Top journals this week: Lancet / Nat Rev Gastro Hep / Nature Medicine / Gut
Selectivity
10.5%
15 in the issue of 143 screened
in the issue 15in depth 26held 11filtered out 91
89.5% of what published this week did not make the issue. That filter is the product. A further 26 cleared the bar and are carried in one line each, in full on the subspecialty pages.
How this week moves the standard
Changes practice 0
No paper this week forces an outright change to the standard. That is the usual, honest result.
Each paper is matched to the guideline that governs its question, then placed by how it moves it. These are the 15 cards in the issue; every one quotes the standard it was measured against, with its source and review date. Click a segment to filter the issue.
The signal map
Each dot is a paper: evidence strength across, how far it moves the standard up, area = the journal's impact factor, colour = subspecialty. The shaded zone is a fixed bar (prospective cohort or better, refining the standard or better), so a big dot outside it is work the field rated highly that is not changing practice. Click a dot to open its card.
The 15 in the issue this week, ranked by signal score. Each anchored to the relevant standard of care. All in full below; 26 more, read and scored the same way, in one line each at the foot of the issue.
the 5 strongest this week · each scored 0 to 100 on what it lets you do, who it touches, the stakes, and how well the evidence backs it
Rank by
Actionability = is there something to do. Prevalence = how much of a general GI practice it touches. Stakes = how consequential the decision is. Evidence strength = how far the study design and the result support the action. Novelty = how likely you are not already doing it.
Endoscopyrct · n=606 · Aug 20, 2026 · Am J Gastro · IF 9.8
New evidenceartificial intelligencecolonoscopyadenomaendoscopy quality
Clinical takeawayImplement AI-assisted second forward-view examination of the right colon during colonoscopy to improve adenoma detection, particularly for small, flat, and hard-to-reach lesions. This combined strategy was effective across all levels of endoscopist experience.
What it foundAI-assisted second forward-view examination of the right colon improved adenoma detection to 36.4% versus 27.9% (p = 0.03, absolute increase 8.5%), with greater detection of small, flat, and anatomically challenging lesions regardless of endoscopist experience.
ContextCombines two established detection strategies (AI assistance and reinspection) in a prospective RCT of right colon adenomas. Extends prior evidence that each approach independently improves adenoma detection by demonstrating their combined effect; the isolated contribution of the AI component versus the second-pass examination alone remains undetermined.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA, et al.), "Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients From the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer," Gastroenterology, 2017ShowHide
Decision at stakehow to perform colonoscopy to maximize adenoma detection in the right colon
Begin average-risk colorectal cancer screening at age 45 using a patient-centered shared-decision modality choice, colonoscopy every 10 years (preferred) or annual FIT as Tier 1 options, with multi-target stool DNA every 3 years, CT colonography every 5 years, or flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 to 10 years as Tier 2 alternatives. A positive stool-based test requires diagnostic colonoscopy, and stool tests should not be ordered for patients who would decline follow-up colonoscopy. Generally stop at age 75 with individualized decisions for ages 76-85 and no screening beyond 85.
Clinical takeawayFor carefully selected advanced HCC patients with macrovascular invasion but without extrahepatic metastasis who achieve PR or SD on induction atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, surgical evaluation for resection may be considered (open-label trial, Chinese multi-center; benefits demonstrated on time-to-treatment-failure, not yet overall survival; safety profile incomplete pending full adverse event reporting). This challenges the paradigm of macrovascular invasion as an absolute contraindication to resection; however, guideline-level endorsement is pending.
What it foundSurgical resection after induction atezolizumab plus bevacizumab extended median time to treatment failure to 20.4 months compared with 11.8 months for maintenance therapy alone (hazard ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.39-0.91, p=0.015) in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, macrovascular invasion, no extrahepatic metastasis, and partial response or stable disease per RECIST 1.1 after induction therapy.
ContextAdvanced HCC with macrovascular invasion has traditionally been considered unresectable and managed with systemic therapy alone. This is the first high-quality evidence that patients who respond to induction immunotherapy plus antiangiogenic therapy may benefit from curative-intent surgery, supporting an emerging 'convert and resect' strategy for select advanced-stage tumors. Current guidelines do not yet endorse this approach.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), 'AASLD Practice Guidance on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma,' Hepatology, 2023 (78(6):1922-1965).ShowHide
Decision at stakewhether surgical resection should be considered in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after systemic therapy response in surgically feasible patients
…Its first-line systemic options for advanced HCC with preserved liver function (Child-Pugh A) are atezolizumab+bevacizumab OR durvalumab+tremelimumab (STRIDE) as preferred, with sorafenib, lenvatinib, or durvalumab monotherapy as alternatives when the preferred combinations are contraindicated.…
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
Perform HCC surveillance in adults with cirrhosis of any etiology who are able to benefit from HCC treatment, accordingly, do not enroll patients with Child-Turcotte-Pugh class C cirrhosis unless they are candidates for (or listed for) liver transplantation, and do not surveil those with life-limiting comorbidity (life expectancy <1-2 years) that transplantation cannot remedy, and in select non-cirrhotic chronic HBV carriers at elevated risk (e.g., active hepatitis/high viral load, family history of HCC, African/African-American ancestry, Asian men >40 and Asian women >50; AASLD references risk scores such as PAGE-B but stops short of mandating a specific numeric cutoff). Surveillance is abdominal ultrasound PLUS serum AFP at ~6-month (semiannual) intervals, a change from prior AASLD guidance, which had left AFP optional (Strong recommendation). Pursue diagnostic evaluation for an AFP ≥20 ng/mL or for a rising AFP, defined as a doubling of AFP or an increase on two consecutive tests even if the absolute value is <20 ng/mL. Any suspicious ultrasound observation ≥1 cm, or an inadequate/limited ultrasound, should be evaluated with multiphasic contrast-enhanced CT or MRI interpreted with CT/MRI LI-RADS. AASLD 2023 stages confirmed HCC using the BCLC framework and links stage to therapy (curative resection, ablation, or transplantation within Milan criteria for very-early/early disease; TACE and other locoregional therapy for intermediate disease; systemic therapy for advanced disease). Its first-line systemic options for advanced HCC with preserved liver function (Child-Pugh A) are atezolizumab+bevacizumab OR durvalumab+tremelimumab (STRIDE) as preferred, with sorafenib, lenvatinib, or durvalumab monotherapy as alternatives when the preferred combinations are contraindicated. After potentially curative therapy, continue surveillance for recurrence given high recurrence risk (AASLD monitors with cross-sectional contrast-enhanced imaging, not ultrasound, in the early post-treatment period).
Clinical takeawayAdopt standardized resection assessment protocols in your practice: use HD white-light inspection as the primary assessment method (supplement with image-enhanced inspection for 10-19 mm polyps), document post-resection photographs for 10-19 mm polyps, ensure histopathological margin assessment for all non-fragmented and en bloc resections, and monitor your personal incomplete resection rate (IRR) for 10-19 mm polyps as a quality assurance metric.
What it foundExpert consensus among 53 international experts (18 of 20 statements achieving >80% agreement) established standardized assessment protocols for colorectal polyp resection <20 mm: HD white-light inspection for all, image-enhanced inspection for 10-19 mm, post-resection photo documentation for 10-19 mm, histopathological margin assessment for all non-fragmented and en bloc resections, and incomplete resection rate measurement via extended margin resection.
ContextIncomplete polyp resection can lead to recurrent polyps and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Standardized methods for assessing resection completeness were lacking; this Delphi consensus establishes international expert agreement on optimal assessment strategies, enabling incomplete resection rate to be tracked as a measurable quality parameter.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (Gupta S, et al.), "Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer," Gastroenterology, 2020ShowHide
Decision at stakeConfirm complete resection before applying a post-polypectomy surveillance interval
…Confirm complete resection and adequate prep before applying an interval, and use site-check/tumor-board pathways for piecemeal resection and malignant (T1) polyps.…
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
After polyp removal, assign the next colonoscopy surveillance interval using USMSTF 2020 based on polyp number, size, and histology (e.g., 1-2 tubular adenomas <10 mm 7-10 years; 3-4 tubular adenomas <10 mm 3-5 years; 5-10 tubular adenomas <10 mm, any adenoma ≥10 mm, or adenoma with tubulovillous/villous histology or high-grade dysplasia 3 years; >10 adenomas 1 year with polyposis evaluation; and for serrated polyps, 1-2 sessile serrated lesions <10 mm 5-10 years, 3-4 sessile serrated lesions <10 mm or a hyperplastic polyp ≥10 mm 3-5 years, and a sessile serrated lesion ≥10 mm or with dysplasia or a traditional serrated adenoma 3 years), and apply the shortest interval indicated when findings are mixed. Confirm complete resection and adequate prep before applying an interval, and use site-check/tumor-board pathways for piecemeal resection and malignant (T1) polyps. Refer for genetic evaluation when Lynch, FAP/AFAP/MAP, or serrated polyposis syndrome criteria are met.
van Bokhorst QNE … SCOPE initiative collaborators · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectalrct · n=500 · Aug 19, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2
Practice-changingcolorectal cancer screeninghealth servicesartificial intelligence
Clinical takeawayConsider implementing WhatsApp-based chatbot outreach for adults aged 50-75 in your CRC screening program. The intervention delivers health education video and tailored behavior-change messaging based on readiness stage, improving uptake by 8-9 percentage points.
What it foundWhatsApp chatbot with video education and personalized risk-assessment increased CRC screening uptake to 36% vs 27.6% at 3 months (p=0.043) in adults aged 50-75, sustained at 6 months (45.6% vs 36.4%, p=0.045)
ContextCRC screening uptake remains suboptimal despite known mortality benefit. This trial demonstrates that structured digital outreach with education and personalized risk assessment significantly outperforms minimal reminder text, refining evidence on how to close screening gaps in community populations.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA, et al.), "Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients From the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer," Gastroenterology, 2017ShowHide
Decision at stakeHow to improve patient uptake of colorectal cancer screening among eligible individuals
Begin average-risk colorectal cancer screening at age 45 using a patient-centered shared-decision modality choice, colonoscopy every 10 years (preferred) or annual FIT as Tier 1 options, with multi-target stool DNA every 3 years, CT colonography every 5 years, or flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 to 10 years as Tier 2 alternatives. A positive stool-based test requires diagnostic colonoscopy, and stool tests should not be ordered for patients who would decline follow-up colonoscopy. Generally stop at age 75 with individualized decisions for ages 76-85 and no screening beyond 85.
Tung Lam TY … Yiu Sung JJ · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBDprospective cohort · n=224 · Aug 20, 2026 · Aliment Pharm Ther · IF 6.7
Clinical takeawayWhen distinguishing UC from CD, consider measuring serum anti-integrin αvβ6 autoantibodies (cutoff 2.44 U/mL) as an adjunct to clinical, endoscopic, and histologic findings. This study excluded indeterminate colitis, so applicability to difficult-to-classify cases remains undefined.
What it foundAnti-integrin αvβ6 autoantibodies (cutoff 2.44 U/mL) achieved 86.5% diagnostic accuracy for UC vs CD (sensitivity 85.8%, specificity 87.1%) with OR 36.18 (95% CI 17.0-83.0) and outperformed ANCA and ASCA.
ContextANCA and ASCA are established serological markers for IBD differentiation, but with modest accuracy. This prospective study shows anti-integrin αvβ6 antibodies provide superior diagnostic performance in established UC vs CD, with a positivity gradient from ileal CD (7.9% positivity) through colonic CD (43.8%) to UC (85.8%). The study excluded indeterminate colitis patients, limiting applicability to cases with clear UC or CD phenotypes.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· ACG Clinical Guideline Update: Ulcerative Colitis in Adults, Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1187-1224; AGA Living Guideline on Pharmacological Management of Moderate-to-Severe UC, Gastroenterology 2024 (panel review March 2026, no changes)ShowHide
Decision at stakeusing serological markers to distinguish ulcerative colitis from Crohn's disease when diagnosis is unclear
Confirm ulcerative colitis with endoscopy showing continuous colonic inflammation from the rectum plus histology, after excluding infection with two-step CDI testing.…Begin CRC surveillance 8-10 years after DIAGNOSIS for extensive or left-sided disease; isolated proctitis follows average-risk screening.
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
Confirm ulcerative colitis with endoscopy showing continuous colonic inflammation from the rectum plus histology, after excluding infection with two-step CDI testing. Treat mild-moderate disease with 5-ASA by route and extent (suppository for proctitis, enema for left-sided, oral plus rectal for extensive); if 5-ASA fails, treat as moderate-to-severe rather than stepping up gradually. Position advanced therapy by EFFICACY TIER, not by an anti-TNF-first rule. Advanced-therapy-naive, higher efficacy: infliximab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod, upadacitinib, risankizumab, guselkumab; intermediate: golimumab, ustekinumab, tofacitinib, filgotinib, mirikizumab; lower: adalimumab. PREVIOUSLY TNF-EXPOSED, higher efficacy: tofacitinib, upadacitinib, ustekinumab; lower: adalimumab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod - S1P modulators are weakest in exactly this group. Do not cycle within the anti-TNF class after primary non-response; switch mechanism. Apply treat-to-target (STRIDE-II) to endoscopic improvement (MES 0-1). Screen for acute severe UC by Truelove-Witts and admit for IV steroids. Begin CRC surveillance 8-10 years after DIAGNOSIS for extensive or left-sided disease; isolated proctitis follows average-risk screening.
Clinical takeawayAvoid 5-ASA monotherapy in newly diagnosed pediatric Crohn's disease. Prioritize early anti-TNF therapy to reduce cumulative corticosteroid exposure, improve biologic durability once escalation occurs, and reduce perianal disease risk.
What it foundEarly 5-ASA monotherapy in pediatric Crohn's disease was associated with greater systemic corticosteroid use (p=0.036), delayed biologic initiation (~11 months), and a 4.47-fold increased risk of biologic discontinuation among escalators (95% CI 1.28-15.65, p=0.029); early anti-TNF therapy protected against perianal disease (OR 0.24 [95% CI 0.06-0.93], p=0.039).
ContextThis extends prior evidence that 5-ASA lacks efficacy in Crohn's disease (demonstrated in randomised trials) by showing that 5-ASA use also increases harm: greater steroid exposure and inferior long-term therapy outcomes. The study addresses a persistent practice gap: 18% of the cohort still received 5-ASA monotherapy despite documented lack of benefit.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (ECCO), "ECCO Guidelines on Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Malignancies," Journal of Crohn's and Colitis, 2023ShowHide
Decision at stakeTiming of biologic therapy initiation relative to initial monotherapy in newly diagnosed pediatric Crohn's disease
Before starting a biologic or immunomodulator in IBD or rheumatology patients, complete prestart safety screening: TB screening (IGRA preferred, treat latent TB before starting), hepatitis B (HBsAg/HBcAb/HBsAb with drug-class risk-stratified antiviral prophylaxis or monitoring), hepatitis C, HIV, Strongyloides serology for endemic-region patients, vaccination review with live vaccines given before starting, and baseline labs.…
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
Before starting a biologic or immunomodulator in IBD or rheumatology patients, complete prestart safety screening: TB screening (IGRA preferred, treat latent TB before starting), hepatitis B (HBsAg/HBcAb/HBsAb with drug-class risk-stratified antiviral prophylaxis or monitoring), hepatitis C, HIV, Strongyloides serology for endemic-region patients, vaccination review with live vaccines given before starting, and baseline labs. Delay initiation for active infection, active/untreated TB, untreated HBV, or near-term pregnancy plans for JAK/methotrexate/ozanimod. Active or prior malignancy is not a blanket reason to delay therapy: the decision requires cancer- and drug-specific assessment (cancer type, stage, prognosis, and treatment status weighed against the specific agent) made jointly with oncology in a multidisciplinary setting, not a universal hold, when IBD activity needs control most therapies can be continued or initiated (gut-selective vedolizumab has the most reassuring cancer-recurrence data), thiopurines are preferably withdrawn in patients with active cancer, and a fixed (e.g., 5-year) delay before restarting therapy after cancer is no longer recommended.
Patel PV … BISCUIT Study Team · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBDretrospective · n=225 · Aug 18, 2026 · Inflamm Bowel Dis · IF 4.5
Clinical takeawayCounsel women with UC seeking contraception that available evidence does not support an increased UC flare risk with HCT. Although C-reactive protein does increase modestly during HCT exposure, this does not manifest as increased flares or cumulative inflammatory burden. Offer HCT as a contraceptive option while noting the modest sample size of exposed women, which limits power to detect rare or smaller effects.
What it foundHormonal contraception was not associated with increased recurrent ulcerative colitis flares (aHR 0.93, 95% CI 0.62-1.40) over 5.3 years median follow-up with 374 flares observed; cumulative inflammatory burden remained comparable. C-reactive protein was significantly higher during HCT-exposed months (β=0.254, P=.0038), but platelet count, ESR, albumin, alpha-1-acid glycoprotein, and fecal calprotectin were not. No safety signals were identified. However, only 58 of 225 women were exposed to HCT, and this modest sample cannot exclude smaller effects or rare outcomes.
ContextAddresses a common clinical uncertainty: many gastroenterologists may counsel against hormonal contraception due to inflammation concerns, but this data clarifies that HCT is safe in UC. Refines understanding of HCT safety without identifying new protective or harmful effects.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· ACG Clinical Guideline Update: Ulcerative Colitis in Adults, Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1187-1224; AGA Living Guideline on Pharmacological Management of Moderate-to-Severe UC, Gastroenterology 2024 (panel review March 2026, no changes)ShowHide
Decision at stakewhether women with ulcerative colitis should avoid hormonal contraception based on flare risk
Confirm ulcerative colitis with endoscopy showing continuous colonic inflammation from the rectum plus histology, after excluding infection with two-step CDI testing.…Begin CRC surveillance 8-10 years after DIAGNOSIS for extensive or left-sided disease; isolated proctitis follows average-risk screening.
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
Confirm ulcerative colitis with endoscopy showing continuous colonic inflammation from the rectum plus histology, after excluding infection with two-step CDI testing. Treat mild-moderate disease with 5-ASA by route and extent (suppository for proctitis, enema for left-sided, oral plus rectal for extensive); if 5-ASA fails, treat as moderate-to-severe rather than stepping up gradually. Position advanced therapy by EFFICACY TIER, not by an anti-TNF-first rule. Advanced-therapy-naive, higher efficacy: infliximab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod, upadacitinib, risankizumab, guselkumab; intermediate: golimumab, ustekinumab, tofacitinib, filgotinib, mirikizumab; lower: adalimumab. PREVIOUSLY TNF-EXPOSED, higher efficacy: tofacitinib, upadacitinib, ustekinumab; lower: adalimumab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod - S1P modulators are weakest in exactly this group. Do not cycle within the anti-TNF class after primary non-response; switch mechanism. Apply treat-to-target (STRIDE-II) to endoscopic improvement (MES 0-1). Screen for acute severe UC by Truelove-Witts and admit for IV steroids. Begin CRC surveillance 8-10 years after DIAGNOSIS for extensive or left-sided disease; isolated proctitis follows average-risk screening.
Clinical takeawayDietary consultation may be incorporated into individualized IBD management. Specific dietary patterns to recommend, timing relative to pharmacotherapy, and suitability for particular IBD types or disease severity require consultation of the primary source. Note that EEN and restrictive dietary approaches carry significant compliance barriers including tube placement and dietary restriction.
What it foundA review of Western diet as a driver of IBD inflammation and discussion of exclusive enteral nutrition and anti-inflammatory dietary approaches as therapeutic concepts. Specific dietary patterns, constituent-level recommendations, and patient selection criteria are presented in the source.
ContextPositions diet as a modifiable therapeutic intervention in IBD rather than supplementary nutrition. Confirms Western dietary patterns promote inflammation and that specific dietary strategies reduce inflammatory burden when tailored to individuals.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562.ShowHide
Decision at stakewhether dietary intervention should be integrated into Crohn's disease treatment alongside or before pharmacotherapy
No single passage of this standard matched the paper closely enough to quote, so none is shown. The standard is cited above.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
DIAGNOSIS: Use fecal calprotectin (cutoff >50-100 μg/g) to differentiate inflammatory from noninflammatory disease OF THE COLON (strong, moderate). Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies for suspected CD; biopsy uninvolved mucosa to define histologic extent; small bowel imaging is part of the initial workup (key concepts, ungraded). CT enterography is comparable to MR enterography for small bowel detection; MRE should be used PREFERENTIALLY in patients younger than 35 years and where serial examinations are likely, because of radiation avoidance, MRE is not a blanket first choice. Intestinal ultrasound is a radiation-free ADJUNCT to diagnosis and to monitoring treatment response (key concept, ungraded, not a graded recommendation). Perform routine endoscopic CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis (strong, moderate). MILD-TO-MODERATE / LOWER PROGRESSION RISK: Recommend AGAINST oral mesalamine for induction or maintenance (strong, moderate); sulfasalazine should be considered ONLY for symptomatic mild COLONIC CD (key concept). Controlled ileal-release budesonide 9 mg daily for induction of symptomatic remission in mildly-to-moderately active ileocecal CD (strong, moderate), but recommend AGAINST ileal-release budesonide for MAINTENANCE (strong, low). MODERATE-TO-SEVERE / HIGHER RISK: SUGGEST AGAINST requiring failure of conventional therapy before initiating advanced therapy (conditional, LOW, a permission to skip step-up, not a mandate to start advanced therapy upfront). Oral corticosteroids for short-term induction only (strong, low). Recommend AGAINST azathioprine 1.5-2.5 mg/kg/d and 6-mercaptopurine 0.75-1.5 mg/kg/d for INDUCTION (strong, moderate), but SUGGEST the same agents and doses for MAINTENANCE after corticosteroid-induced remission (conditional, low). Check TPMT before starting azathioprine/6-MP (strong, low); measure NUDT15 variants in patients of East Asian ancestry and TPMT variants in all patients prior to thiopurine initiation (strong, moderate). Methotrexate up to 25 mg weekly IM/SC for maintenance after corticosteroid induction (conditional, low). Anti-TNF agents (IV infliximab, SC adalimumab, SC certolizumab pegol) for induction and maintenance (strong, moderate). Recommend COMBINATION IV infliximab + thiopurine over either agent alone in patients naive to both (strong, moderate). Vedolizumab IV for induction and maintenance of symptomatic remission (strong, moderate). Ustekinumab (strong, moderate); risankizumab (strong, moderate), and risankizumab over ustekinumab in prior anti-TNF exposure (conditional, low); mirikizumab (strong, moderate); guselkumab IV-then-SC or all-SC (strong, moderate). Upadacitinib for induction and maintenance in patients PREVIOUSLY EXPOSED TO ANTI-TNF (strong, moderate), the ACG does not endorse it as a first-line biologic-naive option. SC infliximab and SC vedolizumab are maintenance options in responders to IV induction (strong, moderate). PERIANAL FISTULIZING: infliximab for induction (strong, moderate); adalimumab (conditional, low); antibiotics added to infliximab or adalimumab (conditional, very low); vedolizumab, ustekinumab, upadacitinib each (conditional, VERY LOW). Drain perianal abscesses and place setons before escalating advanced therapy (key concept). POST-OPERATIVE: endoscopic assessment at 6-12 months after surgically induced remission over no monitoring (conditional, moderate); in LOW post-op recurrence risk, continued observation rather than immediate medical therapy (conditional, very low); imidazole antibiotics (metronidazole) 1-2 g/d after small intestinal resection (conditional, low); in HIGH-risk CD, anti-TNF to prevent endoscopic recurrence (STRONG, moderate) and vedolizumab (CONDITIONAL, low), these two are not co-equal. SURGERY/ABSCESS: intra-abdominal abscess >2 cm should be treated with antibiotics plus a drainage procedure, and immunosuppression HELD until drainage is achieved (conditional, low). DISEASE MODIFIERS: counsel active smokers to quit; use NSAIDs with caution; assess stress, depression and anxiety as part of comprehensive care (key concepts).
Clinical takeawayNo clinical action yet: mechanistic mouse study of dysbiosis-driven inflammation; flagellin-TLR5-IL-15-ARA is a candidate axis requiring prospective human validation.
What it foundFlagellated bacterial expansion was shared across RA, AS, IBD, and long covid cohorts. These bacteria activate TLR5 on neutrophils, triggering IL-15 release and macrophage arachidonic acid (ARA) production. Genetic ablation of macrophage ARA or neutrophil IL-15 attenuated lung pathology in a co-infection mouse model; gentamicin-mediated microbiome clearance suppressed systemic inflammation.
ContextExtends prior evidence linking dysbiosis to systemic inflammation by identifying a specific mechanistic axis that operates across multiple inflammatory diseases. Proposes long covid as a tractable model for understanding how postinfectious dysbiosis triggers multi-organ pathophysiology, with implications for IBD and systemic diseases.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562.ShowHide
Decision at stakeWhat role the flagellin-IL-15-ARA axis should play in future Crohn's disease therapeutics
DIAGNOSIS: Use fecal calprotectin (cutoff >50-100 μg/g) to differentiate inflammatory from noninflammatory disease OF THE COLON (strong, moderate). Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies for suspected CD; biopsy uninvolved mucosa to define histologic extent; small bowel imaging is part of the initial workup (key concepts, ungraded). CT enterography is comparable to MR enterography for small bowel detection; MRE should be used PREFERENTIALLY in patients younger than 35 years and where serial examinations are likely, because of radiation avoidance, MRE is not a blanket first choice. Intestinal ultrasound is a radiation-free ADJUNCT to diagnosis and to monitoring treatment response (key concept, ungraded, not a graded recommendation). Perform routine endoscopic CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis (strong, moderate).…
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text. The rest of this standard includes PERIANAL FISTULIZING, POST-OPERATIVE, SURGERY/ABSCESS and 3 more.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
DIAGNOSIS: Use fecal calprotectin (cutoff >50-100 μg/g) to differentiate inflammatory from noninflammatory disease OF THE COLON (strong, moderate). Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies for suspected CD; biopsy uninvolved mucosa to define histologic extent; small bowel imaging is part of the initial workup (key concepts, ungraded). CT enterography is comparable to MR enterography for small bowel detection; MRE should be used PREFERENTIALLY in patients younger than 35 years and where serial examinations are likely, because of radiation avoidance, MRE is not a blanket first choice. Intestinal ultrasound is a radiation-free ADJUNCT to diagnosis and to monitoring treatment response (key concept, ungraded, not a graded recommendation). Perform routine endoscopic CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis (strong, moderate). MILD-TO-MODERATE / LOWER PROGRESSION RISK: Recommend AGAINST oral mesalamine for induction or maintenance (strong, moderate); sulfasalazine should be considered ONLY for symptomatic mild COLONIC CD (key concept). Controlled ileal-release budesonide 9 mg daily for induction of symptomatic remission in mildly-to-moderately active ileocecal CD (strong, moderate), but recommend AGAINST ileal-release budesonide for MAINTENANCE (strong, low). MODERATE-TO-SEVERE / HIGHER RISK: SUGGEST AGAINST requiring failure of conventional therapy before initiating advanced therapy (conditional, LOW, a permission to skip step-up, not a mandate to start advanced therapy upfront). Oral corticosteroids for short-term induction only (strong, low). Recommend AGAINST azathioprine 1.5-2.5 mg/kg/d and 6-mercaptopurine 0.75-1.5 mg/kg/d for INDUCTION (strong, moderate), but SUGGEST the same agents and doses for MAINTENANCE after corticosteroid-induced remission (conditional, low). Check TPMT before starting azathioprine/6-MP (strong, low); measure NUDT15 variants in patients of East Asian ancestry and TPMT variants in all patients prior to thiopurine initiation (strong, moderate). Methotrexate up to 25 mg weekly IM/SC for maintenance after corticosteroid induction (conditional, low). Anti-TNF agents (IV infliximab, SC adalimumab, SC certolizumab pegol) for induction and maintenance (strong, moderate). Recommend COMBINATION IV infliximab + thiopurine over either agent alone in patients naive to both (strong, moderate). Vedolizumab IV for induction and maintenance of symptomatic remission (strong, moderate). Ustekinumab (strong, moderate); risankizumab (strong, moderate), and risankizumab over ustekinumab in prior anti-TNF exposure (conditional, low); mirikizumab (strong, moderate); guselkumab IV-then-SC or all-SC (strong, moderate). Upadacitinib for induction and maintenance in patients PREVIOUSLY EXPOSED TO ANTI-TNF (strong, moderate), the ACG does not endorse it as a first-line biologic-naive option. SC infliximab and SC vedolizumab are maintenance options in responders to IV induction (strong, moderate). PERIANAL FISTULIZING: infliximab for induction (strong, moderate); adalimumab (conditional, low); antibiotics added to infliximab or adalimumab (conditional, very low); vedolizumab, ustekinumab, upadacitinib each (conditional, VERY LOW). Drain perianal abscesses and place setons before escalating advanced therapy (key concept). POST-OPERATIVE: endoscopic assessment at 6-12 months after surgically induced remission over no monitoring (conditional, moderate); in LOW post-op recurrence risk, continued observation rather than immediate medical therapy (conditional, very low); imidazole antibiotics (metronidazole) 1-2 g/d after small intestinal resection (conditional, low); in HIGH-risk CD, anti-TNF to prevent endoscopic recurrence (STRONG, moderate) and vedolizumab (CONDITIONAL, low), these two are not co-equal. SURGERY/ABSCESS: intra-abdominal abscess >2 cm should be treated with antibiotics plus a drainage procedure, and immunosuppression HELD until drainage is achieved (conditional, low). DISEASE MODIFIERS: counsel active smokers to quit; use NSAIDs with caution; assess stress, depression and anxiety as part of comprehensive care (key concepts).
Clinical takeawaySystematically screen patients with cardiometabolic risk factors (obesity, diabetes) and any alcohol use for MetALD using risk-based approach: simple blood-based non-invasive fibrosis tests (e.g., FIB-4, AST-to-ALT ratio), imaging, and advanced serum biomarkers of fibrosis. Measure phosphatidylethanol when alcohol history is uncertain or under-reported. Recognize that MetALD carries substantially higher progression risk than MASLD alone and warrants more aggressive surveillance and treatment strategies.
What it foundMetALD affects approximately 4.1% of the global adult population, carries substantially higher risk of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma than MASLD, and results from synergistic (not additive) acceleration by alcohol and cardiometabolic risk factors; alcohol consumption is systematically under-reported in clinical histories but phosphatidylethanol biomarker increases diagnostic yield fourfold.
ContextFormalizes MetALD as a distinct clinical entity (formally defined 2023) beyond traditional separate categories of MASLD and alcohol-associated liver disease. Demonstrates synergistic rather than additive interaction between alcohol and metabolic risk factors, explaining disproportionately worse outcomes. Shifts prior practice from treating these as separate disease entities to recognizing their combined risk as the key driver of accelerated progression and calls for systematic risk-based screening rather than incidental diagnosis.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), "ACG Clinical Guideline: Alcohol-Associated Liver Disease" (Jophlin, Singal, Bataller, et al.), Am J Gastroenterol 2024;119(1):30-54ShowHide
Decision at stakehow to identify and risk-stratify patients with concurrent alcohol use and cardiometabolic risk factors
No single passage of this standard matched the paper closely enough to quote, so none is shown. The standard is cited above.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
Treatment of AUD with sustained abstinence is the most effective strategy to prevent progression and improve long-term outcomes at any stage of ALD; ACG recommends brief screening with a tool such as AUDIT-C (strong, high), brief motivational interventions (strong, low), and integrated multidisciplinary care combining behavioral therapy and/or pharmacotherapy (strong, low). AUD pharmacotherapy recommendations are scoped specifically to COMPENSATED ALD and are not co-equal: baclofen is recommended as an option (strong recommendation, moderate evidence); acamprosate or naltrexone are only suggested as options (conditional, very low); gabapentin or topiramate are suggested as options (conditional, very low); disulfiram is suggested AGAINST along any spectrum of ALD (conditional, very low). For severe alcohol withdrawal, benzodiazepines are the treatment of choice but with explicitly cautious use and careful monitoring given their potential to precipitate or exacerbate hepatic encephalopathy (strong, moderate); AWS is managed per CIWA-Ar protocol, differentiating it from HE while acknowledging the two can coexist. For alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH), severity is stratified by MELD: MELD >20 defines severe AH, which carries high short-term mortality and should preferably be managed in hospital; MELD ≤20 defines moderate AH. In severe AH (MELD >20) ACG recommends corticosteroid therapy ONLY if there are no contraindications (strong, moderate); active infection (including untreated HBV infection), uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, gastrointestinal bleeding, and severe renal failure are contraindications to corticosteroid use, though corticosteroids can be started after adequate control or reversal of infection, renal failure, and gastrointestinal bleeding. Prednisolone is preferred over prednisone; both are dosed 40 mg/day for a total of 4 weeks, with IV methylprednisolone 32 mg/day as the alternative for patients unable to take oral medication; there is no evidence supporting rapid vs slow tapering after the 4-week course. Corticosteroid response is assessed by Lille score at day 7 OR day 4 (day-4 shown as accurate as day-7); among non-responders (Lille >0.45) corticosteroids should be discontinued. ACG recommends IV N-acetylcysteine as an adjuvant to corticosteroids in severe AH (strong, moderate), while explicitly noting that other society guidelines have not adopted this recommendation. ACG recommends AGAINST pentoxifylline (strong, moderate) and AGAINST universal prophylactic antibiotics in hospitalized severe AH (strong, moderate); data on G-CSF and microbiome-based therapies are insufficient. Nutrition: target 35 kcal/kg/day with 1.2-1.5 g/kg/day protein; patients consuming <21 kcal/kg/day should receive nutritional support, preferably oral/enteral, oral nutritional supplements first, escalating to enteral nutrition if caloric targets remain unmet (strong, moderate). Thiamine, vitamin B12 and zinc deficiencies are common in AH and should be supplemented. For severe AH unresponsive to medical management with high risk of death, early liver transplantation for highly selected patients should be considered according to regional and institutional protocols (conditional recommendation, low level of evidence); LT selection must not be based solely on an arbitrary duration of sobriety, and should rest on detailed psychosocial evaluation by a social worker and addiction specialist, optionally supported by tools such as SIPAT, HRAR, MAPS, HPSS or SALT. For severe AH with 4 or more organ failures, non-responsive to corticosteroids and ineligible for early LT, palliative care engagement is appropriate.
Clinical takeawayIn cirrhotic patients with abnormal INR or platelet counts undergoing invasive procedures, implement ROTEM-guided transfusion protocols instead of routine prophylactic transfusion to reduce unnecessary blood product exposure while maintaining hemostatic safety; adoption requires ROTEM availability and institutional protocol support.
What it foundROTEM-guided transfusion reduced prophylactic blood product administration from 97% (28/29 procedures) in standard care to 71% (20/28 procedures) without increasing major bleeding, thrombosis, or mortality.
ContextChallenges the routine practice of prophylactic transfusion in cirrhotic patients with abnormal INR or platelet counts; demonstrates that a more conservative, goal-directed approach using ROTEM is safe and significantly reduces transfusion burden.
No standard claimed for this paper
Every paper is compared to the standard governing its question. This one is not: either no standard in the corpus matches it, or the comparison did not hold up on review and was withdrawn rather than published unverified. Both are logged.
Janko N … Roberts SK · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatologyretrospective · n=130 · Aug 18, 2026 · Dig Dis Sci · IF 2.5
Clinical takeawayFor non-cirrhotic HBeAg-negative patients actively being considered for treatment discontinuation, entecavir showed substantially lower post-cessation relapse risk than TAF. ETV clinical relapse ranged from 0% (HBsAg <2) to 25% (HBsAg ≥3 log10 IU/mL) and was stratified by end-of-treatment quantitative HBsAg; TAF relapse remained uniformly high. This is an observational comparison among patients who discontinued; it does not guide drug selection at treatment initiation.
What it foundIn this retrospective propensity-matched cohort (n=65 per group), non-cirrhotic HBeAg-negative patients discontinuing TAF had 5.6-fold higher 12-month clinical relapse risk than ETV discontinuers (sHR 5.633, 95% CI 2.801-11.329). TAF clinical relapse rates were uniformly high at 48.5-57.1% regardless of end-of-treatment quantitative HBsAg, whereas ETV relapse risk stratified progressively by HBsAg level (<2, 2-3, ≥3 log10 IU/mL: 0%, 14.6%, 25%).
ContextEnd-of-treatment quantitative HBsAg is an established marker for post-discontinuation relapse in HBeAg-negative CHB, but this retrospective study is the first to compare relapse predictability between first-line antivirals. Treatment discontinuation is not routine in non-cirrhotic HBeAg-negative CHB; most patients remain on long-term suppressive therapy. Current guidelines do not explicitly address discontinuation strategies for this population.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases / Infectious Diseases Society of America (AASLD/IDSA), "AASLD/IDSA Practice Guideline on Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B," Hepatology, 2026ShowHide
Decision at stakechoice of ETV vs TAF in HBeAg-negative CHB patients when off-therapy relapse risk is a consideration
…Preferred agents remain entecavir, TDF, or TAF.…(5) DISCONTINUATION, in adults with CHB who are HBeAg-negative, without cirrhosis, with sustained undetectable HBV DNA on nucleos(t)ide analogue therapy, AASLD SUGGESTS NOT withdrawing NA therapy until HBsAg loss (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty).…
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
The 2026 AASLD/IDSA guideline addresses six PICO questions only; it states explicitly that all other 2018 AASLD recommendations for CHB management remain applicable, and that screening/diagnosis were out of scope. Baseline evaluation and the standard treatment indications (cirrhosis with detectable HBV DNA; HBeAg-positive immune-active with ALT >2x ULN and HBV DNA >20,000 IU/mL; HBeAg-negative immune-active with ALT >2x ULN and HBV DNA >2,000 IU/mL; prophylaxis for reactivation risk during immunosuppression) derive from the 2018 document, not this update, which lists 'treatment of HBeAg-positive and -negative immune active CHB with ALT >2x ULN', treatment of children, treatment of cirrhosis, low-level viremia, virologic breakthrough, and special populations (transplant, acute HBV, HCV/HDV/HIV coinfection) as topics 'well covered in previous AASLD 2018 Guidance and for which recommendations have not changed'. Preferred agents remain entecavir, TDF, or TAF. THE SIX 2026 RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) PMTCT, for pregnant persons with HBV DNA >200,000 IU/mL at any time point during pregnancy, regardless of HBeAg status, AASLD RECOMMENDS initiating TDF or TAF at gestational week 28 (STRONG recommendation, MODERATE certainty, the only strong recommendation in the guideline); TDF has a more extensive safety record in pregnancy than TAF. Implementation qualifiers: initiate immediately if care is first sought after week 28; initiate at week 16 if infant HBIG will be unavailable (with subsequent infant vaccination); consider earlier initiation when amniocentesis is anticipated (transmission risk is increased with HBV DNA >2,000,000 IU/mL) or when preterm labor risk is high; continue TDF/TAF if already on it, switch entecavir or other agents to TDF/TAF; if treatment was solely for perinatal prophylaxis it may be discontinued at delivery, with HBV DNA and ALT monitored every 1-3 months for up to 6 months for withdrawal flare and treatment reinitiated if ALT >=5x ULN; use TDF or TAF in breastfeeding persons requiring treatment. (2) HORIZONTAL TRANSMISSION, for HBsAg-positive viremic persons not meeting disease-specific treatment indications who are in high-risk scenarios for transmission to others, AASLD SUGGESTS a shared decision-making approach regarding antiviral treatment (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). Qualifiers the guideline stresses: the decision weighs exposure risk and the vaccine/immunity status of contacts, favoring treatment if contacts are unvaccinated, vaccine-nonresponsive, immunocompromised, or of unknown vaccine status; persons requesting treatment for prevention may be prescribed it since risks may not be disclosed; explicitly, people with CHB must NOT be restricted in daily activities, contact sports, school, or professional training and must NOT be required to take antivirals because of transmission risk in those settings; routine contact, shared meals, and hugging are not transmission routes (avoid sharing toothbrushes/razors); most healthcare workers with CHB are NOT high-risk, but those performing SHEA Category III exposure-prone procedures may require antivirals (SHEA target HBV DNA <1000 IU/mL); neither CDC nor SHEA requires disclosure to patients or staff; anti-stigma framing is part of the recommendation. (3) IMMUNE-TOLERANT PHASE, defined as HBeAg-positive, HBV DNA >10^7 IU/mL, and normal ALT; AASLD SUGGESTS antiviral therapy for those over age 40 years, OR with significant liver inflammation (grade >=2) or fibrosis (>=F2) on biopsy or noninvasive tests (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). For persons under age 40 who are interested in starting treatment earlier, AASLD suggests shared decision-making weighing risk factors and the benefits and risks of treatment. Accurate phase identification requires persistently normal ALT on >=2 measurements >=6 months apart, using ULN 35 U/L (males) and 25 U/L (females). (4) INDETERMINATE ('grey zone') PHASE, the HBeAg-negative indeterminate phase is defined as HBsAg-positive, HBeAg-negative persons whose ALT and/or HBV DNA fall outside the thresholds for HBeAg-negative immune-active CHB (ALT >2x ULN and HBV DNA >2,000 IU/mL) and outside those for inactive CHB (HBV DNA <2,000 IU/mL with normal ALT), comprising predominantly two subgroups, (I) normal (<ULN) or mildly elevated (<2x ULN) ALT with HBV DNA >=2,000 IU/mL, or (II) elevated ALT (>ULN) with HBV DNA <2,000 IU/mL, with ALT interpreted against ULN 35 U/L (males) and 25 U/L (females) and phase assigned on >=2 ALT and HBV DNA measurements over a 6-12 month period; in adults who are HBsAg-positive, HBeAg-negative, without cirrhosis and in the indeterminate phase so defined, AASLD SUGGESTS antiviral therapy using a shared decision-making approach assessing risks and benefits, and re-evaluating that decision at each follow-up visit if treatment has not been initiated (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). Decision-relevant factors include fibrosis stage, age, and sex, e.g. age >40, male sex, and low-normal platelets (<180 k/mm3) favor treatment. (5) DISCONTINUATION, in adults with CHB who are HBeAg-negative, without cirrhosis, with sustained undetectable HBV DNA on nucleos(t)ide analogue therapy, AASLD SUGGESTS NOT withdrawing NA therapy until HBsAg loss (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). If a patient nonetheless has a strong desire to stop, shared decision-making applies and ALL of the following must be met: no history of advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation (variceal bleed, ascites, encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome), HCC, or extrahepatic HBV complications; if HBeAg-positive at treatment start, HBeAg seroconversion to anti-HBe-positive for >=1 year with undetectable HBV DNA >=2 years; if HBeAg-negative at start, undetectable HBV DNA >=2 years; no HIV or HDV coinfection; quantitative HBsAg <100 IU/mL; and willingness to adhere to frequent monitoring. After stopping, monitor ALT and HBV DNA every 1-3 months for 6 months, then every 3 months for 6-12 months, then every 3-6 months. Restart antivirals IMMEDIATELY if HBV DNA >=10,000 IU/mL (4 log IU/mL) at any time regardless of ALT, OR ALT >=5x ULN regardless of HBV DNA, OR total bilirubin >2.5 mg/dL. (6) HCC SURVEILLANCE (all CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty; modality/interval per AASLD 2023 HCC Practice Guidance), Rec 6: after HBsAg loss, continue surveillance in those with cirrhosis, family history of HCC, men who lost HBsAg after age 40, and women who lost HBsAg after age 50. Rec 7: in HBV-HDV coinfection, surveil adults independent of cirrhosis status; in children, individualize because HCC risk in that population is unknown. Rec 8: in HBV-HIV coinfection, surveil men >=18 years and women >=40 years. Rec 9: in HBV-HCV coinfection, AASLD recommends treating HCV and suggests HCC surveillance per HBV mono-infection criteria. Where a person has more than one coinfection, the surveillance recommendation should follow the coinfection carrying the highest associated risk. The guideline notes that most of its recommendations rest on low or very low certainty evidence and that shared decision-making, not uniform policy, is the intended mode of application.
Clinical takeawayIn ICI colitis, escalation to immunosuppressive therapy is primarily determined by ICI type and clinical progression, not mucosal endoscopic appearance. Do not use IMCES (AUC 0.57) or endoscopic features (erythema, exudate) to predict escalation. Monitor for clinical worsening-progressive diarrhea especially bloody, fever, severe abdominal pain, or laboratory decline (rising CRP, falling albumin)-as signals for escalation need. ICI type carries dominant risk; ipilimumab and aCTLA-4-based therapies warrant particular vigilance. Base escalation decisions on symptom trajectory and known ICI immunobiology, not endoscopic severity scoring.
What it foundAmong 255 patients with histologically confirmed ICI colitis, 38% required selective immunosuppressive therapy escalation. ICI type was the dominant multivariable predictor (OR 12.8). Endoscopic features (erythema OR 4.09, exudate OR 3.24) and biochemical markers offered minimal additional predictive value. The Immune-Mediated Colitis Endoscopic Score (IMCES) demonstrated poor discriminative ability (AUC 0.57 overall, 0.61 for early escalation).
ContextCurrent practice often applies endoscopic severity scoring (Mayo, IMCES) to grade ICI colitis severity and inform escalation to immunosuppressive therapy. This external validation shows IMCES performs poorly (AUC 0.57, barely better than chance) and reveals that ICI type and drug immunology, rather than mucosal findings, determine escalation risk.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), "AGA Clinical Practice Update on Diagnosis and Management of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Colitis and Hepatitis: Expert Review" (Dougan M, Wang Y, Rubio-Tapia A, Lim JK), Gastroenterology 2021;160(4):1384-1393ShowHide
Decision at stakewhether endoscopic severity scoring helps identify ICI colitis patients who will need escalation to selective immunosuppressive therapy
…In grade 2 or higher colitis/diarrhea, early stool inflammatory markers (lactoferrin, calprotectin) may help stratify patients for endoscopy, and endoscopic confirmation of the diagnosis and severity should be considered before starting high-dose systemic glucocorticoids; abdominal imaging is reserved for dominant pain, fever, or bleeding and should not be done routinely for diarrhea alone.…
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
For suspected ICI colitis, exclude infectious causes of diarrhea (including C. difficile) before treating. In grade 2 or higher colitis/diarrhea, early stool inflammatory markers (lactoferrin, calprotectin) may help stratify patients for endoscopy, and endoscopic confirmation of the diagnosis and severity should be considered before starting high-dose systemic glucocorticoids; abdominal imaging is reserved for dominant pain, fever, or bleeding and should not be done routinely for diarrhea alone. The AGA cautions that no validated severity index for ICI colitis exists and that symptoms correlate poorly with endoscopic, radiologic, and treatment-response severity, and that rapid progression over days can occur, particularly with ipilimumab. ICI colitis typically responds to high-dose systemic glucocorticoids at 0.5-2 mg/kg prednisone-equivalent daily tapered over 4-6 weeks (the AGA explicitly notes these doses and schedules have not been rigorously examined). If there is no improvement after 2-3 days, add infliximab or vedolizumab while continuing glucocorticoids; both are reasonable options for glucocorticoid-refractory colitis. Budesonide is ineffective as prophylaxis and is not a standard treatment for ICI colitis, it is reserved for ICI-associated microscopic colitis. Retreatment with immunotherapy is possible under select conditions. For hepatitis, obtain baseline liver chemistries (total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, AST, ALT) and HBV serologies before ICI; grade by CTCAE and manage as follows: grade 1 (AST/ALT 1-3x ULN or bilirubin 1-1.5x ULN), monitor liver chemistries 1-2 times weekly; grade 2 (AST/ALT >3-5x ULN or bilirubin >1.5-3x ULN), hold ICI until resolution to grade 1, and if symptomatic give prednisone 0.5-1.0 mg/kg/d or equivalent; grade 3 (AST/ALT >5-20x ULN or bilirubin >3-10x ULN), discontinue ICI and start methylprednisolone 1-2 mg/kg/d or equivalent; grade 4 (AST/ALT >20x ULN or bilirubin >10x ULN or hepatic decompensation), permanently discontinue ICI and start methylprednisolone 2 mg/kg/d. For ICI hepatitis that does not adequately improve after 3-5 days of high-dose glucocorticoids, escalate to a second-line immunosuppressant, mycophenolate mofetil (with azathioprine as an accepted alternative), while continuing glucocorticoids; infliximab is not recommended for ICI hepatitis because of its potential for hepatotoxicity. Evaluate all ICI-related liver-chemistry elevations for alternate etiologies (consider liver biopsy), and obtain biliary imaging when alkaline phosphatase and/or bilirubin are elevated.
Clinical takeawayIn IBS-D patients responding to rifaximin, consolidation with 4 weeks of Medilac-S (Bacillus subtilis and Enterococcus faecium) may be considered to reduce relapse risk. Clinicians should note this contradicts current ACG recommendations against probiotics in IBS (conditional, very low evidence against).
What it foundIn IBS-D patients responding to rifaximin, 4-week Medilac-S consolidation therapy reduced relapse from 58% to 40% (p=0.0378) and improved bowel frequency (1.73 vs 2.53 stools/day, p<0.001) and stool consistency (BSFS 4.38 vs 5.15, p<0.001).
ContextRifaximin achieves good initial remission but relapse remains common. This open-label multicenter RCT tested post-rifaximin probiotic consolidation in a specific population (rifaximin-responders). While the 18-point relapse reduction is clinically meaningful, the open-label design and borderline significance (p=0.0378) mean this single trial does not overturn guideline guidance; should involve shared decision-making and explicit discussion that this is an off-guideline approach.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Irritable Bowel Syndrome', 2021ShowHide
Decision at stakewhether to recommend probiotics in IBS-D management
…IBS-D: rifaximin (strong, moderate); alosetron only for women with severe IBS-D who have failed conventional therapy (conditional, low); mixed opioid agonists/antagonists, i.e. eluxadoline (conditional, moderate); AGAINST bile acid sequestrants (conditional, very low).
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text. The rest of this standard includes IBS-C.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
Diagnosis: use a positive diagnostic strategy based on Rome IV criteria rather than a strategy of exclusion (strong for cost-effectiveness, high quality; consensus for time-to-therapy), and categorize by IBS subtype (consensus). In patients with IBS and diarrhea symptoms: check celiac serology (strong, moderate) and, in those WITHOUT alarm features, fecal calprotectin (or fecal lactoferrin) plus CRP to rule out IBD (strong; moderate quality for CRP/calprotectin, very low for lactoferrin). Recommend AGAINST routine stool testing for enteric pathogens (conditional, low) and AGAINST routine colonoscopy in patients younger than 45 without warning signs (conditional, low). Anorectal physiology testing only when symptoms suggest a pelvic floor disorder and/or for refractory constipation not responding to standard medical therapy (consensus). Treatment, all subtypes: soluble, not insoluble, fiber (strong, moderate); a LIMITED trial of a low-FODMAP diet (conditional, very low); gut-directed psychotherapies for global symptoms (conditional, very low); TCAs for global symptoms (strong, moderate); peppermint suggested (conditional, low); antispasmodics for abdominal pain (conditional, low); AGAINST probiotics (conditional, very low), AGAINST fecal transplant (strong, very low). IBS-C: chloride channel activators (strong, moderate) and guanylate cyclase activators (strong, high); AGAINST PEG products for global IBS-C symptoms (conditional, low); tegaserod reserved for women younger than 65 with ≤1 cardiovascular risk factor who have not adequately responded to secretagogues (strong/conditional, low). IBS-D: rifaximin (strong, moderate); alosetron only for women with severe IBS-D who have failed conventional therapy (conditional, low); mixed opioid agonists/antagonists, i.e. eluxadoline (conditional, moderate); AGAINST bile acid sequestrants (conditional, very low).
Clinical takeawayHeighten clinical recognition that DGBI are prevalent in pediatric populations; systematically assess using Rome V criteria in children with GI symptoms, especially when anxiety, depression, or functional impairment present.
What it foundmultinational epidemiologic data showing 28% of children have DGBI, with peak prevalence at 41% in ages 0-3 and strong association with anxiety, depression and functional impairment
ContextEstablishes first standardized multinational prevalence of paediatric DGBI using Rome V criteria across diverse populations. Demonstrates DGBI affect >1 in 4 children with significant comorbidity and healthcare burden; supports systematic recognition and classification in pediatric care.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· Rome Foundation, "Neuromodulators for Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders (Disorders of Gut−Brain Interaction): A Rome Foundation Working Team Report" (Drossman DA, Tack J, Ford AC, Szigethy E, Törnblom H, Van Oudenhove L), Gastroenterology 2018;154(4):1140-1171.e1, 2018ShowHide
Decision at stakewhether to screen for DGBI in pediatric patients with functional gastrointestinal symptoms and or psychiatric comorbidity
…(3) SSRIs are for anxiety, depression and phobic features, not pain: 'SSRIs can be considered in IBS if anxiety states, including hypervigilance, somatic symptom disorder, visceral anxiety, and maladaptive cognitions, are present, and the abdominal pain and diarrhea are not the dominant clinical features.' (4) Functional dyspepsia is treated by Rome IV subgroup.…
From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.
Our full summary of this standardShowHide
In DGBI where pain is dominant, a central neuromodulator is a logical part of the treatment profile. (1) TCAs are first-line when pain dominates: low-to-modest dosages have the most convincing evidence for chronic GI pain. Start low (10 mg/d helps patients get past early side effects), titrate within 4-6 weeks to 25-75 mg/d at night, and increase further to 100-150 mg/d only if no disturbing side effects develop; evidence for analgesic effect at <25 mg/d is lacking. Tertiary amines (amitriptyline, imipramine) are more anticholinergic/antihistaminic and may be chosen when constipating/sedating effects are useful (IBS-D, disturbed sleep); secondary amines (nortriptyline, desipramine) when those effects are unwanted (IBS-C, or pain with constipation). The TCA class is first-line for IBS, especially IBS-D. (2) SNRIs (duloxetine 30-90 mg, venlafaxine 75-225 mg with >225 mg needed for noradrenergic pain effect, milnacipran) 'may have at least equal benefit as TCAs' for chronic GI pain, but this is extrapolated from fibromyalgia, migraine, widespread body pain and neuropathy; they 'have not been adequately tested for chronic GI pain' and have not been adequately studied in IBS. Their advantage is the absence of anticholinergic/antihistaminic effects that preclude adequate TCA dosing; start in the low-dose range for the first week because nausea is common. SNRIs may be favored for IBS-C. (3) SSRIs are for anxiety, depression and phobic features, not pain: 'SSRIs can be considered in IBS if anxiety states, including hypervigilance, somatic symptom disorder, visceral anxiety, and maladaptive cognitions, are present, and the abdominal pain and diarrhea are not the dominant clinical features.' (4) Functional dyspepsia is treated by Rome IV subgroup. For PDS with early satiety, fullness and nausea predominating: buspirone, dosed as for anxiety, 30 mg/d divided 2-3 times daily, increasable to 60 mg/d (a 4-week trial reduced dyspeptic symptoms). Mirtazapine is 'a good treatment option for PDS when there is chronic nausea and vomiting, or weight loss', 15 mg in the evening for 8 weeks was superior to placebo in FD patients with weight loss and without coexisting anxiety or depression; usual range 15-45 mg in the evening. For EPS, studies mainly support TCAs (amitriptyline), either initially or after an unsuccessful PPI trial; the SNRI group 'can also be considered for patients with EPS who do not tolerate TCA treatment, although confirmatory studies are lacking.' (5) Functional heartburn and functional chest pain (after excluding GERD): 'There is insufficient evidence to recommend a particular class of central agent.' SSRIs have shown some benefit for esophageal pain; low-dose imipramine or amitriptyline 'can be considered,' but those studies are small and one was open-label; venlafaxine 75 mg extended-release at night beat placebo in a young cohort (20-29 years). (6) A comorbid dominant psychiatric diagnosis, identified by clinical assessment or questionnaires such as the HADS, 'may need to be a primary consideration when selecting a neuromodulator'; neuromodulators can alternatively be selected for their peripheral effects (disturbed bowel habit, chronic nausea). (7) Augmentation, reducing the dose of the first agent and adding a second, complementary treatment, is recommended when monotherapy is insufficient or dose-limited by side effects: an azapirone (dyspeptic features, prominent anxiety), a delta ligand (abdominal wall pain, comorbid fibromyalgia; pregabalin 150-600 mg/d, effect expected within a month), an SSRI (dominant anxiety/phobic features), an atypical antipsychotic (quetiapine 25-200 mg for pain with disturbed sleep, the psychiatric range of ≥200-400 mg/d is poorly tolerated; olanzapine/sulpiride for anxiety and nausea), bupropion (prominent fatigue/sleepiness), or a psychological treatment. (8) Behavioral therapy is positioned as an adjunct/augmentation, not as a co-equal mandatory arm: CBT where maladaptive cognitions and catastrophizing are present, DBT/EMDR with a history of PTSD or trauma, hypnosis/mindfulness/relaxation as alternatives; many RCTs support behavioral interventions 'as an adjunct to pharmacologic strategies,' and few studies compare behavioral alone against combination. (9) Continue treatment 6-12 months after treatment response to reduce relapse (empiric recommendation, extrapolated from major depression where 4-9 months is advised); consider longer-term treatment where ongoing psychosocial stress, positive family history, multiple prior episodes, or current psychiatric comorbidity exist. (10) Opioids should be avoided: there are no controlled data supporting opioids in chronic visceral pain, and their use carries substantial risk of opioid-induced constipation and narcotic bowel syndrome. (11) Implementation depends on communication: educate, provide a physiological rationale, address the patient's reluctance to take a 'psychiatric' drug, and involve the patient in medication choice, merely recommending the drug leads to refusal, nonadherence, or anxiety-driven side-effect reports.
Everything else this week26 that cleared the barShowHide
Ranked below the cards above, not excluded: these met the bar and were read and scored the same way. One line each, grouped by subspecialty, highest signal first; click through for the paper.
Also screened this week56 papers read, not selectedShowHide
These cleared the journal filter and were read, but were not
selected this week. A score means the paper was weighed: below 35 it fell
short of the bar; at 35 or above, a check after scoring set it aside. A blank
means it was set aside before scoring. Listed for anyone going deeper; no
takeaway attached, because none was written.
How we choose →