147 research outputs found

    Effectiveness of first and second-line empirical treatment in Italy: Results of the European registry on Helicobacter pylori management.

    Get PDF
    Background and aims: The optimal management of naïve and not naïve Helicobacter pylori patients remains unclear. Therefore, it is essential to evaluate whether the actual clinical practice mirrors the indications suggested by the guidelines. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and the safety of the empirical first- and second-line treatments prescribed to patients enroled at Italian centres participating in the European Registry on H. pylori Management (Hp-EuReg). Methods: The Hp-EuReg is an international multicentre prospective non-interventional registry starting in 2013 aiming to evaluate the management of H. pylori infection by European gastroenterologists. Patients were registered in an e-CRF by AEG-REDCap. Variables assessed included demographics, previous eradication attempts, treatment regimen, effectiveness, and tolerance. Results: Overall, 3723 patients from 2013 to February 2021 were included: 2996 and 727 received an empirical first- and second-line treatment, respectively. According to the modified ITT analysis, among the first-line regimens, only the bismuth quadruple therapy with three-in-one-single capsule (BQT-TSC), the concomitant, and the sequential treatment - all lasting 10 days - achieved an eradication rate >90%. Among the second-line regimens, only the 10-day BQT-TSC reported an effectiveness >90%. High-dose PPI twice daily also significantly increased the effectiveness of some therapies. The BQT-TSC was the regimen with the highest incidence of adverse events. Conclusions: Only quadruple therapies lasting at least 10 days achieved over 90% eradication rates among the empirical first- and second-line regimens. It remains unclear whether high-dose PPI twice daily can improve the efficacy of quadruple treatment

    Antibiotic resistance prevalence and trends in patients infected with helicobacter pylori in the period 2013–2020: Results of the european registry on h. pylori management (hp-eureg)

    Get PDF
    Background: Bacterial antibiotic resistance changes over time depending on multiple factors; therefore, it is essential to monitor the susceptibility trends to reduce the resistance impact on the effectiveness of various treatments. Objective: To conduct a time-trend analysis of Helicobacter pylori resistance to antibiotics in Europe. Methods: The international prospective European Registry on Heli-cobacter pylori Management (Hp-EuReg) collected data on all infected adult patients diagnosed with culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing positive results that were registered at AEG-REDCap e-CRF until December 2020. Results: Overall, 41,562 patients were included in the Hp-EuReg. Culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed on gastric biopsies of 3974 (9.5%) patients, of whom 2852 (7%) were naive cases included for analysis. The number of positive cultures decreased by 35% from the period 2013–2016 to 2017–2020. Concerning naïve patients, no antibiotic resistance was found in 48% of the cases. The most frequent resistances were reported against metronidazole (30%), clarithromycin (25%), and levofloxacin (20%), whereas resistances to tetracycline and amoxicillin were below 1%. Dual and triple resistances were found in 13% and 6% of the cases, respectively. A decrease (p < 0.001) in the metronidazole resistance rate was observed between the 2013–2016 (33%) and 2017–2020 (24%) periods. Conclusion: Culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing for Helicobacter pylori are scarcely performed (<10%) in Europe. In naïve patients, Helicobacter pylori resistance to clarithromycin remained above 15% throughout the period 2013–2020 and resistance to levofloxacin, as well as dual or triple resistances, were high. A progressive decrease in metronidazole resistance was observed

    European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management (Hp-EuReg): Patterns and trends in first-line empirical eradication prescription and outcomes of 5 years and 21 533 patients

    Get PDF
    Objective The best approach for Helicobacter pylori management remains unclear. An audit process is essential to ensure clinical practice is aligned with best standards of care. Design International multicentre prospective non-interventional registry starting in 2013 aimed to evaluate the decisions and outcomes in H. pylori management by European gastroenterologists. Patients were registered in an e-CRF by AEG-REDCap. Variables included demographics, previous eradication attempts, prescribed treatment, adverse events and outcomes. Data monitoring was performed to ensure data quality. Time-trend and geographical analyses were performed. Results 30 394 patients from 27 European countries were evaluated and 21 533 (78%) first-line empirical H. pylori treatments were included for analysis. Pretreatment resistance rates were 23% to clarithromycin, 32% to metronidazole and 13% to both. Triple therapy with amoxicillin and clarithromycin was most commonly prescribed (39%), achieving 81.5% modified intention-to-treat eradication rate. Over 90% eradication was obtained only with 10-day bismuth quadruple or 14-day concomitant treatments. Longer treatment duration, higher acid inhibition and compliance were associated with higher eradication rates. Time-trend analysis showed a region-dependent shift in prescriptions including abandoning triple therapies, using higher acid-inhibition and longer treatments, which was associated with an overall effectiveness increase (84%-90%). Conclusion Management of H. pylori infection by European gastroenterologists is heterogeneous, suboptimal and discrepant with current recommendations. Only quadruple therapies lasting at least 10 days are able to achieve over 90% eradication rates. European recommendations are being slowly and heterogeneously incorporated into routine clinical practice, which was associated with a corresponding increase in effectiveness

    Recommendations for a step-wise comparative approach to the evaluation of new screening tests for colorectal cancer

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: New screening tests for colorectal cancer continue to emerge, but the evidence needed to justify their adoption in screening programs remains uncertain.METHODS: A review of the literature and a consensus approach by experts was undertaken to provide practical guidance on how to compare new screening tests with proven screening tests.RESULTS: Findings and recommendations from the review included the following: Adoption of a new screening test requires evidence of effectiveness relative to a proven comparator test. Clinical accuracy supported by programmatic population evaluation in the screening context on an intention-to-screen basis, including acceptability, is essential. Cancer-specific mortality is not essential as an endpoint provided that the mortality benefit of the comparator has been demonstrated and that the biologic basis of detection is similar. Effectiveness of the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test provides the minimum standard to be achieved by a new test. A 4-phase evaluation is recommended. An initial retrospective evaluation in cancer cases and controls (Phase 1) is followed by a prospective evaluation of performance across the continuum of neoplastic lesions (Phase 2). Phase 3 follows the demonstration of adequate accuracy in these 2 prescreening phases and addresses programmatic outcomes at 1 screening round on an intention-to-screen basis. Phase 4 involves more comprehensive evaluation of ongoing screening over multiple rounds. Key information is provided from the following parameters: the test positivity rate in a screening population, the true-positive and false-positive rates, and the number needed to colonoscope to detect a target lesion.CONCLUSIONS: New screening tests can be evaluated efficiently by this stepwise comparative approach. Cancer 2016;122:826-39. © 2016 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.</p

    The role of statins on helicobacter pylori eradication: Results from the european registry on the management of h. pylori (hp-eureg)

    Get PDF
    Statins could increase the effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori eradication therapies due to their anti-inflammatory effect. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of this therapeutic association in real life. This is a multicenter, prospective, non-interventional study aimed at evaluating the management of H. pylori by European gastroenterologists. Patients were registered in an e-CRF by AEG-REDCap from 2013 to 2020. The association between statin use and H. pylori eradication effectiveness was evaluated through multivariate analysis. Overall, 9988 and 705 patients received empirical and culture-guided treatment, respectively. Overall, statin use was associated with higher effectiveness in the empirical group (OR = 1.3; 95%CI = 1.1-1.5), but no association was found with first-line treatment effectiveness (N = 7738); as an exception, statin use was specifically associated with lower effectiveness of standard triple therapy (OR = 0.76; 95%CI = 0.59-0.99). In the rescue therapy empirical group (N = 2228), statins were associated with higher overall effectiveness (OR = 1.9; 95%CI = 1.4-2.6). However, sub-analyses by treatment schemes only confirmed this association for the single-capsule bismuth quadruple therapy (OR = 2.8; 95%CI = 1.3-5.7). No consistent association was found between statin use and H. pylori therapy effectiveness. Therefore, the addition of statins to the usual H. pylori treatment cannot be currently recommended to improve cure rates. © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland

    Role of proton pump inhibitors dosage and duration in Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment: Results from the European Registry on H. pylori management

    Get PDF
    Background: Management of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection requires co-treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and the use of antibiotics to achieve successful eradication. Aim: To evaluate the role of dosage of PPIs and the duration of therapy in the effectiveness of H. pylori eradication treatments based on the ‘European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management’ (Hp-EuReg). Methods: Hp-EuReg is a multicentre, prospective, non-interventionist, international registry on the routine clinical practice of H. pylori management by European gastroenterologists. All infected adult patients were systematically registered from 2013 to 2022. Results: Overall, 36,579 patients from five countries with more than 1000 patients were analysed. Optimal (≥90%) first-line-modified intention-to-treat effectiveness was achieved with the following treatments: (1) 14-day therapies with clarithromycin-amoxicillin-bismuth and metronidazole-tetracycline-bismuth, both independently of the PPI dose prescribed; (2) All 10-day (except 10-day standard triple therapy) and 14-day therapies with high-dose PPIs; and (3) 10-day quadruple therapies with clarithromycin-amoxicillin-bismuth, metronidazole-tetracycline-bismuth, and clarithromycin-amoxicillin-metronidazole (sequential), all with standard-dose PPIs. In first-line treatment, optimal effectiveness was obtained with high-dose PPIs in all 14-day treatments, in 10- and 14-day bismuth quadruple therapies and in 10-day sequential with standard-dose PPIs. Optimal second-line effectiveness was achieved with (1) metronidazole-tetracycline-bismuth quadruple therapy for 14- and 10&nbsp;days with standard and high-dose PPIs, respectively; and (2) levofloxacin-amoxicillin triple therapy for 14&nbsp;days with high-dose PPIs. None of the 7-day therapies in both treatment lines achieved optimal effectiveness. Conclusions: We recommend, in first-line treatment, the use of high-dose PPIs in 14-day triple therapy and in 10-or 14-day quadruple concomitant therapy in first-line treatment, while standard-dose PPIs would be sufficient in 10-day bismuth quadruple therapies. On the other hand, in second-line treatment, high-dose PPIs would be more beneficial in 14-day triple therapy with levofloxacin and amoxicillin or in 10-day bismuth quadruple therapy either as a three-in-one single capsule or in the traditional scheme

    Analysis of Clinical Phenotypes through Machine Learning of First-Line H. pylori Treatment in Europe during the Period 2013–2022: Data from the European Registry on H. pylori Management (Hp-EuReg)

    Get PDF
    The segmentation of patients into homogeneous groups could help to improve eradication therapy effectiveness. Our aim was to determine the most important treatment strategies used in Europe, to evaluate first-line treatment effectiveness according to year and country. Data collection: All first-line empirical treatments registered at AEGREDCap in the European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management (Hp-EuReg) from June 2013 to November 2022. A Boruta method determined the “most important” variables related to treatment effectiveness. Data clustering was performed through multi-correspondence analysis of the resulting six most important variables for every year in the 2013–2022 period. Based on 35,852 patients, the average overall treatment effectiveness increased from 87% in 2013 to 93% in 2022. The lowest effectiveness (80%) was obtained in 2016 in cluster #3 encompassing Slovenia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Russia, treated with 7-day triple therapy with amoxicillin–clarithromycin (92% of cases). The highest effectiveness (95%) was achieved in 2022, mostly in Spain (81%), with the bismuth–quadruple therapy, including the single-capsule (64%) and the concomitant treatment with clarithromycin–amoxicillin–metronidazole/tinidazole (34%) with 10 (69%) and 14 (32%) days. Cluster analysis allowed for the identification of patients in homogeneous treatment groups assessing the effectiveness of different first-line treatments depending on therapy scheme, adherence, country, and prescription year

    An efficient strategy for evaluating new non-invasive screening tests for colorectal cancer: the guiding principles.

    Get PDF
    New screening tests for colorectal cancer (CRC) are rapidly emerging. Conducting trials with mortality reduction as the end point supporting their adoption is challenging. We re-examined the principles underlying evaluation of new non-invasive tests in view of technological developments and identification of new biomarkers. A formal consensus approach involving a multidisciplinary expert panel revised eight previously established principles. Twelve newly stated principles emerged. Effectiveness of a new test can be evaluated by comparison with a proven comparator non-invasive test. The faecal immunochemical test is now considered the appropriate comparator, while colonoscopy remains the diagnostic standard. For a new test to be able to meet differing screening goals and regulatory requirements, flexibility to adjust its positivity threshold is desirable. A rigorous and efficient four-phased approach is proposed, commencing with small studies assessing the test's ability to discriminate between CRC and non-cancer states (phase I), followed by prospective estimation of accuracy across the continuum of neoplastic lesions in neoplasia-enriched populations (phase II). If these show promise, a provisional test positivity threshold is set before evaluation in typical screening populations. Phase III prospective studies determine single round intention-to-screen programme outcomes and confirm the test positivity threshold. Phase IV studies involve evaluation over repeated screening rounds with monitoring for missed lesions. Phases III and IV findings will provide the real-world data required to model test impact on CRC mortality and incidence. New non-invasive tests can be efficiently evaluated by a rigorous phased comparative approach, generating data from unbiased populations that inform predictions of their health impact

    Environmental factors in a population-based inception cohort of inflammatory bowel disease patients in Europe--an ECCO-EpiCom study.

    Get PDF
    To access publisher's full text version of this article click on the hyperlink at the bottom of the pageThe incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is increasing in Eastern Europe possibly due to changes in environmental factors towards a more "westernised" standard of living. The aim of this study was to investigate differences in exposure to environmental factors prior to diagnosis in Eastern and Western European IBD patients.The EpiCom cohort is a population-based, prospective inception cohort of 1560 unselected IBD patients from 31 European countries covering a background population of 10.1 million. At the time of diagnosis patients were asked to complete an 87-item questionnaire concerning environmental factors.A total of 1182 patients (76%) answered the questionnaire, 444 (38%) had Crohn's disease (CD), 627 (53%) ulcerative colitis (UC), and 111 (9%) IBD unclassified. No geographic differences regarding smoking status, caffeine intake, use of oral contraceptives, or number of first-degree relatives with IBD were found. Sugar intake was higher in CD and UC patients from Eastern Europe than in Western Europe while fibre intake was lower (p<0.01). Daily consumption of fast food as well as appendectomy before the age of 20 was more frequent in Eastern European than in Western European UC patients (p<0.01). Eastern European CD and UC patients had received more vaccinations and experienced fewer childhood infections than Western European patients (p<0.01).In this European population-based inception cohort of unselected IBD patients, Eastern and Western European patients differed in environmental factors prior to diagnosis. Eastern European patients exhibited higher occurrences of suspected risk factors for IBD included in the Western lifestyle.Danish Colitis Crohn Patients Organisation (CCF) Vibeke Binder and Povl Riis Foundation Scientific Council at Herlev Hospital Sigrid Rignnor Moran Foundation, Aage and Johanne Louis-Hansens Foundation Munkholm Foundation C.C. Klestrup and Henriette Klestrup Foundation Knud and Dagny Gad Andresens Foundation Else and Mogens Wedell-Wedellsborgs Foundation Direktor Jacob Madsen and Olga Madsen's Foundation, Scan Ve
    corecore