IMPORTANCE Older patients with diabetes mellitus receiving medical treatment whose blood pressure (BP) or blood glucose level are potentially dangerously low are rarely deintensified. Given the established risks of low blood pressure and blood glucose, this is a major opportunity to decrease medication harm. OBJECTIVE To examine the rate of BP-and blood glucose-lowering medicine deintensification among older patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus who potentially receive overtreatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective cohort study conducted using data from the US Veterans Health Administration. Participants included 211 667 patients older than 70 years with diabetes mellitus who were receiving active treatment (defined as BP-lowering medications other than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, or glucose-lowering medications other than metformin hydrochloride) from January 1 to December 31, 2012. Data analysis was performed December 10, 2013, to July 20, 2015. EXPOSURES Participants were eligible for deintensification of treatment if they had low BP or a low hemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c) level in their last measurement in 2012. We defined very low BP as less than 120/65 mm Hg, moderately low as systolic BP of 120 to 129 mm Hg or diastolic BP (DBP) less than 65 mm Hg, very low HbA 1c as less than 6.0%, and moderately low HbA 1c as 6.0% to 6.4%. All other values were not considered low. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Medication deintensification, defined as discontinuation or dosage decrease within 6 months after the index measurement. RESULTS The actively treated BP cohort included 211 667 participants, more than half of whom had moderately or very low BP levels. Of 104 486 patients with BP levels that were not low, treatment in 15.1% was deintensified. Of 25 955 patients with moderately low BP levels, treatment in 16.0% was deintensified. Among 81 226 patients with very low BP levels, 18.8% underwent BP medication deintensification. Of patients with very low BP levels whose treatment was not deintensified, only 0.2% had a follow-up BP measurement that was elevated (BP Ն140/90 mm Hg). The actively treated HbA 1c cohort included 179 991 participants. Of 143 305 patients with HbA 1c levels that were not low, treatment in 17.5% was deintensified. Of 23 769 patients with moderately low HbA 1c levels, treatment in 20.9% was deintensified. Among 12 917 patients with very low HbA 1c levels, 27.0% underwent medication deintensification. Of patients with very low HbA 1c levels whose treatment was not deintensified, fewer than 0.8% had a follow-up HbA 1c measurement that was elevated (Ն7.5%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among older patients whose treatment resulted in very low levels of HbA 1c or BP, 27% or fewer underwent deintensification, representing a lost opportunity to reduce overtreatment. Low HbA 1c or BP values or low life expectancy had little association with deintensification events. Practice guidelines and performance measures should place more focus on reducing ove...

Despite dramatic improvements in antiviral therapy for hepatitis C, there is reason to believe that the uptake of antiviral therapy remains limited. The aims of this study were to determine the number of patients being treated with antiviral therapy in the U.S., to estimate the public health impact of these treatment patterns, and to identify barriers to treatment for patients

No abstract

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials conducted by B. Joseph Elmunzer and colleagues reports that that flexible sigmoidoscopy-based screening reduces the incidence of colorectal cancer in average-risk patients, as compared to usual care or no screening.

Though many gastroenterologists lack knowledge about guideline recommendations for colon polyp surveillance, even those who know the recommendations often ignore them and perform surveillance colonoscopy sooner than recommended.

Summary Background Antibodies against tumour necrosis factor‐alpha (anti‐TNF) are effective therapies in the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC), but their comparative efficacy is unknown. Aim To perform a network meta‐analysis comparing the efficacy of anti‐TNF agents in UC. Methods After screening 506 studies, reviewers extracted information on seven studies. Traditional meta‐analysis (TMA) was used to compare each anti‐TNF agent to placebo. Bayesian network meta‐analysis (NMA) was performed to compare the effects of anti‐TNF agents to placebo. In addition, sample sizes for comparative efficacy trials were calculated. Results Compared to placebo, TMA revealed that anti‐TNF agents result in a higher likelihood of induction of remission and response (RR: 2.45, 95% CI: 1.72–3.47 and RR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.37–1.99 respectively) as well as maintenance of remission and response (RR: 2.00, 95% CI: 1.52–2.62 and RR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.46–2.14 respectively). Individually, infliximab, adalimumab and goliumumab resulted in a higher likelihood of induction and maintenance for both remission and response. NMA found nonsignificant trends in comparisons of the individual agents. The required sample sizes for direct head‐to‐head trials between infliximab and adalimumab for induction and maintenance are 174 and 204 subjects respectively. Conclusions This study demonstrates that, compared to placebo, infliximab, adalimumab and golimumab are all effective for the induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis. However, network meta‐analysis demonstrates that no single agent is clinically superior to the others and therefore, other factors such as cost, safety, route of administration and patient preference should dictate our choice of anti‐TNF agents. A randomised comparative efficacy trial between infliximab and adalimumab in UC is of practical size and should be performed.

SummaryBackgroundAnti‐tumour necrosis factor‐alpha agents (anti‐TNF) are effective therapies for the treatment of Crohn's disease (CD), but their comparative efficacy is unknown.AimTo perform a network meta‐analysis comparing the efficacy of anti‐TNF therapies in CD.MethodsAfter screening 506 studies, reviewers extracted information on 10 studies. Traditional meta‐analysis (TMA) was used to compare each anti‐TNF agent to placebo. Bayesian network meta‐analysis (NMA) was performed to compare the effects of anti‐TNF agents to placebo. In addition, sample sizes for comparative efficacy trials were calculated.ResultsCompared to placebo, TMA revealed that anti‐TNF agents result in a higher likelihood of induction of remission and response (RR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.17–2.36 and RR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.17–1.73, respectively) as well as maintenance of remission and response (RR: 1.78, 95% CI: 1.51–2.09 and RR: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.46–1.93, respectively). NMA found nonsignificant trends between infliximab and adalimumab or certolizumab pegol. Among subcutaneous therapies, NMA demonstrated superiority of adalimumab to certolizumab pegol for induction of remission (RR: 2.93, 95% CrI: 1.21–7.75). Sample size calculations suggest that adequately powered head‐to‐head comparative efficacy trials would require greater than 3000 patients.ConclusionsAll anti‐TNF agents are effective for induction and maintenance of response and remission in the treatment of CD. Although adalimumab is superior to certolizumab pegol for induction of remission, there is no evidence of clinical superiority among anti‐TNF agents. Head‐to‐head trials among the anti‐TNF agents are impractical in terms of size and cost.

Background and AimsCorticosteroids are effective for the short-term treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Long-term use, however, is associated with significant adverse effects. To define the: (1) frequency and duration of corticosteroid use, (2) frequency of escalation to corticosteroid-sparing therapy, (3) rate of complications related to corticosteroid use, (4) rate of appropriate bone density measurements (dual energy X-ray absorptiometry [DEXA] scans), and (5) factors associated with escalation and DEXA scans.MethodsRetrospective review of Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data from 2002–2010.ResultsOf the 30,456 Veterans with IBD, 32% required at least one course of corticosteroids during the study time period, and 17% of the steroid users had a prolonged course. Among these patients, only 26.2% underwent escalation of therapy. Patients visiting a gastroenterology (GI) physician were significantly more likely to receive corticosteroid-sparing medications. Factors associated with corticosteroid-sparing medications included younger age (OR = 0.96 per year,95%CI:0.95, 0.97), male gender (OR = 2.00,95%CI:1.16,3.46), GI visit during the corticosteroid evaluation period (OR = 8.01,95%CI:5.85,10.95) and the use of continuous corticosteroids vs. intermittent corticosteroids (OR = 2.28,95%CI:1.33,3.90). Rates of complications per 1000 person-years after IBD diagnosis were higher among corticosteroid users (venous thromboembolism [VTE] 9.0%; fragility fracture 2.6%; Infections 54.3) than non-corticosteroid users (VTE 4.9%; fragility fracture 1.9%; Infections 26.9). DEXA scan utilization rates among corticosteroid users were only 7.8%.ConclusionsProlonged corticosteroid therapy for the treatment of IBD is common and is associated with significant harm to patients. Patients with prolonged use of corticosteroids for IBD should be referred to gastroenterology early and universal efforts to improve the delivery of high quality care should be undertaken.