Pub Date : 2021-12-06eCollection Date: 2022-07-01DOI: 10.1159/000520522
Jesús K Yamamoto-Furusho, Norma N Parra-Holguín
Introduction: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) includes ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) characterized by a fluctuating course with periods of clinical activity and remission. No previous studies have demonstrated the frequency of delay at diagnosis and its associated factors in Mexico and Latin America. The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic delay of IBD in the last 4 decades in 2 different health care systems (public vs. private) and its associated factors.
Methods: This is a cohort study that included 1,056 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of IBD from public and private health care systems. The diagnostic delay was defined as time >1 year from the onset of symptoms to the confirmed diagnosis for patients with UC and 2 years for patients with CD. Statistical analysis was performed with the SPSS v.24 program. A value of p ≤ 0.05 was taken as significant.
Results: The delay at diagnosis decreased significantly by 24.9% in the last 4 decades. The factors associated with the diagnostic delay were proctitis in UC, clinical course >2 relapses per year and IBD surgeries for CD. We found a delay at diagnosis in 35.2% of IBD patients in the public versus 16.9% in the private health care system (p = 0.00001).
Conclusions: We found a significant diagnosis delay of IBD in 35.2% from the public health care system versus 16.9% in the private health care system.
{"title":"Diagnostic Delay of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Is Significantly Higher in Public versus Private Health Care System in Mexican Patients.","authors":"Jesús K Yamamoto-Furusho, Norma N Parra-Holguín","doi":"10.1159/000520522","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000520522","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) includes ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) characterized by a fluctuating course with periods of clinical activity and remission. No previous studies have demonstrated the frequency of delay at diagnosis and its associated factors in Mexico and Latin America. The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic delay of IBD in the last 4 decades in 2 different health care systems (public vs. private) and its associated factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a cohort study that included 1,056 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of IBD from public and private health care systems. The diagnostic delay was defined as time >1 year from the onset of symptoms to the confirmed diagnosis for patients with UC and 2 years for patients with CD. Statistical analysis was performed with the SPSS v.24 program. A value of <i>p</i> ≤ 0.05 was taken as significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The delay at diagnosis decreased significantly by 24.9% in the last 4 decades. The factors associated with the diagnostic delay were proctitis in UC, clinical course >2 relapses per year and IBD surgeries for CD. We found a delay at diagnosis in 35.2% of IBD patients in the public versus 16.9% in the private health care system (<i>p</i> = 0.00001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found a significant diagnosis delay of IBD in 35.2% from the public health care system versus 16.9% in the private health care system.</p>","PeriodicalId":13605,"journal":{"name":"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases","volume":"7 2","pages":"72-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/fc/0a/iid-0007-0072.PMC9294956.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40706572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-02eCollection Date: 2022-07-01DOI: 10.1159/000521285
Christine B Flicek, Nathaniel A Sowa, Millie D Long, Hans H Herfarth, Spencer D Dorn
Background: Individuals with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are up to twice as likely to suffer from anxiety and/or depression. Collaborative care management (CoCM) is an evidence-based approach to treating behavioral health disorders that have proven effective for a range of conditions in primary care and some specialty settings. This model involves a team-based approach, with care delivered by a care manager (case reviews and behavioral therapy), psychiatrist (case reviews and psychopharmacological recommendations), and medical provider (ongoing care including psychopharmacological prescriptions). We assessed the feasibility and effectiveness of CoCM in reducing anxiety and depressive symptoms in patients with IBD.
Methods: Patients with psychological distress identified by clinical impression and/or the results of the Patient Health Questionaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) were referred to the CoCM program. Data from our 9-month CoCM pilot were collected to assess depression and anxiety response and remission rates. We obtained provider surveys to assess provider acceptability with delivering care in this model.
Results: Though the SARS-CoV2 COVID-19 pandemic interrupted screening, 39 patients enrolled and 19 active participants completed the program. Overall, 47.4% had either a response or remission in depression, while 36.8% had response or remission in anxiety. The gastroenterologists highly agreed that the program was a beneficial resource for their patients and felt comfortable implementing the recommendations.
Discussion: CoCM is a potentially feasible and well accepted care delivery model for treatment of depression and anxiety in patients with IBD in a specialty gastroenterology clinic setting.
{"title":"Implementing Collaborative Care Management of Behavioral Health for Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.","authors":"Christine B Flicek, Nathaniel A Sowa, Millie D Long, Hans H Herfarth, Spencer D Dorn","doi":"10.1159/000521285","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000521285","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Individuals with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are up to twice as likely to suffer from anxiety and/or depression. Collaborative care management (CoCM) is an evidence-based approach to treating behavioral health disorders that have proven effective for a range of conditions in primary care and some specialty settings. This model involves a team-based approach, with care delivered by a care manager (case reviews and behavioral therapy), psychiatrist (case reviews and psychopharmacological recommendations), and medical provider (ongoing care including psychopharmacological prescriptions). We assessed the feasibility and effectiveness of CoCM in reducing anxiety and depressive symptoms in patients with IBD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with psychological distress identified by clinical impression and/or the results of the Patient Health Questionaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) were referred to the CoCM program. Data from our 9-month CoCM pilot were collected to assess depression and anxiety response and remission rates. We obtained provider surveys to assess provider acceptability with delivering care in this model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Though the SARS-CoV2 COVID-19 pandemic interrupted screening, 39 patients enrolled and 19 active participants completed the program. Overall, 47.4% had either a response or remission in depression, while 36.8% had response or remission in anxiety. The gastroenterologists highly agreed that the program was a beneficial resource for their patients and felt comfortable implementing the recommendations.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>CoCM is a potentially feasible and well accepted care delivery model for treatment of depression and anxiety in patients with IBD in a specialty gastroenterology clinic setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":13605,"journal":{"name":"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases","volume":"7 2","pages":"97-103"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e8/b7/iid-0007-0097.PMC9294946.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40706568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
G. Rogler, T. Hibi, S. Danese, M. Scharl, S. Shinzaki, B. Ye
Silvio Danese – Humanitas University, Rozzano (MI), Italy Hans Herfarth – University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA Beat Müllhaupt – University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland Choon Jin Ooi – Gleneagles Medical Centre, Singapore, Singapore Masakazu Nagahori – Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Medical Hospital, Tokyo, Japan Zhihua Ran – Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China Florian Rieder – Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA Ala Sharara – American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon Stephan Vavricka – Zentrum für Gastroenterologie und Hepatologie, Zurich, Switzerland Kenji Watanabe – Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Japan Mamoru Watanabe – Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan Gillian Watermeyer – Groote Schuur Hospital and University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa Ming-Shiang Wu – National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan Suk-Kyun Yang – University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
Silvio Danese - Humanitas University, Rozzano (MI), Italy Hans Herfarth - University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA Beat m llhaupt - University Hospital, Switzerland苏黎世Choon Jin Ooi -新加坡Gleneagles医疗中心,新加坡Masakazu Nagahori -日本东京医科和牙科大学医院,日本东京Zhihua Ran -上海交通大学,中国上海Florian Rieder - Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland, OH美国Ala Sharara -美国贝鲁特大学医学中心,黎巴嫩贝鲁特Stephan Vavricka -瑞士苏黎世消化与肝脏中心,瑞士苏黎世渡边健二(Kenji Watanabe) -日本西宫市军库县医学院,日本东京医科与牙科大学,日本东京台湾杨硕均-蔚山大学医学院,韩国首尔
{"title":"Contents Vol. 6, 2021","authors":"G. Rogler, T. Hibi, S. Danese, M. Scharl, S. Shinzaki, B. Ye","doi":"10.1159/000521119","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000521119","url":null,"abstract":"Silvio Danese – Humanitas University, Rozzano (MI), Italy Hans Herfarth – University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA Beat Müllhaupt – University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland Choon Jin Ooi – Gleneagles Medical Centre, Singapore, Singapore Masakazu Nagahori – Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Medical Hospital, Tokyo, Japan Zhihua Ran – Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China Florian Rieder – Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA Ala Sharara – American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon Stephan Vavricka – Zentrum für Gastroenterologie und Hepatologie, Zurich, Switzerland Kenji Watanabe – Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Japan Mamoru Watanabe – Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan Gillian Watermeyer – Groote Schuur Hospital and University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa Ming-Shiang Wu – National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan Suk-Kyun Yang – University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea","PeriodicalId":13605,"journal":{"name":"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases","volume":"12 1","pages":"I - IV"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80831988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-18eCollection Date: 2022-07-01DOI: 10.1159/000520995
Alain M Schoepfer, Vu Dang Chau Tran, Jean-Benoit Rossel, Christiane Sokollik, Johannes Spalinger, Ekaterina Safroneeva, Thea von Graffenried, Sébastien Godat, Dieter Hahnloser, Stephan R Vavricka, Christian Braegger, Andreas Nydegger
Introduction: Given the lack of data, we aimed to assess the impact of the length of diagnostic delay on the natural history of ulcerative colitis (UC) in pediatric (diagnosed <18 years) and adult patients (diagnosed ≥18 years).
Methods: Data from the Swiss Inflammatory Bowel Disease Cohort Study were analyzed. Diagnostic delay was defined as the interval between the first appearance of UC-related symptoms until diagnosis. Logistic regression modeling evaluated the appearance of the following complications in the long term according to the length of diagnostic delay: colonic dysplasia, colorectal cancer, UC-related hospitalization, colectomy, and extraintestinal manifestations (EIMs).
Results: A total of 184 pediatric and 846 adult patients were included. The median diagnostic delay was 4 [IQR 2-7.5] months for the pediatric-onset group and 3 [IQR 2-10] months for the adult-onset group (p = 0.873). In both, pediatric- and adult-onset groups, the length of diagnostic delay at UC diagnosis was not associated with colectomy, UC-related hospitalization, colon dysplasia, and colorectal cancer. EIMs were significantly more prevalent at UC diagnosis in the adult-onset group with long diagnostic delay than in the adult-onset group with short diagnostic delay (p = 0.022). In the long term, the length of diagnostic delay was associated in the adult-onset group with colorectal dysplasia (p = 0.023), EIMs (p < 0.001), and more specifically arthritis/arthralgias (p < 0.001) and ankylosing spondylitis/sacroiliitis (p < 0.001). In the pediatric-onset UC group, the length of diagnostic delay in the long term was associated with arthritis/arthralgias (p = 0.017); however, it was not predictive for colectomy and UC-related hospitalization.
Conclusions: As colorectal cancer and EIMs are associated with considerable morbidity and costs, every effort should be made to reduce diagnostic delay in UC patients.
{"title":"Impact of Diagnostic Delay on Disease Course in Pediatric- versus Adult-Onset Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: Data from the Swiss IBD Cohort.","authors":"Alain M Schoepfer, Vu Dang Chau Tran, Jean-Benoit Rossel, Christiane Sokollik, Johannes Spalinger, Ekaterina Safroneeva, Thea von Graffenried, Sébastien Godat, Dieter Hahnloser, Stephan R Vavricka, Christian Braegger, Andreas Nydegger","doi":"10.1159/000520995","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000520995","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Given the lack of data, we aimed to assess the impact of the length of diagnostic delay on the natural history of ulcerative colitis (UC) in pediatric (diagnosed <18 years) and adult patients (diagnosed ≥18 years).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from the Swiss Inflammatory Bowel Disease Cohort Study were analyzed. Diagnostic delay was defined as the interval between the first appearance of UC-related symptoms until diagnosis. Logistic regression modeling evaluated the appearance of the following complications in the long term according to the length of diagnostic delay: colonic dysplasia, colorectal cancer, UC-related hospitalization, colectomy, and extraintestinal manifestations (EIMs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 184 pediatric and 846 adult patients were included. The median diagnostic delay was 4 [IQR 2-7.5] months for the pediatric-onset group and 3 [IQR 2-10] months for the adult-onset group (<i>p</i> = 0.873). In both, pediatric- and adult-onset groups, the length of diagnostic delay at UC diagnosis was not associated with colectomy, UC-related hospitalization, colon dysplasia, and colorectal cancer. EIMs were significantly more prevalent at UC diagnosis in the adult-onset group with long diagnostic delay than in the adult-onset group with short diagnostic delay (<i>p</i> = 0.022). In the long term, the length of diagnostic delay was associated in the adult-onset group with colorectal dysplasia (<i>p</i> = 0.023), EIMs (<i>p</i> < 0.001), and more specifically arthritis/arthralgias (<i>p</i> < 0.001) and ankylosing spondylitis/sacroiliitis (<i>p</i> < 0.001). In the pediatric-onset UC group, the length of diagnostic delay in the long term was associated with arthritis/arthralgias (<i>p</i> = 0.017); however, it was not predictive for colectomy and UC-related hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>As colorectal cancer and EIMs are associated with considerable morbidity and costs, every effort should be made to reduce diagnostic delay in UC patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":13605,"journal":{"name":"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases","volume":"7 2","pages":"87-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9294935/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40706570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Background: There is no cure for Crohn’s disease (CD). Available treatments and treatment strategies, particularly anti-TNF, allow healing intestinal lesions and maintaining steroid-free remission in a subset of patients. Having in mind the remitting/relapsing nature of the disease, patients and health care providers often ask themselves whether the treatment could be withdrawn. Several studies have demonstrated a risk of relapse of CD after anti-TNF withdrawal, which varies from 20 to 50% at 1 year and from 50 to 80% beyond 5 years. These numbers clearly highlight that stopping therapy should not be a systematically proposed strategy in those remitting patients. Summary: Nobody would argue for anti-TNF withdrawal in patients with a high risk of short-term relapse. Nevertheless, they also indicate that a minority of patients may not relapse over midterm and that those who have relapsed may have benefited from a drug-free period before being again treated for a new cycle of treatment. The most relevant question is thus whether in those patients with a low to medium risk of disease relapse, treatment withdrawal could be contemplated. In this specific setting, there may be pros and cons for anti-TNF withdrawal. Among the pros are the potential side effects and toxicity of anti-TNF, the risk of loss of response over time, the patient preference allowing the patient to regain control of one’s health and investing in it, also improving adherence, the absence of a negative impact on disease evolution of a transient anti-TNF withdrawal, and finally the cost. Key Messages: Although anti-TNF withdrawal in patients with sustained clinical remission is associated with a high risk of relapse, this risk seems to be much lower in a subgroup of patients, particularly in endoscopic and biologic remission. Stopping anti-TNF in this subgroup of patients may be associated with a favorable benefit/risk ratio.
{"title":"Stopping Anti-TNF in Crohn’s Disease Remitters: Pros and Cons: The Pros","authors":"E. Louis","doi":"10.1159/000520942","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000520942","url":null,"abstract":"Background: There is no cure for Crohn’s disease (CD). Available treatments and treatment strategies, particularly anti-TNF, allow healing intestinal lesions and maintaining steroid-free remission in a subset of patients. Having in mind the remitting/relapsing nature of the disease, patients and health care providers often ask themselves whether the treatment could be withdrawn. Several studies have demonstrated a risk of relapse of CD after anti-TNF withdrawal, which varies from 20 to 50% at 1 year and from 50 to 80% beyond 5 years. These numbers clearly highlight that stopping therapy should not be a systematically proposed strategy in those remitting patients. Summary: Nobody would argue for anti-TNF withdrawal in patients with a high risk of short-term relapse. Nevertheless, they also indicate that a minority of patients may not relapse over midterm and that those who have relapsed may have benefited from a drug-free period before being again treated for a new cycle of treatment. The most relevant question is thus whether in those patients with a low to medium risk of disease relapse, treatment withdrawal could be contemplated. In this specific setting, there may be pros and cons for anti-TNF withdrawal. Among the pros are the potential side effects and toxicity of anti-TNF, the risk of loss of response over time, the patient preference allowing the patient to regain control of one’s health and investing in it, also improving adherence, the absence of a negative impact on disease evolution of a transient anti-TNF withdrawal, and finally the cost. Key Messages: Although anti-TNF withdrawal in patients with sustained clinical remission is associated with a high risk of relapse, this risk seems to be much lower in a subgroup of patients, particularly in endoscopic and biologic remission. Stopping anti-TNF in this subgroup of patients may be associated with a favorable benefit/risk ratio.","PeriodicalId":13605,"journal":{"name":"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases","volume":"12 1","pages":"64 - 68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75808634","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-17eCollection Date: 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1159/000519123
Danielle Bargo, Theo Tritton, Joseph C Cappelleri, Marco DiBonaventura, Timothy W Smith, Takanori Tsuchiya, Sean Gardiner, Irene Modesto, Tim Holbrook, Daniel Bluff, Taku Kobayashi
Objective: The aim of the study was to improve understanding of adherence and persistence to biologics, and their association with health-care resource utilization (HCRU), in Japanese patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC).
Methods: Data were from Medical Data Vision, a secondary care administrative database. A retrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis was conducted of data from UC patients initiating biologic therapy between August 2013 and July 2016. Data collected for 2 years prior (baseline) and 2 years after (follow-up) the index date were evaluated. Patients completing biologic induction were identified, and adherence/persistence to biologic therapy calculated. HCRU, steroid, and immunosuppressant use during baseline and follow-up were assessed. Biologic switching during the follow-up was evaluated. Descriptive statistics (e.g., means and proportions) were obtained and inferential analyses (from Student's t tests, Fisher's exact tests, χ2 tests, the Cox proportional hazard model, and negative binomial regression) were performed.
Results: The analysis included 649 patients (adalimumab: 265; infliximab: 384). Biologic induction was completed by 80% of patients. Adherence to adalimumab was higher than that to infliximab (p < 0.001). Persistence at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months was higher with infliximab than with adalimumab (p < 0.05). Overall, gastroenterology outpatient visits increased, and hospitalization frequency and duration decreased, from baseline to follow-up. UC-related hospitalizations were fewer and shorter, and endoscopies fewer, in persistent than in nonpersistent patients, although persistent patients made more outpatient visits than nonpersistent patients. Hospitalization duration was lower in persistent than nonpersistent patients. Approximately 50% of patients received an immunosuppressant during biologic therapy; 5% received a concomitant steroid during biologic therapy. Overall, 17% and 3% of patients, respectively, received 2nd line and 3rd line biologics.
Conclusions: Poor biologic persistence was associated with increased non-medication-associated HCRU. Effective treatments with high persistence levels and limited associated HCRU are needed in UC.
目的:本研究的目的是提高对日本中重度溃疡性结肠炎(UC)患者对生物制剂的依从性和持久性及其与卫生保健资源利用(HCRU)的关系的理解。方法:数据来自二级医疗管理数据库Medical Data Vision。对2013年8月至2016年7月间开始生物治疗的UC患者的数据进行回顾性纵向队列分析。对指标日期前2年(基线)和后2年(随访)收集的数据进行评估。确定完成生物诱导的患者,并计算对生物治疗的依从性/持久性。评估基线和随访期间HCRU、类固醇和免疫抑制剂的使用情况。评估随访期间的生物转换。获得描述性统计数据(如均值和比例),并进行推理分析(来自Student's t检验、Fisher精确检验、χ2检验、Cox比例风险模型和负二项回归)。结果:分析纳入649例患者(阿达木单抗:265例;英夫利昔单抗:384)。80%的患者完成了生物诱导。阿达木单抗的依从性高于英夫利昔单抗(p < 0.001)。英夫利昔单抗组6、12、18和24个月的持续时间高于阿达木单抗组(p < 0.05)。总体而言,从基线到随访,胃肠病学门诊就诊增加,住院频率和持续时间减少。与非持续性患者相比,持续性患者与uc相关的住院次数更少,时间更短,内窥镜检查次数更少,尽管持续性患者比非持续性患者就诊次数更多。顽固性患者住院时间低于非顽固性患者。大约50%的患者在生物治疗期间接受了免疫抑制剂;5%的患者在生物治疗期间同时使用类固醇。总体而言,分别有17%和3%的患者接受了二线和三线生物制剂。结论:生物持续性差与非药物相关HCRU增加有关。UC需要高持续性和有限相关HCRU的有效治疗。
{"title":"Living with Ulcerative Colitis in Japan: Biologic Persistence and Health-Care Resource Use.","authors":"Danielle Bargo, Theo Tritton, Joseph C Cappelleri, Marco DiBonaventura, Timothy W Smith, Takanori Tsuchiya, Sean Gardiner, Irene Modesto, Tim Holbrook, Daniel Bluff, Taku Kobayashi","doi":"10.1159/000519123","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000519123","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the study was to improve understanding of adherence and persistence to biologics, and their association with health-care resource utilization (HCRU), in Japanese patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were from Medical Data Vision, a secondary care administrative database. A retrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis was conducted of data from UC patients initiating biologic therapy between August 2013 and July 2016. Data collected for 2 years prior (baseline) and 2 years after (follow-up) the index date were evaluated. Patients completing biologic induction were identified, and adherence/persistence to biologic therapy calculated. HCRU, steroid, and immunosuppressant use during baseline and follow-up were assessed. Biologic switching during the follow-up was evaluated. Descriptive statistics (e.g., means and proportions) were obtained and inferential analyses (from Student's <i>t</i> tests, Fisher's exact tests, χ<sup>2</sup> tests, the Cox proportional hazard model, and negative binomial regression) were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 649 patients (adalimumab: 265; infliximab: 384). Biologic induction was completed by 80% of patients. Adherence to adalimumab was higher than that to infliximab (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Persistence at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months was higher with infliximab than with adalimumab (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Overall, gastroenterology outpatient visits increased, and hospitalization frequency and duration decreased, from baseline to follow-up. UC-related hospitalizations were fewer and shorter, and endoscopies fewer, in persistent than in nonpersistent patients, although persistent patients made more outpatient visits than nonpersistent patients. Hospitalization duration was lower in persistent than nonpersistent patients. Approximately 50% of patients received an immunosuppressant during biologic therapy; 5% received a concomitant steroid during biologic therapy. Overall, 17% and 3% of patients, respectively, received 2nd line and 3rd line biologics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Poor biologic persistence was associated with increased non-medication-associated HCRU. Effective treatments with high persistence levels and limited associated HCRU are needed in UC.</p>","PeriodicalId":13605,"journal":{"name":"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases","volume":"6 4","pages":"186-198"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8739862/pdf/iid-0006-0186.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39863390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction: Predictive biomarkers for the therapeutic outcome of induction therapy with systemic corticosteroid for active ulcerative colitis (UC) have not been established. This study aimed to investigate whether neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and/or platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) can be predictive biomarkers for the therapeutic outcomes of systemic corticosteroid therapy in UC.
Methods: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study. In total, 48 patients with UC who received induction therapy with systemic corticosteroid were enrolled. Based on the achievement of clinical remission after 8 weeks of treatment, the patients were divided into the remission group (n = 28) and the nonremission group (n = 20). Clinical characteristics, NLR, and PLR at baseline between the remission and nonremission groups were compared via a univariate analysis. The independent risk factors of nonremission were identified via a multivariate analysis.
Results: The baseline Mayo score, platelet count, lymphocyte count, C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, NLR, and PLR between the 2 groups significantly differed. The nonremission group had higher NLR and PLR than the remission group (4.70 [3.04-11.3] vs. 3.10 [1.36-16.42]; p < 0.05, and 353.6 [220.3-499.8] vs. 207.2 [174.4-243.6]; p < 0.001, respectively). A multivariate analysis revealed that a Mayo score of ≥9, CRP level of ≥1.26 mg/dL, and PLR of ≥262 (hazard ratio: 23.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.29-413.7, p = 0.033) were considered independent risk factors for nonremission.
Conclusion: This report first identified the efficacy of NLR and PLR as candidate biomarkers for predicting the therapeutic outcomes of systemic corticosteroid therapy in UC.
{"title":"Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratios as Noninvasive Predictors of the Therapeutic Outcomes of Systemic Corticosteroid Therapy in Ulcerative Colitis.","authors":"Katsuya Endo, Tomonori Satoh, Yuki Yoshino, Shiho Kondo, Yoko Kawakami, Tomofumi Katayama, Yoshiteru Sasaki, Atsuko Takasu, Takayuki Kogure, Morihisa Hirota, Takayoshi Meguro, Kennichi Satoh","doi":"10.1159/000520523","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000520523","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Predictive biomarkers for the therapeutic outcome of induction therapy with systemic corticosteroid for active ulcerative colitis (UC) have not been established. This study aimed to investigate whether neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and/or platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) can be predictive biomarkers for the therapeutic outcomes of systemic corticosteroid therapy in UC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a single-center retrospective cohort study. In total, 48 patients with UC who received induction therapy with systemic corticosteroid were enrolled. Based on the achievement of clinical remission after 8 weeks of treatment, the patients were divided into the remission group (<i>n</i> = 28) and the nonremission group (<i>n</i> = 20). Clinical characteristics, NLR, and PLR at baseline between the remission and nonremission groups were compared via a univariate analysis. The independent risk factors of nonremission were identified via a multivariate analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The baseline Mayo score, platelet count, lymphocyte count, C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, NLR, and PLR between the 2 groups significantly differed. The nonremission group had higher NLR and PLR than the remission group (4.70 [3.04-11.3] vs. 3.10 [1.36-16.42]; <i>p</i> < 0.05, and 353.6 [220.3-499.8] vs. 207.2 [174.4-243.6]; <i>p</i> < 0.001, respectively). A multivariate analysis revealed that a Mayo score of ≥9, CRP level of ≥1.26 mg/dL, and PLR of ≥262 (hazard ratio: 23.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.29-413.7, <i>p</i> = 0.033) were considered independent risk factors for nonremission.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This report first identified the efficacy of NLR and PLR as candidate biomarkers for predicting the therapeutic outcomes of systemic corticosteroid therapy in UC.</p>","PeriodicalId":13605,"journal":{"name":"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases","volume":"6 4","pages":"218-224"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8740212/pdf/iid-0006-0218.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39863393","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}