Current medical research and opinion · 2022
Endoscopic mucosal healing and histologic remission in ulcerative colitis: a systematic literature review of clinical, quality-of-life and economic outcomes.
СтатьяСистематический обзорПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pandey Anuja, Achrafie Lea, Kodjamanova Petya, Tencer Tom, Kumar Jinender
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This systematic literature review (SLR) assessed the effects of endoscopic mucosal healing and histologic remission on clinical, quality-of-life (QoL), and economic outcomes in adults with ulcerative colitis (UC) in the real-world setting.
METHODS: Literature searches of Embase and MEDLINE (6 July 2020) and conference proceedings (2017-2020) were performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Eligible studies included adults with UC with documented endoscopic mucosal healing or histologic remission. Clinical, QoL, and economic outcomes were extracted and narratively synthesized.
RESULTS: Of 1603 studies screened, 25 met eligibility criteria and collectively included 2813 patients (mean age: 34-60 years). The most commonly reported indices were Mayo endoscopic score (MES) for endoscopic mucosal healing (n = 22, 88%) and Geboes score (n = 5, 20%) for histologic outcomes. The most frequently reported clinical outcome was relapse-free survival (n = 15, 60%). Less commonly reported outcomes were avoidance of colectomy (n = 5, 20%), hospitalization (n = 4, 16%), clinical remission (n = 4, 16%), and steroid-free clinical remission (n = 3, 12%). Most studies reported relapse-free survival rates up to 50% over 6-48 months of follow-up in endoscopic mucosal healing cohorts. Studies reporting results by MES demonstrated higher relapse-free survival rates among patients with MES 0 than with MES 1 (32%-100% vs 26%-86%, respectively). Similarly, patients with histologic remission had better relapse-free survival rates over 12-24 months of follow-up compared with those without histologic remission (72%-91% vs 40%-63%, respectively). Rates of clinical remission, steroid-free remission, hospitalization, and colectomy avoidance were also better among patients with endoscopic mucosal healing and histologic remission. Two studies examining QoL reported endoscopic mucosal healing was associated with improved QoL. No study reported economic outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: This SLR demonstrated consistent evidence of improved clinical outcomes among UC patients with endoscopic mucosal healing and histologic remission.
METHODS: Literature searches of Embase and MEDLINE (6 July 2020) and conference proceedings (2017-2020) were performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Eligible studies included adults with UC with documented endoscopic mucosal healing or histologic remission. Clinical, QoL, and economic outcomes were extracted and narratively synthesized.
RESULTS: Of 1603 studies screened, 25 met eligibility criteria and collectively included 2813 patients (mean age: 34-60 years). The most commonly reported indices were Mayo endoscopic score (MES) for endoscopic mucosal healing (n = 22, 88%) and Geboes score (n = 5, 20%) for histologic outcomes. The most frequently reported clinical outcome was relapse-free survival (n = 15, 60%). Less commonly reported outcomes were avoidance of colectomy (n = 5, 20%), hospitalization (n = 4, 16%), clinical remission (n = 4, 16%), and steroid-free clinical remission (n = 3, 12%). Most studies reported relapse-free survival rates up to 50% over 6-48 months of follow-up in endoscopic mucosal healing cohorts. Studies reporting results by MES demonstrated higher relapse-free survival rates among patients with MES 0 than with MES 1 (32%-100% vs 26%-86%, respectively). Similarly, patients with histologic remission had better relapse-free survival rates over 12-24 months of follow-up compared with those without histologic remission (72%-91% vs 40%-63%, respectively). Rates of clinical remission, steroid-free remission, hospitalization, and colectomy avoidance were also better among patients with endoscopic mucosal healing and histologic remission. Two studies examining QoL reported endoscopic mucosal healing was associated with improved QoL. No study reported economic outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: This SLR demonstrated consistent evidence of improved clinical outcomes among UC patients with endoscopic mucosal healing and histologic remission.