228 research outputs found
Esophageal Granular Cell Tumor and Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Two Interesting Entities Identified in the Same Patient
We illustrate the case of a 41-year-old male with allergic manifestations since childhood. He sought medical attention for intermittent, progressive dysphagia from which he had been suffering for a number of years, having felt the sensation of a retrosternal lump and a self-limited obstruction to the passage of food. Endoscopy detected a submucosal tumor in the upper third of the esophagus, which was typified, via biopsy, as a granular cell tumor with benign characteristics and probably responsible for the symptoms. Two years later, the patient sought medical attention once again as these symptoms had not abated, hence digestive endoscopy was repeated. This revealed stenosis of the junction between the middle and lower thirds of the organ which had not been detected previously but was passable under gentle pressure. Eosinophilic esophagitis was detected after biopsies were taken. Esophageal manometry identified a motor disorder affecting the esophageal body. Following three months of treatment using fluticasone propionate applied topically, the symptoms went into remission, esophageal stenosis disappeared and the esophageal biopsies returned to normal. This is the first documented case of the link between granular cell tumors and Eosinophilic esophagitis, two different disorders which could cause dysphagia in young patients
Genome-wide expression changes induced by bisphenol A, F and S in human stem cell derived hepatocyte-like cells
Acknowledgments BLV and DCH were funded by an award from the Chief Scientist Office (TCS 16/37). This work has received funding from the European Unionâs Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 681002 (EU-ToxRisk) and from TransQST (no. 116030).Peer reviewedPublisher PD
Erratum to: Modelling foetal exposure to maternal smoking using hepatoblasts from pluripotent stem cells
Quantification of ethyl glucuronide, ethyl sulfate, nicotine, and its metabolites in human fetal liver and placenta
This research was supported by the Medical Research Council (UK) grant MR/L010011/1 and the Intramural Research Program at the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health. Paired fetal liver and placenta samples were graciously provided by the Joint Medical Research Council/Wellcome Trust (grant number 099175/Z/12/Z) Human Developmental Biology Resource (www.hdbr.org). The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11419-017-0389-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.Peer reviewedPostprin
The role of statins on helicobacter pylori eradication: Results from the european registry on the management of h. pylori (hp-eureg)
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
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 âEuropean Registry on Helicobacter pylori managementâ (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 (â„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 days with standard and high-dose PPIs, respectively; and (2) levofloxacin-amoxicillin triple therapy for 14 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
European registry on helicobacter pylori management: Effectiveness of first and second-line treatment in Spain
The management of Helicobacter pylori infection has to rely on previous local effectiveness due to the geographical variability of antibiotic resistance. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of first and second-line H. pylori treatment in Spain, where the empirical prescription is recommended. A multicentre prospective non-interventional registry of the clinical practice of European gastroenterologists concerning H. pylori infection (Hp-EuReg) was developed, including patients from 2013 until June 2019. Effectiveness was evaluated descriptively and through a multivariate analysis concerning age, gender, presence of ulcer, proton-pump in-hibitor (PPI) dose, therapy duration and compliance. Overall, 53 Spanish hospitals were included, and 10, 267 patients received a first-line therapy. The best results were obtained with the 10-day bismuth single-capsule therapy (95% cure rate by intention-to-treat) and with both the 14-day bismuth-clarithromycin quadruple (PPI-bismuth-clarithromycin-amoxicillin, 91%) and the 14-day non-bismuth quadruple concomitant (PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin-metronidazole, 92%) therapies. Second-line therapies were prescribed to 2448 patients, with most-effective therapies being the triple quinolone (PPI-amoxicillin-levofloxacin/moxifloxacin) and the bismuth-levofloxacin quadruple schemes (PPI-bismuth-levofloxacin-amoxicillin) prescribed for 14 days (92%, 89% and 90% effective-ness, respectively), and the bismuth single-capsule (10 days, 88.5%). Compliance, longer duration and higher acid inhibition were associated with higher effectiveness. âOptimizedâ H. pylori therapies achieve over 90% success in Spain
Incidence, clinical characteristics and management of inflammatory bowel disease in Spain: large-scale epidemiological study
(1) Aims: To assess the incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Spain, to describe the main epidemiological and clinical characteristics at diagnosis and the evolution of the disease, and to explore the use of drug treatments. (2) Methods: Prospective, population-based nationwide registry. Adult patients diagnosed with IBDâCrohnâs disease (CD), ulcerative colitis (UC) or IBD unclassified (IBD-U)âduring 2017 in Spain were included and were followed-up for 1 year. (3) Results: We identified 3611 incident cases of IBD diagnosed during 2017 in 108 hospitals covering over 22 million inhabitants. The overall incidence (cases/100, 000 person-years) was 16 for IBD, 7.5 for CD, 8 for UC, and 0.5 for IBD-U; 53% of patients were male and median age was 43 years (interquartile range = 31â56 years). During a median 12-month follow-up, 34% of patients were treated with systemic steroids, 25% with immunomodulators, 15% with biologics and 5.6% underwent surgery. The percentage of patients under these treatments was significantly higher in CD than UC and IBD-U. Use of systemic steroids and biologics was significantly higher in hospitals with high resources. In total, 28% of patients were hospitalized (35% CD and 22% UC patients, p < 0.01). (4) Conclusion: The incidence of IBD in Spain is rather high and similar to that reported in Northern Europe. IBD patients require substantial therapeutic resources, which are greater in CD and in hospitals with high resources, and much higher than previously reported. One third of patients are hospitalized in the first year after diagnosis and a relevant proportion undergo surgery. © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland
Effectiveness and Safety of the Sequential Use of a Second and Third Anti-TNF Agent in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Results from the Eneida Registry
Background: The effectiveness of the switch to another anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent is not known. The aim of this study was to analyze the effectiveness and safety of treatment with a second and third anti-TNF drug after intolerance to or failure of a previous anti-TNF agent in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Methods: We included patients diagnosed with IBD from the ENEIDA registry who received another anti-TNF after intolerance to or failure of a prior anti-TNF agent. Results: A total of 1122 patients were included. In the short term, remission was achieved in 55% of the patients with the second anti-TNF. The incidence of loss of response was 19% per patient-year with the second anti-TNF. Combination therapy (hazard ratio [HR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-3; P < 0.0001) and ulcerative colitis vs Crohn''s disease (HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1; P = 0.005) were associated with a higher probability of loss of response. Fifteen percent of the patients had adverse events, and 10% had to discontinue the second anti-TNF. Of the 71 patients who received a third anti-TNF, 55% achieved remission. The incidence of loss of response was 22% per patient-year with a third anti-TNF. Adverse events occurred in 7 patients (11%), but only 1 stopped the drug. Conclusions: Approximately half of the patients who received a second anti-TNF achieved remission; nevertheless, a significant proportion of them subsequently lost response. Combination therapy and type of IBD were associated with loss of response. Remission was achieved in almost 50% of patients who received a third anti-TNF; nevertheless, a significant proportion of them subsequently lost response
Budesonide Orodispersible Tablets Maintain Remission in a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disorder. Swallowed topical-acting corticosteroids are effective in bringing active EoE into remission. However, it is not clear whether these drugs are effective for long-term maintenance of remission. METHODS: We performed a double-blind trial to compare the efficacy and safety of 2 dosages of a budesonide orodispersible tablet (BOT) vs placebo in maintaining remission of EoE. Maintenance of remission was defined as absence of clinical and histologic relapse and no premature withdrawal for any reason. Two hundred and four adults with EoE in clinical and histologic remission, from 29 European study sites, were randomly assigned to groups given BOT 0.5 mg twice daily (n = 68), BOT 1.0 mg twice daily (n = 68), or placebo twice daily (n = 68) for up to 48 weeks. RESULTS: At end of treatment, 73.5% of patients receiving BOT 0.5 mg twice daily and 75% receiving BOT 1.0 mg twice daily were in persistent remission compared with 4.4% of patients in the placebo group (P < .001 for both comparisons of BOT with placebo). Median time to relapse in the placebo group was 87 days. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the BOT and placebo groups. Morning serum levels of cortisol were in the normal range at baseline and did not significantly change during treatment. Four patients receiving BOT developed asymptomatic, low serum levels of cortisol. Clinically manifested candidiasis was suspected in 16.2% of patients in the BOT 0.5 mg group and in 11.8% of patients in the BOT 1.0 mg group; all infections resolved with treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 3 trial, up to 48 weeks of treatment with BOT (0.5 mg or 1.0 mg twice daily) was superior to placebo in maintaining remission of EoE. Both dosages were equally effective and well tolerated. EudraCT number; 2014-001485-99; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02434029
- âŠ