant reduction in disease activity was observed with 5 days vs 3 days of hyperbaric oxygen (P = 0.03). Infliximab or colectomy was required in only three patients (15%) despite a predicted probability of 80% for second‐line therapy. Day 3 hyperbaric oxygen responders were less likely to require re‐hospitalisation or colectomy by 3 months vs non‐responders (0% vs 66%, P = 0.002). No treatment‐related adverse events were observed.ConclusionHyperbaric oxygen appears to be effective for optimising response to intravenous steroids in UC patients hospitalised for acute flares, with low rates of re‐hospitalisation or colectomy at 3 months. An optimal clinical response is achieved with 5 days of hyperbaric oxygen. Larger phase 3 trials are needed to confirm efficacy and obtain labelled approval.

INTRODUCTION: We applied the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to evaluate the performance of fecal calprotectin (FC) as an alternative to endoscopy in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) treated with a biologic agent or tofacitinib. METHODS: Individual participant data from the trials of infliximab, golimumab, vedolizumab, and tofacitinib for UC were pooled to generate prevalence of endoscopic activity (Mayo endoscopy score) across different combinations of the rectal bleeding score (RBS) and stool frequency score (SFS). These estimates were then combined with the data from an updated systematic review of the operating properties of FC to generate clinical scenario–specific assessments of the performance of FC as a predictor of endoscopic disease activity. A prespecified threshold of acceptability for false-negative (FN) and false-positive (FP) test results was set at 5%. RESULTS: For patients with UC achieving RBS 0 + SFS 0/1, FC ≤ 50 μg/g may avoid endoscopy in 50% patients with a FN rate <5%. Similarly, for patients with RBS 2/3 + SFS 2/3, FC ≥ 250 μg/g potentially avoids endoscopy in approximately 50% patients with an FP rate <5%. The greatest uncertainty in the diagnostic performance for FC was observed in patients with UC achieving RBS 0 but having SFS 2/3, where FN and FP rates were consistently >10%, and endoscopic evaluation may be warranted. DISCUSSION: Two clinical scenarios were identified where FC can be used with confidence for monitoring treatment response to biologics or tofacitinib in patients with UC without the requirement for endoscopy.

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.