Search

BACKGROUND: Etrolizumab is a gut-targeted anti-β7 integrin monoclonal antibody. In a previous phase 2 induction study, etrolizumab significantly improved clinical remission versus placebo in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of etrolizumab for maintenance of remission in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study (LAUREL) across 111 treatment centres worldwide. We included adults (age 18-80 years) with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (Mayo Clinic total score [MCS] of 6-12 with an endoscopic subscore of ≥2, a rectal bleeding subscore of ≥1, and a stool frequency subscore of ≥1) who were naive to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Patients were required to have had an established diagnosis of ulcerative colitis for at least 3 months, corroborated by both clinical and endoscopic evidence, and evidence of disease extending at least 20 cm from the anal verge. During open-label induction, participants received subcutaneous etrolizumab 105 mg once every 4 weeks. Participants who had clinical response at week 10 (MCS with ≥3-point decrease and ≥30% reduction from baseline, plus ≥1-point decrease in rectal bleeding subscore or absolute rectal bleeding score of 0 or 1) proceeded into the double-blind maintenance phase and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive subcutaneous etrolizumab 105 mg once every 4 weeks or matched placebo until week 62. Randomisation was stratified by baseline concomitant treatment with corticosteroids, treatment with immunosuppressants, baseline disease activity, and week 10 remission status. All participants and study site personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was remission at week 62 (MCS ≤2, with individual subscores ≤1, and rectal bleeding subscore of 0) among patients with a clinical response at week 10, measured in the modified intention-to-treat population (all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02165215, and is now closed to recruitment. FINDINGS: Between Aug 12, 2014, and June 4, 2020, 658 patients were screened for eligibility and 359 were enrolled into the induction phase. 214 (60%) patients had a clinical response at week 10 and were randomly assigned to receive etrolizumab (n=108) or placebo (n=106) in the maintenance phase. 80 (74%) patients in the etrolizumab group and 42 (40%) in the placebo group completed the study through week 62. Four patients in the placebo group did not receive study treatment and were excluded from the analyses. At week 62, 32 (29·6%) of 108 patients in the etrolizumab group and 21 (20·6%) of 102 in the placebo group were in remission (adjusted treatment difference 7·7% [95% CI -4·2 to 19·2]; p=0·19). A greater proportion of patients reported one or more adverse events in the placebo group (82 [80%] of 102) than in the etrolizumab group (70 [65%] of 108); the most common adverse event in both groups was ulcerative colitis (16 [15%] patients in the etrolizumab group and 37 [36%] in the placebo group). Ten (9%) patients in the etrolizumab group and eight (8%) in the placebo group reported one or more serious adverse events. No deaths were reported in either treatment group. INTERPRETATION: No significant differences were observed between maintenance etrolizumab and placebo in the primary endpoint of remission at week 62 among patients who had a clinical response at week 10. Etrolizumab was well tolerated in this population and no new safety signals were identified. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche. ispartof: LANCET GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY vol:7 issue:1 pages:28-37 ispartof: location:Netherlands status: published

Background and Aim: The BreathID® Hp urea breath test provides several advantages over other 13C breath analyzers for the detection of Helicobacter pylori. We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of a new BreathID® Hp Lab System (Exalenz Bioscience Ltd, Israel), a 13C-urea breath test system using breath sampling bags that facilitates multiple testing in a multicenter international clinical study. Methods: A total of 257 subjects with evaluable results for urea breath test, rapid urease test, and histology were enrolled into two study groups: 189 naïve subjects were included in the pre-therapy group, and 68 subjects comprised the post-eradication therapy group. Analytical studies were conducted to evaluate the stability, reproducibility, and repeatability of the 13C-urea breath test results using a delta over baseline cut-off value of 5. Results: Among the pre-therapy subjects evaluated with the composite results from the rapid urease test and histology/immunohistochemistry, 176 results matched those of the urea breath test, resulting in an overall agreement of 98.3% with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 97.9%. In the post-eradication therapy cohort, the overall agreement between the urea breath test and the biopsy diagnosis was 98.5%; the sensitivity of the urea breath test in this cohort was 92.3% and the specificity was 100%. There was uniformly high overall reproducibility (99.48%) of the test results over different batches of breath sample bags, when analyzed on different days and under different storage conditions, showing stability of the breath samples in the breath collection bags Conclusion: The BreathID® Hp Lab System is a highly accurate and dependable method for the diagnosis of H. pylori infection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Topically applied methylene blue dye chromoendoscopy is effective in improving detection of colorectal neoplasia. When combined with a pH- and time-dependent multimatrix structure, a per-oral methylene blue formulation (MB-MMX) can be delivered directly to the colorectal mucosa. METHODS: We performed a phase 3 study of 1205 patients scheduled for colorectal cancer screening or surveillance colonoscopies (50-75 years old) at 20 sites in Europe and the United States, from December 2013 through October 2016. Patients were randomly assigned to groups given 200 mg MB-MMX, placebo, or 100 mg MB-MMX (ratio of 2:2:1). The 100-mg MB-MMX group was included for masking purposes. MB-MMX and placebo tablets were administered with a 4-L polyethylene glycol-based bowel preparation. The patients then underwent colonoscopy by an experienced endoscopist with centralized double-reading. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with 1 adenoma or carcinoma (adenoma detection rate [ADR]). We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for differences in detection between the 200-mg MB-MMX and placebo groups. False-positive (resection rate for non-neoplastic polyps) and adverse events were assessed as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: The ADR was higher for the MB-MMX group (273 of 485 patients, 56.29%) than the placebo group (229 of 479 patients, 47.81%) (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.09-1.96). The proportion of patients with nonpolypoid lesions was higher in the MB-MMX group (213 of 485 patients, 43.92%) than the placebo group (168 of 479 patients, 35.07%) (OR 1.66; 95% CI 1.21-2.26). The proportion of patients with adenomas ≤5 mm was higher in the MB-MMX group (180 of 485 patients, 37.11%) than the placebo group (148 of 479 patients, 30.90%) (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.01-1.83), but there was no difference between groups in detection of polypoid or larger lesions. The false-positive rate did not differ significantly between groups (83 [23.31%] of 356 patients with non-neoplastic lesions in the MB-MMX vs 97 [29.75%] of 326 patients with non-neoplastic lesions in the placebo group). Overall, 0.7% of patients had severe adverse events but there was no significant difference between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 3 trial of patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopies, we found MB-MMX led to an absolute 8.5% increase in ADR, compared with placebo, without increasing the removal of non-neoplastic lesions. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT01694966. ispartof: GASTROENTEROLOGY vol:156 issue:8 pages:2198-+ ispartof: location:United States status: published

Primary prevention of colonic adenomas and cancer through dietary interventions or chemoprevention has great appeal. This article discusses primary prevention goals and promising nutritional or chemopreventive strategies. There is substantial observational evidence that diets high in total calories and fat and or low in fruits and vegetables or total fiber as well as low levels of physical activity are related to the risk of colonic neoplasia. Similar observational data indicate that diets high in specific nutrients such as antioxidant vitamins or calcium may be protective. The article describes some of the newer chemopreventive agents and reviews the data linking diet and lifestyle to colorectal cancer risk, focusing on interventions that have also been studied in prospective clinical trials. Finally the evidence supporting the role of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the chemoprevention of CRC is reviewed and the status of several other promising newer agents that are entering human trials is summarized.