Gastrointestinal symptoms involvement in hospitalised COVID-19 patients in Liverpool, UK: a descriptive cross-sectional, single-centre study

Since December 2019, COVID-19 has caused huge global morbidity and mortality.1 Although the disease is primarily a respiratory illness, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are increasingly recognised.2 However, reported literature on the prevalence of these symptoms is conflicting, as is their relationship with disease course and outcome.3,4 We aimed to identify the prevalence of GI symptoms among a cohort of UK hospitalised adults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and to describe the association of GI symptoms with patient characteristics, clinical course and outcome

Frequency and clinical significance of localized adverse events following mass drug administration for lymphatic filariasis in an endemic area in South India

Fear of adverse events (AEs) negatively affects compliance to mass drug administration (MDA) for lymphatic filariasis (LF) elimination program. Systemic AEs are believed to occur because of killing of microfilariae, whereas localized soft tissue reactions might be due to the death of adult worms following therapy. Most AEs are mild and self-limited. However, localized AEs are sometimes more significant and of concern to participants. Here, we describe localized AEs that were noted during a large community study that evaluated the safety of a triple-drug regimen (ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine, and albendazole) for the treatment of LF in India. We have also discussed the importance of timely detection and careful management of AEs for preserving community confidence in MDA

Serum galectins as potential biomarkers of inflammatory bowel diseases

The inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), which include mainly Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are common chronic inflammatory conditions of the digestive system. The diagnosis of IBD relies on the use of a combination of factors including symptoms, endoscopy and levels of serum proteins such as C-reactive protein (CRP) or faecal calprotectin. Currently there is no single reliable biomarker to determine IBD. Galectins are a family of galactoside-binding proteins that are commonly altered in the circulation of disease conditions such as cancer and inflammation. This study investigated serum galectin levels as possible biomarkers in determining IBD and IBD disease activity. Levels of galectins-1, -2, -3, -4, -7 and -8 were analysed in 208 samples from ambulant IBD patients (97 CD, 71 UC) patients and 40 from healthy people. Disease activity was assessed using Harvey-Bradshaw Index for CD and simple clinical colitis activity index for UC. The relationship of each galectin in determining IBD and IBD disease activity were analysed and compared with current IBD biomarker CRP. It was found that serum level of galectin-1 and -3, but not galectins-2, -4, -7 and -8, were significantly higher in IBD patients than in healthy people. At cut-off of 4.1ng/ml, galectin-1 differentiated IBD from healthy controls with 71% sensitivity and 87% specificity. At cut-off of 38.5ng/ml, galectin-3 separated IBD from healthy controls with 53% sensitivity and 87% specificity. None of the galectins however were able to distinguish active disease from remission in UC or CD. Thus, levels of galectins-1 and -3 are significantly elevated in both UC and CD patients compared to healthy people. Although the increased galectin levels are not able to separate active and inactive UC and CD, they may have the potential to be developed as useful biomarkers for IBD diagnosis either alone or in combination with other biomarkers

Safety and efficacy of granulocyte/monocyte apheresis in steroid-dependent active ulcerative colitis with insufficient response or intolerance to immunosuppressants and/or biologics (ART trial): 12-week interim results

International audienceBACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with active, steroid-dependent ulcerative colitis with insufficient response or intolerance to immunosuppressants and/or biologic therapies have limited treatment options. Adacolumn, a granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis device, has shown clinical benefit in these patients. This study aimed to provide additional clinical data regarding the safety and efficacy of Adacolumn in this patient subgroup.METHODS: This single arm, open-label, multicentre trial (ART) was conducted at 18 centres across the UK, France and Germany. Eligible patients were 18-75 years old with moderate-to-severe, steroid-dependent active ulcerative colitis with insufficient response or intolerance to immunosuppressants and/or biologics. Patients received ≥5 weekly apheresis sessions with Adacolumn. The primary endpoint was clinical remission rate (clinical activity index ≤4) at Week 12.RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were enrolled. At Week 12, 33/84 (39.3%) of patients in the intention-to-treat population achieved clinical remission, with 47/84 (56.0%) achieving a clinical response (clinical activity index reduction of ≥3). Clinical remission was achieved in 30.0% of patients with prior immunosuppressant and biologic failure; steroid-free clinical remission and response were observed in 22.6% and 35.7% of these patients, respectively. Quality of life (Short Health Scale) significantly improved at Week 12 (p\textless0.0001). The majority of adverse events were of mild/moderate intensity.CONCLUSIONS: At Week 12, Adacolumn provided significant clinical benefit in a large cohort of steroid-dependent ulcerative colitis patients with previous failure to immunosuppressant and/or biologic treatment, with a favourable safety profile. These results are consistent with previous studies and support Adacolumn use in this difficult-to-treat patient subgrou

Ambulatory care management of 69 patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis in comparison to 695 inpatients: insights from a multicentre UK cohort study

Introduction Acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) traditionally requires inpatient hospital management for intravenous therapies and/or colectomy. Ambulatory ASUC care has not yet been evaluated in large cohorts. Aims We used data from PROTECT, a UK multicentre observational COVID-19 inflammatory bowel disease study, to report the extent, safety and effectiveness of ASUC ambulatory pathways. Methods Adults (≥18 years old) meeting Truelove and Witts criteria between 1 January 2019-1 June 2019 and 1 March 2020-30 June 2020 were recruited to PROTECT. We used demographic, disease phenotype, treatment outcomes and 3-month follow-up data. Primary outcome was rate of colectomy during the index ASUC episode. Secondary outcomes included corticosteroid response, time to and rate of rescue or primary induction therapy, response to rescue or primary induction therapy, time to colectomy, mortality, duration of inpatient treatment and hospital readmission and colectomy within 3 months of index flare. We compared outcomes in three cohorts: (1) patients treated entirely in inpatient setting; ambulatory patients subdivided into; (2) patients managed as ambulatory from diagnosis and (3) patients hospitalised and subsequently discharged to ambulatory care for continued intravenous steroids. Results 37% (22/60) participating hospitals used ambulatory pathways. Of 764 eligible patients, 695 (91%) patients received entirely inpatient care, 15 (2%) patients were managed as ambulatory from diagnosis and 54 (7%) patients were discharged to ambulatory pathways. Aside from younger age in patients treated as ambulatory from diagnosis, no significant differences in disease or patient phenotype were observed. The rate of colectomy (15.0% (104/695) vs 13.3% (2/15) vs 13.0% (7/54), respectively, p=0.96) and secondary outcomes were similar among all three cohorts. Stool culture and flexible sigmoidoscopy were less frequently performed in ambulatory cohorts. Forty per cent of patients treated as ambulatory from diagnosis required subsequent hospital admission. Conclusions In a post hoc analysis of one of the largest ASUC cohorts collected to date, we report an emerging UK ambulatory practice which challenges treatment paradigms. However, our analysis remains underpowered to detect key outcome measures and further studies exploring clinical and cost-effectiveness as well as patient and physician acceptability are needed. Trial registration number NCT04411784