British Society of Gastroenterology guidance for management of inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic is putting unprecedented pressures on healthcare systems globally. Early insights have been made possible by rapid sharing of data from China and Italy. In the UK, we have rapidly mobilised inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) centres in order that preparations can be made to protect our patients and the clinical services they rely on. This is a novel coronavirus; much is unknown as to how it will affect people with IBD. We also lack information about the impact of different immunosuppressive medications. To address this uncertainty, the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) COVID-19 IBD Working Group has used the best available data and expert opinion to generate a risk grid that groups patients into highest, moderate and lowest risk categories. This grid allows patients to be instructed to follow the UK government's advice for shielding, stringent and standard advice regarding social distancing, respectively. Further considerations are given to service provision, medical and surgical therapy, endoscopy, imaging and clinical trials

Inflammatory bowel disease patient‐reported quality assessment should drive service improvement: A national survey of UK IBD units and patients

© 2022 The Authors. Published by Wiley. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.17042Background & Aims Healthcare service provision in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is often designed to meet targets set by healthcare providers rather than those of patients. It is unclear whether this meets the needs of patients, as assessed by patients themselves. This nationwide study assessed patients' experience of IBD and the healthcare they received, aiming to identify factors in IBD healthcare provision associated with perceived high-quality care. Methods Using the 2019 IBD Standards as a framework, a national benchmarking tool for quality assessment in IBD was developed by IBD UK, comprising a Patient Survey and Service Self-Assessment. Results In all, 134 IBD services and 9757 patients responded. Perceived quality of care was lowest in young adults then increased with age, was higher in males and those >2 years since diagnosis. No hospital services met all the National IBD Standards for recommended workforce numbers. Key metrics associated with patient-reported high-quality care were as follows: identification as a tertiary centre, patient information availability, shared decision-making, rapid response to contact for advice, access to urgent review, joint medical/surgical clinics and access to research (all p < 0.001). Higher numbers of IBD nurse specialists in a service was strongly associated with patients receiving regular reviews and having confidence in self-management and reporting high-quality care. Conclusions This extensive patient and healthcare provider survey emphasises the importance of aspects of care less often measured by clinicians, such as communication, shared decision-making and provision of information, and demonstrates that IBD nurse specialists are crucial to meeting the needs of people living with IBD.This work was supported by Crohn's & Colitis UK.Published onlin

HLA-DQA1*05 carriage associated with development of anti-drug antibodies to infliximab and adalimumab in patients with Crohn's Disease

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies are the most widely used biologic drugs for treating immune-mediated diseases, but repeated administration can induce the formation of anti-drug antibodies. The ability to identify patients at increased risk for development of anti-drug antibodies would facilitate selection of therapy and use of preventative strategies.This article is freely available via Open Access. Click on Publisher URL to access the full-text

Lived experience in people with inflammatory bowel disease and co-morbid anxiety and depression in the UK and Australia

This study explored the lived experience of people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and anxiety/depression. It utilised a deductive biopsychosocial framework. Overall, 24 patients and 20 healthcare professionals from two countries participated. In the UK, the main themes included: 1) Bidirectional relationship between IBD and mental health, 2) The need for health care integration, 3) Lack of awareness about the disease. In Australia: 1) The “vicious cycle” of IBD and psychosocial health; 2) The need for biopsychosocial healthcare integration; and 3) The stigma of a hidden disease. Better communication around mental illness is essential in improving IBD healthcare

EGFR–co-mutated advanced NSCLC and response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors

Objectives The evolution of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has changed the landscape of disease for a subset of patients with NSCLC. Most patients with an EGFR mutation respond to these drugs; however, a proportion show limited or no tumor response. We explored the impact of co-mutation (double or multiple mutation), compared with a single mutation, of the EGFR gene on response to TKIs in a series of patients with metastatic NSCLC. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the mutation profiles of nonsquamous NSCLC tested at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital between 2012 and 2015 by MassArray using the OncoCarta v1.0 panel. Patients with metastatic disease whose tumors had sensitizing EGFR mutation(s) were included. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). We used the Kaplan-Meier method for PFS and overall survival; the log rank test was used to compare groups with and without co-mutation. Multivariable analysis was done for PFS; response rate was assessed using chi-square and logistic regression analysis. Results A total of 62 patients were included, and of these, eight (12.9%) had a co-mutation. The median PFS and overall survival times were 11.5 and 26.3 months, respectively. Patients with EGFR co-mutation had a significantly shorter median PFS than those with a single mutation (5.7 months versus 12.3 months, p = 0.02). The response rate to TKIs was significantly worse in those with co-mutation compared with in those without co-mutation (38% versus 89%, p < 0.001). Conclusions Taking into account the small number of patients in this study, PFS in patients with EGFR co-mutation appeared significantly shorter, and response rate significantly lower, than in patients with a single mutation. Data from multipanel testing may identify subgroups of patients who are likely to respond poorly to standard treatment. Clarification of these subgroups may improve patient care