Citations

SummaryBackgroundThe optimal ulcerative colitis biopsy protocol is unclear.AimTo evaluate the number of biopsies required to accurately assess microscopic disease activity in ulcerative colitisMethodsBiopsies from patients with ≥4 rectosigmoid samples, and clinical and endoscopic data, were retrospectively obtained from a prospective biobank. Histology and endoscopic videos were read blindly. A 4‐biopsy Robarts Histopathology Index (RHI) reference score, consisting of the worst item‐level ratings from four biopsies, was compared to 1‐, 2‐ and 3‐biopsy estimates. Agreement was determined using bivariate errors‐in‐variable regression analysis (acceptance interval: ±8.25). Endoscopic activity and disease location subgroup analyses were also performed.ResultsForty‐six patients had ≥4 rectosigmoid biopsies available (N = 287). The 2‐biopsy (tolerance interval: −7.66, 4.79) and 3‐biopsy (tolerance interval: −4.86, 3.46) RHI scores demonstrated acceptable agreement with 4‐biopsy scores. One‐biopsy scores demonstrated unacceptable agreement (tolerance interval: −13.99, 7.78). Mean RHI scores using the 2‐, 3‐ and 4‐biopsy approaches were similar (6.1 ± 9.6 P = 0.36; 6.8 ± 10.5, P = 0.7; 7.5 ± 11.2), whereas the 1‐biopsy estimate was lower (4.4 ± 8.1, P = 0.06). Histological remission rates were identical for the 2‐, 3‐ and 4‐biopsy methods (65.2%, P = 1.0). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that three biopsies were required in patients with endoscopically active disease. Sampling additional colonic locations yielded lower histological remission rates compared to rectosigmoid sampling alone (33.3% vs 61.9%, P = 0.1).ConclusionsA minimum of two — conservatively, three — biopsies are required to reliably assess disease activity in a single colonic segment using the RHI. Further studies are needed of endoscopically active patients and sampling locations. These results have implications for biopsy strategies in clinical trials and practice.

Abstract Background Perianal fistulas and abscesses occur commonly as complications of pediatric Crohn’s disease (CD). A validated imaging assessment tool for quantification of perianal disease severity and activity is needed to evaluate treatment response. We aimed to identify magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based measures of perianal fistulizing disease activity and study design features appropriate for pediatric patients. Methods Seventy-nine statements relevant to MRI-based assessment of pediatric perianal fistulizing CD activity and clinical trial design were generated from literature review and expert opinion. Statement appropriateness was rated by a panel (N = 15) of gastroenterologists, radiologists, and surgeons using modified RAND/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness methodology. Results The modified Van Assche Index (mVAI) and the Magnetic Resonance Novel Index for Fistula Imaging in CD (MAGNIFI-CD) were considered appropriate instruments for use in pediatric perianal fistulizing disease clinical trials. Although there was concern regarding the use of intravascular contrast material in pediatric patients, its use in clinical trials was considered appropriate. A clinically evident fistula tract and radiologic disease defined as at least 1 fistula or abscess on pelvic MRI were considered appropriate trial inclusion criteria. A coprimary clinical and radiologic end point and inclusion of a patient-reported outcome were also considered appropriate. Conclusion Outcomes of treatment of perianal fistulizing disease in children must include MRI. Existing multi-item measures, specifically the mVAI and MAGNIFI-CD, can be adapted and used for children. Further research to assess the operating properties of the indices when used in a pediatric patient population is ongoing.

Abstract Artificial intelligence has been introduced to clinical practice, especially radiology and radiation oncology, from image segmentation, diagnosis, treatment planning and prognosis. It is not only crucial to have an accurate artificial intelligence model, but also to understand the internal logic and gain the trust of the experts. This review is intended to provide some insights into core concepts of the interpretability, the state-of-the-art methods for understanding the machine learning models, the evaluation of these methods, identifying some challenges and limits of them, and gives some examples of medical applications.

Introduction: Rare cardiac complications of COVID-19 and COVID-19 mRNA vaccination include pericarditis and myocarditis. Patients with recurrent pericarditis may be at increased risk of triggered recurrence. The known efficacy of the interleukin (IL)-1 antagonist rilonacept in treating and preventing recurrence could inform COVID-19 disease and vaccination management. Methods: The Phase 3 trial RHAPSODY was a global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized-withdrawal study. A long-term extension (LTE) enabled up to 24 months further open-label treatment from May 2020 until June 2022. Concomitant vaccination data and adverse events, including COVID-19, were collected. Results: No COVID-19 cases were reported during the run-in and randomized withdrawal periods (n=86). As of the 6 May 2022 data cutoff, a COVID-19 AE was reported in 19% (14/74) of LTE subjects, of whom 12 were on rilonacept: 5 of 44 fully-vaccinated (≥14 days beyond second serial dose) subjects (11.4%) and 9 of 30 unvaccinated or partially-vaccinated subjects (30.0%). Of the fully-vaccinated subjects, 1 case occurred ~11 months post primary vaccination cycle (no booster). COVID-19 severity was mild (n= 11), moderate (n=2), or severe (n=1). All cases resolved except the severe AE complicated by comorbidities; the subject discontinued. Of 12 subjects receiving rilonacept at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, 10 maintained dosing with rilonacept, 1 interrupted rilonacept for ~4 weeks, and 1 discontinued rilonacept permanently; none experienced a pericarditis recurrence (PR) after the AE. The remaining 2 subjects had previously interrupted rilonacept for off-treatment observation: one had a PR >4.5 months after suspending rilonacept and 18 days after COVID-19 resolution; no PR in the other (>6 months). There were no PR AEs associated with COVID-19 vaccination (all subjects were receiving rilonacept). Conclusions: In patients on rilonacept in this study, although numbers are small, vaccination reduced COVID-19 events, pericarditis recurrence was not increased by vaccination or disease, and no pericarditis recurrences occurred during rilonacept treatment. One pericarditis recurrence occurred remotely after rilonacept suspension in the peri-COVID-19 period.

Introduction: Rilonacept reduced pericarditis recurrence in the phase 3 trial RHAPSODY. The long-term extension (LTE) enabled further insights into efficacy, safety, and clinical decision making. Methods: The RHAPSODY run-in (RI) and randomized-withdrawal periods were followed by an LTE that enabled open-label rilonacept treatment up to 24 additional months. A decision at 18 months after the most recent recurrence was based on clinical status at investigator discretion: 1) continue rilonacept on-study, 2) suspend rilonacept for observation or 3) discontinue from the LTE without observation. Endpoints included recurrence and quality of life. Results: In May 2020, 74 of 75 eligible subjects continued to LTE; US subjects (n=45) switched to commercial therapy or discontinued in April 2021 (treatment duration from RI baseline [median; maximum] 18; 27 months). Non-US subjects (n=29) completed the LTE in June 2022 (treatment duration from RI baseline [median; maximum] 27; 33 months). Concomitant oral medications during LTE: 22% NSAIDS, 20% colchicine, 0% corticosteroids, 43% none. Inflammation signs (CRP), RP symptoms (PGIPS), and recurrences were low on-treatment. Before the 18-month decision (n=74), there were 3 investigator-assessed recurrences (0.04 per patient-year). At the 18-month decision (n=52), 64% (n=33) continued rilonacept on-study, 15% (n=8) suspended rilonacept for observation, and 21% (n=11) discontinued the study without observation, of whom 7 switched to commercial rilonacept. There was a 75% recurrence rate (n=6/8) in the off-treatment observation group (median time to event 11.8 [3.7, Not-Estimable (NE)] weeks) but only 1 recurrence in subjects on rilonacept (time to event NE [too few events]) associated with a 4-week interruption; HR 0.018, p<0.0001; Fig 1. Conclusions: Continued rilonacept treatment resulted in continued treatment response, whereas treatment suspension at 18 months may be associated with pericarditis recurrence.