Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP), a unique subtype of pancreatitis, is often accompanied by systemic inflammatory disorders. AIP is classified into two distinct subtypes on the basis of the histological subtype: immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4)-related lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis (type 1) and idiopathic duct-centric pancreatitis (type 2). Type 1 AIP is often accompanied by systemic lesions, biliary strictures, hepatic inflammatory pseudotumors, interstitial pneumonia and nephritis, dacryoadenitis, and sialadenitis. Type 2 AIP is associated with inflammatory bowel diseases in approximately 30% of cases. Standard therapy for AIP is oral corticosteroid administration. Steroid treatment is generally indicated for symptomatic cases and is exceptionally applied for cases with diagnostic difficulty (diagnostic steroid trial) after a negative workup for malignancy. More than 90% of patients respond to steroid treatment within 1 month, and most within 2 weeks. The steroid response can be confirmed on clinical images (computed tomography, ultrasonography, endoscopic ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography). Hence, the steroid response is included as an optional diagnostic item of AIP. Steroid treatment results in normalization of serological markers, including IgG4. Short- and long-term corticosteroid treatment may induce adverse events, including chronic glycometabolism, obesity, an immunocompromised status against infection, cataracts, glaucoma, osteoporosis, and myopathy. AIP is common in old age and is often associated with diabetes mellitus (33–78%). Thus, there is an argument for corticosteroid therapy in diabetes patients with no symptoms. With low-dose steroid treatment or treatment withdrawal, there is a high incidence of AIP recurrence (24–52%). Therefore, there is a need for long-term steroid maintenance therapy and/or steroid-sparing agents (immunomodulators and rituximab). Corticosteroids play a critical role in the diagnosis and treatment of AIP.

INTRODUCTION: Noninvasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening methods with higher sensitivity for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) than the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) alone are warranted. This study aimed to elucidate the diagnostic performance of a risk stratification score calculated using baseline individual characteristics and its combination with FIT for detecting ACN. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis of data from a prospective cohort in Izu Oshima, Japan, included asymptomatic individuals age 40–79 years who underwent both 2-day quantitative FIT and screening colonoscopy. The 8-point risk score, calculated based on age, sex, CRC family history, body mass index, and smoking history, was assessed. Colonoscopy results were used as reference. RESULTS: Overall, 1,191 individuals were included, and 112 had ACN. The sensitivity and specificity of the 1-/2-day FIT (cutoff: 50–200 ng Hb/mL) for ACN were 17.9%–33.9% (4.9%–22.0% for right-sided ACN) and 91.8%–97.6%, respectively. The risk score's c-statistic for ACN was 0.66, and combining the score (cutoff: 5 points) with 1-/2-day FIT (cutoff: 50–200 ng Hb/mL) yielded a sensitivity and specificity for ACN of 46.4%–56.3% (43.9%–48.8% for right-sided ACN) and 76.6%–80.8%, respectively. The specificity of the risk score and FIT combination for all adenomatous lesions was 82.4%–86.4%. DISCUSSION: The 8-point risk score remarkably increased the sensitivity for ACN, particularly for right-sided ACN. Although the specificity decreased, it was still maintained at a relatively high level. The risk score and FIT combination has the potential to become a viable noninvasive CRC screening option.

Prediction of histology by endoscopic examination is important in the clinical management of non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (NADETs), including adenoma and adenocarcinoma. The use of a simple scoring system based on the findings of white-light endoscopy or magnified endoscopy with narrow-band imaging is useful to differentiate between Vienna category 3 (C3) and C4/5 lesions. Less invasive endoscopic resection procedures, such as cold snare polypectomy, are quick to perform and convenient for small (<10 mm) C3 lesions. Neoplasms with higher grade histology, such as C4/5 lesions, should be treated by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or surgery. Although EMR often requires piecemeal resection, the complication rate is acceptable. Excellent complete resection rates could be achieved by ESD; however, it remains a challenging method considering the high risk of complications. Shielding or closure of the ulcer after ESD is effective at decreasing the risk of delayed bleeding and perforation. Laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery is an ideal treatment with a high rate of en bloc resection and a low rate of complications, although it is limited to high-volume centers. Patients with NADETs could benefit from a multidisciplinary approach to stratify the optimal treatment based on endoscopic diagnoses.