Singh, Siddharth

SummaryIntroductionPost‐colonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) have been proposed as a performance metric for colonoscopy quality assurance programs. Previously, there was no standardised terminology or reporting methods. In 2018, the World Endoscopy Organization (WEO) advised standardised definitions and prevalence calculation methodology.AimsTo assess PCCRC burden using WEO standardised methods, to explore causes of heterogeneity, and to review changes in prevalence over timeMethodsWe updated a prior systematic review by searching Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 1 January 2013 to 31 January 2021 to identify population‐based studies (or multicentre studies representative of the local population) reporting PCCRC prevalence (PROSPERO [CRD42020183796]). Two authors independently determined study eligibility, assessed quality, and extracted data. We estimated the PCCRC 3‐year prevalence using WEO‐recommended methodologies and investigated between‐study sources of heterogeneity. We examined changes in prevalence over time.ResultsFifteen studies reporting on 25 872 PCCRC cases met eligibility criteria. Pooled PCCRC 3 year prevalence was 8.2% (95% CI = 6.9%‐9.4%, I2 = 98.2%) across four European studies using WEO precise methodology. Proximal PCCRC prevalence was greater than distal (9.7% [95% CI = 7.0%‐12.4%] vs 5.4% [95% CI = 2.9%‐7.8%], I2 = 99.2%). Seven studies reporting PCCRC rates over time showed no consistent trend: four showed a decrease, one an increase and two were unchanged. Between‐study heterogeneity was high.ConclusionsPooled 3‐year PCCRC prevalence was 8.2% (95% CI = 6.9%‐9.4%). Despite WEO standardised methodology to define and calculate PCCRC rates, there was significant heterogeneity among studies. Comparing rates between populations remains challenging and additional studies are needed to better understand the global PCCRC burden to inform quality assurance programs.

SummaryBackgroundNonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is a common cause of chronic liver disease. There is a major need to understand the efficacy of different pharmacological agents for the treatment of NASH.AimTo assess the relative rank‐order of different pharmacological interventions in fibrosis improvement and NASH resolution.MethodsA comprehensive search of several databases was conducted by an experienced librarian. We included randomised controlled‐trials (RCTs) comparing pharmacological interventions in patients with biopsy‐proven NASH. The primary outcome was ≥1 stage improvement in fibrosis. The secondary outcome was NASH resolution.ResultsA total of 26 RCTs with 23 interventions met the eligibility criteria. Lanifibranor and obeticholic acid had the highest probability of being ranked the most effective intervention for achieving ≥1 stage of fibrosis improvement (SUCRA 0.78) and (SUCRA 0.77), respectively. For NASH resolution, semaglutide, liraglutide and vitamin E plus pioglitazone had the highest probability of being ranked the most effective intervention for achieving NASH resolution (SUCRA 0.89), (SUCRA 0.84) and (SUCRA 0.83), respectively. Lanifibranor, obeticholic acid, pioglitazone and vitamin E were significantly better than placebo in achieving ≥1 stage of fibrosis improvement. Conversely, semaglutide, liraglutide, vitamine E plus pioglitazone, pioglitazone, lanifibranor and obeticholic acid were significantly better than placebo in achieving NASH resolution.ConclusionThese data provide relative rank‐order efficacy of various NASH therapies in terms of their improvements in liver fibrosis and NASH resolution. Therapies that have been shown to improve NASH resolution may be combined with therapies that have an antifibrotic effect to further boost treatment response rate in future.

SummaryBackgroundNeoplasia detection rate, the proportion of Barrett's oesophagus patients with high‐grade dysplasia or oesophageal adenocarcinoma detected at index surveillance endoscopy has been proposed as a quality metric. However, the correlation between neoplasia detection rate and a clinically relevant outcome like post‐endoscopy Barrett's neoplasia remains unknown. Post‐endoscopy Barrett's neoplasia refers to the rate of high‐grade dysplasia or oesophageal adenocarcinoma on repeat endoscopy within one year of an index screening examination revealing non‐dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus or low‐grade dysplasia.AimTo assess correlation between neoplasia detection rate and post‐endoscopy Barrett's neoplasia.MethodsWe performed a systematic search of multiple databases from date of inception to June 2021 to identify cohort studies reporting both neoplasia detection rate and post‐endoscopy Barrett's neoplasia. Data from each study were pooled using a random effects model, and their correlation assessed using meta‐regression. Heterogeneity was assessed and a priori planned subgroup analyses were conducted.ResultsTen studies with 27 894 patients with Barrett's oesophagus were included. The pooled neoplasia detection rate and post‐endoscopy Barrett's neoplasia were 5.0% (95% CI: 3.4%‐7.1%, I2 = 97%) and 19.6% (95% CI: 10.1%‐34.7%, I2 = 96%), respectively. Meta‐regression revealed a statistically significant inverse relationship between the two variables (coefficient −3.50, 95% CI: −4.63 to −2.37, P < 0.01). With every 1% increase of neoplasia detection rate, post‐endoscopy Barrett's neoplasia decreased by 3.50%. Heterogeneity was high despite adjusting for study quality and performing several subgroup analyses.ConclusionWe observed a statistically significant inverse correlation between neoplasia detection rate and post‐endoscopy Barrett's neoplasia. Additional studies are needed to further validate this correlation.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity has been associated with adverse disease-related outcomes and inferior treatment response to biologic agents in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), but its impact on the risk of treatment-related complications is unknown. We performed a cohort study examining the association between obesity and risk of serious infections in biologic-treated patients with IBD. METHODS: Using an administrative claims database, in a cohort of biologic-treated patients with IBD between 2014 and 2018 with follow-up 1 year before and after treatment initiation, we compared the risk of serious infections (infections requiring hospitalization) between obese vs nonobese patients (based on validated administrative claims) using Cox proportional hazard analysis. RESULTS: We included 5,987 biologic-treated patients with IBD (4,881 on tumor necrosis factor-α antagonists and 1,106 on vedolizumab), of whom 524 (8.8%) were classified as obese. Of the 7,115 person-year follow-up, 520 patients developed serious infection. Risk of serious infection was comparable in obese vs nonobese patients (8.8% vs 8.5%; unadjusted hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.86–1.54). After adjusting for age, comorbidities, disease characteristics, health care utilization, use of corticosteroids, immunomodulators, and opiates, obesity was not associated with an increased risk of serious infection (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% confidence interval, 0.55–1.01]). Similar results were seen on stratified analysis by disease phenotype (Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis) and index biologic therapy (tumor necrosis factor-α antagonists and vedolizumab). DISCUSSION: After adjusting for comorbid conditions and disease characteristics, obesity is not independently associated with an increased risk of serious infections in biologic-treated patients with IBD.

Abstract Background Identifying biologic-treated patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) at higher risk of serious infections is a priority. We conducted a retrospective cohort study evaluating frailty and risk of serious infections in biologic-treated patients with IBD. Methods Using an administrative claims database, we identified biologic-treated patients with IBD between 2014 and 2018 with follow-up 1 year before and after treatment initiation. Using a validated claims-based hospital frailty risk scoring system, patients were classified as frail and nonfrail. We compared the risk of serious infections (infections requiring hospitalization) between frail and nonfrail patients using Cox proportional hazard analysis adjusting for age, comorbidities, disease characteristics, health care utilization, use of corticosteroids, immunomodulators, and opiates. Results We included 5987 biologic-treated patients with IBD (4881 on TNFα antagonists, 1106 on vedolizumab), of whom 2350 (39.3%) were classified as frail; over 7115 person-years of follow-up was included, and 520 patients developed serious infection. Frailty was not associated with increased risk of serious infection (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.12; 95% CI, 0.93–1.36), whereas advanced age (older than 60 years), high comorbidity burden, corticosteroid use, opiate use, and prior serious infection were associated with increased risk of serious infection. On stratified analysis, frailty was associated with increased risk of serious infections in vedolizumab-treated patients (aHR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.03–2.79) but not in TNFα antagonist-treated patients (aHR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.83–1.27). Conclusions In biologic-treated patients with IBD, frailty assessed using a claims-based frailty index was not independently associated with increased risk of serious infections. Future studies evaluating objective and biological measures of frailty are warranted to risk-stratify older patients with IBD.

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.

Background and Aims Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) can lead to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). While both tenofovir disoproxil (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) have been shown to reduce the risk of HCC, their comparative effectiveness is unclear. We estimated the comparative effectiveness of these two agents in reducing the risk of HCC in patients with CHB, through a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Approach and Results We searched multiple electronic databases from January 1, 1998, to October 31, 2019, for randomized controlled trials and observational comparative effectiveness studies in adults with CHB treated with ETV compared to TDF, reporting the incidence of HCC (minimum follow‐up 12 months). Primary outcome was incidence of HCC, calculated as incidence rate ratio (IRR) with 95% confidence interval (CI, unadjusted analysis) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI (adjusted analysis, where reported). Of 1,971 records identified, 14 studies (263,947 person‐years) were included for quantitative analysis. On unadjusted meta‐analysis of 14 studies, the risk of HCC was not statistically different between ETV and TDF (IRR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.99‐1.66). When using available adjusted data (multivariate or propensity‐matched data), the risk of HCC among patients treated with ETV was 27% higher when compared to TDF (seven studies; 95% CI, 1.01‐1.60, P = 0.04). Additional analysis of adjusted data when separately reported among patients with cirrhosis demonstrated an adjusted HR of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.66‐1.23), suggesting no difference between ETV‐treated and TDF‐treated groups. The overall confidence in estimates was very low (observational studies, high heterogeneity). Conclusions TDF may be associated with lower risk of HCC when compared to ETV.