The Asia-Pacific Working Group on inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was established in Cebu, Philippines, under the auspices of the Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology with the goal of improving IBD care in Asia. This consensus is carried out in collaboration with Asian Organization for Crohn’s and Colitis. With biologic agents and biosimilars becoming more established, it is necessary to conduct a review on existing literature and establish a consensus on when and how to introduce biologic agents and biosimilars in the conjunction with conventional treatments for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD) in Asia. These statements also address how pharmacogenetics influence the treatments of UC and CD and provide guidance on response monitoring and strategies to restore loss of response. Finally, the review includes statements on how to manage treatment alongside possible hepatitis B and tuberculosis infections, both common in Asia. These statements have been prepared and voted upon by members of IBD workgroup employing the modified Delphi process. These statements do not intend to be all-encompassing and future revisions are likely as new data continue to emerge.

The Asia–Pacific Working Group on Inflammatory Bowel Disease was established in Cebu, Philippines, under the auspices of the Asia–Pacific Association of Gastroenterology with the goal of improving inflammatory bowel disease care in Asia. This consensus is carried out in collaboration with Asian Organization for Crohn's and Colitis. With biologic agents and biosimilars becoming more established, it is necessary to conduct a review on existing literature and establish a consensus on when and how to introduce biologic agents and biosimilars in conjunction with conventional treatments for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in Asia. These statements also address how pharmacogenetics influences the treatments of ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease and provides guidance on response monitoring and strategies to restore loss of response. Finally, the review includes statements on how to manage treatment alongside possible hepatitis B and tuberculosis infections, both common in Asia. These statements have been prepared and voted upon by members of inflammatory bowel disease workgroup employing the modified Delphi process. These statements do not intend to be all‐encompassing, and future revisions are likely as new data continue to emerge.

More attention should be given to treatment gaps with regards to possible under-treatment with antispasmodics in irritable bowel syndrome and to critically evaluating the efficacy of constipation management.

No abstract

BACKGROUND An increasing trend in colorectal cancer (CRC) occurring at younger ages has been observed worldwide, even though incidence is declining in the general population. Most currently available guidelines still recommend CRC screening for older populations, despite an alarming rise in early-onset CRC incidence. Risk stratification is necessary to further determine the population most at risk for early-onset CRC. However, epidemiological data on related clinical characteristics and potential risk factors, especially in developing countries, have not been widely reported. AIM To investigate the prevalence, demographics, clinicopathologic features, and associated factors of young-onset CRC patients in a tertiary hospital in Indonesia. METHODS Patients undergoing colonoscopy examination between 2008 and 2019, yielding a diagnosis of CRC were identified from medical records. The subjects were classified into two groups according to their age at diagnosis, namely early-onset (18-49 years old) and late-onset (≥ 50-years-old). Demographic data, characteristics, and risk factors of both onset age groups were evaluated using the chi-square and Fisher’s exact test. RESULTS Among 495 CRC patients confirmed by histopathology, 205 (41.4%) were classified as early-onset and 290 (58.6%) as late-onset. Most subjects in the early-onset CRC group were male (53.7%), with 89.8% displaying adenocarcinoma histopathology. A majority (78%) of the early-onset CRC patients had left-sided tumors, with the rectum (41%) and rectosigmoid (17.6%) being the most common sites. Abdominal pain was the most frequent symptom in the early-onset CRC patients (55.6%), which was significantly higher than that in the late-onset CRC patients (43.8%, P < 0.05). Early-onset CRC cases were more likely to be underweight (34.6% vs 20.0%, P < 0.001) compared to late-onset CRC cases. The proportion of subjects with suspected hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) was also higher in the early-onset CRC group than in the late-onset age group (9.3% vs 4.1%, P < 0.05). However, no difference was observed in the parental or family histories of CRC cases. CONCLUSION Early-onset CRC patients were more likely to have abdominal pain, underweight status, and HNPCC suspicion than late-onset CRC patients.

The concept of consuming microorganisms in the treatment of a medical condition and in health maintenance has gained much attraction, giving rise to an abundance of medical claims and of health supplements. This study identified relevant clinical questions on the therapeutic use of probiotics and reviewed the literature in irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, impaired intestinal immunity, liver disease, intestinal infections, and common childhood digestive disorders. Statements were developed to address these clinical questions. A panel of experienced clinicians was tasked to critically evaluate and debate the available data. Both consensus and contentious statements are presented to provide to clinicians a perspective on the potential of probiotics and importantly their limitations.

Background and Aims Persons with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may be particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 either because of their underlying disease or its management. Guidance has been presented on the management of persons with IBD in the time of this pandemic by different groups. We aimed to determine how gastroenterologists around the world were approaching the management of IBD. Methods Members of the World Gastroenterology Organization (WGO) IBD Task Force contacted colleagues in countries largely beyond North America and Europe, inviting them to review the WGO website for IBD and COVID-19 introduction, with links to guideline documents, and then to respond to 9 ancillary open-ended management questions. Results Fifty-two gastroenterologists from 33 countries across 6 continents completed the survey (April 14 to May 16, 2020). They were all adhering for the most part to published guidelines on IBD management in the COVID-19 era. Some differences and reductions in services related to access, and some related to approach within their communities in terms of limiting virus spread. In particular, most gastroenterologists reduced in-person clinics (43 of 52), limited steroid use (47 of 51), limited elective endoscopy (45 of 52), and limited elective surgeries (48 of 51). If a patient was diagnosed with COVID-19, immunomodulatory therapy was mostly held. Conclusions In most countries, the COVID-19 pandemic significantly altered the approach to persons with IBD. The few exceptions were mostly based on low burden of COVID-19 in individual communities. Regardless of resources or health care systems, gastroenterologists around the world took a similar approach to the management of IBD.

ObjectiveThis study will test the performance of the anal swab PCR test when compared with the nasopharyngeal swab PCR test as a diagnostic tool for COVID-19.DesignAn observational descriptive study which included hospitalised suspected, or probable cases of hopitalised COVID-19 patients, conducted in Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo National Hospital, Ciputra Hospital, Mitra Keluarga Depok Hospital and Mitra Keluarga Kelapa Gading Hospital, Indonesia. Epidemiological, clinical, laboratory and radiology data were obtained. Nasopharyngeal and anal swabs specimens were collected for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection.ResultsWe analysed 136 subjects as part of this study. The clinical spectrum of COVID-19 manifesation in this study was typical of hospitalised patients, with 25% classified as mild cases, 14.7% in severe condition and 12.5% of subjects classified as having acute respiratory distress syndrome. When compared with nasopharyngeal swab as the standard specimen for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen, the sensitivity and specificity of the anal swab was 36.7% and 93.8%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive value were 97.8% and 16.5 %, respectively. The performance of the anal swab remained similar when only the subgroup of patients with gastrointestinal symptoms (n=92, 67.6%) was analysed (sensitivity 40% and specificity 91.7%). Out of all the subjects included in analysis, 67.6% had gastrointestinal symptoms. Similarly, 73.3% of patients in the anal swab-positive group had gastrointestinal symptoms. The two most common gastrointestinal symptoms in the subjects’ population were nausea and anorexia.ConclusionAnal swab specimen has low sensitivity (36.7%) but high specificity (93.8%) for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antigen by RT-PCR. Only one additional positive result was found by anal swab among the nasopharyngeal swab-negative group. Anal swab may not be needed as an additional test at the beginning of a patient’s diagnostic investigation and nasopharyngeal swab RT-PCR remains as the standard diagnostic test for COVID-19.