Predictive factors of response to intravenous ciclosporin in severe ulcerative colitis: the development of a novel prediction formula

Abstract

SUMMARY BackgroundWhen treating patients with severe ulcerative colitis (UC), accurate prediction of drug efficacy contributes to early clinical decision-making.

Efficacy, Dose Reduction, and Resistance to High-Dose Fluticasone in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

“…9, 23 The EDP has been shown to possess high sensitivity and specificity with only a single biopsy; in contrast, histology requires 5-6 biopsies to reach >95% sensitivity. 24 Thus, in addition to providing key molecular insight into the action of steroids in the esophagus, this study provided an opportunity to examine the value of the EDP in a prospective, controlled trial.…”

“…23 Therefore, we also screened the pre–FP treatment samples for their subsequent FP responsiveness and identified 15 genes exhibiting a tendency for FP efficacy predictions. Of note, we were limited by the sample size and did not have a power high enough to apply a false-positive correction filter on this result, as such, these findings should be considered preliminary.…”

Outcomes of salvage therapy for steroid-refractory acute severe ulcerative colitis: ciclosporin vs. infliximab

“…Thus, the collation of sufficiently powered studies has proven difficult. Indeed, several published series represent admixtures containing cases from the moderate to the fulminant end of the disease severity spectrum . In addition, most studies in this field compare the efficacy of either of these agents against a placebo or intravenous steroids alone, with response rates heavily dependent on the subject inclusion criteria used in these studies …”

Letter: factors that may predict response to ciclosporin in ulcerative colitis – authors’ reply

“…2 SIRS, We read with interest the review of non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of non-alcoholic fatty liver in liver disease (NAFLD) by Festi et al 1 We agree with several of their conclusions, but not on their ranking of biomarkers' performance, stated in the summary, results and discussion. Several methodological errors, lead to misleading conclusions concerning the biomarkers' comparisons.…”

“…If the spectrum effect is not taken into account, the AUROC for bridging fibrosis (or cirrhosis) can vary significantly according to stages' prevalence from 0.67 to 0.98 for the same biomarker. 2 Second, this review is not exhaustive. Several large studies of FibroTest have not been included.…”