6-thioguanine treatment in inflammatory bowel disease: A critical appraisal by a European 6-TG working party

Recently, the suggestion to use 6-thioguanine (6-TG) as an alternative thiopurine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been discarded due to reports about possible (hepato) toxicity. During meetings arranged in Vienna and Prague in 2004, European experts applying 6-TG further on in IBD patients presented data on safety and efficacy of 6-TG. After thorough evaluation of its risk-benefit ratio, the group consented that 6-TG may still be considered as a rescue drug in stringently defined indications in IBD, albeit restricted to a clinical research setting. As a potential indication for administering 6-TG, we delineated the requirement for maintenance therapy as well as intolerance and/or resistance to aminosalicylates, azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, methotrexate and infliximab. Furthermore, indications are preferred in which surgery is thought to be inappropriate. The standard 6-TG dosage should not exceed 25 mg daily. Routine laboratory controls are mandatory in short intervals. Liver biopsies should be performed after 6-12 months, three years and then three-yearly accompanied by gastroduodenoscopy, to monitor for potential hepatotoxicity, including nodular regenerative hyperplasia (NRH) and veno-occlusive disease (VOD). Treatment with 6-TG must be discontinued in case of overt or histologically proven hepatotoxicity. Copyright (c) 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel

Development and Validation of a Symptom-Based Activity Index for Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Standardized instruments are needed to assess the activity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), to provide endpoints for clinical trials and observational studies. We aimed to develop and validate a patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument and score, based on items that could account for variations in patients’ assessments of disease severity. We also evaluated relationships between patients’ assessment of disease severity and EoE-associated endoscopic, histologic, and laboratory findings

Current management of the gastrointestinal complications of systemic sclerosis.

Systemic sclerosis is a multisystem autoimmune disorder that involves the gastrointestinal tract in more than 90% of patients. This involvement can extend from the mouth to the anus, with the oesophagus and anorectum most frequently affected. Gut complications result in a plethora of presentations that impair oral intake and faecal continence and, consequently, have an adverse effect on patient quality of life, resulting in referral to gastroenterologists. The cornerstones of gastrointestinal symptom management are to optimize symptom relief and monitor for complications, in particular anaemia and malabsorption. Early intervention in patients who develop these complications is critical to minimize disease progression and improve prognosis. In the future, enhanced therapeutic strategies should be developed, based on an ever-improving understanding of the intestinal pathophysiology of systemic sclerosis. This Review describes the most commonly occurring clinical scenarios of gastrointestinal involvement in patients with systemic sclerosis as they present to the gastroenterologist, with recommendations for the suggested assessment protocol and therapy in each situation

Duodenitis: a reliable radiologic diagnosis?

The authors performed a retrospective study of 50 patients with endoscopically diagnosed duodenitis who had undergone double-contrast upper gastrointestinal (GI) examinations. Duodenitis was diagnosed on the original radiographic reports in six of 37 patients (16%) with mild-to-moderate duodenitis, five of 13 patients (38%) with severe duodenitis, and 11 of 50 patients (22%) with all grades of duodenitis on endoscopy. Subsequent analysis of the films revealed one or more radiologic signs of duodenitis (including folds more than 4 mm in thickness, mucosal nodularity, bulbar deformity, and erosions) in 18 of 37 patients (49%) with mild-to-moderate duodenitis, eight of 13 patients (62%) with severe duodenitis, and 26 of 50 patients (52%) with all grades of duodenitis on endoscopy. In a separate part of the study, the authors identified another 20 patients with radiographically diagnosed duodenitis who had undergone endoscopic examinations. Nine of those 20 patients (45%) had duodenitis on endoscopy. Subsequent analysis of the films revealed one or more signs of duodenitis in 17 patients from this group. Nine of the latter patients (53%) had duodenitis on endoscopy. Using established radiologic criteria for duodenitis, our rate of false-positive and false-negative radiologic diagnoses still was about 50%. Thus, the double-contrast upper GI examination is a relatively unreliable technique for diagnosing duodenitis