Background: Therapeutic monoclonal anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibodies are associated with immune-mediated enterocolitis. The aim of this study was to provide a detailed description of this entity. Methods: We included patients with endoscopic signs of inflammation after anti-CTLA-4 infusions for cancer treatment. Other causes of enterocolitis were excluded. Clinical, biological and endoscopic data were recorded. A single pathologist reviewed endoscopic biopsies and colectomy specimens from 27 patients. Patients with and without enterocolitis after ipilimumab-treated melanoma were compared, to identify clinical factors associated with enterocolitis. Results: Thirty-nine patients with anti-CTLA-4 enterocolitis were included (ipilimumab n = 37; tremelimumab n = 2). The most frequent symptom was diarrhoea. Ten patients had extra-intestinal manifestations. Most colonoscopies showed ulcerations involving the rectum and sigmoid, 66% of patients had extensive colitis, 55% had patchy distribution and 20% had ileal inflammation. Endoscopic colonic biopsies showed acute colitis in most patients, while half of the patients had chronic duodenitis. Thirty-five patients received steroids that led to complete clinical remission in 13 patients (37%). Twelve patients required infliximab, of whom 10 (83%) responded. Six patients underwent colectomy (perforation n = 5; toxic megacolon n = 1); one of them died postoperatively. Four patients had a persistent enterocolitis at follow-up colonoscopy. Patients with enterocolitis were more frequently prescribed NSAIDs compared with patients without enterocolitis (31 vs 5%, p = 0.003). Conclusions: Ipilimumab and tremelimumab may induce a severe and extensive form of inflammatory bowel disease. Rapid escalation to infliximab should be advocated in patients who do not respond to steroids. Patients treated with anti-CTLA-4 should be advised to avoid NSAIDs.

Objective The efficacy of anti-tumour necrosis factors (anti-TNFs) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and symptomatic small bowel stricture (SSBS) is controversial. The aim of this study was to estimate the efficacy of adalimumab in these patients and to identify the factors predicting success. Design We performed a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study in patients with CD and SSBS. The included patients underwent magnetic resonance enterography at baseline and subsequently received adalimumab. The primary endpoint was success at week 24, defined as adalimumab continuation without prohibited treatment (corticosteroids after the eight week following inclusion, other anti-TNFs), endoscopic dilation or bowel resection. The baseline factors independently associated with success were identified using a logistic regression model, leading to a simple prognostic score. Secondary endpoints were prolonged success after week 24 (still on adalimumab, without dilation nor surgery) and time to bowel resection in the whole cohort. Results From January 2010 to December 2011, 105 patients were screened and 97 were included. At week 24, 62/97 (64%) patients had achieved success. The prognostic score defined a good prognosis group with 43/49 successes, an intermediate prognosis group with 17/28 successes and a poor prognosis group with 1/16 successes. After a median follow-up time of 3.8 years, 45.7%±6.6% (proportion±SE) of patients who were in success at week 24 (ie, 29% of the whole cohort) were still in prolonged success at 4 years. Among the whole cohort, 50.7%±5.3% of patients did not undergo bowel resection 4 years after inclusion. Conclusions A successful response to adalimumab was observed in about two-thirds of CD patients with SSBS and was prolonged in nearly half of them till the end of follow-up. More than half of the patients were free of surgery 4 years after treatment initiation. Clinical Trial registration number NCT01183403; Results.

Objective control of intestinal inflammation during inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is becoming the main driver for medical treatment. However, the monitoring tools-related burden remains poorly investigated. We aimed to evaluate their comparative acceptability and utility according to patients with IBD. After a preliminary phase, the final questionnaire encompassing self-administered and physician questionnaires was prospectively and consecutively submitted to 916 patients with IBD from 20 public and private centers. Acceptability and utility visual analog scales (VAS) were expressed as median with interquartile range. Regarding the group of patients with Crohn's disease (n = 618), venipuncture (VAS = 9.3 [8.8–9.7]) and ultrasonography (VAS = 9.3 [8.7–9.7]) were the most acceptable tools (P < 0.0001, for each comparison), whereas rectosigmoidoscopy was the least acceptable tool (VAS = 4.4 [1.2–7.3]) (P < 0.0001, for each comparison). Wireless capsule endoscopy (VAS = 8.5 [5.2–9.3]), magnetic resonance enterocolonography (VAS = 8.0 [5.0–9.2]), and stools collection (VAS = 7.7 [4.6–9.3]) were more acceptable than colonoscopy (VAS = 6.7 [4.3–8.9]) (P < 0.0001, for each comparison). The acceptability was assessed in 298 patients with ulcerative colitis for venipuncture (VAS = 9.4 [8.8–9.7]), stools collection (VAS = 8.1 [5.7–9.4]), colonoscopy (VAS = 7.5 [4.7–9.2]), and rectosigmoidoscopy (VAS = 6.7 [2.8–9.1]); (P < 0.001 for each comparison). All monitoring tools were considered as highly useful by patients with IBD. Decreased acceptability was related to embarrassment for the collection/transport of stools (60.7%), bowel cleansing (76.3%) for colonoscopy, abdominal discomfort (51.3%) and rectal enema (36.6%) for rectosigmoidoscopy, bowel distension (48.3%) for magnetic resonance enterocolonography, and potential capsule retention (21.4%) for wireless capsule endoscopy. Among the IBD monitoring tools, endoscopy demonstrated the lowest acceptability supporting the development of alternative modalities. Patients' information and examination conditions should be improved to ensure proper monitoring adherence.

The American Journal of Gastroenterology is published by Nature Publishing Group (NPG) on behalf of the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG). Ranked the #1 clinical journal covering gastroenterology and hepatology*, The American Journal of Gastroenterology (AJG) provides practical and professional support for clinicians dealing with the gastroenterological disorders seen most often in patients. Published with practicing clinicians in mind, the journal aims to be easily accessible, organizing its content by topic, both online and in print. www.amjgastro.com, *2007 Journal Citation Report (Thomson Reuters, 2008)