Habitual dietary fibre and prebiotic intake is inadequate in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: findings from a multicentre cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Recommendations for dietary fibre intake in patients with inflammatory bowel disease are highly variable. Despite the potential benefits of prebiotic fibres on the gut microbiome, many patients with inflammatory bowel disease follow a low fibre diet. The present study comprehensively evaluated intakes of total and prebiotic fibres in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, aiming to determine the adequacy of fibre intake and factors that may influence intake. METHODS: Outpatients with a formal diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease were recruited to this multicentre cross-sectional study. Habitual dietary fibre intake including prebiotic fibre types was measured using a validated comprehensive nutrition assessment questionnaire. Adequacy of total fibre intake was compared with Australian Nutrient Reference Values. Multiple linear regressions were performed to determine factors influencing fibre intake. RESULTS: Of 92 participants, 52% had Crohn's disease, 51% were male and the mean age was 40 years. Overall, only 38% of the cohort consumed adequate total fibre (median 24 g day-1 , interquartile range 18.5-32.9 g day-1 ). Adequate fibre consumption was significantly less common in males than females (21.3% versus 55.6%, P = 0.002). Resistant starch intake (median 2.9 g day-1 , interquartile range 2.1-4.8 g day-1 ) was significantly less than the proposed recommendations (20 g day-1 ). Disease-related factors such as phenotype and disease activity were not found to influence fibre intake. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease habitually consume inadequate fibre, particularly prebiotic fibre resistant starch. The potential deleterious effects of low prebiotic intake on the gut microbiome and disease-related outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease are unknown and warrant further research.

Compassionate access anti-tumour necrosis factor-α therapy for ulcerative colitis in Australia: the benefits to patients.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of infliximab has been demonstrated in patients with both acute severe and moderate-severe ulcerative colitis (UC). However, there is a need for 'real-life data' to ensure that conclusions from trial settings are applicable in usual care. We therefore examined the national experience of anti-tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) therapy in UC. METHODS: Case notes review of patients with UC who had received compassionate access (CA) anti-TNF-α therapy from prospectively maintained inflammatory bowel disease databases of six Australian adult teaching hospitals. RESULTS: Patients either received drug for acute severe UC (ASUC) failing steroids (n = 29) or for medically refractory UC (MRUC) (n = 35). In ASUC, the treating physicians judged that anti-TNF-α therapy was successful in 20/29 patients (69%); in these cases, anti-TNF-α was able to be discontinued (after 1-3 infusions in 19/20 responders) as clinical remission was achieved. Consistent with this perceived benefit, only 7/29 (24%) subsequently underwent colectomy during a median follow up of 12 months (interquartile range (IQR) 5-16). Eight of the 35 patients with MRUC (23%) required colectomy during a median follow up of 28 months (IQR 11-43). The majority of these patients (20/35 or 57%) had anti-TNF-α therapy for ≥4 months, whereas, 27/29 (93%) of ASUC patients had CA for ≤3 months. CONCLUSIONS: These data show an excellent overall benefit for anti-TNF-α therapy in both ASUC and MRUC. In particular, only short-duration anti-TNF-α was required in ASUC. These real-life data thus support the clinical trial data and should lead to broader use of this therapy in UC.

Adjunctive fecal microbiota transplantation in supportive oncology: Emerging indications and considerations in immunocompromised patients.

FMT has gained enormous momentum in the treatment of acute inflammatory and infectious diseases. Despite an encouraging safety profile, FMT has been met with caution in the oncological setting due to perceived infectious risks in immunocompromised patients. Theoretical risks aside, the application of FMT in oncology may stand to benefit patients, via modulation of treatment efficacy and the mitigation of treatment complications. Here, we summarize most recent safety data of FMT in immunocompromised cohorts, including people with cancer, highlighting that FMT may actually provide protection against bacterial translocation via introduction of a diverse microbiome and restoration of epithelial defenses. We also discuss the emerging translational applications of FMT within supportive oncology, including the prevention and treatment of graft vs. host disease and sepsis, treatment of immunotherapy-induced colitis and restoration of the gut microbiome in survivors of childhood cancer.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: faecal microbiota transplantation for the induction of remission for active ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is emerging as a novel therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC). Interpretation of efficacy of FMT for UC is complicated by differences among studies in blinding, FMT administration procedures, intensity of therapy and donor stool processing methods. AIM: To determine whether FMT is effective and safe for the induction of remission in active UC. METHODS: Medline (Ovid), Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception through February 2017. Original studies reporting remission rates following FMT for active UC were included. All study designs were included in the systematic review and a meta-analysis performed including only randomised controlled trials (RCTs). RESULTS: There were 14 cohort studies and four RCTs that used markedly different protocols. In the meta-analysis of RCTs, clinical remission was achieved in 39 of 140 (28%) patients in the donor FMT groups compared with 13 of 137 (9%) patients in the placebo groups; odds ratio 3.67 (95% CI: 1.82-7.39, P<.01). Clinical response was achieved in 69 of 140 (49%) donor FMT patients compared to 38 of 137 (28%) placebo patients; odds ratio 2.48 (95% CI: 1.18-5.21, P=.02). In cohort studies, 39 of 168 (24%; 95% CI: 11%-40%) achieved clinical remission. CONCLUSIONS: Despite variation in processes, FMT appears to be effective for induction of remission in UC, with no major short-term safety signals. Further studies are needed to better define dose frequency and preparation methods, and to explore its feasibility, efficacy and safety as a maintenance agent.

Faecal microbiota transplant for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection using long-term frozen stool is effective: clinical efficacy and bacterial viability data.

BACKGROUND: Faecal microbial transplant (FMT) for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (rCDI) is greatly facilitated by frozen stool banks. However, the effect of frozen storage of stool for greater than 2 months on the viability of stool bacteria is unknown and the efficacy of FMT is not clear. AIM: To evaluate the viability of bacteria in stool frozen for up to 6 months, and the clinical efficacy of FMT with stool frozen for 2-10 months, for the treatment of rCDI. METHODS: Viability of six representative groups of faecal bacteria after 2 and 6 months of storage at -80 °C, in normal saline (NS) or 10% glycerol were assessed by culture on plate media. The clinical outcomes of 16 consecutive patients with rCDI treated with aliquots of stool frozen in 10% glycerol and stored for 2-10 months were also examined. RESULTS: Viability at both 2 and 6 months was similar to baseline, in specimens stored in 10% glycerol and at 2 months in stool stored in NS, but was reduced by >1 log at 6 months for Aerobes (P < 0.01), total Coliforms (P < 0.01) and Lactobacilli (P < 0.01) in NS. Using stool frozen for 2-10 months in 10% glycerol, the cure rate for rCDI was 88% with one FMT and 100% after repeat FMT in those who relapsed. CONCLUSION: Stool for faecal microbial transplant to treat rCDI can be safely stored frozen in 10% glycerol for at least 6 months without loss of clinical efficacy or viability in the six bacterial groups tested.