This paper is the first in a series of two publications relating to the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] evidence-based consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn’s disease and concerns the methodology of the consensus process, and the classification, diagnosis and medical management of active and quiescent Crohn’s disease. Surgical management as well as special situations including management of perianal Crohn’s disease of this ECCO Consensus are covered in a subsequent second paper [Gionchetti et al JCC 2016].

This paper is the second in a series of two publications relating to the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] evidence-based consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn’s disease [CD] and concerns the surgical management of CD as well as special situations including management of perianal CD and extraintestinal manifestations. Diagnostic approaches and medical management of CD of this ECCO Consensus are covered in the first paper [Gomollon et al. JCC 2016].

This ECCO topical review of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, management and outcome of the two most common forms of inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, in elderly patients. The objective was to reach expert consensus to provide evidence-based guidance for clinical practice.

This ECCO topical review of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] focused on prediction, diagnosis, and management of fibrostenosing Crohn’s disease [CD]. The objective was to achieve evidence-supported, expert consensus that provides guidance for clinical practice.

The European Union offers opportunities for high-level of funding of collaborative European research. Calls are regularly published: after the end of the FP7 funding programme the new round of Horizon 2020 calls started in 2015. Several topics are relevant to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) challenges, including chronic disease management, biomarker discovery and new treatments developments. The aim of this Viewpoint article is to describe the new Horizon 2020 instrument and the project submission procedures, and to highlight these through the description of tips and tricks, taking advantage of four examples of successful projects in the field of IBD: the SADEL, IBD-BIOM, IBD Character and BIOCYCLE projects.

Background and Aim:

The aim of this survey was to find out the patients’ perspectives concerning biosimilars.

Methods:

An online survey consisting of 14 questions was made available between November 2014 and October 2015. Only respondents who had heard of biosimilars were asked to respond the final twelve questions.

Results:

A total of 1181 patients responded. Of these, 38% had heard of biosimilars. The respondents worried about biosimilars’ safety profile [47.0%], efficacy [40.3%], and molecular basis [35.0%]. Only 25.2% of the respondents had no concerns about biosimilars. Just over half [55.9%] of the respondents thought that the lower cost of the biosimilars should not come before their safety and efficacy. Only 12.5% of respondents felt that extrapolation made sense. The survey showed that 39.9% felt that patients should be systematically informed, and 26.7% felt that patient associations should be informed and able to give their opinions. It also revealed that 20.9% of the respondents would be against the idea of interchangeability if the patient was not aware; 65.7% of the respondents would want to know whether they were receiving the reference drug or the biosimilar, and have all necessary information in writing before the drug was administered. Only 31.0% of the respondents would be fully confident about biosimilars, even if they were prescribed and explained by the treating physician.

Conclusions:

Most patients were not familiar with biosimilars, and those who were had doubts and concerns about the biosimilars’ safety and efficacy. The patients wished to be informed and involved in decision-making concerning biosimilars.