Abstract Background Perianal Crohn’s disease (pCD) is a morbid condition with a prevalence of approximately 20% in patients within 10 years of diagnosis of Crohn’s disease (CD) (1). The changing global epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) suggests that the rising incidence of CD, particularly in areas with currently low prevalence, may translate into an increased future burden of pCD (2). Given the significant impact this condition has on patient quality of life, a Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was established to define the top 10 priorities for future research into pCD, with an aim to develop a coordinated and inclusive research agenda, and anticipate future global needs. Methods The PSP was conducted in collaboration with the James Lind Alliance (JLA) using standardised JLA methodology. An initial survey was circulated to gather unanswered research questions from key stakeholders globally. From this, a longlist of 51 summary questions was formed. A second survey asked stakeholders to prioritise the 51 summary questions, and the highest ranking 19 questions were taken into the final workshop. During the final workshop, a panel of people with lived or professional experience of pCD ranked the top 10 research priorities, in a process facilitated by JLA advisors using Nominal Group Technique. Results 1200 individual research uncertainties were submitted by over 464 respondents, representing 30 countries. The majority of responses were from the United Kingdom (19%), the Netherlands (14%), Portugal (13%), the United States (US) (11%) and Brazil (9%). Patients provided 58% of responses, with 20% of responses coming from lower and middle-income countries according to the World Bank Criteria. From the 51 summary questions that were developed from these responses, the Top 10 research priorities were established in the final workshop (Figure 1). Themes that were identified in the Top 10 included elucidating the underlying causes of pCD, improving strategies for early diagnosis, determining predictors of quality of life, and advancing therapeutic approaches and quality of life across the full spectrum of disease. Conclusion This Global pCD PSP marks an importance advance towards stakeholder-driven, focused research in pCD, providing a roadmap for researchers, clinicians and funders to align future research with patient and clinician priorities. References: 1. Tsai L, McCurdy JD, Ma C, Jairath V, Singh S. Epidemiology and Natural History of Perianal Crohn’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Population-Based Cohorts. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. 2021 Nov 18;28(10):1477. 2. Hracs L, Windsor JW, Gorospe J, Cummings M, Coward S, Buie MJ, et al. Global evolution of inflammatory bowel disease across epidemiologic stages. Nature. 2025 Apr 30;642(8067):458. Conflict of interest: Mr. Pelly, Theo: No Conflicts Anand, Easan: Nil Gower, Jonathan: No conflict of interest Mannick, Sameer: No conflict of interest Hough, Tom: No conflict of interest Markham, Sarah: No conflict of interest Sebastian, Shaji: Grant: Takeda, Tillots pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, Abbvie, Johnson & Johnson, Olympus -Odin Vision Personal Fees: Tillots, Johnson & Johnson, Olympus Odin Vision, AbbVie, Takeda, Merck, Pharmacosmos, Amgen, Eli Lilly, BMS, Odin Vision Non-financial Support: Tillots, Takeda, AbbVie, Celltrion, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Alphasigma, Ferring Pharma Buskens, Christianne J.: Grant: C. Buskens has received an unrestricted grant from Boehringer Ingelheim and Roche Personal Fees: C. Buskens has received consultancy fees and/or speaker’s honoraria from Tillotts, Takeda, MSD and Janssen McCurdy, Jeffrey: Consulting fees from Abbvie,J & J, Takeda, Ferring, Fresenius Kabbi, Celltrion, Merck, Pfizer, and honoraria from Abbvie,J & J, Takeda, Ferring, Pfizer. Deepak, Parakkal: Parakkal Deepak has received research support under a sponsored research agreement unrelated to the data in the abstract from AbbVie, Johnson and Johnson, Sanofi, Merck, Teva, Direct Biologics, Tr1x, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Prometheus Biosciences, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Roche Genentech, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Spyre and Agomab, has received consulting fees from Johnson and Johnson, Abbvie, Merck, Sobi, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Sandoz and CorEvitas, LLC and has served on the board of the Srategic Alliance for Intercultural Advocacy in GI. Radmard, Amir Reza: No conflict of interest Stoker, Jaap: Institutional Litwin Grant from the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation. President of European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (unpaid). Lung, Phillip FC: No conflict of interest Kotze, Paulo Gustavo: Grant: Pfizer, Takeda Personal Fees: Abbvie, Johnson & Johnson, Ferring, Pfizer, Takeda, Celltrion Other: Abbvie, Janssen, Ferring, Pfizer, Takeda Younge, Lisa: Personal Fees: Abbvie, Takeda, Jannsen, Ferring Pharm Robinson, Denise: No conflict of interest Joshi, Shivani: Speaker Fees from Lilly Shakweh, Eathar: Honoraria from Takeda, Astrazeneca. Expert testimony fees from Takeda. Support for attending meetings from Takeda, Eli Lilly and Dr Falk. Hanna, Luke: None Singh, Harjeet: None Selvaraj, Kartheeswaran: No conflict of interest Abbas, Amira: No conflict of interest Khan, Yarunnessa: No conflict of interest Nightingale, Katie: No conflict of interest Powell, Nick: Grant: Takeda, BMS, Pfizer, Astra-Zeneca Personal Fees: Abbvie, Abivax, Allergan, Astra-Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Dr Falk Pharma UK Ltd, Ferring, Galapagos, GSK, Janssen, MSD, Roche, Pfizer, Sobi, Takeda, Tillotts Tozer, Philip: Personal Fees: Takeda - speakers fees, member of Inspire, and advisory boards Ferring - speakers fees Falk - speakers fees Tillott’s - speakers fees J & J - speakers fees Abbvie - speakers fees Hart, Ailsa: Grant: Takeda Personal Fees: Abbvie, Amgen, Arena, AZ, Falk, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Genentech/ Roche, GSK, Pfizer, Takeda, Napp, Pharmacosmos, Janssen (J & J), Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Galapagos, Alfasigma
Pelly et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: