Background/Aims: Most patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) report food-related aggravation of symptoms. Wheat/gluten is one of the most commonly incriminated. We studied the prevalence of self-reported wheat sensitivity in patients with IBS and in a healthy population from a region in India consuming mixed-cereal diets, correlated it with serological and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) markers of celiac disease, and evaluated the response to a wheat-free diet. Methods: We surveyed 204 patients with IBS and 400 healthy persons for self-reported wheat sensitivity. Testing for IgA anti-tissue transglutaminase and HLA DQ2 or DQ8 was done in individuals who reported wheat sensitivity. Consenting persons with wheat sensitivity were put on wheat-free diet and monitored for symptom change. Results: Twenty-three of 204 patients with IBS (11.3%) and none of the healthy subjects self-reported wheat sensitivity. Of 23 patients, 14 (60.9%) were positive for HLA DQ2 or DQ8 and none for anti-tissue transglutaminase antibody. After 6 weeks on wheat-free diet, all 19 participating patients reported clinical improvement; fewer patients had bloating, diarrhea, constipation, and easy fatigue. Conclusions Eleven percent of patients with IBS self-reported wheat sensitivity. None of them had positive celiac serology; 60.9% were positive for HLA DQ2 and DQ8, suggesting a possible genetic basis. All of them improved symptomatically on a wheat-free diet.

Background/Aims: Most patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) report food-related aggravation of symptoms. Wheat/gluten is one of the most commonly incriminated. We studied the prevalence of self-reported wheat sensitivity in patients with IBS and in a healthy population from a region in India consuming mixed-cereal diets, correlated it with serological and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) markers of celiac disease, and evaluated the response to a wheat-free diet. Methods: We surveyed 204 patients with IBS and 400 healthy persons for self-reported wheat sensitivity. Testing for IgA anti-tissue transglutaminase and HLA DQ2 or DQ8 was done in individuals who reported wheat sensitivity. Consenting persons with wheat sensitivity were put on wheat-free diet and monitored for symptom change. Results: Twenty-three of 204 patients with IBS (11.3%) and none of the healthy subjects self-reported wheat sensitivity. Of 23 patients, 14 (60.9%) were positive for HLA DQ2 or DQ8 and none for anti-tissue transglutaminase antibody. After 6 weeks on wheat-free diet, all 19 participating patients reported clinical improvement; fewer patients had bloating, diarrhea, constipation, and easy fatigue. Conclusions Eleven percent of patients with IBS self-reported wheat sensitivity. None of them had positive celiac serology; 60.9% were positive for HLA DQ2 and DQ8, suggesting a possible genetic basis. All of them improved symptomatically on a wheat-free diet.

Background/Aims: The national registry for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was designed to study epidemiology and prescribing pattern of treatment of IBD in India. Methods: A multicenter, cross-sectional, prospective registry was established across four geographical zones of India. Adult patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn’s disease (CD) were enrolled between January 2014 and December 2015. Information related to demographics; disease features; complications; and treatment history were collected and analyzed. Results: A total of 3,863 patients (mean age, 36.7 ± 13.6 years; 3,232 UC [83.7%] and 631 CD [16.3%]) were enrolled. The majority of patients with UC (n = 1,870, 57.9%) were from north, CD was more common in south (n = 348, 55.5%). The UC:CD ratio was 5.1:1. There was a male predominance (male:female = 1.6:1). The commonest presentation of UC was moderately severe (n = 1,939, 60%) and E2 disease (n = 1,895, 58.6%). Patients with CD most commonly presented with ileocolonic (n = 229, 36.3%) inflammatory (n = 504, 79.9%) disease. Extraintestinal manifestations were recorded among 13% and 20% of patients in UC and CD respectively. Less than 1% patients from both cohorts developed colon cancer (n = 26, 0.7%). The commonly used drugs were 5-aminosalicylates (99%) in both UC and CD followed by azathioprine (34.4%). Biologics were used in only 1.5% of patients; more commonly for UC in north and CD in south. Conclusions The national IBD registry brings out diversities in the 4 geographical zones of India. This will help in aiding research on IBD and improving quality of patient care.

Background/Aims: The national registry for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was designed to study epidemiology and prescribing pattern of treatment of IBD in India. Methods: A multicenter, cross-sectional, prospective registry was established across four geographical zones of India. Adult patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn’s disease (CD) were enrolled between January 2014 and December 2015. Information related to demographics; disease features; complications; and treatment history were collected and analyzed. Results: A total of 3,863 patients (mean age, 36.7 ± 13.6 years; 3,232 UC [83.7%] and 631 CD [16.3%]) were enrolled. The majority of patients with UC (n = 1,870, 57.9%) were from north, CD was more common in south (n = 348, 55.5%). The UC:CD ratio was 5.1:1. There was a male predominance (male:female = 1.6:1). The commonest presentation of UC was moderately severe (n = 1,939, 60%) and E2 disease (n = 1,895, 58.6%). Patients with CD most commonly presented with ileocolonic (n = 229, 36.3%) inflammatory (n = 504, 79.9%) disease. Extraintestinal manifestations were recorded among 13% and 20% of patients in UC and CD respectively. Less than 1% patients from both cohorts developed colon cancer (n = 26, 0.7%). The commonly used drugs were 5-aminosalicylates (99%) in both UC and CD followed by azathioprine (34.4%). Biologics were used in only 1.5% of patients; more commonly for UC in north and CD in south. Conclusions The national IBD registry brings out diversities in the 4 geographical zones of India. This will help in aiding research on IBD and improving quality of patient care.

Background/Aims: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) represents the most common hepatobiliary extraintestinal manifestation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD). Limited data exist on PSC in patients with IBD from India. We aimed to assess the prevalence and disease spectrum of PSC in Indian patients with IBD. Methods: Database of IBD patients at 5 tertiary care IBD centers in India were analyzed retrospectively. Data were extracted and the prevalence of PSC-IBD was calculated. Results: Forty-eight patients out of 12,216 patients with IBD (9,231 UC, 2,939 CD, and 46 IBD unclassified) were identified to have PSC, resulting in a prevalence of 0.39%. The UC to CD ratio was 7:1. Male sex and pancolitis (UC) or colonic CD were more commonly associated with PSC-IBD. The diagnosis of IBD preceded the diagnosis of PSC in most of the patients. Majority of the patients were symptomatic for liver disease at diagnosis. Eight patients (16.66%) developed cirrhosis, 5 patients (10.41%), all UC, developed malignancies (3 colorectal cancer [6.25%] and 2 cholangiocarcinoma [4.16%]), and 3 patients died (2 decompensated liver disease [4.16%] and 1 cholangiocarcinoma [2.08%]) on follow-up. None of the patients mandated surgical therapy for IBD. Conclusions Concomitant PSC in patients with IBD is uncommon in India and is associated with lower rates of development of malignancies.

Despite several recent advances in therapy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) therapy has retained its place especially in ulcerative colitis. This consensus on 5-ASA is obtained through a modified Delphi process, and includes guiding statements and recommendations based on literature evidence (randomized trials, and observational studies), clinical practice, and expert opinion on use of 5-ASA in IBD by Indian gastroenterologists. The aim is to aid practitioners in selecting appropriate treatment strategies and facilitate optimal use of 5-ASA in patients with IBD.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), once considered a disease of the Western hemisphere, has emerged as a global disease. As the disease prevalence is on a steady rise, management of IBD has come under the spotlight. 5-Aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, immunosuppressive agents and biologics are the backbone of treatment of IBD. With the advent of biologics and small molecules, the need for surgery and hospitalization has decreased. However, economic viability and acceptability is an important determinant of local prescription patterns. Nearly one-third of the patients in West receive biologics as the first/initial therapy. The scenario is different in developing countries where biologics are used only in a small proportion of patients with IBD. Increased risk of reactivation of tuberculosis and high cost of the therapy are limitations to their use. Thiopurines hence become critical for optimal management of patients with IBD in these regions. However, approximately one-third of patients are intolerant or develop adverse effects with their use. This has led to suboptimal use of thiopurines in clinical practice. This review article discusses the clinical aspects of thiopurine use in patients with IBD with the aim of optimizing their use to full therapeutic potential.

The lack of clear definition and classification for “moderate ulcerative colitis (UC)” creates ambiguity regarding the suitability of step-up versus top-down treatment approaches. In this paper, experts address crucial gaps in assessing and managing moderate UC. The Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa Inflammatory Bowel Disease Coalition comprised 24 experts who convened to share, discuss and vote electronically on management recommendations for moderate UC. Experts emphasized that the goal of treating UC is to attain clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic remission using cost-effective strategies such as 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs), well-tolerated therapy that can be optimized to improve outcomes. Experts agreed that 5-ASA therapy could be optimized by maximizing dosage (4 g/day for induction of remission), combining oral and topical administration, extending treatment duration beyond 8 weeks, and enhancing patient adherence through personalized counselling and reduced pill burden. Treatment escalation should ideally be reserved for patients with predictors of aggressive disease or those who do not respond to 5-ASA optimization. Premature treatment escalation to advanced therapies (including biologics and oral small molecules) may have long-term health and financial consequences. This paper provides consensus-based expert recommendations and a treatment algorithm, based on current evidence and practices, to assist decision-making in real-world settings.

The lack of clear definition and classification for “moderate ulcerative colitis (UC)” creates ambiguity regarding the suitability of step-up versus top-down treatment approaches. In this paper, experts address crucial gaps in assessing and managing moderate UC. The Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa Inflammatory Bowel Disease Coalition comprised 24 experts who convened to share, discuss and vote electronically on management recommendations for moderate UC. Experts emphasized that the goal of treating UC is to attain clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic remission using cost-effective strategies such as 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs), well-tolerated therapy that can be optimized to improve outcomes. Experts agreed that 5-ASA therapy could be optimized by maximizing dosage (4 g/day for induction of remission), combining oral and topical administration, extending treatment duration beyond 8 weeks, and enhancing patient adherence through personalized counselling and reduced pill burden. Treatment escalation should ideally be reserved for patients with predictors of aggressive disease or those who do not respond to 5-ASA optimization. Premature treatment escalation to advanced therapies (including biologics and oral small molecules) may have long-term health and financial consequences. This paper provides consensus-based expert recommendations and a treatment algorithm, based on current evidence and practices, to assist decision-making in real-world settings.

The lack of clear definition and classification for “moderate ulcerative colitis (UC)” creates ambiguity regarding the suitability of step-up versus top-down treatment approaches. In this paper, experts address crucial gaps in assessing and managing moderate UC. The Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa Inflammatory Bowel Disease Coalition comprised 24 experts who convened to share, discuss and vote electronically on management recommendations for moderate UC. Experts emphasized that the goal of treating UC is to attain clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic remission using cost-effective strategies such as 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs), well-tolerated therapy that can be optimized to improve outcomes. Experts agreed that 5-ASA therapy could be optimized by maximizing dosage (4 g/day for induction of remission), combining oral and topical administration, extending treatment duration beyond 8 weeks, and enhancing patient adherence through personalized counselling and reduced pill burden. Treatment escalation should ideally be reserved for patients with predictors of aggressive disease or those who do not respond to 5-ASA optimization. Premature treatment escalation to advanced therapies (including biologics and oral small molecules) may have long-term health and financial consequences. This paper provides consensus-based expert recommendations and a treatment algorithm, based on current evidence and practices, to assist decision-making in real-world settings.