In a retrospective study and meta-analysis, we found no association between accelerated infliximab induction therapy and lower rates of colectomy in patients with ASUC, compared to standard induction therapy. However, confounding by disease severity cannot be excluded. Randomized trials are warranted to compare these treatment strategies.

Summary Background and aims Extra‐intestinal manifestations (EIMs) are a common complication of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), affecting up to half of the patients. Despite their high prevalence, information on standardised definitions, diagnostic strategies, and treatment targets is limited. Methods As a starting point for a national EIM study network, an interdisciplinary expert panel of 12 gastroenterologists, 4 rheumatologists, 3 ophthalmologists, 6 dermatologists, and 4 patient representatives was assembled. Modified Delphi consensus methodology was used. Fifty‐four candidate items were derived from the literature review and expert opinion focusing on five major EIMs (erythema nodosum, pyoderma gangrenosum, uveitis, peripheral arthritis, and axial arthritis) were rated in three voting rounds. Results For use in a clinical practice setting and as part of the creation of a prospective registry of patients with EIMs, the panel developed definitions for erythema nodosum, pyoderma gangrenosum, uveitis, peripheral arthritis, and axial arthritis; identified the appropriate and optimal subspecialists to diagnose and manage each; provided methods to monitor disease course; offered guidance regarding monitoring intervals; and defined resolution and recurrence. Conclusions Consensus criteria for appropriate and optimal means of diagnosing and monitoring five EIMs have been developed as a starting point to inform clinical practice and future trial design. Key findings include straightforward diagnostic criteria, guidance regarding who can appropriately and optimally diagnose each, and monitoring options that include patient and physician‐reported outcomes. These findings will be used in a national multicenter study network to optimise the management of EIMs.

Background Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is rarely associated with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Long-term outcomes of AIP and IBD in patients with AIP-IBD coexistence and predictors of complicated AIP course are scarcely known. Methods An ECCO COllaborative Network For Exceptionally Rare case reports project (ECCO-CONFER) collected cases of AIP diagnosed in patients with IBD. Complicated AIP was defined as a composite of endocrine and/or exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and/or pancreatic cancer. We explored factors associated with complicated AIP in IBD. Results We included 96 patients (53% males, 79% ulcerative colitis, 72% type 2 AIP, age at AIP diagnosis 35±16 years). The majority of Crohn’s disease (CD) cases (78%) had colonic/ileocolonic involvement. In 59%, IBD preceded AIP diagnosis, whereas 18% were diagnosed simultaneously. Advanced therapy to control IBD was used in 61% and 17% underwent IBD-related surgery. 82% of patients were treated with steroids for AIP, the majority of which (91%) responded to a single course of treatment. During a mean follow-up of 7 years, AIP complications occurred in 25/96 (26%) individuals. In a multivariate model, younger age at AIP diagnosis (OR=1.05, P=0.008), family history of IBD (OR=0.1, P=0.03) and CD diagnosis (OR=0.2, P=0.04) were associated with uncomplicated AIP course. No IBD or AIP-related deaths occurred. Conclusions In this large international cohort of patients with concomitant AIP-IBD, most patients have type 2 AIP and colonic IBD. AIP course is relatively benign and long-term outcomes are favourable, however, one-quarter develop pancreatic complications. Age, familial history of IBD and CD may predict uncomplicated AIP course.

During the last few decades, major progress has been made in the treatment of the two major forms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD): Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. However, the success of the most advanced forms of therapy is at best 50%, and most patients lose responsiveness with time and need to switch to alternative medications. This denotes that a therapeutic ceiling has been reached and brand new approaches are badly needed. This commentary first briefly reviews current and recent therapeutic approaches for Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, pointing out their limitations. This is followed by an objective evidence-based discussion of why the current approaches are far from optimal, and the commentary is concluded by proposing how to change IBD treatment based on the holistic concept of network medicine, and how to implement precision medicine for IBD using artificial intelligence-based multi-omics analyses.

Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques are quickly spreading across medicine as an analytical method to tackle challenging clinical questions. What were previously thought of as highly complex data sources, such as images or free text, are now becoming manageable. Novel analytical methods merge the latest developments in information technology infrastructure with advances in computer science. Once primarily associated with Silicon Valley, AI techniques are now making their way into medicine, including in the field of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Understanding potential applications and limitations of these techniques can be difficult, in particular for busy clinicians. In this article, we explain the basic terminologies and provide particular focus on the foundations behind state-of-the-art AI methodologies in both imaging and text. We explore the growing applications of AI in medicine, with a specific focus on IBD to inform the practicing gastroenterologist and IBD specialist. Finally, we outline possible future uses of these technologies in daily clinical practice.