Predisposing and precipitating risk factors for delirium in gastroenterology and hepatology: Subgroup analysis of 718 patients from a hospital-wide prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Delirium is the most common acute neuropsychiatric syndrome in hospitalized patients. Higher age and cognitive impairment are known predisposing risk factors in general hospital populations. However, the interrelation with precipitating gastrointestinal (GI) and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) diseases remains to be determined. PATIENTS AND METHODS Prospective 1-year hospital-wide cohort study in 29'278 adults, subgroup analysis in 718 patients hospitalized with GI/HPB disease. Delirium based on routine admission screening and a DSM-5 based construct. Regression analyses used to evaluate clinical characteristics of delirious patients. RESULTS Delirium was detected in 24.8% (178/718). Age in delirious patients (median 62 years [IQR 21]) was not different to non-delirious (median 60 years [IQR 22]), p = 0.45). Dementia was the strongest predisposing factor for delirium (OR 66.16 [6.31-693.83], p < 0.001). Functional impairment, and at most, immobility increased odds for delirium (OR 7.78 [3.84-15.77], p < 0.001). Patients with delirium had higher in-hospital mortality rates (18%; OR 39.23 [11.85-129.93], p < 0.001). From GI and HPB conditions, cirrhosis predisposed to delirium (OR 2.11 [1.11-4.03], p = 0.023), while acute renal failure (OR 4.45 [1.61-12.26], p = 0.004) and liver disease (OR 2.22 [1.12-4.42], p = 0.023) were precipitators. Total costs were higher in patients with delirium (USD 30003 vs. 10977; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION Delirium in GI- and HPB-disease was not associated with higher age per se, but with cognitive and functional impairment. Delirium needs to be considered in younger adults with acute renal failure and/or liver disease. Clinicians should be aware about individual risk profiles, apply preventive and supportive strategies early, which may improve outcomes and lower costs

Assessment of hepatic fibrosis and inflammation with look-locker T1 mapping and magnetic resonance elastography with histopathology as reference standard

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of T1 mapping and MR elastography (MRE) for staging of hepatic fibrosis and grading inflammation with histopathology as standard of reference. Methods: 68 patients with various liver diseases undergoing liver biopsy for suspected fibrosis or with an established diagnosis of cirrhosis prospectively underwent look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping and MRE. T1 relaxation time and liver stiffness (LS) were measured by two readers. Hepatic fibrosis and inflammation were histopathologically staged according to a standardized fibrosis (F0-F4) and inflammation (A0-A2) score. For statistical analysis, independent t test, and Mann-Whitney U test and ROC analysis were performed, the latter to determine the performance of T1 mapping and MRE for fibrosis staging and inflammation grading, as compared to histopathology. Results: Histopathological analysis diagnosed 9 patients with F0 (13.2%), 21 with F1 (30.9%), 11 with F2 (16.2%), 10 with F3 (14.7%), and 17 with F4 (25.0%). Both T1 mapping and MRE showed significantly higher values for patients with significant fibrosis (F0-1 vs. F2-4; T1 mapping p < 0.0001, MRE p < 0.0001) as well as for patients with severe fibrosis or cirrhosis (F0-2 vs. F3-4; T1 mapping p < 0.0001, MRE p < 0.0001). T1 values and MRE LS were significantly higher in patients with inflammation (A0 vs. A1-2, both p = 0.01). T1 mapping showed a tendency toward lower diagnostic performance without statistical significance for significant fibrosis (F2-4) (AUC 0.79 vs. 0.91, p = 0.06) and with a significant difference compared to MRE for severe fibrosis (F3-4) (AUC 0.79 vs. 0.94, p = 0.03). For both T1 mapping and MRE, diagnostic performance for diagnosing hepatic inflammation (A1-2) was low (AUC 0.72 vs. 0.71, respectively). Conclusion: T1 mapping is able to diagnose hepatic fibrosis, however, with a tendency toward lower diagnostic performance compared to MRE and thus may be used as an alternative to MRE for diagnosing hepatic fibrosis, whenever MRE is not available or likely to fail due to intrinsic factors of the patient. Both T1 mapping and MRE are probably not sufficient as standalone methods to diagnose hepatic inflammation with relatively low diagnostic accuracy. Keywords: Biopsy; Fibrosis; Liver; MR elastography; T1 mappin

Assessment of hepatic fibrosis and inflammation with look-locker T1 mapping and magnetic resonance elastography with histopathology as reference standard.

PURPOSE To compare the diagnostic performance of T1 mapping and MR elastography (MRE) for staging of hepatic fibrosis and grading inflammation with histopathology as standard of reference. METHODS 68 patients with various liver diseases undergoing liver biopsy for suspected fibrosis or with an established diagnosis of cirrhosis prospectively underwent look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping and MRE. T1 relaxation time and liver stiffness (LS) were measured by two readers. Hepatic fibrosis and inflammation were histopathologically staged according to a standardized fibrosis (F0-F4) and inflammation (A0-A2) score. For statistical analysis, independent t test, and Mann-Whitney U test and ROC analysis were performed, the latter to determine the performance of T1 mapping and MRE for fibrosis staging and inflammation grading, as compared to histopathology. RESULTS Histopathological analysis diagnosed 9 patients with F0 (13.2%), 21 with F1 (30.9%), 11 with F2 (16.2%), 10 with F3 (14.7%), and 17 with F4 (25.0%). Both T1 mapping and MRE showed significantly higher values for patients with significant fibrosis (F0-1 vs. F2-4; T1 mapping p < 0.0001, MRE p < 0.0001) as well as for patients with severe fibrosis or cirrhosis (F0-2 vs. F3-4; T1 mapping p < 0.0001, MRE p < 0.0001). T1 values and MRE LS were significantly higher in patients with inflammation (A0 vs. A1-2, both p = 0.01). T1 mapping showed a tendency toward lower diagnostic performance without statistical significance for significant fibrosis (F2-4) (AUC 0.79 vs. 0.91, p = 0.06) and with a significant difference compared to MRE for severe fibrosis (F3-4) (AUC 0.79 vs. 0.94, p = 0.03). For both T1 mapping and MRE, diagnostic performance for diagnosing hepatic inflammation (A1-2) was low (AUC 0.72 vs. 0.71, respectively). CONCLUSION T1 mapping is able to diagnose hepatic fibrosis, however, with a tendency toward lower diagnostic performance compared to MRE and thus may be used as an alternative to MRE for diagnosing hepatic fibrosis, whenever MRE is not available or likely to fail due to intrinsic factors of the patient. Both T1 mapping and MRE are probably not sufficient as standalone methods to diagnose hepatic inflammation with relatively low diagnostic accuracy

Serological Assays for Alveolar and Cystic Echinococcosis-A Comparative Multi-Test Study in Switzerland and Kyrgyzstan.

Both alveolar (AE) and cystic echinococcosis (CE) are lacking pathognomonic clinical signs; consequently imaging technologies and serology remain the main pillars for diagnosis. The present study included 100 confirmed treatment-naïve AE and 64 CE patients that were diagnosed in Switzerland or Kyrgyzstan. Overall, 10 native Echinococcus spp. antigens, 3 recombinant antigens, and 4 commercial assays were comparatively evaluated. All native E. multilocularis antigens were produced in duplicates with a European and a Kyrgyz isolate and showed identical test values for the diagnosis of AE and CE. Native antigens and three commercial tests showed high diagnostic sensitivities (Se: 86-96%) and specificities (Sp: 96-99%) for the diagnosis of AE and CE in Swiss patients. In Kyrgyz patients, values of sensitivities and specificities were 10-20% lower as compared to the Swiss patients' findings. For the sero-diagnosis of AE in Kyrgyzstan, a test-combination of an E. multilocularis protoscolex antigen and the recombinant antigen Em95 appears to be the most suitable test strategy (Se: 98%, Sp: 87%). For the diagnosis of CE in both countries, test performances were hampered by major cross-reactions with AE patients and other parasitic diseases as well as by limited diagnostic sensitivities (93% in Switzerland and 76% in Kyrgyzstan, respectively)

Serological Assays for Alveolar and Cystic Echinococcosis—A Comparative Multi-Test Study in Switzerland and Kyrgyzstan

Both alveolar (AE) and cystic echinococcosis (CE) are lacking pathognomonic clinical signs; consequently imaging technologies and serology remain the main pillars for diagnosis. The present study included 100 confirmed treatment-naïve AE and 64 CE patients that were diagnosed in Switzerland or Kyrgyzstan. Overall, 10 native Echinococcus spp. antigens, 3 recombinant antigens, and 4 commercial assays were comparatively evaluated. All native E. multilocularis antigens were produced in duplicates with a European and a Kyrgyz isolate and showed identical test values for the diagnosis of AE and CE. Native antigens and three commercial tests showed high diagnostic sensitivities (Se: 86-96%) and specificities (Sp: 96-99%) for the diagnosis of AE and CE in Swiss patients. In Kyrgyz patients, values of sensitivities and specificities were 10-20% lower as compared to the Swiss patients' findings. For the sero-diagnosis of AE in Kyrgyzstan, a test-combination of an E. multilocularis protoscolex antigen and the recombinant antigen Em95 appears to be the most suitable test strategy (Se: 98%, Sp: 87%). For the diagnosis of CE in both countries, test performances were hampered by major cross-reactions with AE patients and other parasitic diseases as well as by limited diagnostic sensitivities (93% in Switzerland and 76% in Kyrgyzstan, respectively). Keywords: ELISA; Echinococcus granulosus sensu lato; Echinococcus multilocularis; Western blot; antibodies; antigens; diagnosis; serology

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge in individuals with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We investigated the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) rechallenge in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received ICI-based therapies in a previous systemic line. METHODS: In this international, retrospective multicenter study, patients with HCC who received at least two lines of ICI-based therapies (ICI-1, ICI-2) at 14 institutions were eligible. The main outcomes included best overall response and treatment-related adverse events. RESULTS: Of 994 ICI-treated patients screened, a total of 58 patients (male, n = 41; 71%) with a mean age of 65.0±9.0 years were included. Median systemic treatment lines of ICI-1 and ICI-2 were 1 (range, 1-4) and 3 (range, 2-9), respectively. ICI-based therapies used at ICI-1 and ICI-2 included ICI alone (ICI-1, n = 26, 45%; ICI-2, n = 4, 7%), dual ICI regimens (n = 1, 2%; n = 12, 21%), or ICI combined with targeted therapies/anti-VEGF (n = 31, 53%; n = 42, 72%). Most patients discontinued ICI-1 due to progression (n = 52, 90%). Objective response rate was 22% at ICI-1 and 26% at ICI-2. Responses at ICI-2 were also seen in patients who had progressive disease as best overall response at ICI-1 (n = 11/21; 52%). Median time-to-progression at ICI-1 and ICI-2 was 5.4 (95% CI 3.0-7.7) months and 5.2 (95% CI 3.3-7.0) months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3-4 at ICI-1 and ICI-2 were observed in 9 (16%) and 10 (17%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ICI rechallenge was safe and resulted in a treatment benefit in a meaningful proportion of patients with HCC. These data provide a rationale for investigating ICI-based regimens in patients who progressed on first-line immunotherapy in prospective trials. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Therapeutic sequencing after first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a challenge as no available second-line treatment options have been studied in immunotherapy-pretreated patients. Particularly, the role of ICI rechallenge in patients with HCC is unclear, as data from prospective trials are lacking. We investigated the efficacy and safety of ICI-based regimens in patients with HCC pretreated with immunotherapy in a retrospective, international, multicenter study. Our data provide the rationale for prospective trials investigating the role of ICI-based regimens in patients who have progressed on first-line immunotherapy

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge in individuals with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We investigated the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) rechallenge in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received ICI-based therapies in a previous systemic line. METHODS: In this international, retrospective multicenter study, patients with HCC who received at least two lines of ICI-based therapies (ICI-1, ICI-2) at 14 institutions were eligible. The main outcomes included best overall response and treatment-related adverse events. RESULTS: Of 994 ICI-treated patients screened, a total of 58 patients (male, n = 41; 71%) with a mean age of 65.0±9.0 years were included. Median systemic treatment lines of ICI-1 and ICI-2 were 1 (range, 1-4) and 3 (range, 2-9), respectively. ICI-based therapies used at ICI-1 and ICI-2 included ICI alone (ICI-1, n = 26, 45%; ICI-2, n = 4, 7%), dual ICI regimens (n = 1, 2%; n = 12, 21%), or ICI combined with targeted therapies/anti-VEGF (n = 31, 53%; n = 42, 72%). Most patients discontinued ICI-1 due to progression (n = 52, 90%). Objective response rate was 22% at ICI-1 and 26% at ICI-2. Responses at ICI-2 were also seen in patients who had progressive disease as best overall response at ICI-1 (n = 11/21; 52%). Median time-to-progression at ICI-1 and ICI-2 was 5.4 (95% CI 3.0-7.7) months and 5.2 (95% CI 3.3-7.0) months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3-4 at ICI-1 and ICI-2 were observed in 9 (16%) and 10 (17%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ICI rechallenge was safe and resulted in a treatment benefit in a meaningful proportion of patients with HCC. These data provide a rationale for investigating ICI-based regimens in patients who progressed on first-line immunotherapy in prospective trials. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Therapeutic sequencing after first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a challenge as no available second-line treatment options have been studied in immunotherapy-pretreated patients. Particularly, the role of ICI rechallenge in patients with HCC is unclear, as data from prospective trials are lacking. We investigated the efficacy and safety of ICI-based regimens in patients with HCC pretreated with immunotherapy in a retrospective, international, multicenter study. Our data provide the rationale for prospective trials investigating the role of ICI-based regimens in patients who have progressed on first-line immunotherapy

Image_2_Predisposing and precipitating risk factors for delirium in gastroenterology and hepatology: Subgroup analysis of 718 patients from a hospital-wide prospective cohort study.jpeg

Background and AimsDelirium is the most common acute neuropsychiatric syndrome in hospitalized patients. Higher age and cognitive impairment are known predisposing risk factors in general hospital populations. However, the interrelation with precipitating gastrointestinal (GI) and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) diseases remains to be determined.Patients and methodsProspective 1-year hospital-wide cohort study in 29’278 adults, subgroup analysis in 718 patients hospitalized with GI/HPB disease. Delirium based on routine admission screening and a DSM-5 based construct. Regression analyses used to evaluate clinical characteristics of delirious patients.ResultsDelirium was detected in 24.8% (178/718). Age in delirious patients (median 62 years [IQR 21]) was not different to non-delirious (median 60 years [IQR 22]), p = 0.45). Dementia was the strongest predisposing factor for delirium (OR 66.16 [6.31–693.83], p ConclusionDelirium in GI- and HPB-disease was not associated with higher age per se, but with cognitive and functional impairment. Delirium needs to be considered in younger adults with acute renal failure and/or liver disease. Clinicians should be aware about individual risk profiles, apply preventive and supportive strategies early, which may improve outcomes and lower costs.</p

Image_1_Predisposing and precipitating risk factors for delirium in gastroenterology and hepatology: Subgroup analysis of 718 patients from a hospital-wide prospective cohort study.jpeg

Background and AimsDelirium is the most common acute neuropsychiatric syndrome in hospitalized patients. Higher age and cognitive impairment are known predisposing risk factors in general hospital populations. However, the interrelation with precipitating gastrointestinal (GI) and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) diseases remains to be determined.Patients and methodsProspective 1-year hospital-wide cohort study in 29’278 adults, subgroup analysis in 718 patients hospitalized with GI/HPB disease. Delirium based on routine admission screening and a DSM-5 based construct. Regression analyses used to evaluate clinical characteristics of delirious patients.ResultsDelirium was detected in 24.8% (178/718). Age in delirious patients (median 62 years [IQR 21]) was not different to non-delirious (median 60 years [IQR 22]), p = 0.45). Dementia was the strongest predisposing factor for delirium (OR 66.16 [6.31–693.83], p ConclusionDelirium in GI- and HPB-disease was not associated with higher age per se, but with cognitive and functional impairment. Delirium needs to be considered in younger adults with acute renal failure and/or liver disease. Clinicians should be aware about individual risk profiles, apply preventive and supportive strategies early, which may improve outcomes and lower costs.</p

Data_Sheet_1_Predisposing and precipitating risk factors for delirium in gastroenterology and hepatology: Subgroup analysis of 718 patients from a hospital-wide prospective cohort study.pdf

Background and AimsDelirium is the most common acute neuropsychiatric syndrome in hospitalized patients. Higher age and cognitive impairment are known predisposing risk factors in general hospital populations. However, the interrelation with precipitating gastrointestinal (GI) and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) diseases remains to be determined.Patients and methodsProspective 1-year hospital-wide cohort study in 29’278 adults, subgroup analysis in 718 patients hospitalized with GI/HPB disease. Delirium based on routine admission screening and a DSM-5 based construct. Regression analyses used to evaluate clinical characteristics of delirious patients.ResultsDelirium was detected in 24.8% (178/718). Age in delirious patients (median 62 years [IQR 21]) was not different to non-delirious (median 60 years [IQR 22]), p = 0.45). Dementia was the strongest predisposing factor for delirium (OR 66.16 [6.31–693.83], p ConclusionDelirium in GI- and HPB-disease was not associated with higher age per se, but with cognitive and functional impairment. Delirium needs to be considered in younger adults with acute renal failure and/or liver disease. Clinicians should be aware about individual risk profiles, apply preventive and supportive strategies early, which may improve outcomes and lower costs.</p