Constipation is a condition that is very prevalent and is reported in up to 40 percent of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). Constipation in this patient population is most commonly secondary to neuromuscular abnormalities, immobility, suboptimal diet, and medication side effects. History taking is frequently limited in adults with IDD due to communication barriers, often leading to a missed diagnosis of constipation. Inadequately treated constipation may lead to adverse effects including behavioral disturbances, fecal impaction, intestinal obstruction, and even death from intestinal perforation and sepsis. As a result, a high index of suspicion must exist for this patient population. Treatment in these patients requires an individualized approach, to reduce the constipation and its associated health complications.

Intellectual disability (ID) encompasses a wide variety of disorders that can severely affect an individual's cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development, even when identified early in life. Initially, individuals with such disorders had shorter life expectancies. However, medical advances have increased the life expectancy of individuals with ID similar to that of the general population. More attention must be paid to manage diseases affecting the intellectually disabled elderly, such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, chronic constipation, and behavioral disorders.

In this retrospective cohort study, upadacitinib induction was effective in achieving steroid-free clinical remission of ulcerative colitis for the majority of patients. Adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation were rare and were consistent with the known safety profile of upadacitinib.

Background: β-blockers (BBs) have shown promise in improving overall survival (OS) in patients with breast, ovarian, pancreatic and lung cancer. However, few studies have evaluated the impact of BBs on unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: The authors compared clinical data and outcomes between unresectable HCC patients based on whether they were prescribed BBs. Results: There was significantly decreased disease progression in the BB group compared with the non-BB group (22.8 vs 28.0%; p < 0.05). No difference was seen in OS or progression-free survival between groups. Those specifically on selective BBs had improved OS (hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.61–0.94; p = 0.01) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45–0.96; p = 0.03) compared with non-BB patients. Conclusion: Although the authors' study did not demonstrate that BBs improve OS in HCC, it did show decreased disease progression among patients with HCC who were taking BBs compared with those who were not.