person:boswob01 or changs05 or francf01 or latorm02 or axelrj01 or fayea02 or gq206 or shauka01 or suf03 or willir02 or popovv01 or pocham01 or gondat01 or goodma02 or grosss10 or haberg02 or hudesd01 or jacobi04 or khannl01 or liangp01 or maltel01 or northp02
Blood-based colorectal cancer screening: are we ready for the next frontier?
Endoscopist-Level and Procedure-Level Factors Associated With Increased Adenoma Detection With the Use of a Computer-Aided Detection Device
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:To investigate the impact of procedure-related and endoscopist-related factors on the effectiveness of a computer-aided detection (CADe) device in adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) detection. METHODS:The SKOUT clinical trial was conducted at 5 US sites. We present prespecified analyses of procedure-related and endoscopist-related factors, and association with APC across treatment and control cohorts. RESULTS:There were numeric increases in APC between SKOUT vs standard colonoscopy in community-based endoscopists, withdrawal time of ≥8 minutes, for endoscopists with >20 years of experience, and endoscopists with baseline adenoma detection rate <45%. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:The application of CADe devices in clinical practice should be carefully evaluated. Larger studies should explore differences in endoscopist-related factors for CADe.
Effect of Behavioral Interventions on the Uptake of Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Screening decreases colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, but uptake in the United States remains suboptimal. Prior studies have investigated the effect of various interventions on overall colorectal cancer screening and stool-based testing, but the effect on colonoscopy-the predominant screening test in the United States-has not been fully examined. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of behavioral interventions on screening colonoscopy uptake. METHODS:We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases through January 2022 for controlled trials that assessed the effect of behavioral interventions on screening colonoscopy uptake. All titles, abstracts, and articles were screened by at least 2 independent reviewers. Odds ratios were extracted from the original article or calculated from the raw data. The primary outcome was the relative increase in screening colonoscopy completion with any behavioral intervention. We performed random-effects meta-analysis, with subgroup analysis by type of intervention. RESULTS:A total of 25 studies with 30 behavioral interventions were analyzed. The most common interventions were patient navigation (n = 11) and multicomponent interventions (n = 6). Overall, behavioral interventions increased colonoscopy completion by 54% compared with controls (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-1.88). Patient navigation (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.35-2.34) and multicomponent interventions (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.17-2.89) had the strongest effect on colonoscopy completion among interventions examined in multiple studies. Significant heterogeneity was observed both overall and by intervention type. There was no evidence of publication bias. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Behavioral interventions increase screening colonoscopy completion and should be adopted in clinical practice. In particular, patient navigation and multicomponent interventions are the best-studied and most effective interventions.
Suboptimal Guideline Adherence and Biomarker Underutilization in Monitoring of Post-operative Crohn's Disease
BACKGROUND:Crohn's disease recurrence after ileocecal resection is common. Guidelines suggest colonoscopy within 6-12 months of surgery to assess for post-operative recurrence, but use of adjunctive monitoring is not protocolized. We aimed to describe the state of monitoring in post-operative Crohn's. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective study of patients with Crohn's after ileocolic resection with ≥ 1-year follow-up. Patients were stratified into high and low risk based on guidelines. Post-operative biomarker (C-reactive protein, fecal calprotectin), cross-sectional imaging, and colonoscopy use were assessed. Biomarker, radiographic, and endoscopic post-operative recurrence were defined as elevated CRP/calprotectin, active inflammation on imaging, and Rutgeerts ≥ i2b, respectively. Data were stratified by surgery year to assess changes in practice patterns over time. P-values were calculated using Wilcoxon test and Fisher exact test. RESULTS:Of 901 patients, 53% were female and 78% high risk. Median follow-up time was 60 m for LR and 50 m for high risk. Postoperatively, 18% low and 38% high risk had CRPs, 5% low and 10% high risk had calprotectins, and half of low and high risk had cross-sectional imaging. 29% low and 38% high risk had colonoscopy by 1 year. Compared to pre-2015, time to first radiography (584 days vs. 398 days) and colonoscopy (421 days vs. 296 days) were significantly shorter for high-risk post-2015 (P < 0.001). Probability of colonoscopy within 1 year increased over time (0.48, 2011 vs. 0.92, 2019). CONCLUSION:Post-operative colonoscopy completion by 1 year is low. The use of CRP and imaging are common, whereas calprotectin is infrequently utilized. Practice patterns are shifting toward earlier monitoring.
Efficacy and safety of the siRNA JNJ-73763989 and the capsid assembly modulator JNJ-56136379 (bersacapavir) with nucleos(t)ide analogues for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection (REEF-1): a multicentre, double-blind, active-controlled, randomised, phase 2b trial
BACKGROUND:JNJ-73763989 (JNJ-3989), a small interfering RNA, targets all hepatitis B virus (HBV) RNAs, reducing all HBV proteins. JNJ-56136379 (JNJ-6379; also known as bersacapavir), a capsid assembly modulator, inhibits HBV replication. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy (ie, antiviral activity) and safety of these therapeutics in combination with nucleos(t)ide analogues in patients with chronic hepatitis B. METHODS:The REEF-1 multicentre, double-blind, active-controlled, randomised, phase 2b study was done at 108 hospitals or outpatient centres across 19 countries in Asia, Europe, and North and South America. We included patients aged 18-65 years with chronic hepatitis B (defined as HBsAg positivity at screening and at least 6 months before screening or alternative markers of chronicity [eg, HBV DNA]), including those not currently treated, virologically suppressed, HBeAg positive, and HBeAg negative. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:2:2:2:2) via permuted block randomisation according to a computer-generated schedule to receive oral nucleos(t)ide analogues once per day plus placebo (control group); oral JNJ-6379 250 mg daily plus nucleos(t)ide analogues (JNJ-6379 dual group); nucleos(t)ide analogues plus subcutaneously injected JNJ-3989 at doses of 40 mg (JNJ-3989 dual 40 mg group), 100 mg (JNJ-3989 dual 100 mg group), or 200 mg (JNJ-3989 dual 200 mg group) every 4 weeks; or JNJ-6379 250 mg plus JNJ-3989 100 mg every 4 weeks plus nucleos(t)ide analogues (triple group) for 48 weeks followed by a follow-up phase. An interactive web response system provided concealed treatment allocation, and investigators remained masked to the intervention groups until the primary analysis at week 48. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients meeting predefined nucleos(t)ide analogue-stopping criteria (alanine aminotransferase <3 × upper limit of normal, HBV DNA below the lower limit of quantitation, HBeAg negative, and HBsAg <10 IU/mL) at week 48. All patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the analysis population used for primary efficacy assessment, excluding those who withdrew because of COVID-19-related reasons, withdrew before week 44, or had no efficacy data (ie, the modified intention-to-treat population). Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drugs. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03982186. The study has been completed. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Between Aug 1, 2019, and April 26, 2022, 470 patients (310 [66%] male and 244 [52%] White) were randomly assigned: 45 to the control group, 48 to the JNJ-6379 dual group, 93 to the JNJ-3989 dual 40 mg group, 93 to the JNJ-3989 dual 100 mg group, 96 to the JNJ-3989 dual 200 mg group, and 95 to the triple group. At week 48, five (5%; 90% CI 2-11) of 91 patients in the JNJ-3989 dual 40 mg group, 15 (16%; 10-24) of 92 in the JNJ-3989 dual 100 mg group, 18 (19%; 13-27) of 94 in the JNJ-3989 dual 200 mg group, eight (9%; 4-15) of 94 in the triple group, and one (2%; 0-10) of 45 in the control group met nucleos(t)ide analogue stopping criteria. No patients in the JNJ-6379 dual group met stopping criteria. 38 (81%) patients who met nucleos(t)ide analogue-stopping criteria at week 48 were virologically suppressed and HBeAg negative at baseline. Ten (2%) of 470 patients had serious adverse events during the treatment phase, and two patients (one each from the JNJ-3989 dual 200 mg group [exercise-related rhabdomyolysis] and the triple group [increase in ALT or AST]) had serious adverse events related to study treatment. During follow-up, 12 (3%) of 460 patients had a serious adverse event; one (<1%), a gastric ulcer, was considered to be related to nucleos(t)ide analogues and occurred in a patient from the JNJ-3989 dual 200 mg group. 29 (6%) of 460 patients in the treatment phase and in ten (2%) of 460 patients in the follow-up phase had grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Five (1%) of 470 patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events, and there were no deaths. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Although treatment with JNJ-3989 led to a dose-dependent response for meeting nucleos(t)ide analogue-stopping criteria, it rarely led to HBsAg seroclearance. However, most patients treated with JNJ-3989 had clinically meaningful reductions in HBsAg that might contribute to a liver environment conducive to better immune control and, in turn, might improve the response to immune-modulating therapies. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:Janssen Research and Development.
Procedural-Related Bleeding in Hospitalized Patients With Liver Disease (PROC-BLeeD): An International, Prospective, Multicenter Observational Study
BACKGROUND & AIMS:Hospitalized patients with cirrhosis frequently undergo multiple procedures. The risk of procedural-related bleeding remains unclear, and management is not standardized. We conducted an international, prospective, multicenter study of hospitalized patients with cirrhosis undergoing nonsurgical procedures to establish the incidence of procedural-related bleeding and to identify bleeding risk factors. METHODS:Hospitalized patients were prospectively enrolled and monitored until surgery, transplantation, death, or 28 days from admission. The study enrolled 1187 patients undergoing 3006 nonsurgical procedures from 20 centers. RESULTS:A total of 93 procedural-related bleeding events were identified. Bleeding was reported in 6.9% of patient admissions and in 3.0% of the procedures. Major bleeding was reported in 2.3% of patient admissions and in 0.9% of the procedures. Patients with bleeding were more likely to have nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (43.9% vs 30%) and higher body mass index (BMI; 31.2 vs 29.5). Patients with bleeding had a higher Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score at admission (24.5 vs 18.5). A multivariable analysis controlling for center variation found that high-risk procedures (odds ratio [OR], 4.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.44-8.84), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.46-3.86), and higher BMI (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.10-1.80) independently predicted bleeding. Preprocedure international normalized ratio, platelet level, and antithrombotic use were not predictive of bleeding. Bleeding prophylaxis was used more routinely in patients with bleeding (19.4% vs 7.4%). Patients with bleeding had a significantly higher 28-day risk of death (hazard ratio, 6.91; 95% CI, 4.22-11.31). CONCLUSIONS:Procedural-related bleeding occurs rarely in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. Patients with elevated BMI and decompensated liver disease who undergo high-risk procedures may be at risk to bleed. Bleeding is not associated with conventional hemostasis tests, preprocedure prophylaxis, or recent antithrombotic therapy.
AGA Clinical Practice Update on Evaluation and Management of Belching, Abdominal Bloating, and Distention: Expert Review
DESCRIPTION/METHODS:Belching, bloating, and abdominal distention are all highly prevalent gastrointestinal symptoms and account for some of the most common reasons for patient visits to outpatient gastroenterology practices. These symptoms are often debilitating, affecting patients' quality of life, and contributing to work absenteeism. Belching and bloating differ in their pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management, and there is limited evidence available for their various treatments. Therefore, the purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update is to provide best practice advice based on both controlled trials and observational data for clinicians covering clinical features, diagnostics, and management considerations that include dietary, gut-directed behavioral, and drug therapies. METHODS:This Expert Review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. These best practice advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature based on clinical trials, the more robust observational studies, and from expert opinion. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these best practice advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Clinical history and physical examination findings and impedance pH monitoring can help to differentiate between gastric and supragastric belching. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Treatment options for supragastric belching may include brain-gut behavioral therapies, either separately or in combination, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, diaphragmatic breathing, speech therapy, and central neuromodulators. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Rome IV criteria should be used to diagnose primary abdominal bloating and distention. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Carbohydrate enzyme deficiencies may be ruled out with dietary restriction and/or breath testing. In a small subset of at-risk patients, small bowel aspiration and glucose- or lactulose-based hydrogen breath testing may be used to evaluate for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Serologic testing may rule out celiac disease in patients with bloating and, if serologies are positive, a small bowel biopsy should be done to confirm the diagnosis. A gastroenterology dietitian should be part of the multidisciplinary approach to care for patients with celiac disease and nonceliac gluten sensitivity. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Abdominal imaging and upper endoscopy should be ordered in patients with alarm features, recent worsening symptoms, or an abnormal physical examination only. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Gastric emptying studies should not be ordered routinely for bloating and distention, but may be considered if nausea and vomiting are present. Whole gut motility and radiopaque transit studies should not be ordered unless other additional and treatment-refractory lower gastrointestinal symptoms exist to warrant testing for neuromyopathic disorders. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: In patients with abdominal bloating and distention thought to be related to constipation or difficult evacuation, anorectal physiology testing is suggested to rule out a pelvic floor disorder. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: When dietary modifications are needed (eg, low-fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols diet), a gastroenterology dietitian should preferably monitor treatment. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Probiotics should not be used to treat abdominal bloating and distention. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Biofeedback therapy may be effective for bloating and distention when a pelvic floor disorder is identified. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Central neuromodulators (eg, antidepressants) are used to treat bloating and abdominal distention by reducing visceral hypersensitivity, raising sensation threshold, and improving psychological comorbidities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: Medications used to treat constipation should be considered for treating bloating if constipation symptoms are present. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Psychological therapies, such as hypnotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, and other brain-gut behavior therapies may be used to treat patients with bloating and distention. BEST PRACTICE 15: Diaphragmatic breathing and central neuromodulators are used to treat abdominophrenic dyssynergia.
Preoperative Risk Factors for Adverse Events in Adults Undergoing Bowel Resection for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: 15-Year Assessment of ACS-NSQIP
IntroductionOlder adults with IBD are at higher risk for postoperative complications as compared to their younger counterparts, however factors contributing to this are unknown. We assessed risk factors associated with adverse IBD-related surgical outcomes, evaluated trends in emergency surgery, and explored differential risks by age.MethodsUsing the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database, we identified adults ≥18 years of age who underwent an IBD-related intestinal resection from 2005-2019. Our primary outcome included a 30-day composite of mortality, readmission, reoperation, and/or major postoperative complication.ResultsOverall, 49,746 intestinal resections were performed with 9,390 (18.8%) occurring among older adults with IBD. Nearly 37% of older adults experienced an adverse outcome as compared to 28.1% among younger adults with IBD (p<0.01). Among all adults with IBD, the presence of preoperative sepsis (aOR, 2.08; 95%CI 1.94-2.24), malnutrition (aOR, 1.22; 95%CI 1.14-1.31), dependent functional status (aOR, 6.92; 95%CI 4.36-11.57), and requiring emergency surgery (aOR, 1.50; 95%CI 1.38-1.64) increased the odds of an adverse postoperative outcome, with similar results observed when stratifying by age. Further, 8.8% of surgeries among older adults were emergent, with no change observed over time (p=0.16).DiscussionPreoperative factors contributing to the risk of an adverse surgical outcome are similar between younger and older individuals with IBD, and include elements such as malnutrition and functional status. Incorporating these measures into surgical decision-making can reduce surgical delays in older individuals at low-risk and help target interventions in those at high risk, transforming care for thousands of older adults with IBD.
A Review of Available Medical Therapies to Treat Moderate to Severe Inflammatory Bowel Disease in 2023
The treatment armamentarium for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has expanded rapidly in the past several years with new biologic and small molecule agents approved for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. This has made treatment selection more challenging with limited but evolving guidance as to where to position each medication. In this review, we discuss the efficacy data for each agent approved in the United States by reviewing their phase III trial data and other comparative effectiveness studies. Additionally, safety considerations and use in special populations is summarized with proposed algorithms for positioning therapies. The aim is to provide a synopsis of high impact data and aid in outpatient treatment decision making for IBD patients.
Gastric Cancer Risk Factors in a Veteran Population
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Risk factors for gastric cancer in the United States are not well understood, especially in populations with a low proportion of immigrants. We conducted a matched case-control study in a Veteran Affairs Medical Center to identify risk factors for gastric cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Gastric cancer patients and age- and sex-matched controls were identified in a 1:4 ratio from January 1, 1997 to October 31, 2018. Demographic, medical, endoscopic, and histologic data were extracted. We performed conditional logistic regression to estimate odds ratios and 95% CIs for associations between potential risk factors and gastric cancer. RESULTS:Most gastric cancer cases were diagnosed on initial endoscopy (71.4%). Of these, the most common presenting stage was stage IV (40.8%). Risk factors for gastric cancer included Black and Asian race and never or current (compared to former) drinkers, although Helicobacter pylori eradication and pernicious anemia were associated with decreased risk. CONCLUSIONS:The high proportion of late-stage gastric cancer diagnoses highlights the need for improved risk stratification as well as screening and surveillance protocols in the U.S. population. Racial disparities among veterans in an equal-access system necessitate further investigation into the etiology of these disparities.