BackgroundThe risk of thromboembolic events in adults with primary immune thrombocytopenia has been little investigated despite findings of increased susceptibility in other thrombocytopenic autoimmune conditions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the risk of thromboembolic events among adult patients with and without primary immune thrombocytopenia in the UK General Practice Research Database. Design and MethodsUsing the General Practice Research Database, 1,070 adults (≥18 years) with coded records for primary immune thrombocytopenia first referenced between January 1 st 1992 and November 30 th 2007, and having at least one year pre-diagnosis and three months post-diagnosis medical history were matched (1:4 ratio) with 4,280 primary immune thrombocytopenia disease free patients by age, gender, primary care practice, and pre-diagnosis observation time. The baseline prevalence and incidence rate of thromboembolic events were quantified, with comparative risk modelled by Cox's proportional hazards regression. ResultsOver a median 47.6 months of follow-up (range: 3.0-192.5 months), adjusted hazard ratios of 1.58 (95% CI, 1.01-2.48), 1.37 (95% CI, 0.94-2.00), and 1.41 (95% CI, 1.04-1.91) were found for venous, arterial, and combined (arterial and venous) thromboembolic events, respectively, when comparing the primary immune thrombocytopenia cohort with the primary immune thrombocytopenia disease free cohort. Further event categorization revealed an elevated incidence rate for each occurring venous thromboembolic subtype among the adult patients with primary immune thrombocytopenia. ConclusionsPatients with primary immune thrombocytopenia are at increased risk for venous thromboembolic events compared with patients without primary immune thrombocytopenia. Database. Haematologica 2010;95:1167-1175. doi:10.3324/haematol.2009 This is an open-access paper. Thromboembolic events among adult patients with primary immune thrombocytopenia in the United Kingdom General Practice Research Database

ObjectiveTo generate real-world evidence for the epidemiology of gastroparesis in the UK, we evaluated the prevalence, incidence, patient characteristics and outcomes of gastroparesis in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) database.DesignThis was a retrospective, cross-sectional study. Prevalence and incidence of gastroparesis were evaluated in the CPRD database, with linkage to Hospital Episodes Statistics Admitted Patient Care and Office for National Statistics mortality data. Prevalence and incidence were age and sex standardised to mid-2017 UK population estimates. Descriptive analyses of demographics, aetiologies, pharmacological therapies and mortality were conducted.ResultsStandardised prevalence of gastroparesis, as documented in general practice records, was 13.8 (95% CI 12.6 to 15.1) per 100 000 persons in 2016, and standardised incidence of gastroparesis rose from 1.5 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.8) per 100 000 person-years in 2004 to 1.9 (95% CI 1.4 to 2.3) per 100 000 person-years in 2016. The most common disease aetiologies were idiopathic (39.4%) and diabetic gastroparesis (37.5%), with a similar distribution of type 1 and type 2 diabetes among the 90% who had type of diabetes documented. Patients with diabetic gastroparesis had a significantly higher risk of mortality than those with idiopathic gastroparesis after diagnosis (adjusted HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.0). Of those with gastroparesis, 31.6% were not offered any recognised pharmacological therapy after diagnosis.ConclusionThis is, to our knowledge, the first population-based study providing data on epidemiology and outcomes of gastroparesis in Europe. Further research is required to fully understand the factors influencing outcomes and survival of patients with gastroparesis.

Background The latest estimate of the prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in the United States was based on 2009 data, which indicates a need for an up-to-date re-estimation. The objectives of this study were to investigate the prevalence of all forms of IBD including ulcerative colitis (UC), Crohn’s disease (CD), and IBD unspecified (IBDU). Methods Pediatric (age 2–17) and adult (age ≥18) IBD patients were identified from 2 large claims databases. For each year between 2007 and 2016, prevalence was calculated per 100,000 population and standardized based on the 2016 national Census. A fixed-effects meta-analytical model was used for overall prevalence. Results The pediatric prevalence of IBD overall increased by 133%, from 33.0/100,000 in 2007 to 77.0/100,000 in 2016. Among children, CD was twice as prevalent as UC (45.9 vs 21.6). Prevalence was higher in boys than girls for all forms of IBD, in contrast to the adult population where the prevalence was higher in women than men. We also found that the 10–17 age subgroup was the major contributor to the rising pediatric IBD prevalence. For adults, the prevalence of IBD overall increased by 123%, from 214.9 in 2007 to 478.4 in 2016. The prevalence rates of UC and CD were similar (181.1 vs 197.7) in 2016. Conclusions Inflammatory bowel disease continues to affect a substantial proportion of the US population. In 2016, 1 in 209 adults and 1 in 1299 children aged 2–17 were affected by IBD. Prevalence of IBD has been increasing compared with previously published 2009 data.

Adults with primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) may be susceptible to thromboembolism (TE). The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate studies that reported the prevalence and risk of developing TE in the ITP population from ITP diagnosis and splenectomy. We searched several bibliographic databases and included 29 studies. Using meta-analytical techniques, the pooled prevalence of TE before ITP diagnosis was 7.84% (arterial 6.25%; venous 1.95%). The pooled 'annualised' cumulative incidence (without prior TE) and cumulative risk (irrespective of prior TE) were 1.29%/yr and 3.00%/yr, respectively. Splenectomised patients had pooled cumulative risk of arterial TE (ATE) and venous TE (VTE) of 0.19%/yr and 1.10%/yr, respectively. In cohorts, regardless of a history of TE, the pooled relative risk (RR) of any TE was 1.60 (1.34, 1.86) for ITP vs. ITP-free individuals [arterial: 1.52 (1.25, 1.80); venous: 1.70 (0.96, 2.43)]. Splenectomised patients were at higher risk of venous events, pooled RR 2.39 (1.61, 3.17). To conclude, we found an increased risk of TE (mainly ATE) among ITP individuals and a higher risk of VTEs after splenectomy. How intrinsic (ITP pathophysiology, age, gender) and extrinsic factors (treatment) contribute to this risk could not be investigated here but is a task for future studies. Primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) in adults is a rare heterogeneous blood disorder which is characterised by a reduced peripheral blood platelet count below 100 9 10 9 /L (1). Its underlying mechanisms are increasingly explained within an 'autoimmune' paradigm in which platelets are destroyed through antibody-mediated destruction and thrombocytopoiesis is reduced through immune-mediated megakaryocytic downregulation (2).Although bleeding is a prominent feature of the disease, patients often present with other comorbid conditions at ITP diagnosis or throughout the course of the disease (3, 4). Notably, there are studies that showed that the risk of thromboembolic events (TE) could be elevated among patients with ITP (4, 5) and also among patients who had ITP-related splenectomies (6). How such a paradoxical 'prothrombotic and thrombocytopenic' state coexists is not completely understood. One likely explanation for this heightened risk for TE is that the ITP pathophysiology promotes a prothrombotic state but the evidence is unclear and weak (7-9). On the other hand, the distribution and influence of typical prothrombotic risk factors, including obesity, smoking, family history of TE, and the impact of ITP-related treatments, such as long-term corticosteroid use or splenectomy, on the risk of TE in ITP have been not completely described and explained. Before engaging into investigative studies on the contributory factors of TE in ITP, it is important to review the published evidence to date to establish whether there is a heightened risk of TE in the ITP population.