Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic, relapsing inflammatory condition of the gastrointestinal tract with a complex genetic and environmental etiology. We performed two distinct UC genome-wide association (GWA) studies, and analyzed these jointly with a previously published scan1, comprising, in aggregate, 2,693 patients with UC and 6,791 controls. A total of 59 SNPs from 14 independent loci attained P < 10−5. Seven of these loci exceeded genome-wide significance (P < 5 × 10−8). After testing an independent cohort of 2009 patients with UC and 1580 controls, 14 loci were significantly associated, including novel UC associations with FCGR2A, 5p15, 2p16, CARD9 and ORMDL3. In our study we confirmed association with 14 previously identified UC susceptibility loci, while an analysis of acknowledged Crohn's disease (CD) loci showed that roughly half of known CD associations are shared with UC. These data implicate approximately 30 loci for UC, providing novel insights into disease pathogenesis.

Recent data suggest that infl ammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients do not receive preventive services at the same rate as general medical patients. Patients with IBD often consider their gastroenterologist to be the primary provider of care. To improve the care delivered to IBD patients, health maintenance issues need to be co-managed by both the gastroenterologist and primary care team. Gastroenterologists need to explicitly inform the primary care provider of the unique needs of the IBD patient, especially those on immunomodulators and biologics or being considered for such therapy. In particular, documentation of up to date vaccinations are crucial as IBD patients are often treated with long-term immune-suppressive therapies and may be at increased risk for infections, many of which are preventable with vaccinations. Health maintenance issues addressed in this guideline include identifi cation, safety and appropriate timing of vaccinations, screening for osteoporosis, cervical cancer, melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer as well as identifi cation of depression and anxiety and smoking cessation. To accomplish these health maintenance goals, coordination between the primary care provider, gastroenterology team and other specialists is necessary. of evidence, we entered data from the papers of highest evidence into the GRADE program (accessible at http://www.gradepro.org ). Th e recommendation statements from this guideline are shown in Table 1 . Summary statements, when listed, are designed to be descriptive in nature without associated evidence-based ratings. VACCINATIONSRecent data suggest that IBD patients do not receive preventive services at the same rate as general medical patients ( 2 ). Members of the gastroenterology team are oft en the only clinicians that a patient with IBD will see. As such, it is incumbent upon gastroenterologists to take a proactive role in the health care needs of their IBD patients ( 3-5 ). It is crucial to clarify with the patient the limits of the specialist's responsibilities and delegate routine health care issues to the primary care clinician. It is equally important to educate the primary care clinician to the unique health maintenance needs of the IBD patient, especially those on immunomodulators and biologic agents. Although it appears that both primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists are hesitant to take ownership of vaccinations ( 6-8 ), it is reasonable ( 9 ) that vaccination recommendations be the responsibility of the treating gastroenterologist, but the actual delivery/administration of these vaccines may be a shared responsibility ( 10-13 ). Communicating specifi c recommendations to the primary care team in a concise fashion are needed. Consider empowering the patient by giving written recommendations to bring to their primary care physician. Clinicians sharing an electronic medical record should use this platform to send recommendations to the referring clinician.Patients with IBD are oft en treated with long-term immunesuppressive therapies and may t...

Intestinal epithelial cells (IEC) interact with a high density of Gram-positive bacteria and are active participants in mucosal immune responses. Recognition of Gram-positive organisms by Toll-like receptor (TLR)2 induces proinflammatory gene expression by diverse cells. We hypothesized that IEC are unresponsive to Gram-positive pathogen-associated molecular patterns and sought to characterize the functional responses of IEC to TLR2-specific ligands. Human colonic epithelial cells isolated by laser capture microscopy and IEC lines (Caco-2, T84, HT-29) were analyzed for expression of TLR2, TLR6, TLR1, and Toll inhibitory protein (Tollip) mRNA by RT-PCR and quantitative real-time PCR. Response to Gram-positive bacterial ligands was measured by NF-κB reporter gene activation and IL-8 secretion. TLR2 protein expression was analyzed by immunofluorescence and flow cytometry. Colonic epithelial cells and lamina propria cells from both uninflamed and inflamed tissue demonstrate low expression of TLR2 mRNA compared with THP-1 monocytes. IECs were unresponsive to TLR2 ligands including the staphylococcal-derived Ags phenol soluble modulin, peptidoglycan, and lipotechoic acid and the mycobacterial-derived Ag soluble tuberculosis factor. Transgenic expression of TLR2 and TLR6 restored responsiveness to phenol soluble modulin and peptidoglycan in IEC. In addition to low levels of TLR2 protein expression, IEC also express high levels of the inhibitory molecule Tollip. We conclude that IEC are broadly unresponsive to TLR2 ligands secondary to deficient expression of TLR2 and TLR6. The relative absence of TLR2 protein expression by IEC and high level of Tollip expression may be important in preventing chronic proinflammatory cytokine secretion in response to commensal Gram-positive bacteria in the gut.

Genetic variation in both innate and adaptive immune systems is associated with Crohn's disease (CD) susceptibility, but much of the heritability to CD remains unknown. We performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) in 896 CD cases and 3204 healthy controls all of Caucasian origin as defined by multidimensional scaling. We found supportive evidence for 21 out of 40 CD loci identified in a recent CD GWAS meta-analysis, including two loci which had only nominally achieved replication (rs4807569, 19p13; rs991804, CCL2/CCL7). In addition, we identified associations with genes involved in tight junctions/epithelial integrity (ASHL, ARPC1A), innate immunity (EXOC2), dendritic cell biology [CADM1 (IGSF4)], macrophage development (MMD2), TGF-beta signaling (MAP3K7IP1) and FUT2 (a physiological trait that regulates gastrointestinal mucosal expression of blood group A and B antigens) (rs602662, P=3.4x10(-5)). Twenty percent of Caucasians are 'non-secretors' who do not express ABO antigens in saliva as a result of the FUT2 W134X allele. We demonstrated replication in an independent cohort of 1174 CD cases and 357 controls between the four primary FUT2 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and CD (rs602662, combined P-value 4.90x10(-8)) and also association with FUT2 W143X (P=2.6x10(-5)). Further evidence of the relevance of this locus to CD pathogenesis was demonstrated by the association of the original four SNPs and CD in the recently published CD GWAS meta-analysis (rs602662, P=0.001). These findings strongly implicate this locus in CD susceptibility and highlight the role of the mucus layer in the development of CD.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is widely available for biologic therapies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We reviewed current data and provided expert opinion regarding the clinical utility of TDM for biologic therapies in IBD. METHODS: We used a modified Delphi method to establish consensus. A comprehensive literature review was performed regarding the use of TDM of biologic therapy in IBD and presented to international IBD specialists. Subsequently, 28 statements on the application of TDM in clinical practice were rated on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 [ strongly disagree and 10 [ strongly agree) by each of the panellists. Statements were accepted if 80% or more of the participants agreed with a score ‡7. The remaining statements were discussed and revised based on the available evidence followed by a second round of voting. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 24 (86%) statements. For anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies, proactive TDM was found to be appropriate after induction and at least once during maintenance therapy, but this was not the case for the other biologics. Reactive TDM was appropriate for all agents both for primary non-response and secondary loss of response. The panellists also agreed on several statements regarding TDM and appropriate drug and anti-drug antibody (ADA) concentration thresholds for biologics in specific clinical scenarios. CONCLUSION: Consensus was achieved towards the utility of TDM of biologics in IBD, particularly anti-TNF therapies. More data are needed especially on non-anti-TNF biologics to further define optimal drug concentration and ADA thresholds as these can vary depending on the therapeutic outcomes assessed.