Functional bowel disorders with diarrhoea: Clinical guidelines of the United European Gastroenterology and European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility

Irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhoea (IBS-D) and functional diarrhoea (FDr) are the two major functional bowel disorders characterized by diarrhoea. In spite of their high prevalence, IBS-D and FDr are associated with major uncertainties, especially regarding their optimal diagnostic work-up and management. A Delphi consensus was performed with experts from 10 European countries who conducted a literature summary and voting process on 31 statements. Quality of evidence was evaluated using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation criteria. Consensus (defined as >80% agreement) was reached for all the statements. The panel agreed with the potential overlapping of IBS-D and FDr. In terms of diagnosis, the consensus supports a symptom-based approach also with the exclusion of alarm symptoms, recommending the evaluation of full blood count, C-reactive protein, serology for coeliac disease, and faecal calprotectin, and consideration of diagnosing bile acid diarrhoea. Colonoscopy with random biopsies in both the right and left colon is recommended in patients older than 50 years and in presence of alarm features. Regarding treatment, a strong consensus was achieved for the use of a diet low fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides and polyols, gut-directed psychological therapies, rifaximin, loperamide, and eluxadoline. A weak or conditional recommendation was achieved for antispasmodics, probiotics, tryciclic antidepressants, bile acid sequestrants, 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 antagonists (i.e. alosetron, ondansetron, or ramosetron). A multinational group of European experts summarized the current state of consensus on the definition, diagnosis, and management of IBS-D and FDr

Vonoprazan Fumarate for the Treatment of Gastric Ulcers: A Short Review on Emerging Data

Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs), such as vonoprazan, represent a novel and heterogeneous class of drugs that competitively block the potassium binding site of gastric H+/K+ ATPase, thus potentially overcoming the limitations of proton-pump inhibitors. Different studies evaluated the efficacy of vonoprazan versus proton-pump inhi-bitors (PPIs) for the treatment of acid-related disorders, and, therefore, P-CABs present the same indications of PPIs: gastroesophageal reflux disease, gastric and duodenal ulcer heal-ing, management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-associated ulcers and Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy. The aim of this review was to evaluate the role of vonoprazan for the treatment of peptic ulcer disease (PUD) and the management of gastric ulcer occurring after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Indeed, vonoprazan (at the dose of both 10 and 20mg) showed similar results to PPIs in patients taking long-term NSAIDs, in the absence of severe adverse effects, and provided a more rapid and effective treatment of ulcers induced by ESD. However, studies in medical literature are heterogeneous, mainly performed with a retrospective design, and often carried out in Japan only. For these reasons, further prospective, randomized studies are warranted in order to help physicians, patients, and policymakers regarding the use of vonoprazan in clinical practice

A propensity score-weighted comparison between adalimumab originator and its biosimilars, ABP501 and SB5, in inflammatory bowel disease: a multicenter Italian study

Background: Adalimumab is an effective and safe biological drug for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Nowadays, several biosimilar agents are available, but data regarding their efficacy and safety in patients with IBD are still lacking. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and tolerability between adalimumab originator, ABP501 and SB5 biosimilars in patients with IBD in the short term (after induction and after 6 months of treatment) through a propensity score-weighted multicenter cohort study. Methods: We included 156 patients with IBD, 69 patients with ulcerative colitis and 87 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) receiving ABP501 or SB5 biosimilars from January 2019 to April 2020 for moderate-to-severe disease. For comparison, a group of age- and sex-matched patients treated with adalimumab originator was used. We collected clinical and biochemical data after induction and at 6 months of treatment. Endoscopic data were recorded only at baseline. Results: Overall, clinical benefit was achieved by 86.4% and 85.3% after induction and at 6 months, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between the three treatment groups (p = 0.68 and p = 0.46). However, after induction, we found significant differences between the two types of the disease (ulcerative colitis or CD, p = 0.004), with a greater clinical benefit achieved by patients with CD. Also, the therapeutic optimization rate between the three drugs was not statistically significant different (p = 0.30). All treatments showed a good safety profile, with only 10 patients who needed to stop therapy because of adverse events. Conclusion: Adalimumab biosimilars seem to be as effective and safe as the originator in patients with IBD. Surely, they represent a great opportunity to reduce the costs of biological therapies, however larger and longer real-life studies are necessary

Effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab in a matched cohort of elderly and nonelderly patients with inflammatory bowel disease: the IG-IBD LIVE study

Background Vedolizumab registration trials were the first to include elderly patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn's disease (CD), but few real-life data have been reported in this population. Aims We investigated the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab in matched cohorts of elderly and nonelderly UC and CD patients. Methods The Long-term Italian Vedolizumab Effectiveness (LIVE) study is a retrospective-prospective study including UC and CD patients who started vedolizumab from April 2016 to June 2017. Elderly patients (>= 65 years) were matched clinically 1:2 to nonelderly patients (18-64 years); the 2 groups were followed until drug discontinuation or June 2019. Results The study included 198 elderly (108 UC, 90 CD) and 396 matched nonelderly patients (205 UC, 191 CD). Nonelderly UC patients had a significantly higher persistence on vedolizumab compared to elderly patients (67.6% vs. 51.4%, p = 0.02). No significant difference in effectiveness was observed between elderly and nonelderly CD patients (59.4% vs. 52.4%, p = 0.32). Age >= 65 years was associated with lower persistence in UC; for CD, previous exposure to anti-TNF-alpha agents, Charlson comorbidity index >2 and moderate-to-severe clinical activity at baseline were associated with lower persistence. There were recorded 130 adverse events, with comparable rates between the two groups. A Charlson comorbidity index >2 was associated with an increased risk of adverse events. Conclusion Vedolizumab can be considered a safe option in elderly IBD patients. Its effectiveness in elderly UC patients may be reduced, while no age-dependent effect on effectiveness was observed in CD

Myths and Facts about Food Intolerance: A Narrative Review

Most adverse reactions to food are patient self-reported and not based on validated tests but nevertheless lead to dietary restrictions, with patients believing that these restrictions will improve their symptoms and quality of life. We aimed to clarify the myths and reality of common food intolerances, giving clinicians a guide on diagnosing and treating these cases. We performed a narrative review of the latest evidence on the widespread food intolerances reported by our patients, giving indications on the clinical presentations, possible tests, and dietary suggestions, and underlining the myths and reality. While lactose intolerance and hereditary fructose intolerance are based on well-defined mechanisms and have validated diagnostic tests, non-coeliac gluten sensitivity and fermentable oligosaccharide, disaccharide, monosaccharide, and polyol (FODMAP) intolerance are mainly based on patients’ reports. Others, like non-hereditary fructose, sorbitol, and histamine intolerance, still need more evidence and often cause unnecessary dietary restrictions. Finally, the main outcome of the present review is that the medical community should work to reduce the spread of unvalidated tests, the leading cause of the problematic management of our patients