Background: Clinicians often utilize off-label dose escalation of ustekinumab (UST) in Crohn’s disease (CD) patients with disease refractory to standard dosing. Previous studies report mixed results with dose escalation of UST. Methods: A retrospective observational study of 143 adult patients with CD receiving UST over a 33-month time period was conducted. Patients receiving UST at standard dosage for a minimum of 16 weeks were included in the analysis. Primary outcomes collected were clinical response [Physician Global Assessment Score (PGA) by >1] and remission (PGA = 0). Changes in clinical parameters were calculated for dose-escalated patients beginning with the time of dose switch (~42 weeks) and compared with a group of patients who were classified as “failing” standard dosing at 42 weeks who were not dose escalated. Results: Dose escalation improved PGA by 0.47 ± 0.19 compared with patients remaining on every 8 weeks dosing (Q8 week), who worsened by 0.23 ± 0.23 ( p < 0.05). Dose escalation decreased CRP 0.33 ± 0.19 mg/L and increased serum albumin 0.23 ± 0.06 g/dL ( p < 0.05). Surprisingly, disease duration and prior CD surgeries inversely correlated with the need for dose escalation. Conclusion: Our results support UST Q4 week dose escalation for selected CD patients who fail to achieve remission on standard Q8 week dosing. Dose escalation improves clinical outcomes, prevents worsening disease severity, and positively impacts CRP and albumin levels. Together these data indicate that clinicians should attempt Q4 week UST dosing in refractory CD patients before switching to an alternative class of biologic therapy.
BackgroundThe nomogram of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been used for outcome prediction. Patients with BCLC stage C HCC often undergo anti-cancer therapy against current treatment guidelines in real world practice. We aimed to use the nomogram to provide guidance on treatment selection for BCLC stage C patients.MethodsA total of 1317 patients with stage C HCC were retrospectively analyzed and divided into four groups by nomogram points. One-to-one matched pairs between patients receiving different treatments were generated by the propensity score with matching model within these groups. Survival analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test.ResultsPatients with higher nomogram points were more often treated with targeted or supportive therapies (p < 0.001). Patients receiving targeted or supportive therapies had a decreased survival compared to patients undergoing aggressive treatments (surgical resection, ablation, transarterial chemo-embolization or transplantation) across all four groups (p < 0.001). After matching for baseline differences in the propensity model, patients receiving different treatments had comparable age, gender, etiology of liver disease, tumor burden, severity of cirrhosis and performance status. Survival analyses were re-performed and disclosed that patients with nomogram points < 15 had better overall outcome after aggressive treatments (p < 0.05). For patients with nomogram points > 15, there was no significant difference in survival between patients receiving two different treatment strategies.ConclusionsThe nomogram of BCLC system is a feasible tool to help stage C HCC patients to select primary anti-cancer treatment in pursuance of better overall survival.
Background The difference in clinical outcomes after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for early Barrett's esophagus (BE) neoplasia remains unclear. We compared the recurrence/residual tissue rates, resection outcomes, and adverse events after ESD and EMR for early BE neoplasia.
Methods We included patients who underwent EMR or ESD for BE-associated high grade dysplasia (HGD) or T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) at eight academic hospitals. We compared demographic, procedural, and histologic characteristics, and follow-up data. A time-to-event analysis was performed to evaluate recurrence/residual disease and a Kaplan–Meier curve was used to compare the groups.
Results 243 patients (150 EMR; 93 ESD) were included. EMR had lower en bloc (43 % vs. 89 %; P < 0.001) and R0 (56 % vs. 73 %; P = 0.01) rates than ESD. There was no difference in the rates of perforation (0.7 % vs. 0; P > 0.99), early bleeding (0.7 % vs. 1 %; P > 0.99), delayed bleeding (3.3 % vs. 2.1 %; P = 0.71), and stricture (10 % vs. 16 %; P = 0.16) between EMR and ESD. Patients with non-curative resections who underwent further therapy were excluded from the recurrence analysis. Recurrent/residual disease was 31.4 % [44/140] for EMR and 3.5 % [3/85] for ESD during a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 15.5 (6.75–30) and 8 (2–18) months, respectively. Recurrence-/residual disease-free survival was significantly higher in the ESD group. More patients required additional endoscopic resection procedures to treat recurrent/residual disease after EMR (EMR 24.2 % vs. ESD 3.5 %; P < 0.001).
Conclusions ESD is safe and results in more definitive treatment of early BE neoplasia, with significantly lower recurrence/residual disease rates and less need for repeat endoscopic treatments than with EMR.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.