8 research outputs found

    The additive value of CA19.9 monitoring in a pancreatic cyst surveillance program

    Get PDF
    Background:Surveillance of pancreatic cysts focuses on the detection of (mostly morphologic) features warranting surgery. European guidelines consider elevated CA19.9 as a relative indication for surgery. We aimed to evaluate the role of CA19.9 monitoring for early detection and management in a cyst surveillance population. Methods: The PACYFIC-registry is a prospective collaboration that investigates the yield of pancreatic cyst surveillance performed at the discretion of the treating physician. We included participants for whom at least one serum CA19.9 value was determined by a minimum follow-up of 12 months.Results: Of 1865 PACYFIC participants, 685 met the inclusion criteria for this study (mean age 67 years, SD 10; 61% female). During a median follow-up of 25 months (IQR 24, 1966 visits), 29 participants developed high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or pancreatic cancer. At baseline, CA19.9 ranged from 1 to 591 kU/L (median 10 kU/L [IQR 14]), and was elevated (≥37 kU/L) in 64 participants (9%). During 191 of 1966 visits (10%), an elevated CA19.9 was detected, and these visits more often led to an intensified follow-up (42%) than those without an elevated CA19.9 (27%; p &lt; 0.001). An elevated CA19.9 was the sole reason for surgery in five participants with benign disease (10%). The baseline CA19.9 value was (as continuous or dichotomous variable at the 37 kU/L threshold) not independently associated with HGD or pancreatic cancer development, whilst a CA19.9 of ≥ 133 kU/L was (HR 3.8, 95% CI 1.1–13, p = 0.03). Conclusions: In this pancreatic cyst surveillance cohort, CA19.9 monitoring caused substantial harm by shortening surveillance intervals (and performance of unnecessary surgery). The current CA19.9 cutoff was not predictive of HGD and pancreatic cancer, whereas a higher cutoff may decrease false-positive values. The role of CA19.9 monitoring should be critically appraised prior to implementation in surveillance programs and guidelines.</p

    Development of pancreatic diseases during long-term follow-up after acute pancreatitis:a post-hoc analysis of a prospective multicenter cohort

    Get PDF
    Background and Aim: More insight into the incidence of and factors associated with progression following a first episode of acute pancreatitis (AP) would offer opportunities for improvements in disease management and patient counseling. Methods: A long-term post hoc analysis of a prospective cohort of patients with AP (2008–2015) was performed. Primary endpoints were recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP), chronic pancreatitis (CP), and pancreatic cancer. Cumulative incidence calculations and risk analyses were performed. Results: Overall, 1184 patients with a median follow-up of 9 years (IQR: 7–11) were included. RAP and CP occurred in 301 patients (25%) and 72 patients (6%), with the highest incidences observed for alcoholic pancreatitis (40% and 22%). Pancreatic cancer was diagnosed in 14 patients (1%). Predictive factors for RAP were alcoholic and idiopathic pancreatitis (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.51–4.82 and OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.40–3.02), and no pancreatic interventions (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.10–3.01). Non-biliary etiology (alcohol: OR 5.24, 95% CI 1.94–14.16, idiopathic: OR 4.57, 95% CI 2.05–10.16, and other: OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.11–7.94), RAP (OR 4.93, 95% CI 2.84–8.58), prior pancreatic interventions (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.20–8.02), smoking (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.14–4.78), and male sex (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.05–4.05) were independently associated with CP. Conclusion: Disease progression was observed in a quarter of pancreatitis patients. We identified several risk factors that may be helpful to devise personalized strategies with the intention to reduce the impact of disease progression in patients with AP.</p

    A Prediction Model for Successful Increase of Adalimumab Dose Intervals in Patients with Crohn’s Disease:Secondary Analysis of the Pragmatic Open-Label Randomised Controlled Non-inferiority LADI Trial

    Get PDF
    Background: In the pragmatic open-label randomised controlled non-inferiority LADI trial we showed that increasing adalimumab (ADA) dose intervals was non-inferior to conventional dosing for persistent flares in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) in clinical and biochemical remission. Aims: To develop a prediction model to identify patients who can successfully increase their ADA dose interval based on secondary analysis of trial data. Methods: Patients in the intervention group of the LADI trial increased ADA intervals to 3 and then to 4 weeks. The dose interval increase was defined as successful when patients had no persistent flare (&gt; 8 weeks), no intervention-related severe adverse events, no rescue medication use during the study, and were on an increased dose interval while in clinical and biochemical remission at week 48. Prediction models were based on logistic regression with relaxed LASSO. Models were internally validated using bootstrap optimism correction. Results: We included 109 patients, of which 60.6% successfully increased their dose interval. Patients that were active smokers (odds ratio [OR] 0.90), had previous CD-related intra-abdominal surgeries (OR 0.85), proximal small bowel disease (OR 0.92), an increased Harvey-Bradshaw Index (OR 0.99) or increased faecal calprotectin (OR 0.997) were less likely to successfully increase their dose interval. The model had fair discriminative ability (AUC = 0.63) and net benefit analysis showed that the model could be used to select patients who could increase their dose interval. Conclusion: The final prediction model seems promising to select patients who could successfully increase their ADA dose interval. The model should be validated externally before it may be applied in clinical practice. Clinical Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03172377.</p

    Over- and Misuse of Antibiotics and the Clinical Consequence in Necrotizing Pancreatitis:An Observational Multicenter Study

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: The use and impact of antibiotics and the impact of causative pathogens on clinical outcomes in a large real-world cohort covering the entire clinical spectrum of necrotizing pancreatitis remain unknown. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: International guidelines recommend broad-spectrum antibiotics in patients with suspected infected necrotizing pancreatitis. This recommendation is not based on high-level evidence and clinical effects are unknown. METHODS: This study is a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective cohort of 401 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis in 15 Dutch centers (2010-2019). Across the patient population from time of admission to 6 months post admission, multivariable regression analyses were used to analyze (1) microbiological cultures and (2) the antibiotic use. RESULTS: Antibiotics were started in 321/401 patients (80%) administered at a median of 5 days (P25-P75: 1-13) after admission. Median duration of antibiotics was 27 days (P25-P75: 15-48). In 221/321 patients (69%) infection was not proven by cultures at time of initiation of antibiotics. Empirical antibiotics for infected necrosis provided insufficient coverage in 64/128 patients (50%) with a pancreatic culture. Prolonged antibiotic therapy was associated with Enterococcus infection (OR1.08 [95%CI 1.03-1.16], P=0.01). Enterococcus infection was associated with new/persistent organ failure (OR3.08 [95%CI 1.35-7.29], P&lt;0.01) and mortality (OR5.78 [95% CI 1.46-38.73], P=0.03). Yeast were found in 30/147 cultures (20%). DISCUSSION: In this nationwide study of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, the vast majority received antibiotics, typically administered early in the disease course and without a proven infection. Empirical antibiotics were inappropriate based on pancreatic cultures in half the patients. Future clinical research and practice must consider antibiotic selective pressure due to prolonged therapy, coverage of Enterococcus and yeast. Improved guidelines on antimicrobial diagnostics and therapy could reduce inappropriate antibiotic use and improve clinical outcomes

    Increased versus conventional adalimumab dose interval for patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission (LADI): a pragmatic, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial

    No full text
    Background: Despite its effectiveness in treating Crohn's disease, adalimumab is associated with an increased risk of infections and high health-care costs. We aimed to assess clinical outcomes of increased adalimumab dose intervals versus conventional dosing in patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission. Methods: The LADI study was a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, parallel, randomised controlled trial, done in six academic hospitals and 14 general hospitals in the Netherlands. Adults (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with luminal Crohn's disease (with or without concomitant perianal disease) were eligible when in steroid-free clinical and biochemical remission (defined as Harvey-Bradshaw Index [HBI] score <5, faecal calprotectin <150 μg/g, and C-reactive protein <10 mg/L) for at least 9 months on a stable dose of 40 mg subcutaneous adalimumab every 2 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to the intervention group or control group by the coordinating investigator using a secure web-based system with variable block randomisation (block sizes of 6, 9, and 12). Randomisation was stratified on concomitant use of thiopurines and methotrexate. Patients and health-care providers were not masked to group assignment. Patients allocated to the intervention group increased adalimumab dose intervals to 40 mg every 3 weeks at baseline and further to every 4 weeks if they remained in clinical and biochemical remission at week 24. Patients in the control group continued their 2-weekly dose interval. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of persistent flares at week 48 defined as the presence of at least two of the following criteria: HBI score of 5 or more, C-reactive protein 10 mg/L or more, and faecal calprotectin more than 250 μg/g for more than 8 weeks and a concurrent decrease in the adalimumab dose interval or start of escape medication. The non-inferiority margin was 15% on a risk difference scale. All analyses were done in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03172377, and is not recruiting. Findings: Between May 3, 2017, and July 6, 2020, 174 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=113) or the control group (n=61). Four patients from the intervention group and one patient from the control group were excluded from the analysis for not meeting inclusion criteria. 85 (50%) of 169 participants were female and 84 (50%) were male. At week 48, the cumulative incidence of persistent flares in the intervention group (three [3%] of 109) was non-inferior compared with the control group (zero; pooled adjusted risk difference 1·86% [90% CI –0·35 to 4·07). Seven serious adverse events occurred, all in the intervention group, of which two (both patients with intestinal obstruction) were possibly related to the intervention. Per 100 person-years, 168·35 total adverse events, 59·99 infection-related adverse events, and 42·57 gastrointestinal adverse events occurred in the intervention group versus 134·67, 75·03, and 5·77 in the control group, respectively. Interpretation: The individual benefit of increasing adalimumab dose intervals versus the risk of disease recurrence is a trade-off that should take patient preferences regarding medication and the risk of a flare into account. Funding: Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development

    Cost-effectiveness analysis of increased adalimumab dose intervals in Crohn's disease patients in stable remission:The Randomized Controlled LADI Trial

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To assess cost-effectiveness of increasing adalimumab dose intervals compared to the conventional dosing interval in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) in stable clinical and biochemical remission. DESIGN: We conducted a pragmatic, open-label, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial, comparing increased adalimumab intervals with the two-weekly interval in adult CD patients in clinical remission. Quality of life was measured with the EQ-5D-5L. Costs were measured from a societal perspective. Results are shown as differences and incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) at relevant willingness to accept (WTA) levels. RESULTS: We randomised 174 patients to the intervention (n=113) and control (n=61) groups. No difference was found in utility (difference: -0.017, 95% confidence interval [-0.044; 0.004]) and total costs (-€943, [-2,226; €1,367] over the 48-week study period between the two groups. Medication costs per patient were lower (-€2,545, [-€2,780; -€2,192]) in the intervention group, but non-medication healthcare (+€474, [+€149; +€952]) and patient costs (+€365 [+€92; €1,058]) were higher. Cost-utility analysis showed that the iNMB was €594 ([-€2,099; €2,050]), €69 [-€2,908; €1,965], and -€455 [-€4,096; €1,984] at WTA levels of €20,000; €50,000; and €80,000. Increasing adalimumab dose intervals was more likely to be cost-effective at WTA levels below €53,960 per QALY. Above €53,960 continuing the conventional dose interval was more likely to be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: When the loss of a quality-adjusted life year is valued at less than €53,960, increasing the adalimumab dose interval is a cost-effective strategy in CD patients in stable clinical and biochemical remission
    corecore