Discovery and Validation of Methylation Biomarkers for Ulcerative Colitis Associated Neoplasia

Abstract Background and aims Ulcerative colitis (UC) is associated with a higher background risk of dysplasia and/or neoplasia due to chronic inflammation. There exist few biomarkers for identification of patients with dysplasia, and targeted biopsies in this group of patients are inaccurate in reliably identifying dysplasia. We aimed to examine the epigenome of UC dysplasia and to identify and validate potential biomarkers Methods Colonic samples from patients with UC-associated dysplasia or neoplasia underwent epigenome-wide analysis on the Illumina 450K methylation array. Markers were validated by bisulphite pyrosequencing on a secondary validation cohort and accuracy calculated using logistic regression and receiver-operator curves. Results Twelve samples from 4 patients underwent methylation array analysis and 6 markers (GNG7, VAV3, KIF5C, PIK3R5, TUBB6, and ZNF583) were taken forward for secondary validation on a cohort of 71 colonic biopsy samples consisting of normal uninflamed mucosa from control patients, acute and chronic colitis, “field” mucosa in patients with dysplasia/neoplasia, dysplasia, and neoplasia. Methylation in the beta-tubulin TUBB6 correlated with the presence of dysplasia (P &amp;lt; 0.0001) and accurately discriminated between dysplasia and nondysplastic tissue, even in the apparently normal field mucosa downstream from dysplastic lesions (AUC 0.84, 95% CI 0.81–0.87). Conclusions Methylation in TUBB6 is a potential biomarker for UC- associated dysplasia. Further validation is needed and is ongoing as part of the ENDCAP-C study. </jats:sec

Fluid Optimisation in Emergency Laparotomy (FLO-ELA) Trial: study protocol for a multi-centre randomised trial of cardiac output-guided fluid therapy compared to usual care in patients undergoing major emergency gastrointestinal surgery

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing major emergency gastrointestinal surgery are a major burden on healthcare systems. Optimal management of perioperative intravenous fluids may reduce mortality rates and improve outcomes from surgery. Previous small trials of cardiac-output guided haemodynamic therapy algorithms in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery have suggested this intervention results in reduced complications and a modest reduction in mortality. However, this existing evidence is based mainly on elective (planned) surgery, with little evaluation in the emergency setting. There are fundamental clinical and pathophysiological differences between the planned and emergency surgical setting which may influence the effects of this intervention. A large definitive trial in emergency surgery is needed to confirm or refute the potential benefits observed in elective surgery and to inform widespread clinical practice. METHODS: The FLO-ELA trial is a multi-centre, parallel-group, open, randomised controlled trial. 3138 patients aged 50 and over undergoing major emergency gastrointestinal surgery will be randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio using minimisation to minimally invasive cardiac output monitoring to guide protocolised administration of intra-venous fluid, or usual care without cardiac output monitoring. The trial intervention will be carried out during surgery and for up to 6 h postoperatively. The trial is funded through an efficient design call by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) programme and uses existing routinely collected datasets for the majority of data collection. The primary outcome is the number of days alive and out of hospital within 90 days of randomisation. Participants and those delivering the intervention will not be blinded to treatment allocation. Participant recruitment started in September 2017 with a 1-year internal pilot phase and is ongoing at the time of publication. DISCUSSION: This will be the largest contemporary randomised trial examining the effectiveness of perioperative cardiac output-guided haemodynamic therapy in patients undergoing major emergency gastrointestinal surgery. The multi-centre design and broad inclusion criteria support the external validity of the trial. Although the clinical teams delivering the trial interventions will not be blinded, significant trial outcome measures are objective and not subject to detection bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 14729158. Registered on 02 May 2017

Erratum to 'Exploring the cost-effectiveness of high versus low perioperative fraction of inspired oxygen in the prevention of surgical site infections among abdominal surgery patients in three low- and middle-income countries' [BJA Open 7 (2023) 100207]

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bjao.2023.100207.].</p

A Randomized Trial of Rofecoxib for the Chemoprevention of Colorectal Adenomas

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In human and animal studies, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal neoplasia. Although the underlying mechanisms are unknown, inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX), particularly COX-2, is thought to play a role. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial to assess whether use of the selective COX-2 inhibitor rofecoxib would reduce the risk of colorectal adenomas. METHODS: We randomized 2587 subjects with a recent history of histologically confirmed adenomas to receive daily placebo or 25 mg rofecoxib. Randomization was stratified by baseline use of cardioprotective aspirin. Colonoscopic follow-up evaluation was planned for 1 and 3 years after randomization. The primary end point was all adenomas diagnosed during 3 years' treatment. In a modified intent-to-treat analysis, we computed the relative risk of any adenoma after randomization, using Mantel-Haenszel statistics stratified by low-dose aspirin use at baseline. RESULTS: Adenoma recurrence was less frequent for rofecoxib subjects than for those randomized to placebo (41% vs 55%; P < .0001; relative risk [RR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.83). Rofecoxib also conferred a reduction in risk of advanced adenomas (P < .01). The chemopreventive effect was more pronounced in the first year (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.57-0.73) than in the subsequent 2 years (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93). As reported previously, rofecoxib was associated with increased risks of significant upper gastrointestinal events and serious thrombotic cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, rofecoxib significantly reduced the risk of colorectal adenomas, but also had serious toxicity

The impact of preoperative oral nutrition supplementation on outcomes in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery for cancer in low- and middle-income countries:a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Malnutrition is an independent predictor for postoperative complications in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We systematically reviewed evidence on the impact of preoperative oral nutrition supplementation (ONS) on patients undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery in LMICs. We searched EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, WHO Global Index Medicus, SciELO, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) databases from inception to March 21, 2022 for randomised controlled trials evaluating preoperative ONS in gastrointestinal cancer within LMICs. We evaluated the impact of ONS on all postoperative outcomes using random-effects meta-analysis. Seven studies reported on 891 patients (446 ONS group, 445 control group) undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. Preoperative ONS reduced all cause postoperative surgical complications (risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% CI 0.46–0.60, P < 0.001, I 2 = 0%, n = 891), infection (0.52, 0.40–0.67, P = 0.008, I 2 = 0%, n = 570) and all-cause mortality (0.35, 0.26–0.47, P = 0.014, I 2 = 0%, n = 588). Despite heterogeneous populations and baseline rates, absolute risk ratio (ARR) was reduced for all cause (pooled effect −0.14, −0.22 to −0.06, P = 0.006; number needed to treat (NNT) 7) and infectious complications (−0.13, −0.22 to −0.06, P < 0.001; NNT 8). Preoperative nutrition in patients undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery in LMICs demonstrated consistently strong and robust treatment effects across measured outcomes. However additional higher quality research, with particular focus within African populations, are urgently required

Trial outcomes and information for clinical decision-making: a comparative study of opinions of health professionals

Background: Trials are robust sources of data for clinical practice, however, trial outcomes may not reflect what is important to communicate for decision making. The study compared clinicians’ views of outcomes to include in a core outcome set for colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery, with what clinicians considered important information for clinical practice (core information). Methods: Potential outcomes/information domains were identified through systematic literature reviews, reviews of hospital information leaflets and interviews with patients. These were organized into 6 categories, and used to design a questionnaire survey that asked surgeons and nurses from a sample of CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain as an outcome or as information on a 9-point Likert scale. Respondents were re-surveyed (round 2) following group feedback (Delphi methods). Comparisons were made by calculating the difference in mean scores between the outcomes and information domains, and paired t-tests were used to explore the difference between mean scores of the 6 outcome/information categories. Results: Data sources identified 1216 outcomes/information of CRC surgery that informed a 94 item questionnaire. First round questionnaires were returned from 63/81 (78%) of centers. Clinicians rated 76/94 (84%) domains of higher importance to measure in trials than to information to communicate to patients in Round 1. This was reduced to 24/47 (51%) in Round 2. The greatest difference was evident in domains about survival, which was rated much more highly as a trial outcome than important piece of information for decision-making (mean difference 2.3, 95% CI 1.9-2.8, p<0.0001). Specific complications and quality-of-life domains were rated similarly (mean difference 0.18, 95% CI -0.1-0.4, p=0.2 and 0.2, 95% CI -0.1-0.5, p=0.2 respectively). Conclusions: Whilst clinicians want to measure key outcomes in trials, they rate these as less important to communicate in decision-making with patients. This discrepancy needs to be explored and addressed to maximize the impact of trials on clinical practice

Core Outcomes for Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Consensus Study

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of worldwide morbidity and mortality. Surgical treatment is common, and there is a great need to improve the delivery of such care. The gold standard for evaluating surgery is within well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, the impact of RCTs is diminished by a lack of coordinated outcome measurement and reporting. A solution to these issues is to develop an agreed standard “core” set of outcomes to be measured in all trials to facilitate cross-study comparisons, meta-analysis, and minimize outcome reporting bias. This study defines a core outcome set for CRC surgery. Methods and Findings: The scope of this COS includes clinical effectiveness trials of surgical interventions for colorectal cancer. Excluded were nonsurgical oncological interventions. Potential outcomes of importance to patients and professionals were identified through systematic literature reviews and patient interviews. All outcomes were transcribed verbatim and categorized into domains by two independent researchers. This informed a questionnaire survey that asked stakeholders (patients and professionals) from United Kingdom CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain. Respondents were resurveyed following group feedback (Delphi methods). Outcomes rated as less important were discarded after each survey round according to predefined criteria, and remaining outcomes were considered at three consensus meetings; two involving international professionals and a separate one with patients. A modified nominal group technique was used to gain the final consensus. Data sources identified 1,216 outcomes of CRC surgery that informed a 91 domain questionnaire. First round questionnaires were returned from 63 out of 81 (78%) centers, including 90 professionals, and 97 out of 267 (35%) patients. Second round response rates were high for all stakeholders (>80%). Analysis of responses lead to 45 and 23 outcome domains being retained after the first and second surveys, respectively. Consensus meetings generated agreement on a 12 domain COS. This constituted five perioperative outcome domains (including anastomotic leak), four quality of life outcome domains (including fecal urgency and incontinence), and three oncological outcome domains (including long-term survival). Conclusion: This study used robust consensus methodology to develop a core outcome set for use in colorectal cancer surgical trials. It is now necessary to validate the use of this set in research practice

Design of a multicentre randomized trial to evaluate CT colonography versus colonoscopy or barium enema for diagnosis of colonic cancer in older symptomatic patients: The SIGGAR study

Background and Aims: The standard whole-colon tests used to investigate patients with symptoms of colorectal cancer are barium enema and colonoscopy. Colonoscopy is the reference test but is technically difficult, resource intensive, and associated with adverse events, especially in the elderly. Barium enema is safer but has reduced sensitivity for cancer. CT colonography ("virtual colonoscopy") is a newer alternative that may combine high sensitivity for cancer with safety and patient acceptability. The SIGGAR trial aims to determine the diagnostic efficacy, acceptability, and economic costs associated with this new technology.Methods: The SIGGAR trial is a multi-centre randomised comparison of CT colonography versus standard investigation ( barium enema or colonoscopy), the latter determined by individual clinician preference. Diagnostic efficacy for colorectal cancer and colonic polyps measuring 1 cm or larger will be determined, as will the physical and psychological morbidity associated with each diagnostic test, the latter via questionnaires developed from qualitative interviews. The economic costs of making or excluding a diagnosis will be determined for each diagnostic test and information from the trial and other data from the literature will be used to populate models framed to summarise the health effects and costs of alternative approaches to detection of significant colonic neoplasia in patients of different ages, prior risks and preferences. This analysis will focus particularly on the frequency, clinical relevance, costs, and psychological and physical morbidity associated with detection of extracolonic lesions by CT colonography.Results: Recruitment commenced in March 2004 and at the time of writing ( July 2007) 5025 patients have been randomised. A lower than expected prevalence of end-points in the barium enema sub-trial has caused an increase in sample size. In addition to the study protocol, we describe our approach to recruitment, notably the benefits of extensive piloting, the use of a sham-randomisation procedure, which was employed to determine whether centres interested in participating were likely to be effective in practice, and the provision of funding for dedicated sessions for a research nurse at each centre to devote specifically to this trial

Interventions in randomised controlled trials in surgery: issues to consider during trial design

Until recently, insufficient attention has been paid to the fact that surgical interventions are complex. This complexity has several implications, including the way in which surgical interventions are described and delivered in trials. In order for surgeons to adopt trial findings, interventions need to be described in sufficient detail to enable accurate replication; however, it may be permissible to allow some aspects to be delivered according to local practice. Accumulating work in this area has identified the need for general guidance on the design of surgical interventions in trial protocols and reports. Key issues to consider when designing surgical interventions include the identification of each surgical intervention and their components, who will deliver the interventions, and where and how the interventions will be standardised and monitored during the trial. The trial design (pragmatic and explanatory), comparator and stage of innovation may also influence the extent of detail required. Thoughtful consideration of surgical interventions in this way may help with the interpretation of trial results and the adoption of successful interventions into clinical practice

Loss of Expression and Promoter Methylation of SLIT2 Are Associated with Sessile Serrated Adenoma Formation.

Serrated adenomas form a distinct subtype of colorectal pre-malignant lesions that may progress to malignancy along a different molecular pathway than the conventional adenoma-carcinoma pathway. Previous studies have hypothesised that BRAF mutation and promoter hypermethylation plays a role, but the evidence for this is not robust. We aimed to carry out a whole-genome loss of heterozygosity analysis, followed by targeted promoter methylation and expression analysis to identify potential pathways in serrated adenomas. An initial panel of 9 sessile serrated adenomas (SSA) and one TSA were analysed using Illumina Goldengate HumanLinkage panel arrays to ascertain regions of loss of heterozygosity. This was verified via molecular inversion probe analysis and microsatellite analysis of a further 32 samples. Methylation analysis of genes of interest was carried out using methylation specific PCR (verified by pyrosequencing) and immunohistochemistry used to correlate loss of expression of genes of interest. All experiments used adenoma samples and normal tissue samples as control. SSA samples were found on whole-genome analysis to have consistent loss of heterozygosity at 4p15.1–4p15.31, which was not found in the sole TSA, adenomas, or normal tissues. Genes of interest in this region were PDCH7 and SLIT2, and combined MSP/IHC analysis of these genes revealed significant loss of SLIT2 expression associated with promoter methylation of SLIT2. Loss of expression of SLIT2 by promoter hypermethylation and loss of heterozygosity events is significantly associated with serrated adenoma development, and SLIT2 may represent a epimutated tumour suppressor gene according to the Knudson “two hit” hypothesis