A SiftingSignal publication/ Edited by Simon Mathews, MD

The week in GI, filtered to what is worth knowing.

Every week, 100+ papers from 25+ top GI and medical journals, transparently scored and physician-vetted. The signal, not the noise.

This week, in numbers

Issue №16 · week of Oct 18, 2026See the trends →
Top journals this week: NEJM / Nature Medicine / J Hepatology / Lancet GH
Selectivity
10.7%
17 in the issue of 159 screened
in the issue 17in depth 30held 11filtered out 101
89.3% of what published this week did not make the issue. That filter is the product. A further 30 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. 12 of the 17 cards in the issue are matched to a standard, and each of those quotes it with its source and review date. From issue 14, every match is independently re-checked, so this bar reads lower than in earlier issues. Click a segment to filter the issue.
The signal map
587389retrospectivemeta-analysis →Clinical utilityEvidence strength
Each dot is a paper: evidence strength across, clinical utility up (what you can do with it, what rides on it, how many patients, how new), area = the journal's impact factor, colour = subspecialty. A dark ring marks a paper that refines or changes its standard of care. The vertical scale spans this week's cards and its numbers are the real scores out of 100. Click a dot to open its card.

What to know this week

the top-scored · the 5-minute version
Your subspecialty, the takeaways
IBD5Hepatology10Esophagus/Reflux6Pancreas/Biliary4Endoscopy7Motility5Colorectal7Nutrition3
Type

This week to know

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
Esophagus/Reflux rct · n=316 · Oct 13, 2026 · J Gastro Hep · IF 3.5

14-Day Keverprazan-Amoxicillin Dual Therapy Versus Bismuth-Containing Quadruple Therapy as First-Line Treatment for Helicobacter pylori Eradication: A Prospective, Single-Center, Randomized Controlled Trial.

New evidencebasic sciencebiomarkerproton pump inhibitors
Clinical takeawaySupports P-CAB plus high-dose amoxicillin dual therapy as a simpler first-line regimen where keverprazan is available (China). Elsewhere vonoprazan-amoxicillin is the analogous dual option and bismuth quadruple remains the guideline default.
What it foundKeverprazan-amoxicillin dual therapy achieved a 93.7% eradication rate (per-protocol analysis), noninferior to bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (93.5%), with fewer adverse events (19.0% vs. 28.5%).
ContextAdds to the P-CAB dual-therapy trials; resistance patterns and single-centre design limit generalisation.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, Chey WD, Howden CW, Moss SF, et al. 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection.' Am J Gastroenterol 2024;119(9):1730-1753

… First-line in treatment-naive patients: the PREFERRED regimen (strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence) is optimized bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) for 14 days = standard-dose PPI twice daily + bismuth subcitrate or subsalicylate four times daily + tetracycline 500 mg four times daily + metronidazole 500 mg three or four times daily; 'optimized' means the full 14 days, using tetracycline (do NOT substitute doxycycline) and adequate metronidazole (at least 1.5 g/day). …

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 standard

Confirm ACTIVE infection before treating using a urea breath test, fecal (stool) antigen test, or endoscopic biopsy-based test (histology or rapid urease); do NOT use serology. Testing and treatment are a SINGLE decision, do NOT test unless you intend to treat, and, conversely, offer eradication to EVERY patient found to have confirmed active infection regardless of why they were tested ('if you test, you treat'); confirmed active infection is itself the indication to treat, not one of the conditions below. The following are indications to TEST for H. pylori (and to treat whenever the test is positive): active or prior peptic ulcer disease, gastric MALT lymphoma, atrophic gastritis / gastric intestinal metaplasia and other gastric premalignant conditions, uninvestigated dyspepsia in patients under 60 without alarm features (test-and-treat), functional dyspepsia, long-term NSAID or aspirin use, unexplained iron-deficiency anemia, immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura, resected early gastric cancer or gastric adenomas, first-degree relatives of gastric-cancer patients, and adult household members of an infected person (test non-serologically). First-line in treatment-naive patients: the PREFERRED regimen (strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence) is optimized bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) for 14 days = standard-dose PPI twice daily + bismuth subcitrate or subsalicylate four times daily + tetracycline 500 mg four times daily + metronidazole 500 mg three or four times daily; 'optimized' means the full 14 days, using tetracycline (do NOT substitute doxycycline) and adequate metronidazole (at least 1.5 g/day). Optimized BQT is preferred even with penicillin allergy; avoid tetracycline in women of childbearing potential and avoid bismuth subsalicylate in salicylate allergy. CONDITIONAL alternatives (low/moderate QOE, require no penicillin allergy) are rifabutin triple therapy (omeprazole 10 mg / amoxicillin 250 mg / rifabutin 12.5 mg, i.e. Talicia, 4 capsules three times daily for 14 days) and vonoprazan-amoxicillin DUAL therapy (vonoprazan 20 mg twice daily + amoxicillin 1000 mg three times daily for 14 days). Vonoprazan-clarithromycin TRIPLE therapy (vonoprazan 20 mg twice daily + clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily + amoxicillin 1000 mg twice daily for 14 days) should be used ONLY when the strain is clarithromycin-susceptible. AVOID any empiric clarithromycin-containing (including PPI-clarithromycin triple) or levofloxacin-containing regimen unless susceptibility is documented (clarithromycin resistance ~22-31%, levofloxacin ~38%); prefer esomeprazole or rabeprazole, or a PCAB, over omeprazole/lansoprazole/pantoprazole in known rapid or ultrarapid CYP2C19 metabolizers. Test of cure is required for ALL treated patients: confirm eradication with a urea breath test, fecal antigen test, or biopsy-based test performed at least 4 weeks after finishing antibiotics and after holding PPIs/PCABs for at least 2 weeks (an H2-receptor antagonist may be used in the interim).

American College of Gastroenterology, Chey WD, Howden CW, Moss SF, et al. 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection.' Am J Gastroenterol 2024;119(9):1730-1753 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Yu Y … Jiang X · Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal prospective cohort · n=15,857 · Oct 16, 2026 · Endoscopy · IF 11.8

Serrated polyp detection rates beyond adenoma detection rate for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: findings from the SCREESCO trial.

New evidencecolorectal cancer screeningserrated polypepidemiology
Clinical takeawayMonitor and aim to improve PSPDR alongside ADR in colonoscopy practice, particularly for endoscopists with low PSPDR (<10%), to reduce PCCRC risk. Specific strategies for improvement should be developed based on further evidence.
What it foundEndoscopists with low PSPDR (<10%) had a 5-year PCCRC incidence of 0.16% vs. 0.06% for those with high PSPDR (≥10%), and PCCRC incidence decreased as PSPDR increased (HR 0.90 per percentage-point increase; 95%CI 0.82-1.00; P = 0.04).
ContextRefines current practice by highlighting PSPDR as a complementary metric to ADR for identifying higher PCCRC risk, particularly in endoscopists with high ADR. Applies to average-risk colorectal cancer screening populations aged 45-75.
Measured against the standard of care· USMSTF 2017 (Rex et al., Gastroenterology) + USMSTF 2022 focused update on age (Patel et al., Gastroenterology 2022;162:285-299) / ACS 2026 (CA Cancer J Clin)

Decision at stakethe role of serrated polyp detection rates in postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer risk

… Multi-Society Task Force (2017 guideline, revised by the 2022 focused update on age to start and stop): offer average-risk colorectal cancer screening to everyone aged 45-75. … Colonoscopy every 10 years and annual FIT are the Tier 1 cornerstones. … The American Cancer Society's May 2026 guideline agrees on the 45-75 range, no screening after 85, and colonoscopy as the preferred option. …

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 standard

U.S. Multi-Society Task Force (2017 guideline, revised by the 2022 focused update on age to start and stop): offer average-risk colorectal cancer screening to everyone aged 45-75. Screening at 45-49 is a weaker recommendation than at 50-75. Colonoscopy every 10 years and annual FIT are the Tier 1 cornerstones. Tier 2 alternatives are multi-target stool DNA every 3 years, CT colonography every 5 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5-10 years. Capsule colonoscopy every 5 years is Tier 3. Any abnormal non-colonoscopy test requires a diagnostic colonoscopy, and a stool test should not be offered to a patient who would decline follow-up colonoscopy. Patients who are up to date with negative prior screening, particularly a high-quality colonoscopy, may consider stopping at 75 or when life expectancy is under 10 years. Decisions at 76-85 are individualized by health and prior screening, and screening after 85 is not recommended. The American Cancer Society's May 2026 guideline agrees on the 45-75 range, no screening after 85, and colonoscopy as the preferred option. It adds the next-generation mt-sDNA test and the multitarget stool RNA test (ColoSense), both every 3 years, and it adds an FDA-approved blood-based cfDNA test (Shield) only for people who decline or do not complete visual or stool screening. ACS says a positive stool or blood test should be followed by colonoscopy, preferably within 6 months. The 2026 ASGE paper on follow-up after an abnormal stool test is an implementation review (navigation, tracking, direct-access colonoscopy), not a new screening guideline.

USMSTF 2017 (Rex et al., Gastroenterology) + USMSTF 2022 focused update on age (Patel et al., Gastroenterology 2022;162:285-299) / ACS 2026 (CA Cancer J Clin) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Sekiguchi M … Forsberg AM · Endoscopy · IF 11.8 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBD rct · n=252 · Oct 15, 2026 · NEJM · IF 84.5

Phase 2 Trial of Icotrokinra for Patients with Ulcerative Colitis.

New therapyulcerative colitisbiologicsJAK inhibitorsanti-TNF
Clinical takeawayConsider oral icotrokinra as a potential oral therapy for adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis, pending phase 3 trial results.
What it foundOral icotrokinra achieved clinical response in 63% (400 mg), 58% (200 mg), and 55% (100 mg) vs 27% placebo at week 12, with adverse events in 60-66% of participants and serious adverse events in 0-5%.
ContextThis introduces a novel oral IL-23 receptor blocker, contrasting with current IV/subcutaneous IL-23 inhibitors.
Measured against the standard of care· AGA Clinical Practice Update on Inpatient Management of Adults With IBD (Gastroenterology 2026) / ACG UC Guideline Update 2025 / AGA Living Guideline, Moderate-to-Severe UC 2024 (panel review March 2026)

Decision at stakepositioning advanced therapy by efficacy tier for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis

Outpatient positioning is unchanged from the ACG 2025 UC guideline and the AGA living guideline for moderate-to-severe UC. … Position advanced therapy by efficacy tier, not by an anti-TNF-first rule. …

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 standard

Outpatient positioning is unchanged from the ACG 2025 UC guideline and the AGA living guideline for moderate-to-severe UC. Confirm UC with endoscopy showing continuous colonic inflammation from the rectum plus histology, after excluding infection with two-step C. difficile testing. Treat mild-moderate disease with 5-ASA chosen by route and extent: suppository for proctitis, enema for left-sided disease, oral plus rectal for extensive disease. 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. After anti-TNF primary non-response, switch mechanism rather than cycling within the class. Treat to target (STRIDE-II): endoscopic improvement, Mayo endoscopic subscore 0-1. Begin CRC surveillance 8-10 years after diagnosis for extensive or left-sided disease; isolated proctitis follows average-risk screening. Inpatient care now follows the 2026 AGA Clinical Practice Update (13 best-practice statements). Admit for severe symptoms refractory to outpatient therapy, suspected complications (obstruction, abscess, toxic megacolon) or significant malnutrition, and identify acute severe UC by Truelove-Witts. Give every patient admitted with diarrhea two-step C. difficile testing. Test for CMV, with early endoscopy, if symptoms worsen, the patient is systemically toxic or disease is steroid-refractory. Give routine VTE prophylaxis with LMWH or fondaparinux unless contraindicated, and individualize post-discharge extension. Give IV methylprednisolone 60 mg/day or equivalent; the AGA living guideline says 40-60 mg/day, and higher doses add no benefit. Do not give adjunctive antibiotics without infection. Involve surgery early. Assess response by day 3 (72 h) using stool frequency and CRP (Oxford criteria); do not continue IV steroids beyond about 7 days without response. Rescue steroid non-responders with infliximab (accelerated or intensified dosing in selected patients with high inflammatory burden or protein-losing colopathy), cyclosporine, or a JAK inhibitor at standard or intensified dosing, or with colectomy. Before discharge, the response should be stable and a transition plan should be in place.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Inpatient Management of Adults With IBD (Gastroenterology 2026) / ACG UC Guideline Update 2025 / AGA Living Guideline, Moderate-to-Severe UC 2024 (panel review March 2026) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Abreu MT … ANTHEM-UC Study Group · New England Journal of Medicine · IF 84.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology meta analysis · Oct 15, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2

Optimal Incidence Threshold for Cost-Effective Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance in Alcohol-Associated Cirrhosis.

New evidencealcohol-associated liver diseasehepatocellular carcinomacost-effectivenessepidemiology
Clinical takeawayModel-based: surveillance was cost-effective in both active drinkers and abstinent patients once annual HCC incidence reaches about 0.45 per 100 person-years, well below the 1% threshold current guidelines cite; the authors argue for updating that threshold.
What it foundBiannual HCC surveillance becomes cost-effective when annual HCC incidence exceeds 0.45 per 100 person-years, yielding an ICER of $18,952 per QALY in active drinkers and $56,000 per QALY in abstinent patients compared to no surveillance.
ContextModel-based, not outcomes data; ICER $18,952 per QALY in active drinkers and $56,000 in abstinent patients.
Measured against the standard of care· AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance (Hepatology 78(6):1922-1965) / AGA Clinical Practice Update 2026 (Gastroenterology, Rich et al.) / BEACON-HCC consensus 2026 (Hepatology)

Perform HCC surveillance with abdominal ultrasound PLUS serum AFP every ~6 months (semiannual, not annual) in adults with cirrhosis of any etiology who could benefit from HCC treatment: Child-Turcotte-Pugh A or B, and CTP C only if a liver-transplant candidate or listed. …

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 standard

Perform HCC surveillance with abdominal ultrasound PLUS serum AFP every ~6 months (semiannual, not annual) in adults with cirrhosis of any etiology who could benefit from HCC treatment: Child-Turcotte-Pugh A or B, and CTP C only if a liver-transplant candidate or listed. Do not surveil patients whose life expectancy is <1-2 years from comorbidity that neither transplantation nor HCC therapy can remedy, and weigh the physical, psychological and financial harms of surveillance case by case. Also surveil selected non-cirrhotic chronic HBV carriers: Asian men >40 and women >50 from endemic regions, people of African origin at younger ages, family history of HCC, or high viral load/active hepatitis. AGA 2026 endorses PAGE-B (intermediate/high risk at ≥10) and REAL-B to stratify these patients. Patients with HCV cirrhosis stay in surveillance after SVR. Patients without cirrhosis from other causes are NOT surveilled because incidence is too low (≤F3 fibrosis, MASLD without cirrhosis, HCV cured before cirrhosis), though fibrosis staging uncertainty warrants individual discussion. CT/MRI are not routine surveillance tools. Abbreviated MRI, GALAD and other blood biomarkers are investigational and should not replace ultrasound+AFP. Multicancer blood detection tests should not be used. Recall per AASLD 2023: AFP ≥20 ng/mL or a rising AFP (doubling, or a rise on two consecutive tests even below 20), any ultrasound observation ≥1 cm, or an inadequate ultrasound triggers multiphasic contrast CT or MRI read with LI-RADS. Treatment per AASLD 2023 is BCLC-linked: resection, ablation or transplant within Milan criteria for very-early/early disease, TACE and other locoregional therapy for intermediate disease, systemic therapy for advanced disease. Preferred first-line systemic therapy in Child-Pugh A is atezolizumab+bevacizumab or durvalumab+tremelimumab (STRIDE); sorafenib, lenvatinib or durvalumab monotherapy are the alternatives. BEACON-HCC (AASLD/HCC-LIVE, Hepatology 2026) is a Delphi consensus framework for treatment allocation that complements BCLC; it does not replace it. Under BEACON-HCC, macrovascular invasion does not automatically mean systemic therapy, and EBRT/SBRT and TARE are primary options. Continue post-treatment surveillance with contrast-enhanced cross-sectional imaging early after curative therapy.

AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance (Hepatology 78(6):1922-1965) / AGA Clinical Practice Update 2026 (Gastroenterology, Rich et al.) / BEACON-HCC consensus 2026 (Hepatology) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Hajjar A … Chhatwal J · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology prospective cohort · n=226 · Oct 12, 2026 · J Hepatology · IF 40.1

Abnormal left ventricular mass as a prognostic marker for outcomes in infants and children with cirrhosis.

New evidencecirrhosispediatricbiomarkerepidemiology
Clinical takeawayConsider echocardiographic LVMI as a pretransplant risk marker in children with cirrhosis for perioperative planning. It is not a validated allocation tool; PELD/MELD still governs listing.
What it foundLeft ventricular mass index (LVMI) ≥ 88 g/m2.7, ≥ 91 g/m2.7, and ≥ 95 g/m2.7 independently predicted waitlist decompensation, composite serious adverse events, and mortality in children with cirrhosis, with OR 6.9 [CI 3,16] for LV hypertrophy.
ContextAbout 25% of children with cirrhosis had LV hypertrophy on echo and necropsy; cirrhotic cardiomyopathy remains undefined in children.
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.

Bashir DA … Desai MS · Journal of Hepatology · IF 40.1 · PubMed ↗Permalink

The read

the next 12, in full

IBD· 2

IBD prospective cohort · n=3,301 · Oct 11, 2026 · Aliment Pharm Ther · IF 6.7

Clinical Course and Predictors of Biologic Therapy, Hospitalisation and Surgery: A Five-Year Prospective Study in Newly Diagnosed Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

New evidenceCrohn's diseaseulcerative colitisbiologicsJAK inhibitors
Clinical takeawayEarly advanced therapy in newly diagnosed IBD tracks with fewer hospitalisations but has not been shown here to reduce surgery. The UC surgery association (HR 11.9) reflects who gets treated, not drug harm, and is no reason to withhold biologics.
What it foundBiologics/JAKi reduced hospitalisation risk in CD (HR=0.4) and UC (HR=0.5) compared to no biologics/JAKi, but increased surgery risk in UC (HR=11.9).
ContextProspective Spanish incident cohort: 30% received biologics or JAKi, 34% were hospitalised and 9% had surgery within 5 years; treated patients had more extensive or aggressive disease.
Measured against the standard of care· AGA Clinical Practice Update on Inpatient Management of Adults With IBD (Gastroenterology 2026) / ACG UC Guideline Update 2025 / AGA Living Guideline, Moderate-to-Severe UC 2024 (panel review March 2026)

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 standard

Outpatient positioning is unchanged from the ACG 2025 UC guideline and the AGA living guideline for moderate-to-severe UC. Confirm UC with endoscopy showing continuous colonic inflammation from the rectum plus histology, after excluding infection with two-step C. difficile testing. Treat mild-moderate disease with 5-ASA chosen by route and extent: suppository for proctitis, enema for left-sided disease, oral plus rectal for extensive disease. 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. After anti-TNF primary non-response, switch mechanism rather than cycling within the class. Treat to target (STRIDE-II): endoscopic improvement, Mayo endoscopic subscore 0-1. Begin CRC surveillance 8-10 years after diagnosis for extensive or left-sided disease; isolated proctitis follows average-risk screening. Inpatient care now follows the 2026 AGA Clinical Practice Update (13 best-practice statements). Admit for severe symptoms refractory to outpatient therapy, suspected complications (obstruction, abscess, toxic megacolon) or significant malnutrition, and identify acute severe UC by Truelove-Witts. Give every patient admitted with diarrhea two-step C. difficile testing. Test for CMV, with early endoscopy, if symptoms worsen, the patient is systemically toxic or disease is steroid-refractory. Give routine VTE prophylaxis with LMWH or fondaparinux unless contraindicated, and individualize post-discharge extension. Give IV methylprednisolone 60 mg/day or equivalent; the AGA living guideline says 40-60 mg/day, and higher doses add no benefit. Do not give adjunctive antibiotics without infection. Involve surgery early. Assess response by day 3 (72 h) using stool frequency and CRP (Oxford criteria); do not continue IV steroids beyond about 7 days without response. Rescue steroid non-responders with infliximab (accelerated or intensified dosing in selected patients with high inflammatory burden or protein-losing colopathy), cyclosporine, or a JAK inhibitor at standard or intensified dosing, or with colectomy. Before discharge, the response should be stable and a transition plan should be in place.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Inpatient Management of Adults With IBD (Gastroenterology 2026) / ACG UC Guideline Update 2025 / AGA Living Guideline, Moderate-to-Severe UC 2024 (panel review March 2026) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Garre A … EpidemIBD Group of GETECCU · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · IF 6.7 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBD prospective cohort · Oct 14, 2026 · Clin Transl Gastro · IF 3.4

Long-term Benefits of Mirikizumab on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Individuals with Crohn's Disease: 2-Year Results from the VIVID-2 Extension Study.

New evidenceCrohn's diseasebiologics
Clinical takeawaySupports continuing mirikizumab in moderate to severe Crohn's disease: at 2 years most patients reported sustained quality-of-life gains, including endoscopic non-responders who were re-induced (IBDQ response 85% vs 73%). Open-label extension without a control arm.
What it foundAt 2 years, 85.0% of endoscopic responders and 72.6% of non-responders achieved IBDQ response, and 75% responders and 54% non-responders achieved clinical remission by PRO (AP ≤1 and SF ≤3).
ContextExtends evidence from VIVID-1, showing mirikizumab's long-term benefits in symptom control and QoL, even in endoscopic non-responders, in patients with Crohn's disease who had prior endoscopic response.
Measured against the standard of care· ACG 2025 (Lichtenstein et al., Am J Gastroenterol) / AGA Living Guideline 2025 (Scott et al., Gastroenterology) / AGA Clinical Practice Update on Therapeutic Endoscopy in IBD 2026 (CGH)

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 standard

Two current US guidelines govern Crohn's disease and should be read together. ACG 2025 (Lichtenstein et al.) remains the reference for diagnosis, mild-to-moderate disease, perianal, postoperative and abscess management. DIAGNOSIS: fecal calprotectin (>50-100 μg/g) separates inflammatory from noninflammatory disease of the colon. Workup is ileocolonoscopy with biopsies, including uninvolved mucosa, plus small-bowel imaging. CTE and MRE are comparable; prefer MRE in patients <35 y and when serial exams are likely. Intestinal ultrasound is an ungraded adjunct. Do routine CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis. MILD-TO-MODERATE: recommend against oral mesalamine; sulfasalazine only for symptomatic mild colonic CD; ileal-release budesonide 9 mg for induction in ileocecal disease but not for maintenance. MODERATE-TO-SEVERE (AGA Living Guideline, Scott et al., Gastroenterology 2025;169(7):1397-1448, 16 recommendations: 1 strong, 9 conditional, 6 knowledge gaps; updated quarterly, adult outpatients only): RECOMMEND infliximab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, risankizumab, mirikizumab, guselkumab or upadacitinib over no treatment; SUGGEST certolizumab pegol or vedolizumab over no treatment. Advanced-therapy-naive: suggest higher-efficacy agents (infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, risankizumab, mirikizumab, guselkumab) over lower-efficacy ones (certolizumab pegol, upadacitinib). Prior advanced-therapy (especially anti-TNF) exposure: suggest higher- or intermediate-efficacy agents (adalimumab, risankizumab, guselkumab, upadacitinib; ustekinumab, mirikizumab) over lower-efficacy ones (vedolizumab, certolizumab pegol). Suggest against thiopurine monotherapy for induction; suggest it for maintenance of remission. Suggest SC/IM methotrexate monotherapy; suggest against oral methotrexate. In thiopurine-naive patients starting infliximab, suggest infliximab + thiopurine over infliximab alone. No recommendation on IFX + MTX, adalimumab + immunomodulator, or non-TNF biologic + immunomodulator. After ≥6 months of steroid-free remission on anti-TNF + immunomodulator, suggest withdrawing the immunomodulator and suggest against withdrawing the anti-TNF. SUGGEST upfront advanced therapy over step-up therapy (corticosteroids and/or immunomodulator first). No recommendation on treating to endoscopic vs symptomatic remission. The ACG 2025 moderate-to-severe recommendations (anti-TNF, IFX + thiopurine combination and IL-12/23/IL-23 agents, each strong/moderate; upadacitinib after anti-TNF exposure; steroids for short-term induction only; TPMT/NUDT15 testing before thiopurines) still stand alongside AGA. ACG perianal (infliximab first; drain abscesses and place setons before escalating), postoperative (endoscopy at 6-12 months; anti-TNF strong, vedolizumab conditional in high-risk patients) and intra-abdominal abscess (>2 cm: antibiotics plus drainage, hold immunosuppression) positions are unchanged. THERAPEUTIC ENDOSCOPY (AGA Clinical Practice Update, CGH 2026; details below come from AGA news coverage, not the full text, and are ungraded advice): get cross-sectional imaging before the procedure. Endoscopic balloon dilation is first-line for short strictures (about ≤4-5 cm) with few risk factors (fistula, prestenotic dilation >5 cm, high CRP, prior anti-TNF). Longer or multiple strictures, or ≥3 risk factors, favor surgery.

ACG 2025 (Lichtenstein et al., Am J Gastroenterol) / AGA Living Guideline 2025 (Scott et al., Gastroenterology) / AGA Clinical Practice Update on Therapeutic Endoscopy in IBD 2026 (CGH) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Chen M … Allegretti JR · Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology · IF 3.4 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Hepatology· 1

Hepatology rct · n=300 · Oct 16, 2026 · Lancet GH · IF 39.1

Thyroid hormone receptor-β agonist simedeutirom (HSK31679) for Chinese patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis: a 52-week, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial.

New therapyMASLDbiomarkerepidemiology
Clinical takeawayInvestigational: simedeutirom is not approved anywhere and the trial was China-only. Treat this as class evidence for THR-beta agonism in F2-F3 MASH, where resmetirom is the approved agent; no clinical use yet.
What it foundSimedeutirom 80 mg and 160 mg achieved MASH improvement (defined as a two-point or more reduction in NAS, one-point or more improvement in hepatocellular ballooning, and no increase in steatosis score) without fibrosis worsening in 37% and 30% of patients, respectively, vs 10% with placebo (ORs 4.87 and 5.24). Grade 3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 5% and 8% of patients, respectively.
ContextThis phase 2b trial provides promising evidence for simedeutirom in MASH, extending prior findings on hepatic fat reduction to fibrosis improvement in a specific population.
Measured against the standard of care· EASL-EASD-EASO 2026 Guidance on Resmetirom and Semaglutide as MASH-Targeted Therapy (J Hepatol, doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2026.08.028) / AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance (+ Oct 2024 resmetirom and Nov 2025 semaglutide updates) / AGA 2026 Clinical Care Pathway for MASLD (Gastroenterology, doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2026.01.047) / AGA 2026 Clinical Practice Update on MetALD (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2026) / EASL 2026 SLD trajectory guidance (JHEP Rep, doi:10.1016/j.jhepr.2026.101798)

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 standard

This standard applies to MASLD: hepatic steatosis on imaging or biopsy, at least one cardiometabolic criterion, no other liver disease, and alcohol below the MetALD range. The AGA 2026 MetALD update sets MetALD at about 140-350 g/week of alcohol in women and 210-420 g/week in men, averaged over at least 3 months. MASLD therefore means under about 140 g/week (women) or 210 g/week (men), and drinking above the MetALD range is ALD. Assess alcohol use in every patient with steatotic liver disease at diagnosis and at least once a year, by interview, a validated questionnaire (e.g., AUDIT-C) and/or biomarkers such as phosphatidylethanol (PEth). Advise every patient with steatotic liver disease to stop drinking. Screen people with type 2 diabetes, people with overweight or obesity plus at least one more metabolic risk factor, and anyone with incidental steatosis or raised aminotransferases. Use FIB-4 first. A score below 1.3 (below 2.0 at age 65 or older) is low risk: the patient stays in primary care and repeats FIB-4 every 1-2 years. A score at or above the cutoff goes to a second-line test: VCTE, or ELF if elastography is not available. VCTE below 8 kPa is low risk. VCTE of 8 kPa or more, or ELF of 9.2 or more, means clinically significant fibrosis is likely and the patient should be referred to hepatology. Read liver stiffness with caution if the patient is actively drinking. Reserve biopsy for discordant or unclear results. Lifestyle change is the base of treatment for everyone: at least 5% weight loss improves steatosis, and 10% or more is usually needed for fibrosis to improve. Pharmacotherapy is recommended for adults with non-cirrhotic MASH and F2-F3 fibrosis (by non-invasive tests or biopsy), alongside structured lifestyle intervention and optimised management of comorbidities. The NIT ranges that stand in for F2-F3 differ by society. AASLD uses VCTE 8-15 kPa, MRE 3.1-4.4 kPa or ELF 9.2-10.5. EASL-EASD-EASO 2026 frames the treatable high-risk group as, for example, VCTE 10-20 kPa, MRE 3.1-5.0 kPa or ELF 9.8-11.3. Two drugs are approved: resmetirom (80 mg oral daily, or 100 mg at body weight of 100 kg or more; AASLD Oct 2024 guidance) and semaglutide 2.4 mg subcutaneously once weekly (FDA accelerated approval Aug 2025, AASLD Nov 2025 guidance; in ESSENCE, MASH resolved without fibrosis worsening in 62.9% vs 34.3% on placebo). EASL-EASD-EASO 2026 says to choose between them by patient preference, risks and cardio-renal-metabolic profile. Semaglutide may be preferred with obesity, type 2 diabetes, established cardiovascular disease or high cardiovascular risk. Resmetirom may be prioritised without obesity, or when the patient is already on or cannot tolerate a GLP-1 receptor agonist. On semaglutide, monitoring includes nutrition and sarcopenia assessment, and fibrosis NITs are used over time to judge response. In MASH cirrhosis, resmetirom and semaglutide appear safe but should not be used as MASH-targeted treatment until liver-related benefit is shown. Pioglitazone or vitamin E remain options under the AASLD 2023 guidance. Neither resmetirom nor semaglutide has been formally studied in MetALD. Manage cardiometabolic risk in every patient whatever the fibrosis stage, including statins for ASCVD and control of glucose and blood pressure. On semaglutide, watch for GI side effects and rare risks (AKI, gallbladder disease, pancreatitis, retinopathy, loss of lean mass). For MetALD, treat moderate or severe alcohol use disorder with medication plus behavioural therapy, correct micronutrient deficiencies (folate, thiamine, vitamin D), and do not offer bariatric or endobariatric procedures. HCC surveillance with ultrasound, with or without AFP, every 6 months is indicated only when cirrhosis is present.

EASL-EASD-EASO 2026 Guidance on Resmetirom and Semaglutide as MASH-Targeted Therapy (J Hepatol, doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2026.08.028) / AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance (+ Oct 2024 resmetirom and Nov 2025 semaglutide updates) / AGA 2026 Clinical Care Pathway for MASLD (Gastroenterology, doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2026.01.047) / AGA 2026 Clinical Practice Update on MetALD (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2026) / EASL 2026 SLD trajectory guidance (JHEP Rep, doi:10.1016/j.jhepr.2026.101798) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Xue F … Simedeutirom-202 Trial Investigators · Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology · IF 39.1 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Esophagus/Reflux· 2

Esophagus/Reflux retrospective · n=888 · Oct 12, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2

Diffuse esophageal eosinophilia is associated with increased endoscopic severity and topical steroid non-response in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.

New evidenceeosinophilic esophagitisbiomarkerpediatric
Clinical takeawayConsider diffuse esophageal eosinophilia as a marker for higher disease severity and potential corticosteroid non-response in EoE patients; monitor these patients more closely.
What it foundDiffuse esophageal eosinophilia (70% of cases) was associated with higher endoscopic severity (EREFS 4.0 vs 2.7-2.8) and reduced histologic response to topical corticosteroids compared to localized disease.
ContextThis study refines risk stratification in EoE by identifying diffuse eosinophilia as a predictor of worse outcomes compared to localized disease.
Measured against the standard of care· ACG 2025 (Dellon et al., Am J Gastroenterol 120(1):31-59) / ASGE 2026 consensus Part 2 (Dellon et al., Gastrointest Endosc 103(3):396-417)

Decision at stakethe choice of initial therapy for eosinophilic esophagitis

… DIAGNOSIS: symptoms of esophageal dysfunction plus ≥15 eos/hpf after excluding other causes of esophageal eosinophilia. A PPI trial is not a diagnostic criterion (PPI-REE abandoned). Do the initial diagnostic EGD off PPI, topical steroid and dietary therapy (ACG key concept; ASGE consensus, which gives no washout duration). Initial assessment is a standard EGD, not a less-invasive modality, so that full biopsies and dilation are possible (ASGE). Take ≥6 esophageal biopsies from ≥2 levels in anyone with symptoms or endoscopic findings consistent with EoE, targeting visible lesions. In CHILDREN with suspected EoE, also biopsy the stomach and duodenum (ASGE). Use EREFS at every endoscopy and report a quantified peak eosinophil count (ACG strong/low; ASGE). …

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 TREATMENT (ACG), DILATION, MAINTENANCE and 2 more.

Our full summary of this standard

ACG 2025 (GRADE) is still the governing guideline. The ASGE 2026 consensus Part 2 (modified Delphi, 28 statements at ≥80% agreement; not GRADE) adds endoscopic and pediatric detail without contradicting it. DIAGNOSIS: symptoms of esophageal dysfunction plus ≥15 eos/hpf after excluding other causes of esophageal eosinophilia. A PPI trial is not a diagnostic criterion (PPI-REE abandoned). Do the initial diagnostic EGD off PPI, topical steroid and dietary therapy (ACG key concept; ASGE consensus, which gives no washout duration). Initial assessment is a standard EGD, not a less-invasive modality, so that full biopsies and dilation are possible (ASGE). Take ≥6 esophageal biopsies from ≥2 levels in anyone with symptoms or endoscopic findings consistent with EoE, targeting visible lesions. In CHILDREN with suspected EoE, also biopsy the stomach and duodenum (ASGE). Use EREFS at every endoscopy and report a quantified peak eosinophil count (ACG strong/low; ASGE). TREATMENT (ACG): swallowed topical steroids STRONG/moderate; high-dose PPI CONDITIONAL/low; empiric elimination diet CONDITIONAL/low. Choose a single initial therapy by shared decision-making. Fluticasone or budesonide are both reasonable. Adult doses: PPI double the reflux dose (e.g., omeprazole 20 mg BID or 40 mg daily); budesonide 2-4 mg/day (BOS 2 mg BID); fluticasone 1,760 mcg/day divided. Pediatric doses: PPI 2 mg/kg/day; budesonide 1-2 mg/day; fluticasone 110-880 mcg/day. Allergy testing is not used to direct diets. A 1FED/2FED step-up diet with a dietitian is acceptable, with endoscopic and biopsy confirmation after each reintroduced food. Dupilumab is CONDITIONAL for PPI-nonresponsive patients aged ≥12 (moderate) and for ages 1-11 at ≥15 kg (low). Weight-band dosing: 15-<30 kg 200 mg q2w; 30-<40 kg 300 mg q2w; ≥40 kg 300 mg weekly. Recommendations AGAINST: omalizumab, cromolyn, montelukast. No recommendation for cendakimab, benralizumab, lirentelimab, mepolizumab or reslizumab. DILATION: an adjunct to anti-inflammatory therapy for strictures causing dysphagia (ACG conditional/low). Start low and go slow; target ≥16 mm in adults and adolescents over ≥1 session. In children, ASGE supports dilation of symptomatic strictures or a narrow-caliber esophagus regardless of disease activity, using the same start-low/go-slow approach. MAINTENANCE: continue effective therapy (ACG STRONG despite low evidence) at the lowest effective dose. MONITORING: judge response on symptoms, endoscopy and histology together, never symptoms alone. Assess response endoscopically at 8-12 weeks after starting a PPI or topical steroid. For diet, ACG says 8-12 weeks and ASGE says 6-8 weeks. For dupilumab or biologics, assess at 12-24 weeks (ASGE: up to 24 weeks). Allow appropriate washout or timing after any treatment change before the follow-up EGD (ASGE). Take monitoring biopsies from the most severe-appearing lesions (rings, furrows, exudates) (ASGE). Monitoring biopsies may be limited to the esophagus when prior gastric and duodenal biopsies were normal and nothing new suggests other pathology (ASGE). The histologic response threshold of <15 eos/hpf is a 'may consider' target, read alongside endoscopic and symptom findings. Shorten follow-up after complications. Care gaps of ≥2 years are associated with fibrostenosis. PEDIATRIC (ACG): esophagram for children with dysphagia to assess fibrostenotic disease; feeding therapy and dietitian for feeding dysfunction; growth, development and nutrition are treatment goals.

ACG 2025 (Dellon et al., Am J Gastroenterol 120(1):31-59) / ASGE 2026 consensus Part 2 (Dellon et al., Gastrointest Endosc 103(3):396-417) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Aleman S … Dellon ES · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Esophagus/Reflux rct · n=69 · Oct 12, 2026 · Am J Gastro · IF 9.8

Dupilumab Improves Esophageal Distensibility in EoE: 24-Week Results From the REMODEL Randomized Trial.

New evidenceeosinophilic esophagitisbiomarkerbasic sciencetranslational
Clinical takeawayConsider dupilumab for adults with EoE, particularly those with low baseline esophageal distensibility (<17 mm), to improve esophageal function compared to placebo. No new safety signals were identified.
What it foundDupilumab increased esophageal distensibility by +1.30 mm vs placebo (95% CI: 0.31, 2.29; P < 0.05), with a greater effect in patients with low baseline distensibility (+2.21 mm, 95% CI: 0.78, 3.63; P = 0.0024).
ContextThis confirms and extends prior evidence of dupilumab's efficacy in EoE, highlighting its benefit in patients with impaired esophageal distensibility, a subgroup with greater therapeutic response. The study population was adults with EoE.
Measured against the standard of care· ACG 2025 (Dellon et al., Am J Gastroenterol 120(1):31-59) / ASGE 2026 consensus Part 2 (Dellon et al., Gastrointest Endosc 103(3):396-417)

… DIAGNOSIS: symptoms of esophageal dysfunction plus ≥15 eos/hpf after excluding other causes of esophageal eosinophilia. A PPI trial is not a diagnostic criterion (PPI-REE abandoned). Do the initial diagnostic EGD off PPI, topical steroid and dietary therapy (ACG key concept; ASGE consensus, which gives no washout duration). Initial assessment is a standard EGD, not a less-invasive modality, so that full biopsies and dilation are possible (ASGE). Take ≥6 esophageal biopsies from ≥2 levels in anyone with symptoms or endoscopic findings consistent with EoE, targeting visible lesions. In CHILDREN with suspected EoE, also biopsy the stomach and duodenum (ASGE). Use EREFS at every endoscopy and report a quantified peak eosinophil count (ACG strong/low; ASGE). …

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 TREATMENT (ACG), DILATION, MAINTENANCE and 2 more.

Our full summary of this standard

ACG 2025 (GRADE) is still the governing guideline. The ASGE 2026 consensus Part 2 (modified Delphi, 28 statements at ≥80% agreement; not GRADE) adds endoscopic and pediatric detail without contradicting it. DIAGNOSIS: symptoms of esophageal dysfunction plus ≥15 eos/hpf after excluding other causes of esophageal eosinophilia. A PPI trial is not a diagnostic criterion (PPI-REE abandoned). Do the initial diagnostic EGD off PPI, topical steroid and dietary therapy (ACG key concept; ASGE consensus, which gives no washout duration). Initial assessment is a standard EGD, not a less-invasive modality, so that full biopsies and dilation are possible (ASGE). Take ≥6 esophageal biopsies from ≥2 levels in anyone with symptoms or endoscopic findings consistent with EoE, targeting visible lesions. In CHILDREN with suspected EoE, also biopsy the stomach and duodenum (ASGE). Use EREFS at every endoscopy and report a quantified peak eosinophil count (ACG strong/low; ASGE). TREATMENT (ACG): swallowed topical steroids STRONG/moderate; high-dose PPI CONDITIONAL/low; empiric elimination diet CONDITIONAL/low. Choose a single initial therapy by shared decision-making. Fluticasone or budesonide are both reasonable. Adult doses: PPI double the reflux dose (e.g., omeprazole 20 mg BID or 40 mg daily); budesonide 2-4 mg/day (BOS 2 mg BID); fluticasone 1,760 mcg/day divided. Pediatric doses: PPI 2 mg/kg/day; budesonide 1-2 mg/day; fluticasone 110-880 mcg/day. Allergy testing is not used to direct diets. A 1FED/2FED step-up diet with a dietitian is acceptable, with endoscopic and biopsy confirmation after each reintroduced food. Dupilumab is CONDITIONAL for PPI-nonresponsive patients aged ≥12 (moderate) and for ages 1-11 at ≥15 kg (low). Weight-band dosing: 15-<30 kg 200 mg q2w; 30-<40 kg 300 mg q2w; ≥40 kg 300 mg weekly. Recommendations AGAINST: omalizumab, cromolyn, montelukast. No recommendation for cendakimab, benralizumab, lirentelimab, mepolizumab or reslizumab. DILATION: an adjunct to anti-inflammatory therapy for strictures causing dysphagia (ACG conditional/low). Start low and go slow; target ≥16 mm in adults and adolescents over ≥1 session. In children, ASGE supports dilation of symptomatic strictures or a narrow-caliber esophagus regardless of disease activity, using the same start-low/go-slow approach. MAINTENANCE: continue effective therapy (ACG STRONG despite low evidence) at the lowest effective dose. MONITORING: judge response on symptoms, endoscopy and histology together, never symptoms alone. Assess response endoscopically at 8-12 weeks after starting a PPI or topical steroid. For diet, ACG says 8-12 weeks and ASGE says 6-8 weeks. For dupilumab or biologics, assess at 12-24 weeks (ASGE: up to 24 weeks). Allow appropriate washout or timing after any treatment change before the follow-up EGD (ASGE). Take monitoring biopsies from the most severe-appearing lesions (rings, furrows, exudates) (ASGE). Monitoring biopsies may be limited to the esophagus when prior gastric and duodenal biopsies were normal and nothing new suggests other pathology (ASGE). The histologic response threshold of <15 eos/hpf is a 'may consider' target, read alongside endoscopic and symptom findings. Shorten follow-up after complications. Care gaps of ≥2 years are associated with fibrostenosis. PEDIATRIC (ACG): esophagram for children with dysphagia to assess fibrostenotic disease; feeding therapy and dietitian for feeding dysfunction; growth, development and nutrition are treatment goals.

ACG 2025 (Dellon et al., Am J Gastroenterol 120(1):31-59) / ASGE 2026 consensus Part 2 (Dellon et al., Gastrointest Endosc 103(3):396-417) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Dellon ES … Biedermann L · American Journal of Gastroenterology · IF 9.8 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Pancreas/Biliary· 1

Pancreas/Biliary retrospective · n=49 · Oct 12, 2026 · J Hepatobil Pancreat Sci · IF 3.8

Evaluation of Extrahepatic Bile Duct Resection as a Parenchyma-Preserving Alternative in Bismuth I-II Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Comparative Single-Center Analysis.

New evidencecholangiocarcinomabiliary stricturepancreatic cancerERCP
Clinical takeawayFor high-risk patients with anatomically limited Bismuth I-II tumours, isolated bile duct resection is an option to raise at the tumour board; the comparison is small, retrospective and surgeon-selected, so it does not show equivalence. Major hepatectomy remains standard for fit patients.
What it foundExtrahepatic bile duct resection (EH) achieved similar R0 resection rates (p=0.88) and 5-year overall survival (24% vs 27%, p=0.472) compared to major hepatectomy (MH) in Bismuth I-II pCCA, with lower perioperative morbidity (p=0.013).
ContextRetrospective single-centre series in which surgeons chose the operation: the bile-duct-resection patients were older and had more hepatic comorbidity.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· NCCN Biliary Tract Cancers V2.2025 (V1.2026 in circulation) / AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance on PSC and Cholangiocarcinoma

Decision at stakewhether to perform major hepatectomy or extrahepatic bile duct resection for Bismuth I-II perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

Stage cholangiocarcinoma with multiphasic MRI/MRCP plus CT chest/abdomen/pelvis, obtain tissue via ERCP brush cytology with FISH, cholangioscopy-directed biopsy, or EUS-FNA (avoiding primary perihilar tumor sampling if liver transplant is being considered due to theoretical seeding risk), and manage through a multidisciplinary tumor board with treatment stratified by tumor location: resect (anatomic hepatectomy for intrahepatic, hemihepatectomy with bile duct resection for perihilar, Whipple for distal) with adjuvant capecitabine (category 1, per BILCAP) when resectable. …

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 standard

Stage cholangiocarcinoma with multiphasic MRI/MRCP plus CT chest/abdomen/pelvis, obtain tissue via ERCP brush cytology with FISH, cholangioscopy-directed biopsy, or EUS-FNA (avoiding primary perihilar tumor sampling if liver transplant is being considered due to theoretical seeding risk), and manage through a multidisciplinary tumor board with treatment stratified by tumor location: resect (anatomic hepatectomy for intrahepatic, hemihepatectomy with bile duct resection for perihilar, Whipple for distal) with adjuvant capecitabine (category 1, per BILCAP) when resectable. For unresectable or metastatic disease, first-line systemic therapy is gemcitabine plus cisplatin combined with a PD-L1/PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor, either durvalumab (TOPAZ-1) or pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-966), both listed as category 1 preferred options by NCCN; comprehensive molecular/genomic profiling is recommended for all unresectable/metastatic candidates for systemic therapy to identify actionable targets (e.g., FGFR2 fusions, IDH1 mutations, HER2 amplification) for later-line therapy. Selected unresectable early-stage perihilar tumors may undergo neoadjuvant chemoradiation and liver transplant per the Mayo Clinic protocol at experienced centers, and jaundice or cholangitis is managed with biliary drainage (ERCP preferred over PTC).

NCCN Biliary Tract Cancers V2.2025 (V1.2026 in circulation) / AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance on PSC and Cholangiocarcinoma · reviewed 2026-07-21 ↗
Keshi E … Krenzien F · Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences · IF 3.8 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Endoscopy· 3

Endoscopy retrospective · n=1,119 · Oct 16, 2026 · Dig Dis Sci · IF 2.5

Papillary Balloon Dilation Versus Sphincterotomy for Small Common Bile Duct Stones: Recurrence and Pneumobilia in a Retrospective Cohort.

New evidencecholedocholithiasisERCPendoscopy qualitybiliary stricture
Clinical takeawayHypothesis-generating: sphincterotomy remains the default for small stones. Balloon dilation stays an option where sphincter preservation matters, and the pneumobilia-recurrence link is worth a randomised test.
What it foundEPBD cut CBDS recurrence to 8.1% vs 15.6% with EST (HR 0.444, 95% CI 0.239-0.825) in patients with CBDSs ≤10 mm. Exploratory CT subgroup analysis found greater sphincter disruption associated with pneumobilia, which was linked to subsequent recurrence (HR 2.66, 95% CI 1.72-4.13).
ContextExploratory CT subgroup: more sphincter disruption tracked with pneumobilia, and pneumobilia with later recurrence (HR 2.66).
Refinessuggested applicable standard· American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), "ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the evaluation and management of choledocholithiasis" (Buxbaum JL et al., Gastrointest Endosc 2019;89(6):1075-1105), 2019

Decision at stakethe choice between endoscopic sphincterotomy and papillary balloon dilation for small common bile duct stones

… For large bile-duct stones, the panel suggests endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by large-balloon dilation (ES-LBD) rather than sphincterotomy alone (conditional, moderate); for large AND difficult stones, it suggests intraductal therapy (cholangioscopy-guided EHL or laser lithotripsy) or conventional therapy with papillary dilation, chosen by local expertise, cost, and patient/physician preference (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.

Our full summary of this standard

Risk-stratify suspected choledocholithiasis (high >50%, intermediate 10-50%, low <10% probability). HIGH-risk criteria, any of which should directly prompt ERCP: (1) CBD stone on ultrasound or cross-sectional imaging; (2) ascending cholangitis; (3) total bilirubin >4 mg/dL AND dilated CBD (>6 mm in adults with gallbladder in situ, >8 mm after cholecystectomy). Gallstone pancreatitis was deliberately REMOVED as a high-risk criterion in the 2019 revision. INTERMEDIATE risk (abnormal liver biochemical tests, age >55 y, or bile-duct dilation on imaging): the panel suggests confirmation with either EUS or MRCP (conditional recommendation, low-quality evidence; choice by patient preference, local expertise, availability), laparoscopic intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) or intraoperative US are equally sanctioned alternatives. LOW risk: cholecystectomy with or without IOC/intraoperative US if indicated for symptomatic cholelithiasis; no ERCP and no mandatory advanced biliary imaging. In gallstone pancreatitis WITHOUT cholangitis or biliary obstruction/choledocholithiasis, the panel recommends AGAINST urgent (<48 h) ERCP (strong recommendation, low-quality evidence). Same-admission cholecystectomy is recommended for patients with MILD gallstone pancreatitis (consensus, PONCHO-based); ERCP with prophylactic sphincterotomy should not be used as an alternative to cholecystectomy unless surgery is absolutely contraindicated (e.g., recurrent pancreatitis in end-stage liver disease). For large bile-duct stones, the panel suggests endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by large-balloon dilation (ES-LBD) rather than sphincterotomy alone (conditional, moderate); for large AND difficult stones, it suggests intraductal therapy (cholangioscopy-guided EHL or laser lithotripsy) or conventional therapy with papillary dilation, chosen by local expertise, cost, and patient/physician preference (conditional, very low). Timing versus cholecystectomy: pre- or postoperative ERCP or laparoscopic bile-duct clearance for patients at high risk or with positive IOC, depending on local surgical and endoscopic expertise (consensus).

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), "ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the evaluation and management of choledocholithiasis" (Buxbaum JL et al., Gastrointest Endosc 2019;89(6):1075-1105), 2019 · reviewed 2026-07-19 ↗
Chen D … Linghu E · Digestive Diseases and Sciences · IF 2.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Endoscopy retrospective · n=127 · Oct 15, 2026 · Dis Colon Rectum · IF 3.5

A Novel Quantitative Endoscopic Tumor Regression Grading System for Predicting Pathological Response Following Neoadjuvant Therapy in Rectal Cancer.

Diagnosticcolorectal cancerendoscopy qualitycomputer-aided detectionbiomarker
Clinical takeawayA weighted endoscopic regression grade from one centre, not yet externally validated; organ-preservation decisions after total neoadjuvant therapy still rest on combined endoscopic, MRI and digital assessment of clinical complete response.
What it foundThe Endoscopic Tumor Regression Grading system, classifying patients into Endoscopic Tumor Regression Grading 1 (complete), Endoscopic Tumor Regression Grading 2 (near complete), or Endoscopic Tumor Regression Grading 3 (partial/incomplete), predicted pathological complete response with excellent interobserver agreement (weighted κ = 0.9) and 88.2% exact agreement.
ContextThis retrospective cohort study introduces a novel, statistically weighted endoscopic scoring system, addressing the lack of standardized quantitative assessment tools in current practice, which rely on subjective clinical impressions.
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.

Erkaya M … Gorgun E · Diseases of the Colon and Rectum · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Endoscopy rct · n=62 · Oct 16, 2026 · Endoscopy · IF 11.8

Rapid versus slow puncture in endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy: a multicenter randomized crossover trial.

New evidenceEUSendoscopy qualitycomputer-aided detectionbiomarker
Clinical takeawayConsider using the rapid puncture technique for EUS-LB to improve specimen quality and diagnostic adequacy.
What it foundRapid puncture increased complete portal tracts by 2.39 (95%CI 1.50-3.27) and total specimen length by 15.19 mm (95%CI 9.65-20.74) vs slow puncture in EUS-LB.
ContextRefines current EUS-LB practice by demonstrating superior specimen quality with rapid puncture compared to the conventional slow technique.
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.

Wu Y … Li B · Endoscopy · IF 11.8 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Motility· 1

Motility rct · n=1,199 · Oct 11, 2026 · Dig Dis Sci · IF 2.5

Efficacy of Tenapanor in Patients With or Without Prior Use of IBS-C Prescription Medications: A Post-hoc Analysis of Phase 3 Clinical Trials.

New evidenceIBSchronic constipation
Clinical takeawayTenapanor beat placebo both in patients without prior IBS-C prescription therapy and in the small prior-use subgroup (42% vs 19%, 26 vs 32 patients), so it is a reasonable option after linaclotide or lubiprostone; the subgroup is too small to call the effect equal.
What it foundTenapanor achieved composite responder rates of 42.3% vs 18.8% (placebo) in patients with prior IBS-C medication use and 31.2% vs 21.3% (placebo) in those without prior use.
ContextThis post-hoc analysis suggests tenapanor's efficacy in IBS-C, including patients who have previously used other IBS-C medications.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Irritable Bowel Syndrome', 2021

Decision at stakethe use of tenapanor in IBS-C patients

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 standard

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).

American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Irritable Bowel Syndrome', 2021 · reviewed 2026-07-21 ↗
Shah E … Rosenbaum DP · Digestive Diseases and Sciences · IF 2.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Colorectal· 2

Colorectal retrospective · n=2,624 · Oct 16, 2026 · Dis Colon Rectum · IF 3.5

Oncologic Outcomes and Adjuvant Chemotherapy Use in Early- Versus Late-Onset Colon Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

New evidencecolorectal cancerepidemiology
Clinical takeawayAge under 50 by itself is not a reason to give adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer; base the decision on T4, nodal status, grade and the other high-risk features as in older patients. The study cannot say whether the extra chemotherapy helped.
What it foundFive-year recurrence-free survival did not differ between early-onset (88.0%) and late-onset (86.1%) colon cancer patients (p = 0.09). Early-onset patients received adjuvant chemotherapy more frequently, including in low-risk Stage II disease.
ContextSingle-centre retrospective matched cohort (656 early-onset vs 1968 late-onset); few early-onset patients went untreated, so age-specific chemotherapy benefit is not estimable.
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.

Oh SY … Lim SB · Diseases of the Colon and Rectum · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal prospective cohort · n=1,000 · Oct 14, 2026 · Dis Colon Rectum · IF 3.5

The New Face of an Old Disease: A Survey of Young People regarding Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.

Epidemiologyepidemiologycolorectal cancerhealth services
Clinical takeawayCounsel patients under 45 on early-onset CRC symptoms and the importance of discussing screening with their healthcare provider, especially those with low awareness or family history.
What it foundAwareness of early-onset colorectal cancer is low (24%) among adults aged 20-44, with only 22% having looked for information on CRC in the last year.
ContextConfirms low public awareness of early-onset CRC, highlighting a gap in education and screening uptake in younger adults. Limitations include the use of an opt-in survey, which may not represent the general population.
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.

Langenfeld SJ … American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (EOCRC) Steering Committee · Diseases of the Colon and Rectum · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Everything else this week30 that cleared the bar

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 week48 papers read, not selected

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 →

Endoscopy· 20

How we choose

the same pipeline every week
01

Scan

Every new paper across 48 vetted GI, hepatology, and general-medicine journals.

02

Screen

Drop what is not a study: letters, editorials, corrections, case reports. Classify the rest.

03

Anchor

Compare each paper to the guideline standard it touches, and record how far it moves it.

04

Verify

An adversarial second pass checks every claim against its cited source.

05

Vet

Each issue is reviewed by a physician editor before it publishes.