The association among diet, dietary fiber, and bowel preparation at colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pre-colonoscopy dietary restrictions vary widely and lack evidence-based guidance. We investigated whether fiber and various other foods/macronutrients consumed during the 3 days before colonoscopy are associated with bowel preparation quality. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study among patients scheduled for outpatient colonoscopy. Patients received instructions including split-dose polyethylene glycol, avoidance of vegetables/beans 2 days before colonoscopy, and a clear liquid diet the day before colonoscopy. Two 24-hour dietary recall interviews and 1 patient-recorded food log measured dietary intake on the 3 days before colonoscopy. The Nutrition Data System for Research was used to estimate dietary exposures. Our primary outcome was the quality of bowel preparation measured by the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). RESULTS: We enrolled 201 patients from November 2015 to September 2016 with complete data for 168. The mean age was 59 years (standard deviation, 7 years), and 90% of colonoscopies were conducted for screening/surveillance. Only 17% and 77% of patients complied with diet restrictions 2 and 1 day(s) before colonoscopy, respectively. We found no association between foods consumed 2 and 3 days before colonoscopy and BBPS scores. However, BPPS was positively associated with intake of gelatin, and inversely associated with intake of red meat, poultry, and vegetables on the day before colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support recent guidelines encouraging unrestricted diets >1 day before colonoscopy if using a split-dose bowel regimen. Furthermore, we found no evidence to restrict dietary fiber 1 day before colonoscopy. We also found evidence to promote consumption of gelatin and avoidance of red meat, poultry, and vegetables 1 day before colonoscopy.Dr Jacobson has acted as a consultant for MOTUS GI and Remedy Partners. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication. Supported by NIH/NIDDK R21DK105476. (R21DK105476 - NIH/NIDDK)Accepted manuscrip

Project #82: HFWH Vertical Treatment Zone

Problem Statement: Limited Emergency Department bed capacity and increased acuity resulted in increased left without completing service (LWCS) resulting in increased patient safety risk. Goal: Design a new patient throughput workflow to provide safe, timely and quality patient-centered care resulting in decreased LWSC, decreased arrival to provider times, decreased LOS of the discharged patient, and increased patient satisfaction.https://scholarlycommons.henryford.com/qualityexpo2023/1007/thumbnail.jp

Evaluation of the role of downregulation of SNF5/INI1 core subunit of SWI/SNF complex in clear cell renal cell carcinoma development

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is characterized by stabilization of hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF1), and mutations in von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) gene. Additionally, in about 40% of ccRCC cases the mutation in PBRM1 (POLYBROMO1) gene coding for a non-core subunit of SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex was found suggesting potential impairment of this complex function in ccRCC. In this study we assessed the extent to which the core SWI/SNF complex subunit - INI1 (hSNF5/SMARCB1) is affected in ccRCC and whether it has any consequences on the development of this type of cancer. The evaluation of INI1 protein level in samples from 50 patients with diagnosed ccRCC, including three displaying rhabdoid features, showed the INI1 positive staining in rhabdoid cells while the conventional ccRCC cells exhibited reduced INI1 level. This indicated the rhabdoid component of ccRCC as distinct from other known rhabdoid tumors. The reduced INI1 protein level observed in all conventional ccRCC cases used in this study correlated with decreased SMARCB1 gene expression at the transcript level. Consistently, the overexpression of INI1 protein in A498 ccRCC cell line resulted in the elevation of endogenous SMARCB1 transcript level indicating that the INI1-dependent regulatory feedback loop controlling expression of this gene is affected in ccRCC Moreover, the set of INI1 target genes including i.e. CXCL12/CXCR7/CXCR4 chemokine axis was identified to be affected in ccRCC. In summary, we demonstrated that the inactivation of INI1 may be of high importance for ccRCC development and aggressiveness

Odanacatib for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis : Results of the LOFT multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and LOFT Extension study

Background Odanacatib, a cathepsin K inhibitor, reduces bone resorption while maintaining bone formation. Previous work has shown that odanacatib increases bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of odanacatib to reduce fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Methods The Long-term Odanacatib Fracture Trial (LOFT) was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven study at 388 outpatient clinics in 40 countries. Eligible participants were women aged at least 65 years who were postmenopausal for 5 years or more, with a femoral neck or total hip bone mineral density T-score between −2·5 and −4·0 if no previous radiographic vertebral fracture, or between −1·5 and −4·0 with a previous vertebral fracture. Women with a previous hip fracture, more than one vertebral fracture, or a T-score of less than −4·0 at the total hip or femoral neck were not eligible unless they were unable or unwilling to use approved osteoporosis treatment. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either oral odanacatib (50 mg once per week) or matching placebo. Randomisation was done using an interactive voice recognition system after stratification for previous radiographic vertebral fracture, and treatment was masked to study participants, investigators and their staff, and sponsor personnel. If the study completed before 5 years of double-blind treatment, consenting participants could enrol in a double-blind extension study (LOFT Extension), continuing their original treatment assignment for up to 5 years from randomisation. Primary endpoints were incidence of vertebral fractures as assessed using radiographs collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months, yearly, and at final study visit in participants for whom evaluable radiograph images were available at baseline and at least one other timepoint, and hip and non-vertebral fractures adjudicated as being a result of osteoporosis as assessed by clinical history and radiograph. Safety was assessed in participants who received at least one dose of study drug. The adjudicated cardiovascular safety endpoints were a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and new-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter. Individual cardiovascular endpoints and death were also assessed. LOFT and LOFT Extension are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT00529373) and the European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT number 2007-002693-66). Findings Between Sept 14, 2007, and Nov 17, 2009, we randomly assigned 16 071 evaluable patients to treatment: 8043 to odanacatib and 8028 to placebo. After a median follow-up of 36·5 months (IQR 34·43–40·15) 4297 women assigned to odanacatib and 3960 assigned to placebo enrolled in LOFT Extension (total median follow-up 47·6 months, IQR 35·45–60·06). In LOFT, cumulative incidence of primary outcomes for odanacatib versus placebo were: radiographic vertebral fractures 3·7% (251/6770) versus 7·8% (542/6910), hazard ratio (HR) 0·46, 95% CI 0·40–0·53; hip fractures 0·8% (65/8043) versus 1·6% (125/8028), 0·53, 0·39–0·71; non-vertebral fractures 5·1% (412/8043) versus 6·7% (541/8028), 0·77, 0·68–0·87; all p<0·0001. Combined results from LOFT plus LOFT Extension for cumulative incidence of primary outcomes for odanacatib versus placebo were: radiographic vertebral fractures 4·9% (341/6909) versus 9·6% (675/7011), HR 0·48, 95% CI 0·42–0·55; hip fractures 1·1% (86/8043) versus 2·0% (162/8028), 0·52, 0·40–0·67; non-vertebral fractures 6·4% (512/8043) versus 8·4% (675/8028), 0·74, 0·66–0·83; all p<0·0001. In LOFT, the composite cardiovascular endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 273 (3·4%) of 8043 patients in the odanacatib group versus 245 (3·1%) of 8028 in the placebo group (HR 1·12, 95% CI 0·95–1·34; p=0·18). New-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter occurred in 112 (1·4%) of 8043 patients in the odanacatib group versus 96 (1·2%) of 8028 in the placebo group (HR 1·18, 0·90–1·55; p=0·24). Odanacatib was associated with an increased risk of stroke (1·7% [136/8043] vs 1·3% [104/8028], HR 1·32, 1·02–1·70; p=0·034), but not myocardial infarction (0·7% [60/8043] vs 0·9% [74/8028], HR 0·82, 0·58–1·15; p=0·26). The HR for all-cause mortality was 1·13 (5·0% [401/8043] vs 4·4% [356/8028], 0·98–1·30; p=0·10). When data from LOFT Extension were included, the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in significantly more patients in the odanacatib group than in the placebo group (401 [5·0%] of 8043 vs 343 [4·3%] of 8028, HR 1·17, 1·02–1·36; p=0·029, as did stroke (2·3% [187/8043] vs 1·7% [137/8028], HR 1·37, 1·10–1·71; p=0·0051). Interpretation Odanacatib reduced the risk of fracture, but was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, specifically stroke, in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Based on the overall balance between benefit and risk, the study's sponsor decided that they would no longer pursue development of odanacatib for treatment of osteoporosis