Background/Aims: Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Western countries, although it is selectively administered to high-risk patients in East Asia. A central venous catheter (CVC) is commonly placed in patients with IBD. Although CVC placement is considered a risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE), the degree of increased risk in patients with IBD is uncertain. This study aimed to identify the risk of VTE with CVC placement in hospitalized Japanese patients with IBD without thromboprophylaxis. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients with ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease who were admitted for disease flares at Keio University Hospital between January 2016 and December 2020. Patients who already had thrombosis or were administered any antithrombotic treatment on admission were excluded. VTE development during the hospitalization was surveyed, and VTE risk associated with CVC indwelling was estimated using propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses. Results: Altogether, 497 hospitalized patients with IBD (ulcerative colitis, 327; Crohn’s disease, 170) were enrolled. VTE developed in 9.30% (12/129) of catheterized patients and in 0.82% (3/368) of non-catheterized patients. The propensity score matching yielded 127 matched pairs of patients. The catheterized group demonstrated higher odds for VTE than the non-catheterized group (odds ratio, 13.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.68–102.70). A similar result was obtained in the inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis (odds ratio, 11.02; 95% confidence interval, 2.64–46.10). Conclusions CVC placement is a major risk factor for VTE among hospitalized Japanese patients with IBD without thromboprophylaxis.

Background/Aims: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is prevalent in East Asia. However, information on CAM in East Asian patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is scarce. We aimed to profile the prevalence and pattern of CAM use among East Asian IBD patients and to identify factors associated with CAM use. We also compared physicians’ perspectives on CAM. Methods: Patients with IBD from China, Japan, and South Korea were invited to complete questionnaires on CAM use. Patient demographic and clinical data were collected. Logistic regression analysis was applied for predictors of CAM use. Physicians from each country were asked about their opinion on CAM services or products. Results: Overall, 905 patients with IBD participated in this study (China 232, Japan 255, and South Korea 418). Approximately 8.6% of patients with IBD used CAM services for their disease, while 29.7% of patients sought at least 1 kind of CAM product. Current active disease and Chinese or South Korean nationality over Japanese were independent predictors of CAM use. Chinese doctors were more likely to consider CAM helpful for patients with IBD than were Japanese and South Korean doctors. Conclusions In 8.6% and 29.7% of East Asian patients with IBD used CAM services and products, respectively, which does not differ from the prevalence in their Western counterparts. There is a significant gap regarding CAM usage among different Asian countries, not only from the patients’ perspective but also from the physicians’ point of view.

Background/Aims: Crohn’s disease is a chronic disorder; therefore, it is essential to investigate long-term safety and efficacy of treatments. This study assessed the safety and effectiveness of adalimumab for up to 3 years in Japanese patients with Crohn’s disease in real-world settings. Methods: This was a multicenter, single-cohort, observational study of patients with Crohn’s disease. Safety assessments included incidence of adverse drug reactions. Effectiveness assessments included clinical remission, mucosal healing, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI). Results: The safety and effectiveness analysis populations comprised 389 and 310 patients, respectively. Mean (standard deviation) exposure to adalimumab in the safety analysis population was 793.4 (402.8) days, with a 58.1% retention rate. A total of 105 patients (27.0%) and 43 patients (11.1%) experienced adverse drug reactions and serious adverse drug reactions, respectively, with no patient reporting tuberculosis or hepatitis B. Infections and serious infections were reported in 37 patients (9.5%) and 17 patients (4.4%), respectively. Malignancy was reported as an adverse drug reaction in 2 patients (0.5%). Remission rate increased from 37.8% (98/259) at baseline to 73.9% (167/226) at week 4 and remained > 70% over 3 years. Proportion of patients without mucosal ulcerations increased from 2.7% (2/73) at baseline to 42.3% (11/26) between years > 2 to ≤ 3. WPAI improvement started at 4 weeks, with the overall work impairment score improving from 42.7 (n = 102) at baseline to 26.9 (n = 84) at 4 weeks. Conclusions Results from this study confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of adalimumab treatment in Japanese patients with Crohn’s disease in the real-world setting.

Background/Aims: Adalimumab has been shown to induce and maintain clinical remission in patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC). However, no large-scale population-based studies have been performed in Japan. This study was conducted to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of adalimumab in clinical practice in Japanese patients with UC. Methods: In this 52-week, prospective, multicenter, single-cohort, noninterventional, observational, postmarketing surveillance study, patients with moderate to severe UC received an initial subcutaneous injection of adalimumab 160 mg, followed by 80 mg at 2 weeks, and then 40 mg every other week. Safety assessments were the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and serious ADRs. Effectiveness assessments were clinical remission, corticosteroid-free remission, mucosal healing, and change in C-reactive protein (CRP) levels from baseline. Results: Of 1,593 registered patients, 1,523 (male, 57.6%; mean age, 41.8 years) and 1,241 patients were included in the safety and effectiveness populations, respectively. ADRs were reported in 18.1% and serious ADRs in 4.9% of patients. Clinical remission was achieved in 49.7% of patients at week 4, increasing to 74.4% at week 52. Corticosteroid-free remission rates increased over time, from 10.4% at week 4 to 53.1% at week 52. More than 60% of patients demonstrated mucosal healing at weeks 24 and 52. Mean CRP levels (mg/dL) decreased from 1.2 at baseline to 0.6 at week 4 and 0.3 at week 52. Conclusions This large real-world study confirmed the safety and effectiveness of adalimumab in patients with UC in Japan. No new safety concerns were identified.

Colon capsule endoscopy was initially introduced in 2006. Since the results of a prospective study to evaluate first-generation colon capsule endoscopy efficacy for the detection of colonic neoplasia were unsatisfactory, second-generation colon capsule endoscopy was developed and reported in 2009. In this review article, we provide an overview of the current state of colon capsule endoscopy for evaluation of inflammatory bowel disease in a clinical setting and describe our clinical experience with this technology and its application. Among the various types of inflammatory bowel diseases, ulcerative colitis is the primary target for application of colon capsule endoscopy. Nevertheless, the initial results of studies using first-generation colon capsule endoscopy to evaluate inflammation were unclear. More recently, second-generation colon capsule endoscopy has provided higher accuracy for assessment of inflammation in patients with ulcerative colitis. Colon capsule endoscopy enables noninvasive observation (with reduced volume preparation) of mucosal inflammation severity in patients with ulcerative colitis.

Background/Aims: The evaluation of small bowel lesions of Crohn’s disease (CD) using balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) is crucial because mucosal healing is associated with a good prognosis. However, BAE procedures are invasive, requiring sedation or analgesia to reduce the patient’s pain.This study evaluated the clinical usefulness of a novel ul-trathin single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) procedure for CD. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included 102 CD patients who underwent trans-anal SBE between Janu-ary 2012 and May 2018. Of these patients, 82 underwent enteroscopy using conventional SBE, while 20 underwent ultrathin SBE. Patients were analyzed using propensity score matching, with 20 patients per group. The median duration of the examination, terminal ileum intubation rate, median cecum intubation time, median insertion depth, adverse events, and sedated dose in each group were compared. Results: Before propensity score matching, the conventional SBE group had a larger number of surgical history patients than the ultrathin SBE group (p=0.05). After matching, the two groups did not significantly differ clinically. There were no significant differences in the mean duration of the examina-tion, cecum intubation time, or terminal ileal intubation rate between ultrathin SBE and conventional SBE. The mean in-sertion depth of ultrathin SBE tended to be deeper than that of conventional SBE (p=0.09). The use of ultrathin SBE also reduced the sedative dose during needed for enteroscopy compared with conventional SBE (p=0.005). Conclusions Novel ultrathin SBE may be less painful for CD patients than conventional SBE.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study compared the efficacy of multimatrix mesalazine 2.4 g/day and 4.8 g/day with controlled-release mesalazine 2.25 g/day. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind study, 251 patients with mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis received multimatrix mesalazine 2.4 g/day once daily (Multimatrix-2.4), 4.8 g/day once daily (Multimatrix-4.8), or controlled-release (time-dependent) mesalazine 2.25 g/day 3 times daily (Time-2.25) for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in the ulcerative colitis-disease activity index (UC-DAI) score. RESULTS: The mean change in the UC-DAI score and standard deviation in the per protocol set was −1.9±2.5 for Multimatrix-2.4 and −2.4±2.8 for Time-2.25. The difference between Multimatrix-2.4 and Time-2.25 was 0.3 (two-sided 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.5 to 1.1), thus non-inferiority was not demonstrated based on the pre-defined non-inferiority margin (1.0). In the full analysis set, the difference between Multimatrix-4.8 and Time-2.25 was −1.2 (two-sided 95% CI, −2.0 to −0.5), and the mean change in UC-DAI score in the FAS was −3.3 (two-sided 95% CI, −3.9 to −2.8) for Multimatrix-4.8 and −1.9 (two-sided 95% CI, −2.5 to −1.3) for Multimatrix-2.4, indicating that Multimatrix-4.8 was more effective than Time-2.25 and Multimatrix-2.4. There was no difference among the treatment groups in terms of safety. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the efficacy of multimatrix mesalazine 2.4 g/day was comparable to controlled release mesalazine 2.25 g/day, although non-inferiority was not demonstrated. Importantly, this was the first study to indicate that multimatrix mesalazine 4.8 g/day was more effective than 2.4g/day with no associated safety concerns.
Colitis, Ulcerative* ; Double-Blind Method* ; Humans ; Mesalamine* ; Ulcer*

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), is a chronic inflammatory disease of the gastrointestinal tract, with increasing prevalence worldwide. IBD Ahead is an international educational program that aims to explore questions commonly raised by clinicians about various areas of IBD care and to consolidate available published evidence and expert opinion into a consensus for the optimization of IBD management. Given differences in the epidemiology, clinical and genetic characteristics, management, and prognosis of IBD between patients in Japan and the rest of the world, this statement was formulated as the result of literature reviews and discussions among Japanese experts as part of the IBD Ahead program to consolidate statements of factors for disease prognosis in IBD. Evidence levels were assigned to summary statements in the following categories: disease progression in CD and UC; surgery, hospitalization, intestinal failure, and permanent stoma in CD; acute severe UC; colectomy in UC; and colorectal carcinoma and dysplasia in IBD. The goal is that this statement can aid in the optimization of the treatment strategy for Japanese patients with IBD and help identify high-risk patients that require early intervention, to provide a better long-term prognosis in these patients.
Asian Continental Ancestry Group ; Colectomy ; Colitis, Ulcerative ; Colorectal Neoplasms ; Consensus ; Crohn Disease ; Disease Management* ; Disease Progression ; Early Intervention (Education) ; Epidemiology ; Expert Testimony ; Gastrointestinal Tract ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases* ; Japan* ; Prevalence ; Prognosis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is one of the major clinical phenotypes of inflammatory bowel diseases. Although 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) is widely used for UC and its efficacy and safety have been demonstrated, a few patients paradoxically develop a severe exacerbation of colitis by 5-ASA administration. It is crucial to know clinical features including endoscopic findings in this condition for making a correct diagnosis and a prompt decision to withdraw the medication. Here, we report case series with UC exacerbated by 5-ASA. Medical records of 8 UC patients experiencing an exacerbation of colitis after induction of 5-ASA that was improved by the withdrawal of 5-ASA but also re-aggravated by dose increase or re-administration of 5-ASA were reviewed. The patients were newly diagnosed with UC, started 5-ASA and developed an exacerbation in approximately 2 to 3 weeks. They did not appear to have systemic allergic reactions. Seven of the 8 patients had a high fever. Three of 5 patients who undertook total colonoscopy showed right-side-dominant colitis. These findings suggest clinical characteristics in this condition. Further assessment of clinical and endoscopic features in more cases is necessary for establishing diagnostic criteria and understanding underlying mechanisms in those cases where 5-ASA aggravates the colitis.
Colitis* ; Colitis, Ulcerative* ; Colonoscopy ; Diagnosis ; Fever ; Humans ; Hypersensitivity ; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases ; Medical Records ; Mesalamine* ; Phenotype ; Ulcer*

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of high-dose multimatrix mesalazine once-daily (QD) compared to another form of high-dose mesalazine. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind study, 280 patients with mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis (UC) received multimatrix mesalazine 4.8 g/day QD or pH-dependent-release mesalazine 3.6 g/day three times daily for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in the UC-Disease Activity Index (UC-DAI) at the end of the treatment period. RESULTS: The change in the UC-DAI (mean±standard deviation) in the per-protocol set was −2.6±2.47 in the multimatrix mesalazine 4.8 g/day group (n=134) and −1.8±2.64 in the pH-dependent-release mesalazine 3.6 g/day group (n=129). The difference in the mean change between the 2 groups was −0.7 (two-sided 95% confidence interval, −1.3 to −0.1). The noninferiority of multimatrix mesalazine 4.8 g/day to pH-dependent-release mesalazine 3.6 g/day was verified within the noninferiority margin (1.1). The superiority of multimatrix mesalazine 4.8 g/day to pH-dependent-release mesalazine 3.6 g/day was also investigated and confirmed in the full analysis set, according to the study protocol. In subgroup analyses, the effectiveness of multimatrix mesalazine 4.8 g/day was consistent in all subgroups. There was no difference in safety between the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Multimatrix mesalazine 4.8 g/day has higher efficacy and shows no difference in safety in mildly to moderately active UC, in comparison with pH-dependent-release mesalazine 3.6 g/day.
Colitis, Ulcerative* ; Double-Blind Method* ; Humans ; Mesalamine* ; Ulcer*