Baseline Data and Measurement Instruments Reported In Observational Studies In Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Results From A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Heterogeneity in demographic and outcomes data with corresponding measurement instruments (MI) creates barriers for data pooling and analysis. Several core outcome sets developed in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) homogenise outcomes data. A parallel Minimum Data Set (MDS) for baseline characteristics is lacking. We conducted a systematic review to develop the first MDS.

METHODS

A systematic review of observational studies from 3 databases (2000 to 2021). Titles and abstracts were screened; full-text articles reviewed, and data extracted by two reviewers. Baseline data were grouped into 10 domains: demographics, clinical features, disease behaviour/complications, biomarkers, endoscopy, histology, radiology, healthcare utilisation and patient-reported data. Frequency of baseline data and MI within respective domains are reported.

RESULTS

From 315 included studies (600,552 subjects), most originated from Europe (196; 62%), and North America (59; 19%), and were published between 2011 and 2021 (251; 80%). The most frequent domains were demographics (311; 98.7%) and clinical (289; 91.7%); 224 (71.1%) studies reported on the triad of sex (306; 97.1%), age (289; 91.7%) and disease phenotype (231; 73.3%). Few included baseline data for radiology 19; 6%), healthcare utilisation (19; 6%) and histology (17; 5.4%). Ethnicity (19; 6%), race (17; 5.4%) and alcohol/drug consumption (6; 1.9%) were least reported demographics. From 25 MI for clinical disease activity, Harvey Bradshaw Index (n=53) and Mayo score (n=37) were most frequently used.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial variability exists in baseline population data reporting. These findings will inform a future consensus for MDS in IBD to enhance data harmonisation and credibility of real-world evidence.

A Narrative Systematic Review and Categorisation of Outcomes in Inflammatory Bowel Disease to Inform a Core Outcome Set for Real-world Evidence

BACKGROUND

Heterogeneity exists in reported outcomes and outcome measurement instruments [OMI] from observational studies. A core outcome set [COS] for observational and real-world evidence [RWE] in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] will facilitate pooling large datasets. This systematic review describes and classifies clinical and patient-reported outcomes, for COS development.

METHODS

The systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases identified observational studies published between 2000 and 2021 using the population exposure outcome [PEO] framework. Studies meeting eligibility criteria were included. After titles and abstracts screening, full-text articles were extracted by two independent reviewers. Primary and secondary outcomes with corresponding OMI were extracted and categorised in accordance with OMERACT Filter 2.1 framework. The frequency of outcomes and OMIs are described.

RESULTS

From 5854 studies, 315 were included: 129 [41%] Crohn's disease [CD], 60 [19%] ulcerative colitis [UC], and 126 [40%] inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] studies with 600 552 participants. Totals of 1632 outcomes and 1929 OMI were extracted mainly from medical therapy [181; 72%], surgical [34; 11%], and endoscopic [6; 2%] studies. Clinical and medical therapy-related safety were frequent outcome domains recorded in 194 and 100 studies. Medical therapy-related adverse events [n = 74] and need for surgery [n = 71] were the commonest outcomes. The most frequently reported OMI were patient or event numbers [n = 914], Harvey-Bradshaw Index [n = 45], and Montreal classification [n = 42].

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial variability in outcomes reporting and OMI types. Categorised outcomes and OMI from this review will inform a Delphi consensus on a COS for future RWE in IBD. Data collection standardisation may enhance the quality of RWE applied to decision-making.

Stress as a Trigger for Relapses in IBD: A Case-Crossover Study

Background

It is important to identify factors that influence the risk of relapses in inflammatory bowel disease. Few studies have been conducted and with limited methodology. This prospective case-crossover study, aims to examine whether perceived stress has a short-term acute effect, namely whether it acts as a trigger, on the risk of relapse in inflammatory bowel disease.

Methods

Sixty patients with inflammatory bowel disease and in remission were included. The case-crossover design was employed, which is an epidemiological design developed to study triggers for acute events and diseases. To collect information regarding symptoms and potential trigger factors, such as perceived stress, a structured diary was constructed. The participants were instructed to fill in the diary daily during six months. Fifty patients completed the study.

Results

The analysis showed an effect for high level of perceived stress. Being exposed to “quite a lot” of stress, yield an increase in risk for relapse during the forthcoming day (OR = 4.8, 95% CI 1.09 - 21.10). No statistically increased risk for lower levels of perceived stress was found, although elevated effect estimates were found for “some” stress.

Conclusion

This study supports earlier findings regarding perceived stress as an important factor in triggering relapses in IBD. However, this is the first case-crossover study performed to explore the trigger risk of stress in this population. Further investigations with larger patient samples are needed to confirm the findings.

Factor structures of the Swedish Version of the RFIPC: Investigating the Validity of Measurements of IBD Patients' Worries and Concerns

Background

Worries and concerns of patients with IBD comprise an important negative factor in their HRQOL. The Rating Form of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patient Concerns (RFIPC) was developed to describe the nature and degree of the worries and concerns of IBD patients. In the original version, the specific issues of worries are divided into four separate factors. These factors provide useful information about HRQOL and the kind of worries and concerns which are most important to the patient. However, the Swedish version of the RFIPC is often scored using a single sum score, implying that all the specific issues of worries stem from a single general worry factor. The aim of this study was to validate the factor structure of the Swedish version of the RFIPC.

Methods

A sample consisting of 195 patients with IBD filled out the RFIPC. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to examine fit of three hypothesized models of factor structure. Spearman’s correlation and Mann-Whitney analysis were used to follow up the results.

Results

The single-factor model displayed poor fit indices. The four-factor model marked substantive improvement, but still remains inadequate. The final four-factor model permitting correlated error terms between some items displayed the most adequate fit.

Conclusions

The factorial structure of the RFIPC, as suggested in the original version, was able to be replicated with a slight modification in the Swedish version. The separate factors identified in this structure provide more detailed information about the worries and concerns of IBD patients as these components of worries are different related to HRQOL and general health.