Fecal calprotectin more accurately reflects endoscopic activity of ulcerative colitis than the Lichtiger Index, CRP, or blood leukocytes

Background: Mucosal healing in ulcerative colitis (UC) is reported to be associated with favourable clinical outcomes such as reduced hospitalization and surgery rates. Activity monitoring by endoscopy has its shortcomings due to invasiveness, costs, and potential patient discomfort. Data on the correlation of noninvasive biomarkers with endoscopic severity in UC are scarce. Aim: to evaluate the correlation between endoscopic activity according to the modified Baron Index and fecal calprotectin, C-reactive protein (CRP), blood leukocytes, and the Lichtiger Index (clinical score). Methods: UC patients with leftsided and extensive colitis undergoing complete colonoscopy were prospectively enrolled and scored clinically and endoscopically. Fecal and blood samples were analyzed in UC patients (in a blinded fashion) and controls. The modified Baron score describes the following 5 endoscopic conditions: 0 = normal, 1 = granular mucosa, edema, 2 = friable mucosa but no spontaneous bleeding, 3 = microulcerations with spontaneous bleeding, 4 = gross ulceration, denuded mucosa. Results: We enrolled 228 UC patients (mean age 41 ± 13 years, 39 female) and 52 healthy controls. Disease was located in 40% in the left colon, 21% had an extensive and 39% a pancolitis. Endoscopic disease activity correlated best with fecal calprotectin (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient r = 0.821), followed by the Lichtiger Index (r = 0.682), CRP (r = 0.556), and blood leukocytes (r = 0.401). Fecal calprotectin was the only marker that could discriminate between different grades of endoscopic activity (grade 0, 25 ± 11 μg/g; grade 1, 44 ± 34 μg/g; grade 2, 111 ± 74 μg/g; grade 3, 330 ± 332 μg/g; grade 4, 659 ± 319 μg/g; P = 0.002 for discriminating grade 0 vs. 1, and P < 0.001 for discriminating grade 1 vs. 2, grade 2 vs. 3, and grade 3 vs. 4). Fecal calprotectin had the highest overall accuracy (91%) to detect endoscopically active disease (modified Baron Index ≥ 2), followed by the Lichtiger Index score of ≥ 4 (77%), CRP > 5 mg/L (69%) and blood leukocytosis (58%). Conclusions: Fecal calprotectin better correlated with endoscopic disease activity than clinical activity, CRP, and blood leukocytes. The strong correlation with endoscopic disease activity suggests that FC represents a useful biomarker for noninvasive monitoring of disease activity in UC patients.

Best practice in the management of mild-to-moderately active ulcerative colitis and achieving maintenance of remission using mesalazine.

Optimizing treatment goals in ulcerative colitis requires recognizing the needs of patients. It is increasingly recognized that adapting treatment strategies aligned with patient needs can improve patient compliance and consequently minimize relapse rates. Tailoring of treatment strategies can improve not only patient quality of life, and decrease the number harmed by adverse events from more potent drugs, but can also save valuable healthcare costs by avoiding high-cost treatment interventions associated with acute ulcerative colitis. This review will consider several elements of mesalazine management from the patient perspective based on a range of clinical and patient-focused evidence. By highlighting patient preferences in disease management it is envisaged that this review will aid physicians to optimize treatment decisions with the different mesalazine preparations available.

Appropriateness and long-term discontinuation rate of biological therapies in ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: Anti-TNFα agents are commonly used for ulcerative colitis (UC) therapy in the event of non-response to conventional strategies or as colon-salvaging therapy. The objectives were to assess the appropriateness of biological therapies for UC patients and to study treatment discontinuation over time, according to appropriateness of treatment, as a measure of outcome. METHODS: We selected adult ulcerative colitis patients from the Swiss IBD cohort who had been treated with anti-TNFα agents. Appropriateness of the first-line anti-TNFα treatment was assessed using detailed criteria developed during the European Panel on the Appropriateness of Therapy for UC. Treatment discontinuation as an outcome was assessed for categories of appropriateness. RESULTS: Appropriateness of the first-line biological treatment was determined in 186 UC patients. For 64% of them, this treatment was considered appropriate. During follow-up, 37% of all patients discontinued biological treatment, 17% specifically because of failure. Time-to-failure of treatment was significantly different among patients on an appropriate biological treatment compared to those for whom the treatment was considered not appropriate (p=0.0007). Discontinuation rate after 2years was 26% compared to 54% between those two groups. Patients on inappropriate biological treatment were more likely to have severe disease, concomitant steroids and/or immunomodulators. They were also consistently more likely to suffer a failure of efficacy and to stop therapy during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Appropriateness of first-line anti-TNFα therapy results in a greater likelihood of continuing with the therapy. In situations where biological treatment is uncertain or inappropriate, physicians should consider other options instead of prescribing anti-TNFα agents.

First explicit criteria to decide on the appropriateness of therapy of ulcerative colitis: the European EPATUC panel

Background: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic disease with a wide variety of treatment options many of which are not evidence based. Supplementing available guidelines, which are often broadly defined, consensus-based and generally not tailored to specifically reflect the individual patient situation, we developed explicit appropriateness criteria to assist, and improve treatment decisions. Methods: We used the RAND appropriateness method which does not force consensus. An extensive literature review was compiled based on and supplementing, where necessary, the ECCO UC 2011 guidelines. EPATUC (endorsed by ECCO) was formed by 8 gastroenterologists, 2 surgeons and 2 general practitioners from throughout Europe. Clinical scenarios reflecting practice were rated on a 9-point scale from 1 (extremely inappropriate) to 9 (extremely appropriate), based on the expert's experience and the available literature. After extensive discussion, all scenarios were re-rated at a two-day panel meeting. Median and disagreement were used to categorize ratings into 3 categories: appropriate, uncertain and inappropriate. Results: 718 clinical scenarios were rated, structured in 13 main clinical presentations: not refractory (n=64) or refractory (n=33) proctitis, mild to moderate left-sided (n=72) or extensive (n=48) colitis, severe colitis (n=36), steroid-dependant colitis (n=36), steroid-refractory colitis (n=55), acute pouchitis (n=96), maintenance of remission (n=248), colorectal cancer prevention (n=9) and fulminant colitis (n=9). Overall, 100 indications were judged appropriate (14%), 129 uncertain (18%) and 489 inappropriate (68%). Disagreement between experts was very low (6%). Conclusion: For the very first time, explicit appropriateness criteria for therapy of UC were developed that allow both specific and rapid therapeutic decision making and prospective assessment of treatment appropriateness. Comparison of these detailed scenarios with patient profiles encountered in the Swiss IBD cohort study indicates good concordance. EPATUC criteria will be freely accessible on the internet (epatuc.ch).

Better 6 months outcome for steroid refractory ulcerative colitis with infliximab rescue therapy compared to tacrolimus or cyclosporine: a Swiss IBD cohort retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND: C iclosporine ( CsA), Tacrolimus (Tcl) and Infliximab (IFX) are effective rescue therapies in steroidrefractory ulcerative colitis (UC). Comparative studies are however m issing. M ETHOD: T his i s the retrospective analysis of treatment outcome for oral Tcl (n=27, initially 0.05mg/Kg twice daily, aiming for serum trough levels of 5-10 n g/mL), i ntravenous C sA ( n=23, 2 mg/kg/daily a nd then o ral CsA 5mg/kg/daily) and IFX ( n=43, 5 mg/kg intravenously at week 0, 2, 6 and then every 8 weeks) in patients with s teroid r efractory moderate to s evere UC enrolled i n the SWISS IBD cohort s tudy. After successful rescue therapy with Tcl o r C sA, t hiopurine m aintenance therapy or maintenance therapy with Tcl (in Tcl pretreated patients) was introduced. The endpoints analyzed steroid free r emission r ate (on the basis of m odified Truelove- Witts severity index (MTWSI)) and number of colectomies after 6 m onths. R ESULTS: A t 6 months, 26% ( 7/27) o f patients treated with T cl r emained i n steroid free remission (MTWSI score ≤4) compared to 30 % (7/23) on 18 droplets to the same extend under the linoleic acid treat, whereas lipid hydrolysis or loss was significantly increased in Huh-7 WT cells after 24h. Conclusions: Chronic alcohol feeding in obese, insulin-resistant rats exerts significant and synergistic effects on PNPLA3 mRNA expression, which correlated with triglyceride content. In v itro experiments suggest that PNPLA3 expression depends on the t ypes of d ietary f atty acids with polyunsaturated fatty a cids i nducing a nd monounsaturated fatty a cids inhibiting PNPLA3 mRNA. I148M polymorphism of PNPLA3 l eads to attenuation o f lipolytic processes resulting in fat accumulation in the cell. 20 CsA and 58% ( 27/41) o f patients t reated w ith IFX ( Tcl & CsA vs I FX p = 0 .018). S ignificant m ore patients had primary non response, loss of response or severe adverse events i n the CsA cohort ( 61%, 1 4/23) c ompared to Tcl cohort (33.3 % , 9/27), and IFX cohort (30%, 1 3/43) (p= 0.037). Colectomy rate was significantly higher after CsA (17.4 %, 4/23) compared to Tcl (3.7 %, 1/27) or IFX (2.3 %, 1/43) (p= 0.047).CONCLUSION: After s ix m onth, rescue therapy with I FX h ad t he l owest c olectomy r ate, significantly h igher steroid free r emission rate, a nd t he lowest rate of non-response, loss of response and severe adverse events compared to CsA or Tcl rescue treatment.

Transcriptional analysis of left-sided colitis, pancolitis, and ulcerative colitis-associated dysplasia

BACKGROUND: It is unknown why patients with extensive ulcerative colitis (UC) have a higher risk of colorectal cancer compared with patients with left-sided UC. This study characterizes the inflammatory processes in left-sided UC, pancolitis, and UC-associated dysplasia at the transcriptional level to identify potential biomarkers and transcripts of importance for the carcinogenic behavior of chronic inflammation. METHODS: The Affymetrix GeneChip Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 was applied on colonic biopsies from UC patients with left-sided UC, pancolitis, dysplasia, and controls. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and immunohistochemistry were performed for validating selected transcripts in the initial cohort and in 2 independent cohorts of patients with UC. Microarray data were analyzed by principal component analysis, and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and immunohistochemistry data by the Wilcoxon's rank-sum test. RESULTS: The principal component analysis results revealed separate clusters for left-sided UC, pancolitis, dysplasia, and controls. Close clustering of dysplastic and pancolitic samples indicated similarities in gene expression. Indeed, 101 and 656 parallel upregulated and downregulated transcripts, respectively, were identified in specimens from dysplasia and pancolitis. Validation of selected transcripts hereof identified insulin receptor alpha (INSRA) and MAP kinase interacting serine/threonine kinase 2 (MKNK2) with an enhanced expression in dysplasia compared with left-sided UC and controls, whereas laminin γ2 (LAMC2) was found with a lower expression in dysplasia compared with the remaining 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates pancolitis and left-sided UC as distinct inflammatory processes at the transcriptional level, and identifies INSRA, MKNK2, and LAMC2 as potential critical transcripts in the inflammation-driven preneoplastic process of UC.

Topical therapy is underused in patients with ulcerative colitis.

The availability of new topical preparations for the treatment of left sided ulcerative colitis offers a therapy optimization for many patients. Rectal application of steroids and 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) is associated with fewer side effects and has a higher therapeutic efficacy in left-sided colitis as compared to a systemic therapy. Therefore, we were interested in the use of topical therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis. The key question was whether topical treatment is more frequently used than oral therapy in patients with proctitis and left sided colitis. Data of 800 patients of the Swiss IBD cohort study were analyzed. Sixteen percent of patients of the cohort had proctitis, 21% proctosigmoiditis and 41% pancolitis. Topical therapy with 5-ASA or corticosteroids was given in 26% of patients with proctitis, a combined systemic and topical treatment was given in 13%, whereas systemic treatment with 5-ASA without topical treatment was given in 29%. Proportion of topical drug use decreased with respect to disease extension from 39% for proctitis to 13.1% for pancolitis (P=0.001). Patients with severe colitis received a significantly higher dose of topical 5-ASA than patients in remission. Side effects of topical or systemic 5-ASA or budesonide treatment were less frequently seen compared to other medications. Topical treatment was frequently stopped over time. The quality of life was the same in patients with limited disease compared to patients with pancolitis. Topical treatment in proctitis patients was underused in Switzerland. Since topical treatment is safe and effective it should be used to a larger extend.

Comparative short-term response and remission rates for tacrolimus, cyclosporine, and infliximab for steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND: Calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine (CsA) and tacrolimus (Tcl)) and the anti-TNF-antibody infliximab (IFX) are established therapeutic options in steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). In acute severe UC failing steroids, a randomized trial showed an 85% short term response to CsA or IFX, with avoidance of colectomy. Comparative responses to the three drugs in outpatients with steroid-refractory UC are unknown. METHOD: Response to treatment in patients with steroid-refractory moderate to severe UC was retrospectively studied in three cohorts of patients: Cohort A (n=24) treated with oral Tcl (initially 0.05mg/kg twice daily, aiming for serum trough levels of 5-10 ng/mL); Cohort B (n=19) treated with intravenous CsA 2mg/kg/daily and then oral CsA 5mg/kg/daily; Cohort C. (n= 41) treated with IFX (5mg/kg intravenously at week 0, 2, 6 and then every 8 weeks). After successful rescue therapy with Tcl or CsA, thiopurine maintenance therapy was introduced. The endpoint was evaluation of clinical remission or response at week 6, on the basis of modified Truelove-Witts severity index (MTWSI). RESULTS: After 6 weeks, 42% (10/24) of patients treated with Tcl achieved remission (MTWSI score ≤4) compared to 47% (9/ 19) on CsA and 66% (27/41) of patients treated with IFX (Tcl & CsA vs IFX p=0.127). Clinical response (decrease of MTWSI score of more than 4 points) at week 6 was reached in 25% (6/24) patients on Tcl, compared to 11% (2/19) on CsA and 20% (8/41) given IFX (p=0.484). Subgroup analysis showed the highest rates of remission in those with moderate steroid-refractory UC treated with IFX: 29% (2/7) in Tcl group compared to 50% (2/4) in CsA group and 76 % (19/25) in IFX group (Tcl &CsA vs IFX p= 0.058) Patients with severe colitis showed similar rates of remission in all three groups: 47% (8/17) on Tcl, 47% (7/ 15) on CsA and 50% (8/16) on IFX (p= 0.700). Colectomy within 6 weeks occurred in 4% (1/24) after Tcl, 5% (1/19) after CsA and 0% (0/41) after IFX. Adverse effects in the first 6 weeks were observed in 13% (3/24) on Tcl, 26% (5/19) on CsA, and 10% (4/41) on IFX (p=0.224) CONCLUSION: No significant differences in response, remission, colectomy rate or adverse events between the three agents were found, although the study is too small for definitive conclusions. There are intriguing differences, with potentially greater response to IFX in moderate, steroid-refractory UC.

Topical therapy is underused in patients with ulcerative colitis.

The availability of new topical preparations for the treatment of left sided ulcerative colitis offers a therapy optimization for many patients. Rectal application of steroids and 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) is associated with fewer side effects and has a higher therapeutic efficacy in left-sided colitis as compared to a systemic therapy. Therefore, we were interested in the use of topical therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis. The key question was whether topical treatment is more frequently used than oral therapy in patients with proctitis and left sided colitis. Data of 800 patients of the Swiss IBD cohort study were analyzed. Sixteen percent of patients of the cohort had proctitis, 21% proctosigmoiditis and 41% pancolitis. Topical therapy with 5-ASA or corticosteroids was given in 26% of patients with proctitis, a combined systemic and topical treatment was given in 13%, whereas systemic treatment with 5-ASA without topical treatment was given in 29%. Proportion of topical drug use decreased with respect to disease extension from 39% for proctitis to 13.1% for pancolitis (P=0.001). Patients with severe colitis received a significantly higher dose of topical 5-ASA than patients in remission. Side effects of topical or systemic 5-ASA or budesonide treatment were less frequently seen compared to other medications. Topical treatment was frequently stopped over time. The quality of life was the same in patients with limited disease compared to patients with pancolitis. Topical treatment in proctitis patients was underused in Switzerland. Since topical treatment is safe and effective it should be used to a larger extend.

Successive treatment with cyclosporine and infliximab in steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis.

OBJECTIVES: Rescue therapy with either cyclosporine (CYS) or infliximab (IFX) is an effective option in patients with intravenous steroid-refractory attacks of ulcerative colitis (UC). In patients who fail, colectomy is usually recommended, but a second-line rescue therapy with IFX or CYS is an alternative. The aims of this study were to investigate the efficacy and tolerance of IFX and CYS as a second-line rescue therapy in steroid-refractory UC or indeterminate colitis (IC) unsuccessfully treated with CYS or IFX.METHODS: This was a retrospective survey of patients seen during the period 2000-2008 in the GETAID centers. Inclusion criteria included a delay of <1 month between CYS withdrawal (when used first) and IFX, or a delay of <2 months between IFX (when used first) and CYS, and a follow-up of at least 3 months after inclusion. Time-to-colectomy, clinical response, and occurrence of serious adverse events were analyzed.RESULTS: A total of 86 patients (median age 34 years; 49 males; 71 UC and 15 IC) were successively treated with CYS and IFX. The median (+/-s.e.) follow-up time was 22.6 (7.0) months. During the study period, 49 patients failed to respond to the second-line rescue therapy and underwent a colectomy. The probability of colectomy-free survival (+/-s.e.) was 61.3 +/- 5.3% at 3 months and 41.3 +/- 5.6% at 12 months. A case of fatal pulmonary embolism occurred at 1 day after surgery in a 45-year-old man. Also, nine infectious complications were observed during the second-line rescue therapy.CONCLUSIONS: In patients with intravenous steroid-refractory UC and who fail to respond to CYS or IFX, a second-line rescue therapy may be effective in carefully selected patients, avoiding colectomy within 2 months in two-thirds of them. The risk/benefit ratio should still be considered individually.

First explicit criteria to decide on the appropriateness of therapy of ulcerative colitis: the European EPATUC panel

Background: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic disease with a wide variety of treatment options many of which are not evidence based. Supplementing available guidelines, which are often broadly defined, consensus-based and generally not tailored to specifically reflect the individual patient situation, we developed explicit appropriateness criteria to assist, and improve treatment decisions. Methods: We used the RAND appropriateness method which does not force consensus. An extensive literature review was compiled based on and supplementing, where necessary, the ECCO UC 2011 guidelines. EPATUC (endorsed by ECCO) was formed by 7 gastroenterologists, 2 surgeons and 2 general practitioners from throughout Europe. Clinical scenarios reflecting practice were rated on a 9-point scale from 1 (extremely inappropriate) to 9 (extremely appropriate), based on the expert's experience and the available literature. After extensive discussion, all scenarios were re-rated at a two-day panel meeting. Median and disagreement (D) were used to categorize ratings into 3 categories: appropriate (A), uncertain (U) and inappropriate (I). Results: 718 clinical scenarios were rated, structured in 13 main clinical presentations: not refractory (n = 64) or refractory (n = 33) proctitis, mild to moderate left-sided (n = 72) or extensive (n = 48) colitis, severe colitis (n = 36), steroid- dependant colitis (n = 36), steroid-refractory colitis (n = 55), acute pouchitis (n = 96), maintenance of remission (n = 248), colorectal cancer prevention (n = 9) and fulminant colitis (n = 9). Overall, 100 indications were judged appropriate (14%), 129 uncertain (18%) and 489 inappropriate (68%). Disagreement between experts was very low (6%). Conclusions: For the very first time, explicit appropriateness criteria for therapy of UC were developed that allow both specific and rapid therapeutic decision making and prospective assessment of treatment appropriateness. Comparison of these detailed scenarios with patient profiles encountered in the Swiss IBD cohort study indicates good concordance. EPATUC criteria will be freely accessible on the internet (epatuc.ch)