{"title":"Editorial: Caught in the Middle-Exploring the Grey Zone Between Decompensated and Recompensated HBV-Related Cirrhosis.","authors":"Stephanie Tsai,Mohammad Amin Fallahzadeh","doi":"10.1111/apt.70456","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.70456","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":121,"journal":{"name":"Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":"146 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145613347","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Editorial: Caught in the Middle-Exploring the Grey Zone Between Decompensated and Recompensated HBV-Related Cirrhosis. Authors' Reply.","authors":"Bingqiong Wang,Shuai Xia,Xiaoning Wu,Hong You","doi":"10.1111/apt.70482","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.70482","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":121,"journal":{"name":"Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145613356","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Juan Frias, Robert Schmouder, Eric Lawitz, Yiming Zhang, Heng Zhou, Michael K. Badman, Chinweike Ukomadu, H. Markus Weiss, Julia Zack, Brijesh Yadav, Miljen Martic, Clive Drakeford, Phillip Koo, Nikolai V. Naoumov, Linda E. Greenbaum
Background Drug combinations have potential for additive or synergistic efficacy in patients with metabolic dysfunction–associated steatohepatitis (MASH). Aim To assess the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of single or combination treatments in patients with MASH. Methods In this multicentre, open‐label, platform phase 2 study, patients ( N = 41) were randomised 1:1 to LYS006 20 mg twice‐daily (bid) monotherapy or LYS006 20 mg bid+tropifexor 200 μg once‐daily (qd) combination therapy for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints were efficacy and pharmacokinetics. Results Pruritus adverse events (AEs) were reported in 62% of patients in the combination arm. Other AEs were similar between the treatment arms. A greater reduction in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and liver fat was observed in the combination versus monotherapy arm (ALT: 43% vs. 13% reduction; liver fat: 37% vs. 20% reduction, respectively). No significant impact on biomarkers for liver fibrosis was observed in either treatment arm, but there was an indication for lower plasma exposure to LYS006 upon co‐administration with tropifexor. Conclusions LYS006 20 mg bid monotherapy and LYS006 20 mg bid+tropifexor 200 μg qd therapy were well tolerated with the exception of a high frequency of pruritus in the combination arm, consistent with the now known pharmacologic effect of farnesoid X receptor agonists. The greater reductions in ALT and liver fat in the combination arm versus monotherapy arm were similar to those observed with tropifexor as monotherapy in a previously reported phase 2 clinical trial, and clear additional benefit was not observed in combination treatment with LYS006. This study design allowed for rapid screening of potentially high efficacy drug combinations in MASH. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04147195
{"title":"Clinical trial: A Phase 2 Randomised Platform Study to Assess Monotherapy and Combination Treatment Regimens in Metabolic Dysfunction–Associated Steatohepatitis","authors":"Juan Frias, Robert Schmouder, Eric Lawitz, Yiming Zhang, Heng Zhou, Michael K. Badman, Chinweike Ukomadu, H. Markus Weiss, Julia Zack, Brijesh Yadav, Miljen Martic, Clive Drakeford, Phillip Koo, Nikolai V. Naoumov, Linda E. Greenbaum","doi":"10.1111/apt.70475","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.70475","url":null,"abstract":"Background Drug combinations have potential for additive or synergistic efficacy in patients with metabolic dysfunction–associated steatohepatitis (MASH). Aim To assess the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of single or combination treatments in patients with MASH. Methods In this multicentre, open‐label, platform phase 2 study, patients ( <jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 41) were randomised 1:1 to LYS006 20 mg twice‐daily (bid) monotherapy or LYS006 20 mg bid+tropifexor 200 μg once‐daily (qd) combination therapy for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints were efficacy and pharmacokinetics. Results Pruritus adverse events (AEs) were reported in 62% of patients in the combination arm. Other AEs were similar between the treatment arms. A greater reduction in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and liver fat was observed in the combination versus monotherapy arm (ALT: 43% vs. 13% reduction; liver fat: 37% vs. 20% reduction, respectively). No significant impact on biomarkers for liver fibrosis was observed in either treatment arm, but there was an indication for lower plasma exposure to LYS006 upon co‐administration with tropifexor. Conclusions LYS006 20 mg bid monotherapy and LYS006 20 mg bid+tropifexor 200 μg qd therapy were well tolerated with the exception of a high frequency of pruritus in the combination arm, consistent with the now known pharmacologic effect of farnesoid X receptor agonists. The greater reductions in ALT and liver fat in the combination arm versus monotherapy arm were similar to those observed with tropifexor as monotherapy in a previously reported phase 2 clinical trial, and clear additional benefit was not observed in combination treatment with LYS006. This study design allowed for rapid screening of potentially high efficacy drug combinations in MASH. Trial Registration <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\" xlink:href=\"http://clinicaltrials.gov\">ClinicalTrials.gov</jats:ext-link> identifier: NCT04147195","PeriodicalId":121,"journal":{"name":"Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":"97 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145609161","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Alexandra Hickey, Chaonan Dong, Christopher A. Lamb
{"title":"Editorial: High‐Grade Dysplasia in Colonic Inflammatory Bowel Disease Is Associated With a High Risk of Synchronous or Metachronous Colorectal Cancer","authors":"Alexandra Hickey, Chaonan Dong, Christopher A. Lamb","doi":"10.1111/apt.70442","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.70442","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":121,"journal":{"name":"Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":"136 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145594026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Letter: Affirming Cardiac Safety While Highlighting Areas for Further Research","authors":"Shanshan Huang, Jie Zhou","doi":"10.1111/apt.70387","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.70387","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":121,"journal":{"name":"Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145594209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>Resmetirom, an oral selective thyroid hormone receptor beta agonist, is the first pharmacological agent approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the United States in 2024 for the treatment of non-cirrhotic metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) with liver fibrosis stages F2 and F3. In the ongoing, registrational phase 3 MAESTRO-NASH study, the administration of resmetirom for 52 weeks led to MASH resolution and significant improvement in fibrosis by at least one stage as compared to placebo [<span>1</span>]. However, there remains a dearth of information about combining resmetirom with medications that are recommended for treating comorbidities of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), such as glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in type 2 diabetes (T2D) with and without obesity [<span>2, 3</span>]. Notably, around half of T2D patients have MASH [<span>4</span>]. Therefore, the prespecified analysis of MAESTRONASH by Noureddin et al. has provided timely evidence that in T2D patients, the efficacy of resmetirom on MASH end points was not affected by the stable background use of GLP1RA or SGLT2i [<span>5</span>], which are now commonly prescribed due to their established independent cardiovascular and kidney benefits.</p><p>Both GLP1RA and SGLT2i have been shown to resolve and improve MASH in the recent Effect of Semaglutide in Subjects with Non-cirrhotic non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (ESSENCE) and Dapagliflozin Efficacy and Action in Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (DEAN) trials, respectively, but residual risk remains [<span>6, 7</span>]. Indeed, in around 40% of the T2D participants from the MAESTRONASH trial, at baseline, their MASH remained present despite the use of either GLP1RA or SGLT2i for a reasonable period (median duration 660 days for GLP1RA and 651 days for SGLT2i) [<span>5</span>]. Although the GLP1RA used were mostly liraglutide, dulaglutide and semaglutide 1 mg weekly instead of semaglutide 2.4 mg weekly as in the ESSENCE trial, it reinforces the need to combine pharmacotherapies to target the different pathophysiological pathways in MASH [<span>8</span>].</p><p>The authors also demonstrated that resmetirom-treated participants who had weight loss ≥ 5%, as compared to those without, showed higher rates of MASH resolution and fibrosis improvement [<span>5</span>]. Further studies should be conducted to investigate if the sequence of initiating these MASH pharmacotherapies matters, for instance, whether starting GLP1RA after resmetirom can enhance its effect through inducing weight loss. Moreover, as several new incretin co-agonists such as tirzepatide, a GLP1- and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) receptors co-agonist, as well as survodutide, a GLP1- and glucagon receptors co-agonist, with more potent weight-reducing effects, have also been shown to improve MASH in phase 2 trials [<span>9,
{"title":"Editorial: An Important Step Towards Mastering Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatohepatitis-Targeted Therapy in Diabetes","authors":"Johnny Yau-Cheung Chang, Chi-Ho Lee","doi":"10.1111/apt.70401","DOIUrl":"10.1111/apt.70401","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Resmetirom, an oral selective thyroid hormone receptor beta agonist, is the first pharmacological agent approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the United States in 2024 for the treatment of non-cirrhotic metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) with liver fibrosis stages F2 and F3. In the ongoing, registrational phase 3 MAESTRO-NASH study, the administration of resmetirom for 52 weeks led to MASH resolution and significant improvement in fibrosis by at least one stage as compared to placebo [<span>1</span>]. However, there remains a dearth of information about combining resmetirom with medications that are recommended for treating comorbidities of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), such as glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in type 2 diabetes (T2D) with and without obesity [<span>2, 3</span>]. Notably, around half of T2D patients have MASH [<span>4</span>]. Therefore, the prespecified analysis of MAESTRONASH by Noureddin et al. has provided timely evidence that in T2D patients, the efficacy of resmetirom on MASH end points was not affected by the stable background use of GLP1RA or SGLT2i [<span>5</span>], which are now commonly prescribed due to their established independent cardiovascular and kidney benefits.</p><p>Both GLP1RA and SGLT2i have been shown to resolve and improve MASH in the recent Effect of Semaglutide in Subjects with Non-cirrhotic non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (ESSENCE) and Dapagliflozin Efficacy and Action in Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (DEAN) trials, respectively, but residual risk remains [<span>6, 7</span>]. Indeed, in around 40% of the T2D participants from the MAESTRONASH trial, at baseline, their MASH remained present despite the use of either GLP1RA or SGLT2i for a reasonable period (median duration 660 days for GLP1RA and 651 days for SGLT2i) [<span>5</span>]. Although the GLP1RA used were mostly liraglutide, dulaglutide and semaglutide 1 mg weekly instead of semaglutide 2.4 mg weekly as in the ESSENCE trial, it reinforces the need to combine pharmacotherapies to target the different pathophysiological pathways in MASH [<span>8</span>].</p><p>The authors also demonstrated that resmetirom-treated participants who had weight loss ≥ 5%, as compared to those without, showed higher rates of MASH resolution and fibrosis improvement [<span>5</span>]. Further studies should be conducted to investigate if the sequence of initiating these MASH pharmacotherapies matters, for instance, whether starting GLP1RA after resmetirom can enhance its effect through inducing weight loss. Moreover, as several new incretin co-agonists such as tirzepatide, a GLP1- and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) receptors co-agonist, as well as survodutide, a GLP1- and glucagon receptors co-agonist, with more potent weight-reducing effects, have also been shown to improve MASH in phase 2 trials [<span>9, ","PeriodicalId":121,"journal":{"name":"Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":"63 1","pages":"165-166"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/apt.70401","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145594024","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>We read with great interest the meta-analysis by Siddique et al. [<span>1</span>], which provides a timely synthesis of short-term mortality in severe alcohol-associated hepatitis (sAH). The application of both frequentist and Bayesian frameworks is a notable strength. However, we have profound concerns regarding the analytical approach to the primary conclusion that mortality has not improved in recent decades, which may be substantially flawed.</p><p>The authors' conclusion of no credible mortality improvement rests heavily on the non-significance of publication year as a covariate in their meta-regression. This model is critically compromised by the systematic and profound structural heterogeneity of the ‘standard care’ groups across decades. As illustrated in your table 1, the control arm for a 1978 trial was ‘diet’, while in 2023, it constituted ‘prednisolone’ combined with advanced prophylactic antibiotics [<span>2, 3</span>]. Pooling these fundamentally different clinical realities into a single ‘standard care’ cohort and then testing for a time trend creates a misleading null signal. The observed decline in 28-day mortality from > 50% to ~25%, as shown in your Bayesian analysis, likely represents the genuine, cumulative benefit of evolving standard care. To assert no improvement is to ignore this evident clinical progress captured by your own data.</p><p>Furthermore, the model selection strategy, which prioritised the corrected Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), is inappropriate for this context. The AIC favours parsimony but cannot distinguish a biologically implausible model from a correct one. Your final model identifies ‘follow-up duration’ as the principal mortality determinant—a tautological finding, as the probability of death intrinsically increases over time in a fatal disease. That this model was selected over one containing ‘treatment era’ underscores the limitation of a purely algorithmic approach over clinical reasoning.</p><p>Finally, the assertion of a significant association between MELD score and mortality (<i>β</i> = +0.20 per point, <i>p</i> = 0.037) is not robust. This analysis was based on a small, non-random subset of only 12 studies reporting MELD scores, heavily predisposed to publication and reporting biases. The conclusion lacks the reliability necessary to inform clinical prognostication, a point not adequately emphasised.</p><p>We believe a re-analysis comparing mortality between pre-specified, clinically distinct eras (e.g., pre- and post-corticosteroid standardisation) or using a network meta-analysis structure to account for evolving standard care, would provide a more valid assessment of temporal trends. In this context, recent reviews and consortium studies—such as those summarising current and emerging therapies for acute alcohol-associated hepatitis, outcomes of patients with sAH and acute kidney injury, interventions for alcohol use disorder in cirrhotic or sAH patients, and current criteria for
我们非常感兴趣地阅读了Siddique等人的荟萃分析，该分析及时综合了严重酒精相关性肝炎（sAH）的短期死亡率。频率主义者和贝叶斯框架的应用是一个显著的优势。然而，我们对最近几十年来死亡率没有改善这一主要结论的分析方法深感关切，这种分析方法可能存在重大缺陷。作者的结论没有可靠的死亡率改善很大程度上取决于在他们的元回归中，出版年份作为协变量的不显著性。几十年来，“标准护理”群体的系统性和深刻的结构异质性严重损害了这种模式。如表1所示，1978年的一项试验的对照组是“饮食”，而在2023年，对照组是“强的松龙”联合先进的预防性抗生素[2,3]。将这些根本不同的临床现实汇集到一个单一的“标准护理”队列中，然后对时间趋势进行测试，这会产生误导性的零信号。正如你的贝叶斯分析所显示的那样，观察到28天死亡率从50%下降到25%，这可能代表了不断发展的标准护理的真正累积效益。断言没有改善就是忽略了你自己的数据所显示的明显的临床进展。此外，模型选择策略优先考虑修正后的赤池信息标准（Akaike Information Criterion， AIC），不适合这种情况。AIC倾向于简约，但无法区分生物学上不合理的模型和正确的模型。你的最终模型将“随访时间”确定为主要的死亡率决定因素——这是一个反复的发现，因为致命疾病的死亡概率本质上随着时间的推移而增加。选择这个模型而不是包含“治疗时代”的模型，强调了纯算法方法相对于临床推理的局限性。最后，MELD评分与死亡率之间存在显著关联的断言（β = +0.20 /分，p = 0.037）并不可靠。该分析仅基于报告MELD评分的12项研究的一个小的非随机子集，严重倾向于发表和报告偏差。结论缺乏为临床预测提供必要信息的可靠性，这一点没有得到充分强调。我们认为，对预先指定的、临床不同时期（例如，皮质类固醇标准化前和标准化后）的死亡率进行重新分析，或使用网络荟萃分析结构来解释不断发展的标准护理，将提供更有效的时间趋势评估。在这种背景下，最近的综述和联合研究——例如总结急性酒精相关性肝炎的当前和新兴治疗方法、sAH和急性肾损伤患者的结局、肝硬化或sAH患者酒精使用障碍的干预措施、sAH早期肝移植的当前标准——共同强调了不断发展的管理格局，并加强了时代分层分析的必要性[4-7]。目前的结论有可能通过低估已建立的支持性护理的价值而误导临床和研究重点。Chao Zhao：写作-原稿，写作-审稿，编辑。作者声明无利益冲突。这篇文章链接到Siddique等人的论文。要查看这些文章，请访问https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.70383和https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.70488.The，根据通讯作者的合理要求，可以获得支持本研究结果的数据。
{"title":"Letter on ‘Meta-Analysis: Mortality Trends and Risk Factors in Severe Alcohol-Associated Hepatitis’","authors":"Chao Zhao","doi":"10.1111/apt.70441","DOIUrl":"10.1111/apt.70441","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We read with great interest the meta-analysis by Siddique et al. [<span>1</span>], which provides a timely synthesis of short-term mortality in severe alcohol-associated hepatitis (sAH). The application of both frequentist and Bayesian frameworks is a notable strength. However, we have profound concerns regarding the analytical approach to the primary conclusion that mortality has not improved in recent decades, which may be substantially flawed.</p><p>The authors' conclusion of no credible mortality improvement rests heavily on the non-significance of publication year as a covariate in their meta-regression. This model is critically compromised by the systematic and profound structural heterogeneity of the ‘standard care’ groups across decades. As illustrated in your table 1, the control arm for a 1978 trial was ‘diet’, while in 2023, it constituted ‘prednisolone’ combined with advanced prophylactic antibiotics [<span>2, 3</span>]. Pooling these fundamentally different clinical realities into a single ‘standard care’ cohort and then testing for a time trend creates a misleading null signal. The observed decline in 28-day mortality from > 50% to ~25%, as shown in your Bayesian analysis, likely represents the genuine, cumulative benefit of evolving standard care. To assert no improvement is to ignore this evident clinical progress captured by your own data.</p><p>Furthermore, the model selection strategy, which prioritised the corrected Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), is inappropriate for this context. The AIC favours parsimony but cannot distinguish a biologically implausible model from a correct one. Your final model identifies ‘follow-up duration’ as the principal mortality determinant—a tautological finding, as the probability of death intrinsically increases over time in a fatal disease. That this model was selected over one containing ‘treatment era’ underscores the limitation of a purely algorithmic approach over clinical reasoning.</p><p>Finally, the assertion of a significant association between MELD score and mortality (<i>β</i> = +0.20 per point, <i>p</i> = 0.037) is not robust. This analysis was based on a small, non-random subset of only 12 studies reporting MELD scores, heavily predisposed to publication and reporting biases. The conclusion lacks the reliability necessary to inform clinical prognostication, a point not adequately emphasised.</p><p>We believe a re-analysis comparing mortality between pre-specified, clinically distinct eras (e.g., pre- and post-corticosteroid standardisation) or using a network meta-analysis structure to account for evolving standard care, would provide a more valid assessment of temporal trends. In this context, recent reviews and consortium studies—such as those summarising current and emerging therapies for acute alcohol-associated hepatitis, outcomes of patients with sAH and acute kidney injury, interventions for alcohol use disorder in cirrhotic or sAH patients, and current criteria for ","PeriodicalId":121,"journal":{"name":"Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":"63 2","pages":"314-315"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/apt.70441","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145594017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Editorial: High‐Grade Dysplasia in Colonic Inflammatory Bowel Disease Is Associated With a High Risk of Synchronous or Metachronous Colorectal Cancer—Authors' Reply","authors":"Monica E. W. Derks, Frank Hoentjen","doi":"10.1111/apt.70473","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.70473","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":121,"journal":{"name":"Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145594021","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：