Faculty Bibliography

Endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) have sparked significant interest as minimally invasive therapeutic options for weight loss. Although bariatric surgery remains an effective option for sustained weight loss and improvement in the metabolic syndrome, access and utilization are limited. Various EBMTs have been designed to emulate the physiologic effects of established surgical interventions, including space-occupying and non-space-occupying gastric therapies, gastric remodeling procedures, and small bowel therapies. This review discusses the safety and efficacy of available US Food and Drug Administration-approved minimally invasive endoscopic bariatric interventions, as well as those currently under investigation. In addition, the role of endoscopic revision after failed surgical intervention is discussed.

BACKGROUND & AIMS:Patients with Crohn's disease (CD), but not ulcerative colitis (UC), of shorter duration have higher rates of response to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists than patients with longer disease duration. Little is known about the association between disease duration and response to other biologic agents. We aimed to evaluate response of patients with CD or UC to vedolizumab, stratified by disease duration. METHODS:We analyzed data from a retrospective, multicenter, consortium of patients with CD (n = 650) or UC (n = 437) treated with vedolizumab from May 2014 through December 2016. Using time to event analyses, we compared rates of clinical remission, corticosteroid-free remission (CSFR), and endoscopic remission between patients with early-stage (≤2 years duration) and later-stage (>2 years) CD or UC. We used Cox proportional hazards models to identify factors associated with outcomes. RESULTS:Within 6 months initiation of treatment with vedolizumab, significantly higher proportions of patients with early-stage CD, vs later-stage CD, achieved clinical remission (38% vs 23%), CSFR (43% vs 14%), and endoscopic remission (29% vs 13%) (P < .05 for all comparisons). After adjusting for disease-related factors including previous exposure to TNF antagonists, patients with early-stage CD were significantly more likely than patients with later-stage CD to achieve clinical remission (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.59; 95% CI, 1.02-2.49), CSFR (aHR, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.66-6.92), and endoscopic remission (aHR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.06-3.39). In contrast, disease duration was not a significant predictor of response among patients with UC. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with CD for 2 years or less are significantly more likely to achieve a complete response, CSFR, or endoscopic response to vedolizumab than patients with longer disease duration. Disease duration does not associate with response vedolizumab in patients with UC.

BACKGROUND:Vedolizumab effectiveness estimates immediately after Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) are limited by use in refractory populations. We aimed to compare treatment patterns and outcomes of vedolizumab in 2 time frames after FDA approval. METHODS:We used 2 data sets for time trend analysis, an academic multicenter vedolizumab consortium (VICTORY) and the Truven MarketScan database, and 2 time periods, May 2014-June 2015 (Era 1) and July 2015-June 2017 (Era 2). VICTORY cumulative 12-month clinical remission, corticosteroid-free remission, and mucosal healing rates, and Truven 12-month hospitalization and surgery rates, were compared between Eras 1 and 2 using time-to-event analyses. RESULTS:A total of 3661 vedolizumab-treated patients were included (n = 1087 VICTORY, n = 2574 Truven). In both cohorts, CD and UC patients treated during Era 2 were more likely to be biologic naïve. Compared with Era 1, Era 2 CD patients in the VICTORY consortium had higher rates of clinical remission (31% vs 40%, P = 0.03) and mucosal healing (42% vs 58%, P < 0.01). These trends were not observed for UC. In the Truven database, UC patients treated during Era 2 had lower rates of inflammatory bowel disease-related hospitalization (22.4% vs 9.6%, P < 0.001) and surgery (17.2% vs 9.4%, P = 0.008), which was not observed for CD. CONCLUSION:Since FDA approval, remission and mucosal healing rates have increased for vedolizumab-treated CD patients, and vedolizumab-treated UC patients have had fewer hospitalizations and surgeries. This is likely due to differences between patient populations treated immediately after drug approval and those treated later.

The incidence of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) has increased by almost ten-fold over the past 30 years. There has been a heightened awareness of the malignant potential of rectal NETs. Fortunately, many rectal NETs are discovered at earlier stages due to colon cancer screening programs. Endoscopic ultrasound is useful in assessing both residual tumor burden after retrospective diagnosis and tumor characteristics to help guide subsequent management. Current guidelines suggest endoscopic resection of rectal NETs ≤10 mm as a safe therapeutic option given their low risk of metastasis. Although a number of endoscopic interventions exist, the best technique for resection has not been identified. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has high complete and en-bloc resection rates, but also an increased risk of complications including perforation. In addition, ESD is only performed at tertiary centers by experienced advanced endoscopists. Endoscopic mucosal resection has been shown to have variable complete resection rates, but modifications to the technique such as the addition of band ligation have improved outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to further compare the available endoscopic interventions, and to elucidate the most appropriate course of management of rectal NETs.