Citations

ABSTRACT Background Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (EDS) comprises inherited connective tissue disorders characterised by joint hypermobility, skin hyperextensibility and tissue fragility. It links to systemic comorbidities, including gastrointestinal (GI) disorders, but hitherto large‐scale data remain limited. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of GI, systemic and psychological comorbidities in EDS patients versus propensity score‐matched controls, using a comprehensive research network database. Design This was a retrospective, propensity‐matched analysis (2005–2023) utilising the TriNetX network. We identified EDS patients (excluding Marfan's syndrome). Propensity score matching (1:1) generated balanced cohorts for age, sex and baseline characteristics. Comorbidities were analysed via prevalence rates and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Matched cohorts included 59,128 pairs. Among GI disorders, gastroesophageal reflux disease was most common in EDS (18.4%, OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.4–1.5, p < 0.001), followed by constipation (12.4%, OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.7–1.9, p < 0.001), irritable bowel syndrome (7.3%, OR 2.6, 95% CI 2.5–2.8, p < 0.001) and gastroparesis (4.7%, OR 8.2, 95% CI 7.3–9.2, p < 0.001). Psychiatric conditions showed heightened prevalence of anxiety (26.1%, OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.7–1.8, p < 0.001) and depression (18.7%, OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2–1.3, p < 0.001). Systemic comorbidities included postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (13.2%, OR 899.7, 95% CI 483.8–1673.0, p < 0.001), chronic pain (7.9%, OR 7.0, 95% CI 6.4–7.6, p < 0.001), migraines (19.7%, OR 2.5, 95% CI 2.4–2.6, p < 0.001) and fibromyalgia (9.5%, OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.6–1.8, p < 0.001). Conclusion EDS patients exhibit heightened risk for GI, systemic and psychological comorbidities, highlighting the importance of multidisciplinary approaches for effective management.

Background: One of the most troublesome complications of acute pericarditis is recurrence. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and colchicine form the cornerstone treatment, with the addition of steroids in cases of incomplete response. Recent evidence also suggests a role for interleukin-1 (IL-1) antagonists in challenging cases of recurrence. However, with an increasing number of potential therapies, our study aims to examine the relative efficacy of these anti-inflammatory treatments for recurrent pericarditis risk reduction. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in October 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies of patients with pericarditis treated with a drug with anti-inflammatory properties compared with those treated with a control. The main outcome evaluated was pericarditis recurrence. Results: A total of 6,831 studies were screened, of which 25 articles were included (14 RCTs and 11 cohort studies) for a total number of patients of 3,561. The mean age across studies was 54.82 years for adults and 9.04 years for children (females = 40.55%). The average follow-up duration was 20.03 months. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to calculate risk estimates using a random effects model (Figure 1). Goflikicept, a fusion protein that neutralizes IL-1, showed a significant reduction in recurrent pericarditis rates (OR: 0.00, 95% Credible Limits [Crl]: 0.00-0.08). Similarly, anakinra (OR: 0.01, 95% Crl: 0.00-0.13), rilonacept (OR: 0.02, 95% Crl: 0.00-0.22) and colchicine (OR: 0.35, 95% Crl: 0.19-0.64) were associated with a significant reduction in recurrent pericarditis events. High dose colchicine (OR: 0.70, 95% Crl: 0.13-4.12) was not superior to regular dose colchicine (1 mg vs 0.6 mg twice daily, respectively). Interestingly, there was not enough data to make a meaningful comparison between steroids and control. Conclusion: In our analysis, goflikicept, rilonacept, and anakinra were most effective at reducing recurrent pericarditis rates. However, the evidence is based on a small number of studies. Our analysis also corroborated evidence regarding the efficacy of colchicine in reducing pericarditis recurrence. For a comprehensive analysis of the benefits and harms of anti-inflammatory therapies, larger comparative studies or network meta-analyses of patient-level data are required.

Abstract Patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) who undergo terminal ileum (TI) resection experience altered bile acid absorption, which may influence colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. We conducted a propensity-matched cohort study using TriNetX to compare CRC risk in patients with CD who underwent TI resection versus those who did not. Terminal ileum resection was associated with an increased risk of CRC (aHR = 2.58, 95% CI, 1.72–3.86). Patients with TI resection also had higher odds of colorectal polyps. These findings suggest the need for heightened CRC surveillance in patients with CD undergoing TI resection.

ABSTRACTIL‐17 inhibitors effectively treat psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis but may increase the risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We assessed their association with IBD compared to apremilast. Utilising the TriNetX database, we analysed patients with psoriasis or ankylosing spondylitis initiating IL‐17 inhibitors or apremilast. We used propensity score matching and Cox models to estimate IBD risk. Among 13,216 matched patients per group, 142 developed IBD with IL‐17 inhibitors versus 60 with apremilast (aHR = 2.50, 95% CI: 1.85–3.39). IL‐17 inhibitors increase IBD risk, necessitating careful patient selection and monitoring.

Abstract Background The role of serologic testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has evolved during the pandemic as seroprevalence in global populations has increased. The Infectious Diseases Society of America convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) serology literature and construct updated best practice guidance related to SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing. This guideline is an update to the fourth in a series of rapid, frequently updated COVID-19 guidelines developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Objective To develop evidence-based recommendations and identify unmet research needs pertaining to the use of anti–SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for diagnosis, decisions related to vaccination and administration of monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma in immunocompromised patients, and identification of a serologic correlate of immunity. Methods A multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists, and experts in systematic literature reviewed, identified, and prioritized clinical questions related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. Results The panel recommends against serologic testing to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first 2 weeks after symptom onset (strong recommendations, low certainty of evidence). Serologic testing should not be used to provide evidence of COVID-19 in symptomatic patients with a high clinical suspicion and repeatedly negative nucleic acid amplification test results (strong recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). Serologic testing may assist with the diagnosis of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (strong recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). To seek evidence for prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, the panel suggests testing for immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgG/IgM, or total antibodies to nucleocapsid protein 3 to 5 weeks after symptom onset (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence). In individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination, the panel suggests against routine serologic testing given no demonstrated benefit to improving patient outcomes (conditional recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). The panel acknowledges further that a negative spike antibody test may be a useful metric to identify immunocompromised patients who are candidates for immune therapy. Conclusions The high seroprevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 worldwide limits the utility of detecting anti-SARS CoV-2 antibody. The certainty of available evidence supporting the use of serology for diagnosis was graded as very low to low. Future studies should use serologic assays calibrated to a common reference standard.