Category Archives: Uncategorized

Update on Esophageal Motility Disorders

Posted on by

DA Patel et al. Gastroenterol 2022; 162: 1617-1634. Open Access: Esophageal Motility Disorders: Current Approach to Diagnostics and Therapeutics

Manometric classification of various esophageal motility disorders
based on CC v4.0. HRIM, high-resolution impedance manometry
Treatment options in patients with disorders of esophageal peristalsis after a careful endoscopy is performed to rule out a mechanical or mucosal disease (such as eosinophilic esophagitis
Impact of mucosal diseases, opioids, and connective tissue disease on esophageal motility. Figure shows presence of various secondary motility abnormalities, and the triangle indicates visual approximations of the prevalence of those motility abnormalities with each disease state. Most patients will have normal motility testing.

Eosinophilic Colitis Is Not a Typical EGID or IBD

Posted on by

T Shoda et al. Gastroenterol 2022; 162: 1635-1642. Open Access: Evaluating Eosinophilic Colitis as a Unique Disease Using Colonic Molecular Profiles: A Multi-Site Study

Methods: Subjects with EoC (n = 27) and controls (normal [NL, n = 20], Crohn’s disease [CD, n = 14]) were enrolled across sites associated with the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers. EoC was diagnosed as colonic eosinophilia (ascending ≥100, descending ≥85, sigmoid ≥65 eosinophils/high-power field) with related symptoms. Colon biopsies were subjected to RNA sequencing.

Key findings:

  • Among EoC and other EGIDs, there was minimal transcriptomic overlap and minimal evidence of a strong allergic type 2 immune response in EoC compared with other EGIDs
  • EoC transcriptome–based scores were reversible with disease remission and differentiated EoC from IBD, even after controlling for colonic eosinophil levels (P < .0001)

My take: The study indicates that eosinophilic colitis is likely unrelated to other eosinophilic GI disease and is likely unrelated to inflammatory bowel disease.

Related blog posts:

Position Paper for Pediatric Breath Testing

Posted on by

IJ Broekaert et al. JPGN 2022; 74: 123-127. Open access: An ESPGHAN Position Paper on the Use of Breath Testing in Paediatric Gastroenterology

This is a good article which provides pediatric dosing of breath testing agents and important considerations in methodology and interpretation. In addition, there are 22 graded recommendations (see below) –some may be surprising. For example, the breath testing is NOT recommended for diagnosis of H pylori but is recommended for determination of eradication therapy.

Related blog posts:

Dupilumab: FDA Approval for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Posted on by

U.S. FDA (5/20/22): FDA Approves First Treatment for Eosinophilic Esophagitis, a Chronic Immune Disorder

“Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Dupixent (dupilumab) to treat eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in adults and pediatric patients 12 years and older weighing at least 40 kilograms (which is about 88 pounds). Today’s action marks the first FDA approval of a treatment for EoE…”

“The efficacy and safety of Dupixent in EoE was studied in a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, placebo-controlled trial, that included two 24-week treatment periods (Part A and Part B)…In Part A of the trial, 60% of the 42 patients who received Dupixent achieved the pre-determined level of reduced eosinophils in the esophagus compared to 5% of the 39 patients who received a placebo…. In Part B, 59% of the 80 patients who received Dupixent achieved the pre-determined level of reduced eosinophils in the esophagus compared to 6% of the 79 patients who received a placebo”

My take: We will need to revise our patient handout and decide how best to position this very expensive therapy. Without insurance, Dupixent (2 pens of 300 mg/2 mL) costs $3,649.97 on GoodRx. For those with insurance, Dupixent has a manufacturer’s coupon (Dupixent MyWay).

Related blog posts:

Sandia Mountain Tram

ENTERPRISE Study: Vedolizumab for Perianal Fistulizing Crohn’s Disease

Posted on by

DA Schwartz et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20: 1059-1067. Open Access: Efficacy and Safety of 2 Vedolizumab Intravenous Regimens for Perianal Fistulizing Crohn’s Disease: ENTERPRISE Study

Methods: “Patients with moderately to severely active CD and 1–3 active perianal fistulae (identified on magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) received vedolizumab 300 mg intravenously at weeks 0, 2, 6, 14, and 22 (VDZ) or the same regimen plus an additional vedolizumab dose at week 10 (VDZ + wk10)… Enrollment was stopped prematurely because of recruitment challenges”

Key findings:

  • “Rapid and sustained fistula closure was observed; 53.6% (VDZ, 64.3%; VDZ + wk10, 42.9%) and 42.9% (VDZ, 50.0%; VDZ + wk10, 35.7%) of patients achieved ≥50% decrease in draining fistulae and 100% fistulae closure, respectively, at week 30”
  • “MRI healing, defined as the disappearance of T2 hyperintensity signal and absence of gadolinium contrast enhancement,3 was not reached in this study…gadolinium contrast enhancement showed improvement at week 30…MRI studies have shown that internal fistulae healing lags behind clinical remission by a median of 12 months”
Figure 1
Figure 2 B

The study findings are limited by relatively small size and lack of control group (eg. placebo or seton/antibiotic group). However, the rate of response in this study is significantly higher than placebo studies which have shown “~1 in 6” who experienced fistula closure.

My take: Vedolizumab is another option for treating Crohn’s disease with perianal fistula. Both regimens in this study were associated with response, though the additional 10-week dose (in one group) did not improve outcomes.

Related blog posts:

Work Disability with Celiac Disease

Posted on by

Most patients that I see with celiac disease (CD) do very well after diagnosis/implementation of dietary therapy. A recent study indicates a subset of patients have significant work disability as adults.

SR Bozorg et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20: 1068-1076. Open Access: Work Loss in Patients With Celiac Disease: A Population-based Longitudinal Study

In this large-scale nationwide study (part of the ESPRESSO study) from Sweden, the authors used prospectively recorded register data to estimate work loss in patients with CD in comparison to the general population, including the temporal relationship of work loss before and after diagnosis. This study included more than 16,000 patients with CD.

Key findings:

  • In 2015, patients with prevalent CD had a mean of 42.5 lost work days as compared with 28.6 in comparators
  • More than one-half of the work loss (60.1%) in patients with CD was derived from a small subgroup (7%), whereas 75.4% had no work loss
  • The annual mean difference between patients and comparators was 8.0 days of lost work 5 years before CD diagnosis, which grew to 13.7 days 5 years after diagnosis in the incident CD group (dx between 2008-2015)

In the discussion, the authors speculate about whether the work loss could be due to inadequate response to a gluten free diet; however, in this study, the authors found similar work loss between patients with CD with or without mucosal healing (only 25% underwent f/u biopsy).

My take: It would be interesting to see the pediatric corollary of work loss, namely school absenteeism and whether this is increased in a small subset as well. My suspicion is that the subset with increased work loss likely has a higher rate of functional disorders, in addition to CD, than the comparator group and probably accounts for a significant amount of the work disability.

Related blog posts:

This sign works better at keeping people from wandering off the trail than “area under restoration.”

Here’s Why Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Should Work

Posted on by

RC Ungaro et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2022; 28: 649-651. Impact of Thiopurine Exposure on Immunogenicity to Infliximab Is Negligible in the Setting of Elevated Infliximab Concentrations

Background: Whether proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (pTDM) is superior to reactive TDM (rTDM) is not entirely clear, though some studies have shown better outcomes with pTDM. Additionally, Colombel et al (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 1525-32) showed that antidrug antibodies during combination therapy were detected only in those with the lowest quartile of infliximab trough levels; this suggests that optimized monotherapy should be similarly effective to combination therapy.

Methods: The authors retrospectively analyzed a commercial laboratory database (Prometheus) with 3970 patients and paired 6-thioguanine (6-TGN) levels with infliximab (IFX) and antibodies to infliximab (ATIs)

Key findings:

  • “Those with higher levels of IFX had negligible benefit from concomitant thiopurine treatment in preventing ATIs.”
  • ATIs were detected in 9.9% of all patients. IFX level of >5 mcg/mL were associated with a very low risk of ATI (OR 0.05). “Immunogenicity was negligible (<3%) in the presence of IFX concentrations greater than 5 mcg/mL.”
  • 6-TGN levels (>125) were associated with lower risk of ATI, OR 0.42; though, this effect had a significant impact, only for those with with IFX <5 mcg/mL.
  • The authors note the prospective OPTIMIZE study (NCT04835506) should help determine the effectiveness of pTDM.

My take: In patients with IFX levels >5 mcg/mL, there does not appear to be much benefit for most patients from the addition of a thiopurine; this may not be true for those who are switching to a 2nd anti-TNF agent due to antidrug antibodies. This study supports pTDM to assure adequate IFX levels.

Related blog posts:

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition

White Sands National Park, New Mexico

AGA Expert Clinical Practice Update for Adults with GERD

Posted on by

R Yadiatpati et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20: 984-994. AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Personalized Approach to the Evaluation and Management of GERD: Expert Review

The general approach, outlined in Figure 1, is to empirically treat patients with typical GERD symptoms for 4-8 weeks with single-dose PPI. In those with response, the goal is to use the lowest effective dose and consider reflux testing (“offer endoscopy with prolonged wireless reflux monitoring”) if needing prolonged treatment (>1 yr). In those without a response, adjusting treatment (possibly change medication or change to twice a day) should be considered and reflux testing (off treatment) is recommended as well in those lacking response to treatment.

Some of the recommendations/best practice advice:

  • Clinicians should provide standardized educational material on GERD mechanisms, weight management, lifestyle and dietary behaviors, relaxation strategies, and awareness about the brain-gut axis relationship to patients with reflux symptoms.
  • Clinicians should emphasize safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the treatment of GERD.
  • Clinicians should provide patients presenting with troublesome heartburn, regurgitation, and/or non-cardiac chest pain without alarm symptoms a 4- to 8-week trial of single-dose PPI therapy. With inadequate response, dosing can be increased to twice a day or switched to a more effective acid suppressive agent once a day. When there is adequate response, PPI should be tapered to the lowest effective dose.
  • If troublesome heartburn, regurgitation, and/or non-cardiac chest pain do not respond adequately to a PPI trial or when alarm symptoms exist, clinicians should investigate with endoscopy and, in the absence of erosive reflux disease (Los Angeles B or greater) or long-segment (≥3 cm) Barrett’s esophagus, perform prolonged wireless pH monitoring off medication (96-hour preferred if available) to confirm and phenotype GERD or to rule out GERD.
  • Clinicians should perform upfront objective reflux testing off medication (rather than an empiric PPI trial) in patients with isolated extra-esophageal symptoms and suspicion for reflux etiology.
  • Clinicians should provide pharmacologic neuromodulation, and/or referral to a behavioral therapist for hypnotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, diaphragmatic breathing, and relaxation strategies in patients with functional heartburn or reflux disease associated with esophageal hypervigilance reflux hypersensitivity and/or behavioral disorders.
  • In patients with proven GERD, laparoscopic fundoplication and magnetic sphincter augmentation are effective surgical options, and transoral incisionless fundoplication is an effective endoscopic option in carefully selected patients.

Related blog posts:

World’s Largest Pistachio (with my favorite pistachio eater). Alamogordo, New Mexico

Antimicrobial Stewardship for Helicobacter Pylori

Posted on by

Yesterday, this blog discussed what is needed to achieve high cure rates for H pylori. One of my microbiology colleagues informed me that until recently there have only been susceptibility standards for clarithromycin from the Clinical Laboratory Standards.  Now, the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing has criteria for clarithromycin, tetracycline, amoxicillin, levofloxacin, metronidazole, and rifampin. Given the difficulty culturing H pylori, his view is that stool testing is the most promising avenue for susceptibility testing because we now have the genes that determine resistance delineated for all of these drugs.

A related issue is antimicrobial stewardship: DY Graham. J-M Liou. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20: 973-983. Open Access: Primer for Development of Guidelines for Helicobacter pylori Therapy Using Antimicrobial Stewardship

Key points:

  • “Therapies that fail to achieve at least a 90% cure rate should be abandoned as unacceptable”
  • “Antibiotics in the access group have lower resistance potential … They should be widely available and affordable. Amoxicillin, tetracycline, and metronidazole are classified as the access group. In contrast, clarithromycin and levofloxacin have higher resistance potential and are classified as the watch group. They should be prioritized as key targets of stewardship program and monitoring”
  • “Therapies that contain antibiotics which do not contribute to outcome should be eliminated”
  • The “full antisecretory activity of PPIs requires 3–4 days. This makes the actual duration of effective therapy shorter than the days it is administered…However, pharmaceutical companies often have chosen to shorten the recommended duration of therapy to obtain a marketing advantage at the expense of reduced effectiveness”
  • “Currently most H pylori infections receive empiric therapy, and the clinician does not know or even have access to treatment guidance based on local or regional antimicrobial susceptibility patterns…few hospitals or clinics offer susceptibility testing”
  • Even without susceptibility testing, clinicians could achieve much better results if test of cure data were carefully collected and analyzed
  • “Metronidazole-containing bismuth quadruple therapy is unique in that it appears that metronidazole resistance can be partially or completely overcome by increasing the dose and duration of therapy…metronidazole resistance as assessed in vitro does not correlate well with its effectiveness in vivo, especially when used as a component of a triple or quadruple therapy”

H pylori is difficult to eradicate:

  • Location: “the organisms reside within the highly acid stomach, which is physically outside of the body and thus poorly accessible to blood-borne antibiotics and the immune system”
  • Inoculum effect: “H pylori is also typically present in vast numbers, resulting in an inoculum effect … the inoculum effect is largely responsible for the failure of dual therapy with PPIs clarithromycin, metronidazole, or levofloxacin, as their effectiveness is undermined by emergence of resistance during therapy”
  • Biofilm and intracellular: “A proportion of H pylori attach to the surface of gastric cells, leading to a biofilm phenomenon, and some are present intracellular by requiring the use of antibiotics capable of penetrating into cells”
  • Dormant state: “H pylori can become dormant in part because they can replicate only when the pH is approximately 6…this results in a persister effect”

My take: The lack of action on H pylori susceptibility despite the current tools is a bad look for the GI community. Would this still be the case if the treatment were relegated to our infectious disease colleagues? Antibiotic stewardship is coming for H pylori -children and adults with this infection should have higher cure rates and easier treatment regimens.

Related blog posts:

White Sands National Park, New Mexico

How To Achieve Helicobacter Pylori Cure Rates of >95%

Posted on by

Related to yesterday’s blog, here is an SNL commercial for the “Koohl” toilet (also with Benedict Cumberbatch) in 2016: SNL Koohl Toilet

————————————

DY Graham, SF Moss. Am J Gastroenterol 2022. 117: 524-528. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Helicobacter pylori Is Now Widely Available: When, How, Why

Key points:

  • Susceptibility testing for H pylori is widely available in the U.S. and should help optimize treatments to get success rates >95%. Testing is now available for the most common treatment antibiotics: amoxicillin, metronidazole, tetracycline, levofloxacin, clarithromycin, and rifabutin.
  • Handling/shipping specimens properly is important with susceptibility testing
  • The authors recommend a PPI which is minimally-affected by CYP2C19 metabolism, namely rabeprazole or esomeprazole.
  • Provide careful instructions to patient/family regarding treatment

Susceptibility Testing Labs (see Table 1):

  • Quest: Our Quest representative indicated code: 36994 (H. pylori culture with reflex to susceptibility). Preferred Specimen: 3 mm Gastric/Antral or Duodenal biopsy collected in Brucella broth or Trypticase Soy Broth (TSB) with 10-20% glycerol
  • LabCorp: Helicobacter pylori Culture Test Code Test Code 180885
  • ARUP: Helicobacter pylori Culture Test Code 2006686
  • Culture (Catalog HELIS) or Stool PCR testing (Catalog HPFRP) can be done by Mayo Clinic
  • Reflex stool testing as well as PCR gastric testing from formalin is available through by American Molecular laboratories

A treatment algorithm is listed:

  • In the absence of highly effective empiric treatment or after treatment failure, the authors recommend susceptibility testing.
  • If clarithromycin susceptible, then a 14-day clarithromycin triple therapy course is recommended
  • If clarithromycin resistant but metronidazole susceptible, then 14-day metronidazole triple therapy
  • If resistant to both clarithromycin and metronidazole, then either a 14-day bismuth quadruple therapy, or a rifabutin triple therapy are preferred. However, if H pylori organisms are levofloxacin susceptible, then 14-day levofloxacin triple therapy may be a good option.
  • The authors recommend quinolone therapy only in the setting of susceptibility testing due to the FDA warnings about long-term adverse effects.

My take: Perhaps H pylori susceptibility testing availability needs to be a quality metric for hospitals and endoscopy centers.


Related blog posts: