Limosilactobacillus reuteri Strains as Adjuvants in the Management of Helicobacter pylori Infection

Helicobacter pylori (HP) is a Gram-negative bacterium which finds its suitable habitat in the stomach. The infection affects about half of the global population with high variability in prevalence among regions and for age. HP is the main causative agent of chronic active gastritis, peptic and duodenal ulcers, and may be the primary cause of gastric cancer or MALT lymphoma. Due to the high rate of failure of eradication therapy in various countries and the increase in antibiotic resistance reported in the literature, there is an ever wider need to seek alternative therapeutic treatments. Probiotics seem to be a promising solution. In particular, the Limosilactobacillus reuteri (L. reuteri) species is a Gram-positive bacterium and is commonly found in the microbiota of mammals. L. reuteri is able to survive the gastric acid environment and bile and to colonize the gastric mucosa. This species is able to inhibit the growth of several pathogenic bacteria through different mechanisms, keeping the homeostasis of the microbiota. In particular, it is able to secrete reuterin and reutericycline, substances that exhibit antimicrobial properties, among other molecules. Through the secretion of these and the formation of the biofilm, it has been found to strongly inhibit the growth of HP and, at higher concentrations, to kill it. Moreover, it reduces the expression of HP virulence factors. In clinical trials, L. reuteri has been shown to decrease HP load when used as a single treatment, but has not achieved statistical significance in curing infected patients. As an adjuvant of standard regimens with antibiotics and pump inhibitors, L. reuteri can be used not only to improve cure rates, but especially to decrease gastrointestinal symptoms, which are a common cause of lack of compliance and interruption of therapy, leading to new antibiotic resistance

Esophageal Eosinophilia and Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Celiac Children: A Ten Year Prospective Observational Study

The association between eosinophilic esophagitis and celiac disease is still controversial and its prevalence is highly variable. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of esophageal eosinophilia and eosinophilic esophagitis in a large group of children with celiac disease, prospectively followed over 11 years. Methods: Prospective observational study performed between 2008 and 2019. Celiac disease diagnosis was based on ESPGHAN criteria. At least four esophageal biopsies were sampled in patients who underwent endoscopy. The presence of at least 15 eosinophils/HPF on esophageal biopsies was considered suggestive of esophageal eosinophilia; at the same time, eosinophilic esophagitis was diagnosed according to the International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for Eosinophilic Esophagitis. Results: A total of 465 children (M 42% mean age 7.1 years (range: 1–16)) were diagnosed with celiac disease. Three hundred and seventy patients underwent endoscopy, and esophageal biopsies were available in 313. The prevalence of esophageal eosinophilia in children with celiac disease was 1.6% (95% CI: 0.54–2.9). Only one child was diagnosed as eosinophilic esophagitis; we calculated a prevalence of 0.3% (95% CI: 0.2–0.5%). The odds ratio for an association between eosinophilic esophagitis and celiac disease was at least 6.5 times higher (95% CI: 0.89–47.7; p = 0.06) than in the general population. Conclusion: The finding of an increased number of eosinophils (>15/HPF) in celiac patients does not have a clinical implication or warrant intervention, and therefore we do not recommend routine esophageal biopsies unless clinically indicated

Diagnosis of Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity (NCGS): The Salerno Experts' Criteria

Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity (NCGS) is a syndrome characterized by intestinal and extra-intestinal symptoms related to the ingestion of gluten-containing food, in subjects that are not affected by either celiac disease or wheat allergy. Given the lack of a NCGS biomarker, there is the need for standardizing the procedure leading to the diagnosis confirmation. In this paper we report experts’ recommendations on how the diagnostic protocol should be performed for the confirmation of NCGS. A full diagnostic procedure should assess the clinical response to the gluten-free diet (GFD) and measure the effect of a gluten challenge after a period of treatment with the GFD. The clinical evaluation is performed using a self-administered instrument incorporating a modified version of the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale. The patient identifies one to three main symptoms that are quantitatively assessed using a Numerical Rating Scale with a score ranging from 1 to 10. The double-blind placebo-controlled gluten challenge (8 g/day) includes a one-week challenge followed by a one-week washout of strict GFD and by the crossover to the second one-week challenge. The vehicle should contain cooked, homogeneously distributed gluten. At least a variation of 30% of one to three main symptoms between the gluten and the placebo challenge should be detected to discriminate a positive from a negative result. The guidelines provided in this paper will help the clinician to reach a firm and positive diagnosis of NCGS and facilitate the comparisons of different studies, if adopted internationally

Diagnosis of Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity (NCGS)

Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity (NCGS) is a syndrome characterized by intestinal and extra-intestinal symptoms related to the ingestion of gluten-containing food, in subjects that are not affected by either celiac disease or wheat allergy. Given the lack of a NCGS biomarker, there is the need for standardizing the procedure leading to the diagnosis confirmation. In this paper we report experts’ recommendations on how the diagnostic protocol should be performed for the confirmation of NCGS. A full diagnostic procedure should assess the clinical response to the gluten-free diet (GFD) and measure the effect of a gluten challenge after a period of treatment with the GFD. The clinical evaluation is performed using a self-administered instrument incorporating a modified version of the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale. The patient identifies one to three main symptoms that are quantitatively assessed using a Numerical Rating Scale with a score ranging from 1 to 10. The double-blind placebo-controlled gluten challenge (8 g/day) includes a one-week challenge followed by a one-week washout of strict GFD and by the crossover to the second one-week challenge. The vehicle should contain cooked, homogeneously distributed gluten. At least a variation of 30% of one to three main symptoms between the gluten and the placebo challenge should be detected to discriminate a positive from a negative result. The guidelines provided in this paper will help the clinician to reach a firm and positive diagnosis of NCGS and facilitate the comparisons of different studies, if adopted internationally

COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey dataset on psychological and behavioural consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak

This N = 173,426 social science dataset was collected through the collaborative COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey - an open science effort to improve understanding of the human experiences of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic between 30th March and 30th May, 2020. The dataset allows a cross-cultural study of psychological and behavioural responses to the Coronavirus pandemic and associated government measures like cancellation of public functions and stay at home orders implemented in many countries. The dataset contains demographic background variables as well as measures of Asian Disease Problem, perceived stress (PSS-10), availability of social provisions (SPS-10), trust in various authorities, trust in governmental measures to contain the virus (OECD trust), personality traits (BFF-15), information behaviours, agreement with the level of government intervention, and compliance with preventive measures, along with a rich pool of exploratory variables and written experiences. A global consortium from 39 countries and regions worked together to build and translate a survey with variables of shared interests, and recruited participants in 47 languages and dialects. Raw plus cleaned data and dynamic visualizations are available.Measurement(s) psychological measurement center dot anxiety-related behavior trait center dot Stress center dot response to center dot Isolation center dot loneliness measurement center dot Emotional Distress Technology Type(s) Survey Factor Type(s) geographic location center dot language center dot age of participant center dot responses to the Coronavirus pandemic Sample Characteristic - Organism Homo sapiens Sample Characteristic - Location global Machine-accessible metadata file describing the reported data:Peer reviewe

Stress and worry in the 2020 coronavirus pandemic: Relationships to trust and compliance with preventive measures across 48 countries in the COVIDiSTRESS global survey

The COVIDiSTRESS global survey collects data on early human responses to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic from 173 429 respondents in 48 countries. The open science study was co-designed by an international consortium of researchers to investigate how psychological responses differ across countries and cultures, and how this has impacted behaviour, coping and trust in government efforts to slow the spread of the virus. Starting in March 2020, COVIDiSTRESS leveraged the convenience of unpaid online recruitment to generate public data. The objective of the present analysis is to understand relationships between psychological responses in the early months of global coronavirus restrictions and help understand how different government measures succeed or fail in changing public behaviour. There were variations between and within countries. Although Western Europeans registered as more concerned over COVID-19, more stressed, and having slightly more trust in the governments' efforts, there was no clear geographical pattern in compliance with behavioural measures. Detailed plots illustrating between-countries differences are provided. Using both traditional and Bayesian analyses, we found that individuals who worried about getting sick worked harder to protect themselves and others. However, concern about the coronavirus itself did not account for all of the variances in experienced stress during the early months of COVID-19 restrictions. More alarmingly, such stress was associated with less compliance. Further, those most concerned over the coronavirus trusted in government measures primarily where policies were strict. While concern over a disease is a source of mental distress, other factors including strictness of protective measures, social support and personal lockdown conditions must also be taken into consideration to fully appreciate the psychological impact of COVID-19 and to understand why some people fail to follow behavioural guidelines intended to protect themselves and others from infection. The Stage 1 manuscript associated with this submission received in-principle acceptance (IPA) on 18 May 2020. Following IPA, the accepted Stage 1 version of the manuscript was preregistered on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/g2t3b. This preregistration was performed prior to data analysis

Stress and worry in the 2020 coronavirus pandemic : relationships to trust and compliance with preventive measures across 48 countries in the COVIDiSTRESS global survey

The COVIDiSTRESS global survey collects data on early human responses to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic from 173 429 respondents in 48 countries. The open science study was co-designed by an international consortium of researchers to investigate how psychological responses differ across countries and cultures, and how this has impacted behaviour, coping and trust in government efforts to slow the spread of the virus. Starting in March 2020, COVIDiSTRESS leveraged the convenience of unpaid online recruitment to generate public data. The objective of the present analysis is to understand relationships between psychological responses in the early months of global coronavirus restrictions and help understand how different government measures succeed or fail in changing public behaviour. There were variations between and within countries. Although Western Europeans registered as more concerned over COVID-19, more stressed, and having slightly more trust in the governments' efforts, there was no clear geographical pattern in compliance with behavioural measures. Detailed plots illustrating between-countries differences are provided. Using both traditional and Bayesian analyses, we found that individuals who worried about getting sick worked harder to protect themselves and others. However, concern about the coronavirus itself did not account for all of the variances in experienced stress during the early months of COVID-19 restrictions. More alarmingly, such stress was associated with less compliance. Further, those most concerned over the coronavirus trusted in government measures primarily where policies were strict. While concern over a disease is a source of mental distress, other factors including strictness of protective measures, social support and personal lockdown conditions must also be taken into consideration to fully appreciate the psychological impact of COVID-19 and to understand why some people fail to follow behavioural guidelines intended to protect themselves and others from infection. The Stage 1 manuscript associated with this submission received in-principle acceptance (IPA) on 18 May 2020. Following IPA, the accepted Stage 1 version of the manuscript was preregistered on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/g2t3b. This preregistration was performed prior to data analysis.Peer reviewe

Stress and worry in the 2020 coronavirus pandemic: relationships to trust and compliance with preventive measures across 48 countries in the COVIDiSTRESS global survey

The COVIDiSTRESS global survey collects data on early human responses to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic from 173 429 respondents in 48 countries. The open science study was co-designed by an international consortium of researchers to investigate how psychological responses differ across countries and cultures, and how this has impacted behaviour, coping and trust in government efforts to slow the spread of the virus. Starting in March 2020, COVIDiSTRESS leveraged the convenience of unpaid online recruitment to generate public data. The objective of the present analysis is to understand relationships between psychological responses in the early months of global coronavirus restrictions and help understand how different government measures succeed or fail in changing public behaviour. There were variations between and within countries. Although Western Europeans registered as more concerned over COVID-19, more stressed, and having slightly more trust in the governments' efforts, there was no clear geographical pattern in compliance with behavioural measures. Detailed plots illustrating between-countries differences are provided. Using both traditional and Bayesian analyses, we found that individuals who worried about getting sick worked harder to protect themselves and others. However, concern about the coronavirus itself did not account for all of the variances in experienced stress during the early months of COVID-19 restrictions. More alarmingly, such stress was associated with less compliance. Further, those most concerned over the coronavirus trusted in government measures primarily where policies were strict. While concern over a disease is a source of mental distress, other factors including strictness of protective measures, social support and personal lockdown conditions must also be taken into consideration to fully appreciate the psychological impact of COVID-19 and to understand why some people fail to follow behavioural guidelines intended to protect themselves and others from infection. The Stage 1 manuscript associated with this submission received in-principle acceptance (IPA) on 18 May 2020. Following IPA, the accepted Stage 1 version of the manuscript was preregistered on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/g2t3b. This preregistration was performed prior to data analysis

GER and Probiotic

Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) refers to retrograde movement of gastric contents out of the stomach with or without regurgitation and vomiting. Regurgitation is defined as the passage of refluxed gastric content into the oral pharynx while vomiting is defined as expulsion of the refluxed gastric content from the mouth. The frequency of regurgitation may vary largely in relation to age, and younger infants up to first month of age are more frequently affected by regurgitation. The effect of the intestinal microflora in the pathophysiology of GER and regurgitation is becoming in the last few years more evident even though the exact mechanisms of interaction between the intestinal bacteria and host are still unknown. Probiotic might play an important role in maintaining gut homeostasis by modulating intestinal barrier function, immunity, motility, and influencing the gut–brain interaction. The role of intestinal microbiota in the pathogenesis of GER could represent a promising field of research in the next future

Indications and Recommendations by Societies and Institutions for the Use of Probiotics and Prebiotics in Paediatric Functional Intestinal Disorders

To report the indications and/or recommendations by Societies and Institutions for the use of probiotics and prebiotics in functional intestinal disorders in childhood