In primary care, second-line IBS therapy with amitriptyline vs. placebo reduced symptoms at 6 mo.

SOURCE CITATION: Ford AC, Wright-Hughes A, Alderson SL, et al; ATLANTIS trialists. Amitriptyline at low-dose and titrated for irritable bowel syndrome as second-line treatment in primary care (ATLANTIS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2023;402:1773-1785. 37858323.

In persons with constipation or IBS-C, kiwifruit vs. psyllium increased spontaneous bowel movements.

SOURCE CITATION: Gearry R, Fukudo S, Barbara G, et al. Consumption of 2 green kiwifruits daily improves constipation and abdominal comfort-results of an international multicenter randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 9 Jan 2023. [Epub ahead of print]. 36537785.

Review of the clinical development of fexuprazan for gastroesophageal reflux-related disease.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a mainstay treatment for acid peptic disorders such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Although PPIs are considered first-line medications for acid suppression, they have notable limitations such as requiring acid-mediated activation, short half-life and duration of action, and metabolic variability. Fexuprazan is a newly developed potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB), which inhibits acid generation and secretion in a competitive and reversible manner. Fexuprazan, like other P-CABs, has significantly different pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties than PPIs with potential advantages including rapid, robust, and durable acid suppression, lack of CYP2C19 metabolism, independence from food intake, and no requirement for activation into an active form. Completed clinical trials of fexuprazan have demonstrated comparable efficacy to PPIs for the healing of erosive esophagitis and relief of GERD-related esophageal symptoms without concerning safety signals. Ongoing clinical trials are evaluating fexuprazan for the prevention of NSAID-induced peptic ulcer disease, non-erosive GERD, and acute and chronic gastritis, as well as healing efficacy and maintenance of erosive esophagitis (EE). Fexuprazan is approved in South Korea for the treatment of EE and at the time of this writing is being considered for regulatory approval in several other countries. In this article, we summarize and discuss the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of fexuprazan.

An Open-label, Multicenter Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Probiotic Blend in Patients With Functional Gastrointestinal Symptoms.

GOAL: A novel 5-strain (Bl-04, Bi-07, HN019, NCFM, and Lpc-37) probiotic blend was developed and its safety and efficacy were evaluated in patients with functional gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms. BACKGROUND: These strains administered together have not previously been investigated. STUDY: Patients aged 18 to 75 years with functional GI symptoms were eligible for inclusion in a single-arm, open-label, multicenter study (NCT04155801). An oral capsule containing the novel probiotic blend was administered once daily for 30 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was patient-reported improvement in overall GI well-being at day 30. Secondary efficacy endpoints included changes in GI symptoms assessed using the GI Health Symptom Questionnaire. Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was recorded at all visits. RESULTS: Of 188 enrolled patients, 72.3% were female and mean (SD) age was 44.1 (13.4) years. At day 30, 85.1% of patients achieved the primary endpoint, a positive response signifying improvement in overall GI well-being. Improvements from baseline were reported at day 30 in diarrhea frequency (baseline frequency≥3 to 4 d/wk) and severity (baseline severity≥5/10) for 75.8% and 87.3% of patients, respectively. Over the same time period, constipation frequency (baseline frequency≥3 to 4 d/wk) and severity (baseline severity≥5/10) improved in 73.6% and 80.4% of patients, respectively. Most patients reported improvements at day 30 in frequency and severity of straining, urgency, abdominal pain/discomfort, bloating, and distention. Improvements reported at day 30 were generally observable at day 14. No safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION: A novel 5-strain probiotic blend improved functional GI symptoms and was safe.

Transient alterations in plasma sodium concentrations with NER1006 bowel preparation: an analysis of three phase III, randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: This analysis characterized changes in sodium levels in patients receiving the 1 L polyethylene glycol-based preparation NER1006. METHODS: Data were pooled from three phase III, randomized clinical trials. A post hoc subanalysis included adults who received a 2-day split-dose (evening/morning) NER1006 regimen, a 1-day split-dose (morning only) regimen, or evening-before regimen and had an increase in sodium concentrations from normal to above the upper limit of normal (143-148 mmol/L) at ≥ 1 of three post-treatment visits. Blood samples were collected at baseline, day of colonoscopy (visit 2), 2 ± 1 days post-colonoscopy (visit 3), and 7 ± 1 days post-colonoscopy (visit 4). RESULTS: A total of 214 of 1028 patients were included. Of the 214 patients, sodium concentration increased from a mean baseline value of 141.8 mmol/L to a mean of 147.1 mmol/L (median increase from baseline of approximately 5 mmol/L). The mean sodium concentration was within normal range at visit 3 (142.3 mmol/L) and visit 4 (142.4 mmol/L), as was the median sodium concentration. Overall, ~ 90% of patients had a normal serum concentration at visits 3 and 4. Based on day of colonoscopy test results, there were four adverse events involving hypernatremia (0.4% of 1028), which were mild and did not require medical intervention; sodium levels returned to normal range by visit 3. CONCLUSION: NER1006 was associated with small, transient increases in sodium levels that were not considered clinically significant. Trial registration NOCT (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02254486 [registered October 2, 2014]), MORA (ClinTrials.gov: NCT02273167 [registered October 23, 2014]; EudraCT number: 2014-002185-78 [registered August 13, 2014]), DAYB (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02273141 [registered October 23, 2014]; EudraCT Number: 2014-002186-30 [registered August 12, 2014]).

A novel duodenal-release formulation of caraway oil and L-menthol is a safe, effective and well tolerated therapy for functional dyspepsia.

BACKGROUND: A randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial (FDREST) of a novel formulation of caraway oil and L-menthol (COLM-SST) demonstrated symptom relief in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). Two follow-up studies were conducted to evaluate patient satisfaction, self-regulated dosing, and long-term safety data: FDACT, Functional Dyspepsia Adherence and Compliance Trial, and FDSU36, Functional Dyspepsia Safety Update at 36 months. METHODS: A patient reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaire was designed and distributed online to assess real-world satisfaction and dosing frequency of open-label COLM-SST in patients with FD. A separate study analyzing voluntary safety surveillance data evaluated the frequency and severity of reported adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 600 FD patients were enrolled in the PRO study. Ninety five percent of respondents reported a major or moderate improvement in their FD symptoms and 91.7% indicated a major or moderate improvement in quality of life (QOL) using COLM-SST. Between 1 and 4 capsules were consumed daily by 91.2% of respondents, with 56.2% taking them before meals. Symptom relief was rapid, with 86.4% of respondents indicating relief within 2 h of taking COLM-SST. Few adverse events (AEs) were reported (0.0187%) by patients using COLM-SST. No serious AEs were identified. CONCLUSION: COLM-SST is safe, well tolerated, and provides rapid relief of FD symptoms. These findings, demonstrated in the FDREST trial, were further supported by a large prospective PRO study evaluating self-regulated dosing frequency, symptom improvement, and QOL. COLM-SST was well-tolerated based on review of AE data at 36 months.

Multicentre, prospective, randomised study comparing the diagnostic yield of colon capsule endoscopy versus CT colonography in a screening population (the TOPAZ study).

OBJECTIVE: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has shown promise for colorectal neoplasia detection compared with optical colonoscopy (OC), but has not been compared with other screening tests in average risk screening patients. DESIGN: Patients 50 to 75 years of age (African Americans, 45-75 years) were randomised to CCE or CT colonography (CTC) and subsequent blinded OC. The primary endpoint was diagnostic yield of polyps ≥6 mm with CCE or CTC. Secondary endpoints included accuracy for size and histology, examination completeness, number/proportion of subjects with polyps and adenomas ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm, subject satisfaction and safety. RESULTS: From 320 enrolled subjects, data from 286 (89.4%) were evaluable. The proportion of subjects with any polyp ≥6 mm confirmed by OC was 31.6% for CCE versus 8.6% for CTC (pPr non-inferiority and superiority=0.999). The diagnostic yield of polyps ≥10 mm was 13.5% with CCE versus 6.3% with CTC (pPr non-inferiority=0.9954). The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥6 mm was 79.2% and 96.3% while that of CTC was 26.8% and 98.9%. The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥10 mm was 85.7% and 98.2% compared with 50% and 99.1% for CTC. Both tests were well tolerated/safe. CONCLUSION: CCE was superior to CTC for detection of polyps ≥6 mm and non-inferior for identification of polyps ≥10 mm. CCE should be considered comparable or superior to CTC as a colorectal neoplasia screening test, although neither test is as effective as OC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02754661.

Kras mutation rate precisely orchestrates ductal derived pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia and pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Despite the high prevalence of Kras mutations in pancreatic cancer patients, murine models expressing the oncogenic mutant Kras (Krasmut) in mature pancreatic cells develop PDAC at a low frequency. Independent of cell of origin, a second genetic hit (loss of tumor suppressor TP53 or PTEN) is important for development of PDAC in mice. We hypothesized ectopic expression and elevated levels of oncogenic mutant Kras would promote PanIN arising in pancreatic ducts. To test our hypothesis, the significance of elevating levels of K-Ras and Ras activity has been explored by expression of a CAG driven LGSL-KrasG12V allele (cKras) in pancreatic ducts, which promotes ectopic Kras expression. We predicted expression of cKras in pancreatic ducts would generate neoplasia and PDAC. To test our hypothesis, we employed tamoxifen dependent CreERT2 mediated recombination. Hnf1b:CreERT2;KrasG12V (cKrasHnf1b/+) mice received 1 (Low), 5 (Mod) or 10 (High) mg per 20 g body weight to recombine cKras in low (cKrasLow), moderate (cKrasMod), and high (cKrasHigh) percentages of pancreatic ducts. Our histologic analysis revealed poorly differentiated aggressive tumors in cKrasHigh mice. cKrasMod mice had grades of Pancreatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia (PanIN), recapitulating early and advanced PanIN observed in human PDAC. Proteomics analysis revealed significant differences in PTEN/AKT and MAPK pathways between wild type, cKrasLow, cKrasMod, and cKrasHigh mice. In conclusion, in this study, we provide evidence that ectopic expression of oncogenic mutant K-Ras in pancreatic ducts generates early and late PanIN as well as PDAC. This Ras rheostat model provides evidence that AKT signaling is an important early driver of invasive ductal derived PDAC.

Patient experience with NER1006 as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a prospective, multicenter US survey.

BACKGROUND: NER1006 (Plenvu®, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Bridgewater, NJ) is a 1 L polyethylene glycol bowel preparation indicated for colonoscopy in adults. A US online survey assessed real-world ease of use and treatment satisfaction in individuals who received NER1006. METHODS: Adults were recruited from 444 US community gastrointestinal practices and provided a kit number for enrollment into an online survey to be completed within 2 weeks. Survey questions evaluated colonoscopy history and prior bowel preparation(s) prescribed, patient experience during NER1006 administration, and patient satisfaction with the bowel preparation process. A 9-point predefined grading scale was used to evaluate ease of NER1006 preparation and consumption (range, 1 "very difficult" to 9 "very easy"); the perceived importance of volume requirement and clear liquid options (range, 1 "not important at all" to 9 "very important"); and patient satisfaction (range, 1 "not satisfied at all" to 9 "very satisfied"). RESULTS: 1630 patients were enrolled, 1606 underwent colonoscopy, and 1598 completed the survey between September 15, 2018 and February 28, 2019. Among 1606 patients who had a colonoscopy, 62.5% were female, and the mean patient age was 54.4 years (range 18-89 years). Most patients (74.7%) did not report a family history of colon cancer, 62.6% had undergone prior colonoscopy, and 64.8% were undergoing colonoscopy for routine colorectal cancer screening. A majority (76.1%) of patients who completed the survey reported that NER1006 was very easy to prepare and take, and 89.9% were very or moderately satisfied with NER1006 overall. Most (97.6%) patients reported consuming all or most of the bowel preparation. Among 1005 patients with previous bowel preparation use, 84.7% indicated that their experience with NER1006 was much better or better (65.3%) or about the same (19.4%) compared with previously used bowel preparations, while only 15.3% rated NER1006 as worse or much worse. CONCLUSIONS: In this first real-world, US multicenter survey, patient-reported experience with NER1006 as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy was favorable and adherence was high. The majority of patients were very or moderately satisfied with the overall experience and found it much better/better than previously used bowel preparations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Lower Annual Rate of Progression of Short-Segment vs Long-Segment Barrett's Esophagus to Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: European guidelines recommend different surveillance intervals of non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE) based on segment length, as opposed to guidelines in the United States, which do recommend surveillance intervals based on BE length. We studied rates of progression of NDBE to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with short-segment BE using the definition of BE in the latest guidelines (length ≥1 cm). METHODS: We collected demographic, clinical, endoscopy, and histopathology data from 1883 patients with endoscopic evidence of NDBE (mean age, 57.3 years; 83.5% male; 88.1% Caucasians) seen at 7 tertiary referral centers. Patients were followed for a median 6.4 years. Cases of dysplasia or EAC detected within 1 year of index endoscopy were considered prevalent and were excluded. Unadjusted rates of progression to HGD or EAC were compared between patients with short (≥1 and <3) and long (≥3) BE lengths using log-rank tests. A subgroup analysis was performed on patients with a documented Prague C&M classification. We used a multivariable proportional hazards model to evaluate the association between BE length and progression. Adjusted hazards ratios were calculated after adjusting for variables associated with progression. RESULTS: We found 822 patients to have a short-segment BE (SSBE) and 1061 to have long segment BE (LSBE). We found patients with SSBE to have a significantly lower annual rate of progression to EAC (0.07%) than of patients with LSBE (0.25%) (P = .001). For the combined endpoint of HGD or EAC, annual progression rates were significantly lower among patients with SSBE (0.29%) compared to compared to LSBE (0.91%) (P < .001). This effect persisted in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.18-0.57; P < .001). CONCLUSION: We analyzed progression of BE (length ≥1 cm) to HGD or EAC in a large cohort of patients seen at multiple centers and followed for a median 6.4 years. We found a lower annual rate of progression of SSBE to EAC (0.07%/year) than of LSBE (0.25%/year). We propose lengthening current surveillance intervals for patients with SSBE.

Efficacy and Safety of Eluxadoline in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Diarrhea Who Report Inadequate Symptom Control With Loperamide: RELIEF Phase 4 Study.

OBJECTIVES: Irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea (IBS-D) is a functional gastrointestinal disorder with limited effective treatment options. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of eluxadoline in patients with IBS-D who reported inadequate symptom control with prior loperamide. METHODS: Three hundred forty-six adults with IBS-D (Rome III criteria) were randomly assigned to placebo or eluxadoline 100 mg twice daily for 12 weeks. Patients recorded daily IBS-D symptoms, including worst abdominal pain (WAP) and stool consistency (through Bristol Stool Scale). The primary endpoint was proportion of composite responders, defined as patients who met daily composite response criteria (≥40% WAP improvement and <5 Bristol Stool Scale score) for at least 50% of treatment days, and recorded ≥60 days of diary entries over the 12-week period. RESULTS: Over 12 weeks, a significantly greater proportion of eluxadoline patients achieved the primary composite responder endpoint compared to placebo (22.7% vs 10.3%, P = 0.002), and component endpoints of improvements in stool consistency (27.9% vs 16.7%, P = 0.01) and WAP (43.6% vs 31.0%, P = 0.02). Additionally, a greater proportion of eluxadoline patients met the composite responder endpoint assessed at monthly intervals compared to placebo (weeks 1-4: 14.0% vs 6.9%, P = 0.03; weeks 5-8: 26.7% vs 14.9%, P = 0.006; weeks 9-12: 30.8% vs 16.7%, P = 0.002). Rates of adverse events were comparable in both groups (37.4% vs 35.3%); no treatment-related serious adverse event, cases of sphincter of Oddi spasm, or pancreatitis were reported. DISCUSSION: Eluxadoline appears safe and effective for treating IBS-D symptoms in patients with an intact gallbladder reporting inadequate relief with prior loperamide use.

Excluding inflammatory bowel disease in the irritable bowel syndrome patient: how far to go?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is among the most commonly encountered conditions in primary care and gastroenterology. There is ample evidence that an IBS diagnosis based on symptom-based criteria and exclusion of alarm features that would otherwise support diagnostic testing is accurate and durable. For many clinicians, however, IBS remains a diagnosis of exclusion because of concern surrounding missed diagnoses of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or other organic gastrointestinal diseases. Using blood and/or fecal biomarker tests to shift the precolonoscopy probability of IBD in patients with symptoms mimicking IBS is becoming an increasingly reasonable practice with improvement in 'preliminary' tests. RECENT FINDINGS: Fecal calprotectin (FCP) testing appears to be the most sensitive preliminary test for discriminating IBD from IBS. Although both fecal lactoferrin and FCP were superior to serum C-reactive peptide (CRP) in their diagnostic accuracy, FCP is superior to fecal lactoferrin based on available literature. SUMMARY: In patients with IBS with diarrhea who have not undergone previous extensive evaluation, the ability of screening tests to detect colonic inflammation is improving. FCP and fecal lactoferrin are reliable predictors of colonic inflammation and should be considered for standard testing in patients with IBS-D symptoms to help identify those who would benefit most from colonoscopy. Although predictive, there currently are no fecal or serum tests that can definitively identify or subtype IBD.

Increasing prevalence of high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma on index endoscopy in Barrett's esophagus over the past 2 decades: data from a multicenter U.S. consortium.

INTRODUCTION: Data on time trends of dysplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) during the index endoscopy (ie, prevalent cases) are limited. Our aim was to determine the prevalence patterns of BE-associated dysplasia on index endoscopy over the past 25 years. METHODS: The Barrett's Esophagus Study is a multicenter outcome project of a large cohort of patients with BE. Proportions of patients with index endoscopy findings of no dysplasia (NDBE), low-grade dysplasia (LGD), high-grade dysplasia (HGD), and EAC were extracted per year of index endoscopy, and 5-yearly patient cohorts were tabulated over years 1990 to 2010+ (2010-current). Prevalent dysplasia and endoscopic findings were trended over the past 25 years using percentage dysplasia (LGD, HGD, EAC, and HGD/EAC) to assess changes in detection of BE-associated dysplasia over the last 25 years. Statistical analysis was done using SAS version 9.4 software (SAS, Cary, NC). RESULTS: A total of 3643 patients were included in the analysis with index endoscopy showing NDBE in 2513 (70.1%), LGD in 412 (11.5%), HGD in 193 (5.4%), and EAC in 181 (5.1%). Over time, there was an increase in the mean age of patients with BE (51.7 ± 29 years vs 62.6 ± 11.3 years) and the proportion of males (84% vs 92.6%) diagnosed with BE but a decrease in the mean BE length (4.4±4.3 cm vs 2.9±3.0 cm) as time progressed (1990-1994 to 2010-2016 time periods). The presence of LGD on index endoscopy remained stable over 1990 to 2016. However, a significant increase (148% in HGD and 112% in EAC) in the diagnosis of HGD, EAC, and HGD/EAC was noted on index endoscopy over the last 25 years (P < .001). There was also a significant increase in the detection of visible lesions on index endoscopy (1990-1994, 5.1%; to 2005-2009, 6.3%; and 2010+, 16.3%) during the same period. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the prevalence of HGD and EAC has significantly increased over the past 25 years despite a decrease in BE length during the same period. This increase parallels an increase in the detection of visible lesions, suggesting that a careful examination at the index examination is crucial.

Performance measures for small-bowel endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative.

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) together with the United European Gastroenterology (UEG) recently developed a short list of performance measures for small-bowel endoscopy (i. e. small-bowel capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy) with the final goal of providing endoscopy services across Europe with a tool for quality improvement. Six key performance measures for both small-bowel capsule endoscopy and for device-assisted enteroscopy were selected for inclusion, with the intention being that practice at both a service and endoscopist level should be evaluated against them. Other performance measures were considered to be less relevant, based on an assessment of their overall importance, scientific acceptability, and feasibility. Unlike lower and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, where performance measures had already been identified, this is the first time that small-bowel endoscopy quality measures have been proposed.

Low Risk of High-Grade Dysplasia or Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Among Patients With Barrett's Esophagus Less Than 1 cm (Irregular Z Line) Within 5 Years of Index Endoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Many patients with a < 1 cm segment of columnar metaplasia in the distal esophagus, also called an irregular Z line, are encountered. These patients, often referred to as patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE), are enrolled in surveillance programs. However, little is known about their risk of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We aimed to determine the incidence of HGD and EAC in patients with irregular Z line with intestinal metaplasia. METHODS: We performed a prospective, multicenter cohort study of patients who underwent endoscopic examination for BE at tertiary care referral centers in the United States and Europe. We analyzed data from 1791 patients (mean age, 56 ± 17 years) found to have non-dysplastic BE at the index endoscopy and after 1 year or more of follow-up. Patients were followed for a median of 5.9 years (interquartile range, 3.1-8.3 years). We calculated rates of progression to HGD or EAC between groups of patients with irregular Z line (n = 167) and those with BE of ≥ 1 cm (n = 1624). RESULTS: A higher proportion of patients in the irregular Z-line group were female (26.3%) than in the BE group (14.8% female BE) (P <.001). A lower proportion of patients in the irregular Z-line group were smokers (33.5%) than in the BE group (52.6% smokers). None of the patients with irregular Z line developed HGD or EAC during a median follow-up period of 4.8 years (interquartile range, 3.2-8.3 years). All 71 incident cases of HGD or EAC developed in patients with BE of ≥1 cm in length. On multivariate analysis, patients with irregular Z line and patients with BE of ≥ 1 cm did not differ significantly in age, race, or duration of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective, multicenter cohort study, we found that patients with irregular Z line do not develop HGD or esophageal cancer within 5 years after index endoscopy.

A phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of remimazolam (CNS 7056) compared with placebo and midazolam in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Remimazolam is an ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine. METHODS: We performed a randomized double-blind comparison of remimazolam to placebo for outpatient colonoscopy. This study design was a requirement of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. An additional group was randomized to open-label midazolam administered according to its package insert instructions (the randomization ratio for remimazolam:placebo:midazolam was 30:6:10). Study medications were administered under the supervision of the endoscopist, without any involvement of an anesthesia specialist. Patients were given 50 to 75 µg of fentanyl before receiving study medications. Patients who failed to achieve adequate sedation in any arm were rescued with midazolam dosed at the investigator's discretion. The primary endpoint was a composite that required 3 criteria be met: completion of the colonoscopy, no need for rescue medication, and ≤5 doses of remimazolam or placebo in any 15-minute interval (≤3 doses of midazolam in any 12-minute interval in the open-label midazolam arm). RESULTS: There were 461 randomized patients in 12 U.S. sites. The primary endpoint was met for remimazolam, placebo, and midazolam in 91.3%, 1.7%, and 25.2% of patients, respectively (P < .0001 for remimazolam vs placebo). Patients administered remimazolam received less fentanyl, had faster recovery of neuropsychiatric function, were ready for discharge earlier, and felt back to normal sooner than patients with both placebo and midazolam. Hypotension was less frequent with remimazolam, and hypoxia occurred in 1% of patients with remimazolam or midazolam. There were no treatment-emergent serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: Remimazolam can be administered safely under the supervision of endoscopists for outpatient colonoscopy, and it allows faster recovery of neuropsychiatric function compared with placebo (midazolam rescue) and midazolam. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02290873.).

Subclonal diversity arises early even in small colorectal tumours and contributes to differential growth fates.

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN: The goal of the study was to determine whether the mutational profile of early colorectal polyps correlated with growth behaviour. The growth of small polyps (6-9 mm) that were first identified during routine screening of patients was monitored over time by interval imaging with CT colonography. Mutations in these lesions with known growth rates were identified by targeted next-generation sequencing. The timing of mutational events was estimated using computer modelling and statistical inference considering several parameters including allele frequency and fitness. RESULTS: The mutational landscape of small polyps is varied both within individual polyps and among the group as a whole but no single alteration was correlated with growth behaviour. Polyps carried 0-3 pathogenic mutations with the most frequent being in APC, KRAS/NRAS, BRAF, FBXW7 and TP53. In polyps with two or more pathogenic mutations, allele frequencies were often variable, indicating the presence of multiple populations within a single tumour. Based on computer modelling, detectable mutations occurred at a mean polyp size of 30±35 crypts, well before the tumour is of a clinically detectable size. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that small colon polyps can have multiple pathogenic mutations in crucial driver genes that arise early in the existence of a tumour. Understanding the molecular pathway of tumourigenesis and clonal evolution in polyps that are at risk for progressing to invasive cancers will allow us to begin to better predict which polyps are more likely to progress into adenocarcinomas and which patients are at greater risk of developing advanced disease.

Eluxadoline Demonstrates a Lack of Abuse Potential in Phase 2 and 3 Studies of Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Diarrhea.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Eluxadoline is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of adults with irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea (IBS-D). Eluxadoline is a locally acting mixed µ-opiod and κ-opioid receptor agonist and δ-opioid receptor antagonist. The abuse potential of eluxadoline was evaluated as part of the Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials assessing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the drug. METHODS: One Phase 2 (IBS-2001) and two Phase 3 (IBS-3001 and IBS-3002) randomized controlled trials enrolled patients meeting Rome III criteria for IBS-D. Patients received oral twice-daily double-blind treatment with eluxadoline or placebo for 12, 26, or 52 weeks. The primary end point of these studies was the proportion of patients who had a composite response of decrease in abdominal pain and improvement in stool consistency on the same day for at least 50% of days. Safety data were pooled, and specific adverse event terms potentially related to abuse were assessed descriptively. Adverse events reported during a 2-week post-treatment period (IBS-3001) and a 4-week single-blind washout period (IBS-3002) were assessed for signs of opioid withdrawal. Potential withdrawal effects were assessed by using the Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale. RESULTS: Overall, 807 and 1032 patients received 1 or more doses of eluxadoline (75 or 100 mg, respectively), and 975 patients received placebo. The overall incidence of adverse events potentially related to abuse did not differ significantly among the groups given placebo, eluxadoline 75 mg, or eluxadoline 100 mg (2.8%, 2.7%, and 4.3%, respectively). The most common adverse events potentially related to abuse were anxiety and somnolence, which occurred in less than 2% of patients in each group. Median overall Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale scores did not differ significantly among the groups given placebo, eluxadoline 75 mg, or eluxadoline 100 mg (3.0, 2.0, and 3.0, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from Phase 2 and Phase 3 trials of eluxadoline (75 or 100 mg) for patients with IBS-D, data revealed no signs of abuse potential for eluxadoline. ClinicalTrials.gov numbers: NCT01130272, NCT01553591, NCT01553747.

Corrigendum: Eluxadoline Efficacy in IBS-D Patients Who Report Prior Loperamide Use.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2017.72.