Predicting Outcomes to Optimize Disease Management in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (original) (raw)

Abstract

Background and Aims:

Efforts to slow or prevent the progressive course of inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] include early and intensive monitoring and treatment of patients at higher risk for complications. It is therefore essential to identify high-risk patients – both at diagnosis and throughout disease course.

Methods:

As a part of an IBD Ahead initiative, we conducted a comprehensive literature review to identify predictors of long-term IBD prognosis and generate draft expert summary statements. Statements were refined at national meetings of IBD experts in 32 countries and were finalized at an international meeting in November 2014.

Results:

Patients with Crohn’s disease presenting at a young age or with extensive anatomical involvement, deep ulcerations, ileal/ileocolonic involvement, perianal and/or severe rectal disease or penetrating/stenosing behaviour should be regarded as high risk for complications. Patients with ulcerative colitis presenting at young age, with extensive colitis and frequent flare-ups needing steroids or hospitalization present increased risk for colectomy or future hospitalization. Smoking status, concurrent primary sclerosing cholangitis and concurrent infections may impact the course of disease. Current genetic and serological markers lack accuracy for clinical use.

Conclusions:

Simple demographic and clinical features can guide the clinician in identifying patients at higher risk for disease complications at diagnosis and throughout disease course. However, many of these risk factors have been identified retrospectively and lack validation. Appropriately powered prospective studies are required to inform algorithms that can truly predict the risk for disease progression in the individual patient.

Key Words: Complications, Crohn’s disease, disease progression, prognostic factors, risk factors, ulcerative colitis

1. Introduction

Crohn’s disease [CD] and ulcerative colitis [UC] are chronic gastrointestinal inflammatory diseases characterized by disabling bowel symptoms. Ongoing inflammation leads to progressive bowel damage and complications, often requiring surgery. These diseases are associated with significant morbidity, resource utilization and costs to society. Furthermore, as these inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] often present early in life, they can compromise education, career development and family planning.

The recognition that chronic uncontrolled inflammation in IBD ultimately results in poor outcomes has led to a recent paradigm shift in treatment, with the belief that early intervention with immunosuppressant and biological therapy can prevent disease progression and avoid complications.1,2,3,4,5 However, treatment of all patients with biologics and/or combination therapy is economically unsustainable and would risk exposing those with an indolent disease course to unnecessary risks or side effects of potent therapy. The challenge remains to select the patients who will benefit most from early intensive therapy, while sparing those who will derive minimal benefit from such treatment.6 The ability to predict specific disease complications such as progression of phenotype from inflammatory to penetrating or fibrostenotic disease, need for surgery or development of dysplasia or cancer would be of particular value, as would being able to identify ‘red flags’ that could alert the clinician to an impending flare or relapse.

As part of the IBD Ahead 2014 educational programme, we conducted a comprehensive literature review to identify predictors of long-term IBD prognosis and generate draft expert summary statements relating to prognosis. Statements were refined at national meetings of IBD experts and were finalized at an international meeting in November 2014. Here we present the agreed statements, together with a summary of published evidence, to guide clinicians on the best use of these predictors in the individual patient.

2. Methods

In February 2014, the Global Steering Committee [GSC] of the IBD Ahead 2014 educational programme identified key topics of interest or uncertainty in understanding prognostic factors in IBD and developed clinical questions relating to these topics. Six bibliographical fellows [FC, KK, TL, DM, JT and MZ] were nominated by the GSC to identify and evaluate the published evidence on prognostic factors under the mentorship of JOL, GVA, DR, J-FC and JCL, respectively. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched using pre-defined search strings and limits, and additional searches were conducted by hand as required. Searches were restricted to manuscripts published in English after 1993. Abstracts from the following conferences were also searched: European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation Congress 2013, 2014; Digestive Disease Week 2013, 2014; and United European Gastroenterology Week 2012, 2013. The bibliographical fellows reviewed the evidence and developed summary statements in response to the clinical questions, with evidence levels [ELs] assigned to each statement based on the University of Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 criteria [http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653\]. In June and July 2014, the literature review subgroup [JOL, JCL, GVA] and the programme co-chairs [J-FC, RP] reviewed and simplified the statements. National meetings were held in August–November 2014 in the 32 participating countries to allow participants to review, vote and provide their expert opinions and local perspective on the statements. Based on this feedback, a set of consolidated statements was generated by the GSC focusing on predictors of long-term IBD prognosis. An international meeting was held in November 2014 with 99 experts from each of the participating countries. Participants voted on their level of agreement with each statement using a scale of 1 to 9 [where 1=strong disagreement and 9=strong agreement]. If ≥75% of participants scored within the 7–9 range, then the statement was deemed to be agreed upon. If <75% of participants scored within this range, the statement was debated and revised, and a second vote was taken. Again, if ≥75% of participants scored within the 7–9 range, the statement was deemed to be agreed upon. If agreement was not reached at this stage, a lack of agreement was noted. The agreed statements and a summary of the supporting evidence are presented here.

3. Results

3.1. Question 1: What are the prognostic factors for disease progression – change in disease behaviour [B1 to B2 and B3], need for therapy escalation, perianal disease, bowel damage and disability – in CD?

CD is an inflammatory disease that may affect the entire GI tract, with repeated flares resulting in bowel damage that leads to a complicated disease course and short- and long-term disability. Therapy may involve repeated courses of corticosteroids and ultimately surgery.7 Our literature search identified a number of studies evaluating risk factors for complicated CD outcomes [Table 1]; however, interpretation was hindered by the lack of consistent or standard definitions of disease progression. Interestingly, we did not find any studies documenting risk factors for bowel damage or participation-related disability.

Table 1.

Clinical, demographic and endoscopic prognostic predictors in Crohn’s disease [CD] and the associated impact on the disease course.

Two large tertiary-centre studies provided the greatest insight into clinical predictors of disability and severe disease in CD.8,9 The primary outcome in these studies was disabling disease, defined as a requirement for more than two steroid courses, steroid dependence, hospitalization for disease flare or complication, disabling chronic symptoms for a cumulative time of more than 12 months, or need for immunosuppressive therapy, intestinal resection or surgery for perianal disease. Variables assessed included gender, ethnicity, age at onset, disease location, previous appendectomy, smoking status, EIMs, perianal lesions at diagnosis and the need for steroids for treating the first flare-up. In the first study, an initial requirement for steroids (odds ratio [OR] 3.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2–4.4), age at diagnosis of less than 40 years [OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.3–3.6] or the presence of perianal disease at diagnosis [OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.2–2.8] were independently associated with disabling disease.8 In the second study, independent predictors of disabling CD were an initial requirement for steroids [OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.0–2.7], perianal lesions at diagnosis [OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.4–5.1] and ileocolonic location of the disease [OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1–2.8].9 Another study found that older age at diagnosis and the absence of perianal lesions predicts a milder CD course.10 One of the most important clinical risk factors for disease progression is disease location [ileal and ileocolonic vs colonic, rectal involvement, and upper GI involvement].11–15 In a population-based cohort from North America, disease in the terminal ileum, ileocolonic disease and upper GI involvement were strongly associated with change in disease behaviour in a multivariate model.16

Other factors that may act as predictors of disease progression include smoking, endoscopic disease severity and serological status. In several studies in CD patients, active smoking was associated with stenosing/fistulizing behaviour,17,18,19 the need for steroids or immunomodulators,20 requirement for surgery21,22 and disease recurrence following surgery.23,24 In one study, passive smoking was associated with increased need for immunosuppressants and biologics in CD patients.25

In the only study identified that specifically assessed the value of endoscopic findings in CD, severe endoscopic lesions [defined as extensive and deep ulcerations covering more than 10% of the mucosal area of at least one segment of the colon] at index colonoscopy were associated with penetrating complications in CD.26

While the prognostic value of inflammatory markers on CD course is limited,27,28,29 results from several independent adult and paediatric cohorts have indicated that circulating antibodies against bacterial antigens are associated with complicated CD and evolution towards stricturing or penetrating behaviour.30,31 Interestingly, a direct correlation was observed between the magnitude of immune response to microbial antigens and frequency of penetrating/stenosing disease in children. Additionally, paediatric CD patients who were positive for one or more immune response progressed to penetrating or stricturing disease sooner after diagnosis compared with those negative for all immune responses.31

An association between mutations in the NOD2 gene and complicated disease phenotype has been suggested in several independent cohorts32,33 and a meta-analysis.34 However, the low effect size of other CD-associated genetic polymorphisms means that a very large sample size is required to make true associations between genotype and phenotype. Current studies have lacked power to establish a true association and do not adequately take into account the effects of age, disease location, smoking and other variables on phenotype. Moreover, several studies have reported that NOD2 mutations are specifically associated with stricturing ileal disease, which almost certainly accounts for the reported association with increased rates of surgery.35,36 Indeed, this association disappears if the data are corrected for disease location.37

3.2. Question 2: What are the prognostic factors for surgery or multiple surgeries in CD?

The cumulative probability of surgery in CD has been evaluated in several population-based cohorts.21,38,39,40 A number of clinical risk factors have been associated with an increased need for surgery [Table 1]. In adult patients, younger age at diagnosis is a prognostic factor for surgery.38,39,41 Within the paediatric population, available data suggest an opposite trend, however, with younger age at diagnosis associated with a decreased risk of surgery.42,43,44 One potential explanation for this observation is that younger paediatric patients present more commonly with isolated colonic disease,42 which has been repeatedly associated with lower surgical rates [see below].

Disease location is among the most important prognostic factors for surgery in CD, and should actively be incorporated into clinical decision-making. Disease located in the small bowel [ileal/ileocolonic disease] has been consistently identified as an independent risk factor for surgery in adult populations,21,38,45,46,47,48 possibly because small bowel disease is more frequently associated with penetrating and stenosing behaviour.22 Disease located in the jejunum and upper GI tract [L4] is also indicative of higher surgical risk for similar reasons,11,12,13,14,15,49 while colonic disease [L2] is protective against major surgery.22,42,49,50,51

Penetrating and stricturing disease at diagnosis is possibly the most important independent factor associated with the need for surgery.21,38,42,48 Furthermore, patients who have surgery for penetrating complications have a higher likelihood of being re-operated on and a shorter time to second surgery.15,52 Extensive and deep ulcerations on index colonoscopy have been shown in a retrospective study to represent an independent risk factor for surgery, in patients with colonic disease.26

A large systematic review and meta-analysis found that the risk of any CD surgery was increased by 58% if any NOD2 mutation was present, with a pooled sensitivity of 41% and a specificity of 74%.34 A meta-analysis of seven cohort studies and four case-control studies showed an association between ASCA-positive status and surgery risk [OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.37–1.95].53 In addition, greater immune responses to anti-Cbir1, anti-ompC, ASCA and perinuclear anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody [p-ANCA] were shown to be predictive of surgery in a paediatric population.43 The increased risk of surgery associated with these genetic and serological markers probably also reflects their association with ileal and ileocolonic disease and complicated disease behaviour.

3.3. Question 3: What are the prognostic factors for hospitalization in CD?

Hospitalization is generally regarded as a marker of high disease activity or severity in CD. However, our review of the literature revealed that very few studies have assessed predictive factors of hospitalization in patients with CD [Table 1]. Generally, risk factors associated with disease progression and risk for surgery are also associated with higher likelihood of hospitalization because they are markers of disease aggressiveness and severity. In a population-based study from Olmsted County, MN, USA, factors associated with time to first hospitalization included ileocolonic disease (hazard ratio [HR] 3.3; 95% CI 1.8–5.8), small bowel disease [HR 3.4; 95% CI 1.9–6.1] and gastroduodenal disease [HR 4.0; 95% CI 1.2–13.8] as opposed to colitis.21 Compared with non-penetrating and non-stricturing disease, penetrating disease also increased the risk of first major abdominal surgery [HR 2.7; 95% CI 1.1–6.7].21 Similar findings have been reported in other cohorts.49,51,54

3.4. Question 4: What are the prognostic factors for intestinal failure or permanent stoma in CD?

Permanent stoma may be a therapeutic necessity in patients with refractory rectal or perianal CD and severe Cohn’s proctocolitis. Identification of risk factors at an earlier stage of disease may guide more intensive medical intervention, preventing the development of strictures and fistulae that ultimately result in the need for irreversible surgery. In our review of the evidence [primarily in patients with perianal and/or colonic CD], the most frequent factors independently associated with a permanent stoma were: complex perianal fistulae,55,56 anal-canal stricture,57 perineum involvement and perineal granulomas,58 perianal sepsis,59 faecal incontinence,55 colonic CD59 and distal colonic involvement.57,60 Additionally, patients undergoing rectal resection or temporary faecal diversion for perianal disease control have a higher rate of permanent faecal diversion.55,61 Patients with permanent stoma have typically experienced a greater number of previous abdominal surgeries than those without a permanent stoma.55,59 It is important to acknowledge that the likelihood of successful stoma reversal after temporary diversion for control of perianal sepsis or disease is low.

Intestinal failure is a rare complication of CD, with a lack of consistent risk factors reported in the literature. Nevertheless, bowel-preserving strategies, such as strictureplasty or stricture balloon dilation, should be used whenever possible to prevent intestinal failure.

3.5. Question 5: What are the prognostic factors for proximal disease extension in UC?

UC is a dynamic disease, with up to 50% of patients progressing from limited forms of disease [proctitis, left-sided colitis] to more extensive forms of colitis [extensive colitis, pancolitis].62,63 The extent of colitis is clinically relevant, as extensive colitis is associated with higher hospitalization rates, need for corticosteroids, greater likelihood of surgery, and increased risk of progression to dysplasia and colorectal cancer [CRC]. The ability to identify patients who are likely to experience disease extension would allow close monitoring and tight control, and perhaps more intensive treatment. It is important to note that most studies on this topic address association of potential risk factors with extensive colitis, rather than predicting proximal extension of disease, and do not allow assessment of whether the same factors that cause proximal disease extension are also predictive of extensive disease from the onset. This analysis was limited to studies that specifically evaluated risk factors for proximal disease extension [Table 2]. In a paediatric cohort with UC, a delay in diagnosis of more than 6 months and a family history of IBD were associated with increased risk of proximal disease extension [OR 5.0; 95% CI 1.2–21.5 and OR 11.8; 95% CI 1.3–111.3, respectively].64 In an adult cohort, independent factors associated with disease proximal extension were younger age at diagnosis [HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96–0.999] and the presence of PSC [HR 12.83, 95% CI 1.36–121.10].65 More than three relapses in one year, a requirement for systemic steroid or immunosuppressive treatment and non-smoking were associated with risk of proximal extension in a retrospective cohort study of adults with UC.66 Increased severity of disease and use of corticosteroids upon diagnosis were significantly associated with proximal disease extension in adults with ulcerative proctitis.67

Table 2.

Clinical, demographic and endoscopic prognostic predictors in ulcerative colitis [UC] and the associated impact on disease course.

3.6. Question 6: What are the prognostic factors for acute severe UC?

Acute severe UC is a medical emergency that requires intensive medical therapy or colectomy; however, robust prognostic factors for this event have not been established [Table 2]. In a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 750 patients in the UK diagnosed with UC from 1996 to 2001, acute severe UC occurred more frequently in patients with more extensive disease, a younger age at diagnosis and a shorter duration of disease.68 More recently, Cesarini et al. have shown that the likelihood of developing acute severe UC within 3 years of diagnosis was increased in patients with extensive colitis [E3 from Montreal classification] who presented with C-reactive protein [CRP] >10 mg/l and low haemoglobin [<13.5 g/dl for men or 12.1 g/dl for women].69 Data from this single-centre study require validation in external cohorts.

In the absence of studies evaluating acute severe UC as a definitive endpoint, hospitalization due to UC flares may act as a surrogate marker. A concurrent diagnosis of PSC may be a protective factor for hospitalization in UC patients,70 which is in accordance with studies suggesting that PSC carries a milder course of colonic activity in UC patients.71 Smoking has also been associated with a lower hospitalization rate in UC;72 conversely, quitting smoking increases the risk of hospitalization.73,74 Finally, extensive colitis,75 cytomegalovirus infection76 and C. difficile infection77 are risk factors for hospitalization for UC flare.

3.7. Question 7: What are the prognostic factors for colectomy in UC?

In patients with UC, colectomy is undertaken in the emergency setting [typically for complications of fulminant colitis], in hospitalized patients who are non-responsive to maximal medical therapy and as elective treatment in patients who have persistent symptoms despite medical therapy, dysplasia or CRC. We recognize that it is important to distinguish prognostic factors according to colectomy context [Table 2].

In an analysis of the University of Manitoba IBD Epidemiology Database, predictors of early colectomy [≤90 days from diagnosis date] included male sex (HR 2.63; [corrected] 95% CI 1.58–4.36) and being initially diagnosed during hospitalization [HR 12.46; 95% CI 7.40–21.0].78 A review of the literature found that disease extent, particularly extensive disease24,79 and pancolitis,80 may predict subsequent colectomy. Longer disease duration was also identified as a risk factor, both in adults24,81 and in children.80 However, caution is needed when interpreting the evidence as the data are cumulative and are confounded by the differences in follow-up duration. Patients who are hospitalized at UC diagnosis78,82 or require recurrent hospitalization for UC management82 should be carefully monitored for colectomy indicators. While the presence of PSC reduces the risk of hospitalization for UC [discussed previously], it is also a risk factor for colectomy, primarily due to the associated risk of colorectal neoplasia.83 There is limited evidence that active smoking is protective against colectomy84 and smoking cessation in patients with established UC has not been shown conclusively to influence the rate of colectomy.73

3.8. Question 8: What are the prognostic factors for dysplasia and CRC in IBD?

Early intervention with immunosuppressive or biological therapies may have contributed to an overall decline in the incidence of CRC in patients with IBD, although it is evident that some subgroups of patients with UC remain at increased risk of CRC.85 In patients with IBD, independent risk factors for the development of CRC or high-grade dysplasia include longer duration of IBD85,86,87,88 and greater extent of colonic involvement at diagnosis.86,87,89 The excess risk becomes significant 7–10 years after diagnosis in the general IBD population90 although it is immediately seen in patients with PSC.85 In UC, disease extent is also a predictor for CRC development, with increased risk in patients with pancolitis compared with left-sided or distal colitis.87,89,91,92 A number of studies have shown that the concurrent presence of PSC is a strong risk factor for dysplasia or CRC development,85,93,94,95,96,97 warranting special surveillance protocols. Furthermore, when assessing for site of cancer development, PSC was a predictor of cancer proximal to the splenic flexure.96 In a study in patients with colonic CD, the presence of PSC was weakly associated with the development of dysplasia or CRC.98

Two referral centre studies have demonstrated an association between histological inflammation score and the development of dysplasia or CRC in patients with UC,99,100 and one case-control study found that every 1-unit increase in histological score independently increased the odds of colorectal neoplasia by a factor of 4.69 [95% CI 2.10–10.48].101 The possible relationship between elevated CRP or erythrocyte sedimentation rate and CRC102 may also support the association between poorly controlled inflammation and cancer risk.

Among IBD patients with a first-degree relative with CRC, the relative risk [RR] of developing CRC was increased [RR 2.5; 95% CI 1.4–4.4] and remained elevated for both UC [RR 2.0; 95% CI 1.0–9.4] and CD [RR 3.7; 95% CI 1.4–9.4].103 Furthermore, the RR was higher for those with a first-degree relative diagnosed with CRC before age 50 [RR 9.2; 95% CI 3.8–23]. Male sex is independently associated with the development of CRC or high-grade dysplasia.86,100,104 While total disease duration is associated with the development of CRC, older age at diagnosis has been associated with shorter time to CRC onset.86,89,93,105,106

3.9. Question 9: What are the prognostic factors for death in IBD?

There are few identified predictor factors for mortality in IBD. A meta-analysis of 10 studies reported standardized mortality ratios [SMRs] in UC with a range from 0.7 to 1.4. The pooled ratio did not demonstrate an overall risk of dying that was different from the background population [pooled SMR 1.1; 95% CI 0.1–1.2].107 A similar meta-analysis of nine studies in CD reported a range of SMRs from 0.72 to 3.2, with a pooled SMR of 1.39 [95% CI 1.30–1.49] reflecting an increased overall mortality in patients with CD compared with the background population.108 The risk of death after adjustment for sex and smoking was compared in a large population cohort study including 16550 patients with IBD and 82917 matched controls; among patients with UC, those aged 40–59 years had the greatest increase in risk of death [HR 1.79; 95% CI 1.42–2.27], while in patients with CD, those aged 20–39 years had the largest statistically significant risk for death [HR 3.82; 95% CI 2.17–6.75].109 One cohort study found that age at diagnosis and male gender were independently associated with mortality in patients with UC; in patients with CD, only age at diagnosis was statistically significant.110 Another study found an independent association between PSC and mortality in IBD patients.111

4. Implications for practice

Stratifying patients and individualizing therapy in IBD should be an ongoing process. It is important for treating physicians and patients to understand which factors are associated with different outcomes as this may influence important therapeutic decisions. Evaluating these factors should arguably be the first step in stratifying patients into low-risk or high-risk groups and should drive treatment target discussions. It is equally important to actively pursue and document resolution of inflammation and adjust therapy accordingly [treat to target], offering the clinician the opportunity to improve patient outcomes at every stage of the disease process.112 Postponing adequate therapy in patients with aggressive disease may result in disease progression and complications; however, treating all patients intensively may lead to over-treatment and expose some patients to unnecessary risks of immunosuppression.113 Therefore, it is important to be aware of the risk factors associated with specific complications and to use these to tailor therapy. Briefly, patients with CD presenting with a young age at diagnosis, extensive anatomical involvement, deep ulcerations at endoscopy, ileal or ileocolonic involvement, perianal disease and/or severe rectal disease and penetrating or stenosing behaviour should be regarded as those with the highest probability of developing complications and therefore merit intensive therapy and close follow-up.114 Patients with UC presenting at young age at diagnosis, with extensive colitis and frequent flare-ups needing steroids or hospitalization bear a higher risk of colectomy. Concurrent presence of PSC, smoking status and superimposed infections may impact the course and activity of UC; therefore, these are clinical risk factors needing attention from the clinician.

5. Future directions

The use of prognostic factors to guide IBD management is an evolving field. We must be mindful that most of the currently available prognostic factors in IBD are clinical and lack precision. Furthermore, many of these risk factors have been identified retrospectively and have yet to be validated; appropriately powered prospective studies are still required to inform algorithms that can truly predict the risk for disease progression in the individual patient. While use of serological and genetic markers in prognostication has been hampered by lack of sensitivity and lack of wide availability, these are of increasing clinical interest. Indeed, composite scores incorporating clinical information and molecular profiling, and considering harder endpoints such as bowel damage115,116 and disability,117 will hopefully allow us to better personalize therapy in the future, both at diagnosis and throughout the disease course.118

Funding

AbbVie provided funding to the Lucid Group, Loudwater, UK, to manage the IBD Ahead educational programme. AbbVie paid consultancy fees to the Global Steering Committee for their participation in the Global Steering Committee meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark, and speaker fees to the committee members who presented at the international IBD Ahead meeting in Frankfurt, Germany. Travel to and from these meetings was reimbursed. The bibliographical fellows were paid consultancy fees by AbbVie to conduct the literature reviews. No payments were made to the authors for the development or writing of this manuscript. Payment of fees for Open Access was made by AbbVie. Juliette Allport of the Lucid Group provided editorial support to the authors in the development of this manuscript; AbbVie paid the Lucid Group for this work.

Conflict of Interest

JT: served as a speaker or consultant for AbbVie, Falk, Ferring, and Takeda. FC: served as a speaker or consultant for AbbVie, MSD and Takeda. KHK: served as a speaker for and received consultancy fees from AbbVie, MSD and Takeda. DM: none. TL: none. MZ: served as an advisory board member or speaker for AbbVie, Apsen, Janssen, Nestlé, Pfizer, Takeda and UCB Biopharma and received support for medical congresses from AbbVie, Janssen and Takeda. GVA: received consultancy and/or lecture fees from AbbVie, Aptalis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ferring, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Takeda, UCB Pharma and Warner Chilcott. Research support to the University of Leuven has also been received from AbbVie, MSD and Zealand Pharma. JCL: served as a speaker or advisory board member for AbbVie, Falk and Ferring. JOL: served as a speaker, consultant or advisory board member for, or has received research funding from, AbbVie, Actavis [Warner Chilcott], Atlantic Healthcare, Ferring, Hospira, Janssen, MSD, Napp, Pfizer, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, Tillotts and Vifor Pharma. DTR: served as a consultant or received grant support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, Prometheus Laboratories, Shire Pharmaceturicals, Takeda and UCB Pharma. RP: received consultant and/or lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Axcan Pharma [now Aptalis], Biogen Idec, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Centocor, ChemoCentryx, Eisai Medical Research Inc., Elan Pharmaceuticals, Ferring, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, MSD, Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. [now Takeda], Ocera Therapeutics Inc., Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Prometheus Laboratories, Schering-Plough, Synta Pharmaceuticals Corp, Teva, UCB Pharma and Warner Chilcott. JFC: served as consultant, advisory board member or speaker for AbbVie, ABScience, Amgen, Bristol-Myers, Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Danone, Dr. August Wolff, Ferring, Genentech, Giuliani SPA, Given Imaging, Immune Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Kyowa Hakko Kirin Pharma, MedImmune, Merck & Co., Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., Navigant Consulting, Neovacs, Nestlé, Nutrition Science Partners, Pfizer, Prometheus Laboratories, Protagonist, Receptos, Sano, Schering Plough, Second Genome, Shire, Takeda, Teva Pharmaceuticals, TiGenix, UCB Pharma and Vertex.

Author Contributions

This paper was developed from recommendations made by the IBD Ahead programme chairs [JFC and RP], literature review sub-committee [JFC, JCL, JOL, DR and GVA] and bibliographical fellows [FC, KK, TL, DM, JT and MZ]. AbbVie selected the programme chairs and reviewed the final draft of the manuscript. The authors maintained complete control over the content of the paper and it reflects their opinions. All authors made substantial contributions to [1] the conception and design of the study, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, [2] drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content and [3] final approval of the version to be submitted.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Marla Dubinsky [Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA] for helping to define the risk factors and outcomes that informed the literature review.

References

• 1.D’Haens G, Baert F, van Assche G, et al. Early combined immunosuppression or conventional management in patients with newly diagnosed Crohn’s disease: an open randomised trial. Lancet 2008;371:660–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 2.Schreiber S, Reinisch W, Colombel JF, et al. Subgroup analysis of the placebo-controlled CHARM trial: increased remission rates through 3 years for adalimumab-treated patients with early Crohn’s disease. J Crohns Colitis 2013;7:213–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 3.Schreiber S, Colombel JF, Bloomfield R, et al. Increased response and remission rates in short-duration Crohn’s disease with subcutaneous certolizumab pegol: an analysis of PRECiSE 2 randomized maintenance trial data. Am J Gastroenterol 2010;105:1574–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 4.Colombel JF, Sandborn WJ, Reinisch W, et al. Infliximab, azathioprine, or combination therapy for Crohn’s disease. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1383–95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 5.Khanna R, Bressler B, Levesque BG, et al. Early combined immunosuppression for the management of Crohn’s disease (REACT): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015;386:1825–34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 6.Devlin SM, Cheifetz AS, Siegel CA, BRIDGe Group Patient-specific approach to combination versus monotherapy with the use of antitumor necrosis factor alpha agents for inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2012;41:411–28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 7.Van Assche G, Dignass A, Panes J, et al. The second European evidence-based Consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn’s disease: definitions and diagnosis. J Crohns Colitis 2010;4:7–27. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 8.Beaugerie L, Seksik P, Nion-Larmurier I, Gendre JP, Cosnes J. Predictors of Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 2006;130:650–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 9.Loly C, Belaiche J, Louis E. Predictors of severe Crohn’s disease. Scand J Gastroenterol 2008;43:948–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 10.Kruis W, Katalinic A, Klugmann T, et al. Predictive factors for an uncomplicated long-term course of Crohn’s disease: a retrospective analysis. J Crohns Colitis 2013;7:e263–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 11.Brant SR, Picco MF, Achkar JP, et al. Defining complex contributions of NOD2/CARD15 gene mutations, age at onset, and tobacco use on Crohn’s disease phenotypes. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2003;9:281–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 12.Gathungu G, Kim MO, Ferguson JP, et al. Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor autoantibodies: a marker of aggressive Crohn’s disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2013;19:1671–80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 13.Gearry RB, Kamm MA, Hart AL, Bassett P, Gabe SM, Nightingale JM. Predictors for developing intestinal failure in patients with Crohn’s disease. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013;28:801–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 14.Karban A, Itay M, Davidovich O, et al. Risk factors for perianal Crohn’s disease: the role of genotype, phenotype, and ethnicity. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:1702–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 15.Lazarev M, Huang C, Bitton A, et al. Relationship between proximal Crohn’s disease location and disease behavior and surgery: a cross-sectional study of the IBD Genetics Consortium. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108:106–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 16.Thia KT, Sandborn WJ, Harmsen WS, Zinsmeister AR, Loftus EV., Jr Risk factors associated with progression to intestinal complications of Crohn’s disease in a population-based cohort. Gastroenterology 2010;139:1147–55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 17.Lindberg E, Jarnerot G, Huitfeldt B. Smoking in Crohn’s disease: effect on localisation and clinical course. Gut 1992;33:779–82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 18.Louis E, Michel V, Hugot JP, et al. Early development of stricturing or penetrating pattern in Crohn’s disease is influenced by disease location, number of flares, and smoking but not by NOD2/CARD15 genotype. Gut 2003;52:552–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 19.Lakatos PL, Vegh Z, Lovasz BD, et al. Is current smoking still an important environmental factor in inflammatory bowel diseases? Results from a population-based incident cohort. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2013;19:1010–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 20.Cosnes J, Carbonnel F, Beaugerie L, Le Quintrec Y, Gendre JP. Effects of cigarette smoking on the long-term course of Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 1996;110:424–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 21.Peyrin-Biroulet L, Harmsen WS, Tremaine WJ, Zinsmeister AR, Sandborn WJ, Loftus EV., Jr Surgery in a population-based cohort of Crohn’s disease from Olmsted County, Minnesota (1970–2004). Am J Gastroenterol 2012;107:1693–701. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 22.Sands BE, Arsenault JE, Rosen MJ, et al. Risk of early surgery for Crohn’s disease: implications for early treatment strategies. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:2712–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 23.Vester-Andersen MK, Prosberg MV, Jess T, et al. Disease course and surgery rates in inflammatory bowel disease: a population-based, 7-year follow-up study in the era of immunomodulating therapy. Am J Gastroenterol 2014;109:705–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 24.Romberg-Camps MJ, Dagnelie PC, Kester AD, et al. Influence of phenotype at diagnosis and of other potential prognostic factors on the course of inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:371–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 25.van der Heide F, Dijkstra A, Weersma RK, et al. Effects of active and passive smoking on disease course of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15:1199–207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 26.Allez M, Lemann M, Bonnet J, Cattan P, Jian R, Modigliani R. Long term outcome of patients with active Crohn’s disease exhibiting extensive and deep ulcerations at colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:947–53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 27.Maeda K, Okada M, Yao T, et al. Intestinal and extraintestinal complications of Crohn’s disease: predictors and cumulative probability of complications. J Gastroenterol 1994;29:577–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 28.Kiss LS, Papp M, Lovasz BD, et al. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein for identification of disease phenotype, active disease, and clinical relapses in Crohn’s disease: a marker for patient classification? Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012;18:1647–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 29.Papi C, Festa V, Leandro G, et al. Long-term outcome of Crohn’s disease following corticosteroid-induced remission. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:814–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 30.Mow WS, Vasiliauskas EA, Lin YC, et al. Association of antibody responses to microbial antigens and complications of small bowel Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 2004;126:414–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 31.Dubinsky MC, Lin YC, Dutridge D, et al. Serum immune responses predict rapid disease progression among children with Crohn’s disease: immune responses predict disease progression. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:360–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 32.Weersma RK, Stokkers PC, van Bodegraven AA, et al. Molecular prediction of disease risk and severity in a large Dutch Crohn’s disease cohort. Gut 2009;58:388–95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 33.Cleynen I, Gonzalez JR, Figueroa C, et al. Genetic factors conferring an increased susceptibility to develop Crohn’s disease also influence disease phenotype: results from the IBDchip European Project. Gut 2013;62:1556–65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 34.Adler J, Rangwalla SC, Dwamena BA, Higgins PD. The prognostic power of the NOD2 genotype for complicated Crohn’s disease: a meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2011;106:699–712. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 35.Onnie CM, Fisher SA, Prescott NJ, et al. Diverse effects of the CARD15 and IBD5 loci on clinical phenotype in 630 patients with Crohn’s disease. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;20:37–45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 36.Ananthakrishnan AN, Huang H, Nguyen DD, Sauk J, Yajnik V, Xavier RJ. Differential effect of genetic burden on disease phenotypes in Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis: analysis of a North American cohort. Am J Gastroenterol 2014;109:395–400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 37.Cleynen I, Boucher G, Jostins L, et al. Inherited determinants of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis phenotypes: a genetic association study. Lancet 2016;387:156–67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 38.Solberg IC, Vatn MH, Hoie O, et al. Clinical course in Crohn’s disease: results of a Norwegian population-based ten-year follow-up study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007;5:1430–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 39.Ramadas AV, Gunesh S, Thomas GA, Williams GT, Hawthorne AB. Natural history of Crohn’s disease in a population-based cohort from Cardiff (1986–2003): a study of changes in medical treatment and surgical resection rates. Gut 2010;59:1200–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 40.Vind I, Riis L, Jess T, et al. Increasing incidences of inflammatory bowel disease and decreasing surgery rates in Copenhagen City and County, 2003–2005: a population-based study from the Danish Crohn colitis database. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:1274–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 41.Bernell O, Lapidus A, Hellers G. Risk factors for surgery and postoperative recurrence in Crohn’s disease. Ann Surg 2000;231:38–45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 42.Schaefer ME, Machan JT, Kawatu D, et al. Factors that determine risk for surgery in pediatric patients with Crohn’s disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;8:789–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 43.Dubinsky MC, Kugathasan S, Mei L, et al. Increased immune reactivity predicts aggressive complicating Crohn’s disease in children. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;6:1105–11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 44.Gupta N, Cohen SA, Bostrom AG, et al. Risk factors for initial surgery in pediatric patients with Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 2006;130:1069–77. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 45.Magro F, Portela F, Lago P, et al. Crohn’s disease in a southern European country: Montreal classification and clinical activity. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15:1343–50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 46.Szamosi T, Banai J, Lakatos L, et al. Early azathioprine/biological therapy is associated with decreased risk for first surgery and delays time to surgery but not reoperation in both smokers and nonsmokers with Crohn’s disease, while smoking decreases the risk of colectomy in ulcerative colitis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;22:872–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 47.Moum B, Ekbom A, Vatn MH, et al. Clinical course during the 1st year after diagnosis in ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. Results of a large, prospective population-based study in southeastern Norway, 1990–93. Scand J Gastroenterol 1997;32:1005–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 48.Lakatos L, Kiss LS, David G, et al. Incidence, disease phenotype at diagnosis, and early disease course in inflammatory bowel diseases in Western Hungary, 2002–2006. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2011;17:2558–65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 49.Chow DK, Sung JJ, Wu JC, Tsoi KK, Leong RW, Chan FK. Upper gastrointestinal tract phenotype of Crohn’s disease is associated with early surgery and further hospitalization. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15:551–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 50.Aldhous MC, Drummond HE, Anderson N, Smith LA, Arnott ID, Satsangi J. Does cigarette smoking influence the phenotype of Crohn’s disease? Analysis using the Montreal classification. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:577–88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 51.Veloso FT, Ferreira JT, Barros L, Almeida S. Clinical outcome of Crohn’s disease: analysis according to the Vienna classification and clinical activity. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2001;7:306–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 52.Greenstein AJ, Lachman P, Sachar DB, et al. Perforating and non-perforating indications for repeated operations in Crohn’s disease: evidence for two clinical forms. Gut 1988;29:588–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 53.Zhang Z, Li C, Zhao X, et al. Anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibodies associate with phenotypes and higher risk for surgery in Crohn’s disease: a meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2012;57:2944–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 54.Golovics PA, Mandel MD, Lovasz BD, et al. Is hospitalization predicting the disease course in Crohn’s disease? Prevalence and predictors of hospitalization and re-hospitalization in Crohn’s disease in a population-based inception cohort between 2000–2012. Gastroenterology 2014;146 [suppl. 1]:S-483. Abstract 1331. [Google Scholar]
• 55.Mueller MH, Geis M, Glatzle J, et al. Risk of fecal diversion in complicated perianal Crohn’s disease. J Gastrointest Surg 2007;11:529–37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 56.Kanaan Z, Ahmad S, Bilchuk N, Vahrenhold C, Pan J, Galandiuk S. Perianal Crohn’s disease: predictive factors and genotype-phenotype correlations. Dig Surg 2012;29:107–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 57.Galandiuk S, Kimberling J, Al-Mishlab TG, Stromberg AJ. Perianal Crohn disease: predictors of need for permanent diversion. Ann Surg 2005;241:796–801; discussion -2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 58.Figg RE, Church JM. Perineal Crohn’s disease: an indicator of poor prognosis and potential proctectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 2009;52:646–50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 59.Kiran RP, Nisar PJ, Church JM, Fazio VW. The role of primary surgical procedure in maintaining intestinal continuity for patients with Crohn’s colitis. Ann Surg 2011;253:1130–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 60.Fichera A, McCormack R, Rubin MA, Hurst RD, Michelassi F. Long-term outcome of surgically treated Crohn’s colitis: a prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48:963–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 61.Singh S, Ding NS, Mathis KL, et al. Systematic review with meta-analysis: faecal diversion for management of perianal Crohn’s disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2015;42:783–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 62.Torres J, Billioud V, Sachar DB, Peyrin-Biroulet L, Colombel JF. Ulcerative colitis as a progressive disease: the forgotten evidence. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012;18:1356–63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 63.Magro F, Rodrigues A, Vieira AI, et al. Review of the disease course among adult ulcerative colitis population-based longitudinal cohorts. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012;18:573–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 64.Gower-Rousseau C, Dauchet L, Vernier-Massouille G, et al. The natural history of pediatric ulcerative colitis: a population-based cohort study. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:2080–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 65.Etchevers MJ, Aceituno M, Garcia-Bosch O, et al. Risk factors and characteristics of extent progression in ulcerative colitis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15:1320–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 66.Meucci G, Vecchi M, Astegiano M, et al. The natural history of ulcerative proctitis: a multicenter, retrospective study. Gruppo di Studio per le Malattie Infiammatorie Intestinali (GSMII). Am J Gastroenterol 2000;95:469–73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 67.Kim B, Park SJ, Hong SP, Kim TI, Kim WH, Cheon JH. Proximal disease extension and related predicting factors in ulcerative proctitis. Scand J Gastroenterol 2014;49:177–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 68.Dinesen LC, Walsh AJ, Protic MN, et al. The pattern and outcome of acute severe colitis. J Crohns Colitis 2010;4:431–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 69.Cesarini M, Collins G, Wang LM, et al. Predicting the individal risk of acute severe colitis at diagnosis. J Crohns Colitis. 2014;8 [suppl. 1]:S38. Abstract DOP049. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 70.Moayyeri A, Daryani NE, Bahrami H, Haghpanah B, Nayyer-Habibi A, Sadatsafavi M. Clinical course of ulcerative colitis in patients with and without primary sclerosing cholangitis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2005;20:366–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 71.Lundqvist K, Broome U. Differences in colonic disease activity in patients with ulcerative colitis with and without primary sclerosing cholangitis: a case control study. Dis Colon Rectum 1997;40:451–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 72.Odes HS, Fich A, Reif S, et al. Effects of current cigarette smoking on clinical course of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. Dig Dis Sci 2001;46:1717–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 73.Beaugerie L, Massot N, Carbonnel F, Cattan S, Gendre JP, Cosnes J. Impact of cessation of smoking on the course of ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:2113–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 74.Van Assche G, Dignass A, Reinisch W, et al. The second European evidence-based Consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn’s disease: special situations. J Crohns Colitis 2010;4:63–101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 75.Burisch J, Pedersen N, Cukovic-Cavka S, et al. Environmental factors in a population-based inception cohort of inflammatory bowel disease patients in Europe – an ECCO-EpiCom study. J Crohns Colitis 2014;8:607–16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 76.Matsumoto S, Yoshida Y. What are the factors that affect hospitalization and surgery for aggravation of ulcerative colitis? Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014;26:282–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 77.Pant C, Anderson MP, Deshpande A, et al. Health care burden of Clostridium difficile infection in hospitalized children with inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2013;19:1080–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 78.Targownik LE, Singh H, Nugent Z, Bernstein CN. The epidemiology of colectomy in ulcerative colitis: results from a population-based cohort. Am J Gastroenterol 2012;107:1228–35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 79.Beaugerie L, Sokol H. Clinical, serological and genetic predictors of inflammatory bowel disease course. World J Gastroenterol 2012;18:3806–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 80.Falcone RA, Jr, Lewis LG, Warner BW. Predicting the need for colectomy in pediatric patients with ulcerative colitis. J Gastrointest Surg 2000;4:201–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 81.Chow DK, Leong RW, Tsoi KK, et al. Long-term follow-up of ulcerative colitis in the Chinese population. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:647–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 82.Ananthakrishnan AN, Issa M, Beaulieu DB, et al. History of medical hospitalization predicts future need for colectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15:176–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 83.Florin TH, Pandeya N, Radford-Smith GL. Epidemiology of appendicectomy in primary sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis: its influence on the clinical behaviour of these diseases. Gut 2004;53:973–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 84.van der Heide F, Wassenaar M, van der Linde K, Spoelstra P, Kleibeuker JH, Dijkstra G. Effects of active and passive smoking on Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis in a cohort from a regional hospital. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011;23:255–61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 85.Jess T, Simonsen J, Jorgensen KT, Pedersen BV, Nielsen NM, Frisch M. Decreasing risk of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease over 30 years. Gastroenterology 2012;143:375–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 86.Beaugerie L, Svrcek M, Seksik P, et al. Risk of colorectal high-grade dysplasia and cancer in a prospective observational cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 2013;145:166–75.e8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 87.Gong W, Lv N, Wang B, et al. Risk of ulcerative colitis-associated colorectal cancer in China: a multi-center retrospective study. Dig Dis Sci 2012;57:503–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 88.Baars JE, Looman CW, Steyerberg EW, et al. The risk of inflammatory bowel disease-related colorectal carcinoma is limited: results from a nationwide nested case-control study. Am J Gastroenterol 2011;106:319–28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 89.Ekbom A, Helmick C, Zack M, Adami HO. Ulcerative colitis and colorectal cancer. A population-based study. N Engl J Med 1990;323:1228–33. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 90.Lutgens MW, van Oijen MG, van der Heijden GJ, Vleggaar FP, Siersema PD, Oldenburg B. Declining risk of colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel disease: an updated meta-analysis of population-based cohort studies. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2013;19:789–99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 91.Heuschen UA, Hinz U, Allemeyer EH, et al. Backwash ileitis is strongly associated with colorectal carcinoma in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 2001;120:841–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 92.Stolwijk JA, Langers AM, Hardwick JC, et al. A thirty-year follow-up surveillance study for neoplasia of a dutch ulcerative colitis cohort. ScientificWorldJournal 2013;2013:274715. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 93.Bansal P, Sonnenberg A. Risk factors of colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol 1996;91:44–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 94.Brentnall TA, Haggitt RC, Rabinovitch PS, et al. Risk and natural history of colonic neoplasia in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 1996;110:331–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 95.Lindberg BU, Broome U, Persson B. Proximal colorectal dysplasia or cancer in ulcerative colitis. The impact of primary sclerosing cholangitis and sulfasalazine: results from a 20-year surveillance study. Dis Colon Rectum 2001;44:77–85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 96.Shetty K, Rybicki L, Brzezinski A, Carey WD, Lashner BA. The risk for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:1643–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 97.Jess T, Loftus EV, Jr, Velayos FS, et al. Risk factors for colorectal neoplasia in inflammatory bowel disease: a nested case-control study from Copenhagen county, Denmark and Olmsted county, Minnesota. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:829–36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 98.Braden B, Halliday J, Aryasingha S, et al. Risk for colorectal neoplasia in patients with colonic Crohn’s disease and concomitant primary sclerosing cholangitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012;10:303–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 99.Gupta RB, Harpaz N, Itzkowitz S, et al. Histologic inflammation is a risk factor for progression to colorectal neoplasia in ulcerative colitis: a cohort study. Gastroenterology 2007;133:1099–105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 100.Rubin DT, Huo D, Kinnucan JA, et al. Inflammation is an independent risk factor for colonic neoplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis: a case-control study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013;11:1601–8, e1–4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 101.Rutter M, Saunders B, Wilkinson K, et al. Severity of inflammation is a risk factor for colorectal neoplasia in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 2004;126:451–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 102.Ananthakrishnan AN, Cheng SC, Cai T, et al. Serum inflammatory markers and risk of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014;12:1342–8, e1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 103.Askling J, Dickman PW, Karlen P, et al. Family history as a risk factor for colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 2001;120:1356–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 104.Soderlund S, Granath F, Brostrom O, et al. Inflammatory bowel disease confers a lower risk of colorectal cancer to females than to males. Gastroenterology 2010;138:1697–703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 105.Brackmann S, Andersen SN, Aamodt G, et al. Relationship between clinical parameters and the colitis-colorectal cancer interval in a cohort of patients with colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel disease. Scand J Gastroenterol 2009;44:46–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 106.Karvellas CJ, Fedorak RN, Hanson J, Wong CK. Increased risk of colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis patients diagnosed after 40 years of age. Can J Gastroenterol 2007;21:443–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 107.Jess T, Gamborg M, Munkholm P, Sorensen TI. Overall and cause-specific mortality in ulcerative colitis: meta-analysis of population-based inception cohort studies. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:609–17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 108.Duricova D, Pedersen N, Elkjaer M, Gamborg M, Munkholm P, Jess T. Overall and cause-specific mortality in Crohn’s disease: a meta-analysis of population-based studies. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2010;16:347–53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 109.Card T, Hubbard R, Logan RF. Mortality in inflammatory bowel disease: a population-based cohort study. Gastroenterology 2003;125:1583–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 110.Jess T, Loftus EV, Jr., Harmsen WS, et al. Survival and cause specific mortality in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a long term outcome study in Olmsted County, Minnesota, 1940–2004. Gut 2006;55:1248–54. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 111.Ananthakrishnan AN, Cagan A, Gainer VS, et al. Mortality and extraintestinal cancers in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and inflammatory bowel disease. J Crohns Colitis 2014;8:956–63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 112.Peyrin-Biroulet L, Sandborn W, Sands BE, et al. Selecting therapeutic targets in inflammatory bowel disease (STRIDE): determining therapeutic goals for treat-to-target. Am J Gastroenterol 2015;110:1324–38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 113.Billiet T, Ferrante M, Van Assche G. The use of prognostic factors in inflammatory bowel diseases. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2014;16:416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 114.Sandborn WJ. Crohn’s disease evaluation and treatment: clinical decision tool. Gastroenterology 2014;147:702–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 115.Pariente B, Mary JY, Danese S, et al. Development of the Lemann index to assess digestive tract damage in patients with Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 2015;148:52–63, e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 116.Gilletta C, Lewin M, Bourrier A, et al. Changes in the Lemann Index values during the first years of Crohn’s disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015;13:1633–40, e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 117.Gower-Rousseau C, Sarter H, Savoye G, et al. Validation of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Disability Index in a population-based cohort. Gut 2015;in press. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 118.Siegel CA, Horton H, Siegel LS, et al. A validated web-based tool to display individualised Crohn’s disease predicted outcomes based on clinical, serologic and genetic variables. _Aliment Pharmacol Ther_2016;43:262–71. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 119.Van Limbergen J, Russell RK, Drummond HE, et al. Definition of phenotypic characteristics of childhood-onset inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 2008;135:1114–22. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 120.Charpentier C, Salleron J, Savoye G, et al. Natural history of elderly-onset inflammatory bowel disease: a population-based cohort study. Gut 2014;63:423–32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 121.Baars JE, Kuipers EJ, van Haastert M, Nicolai JJ, Poen AC, van der Woude CJ. Age at diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease influences early development of colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel disease patients: a nationwide, long-term survey. J Gastroenterol 2012;47:1308–22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• 122.Samuel S, Ingle SB, Dhillon S, et al. Cumulative incidence and risk factors for hospitalization and surgery in a population-based cohort of ulcerative colitis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2013;19:1858–66. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]