Faecal microbiota transplantation for sleep disturbance in post-acute COVID-19 syndrome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS) is associated with sleep disturbance but treatment options are limited. The aetiology of PACS may be secondary to alterations in the gut microbiome. Here, we report the efficacy of faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) in alleviating post-COVID insomnia symptoms in a non-randomised, open-label prospective interventional study. METHODS: Between September 22, 2022 and May 22, 2023, we recruited 60 PACS patients with insomnia defined as Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) ≥ 8 and assigned them to the FMT group (FMT at weeks 0, 2, 4 and 8; n=30) or the control group (n=30). The primary outcome was clinical remission defined by an ISI of less than eight at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included changes in the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 scale (GAD-7), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI), blood cortisol and melatonin, and gut microbiome analysis on metagenomic sequencing. RESULTS: At week 12, more patients in the FMT than the control group had insomnia remission (37.9% vs 10.0%; p=0.018). The FMT group showed a decrease in ISI score (p<0.0001), PSQI (p<0.0001), GAD-7 (p=0.0019), ESS (p=0.0057) and blood cortisol concentration (p=0.035) from baseline to week 12, but there was no significant change in the control group. There was enrichment of bacteria such as Gemmiger formicilis and depletion of microbial pathways producing menaquinol derivatives after FMT. Gut microbiome profile resembled that of the donor in FMT responders but not in non-responders at week 12. There was no serious adverse event. CONCLUSION: This pilot study showed that FMT could be effective and safe in alleviating post-COVID insomnia and further clinical trials are warranted. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT05556733.

Effect of Real-Time Computer-Aided Polyp Detection System (ENDO-AID) on Adenoma Detection in Endoscopists-in-Training: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effect of computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) on adenoma detection rate (ADR) among endoscopists-in-training remains unknown. METHODS: We performed a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial in Hong Kong between April 2021 and July 2022 (NCT04838951). Eligible subjects undergoing screening/surveillance/diagnostic colonoscopies were randomized 1:1 to receive colonoscopies with CADe (ENDO-AID[OIP-1]) or not (control) during withdrawal. Procedures were performed by endoscopists-in-training with <500 procedures and <3 years' experience. Randomization was stratified by patient age, sex, and endoscopist experience (beginner vs intermediate level, <200 vs 200-500 procedures). Image enhancement and distal attachment devices were disallowed. Subjects with incomplete colonoscopies or inadequate bowel preparation were excluded. Treatment allocation was blinded to outcome assessors. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR for different adenoma sizes and locations, mean number of adenomas, and non-neoplastic resection rate. RESULTS: A total of 386 and 380 subjects were randomized to CADe and control groups, respectively. The overall ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (57.5% vs 44.5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.72; P < .001). The ADRs for <5 mm (40.4% vs 25.0%) and 5- to 10-mm adenomas (36.8% vs 29.2%) were higher in the CADe group. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group in both the right colon (42.0% vs 30.8%) and left colon (34.5% vs 27.6%), but there was no significant difference in advanced ADR. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group among beginner (60.0% vs 41.9%) and intermediate-level (56.5% vs 45.5%) endoscopists. Mean number of adenomas (1.48 vs 0.86) and non-neoplastic resection rate (52.1% vs 35.0%) were higher in the CADe group. CONCLUSIONS: Among endoscopists-in-training, the use of CADe during colonoscopies was associated with increased overall ADR. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT04838951).

Comparative effectiveness of a second-line biologic in patients with ulcerative colitis: vedolizumab followed by an anti-TNF versus anti-TNF followed by vedolizumab.

Background: Sequential drug treatment with biological agents in ulcerative colitis (UC) is becoming increasingly complex. There are few studies comparing head-to-head outcomes in second-line treatments. The study assesses whether using anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF)-α therapy following the α4ß7 integrin blocker vedolizumab (VDZ) or VDZ after an anti-TNF has more favourable clinical outcomes in UC in a real-world outpatient setting. Methods: Patients with UC who were exposed to first-line anti-TNF (adalimumab or infliximab) or VDZ who subsequently switched to the alternate class between May 2013 and August 2020 were identified by reviewing patient databases at 10 hospitals. Data were collected retrospectively using patient records. Baseline demographics, disease activity indices, biochemical markers, endoscopic Mayo score, colectomy rates, treatment persistence and urgent hospital utilisation composite endpoint (UHUC) rates were examined over a 52-week period. Results: Second-line week 52 treatment persistence was higher in the VDZ group (71/81, 89%) versus the anti-TNF group (15/34, 44%; p=0.0001), as were week 52 colectomy-free survival (VDZ: 77/80, 96%, vs anti-TNF: 26/32, 81%; p=0.009), week 52 UHUC survival (VDZ: 68/84, 81%, vs anti-TNF: 20/34, 59%; p=0.002) and week 52 corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CFCR) rates (VDZ: 22/34, 65%, vs anti-TNF: 4/20, 20%; p=0.001). Conclusion: Compared with second-line anti TNF usage, the VDZ second-line cohort had significantly higher 52-week treatment persistence, UHUC survival, higher colectomy-free survival rates and higher week 52 CFCR. These data suggest that VDZ is an effective biologic in UC as a second-line therapy after anti-TNF exposure. It highlights the effect of biological order on clinically important outcomes.