Clinical guidelines typically endorse conventional therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) as the mainstay of ulcerative colitis management. However, the degree of adoption and application of guideline recommendations by physicians within Asia remains unclear. This study aims to understand the prescribing patterns of 5-ASA and implementation of current guideline recommendations across Asian clinical practice. A physician survey was conducted among inflammatory bowel disease specialists in 8 Asian territories to understand practices and preferences in ulcerative colitis management, focusing on the use of 5-ASA and concordance with guideline recommendations. Survey findings were validated by country experts in diverse healthcare settings. Subgroup analyses stratified data by income levels and treatment reimbursement status. Ninety-eight valid responses were received from inflammatory bowel disease specialists or gastroenterologists among 8 economic entities. Significant differences were found in clinical practices and treatment preferences for ulcerative colitis management among different income-level and government-subsidy groups. Survey results are summarized in 8 findings that illustrate trends in 5-ASA use and guideline implementation across Asian territories. This study emphasizes socioeconomic factors that impact the adoption of guideline recommendations in real-world practice. Our findings indicate an eclectic approach to guideline implementation across Asia, based on resource availability and feasibility of treatment goals.

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.

Clinical guidelines typically endorse conventional therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) as the mainstay of ulcerative colitis management. However, the degree of adoption and application of guideline recommendations by physicians within Asia remains unclear. This study aims to understand the prescribing patterns of 5-ASA and implementation of current guideline recommendations across Asian clinical practice. A physician survey was conducted among inflammatory bowel disease specialists in 8 Asian territories to understand practices and preferences in ulcerative colitis management, focusing on the use of 5-ASA and concordance with guideline recommendations. Survey findings were validated by country experts in diverse healthcare settings. Subgroup analyses stratified data by income levels and treatment reimbursement status. Ninety-eight valid responses were received from inflammatory bowel disease specialists or gastroenterologists among 8 economic entities. Significant differences were found in clinical practices and treatment preferences for ulcerative colitis management among different income-level and government-subsidy groups. Survey results are summarized in 8 findings that illustrate trends in 5-ASA use and guideline implementation across Asian territories. This study emphasizes socioeconomic factors that impact the adoption of guideline recommendations in real-world practice. Our findings indicate an eclectic approach to guideline implementation across Asia, based on resource availability and feasibility of treatment goals.

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.

Clinical guidelines typically endorse conventional therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) as the mainstay of ulcerative colitis management. However, the degree of adoption and application of guideline recommendations by physicians within Asia remains unclear. This study aims to understand the prescribing patterns of 5-ASA and implementation of current guideline recommendations across Asian clinical practice. A physician survey was conducted among inflammatory bowel disease specialists in 8 Asian territories to understand practices and preferences in ulcerative colitis management, focusing on the use of 5-ASA and concordance with guideline recommendations. Survey findings were validated by country experts in diverse healthcare settings. Subgroup analyses stratified data by income levels and treatment reimbursement status. Ninety-eight valid responses were received from inflammatory bowel disease specialists or gastroenterologists among 8 economic entities. Significant differences were found in clinical practices and treatment preferences for ulcerative colitis management among different income-level and government-subsidy groups. Survey results are summarized in 8 findings that illustrate trends in 5-ASA use and guideline implementation across Asian territories. This study emphasizes socioeconomic factors that impact the adoption of guideline recommendations in real-world practice. Our findings indicate an eclectic approach to guideline implementation across Asia, based on resource availability and feasibility of treatment goals.

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.

Background/Aims: This study aims to compare polyp detection performance of “Deep-GI,” a newly developed artificial intelligence (AI) model, to a previously validated AI model computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) using various false positive (FP) thresholds and determining the best threshold for each model. Methods: Colonoscopy videos were collected prospectively and reviewed by three expert endoscopists (gold standard), trainees, CADe (CAD EYE; Fujifilm Corp.), and Deep-GI. Polyp detection sensitivity (PDS), polyp miss rates (PMR), and false-positive alarm rates (FPR) were compared among the three groups using different FP thresholds for the duration of bounding boxes appearing on the screen. Results: In total, 170 colonoscopy videos were used in this study. Deep-GI showed the highest PDS (99.4% vs. 85.4% vs. 66.7%, p<0.01) and the lowest PMR (0.6% vs. 14.6% vs. 33.3%, p<0.01) when compared to CADe and trainees, respectively. Compared to CADe, Deep-GI demonstrated lower FPR at FP thresholds of ≥0.5 (12.1 vs. 22.4) and ≥1 second (4.4 vs. 6.8) (both p<0.05). However, when the threshold was raised to ≥1.5 seconds, the FPR became comparable (2 vs. 2.4, p=0.3), while the PMR increased from 2% to 10%. Conclusions Compared to CADe, Deep-GI demonstrated a higher PDS with significantly lower FPR at ≥0.5- and ≥1-second thresholds. At the ≥1.5-second threshold, both systems showed comparable FPR with increased PMR.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) accounts for approximately 10.3% of new cancer cases in Thailand and is currently the 3rd most prevalent cancer found among the Thai population. Starting in 2017, the Thai government announced the national CRC screening program as a response to this important issue. Among the 70 million people currently residing in Thailand, 14 million require screening, while there are approximately a total of 1,000 endoscopists available to perform colonoscopy. Due to the limited resources and shortage of endoscopists in Thailand, applying a population-based one-step colonoscopy program as a primary screening method is not feasible. To reduce colonoscopy workload, with the help of others, including village health volunteers, institution-based health personnel, reimbursement coders, pathologists, and patients due for CRC screening, a two-step approach of one-time fecal immunochemical test (FIT), which prioritizes and filters out subjects for colonoscopy, is chosen. Moreover, additional adjustments to the optimal FIT cutoff value and the modified Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening risk score, including body weight, were proposed to stratify the priority of colonoscopy schedule. This article aims to give an overview of the past and current policy developmental strategies and the current status of the Thailand CRC screening program.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) accounts for approximately 10.3% of new cancer cases in Thailand and is currently the 3rd most prevalent cancer found among the Thai population. Starting in 2017, the Thai government announced the national CRC screening program as a response to this important issue. Among the 70 million people currently residing in Thailand, 14 million require screening, while there are approximately a total of 1,000 endoscopists available to perform colonoscopy. Due to the limited resources and shortage of endoscopists in Thailand, applying a population-based one-step colonoscopy program as a primary screening method is not feasible. To reduce colonoscopy workload, with the help of others, including village health volunteers, institution-based health personnel, reimbursement coders, pathologists, and patients due for CRC screening, a two-step approach of one-time fecal immunochemical test (FIT), which prioritizes and filters out subjects for colonoscopy, is chosen. Moreover, additional adjustments to the optimal FIT cutoff value and the modified Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening risk score, including body weight, were proposed to stratify the priority of colonoscopy schedule. This article aims to give an overview of the past and current policy developmental strategies and the current status of the Thailand CRC screening program.