Jairath, Vipul

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.

INTRODUCTION: There are limited real-world data comparing the effectiveness of upadacitinib and tofacitinib in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using TriNetX, a multi-institutional database, to compare the effectiveness of upadacitinib and tofacitinib in patients with UC. The primary aim was to assess the risk of a composite outcome of hospitalization requiring intravenous steroids and/or colectomy within 6 and 12 months. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed for demographics, comorbid conditions, mean hemoglobin, C-reactive protein, albumin, and calprotectin, and prior UC medications including recent oral or intravenous steroid use between the cohorts. Risk was expressed as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: There were 526 patients in the upadacitinib cohort (mean age 40.4 ± 16.3, 44.8% female sex, 76.6% White race) and 1,149 patients in the tofacitinib cohort (mean age 42 ± 17.1, 41.9% female sex, 76% White race). After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in the risk of the composite outcome of need for intravenous steroids and/or colectomy within 6 months (aOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49–1.09). However, there was a lower risk of the composite outcome (aOR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44–0.89) in the upadacitinib cohort compared with the tofacitinib cohort within 12 months. There was no difference in the risk of intravenous steroid use (aOR 0.70, 95% CI 0.48–1.02) but lower risk of colectomy (aOR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27–0.79). In sensitivity analysis, there was also a lower risk of the composite outcome (aOR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44–0.94), including lower risk of intravenous steroid use (aOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45–0.99) and colectomy (aOR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26–0.92) in the upadacitinib cohort compared with the tofacitinib cohort within 12 months. DISCUSSION: This study utilizing real-world data showed that upadacitinib was associated with improved disease-specific outcomes at 12 months compared with tofacitinib in patients with UC.

Abstract Background and study aims There is limited consensus on the optimal method for measuring disease severity in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). We aimed to systematically review the operating properties of existing endoscopic severity indices for FAP. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to February 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that utilized endoscopic outcomes or studies that evaluated the operating properties of endoscopic disease severity indices in FAP. Results A total of 134 studies were included. We evaluated scoring indices and component items of scoring indices, such as polyp count, polyp size, and histology. Partial validation was observed for polyp count and size. The most commonly reported scoring index was the Spigelman classification system, which was used for assessing the severity of duodenal involvement. A single study reported almost perfect interobserver and intra-observer agreement for this system. The InSIGHT polyposis staging system, which was used for assessing colorectal polyp burden, has been partially validated. It showed substantial interobserver reliability; however, the intra-observer reliability was not assessed. Novel criteria for high-risk gastric polyps have been developed and assessed for interobserver reliability. However, these criteria showed a poor level of agreement. Other scoring indices assessing the anal transition zone, duodenal, and colorectal polyps have not undergone validation. Conclusions There are no fully validated endoscopic disease severity indices for FAP. Development and validation of a reliable and responsive endoscopic disease severity instrument will be informative for clinical care and RCTs of pharmacological therapies for FAP.

Abstract Background Regulatory guidance for Crohn’s disease trials recommends coprimary efficacy end points that evaluate both symptoms and mucosal inflammation. We aimed to characterize the operating properties of commonly used disease activity assessments alone and in combination. Methods Endoscopic and clinical data were available for 129 participants from the Study of Biologic and Immunomodulator Naïve Patients in Crohn’s Disease trial. Readers scored the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn’s Disease and the Crohn’s Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity using standardized conventions. Index reliability was determined using intraclass correlation coefficients. Index responsiveness was assessed using standardized effect sizes based upon treatment assignment. Outcomes were evaluated for optimal sensitivity to treatment effect. Results Substantial inter-rater reliability was observed when the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn’s Disease and Crohn’s Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity were used as continuous measures (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.73; and 0.62 95% CI, 0.36-0.77) compared with moderate reliability when dichotomized (0.46; 95% CI, 0.26-0.65; and 0.51; 95% CI, 0.00-0.78). The Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn’s Disease, Crohn’s Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity, patient-reported outcome-2, and Crohn’s Disease Activity Index were similarly responsive (standardized effect size, 0.43, 95% CI, 0.05-0.81; 0.38, 95% CI, 0.0-0.76; 0.53, 95% CI, 0.15-0.91). A composite outcome of Crohn’s Disease Activity Index score <150 and Crohn’s Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity score <6 was most sensitive to treatment effect (28.9%; 95% CI, 11.0%-46.8%; P = .003). Conclusion Endoscopic indices were more reliable as continuous measures. Composite outcomes including endoscopy improved sensitivity to treatment effect.

Summary Background Stricturing Crohn's disease (CD) occurs most commonly in the terminal ileum and poses a clinical problem. Cross‐sectional imaging modalities such as intestinal ultrasound (IUS), computed tomography enterography (CTE), and magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) allow for assessment of the entire bowel wall and associated peri‐enteric findings. Radiologic definitions of strictures have been developed for CTE and MRE; their reliability and responsiveness are being evaluated in index development programs. A comprehensive assessment strategy for strictures using IUS is needed. Aims To provide a detailed summary of definitions, diagnosis and monitoring of strictures on IUS as well as technical aspects of image acquisition. Methods We searched four databases up to 6 January 2024. Two‐stage screening was done in duplicate. We assessed risk of bias using QUADAS‐2. Results There were 56 studies eligible for inclusion. Definitions for strictures on IUS are heterogeneous, but the overall accuracy for diagnosis of strictures is high. The capability of IUS for characterising inflammation versus fibrosis in strictures is not accurate enough to be used in clinical practice or trials. We summarise definitions for improvement of strictures on IUS, and discuss parameters for image acquisition and standardisation. Conclusions This systematic review is the first step for a structured program to develop a stricture IUS index for CD.