Multicentric Italian survey on daily practice for autoimmune pancreatitis: Clinical data, diagnosis, treatment, and evolution toward pancreatic insufficiency.
Aftercare
/ standards
Autoimmune Pancreatitis
/ blood
Biopsy
Endoscopy
Feces
/ enzymology
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Gastroenterology
/ methods
Glucocorticoids
/ therapeutic use
Guideline Adherence
/ statistics & numerical data
Humans
Immunosuppressive Agents
/ therapeutic use
Italy
/ epidemiology
Male
Middle Aged
Pancreas
/ diagnostic imaging
Pancreatic Elastase
/ analysis
Practice Patterns, Physicians'
/ standards
Recurrence
Retrospective Studies
Rituximab
/ therapeutic use
Secondary Prevention
/ methods
Autoimmune pancreatitis
endoscopic ultrasound
fine needle aspiration/biopsy
pancreatic insufficiency
steroid trial
Journal
United European gastroenterology journal
ISSN: 2050-6414
Titre abrégé: United European Gastroenterol J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101606807
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2020
07 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
14
5
2020
medline:
29
6
2021
entrez:
14
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a rare, and relatively new, form of chronic pancreatitis. The management of AIP can vary considerably among different centres in daily clinical practice. The aim of this study is to present a picture of epidemiological, clinical characteristics, outcomes, and the real-life practice in terms of management in several academic and non-academic centres in Italy. Data on the clinical presentation, diagnostic work-up, treatments, frequency of relapses, and long-term outcomes were retrospectively collected in a cohort of AIP patients diagnosed at 14 centres in Italy. One hundred and six patients were classified as type 1 AIP, 48 as type 2 AIP, and 19 as not otherwise specified. Epidemiological, clinical, radiological, and serological characteristics, and relapses were similar to those previously reported for different types of AIP. Endoscopic cytohistology was available in 46.2% of cases, and diagnostic for AIP in only 35.2%. Steroid trial to aid diagnosis was administered in 43.3% cases, and effective in 93.3%. Steroid therapy was used in 70.5% of cases, and effective in 92.6% of patients. Maintenance therapy with low dose of steroid (MST) was prescribed in 25.4% of cases at a mean dose of 5 (±1.4) mg/die, and median time of MST was 60 days. Immunosuppressive drugs were rarely used (10.9%), and rituximab in 1.7%. Faecal elastase-1 was evaluated in only 31.2% of patients, and was pathological in 59.2%. In this cohort of AIP patients, diagnosis and classification for subtype was frequently possible, confirming the different characteristics of AIP1 and AIP2 previously reported. Nevertheless, we observed a low use of histology and steroid trial for a diagnosis of AIP. Steroid treatment was the most used therapy in our cohort. Immunosuppressants and rituximab were rarely used. The evaluation of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency is underemployed considering its high prevalence.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a rare, and relatively new, form of chronic pancreatitis. The management of AIP can vary considerably among different centres in daily clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study is to present a picture of epidemiological, clinical characteristics, outcomes, and the real-life practice in terms of management in several academic and non-academic centres in Italy.
METHODS
Data on the clinical presentation, diagnostic work-up, treatments, frequency of relapses, and long-term outcomes were retrospectively collected in a cohort of AIP patients diagnosed at 14 centres in Italy.
RESULTS
One hundred and six patients were classified as type 1 AIP, 48 as type 2 AIP, and 19 as not otherwise specified. Epidemiological, clinical, radiological, and serological characteristics, and relapses were similar to those previously reported for different types of AIP. Endoscopic cytohistology was available in 46.2% of cases, and diagnostic for AIP in only 35.2%. Steroid trial to aid diagnosis was administered in 43.3% cases, and effective in 93.3%. Steroid therapy was used in 70.5% of cases, and effective in 92.6% of patients. Maintenance therapy with low dose of steroid (MST) was prescribed in 25.4% of cases at a mean dose of 5 (±1.4) mg/die, and median time of MST was 60 days. Immunosuppressive drugs were rarely used (10.9%), and rituximab in 1.7%. Faecal elastase-1 was evaluated in only 31.2% of patients, and was pathological in 59.2%.
CONCLUSIONS
In this cohort of AIP patients, diagnosis and classification for subtype was frequently possible, confirming the different characteristics of AIP1 and AIP2 previously reported. Nevertheless, we observed a low use of histology and steroid trial for a diagnosis of AIP. Steroid treatment was the most used therapy in our cohort. Immunosuppressants and rituximab were rarely used. The evaluation of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency is underemployed considering its high prevalence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32397913
doi: 10.1177/2050640620924302
pmc: PMC7437084
doi:
Substances chimiques
Glucocorticoids
0
Immunosuppressive Agents
0
Rituximab
4F4X42SYQ6
Pancreatic Elastase
EC 3.4.21.36
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
705-715Références
Digestion. 2017;95(2):172-180
pubmed: 28226313
Case Rep Gastroenterol. 2011;5(2):378-85
pubmed: 21769291
Pancreatology. 2018 Mar;18(2):168-169
pubmed: 29338920
Pancreatology. 2012 Jul-Aug;12(4):289-94
pubmed: 22898628
Virchows Arch. 2004 Dec;445(6):552-63
pubmed: 15517359
Lancet. 2007 Oct 20;370(9596):1453-7
pubmed: 18064739
Pancreas. 2010 Jul;39(5):549-54
pubmed: 20562576
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Oct;7(10):1097-103
pubmed: 19410017
Pathol Int. 2017 Oct;67(10):514-520
pubmed: 28868649
World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov 28;19(44):7930-46
pubmed: 24307787
United European Gastroenterol J. 2013 Aug;1(4):276-84
pubmed: 24917972
Gastrointest Endosc. 2016 Aug;84(2):241-8
pubmed: 26777565
Pancreas. 2003 Oct;27(3):235-8
pubmed: 14508128
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 May;17(6):1061-1072.e8
pubmed: 30312787
Pancreas. 2007 Mar;34(2):254-9
pubmed: 17312466
Pancreatology. 2017 May - Jun;17(3):381-394
pubmed: 28365128
Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 Sep;104(9):2288-94
pubmed: 19568232
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Mar;10(3):316-22
pubmed: 22019795
Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Sep;76(3):594-602
pubmed: 22898417
Pancreas. 2011 Apr;40(3):352-8
pubmed: 21412117
Pancreatology. 2011;11(2):261-7
pubmed: 21625197
Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Mar;61(3):467-72
pubmed: 15758927
Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 Sep;104(9):2308-10; quiz 2311
pubmed: 19727085
World J Gastroenterol. 2011 Apr 28;17(16):2080-5
pubmed: 21547126
Pancreas. 2014 May;43(4):559-64
pubmed: 24658319
Gastroenterology. 2010 Jul;139(1):140-8; quiz e12-3
pubmed: 20353791
Pancreatology. 2012 May-Jun;12(3):276-83
pubmed: 22687385
Pancreatology. 2016 Jan-Feb;16(1):73-7
pubmed: 26694138
Dig Liver Dis. 2011 Nov;43(11):869-74
pubmed: 21733766
Pancreatology. 2014 Jul-Aug;14(4):233-7
pubmed: 25062869
Pancreas. 2006 Apr;32(3):244-8
pubmed: 16628078
Pancreatology. 2018 Dec;18(8):900-904
pubmed: 30236651
Pancreas. 2011 Aug;40(6):809-14
pubmed: 21747310
Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl. 2006;(243):70-8
pubmed: 16782625
J Gastroenterol. 2008;43(6):403-8
pubmed: 18600383
J Clin Med. 2020 Feb 03;9(2):
pubmed: 32028650
United European Gastroenterol J. 2019 Oct;7(8):1073-1083
pubmed: 31662864
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006 Aug;4(8):1010-6; quiz 934
pubmed: 16843735
Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Nov;102(11):2417-25
pubmed: 17894845
Gut Liver. 2012 Oct;6(4):501-4
pubmed: 23170157