UEG Week Recordings UEG Week Posters Online courses Guidelines Mistakes in... Podcasts Webinars
Visit ueg.eu Create myUEG account Log In
Visit ueg.eu Create myUEG account Log In

Filters:

UEG Presentation
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky
BILE LIQUID BIOPSY IN PANCREATOBILIARY TUMORS: A NOVEL APPROACH TO DETECT ACTIONABLE MUTATIONS

Log in to access this content.

Free for all myUEG account holders. Your access level is set automatically based on your occupation. Medical professionals get full access to all content. If you are a non-medical user, you can only access UEG Week content from congresses you attended.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

Introduction

Biliary strictures are usually caused by malignancies such as Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) or Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC). 70% of these neoplasms are diagnosed at advanced stages due to late-onset symptoms, lack of biomarkers, and challenges in obtaining histological samples. Curative surgical resection with adjuvant therapy is the first-line treatment, but 20% of cases are resectable at diagnosis and 80% relapse within 3 years1,2. The impact of systemic therapies on overall survival remains limited, however new targeted therapies have shown remarkable efficacy in patients with actionable mutations based on tumor genetic profiling. Clinical guidelines advocate multigene panel analysis of tumor tissue prior to or during first-line treatment3,4, considering that 40% of CCA patients and around 25% of PDAC patients harbor actionable genetic mutations5,6. When tumor tissue is insufficient, liquid biopsies using cfDNA can be considered3. Liquid biopsy of bile, collected during an Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in malignant biliary stricture cases, could potentially detect therapeutic targets.

Aims & Methods

This prospective proof-of-concept pilot study aims to assess NGS-based cfDNA analysis in bile as a novel liquid biopsy for detecting genetic mutations, and specifically actionable mutations, compared to tissue NGS.
19 CCA and 9 PDAC patients with malignant biliary stenosis undergoing ERCP in a tertiary hospital (2017-2020) were included. Bile samples were collected during the first ERCP and the Pathological Anatomy department selected tissue samples with ≥40% tumor content. Massive sequencing of DNA libraries was performed using the Pan-Cancer PanelTM (52-genes) for bile samples, and the OncomineTM Comprehensive Assay Panel v3 (161 genes) for tissue.

Results

Concerning CCA patients, bile NGS identified all patients with mutations (19/19) opposite to 84.3% (16/19) of patients in tissue. Bile NGS identified 7 patients (37%) with actionable mutations, none was detected in tissue. We detected 47/49 mutations in bile NGS vs. 22/49 in tissue. High concordance was observed: 91% (20/22) of tissue mutations were also in bile. Regarding actionable mutations considered in ESMO guidelines3; 7 were detected in bile NGS, none detected in tissue. The actionable mutations identified were ERBB2 (5), IDH2 (1), and KRASG12C(1).
In the PDAC group, bile NGS identified 89% (8/9) of patients with mutations, compared to 66.6% (6/9) of patients in tissue. Bile NGS identified 5 patients (55%) with actionable mutations vs. 4 (44%) in tissue. Bile NGS detected 16/18 mutations in bile in contrast to 12/18 in tissue. High concordance was observed: 83.3% (10/12) of tissue mutations were also in bile. NGS in bile detected 6 actionable mutations considered in ESMO guidelines4,; KRASG12D (5) and ERBB3, compared to 4 in tissue; KRASG12D.

Conclusion

These results highlight the potential of bile liquid biopsy in detecting actionable mutations; bile NGS increased the diagnosis sensibility and the number of mutations detected, compared with tissue NGS, which could allow more patients to be considered for targeted therapies. This approach does not require histological material consumption and collecting bile during an ERCP is simple and secure. In addition, NGS technology is available in all molecular laboratories. We consider that the application of liquid biopsy in bile can be accessible and an effective tool, with direct and immediate clinical implementation, improving precision medicine strategies and the therapeutic management of CCA and PDAC patients with biliary stenosis.

References

1. Banales JM, Marin JJG, Lamarca A, Rodrigues PM, Khan SA, Roberts LR, et al. Cholangiocarcinoma 2020: the next horizon in mechanisms and management. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Sep;17(9):557-588. Epub 2020 Jun 30.
2.Park W, Chawla A, O’Reilly EM. Pancreatic Cancer: A Review. JAMA. 2021 Sep 7;326(9):851–62.3.
3.Vogel A, Ducreux M; ESMO Guidelines Committee. ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline interim update on the management of biliary tract cancer. ESMO Open. 2025 Jan;10(1):104003. Epub 2024 Dec 17.
4.Conroy T, Pfeiffer P, Vilgrain V, Lamarca A, Seufferlein T, O’Reilly EM, et al. Pancreatic cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2023 Nov;34(11):987–1002.
5. Gilbert TM, Randle L, Quinn M, McGreevy O, O'leary L, Young R, et al. Molecular biology of cholangiocarcinoma and its implications for targeted therapy in patient management. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2025 Feb;51(2):108352. Epub 2024 Apr 17
6. Boileve A, Smolenschi C, Lambert A, Boige V, Tarabay A, Valery M, et al. Role of molecular biology in the management of pancreatic cancer. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2024 Jul 15;16(7):2902-2914.

BILE LIQUID BIOPSY IN PANCREATOBILIARY TUMORS: A NOVEL APPROACH TO DETECT ACTIONABLE MUTATIONS

Javier Rández-Garbayo 1, Maria Rullan Iriarte 2, Diary Fall 3, Silvia Pinto Martínez 2, Patricia de Miguel 2, David Ruiz-Clavijo Garcia 2, Belen GONZÁLEZ DE LA HIGUERA CARNICER 2, Federico Bolado Concejo 2, Daniel Oyón 4, Irene Amat 2, David Guerrero-Setas 2, Ana Purroy 1, Juan Carrascosa Gil 2, Vanesa Jusué Irurita 2, Ignacio Fernández-Urién Sainz 2, María Arechederra 5, Carmen Berasain 5, Juan Jose Vila 2, Matias A. Avila 5, Jesús M. Urman 2

1 Navarrabiomed, Pamplona, Spain|||Navarra Institute for Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain

2 Navarra University Hospital, Pamplona, Spain|||Navarra Institute for Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain

3 Navarra University Hospital, Pamplona, Spain

4 Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain|||Navarra Institute for Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain

5 Center of Applied Medicine (CIMA) / University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain|||Navarra Institute for Health Research, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain

Event

UEG Week Berlin 2025

Topics

Digestive Oncology Immunology Pancreas Surgery Hepatobiliary

Submission format

Abstract

Session

PDAC surveillance and treatment: The how's and why's

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025
UEG Presentation
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky
HCC: Novel treatment options in advanced diseases

Log in to access this content.

Free for all myUEG account holders. Your access level is set automatically based on your occupation. Medical professionals get full access to all content. If you are a non-medical user, you can only access UEG Week content from congresses you attended.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

HCC: Novel treatment options in advanced diseases

Najib Ben Khaled 1

1 LMU Munich, Munich, Germany

Event

UEG Week Berlin 2025

Topics

Digestive Oncology Hepatobiliary Mechanisms & Personalised Medicine Radiology & Imaging

Session

Advancement in management of primary liver tumors

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025
UEG Presentation
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky
Acute pancreatitis: When to reserve an ITU bed?

Log in to access this content.

Free for all myUEG account holders. Your access level is set automatically based on your occupation. Medical professionals get full access to all content. If you are a non-medical user, you can only access UEG Week content from congresses you attended.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

Acute pancreatitis: When to reserve an ITU bed?

Georg Beyer 1

1 University Hospital LMU Munich, München, Germany

Event

UEG Week Berlin 2025

Topics

Colorectal Hepatobiliary Pancreas

Session

Predicting disease severity

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025
UEG Presentation
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky
LINERIXIBAT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVES CHOLESTATIC PRURITUS IN PRIMARY BILIARY CHOLANGITIS: RESULTS OF THE PIVOTAL PHASE 3 GLISTEN TRIAL

Log in to access this content.

Free for all myUEG account holders. Your access level is set automatically based on your occupation. Medical professionals get full access to all content. If you are a non-medical user, you can only access UEG Week content from congresses you attended.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

Introduction

Cholestatic pruritus is common, debilitating and undertreated in patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). Here, we describe the results of GLISTEN (NCT04950127), a Phase 3 study investigating the efficacy and safety of the ileal bile acid transporter inhibitor linerixibat for pruritus in PBC.

Aims & Methods

In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study, patients with PBC and moderate-to-severe pruritus received oral linerixibat 40 mg or placebo twice daily. Pruritus severity and pruritus-related sleep interference were assessed using a 0–10 numerical rating scale. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in worst itch over 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included: at Week 2, change in worst itch; over 24 weeks, change in sleep interference; at Week 24, proportion of responders (≥ 2-, ≥ 3-, ≥ 4-point reduction in worst itch) and analysis of responses to 2 patient global impression items (itch severity and change). Safety endpoints included adverse event (AE) reporting.

Results

238 patients were randomised; 95% were female, itch severity was mean (standard deviation [SD]) 7.34 (1.54), 52% had alkaline phosphatase < 1.67 times upper limit of normal, and 47% were receiving stable therapy for pruritus. Pruritus improvement over 24 weeks was significantly greater with linerixibat than placebo: least-squares (LS) mean change -2.86 versus -2.15, adjusted mean difference -0.72; p = 0.001. At Week 24, the observed mean (SD) difference from baseline in pruritus was -3.66 (2.50) with linerixibat and -2.82 (2.32) with placebo. The effect of linerixibat was rapid and superior to placebo at Week 2: LS mean change -1.78 versus -1.07, adjusted mean difference -0.71; p < 0.001. Linerixibat also significantly improved pruritus-related sleep interference over 24 weeks versus placebo: LS mean change ‑2.77 versus -2.24, adjusted mean difference -0.53; p = 0.024. At Week 24, more patients on linerixibat than placebo achieved a ≥ 2-point (68% vs 64%), ≥ 3-point (56% vs 43%) or ≥ 4-point (41% vs 29%) reduction in pruritus and a higher proportion of linerixibat than placebo-treated patients reported their pruritus was very much improved (55% vs 37%) or absent (21% vs 9%). AEs reported more frequently with linerixibat than placebo were predominantly gastrointestinal (GI), including diarrhoea (61% vs 18% of patients) and abdominal pain (18% vs 3% of patients); 4% of patients in the linerixibat group discontinued treatment due to diarrhoea.

Conclusion

In patients with PBC and moderate-to-severe pruritus, linerixibat rapidly and significantly improved pruritus and pruritus-related sleep interference versus placebo. While GI AEs were more common with linerixibat than placebo, they rarely led to treatment discontinuation.

Disclosure

Funded by GSK. Various authors declare conflicts of interest as consultants, employee, recipients of grants and stockholders. These will be reported in full during the presentation.

LINERIXIBAT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVES CHOLESTATIC PRURITUS IN PRIMARY BILIARY CHOLANGITIS: RESULTS OF THE PIVOTAL PHASE 3 GLISTEN TRIAL

Gideon M. Hirschfield 1, Christopher L. Bowlus 2, David Jones 3, Andreas E. Kremer 4, Marlyn J. Mayo 5, Atsushi Tanaka 6, Pietro Andreone 7, Jidong Jia 8, Qinglong Jin 9, Ricardo Macias-Rodriguez 10, Alexander R. Cobitz 11, Brooke M. Currie 11, Ciara Gorey 12, Ivana Lazic 12, Danielle J. Podmore 12, Andrea Ribiero 13, Jennifer B. Shannon 14, Brandon Swift 14, Megan M. McLaughlin 11, Cynthia Levy 15

1 Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Canada

2 University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, United States

3 Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom

4 University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

5 University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, Dallas, United States

6 Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

7 Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Modena and Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy

8 Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

9 The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China

10 Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico

11 GSK, Collegeville, United States

12 GSK, London, United Kingdom

13 GSK, Madrid, Spain

14 GSK, Durham, United States

15 University of Miami, Miami, United States

Event

UEG Week Berlin 2025

Topics

Hepatobiliary Immunology Mechanisms & Personalised Medicine

Submission format

Abstract

Session

Advances in management of immune-mediated biliary disease

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025
UEG Presentation
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky
PREDICTORS OF BIOLOGICS/JAKI USE, SURGERIES, AND HOSPITALISATIONS IN A NEWLY DIAGNOSED COHORT OF IBD PATIENTS: LONG-TERM OUTCOMES FROM THE NATIONWIDE EPIDEMIBD STUDY OF GETECCU

Log in to access this content.

Free for all myUEG account holders. Your access level is set automatically based on your occupation. Medical professionals get full access to all content. If you are a non-medical user, you can only access UEG Week content from congresses you attended.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

Introduction

Factors influencing the exposure to targeted therapies (biologics/JAKi), intestinal resections and hospitalisations in newly diagnosed IBD patients have been scarcely studied.

Aims & Methods

Aim: To identify predictive factors of exposure to biologics/JAKi, surgeries, and hospitalisations within the first five years in IBD patients.
Methods: Prospective, population-based, nationwide registry. Adult patients diagnosed with IBD [Crohn’s disease (CD), ulcerative colitis (UC) or IBD unclassified (IBD-U)] during 2017 in the 17 Spanish regions were included. Patients who consented were followed-up for 5 years after diagnosis. Multivariate analyses were performed to identify the predictive factors for biologics/JAKi use, surgeries, and hospitalisations. To this end, only abdominal surgeries were analysed, and early treatment with immunomodulators or biologics/JAKi drugs were considered if these had been prescribed within the first six months of diagnosis.

Results

A total of 1,526 patients diagnosed with CD and 1,633 with UC were included. Regarding the predictors of exposure to biologics/JAKi treatments, we observed that younger age, more aggressive phenotype of CD and greater extent of UC were associated with a higher risk of exposure (table 1). Furthermore, smoking was associated with a higher likelihood of exposure to biologics/JAKi drugs in patients with CD (HR=1.33, 95%CI=1.11-1.60) while in UC patients it was associated with a lower risk (HR=0.56, 95%CI=0.35-0.89). Concerning surgeries (table 1), early treatment with immunomodulators was associated with a lower risk in patients with CD (HR=0.33, 95%CI=0.22-0.49), whereas early use of biologics/JAKi drugs was associated with a higher likelihood of surgery in patients with UC (HR=11.86, 95%CI=4.62-30.42). Finally, the exposure to biologics/JAKi drugs was associated with a lower risk of hospital admissions both in patients with CD (HR=0.37, 95%CI=0.24-0.56) and UC (HR=0.45, 95%CI=0.22-0.91) (table 1).

Table 1: Predictors of biologics/JAKi use (A), surgeries (B) and hospitalisations (C) in patients with Corhn´s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)

A
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
CD
​
​Age
​Family history of IBD
​Smoker
​Behaviour disease
B1 (inflammatory)
B2 (stricturing)
B3 (fistulising)
Perianal
HR (95% CI)
​
0.99 (0.98-1.00)
1.29 (1.06-1.57)
1.26 (1.06-1.50)

Ref
1.89 (1.50-2.39)
2.35 (1.79-3.10)
1.86 (1.47-2.35)
P-value
​
<0.001
0.010
0.002


<0.001
<0.001
<0.001

UC
​
Age
Smoker
Extension
Proctitis
Left-side colitis
Pancolitis


0.99 (0.99-1.00)
0.56 (0.35-0.89)

Ref
2.33 (1.62-3.36)
5.02 (3.59-7.03)


0.047
0.015


<0.001
<0.001
BCD
​
Behaviour disease
B1 (inflammatory)
B2 (stricturing)
B3 (fistulising)
Exposure to biologics/JAKi before surgery
No exposure to treatment
Exposure to treatment
Early exposure to treatment
Exposure to Immunomodulators before surgery
No exposure to treatment
Exposure to treatment
Early exposure to treatment
HR (95% CI)


Ref
5.52 (3.62-8.42)
8.68 (5.55-13.58)

Ref
0.73 (0.45-1.78)
1.29 (0.84-1.98)

Ref
0.23 (0.11-0.46)
0.33 (0.22-0.49)

P-value



<0.001
<0.001


0.197
0.245


<0.001
<0.001

UC
​
Extension
Proctitis
Left-side colitis
Pancolitis
Exposure to biologics/JAKi before surgery
No exposure to treatment
Exposure to treatment
Early exposure to treatment
Exposure to Immunomodulators before surgery
No exposure to treatment
Exposure to treatment
Early exposure to treatment
HR (95% CI)


Ref
2.00 (0.53-7.53)
2.33 (0.64-8.45)


Ref
2.70 (0.93-7.87)
11.86 (4.62-30.42)


Ref
0.50 (0.16-1.58)
0.89 (0.37-2.15)
P-value



0.311
0.199



0.068
<0.001



0.238
0.973
C
CD
​
Smoker
Behaviour disease
B1 (inflammatory)
B2 (stricturing)
B3 (fistulising)
Exposure to biologics/JAKi before hospitalisation
No exposure to treatment
Exposure to treatment
Early exposure to treatment
Exposure to Immunomodulators before hospitalisation
No exposure to treatment
Exposure to treatment
Early exposure to treatment
HR (95% CI)

1.31 (1.09-1.57)

Ref
1.69 (1.33-2.15)
1.63 (1.27-2.09)


Ref
0.37 (0.24-0.56)
0.48 (0.32-0.72)


Ref
0.39 (0.25-0.60)
0.59 (0.44-0.79)
P-value

0.004


<0.001
<0.001



<0.001
<0.001



<0.001
<0.001

UC
​
Extension
Proctitis
Left-side colitis
Pancolitis
Exposure to biologics/JAKi before hospitalisation
No exposure to treatment
Exposure to treatment
Early exposure to treatment
Exposure to Immunomodulators before hospitalisation
No exposure to treatment
Exposure to treatment
Early exposure to treatment
HR (95% CI)


Ref
4.02 (1.62-3.36)
10.77 (0.67-8.65)


Ref
0.45 (0.22-0.91)
0.63 (0.19-2.07)


Ref
0.67 (0.34-1.31)
0.77 (0.38-1.57)
P-value



<0.001
<0.001



0.027
0.444



0.245
0.475

Conclusion

The exposure to biologics/JAKi drugs is mediated by the more aggressive phenotype of CD, greater extent of UC, and younger patient age. The use of biologics/JAKi drugs, as currently practiced, is associated with a lower risk of hospitalisations but does not reduce the need for surgery, even when administered early. There is an unmet need for more accurate identification of patients who require these treatments to modify the natural course of the disease.

Disclosure

SR has received support for conference attendance, speaker fees, research support, and consulting fees from AbbVie, Adacyte, Faes Pharma, Ferring, Tillots, Galapagos, Janssen, Pfizer, and Lilly.
RF has received support for conference attendance, and research support from AbbVie, Faes Pharma, Ferring, Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda, and Galapagos.
RC: has received support from Janssen, Johnson&Johnson, Ferring, Abbvie, Falk, Pfizer y Galápagos.
AN: has received financial support for travelling and educational activities from Pfizer, Abbvie, Takeda, Janssen, Tillotts Pharma and Ferring.
JPG has served as a speaker, a consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, Abbvie, Hospira, Pfizer, Kern Pharma, Biogen, Takeda, Janssen, Roche, Ferring, Faes Farma, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Falk Pharma, Tillotts Pharma, Chiesi, Casen Fleet, Gebro Pharma, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Vifor Pharma.
MC has served as a speaker, or has received research or education funding from MSD, Abbvie, Hospira, Pfizer, Takeda, Janssen, Ferring, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Falk Pharma, Tillotts Pharma.

PREDICTORS OF BIOLOGICS/JAKI USE, SURGERIES, AND HOSPITALISATIONS IN A NEWLY DIAGNOSED COHORT OF IBD PATIENTS: LONG-TERM OUTCOMES FROM THE NATIONWIDE EPIDEMIBD STUDY OF GETECCU

Ana Garre Vázquez 1, Andrea Núñez Ortiz 2, Saioa Rubio Iturria 3, María Teresa Diz-Lois Palomares 4, Sabino Riestra 5, Horacio Alonso-Galán 6, Estela Fernández-Salgado 7, Rocío Ferreiro-Iglesias 8, Milagros Vela Gonzalez 9, Ángel Ponferrada-Díaz 10, Eugenia Sánchez Rodríguez 11, Vicent Hernández 12, Lara Arias García 13, Jesús Barrio 14, Jose Maria Huguet 15, Daniel Ginard 16, Montserrat Rivero 17, Maria Isabel Vera Mendoza 18, Inmaculada Alonso-Abreu 19, JOSE MANUEL BENITEZ CANTERO 20, Mariam Aguas 21, Iago Rodríguez-Lago 22, Xavier Calvet 23, Luis Fernández-Salazar 24, Ana Echarri Piudo 25, María Teresa Arroyo-Villarino 26, Mercè Navarro 27, Pablo Vega 28, Monica Sierra 29, ELENA OTILIA GUERRA DEL RIO CÁRDENES 30, Raquel Vicente Lidón 31, María José Casanova 1, Pablo Navarro Cortés 32, Jone Ortiz de zarate 33, Pilar Varela Trastoy 34, Katerina Spicakova 35, Ana Gutiérrez-Casbas 36, María Dolores Martín-Arranz 37, Concepcion Piñero 38, Alvaro Hernández Martínez 39, Emilio a Torrella Cortes 40, Jose Miguel Marrero Monroy 41, Rufo Lorente Poyatos 42, Lidia Martí Romero 43, Orencio Bosch 44, José María Duque-Alcorta 45, Montserrat Aceituno 46, HIPÓLITO FERNÁNDEZ 47, Javier P. Gisbert 1, María Chaparro 1

1 Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Madrid, Spain

2 Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Sevilla, Spain

3 Hospital Universitario de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

4 Hospital Universitario A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain

5 Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias and ISPA, Oviedo, Spain

6 Hospital Universitario Donostia and Instituto Biogipuzkoa, San Sebastián, Spain

7 Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Pontevedra, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur, Pontevedra, Spain

8 , Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain

9 Complejo Hospitalario Universitario Ntra. Sra. de Candelaria, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain

10 Hospital Universitario Infanta Leonor, Madrid, Spain

11 Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain

12 Hospital Álvaro Cunqueiro, Estrutura Organizativa de Xestión Integrada de Vigo, Vigo, Spain

13 Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Burgos, Spain

14 Hospital Universitario Rio Hortega, Valladolid, Spain

15 Consorcio Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain

16 Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain

17 Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla and IDIVAL, Santander, Spain

18 Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain

19 Hospital Universitario de Canarias (H.U.C.), Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain

20 Hospital Universitario Reina Sofia and IMIBIC, Cordoba, Spain

21 Hospital Universitari i Politecnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain

22 Hospital de Galdakao-Usansolo, Vizcaya, Spain

23 Hospital de Sabadell, Institut Universitari Parc Taulí, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, CIBEREHD., Sabadell, Spain

24 Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain

25 Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Ferrol, A Coruña, Spain

26 Hospital Clínico Universitario “Lozano Blesa”, IIS Aragón and CIBERehd, Zaragoza, Spain

27 Hospital de Sant Joan Despí Moisès Broggi, Barcelona, Spain

28 Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Ourense, Ourense, Spain

29 Complejo Asistencial Universitario de León, León, Spain

30 Hospital Universitario de Gran Canaria Dr. Negrín, Las Palmas, Spain

31 Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain

32 Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valencia, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain

33 Hospital Universitario de Basurto, Bilbao, Spain

34 Hospital de Cabueñes, Gijón, Spain

35 Hospital Universitario de Araba, Vitoria, Spain

36 Hospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis and CIBERehd, Alicante, Spain

37 Hospital Universitario de La Paz, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de La Paz, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

38 Hospital Universitario de Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain

39 Complejo Hospitalario de Especialidades Torrecárdenas, Almería, Spain

40 Hospital General Universitario J.M. Morales Meseguer, Murcia, Spain

41 Hospital Universitario Insular de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas, Spain

42 Hospital General Universitario de Ciudad Real, Ciudad real, Spain

43 Hospital Francesc De Borja de Gandía, Valencia, Spain

44 Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain

45 Hospital San Agustín, Aviles, Spain

46 Hospital Universitari Mutua Terrasa and CIBEREHD, Terrassa, Spain

47 Hospital San Pedro, Logroño, Spain

Event

UEG Week Berlin 2025

Topics

IBD

Submission format

Abstract

Session

Predicting clinical outcomes in IBD

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025
UEG Presentation
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky
IMPLEMENTING DISCARD STRATEGIES FOR DIMINUTIVE POLYPS USING CADX IN CLINICAL PRACTICE

Log in to access this content.

Free for all myUEG account holders. Your access level is set automatically based on your occupation. Medical professionals get full access to all content. If you are a non-medical user, you can only access UEG Week content from congresses you attended.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

Introduction

Histopathology remains the gold standard for the assessment of diminutive (≤5 mm) colorectal polyps, but it requires considerable cost and resources allocation. Optical diagnosis supported by artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promise, though its integration into clinical decision-making is limited. Our prior work showed the feasibility of replacing histopathology with AI-assisted human optical diagnosis in real-time practice.1

Aims & Methods

This study aimed to assess patient acceptance, and diagnostic performance of autonomous computer-aided optical diagnosis (CADx) when used as the sole determinant in resect-and-discard (RD) and diagnose-and-leave (DL) strategies.
This prospective study was conducted at the University of Montreal Hospital Center between August and November 2024 (ID: CER23.095, NCT06059378). Consecutive patients aged 45–80 years undergoing elective colonoscopy were approached and provided detailed information about the use of CADx, and the principles of the RD and DL strategies. For consented patients, procedures were performed using CADEYE system, which autonomously provided an optical diagnosis for detected diminutive polyps. Lesions predicted to be neoplastic were removed and discarded without histopathologic analysis (RD), while rectosigmoid lesions predicted to be hyperplastic were left in place (DL). All colonoscopies were video-recorded. To establish the reference standard, the videos of all polyps undergoing optical diagnosis were independently reviewed by two expert endoscopists. In cases of disagreement, a third reviewer arbitrated the final decision. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients consenting to undergo autonomous CADx. Secondary outcomes included the accuracy of the RD strategy, the negative predictive value (NPV) of the DL approach, and the agreement between CADx- and expert-driven surveillance interval recommendations.

Results

95/102 patients approached (93.1%) consented to undergo CADx-based optical diagnosis (mean age 65.7 years). Among 149 diminutive polyps detected (51 (34.2%) in the rectosigmoid and 98 (65.8%) in the proximal colon), CADx provided optical diagnosis in 98.7% (n=147) of cases. The RD and DL strategies were applied to 113 (76.9%) and 30 (20.4%) of polyps, respectively. After excluding indeterminate cases (n=5) and sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) (n=14), the RD strategy achieved an accuracy of 83.5% and the DL strategy demonstrated a NPV of 92.3%. Surveillance interval agreement between CADx and expert recommendations was 100% (95%CI 96.2-100.0). Sensitivity analyses showed reduced performance when SSLs were classified as neoplastic, but Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations (PIVI) benchmarks were met when SSLs were considered hyperplastic.

Table 1. Diagnostic performance of computer- assisted optical diagnosis (CADx), using expert optical diagnosis as the reference.

Diagnostic performance
(%; (95% CI))
Sensitivity
Specificity
PPV
NPV
Accuracy
RD77.6%
(65.78-86.89)
96.7%
(82.78-99.92)
98.1%
(86.29-99.72)
65.9%
(55.19-75.21)
83.5%
(74.60-90.27)
DL-96.0%
(79.65-99.90)
-92.3%
(91.72-92.86)
88.9%
(70.84-97.65)
RD: resect and discard; DL: diagnose and leave; NPV: negative predictive value; PPV: positive predictive value; CI: confidence interval.

Conclusion

Autonomous CADx achieved high patient acceptance and met key performance benchmarks for managing diminutive polyps using RD and DL strategies. These findings support its potential for safe, real-world implementation, though further development is needed to address current limitations in SSL detection and to enable quality optical diagnosis practice.

References

1. Taghiakbari M, Rex DK, Pohl H, et al. Pragmatic Resect and Discard Implementation Using Computer-Assisted Optical Polyp Diagnosis. Gastroenterology 2025;168:154-156.e2.

Disclosure

Daniel von Renteln has received research funding from ERBE Elektromedizin GmbH, Ventage, Pendopharm, Fujifilm and Pentax, and has received consultant or speaker fees from Boston Scientific Inc., ERBE Elektromedizin GmbH, and Pendopharm. Roupen Djinbachian has received speaker fees from Fujifilm. The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

IMPLEMENTING DISCARD STRATEGIES FOR DIMINUTIVE POLYPS USING CADX IN CLINICAL PRACTICE

Mahsa Taghiakbari 1, Douglas Kevin Rex 2, Heiko Pohl 3, Cesare Hassan 4, Roupen Djinbachian 1, Felix Huang 5, Daniel von Renteln 1

1 University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Canada

2 Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States

3 White River Junction VA Medical Center, New Hampshire, United States

4 IRCCS Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele MI, Italy

5 University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada

Event

UEG Week Berlin 2025

Topics

Endoscopy Colorectal

Submission format

Abstract

Session

Detecting polyps with the help of AI

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025
UEG Presentation
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky
The management of enterocutaneous fistulae

Log in to access this content.

Free for all myUEG account holders. Your access level is set automatically based on your occupation. Medical professionals get full access to all content. If you are a non-medical user, you can only access UEG Week content from congresses you attended.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

The management of enterocutaneous fistulae

Philip Allan 1

1 Oxford University Hospitals Nhs Ft, Oxford, United Kingdom

Event

UEG Week Berlin 2025

Topics

Endoscopy Nurses Small Intestine & Nutrition Oesophagus Surgery

Session

Mistakes in…: Upper GI

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025

The global reference point for the digestive health community

Platform Publisher

United European Gastroenterology

Wickenburggasse 1 1080 Vienna, Austria

Contact us

support@ueg.eu

ueg.eu

T: +43 1 997 1639

Legal

Terms & Conditions

Imprint

Privacy Policy

Explore

My Bookmarks

My recommendations

My fields of interest

© 2026 United European Gastroenterology

Change fields of interest

These fields are selected based on the interests in your myUEG profile.
Click the item to unselect it. You can select multiple items.