Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in colorectal cancer diagnosis and presentation / Impacto de la pandemia del COVID-19 en el diagnóstico y la presentación del cáncer colorrectal

Background and objective: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a decrease in the colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence, due to the disruption of screening programmes and a downscaling of endoscopic activity. The endpoint of this study is to evaluate if the pandemic has led to a change in CRC diagnostic rate and presentation in our population. Methods: Multicenter retrospective study of all public hospitals of the Aragon region, attending a population of 1,329,391 inhabitants. We have analyzed all CRC cases detected and endoscopic units workload the year before the pandemic onset (1 March 2019–14 March 2020) and the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (15 March 2020–28 February 2021). Results: The diagnosis of CRC cases dropped a 38.9% (888 pre-pandemic vs 542 pandemic cases). Also, there were 30.3% less colonoscopies performed (24,860 vs 17,337). During the pandemic, CRC cases were diagnosed in older patients (72.4±12.2 vs 71.2±12.1 years, p=0.021), and had more frequently severe complications at diagnosis (14.6% vs 10.4%, p=0.019). Moreover, most CRC cases were diagnosed in symptomatic patients (81.4%). No significant difference was found in CRC stage at diagnosis, although stage IV was more frequent (20.1% vs 16.1%). Most hospitals reported a lower workload of endoscopic activity. Conclusion: CRC diagnostic rate was lower after the onset of the pandemic. CRC was diagnosed in older patients and was more frequently associated with complications. After the onset of the pandemic, the endoscopic units did not reach the workload performed previously. (AU)

Introducción y objetivo: La pandemia del COVID-19 ha provocado una disminución en la incidencia de cáncer colorrectal (CCR) tras la suspensión de los programas de cribado y la reducción de la actividad endoscópica. El objetivo del estudio es evaluar si la pandemia se ha asociado a un cambio en la incidencia y presentación del CCR en nuestra población. Métodos: Estudio multicéntrico, retrospectivo de todos los hospitales públicos de Aragón, con 1.329.391 habitantes. Analizamos todos los CRC detectados y la carga laboral de las unidades de endoscopia del año prepandémico (1 marzo 2019 – 14 marzo 2020) y el primer año de la pandemia (15 marzo 2020 – 28 febrero 2021). Resultados: El diagnóstico de CRC descendió un 38,9% (888 casos prepandemia vs. 542 en pandemia). Se realizaron un 30,3% menos de colonoscopias (24.860 vs. 17.337). El CRC en pandemia se diagnosticó en pacientes de mayor edad (72,4±12,2 vs 71,2±12,1 años; p=0,021) y presentaron más complicaciones graves en el momento del diagnóstico (14,6 vs. 10,4%; p=0.019). La mayoría de los CRC se diagnosticaron en pacientes sintomáticos (81,4%). No hubo diferencias en el estadio al diagnóstico aunque el estadio iv fue más frecuente (20,1 vs. 16,1%). La mayoría de los hospitales reiniciaron la actividad endoscópica con una menor carga laboral. Conclusión: La tasa diagnóstica de CRC descendió tras el inicio de la pandemia, el CRC fue diagnosticado en pacientes mayores y se asoció con más complicaciones al diagnóstico. Tras el inicio de la pandemia, la mayoría de los hospitales reiniciaron su actividad con una menor carga laboral. (AU)

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in colorectal cancer diagnosis and presentation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a decrease in the colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence, due to the disruption of screening programmes and a downscaling of endoscopic activity. The endpoint of this study is to evaluate if the pandemic has led to a change in CRC diagnostic rate and presentation in our population. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study of all public hospitals of the Aragon region, attending a population of 1,329,391 inhabitants. We have analyzed all CRC cases detected and endoscopic units workload the year before the pandemic onset (1 March 2019-14 March 2020) and the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (15 March 2020-28 February 2021). RESULTS: The diagnosis of CRC cases dropped a 38.9% (888 pre-pandemic vs 542 pandemic cases). Also, there were 30.3% less colonoscopies performed (24,860 vs 17,337). During the pandemic, CRC cases were diagnosed in older patients (72.4±12.2 vs 71.2±12.1 years, p=0.021), and had more frequently severe complications at diagnosis (14.6% vs 10.4%, p=0.019). Moreover, most CRC cases were diagnosed in symptomatic patients (81.4%). No significant difference was found in CRC stage at diagnosis, although stage IV was more frequent (20.1% vs 16.1%). Most hospitals reported a lower workload of endoscopic activity. CONCLUSION: CRC diagnostic rate was lower after the onset of the pandemic. CRC was diagnosed in older patients and was more frequently associated with complications. After the onset of the pandemic, the endoscopic units did not reach the workload performed previously.

European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management (Hp-EuReg): patterns and trends in first-line empirical eradication prescription and outcomes of 5 years and 21 533 patients.

OBJECTIVE: The best approach for Helicobacter pylori management remains unclear. An audit process is essential to ensure clinical practice is aligned with best standards of care. DESIGN: International multicentre prospective non-interventional registry starting in 2013 aimed to evaluate the decisions and outcomes in H. pylori management by European gastroenterologists. Patients were registered in an e-CRF by AEG-REDCap. Variables included demographics, previous eradication attempts, prescribed treatment, adverse events and outcomes. Data monitoring was performed to ensure data quality. Time-trend and geographical analyses were performed. RESULTS: 30 394 patients from 27 European countries were evaluated and 21 533 (78%) first-line empirical H. pylori treatments were included for analysis. Pretreatment resistance rates were 23% to clarithromycin, 32% to metronidazole and 13% to both. Triple therapy with amoxicillin and clarithromycin was most commonly prescribed (39%), achieving 81.5% modified intention-to-treat eradication rate. Over 90% eradication was obtained only with 10-day bismuth quadruple or 14-day concomitant treatments. Longer treatment duration, higher acid inhibition and compliance were associated with higher eradication rates. Time-trend analysis showed a region-dependent shift in prescriptions including abandoning triple therapies, using higher acid-inhibition and longer treatments, which was associated with an overall effectiveness increase (84%-90%). CONCLUSION: Management of H. pylori infection by European gastroenterologists is heterogeneous, suboptimal and discrepant with current recommendations. Only quadruple therapies lasting at least 10 days are able to achieve over 90% eradication rates. European recommendations are being slowly and heterogeneously incorporated into routine clinical practice, which was associated with a corresponding increase in effectiveness.

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 inhibitor (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% effectiveness, respectively), and the bismuth single-capsule (10 days, 88.5%). Compliance, longer duration and higher acid inhibition were associated with higher effectiveness. "Optimized" H. pylori therapies achieve over 90% success in Spain.

Helicobacter pylori first-line and rescue treatments in patients allergic to penicillin: Experience from the European Registry on H pylori management (Hp-EuReg).

BACKGROUND: Experience in Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment of patients allergic to penicillin is very scarce. A triple combination with a PPI, clarithromycin (C), and metronidazole (M) is often prescribed as the first option, although more recently the use of a quadruple therapy with PPI, bismuth (B), tetracycline (T), and M has been recommended. AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of first-line and rescue treatments in patients allergic to penicillin in the "European Registry of H pylori management" (Hp-EuReg). METHODS: A systematic prospective registry of the clinical practice of European gastroenterologists (27 countries, 300 investigators) on the management of H pylori infection. An e-CRF was created on AEG-REDCap. Patients with penicillin allergy were analyzed until June 2019. RESULTS: One-thousand eighty-four patients allergic to penicillin were analyzed. The most frequently prescribed first-line treatments were as follows: PPI + C + M (n = 285) and PPI + B + T + M (classic or Pylera® ; n = 250). In first line, the efficacy of PPI + C + M was 69%, while PPI + B + T + M reached 91% (P < .001). In second line, after the failure of PPI + C + M, two rescue options showed similar efficacy: PPI + B + T + M (78%) and PPI + C + levofloxacin (L) (71%) (P > .05). In third line, after the failure of PPI + C + M and PPI + C + L, PPI + B + T + M was successful in 75% of cases. CONCLUSION: In patients allergic to penicillin, a triple combination with PPI + C + M should not be generally recommended as a first-line treatment, while a quadruple regimen with PPI + B + T + M seems to be a better option. As a rescue treatment, this quadruple regimen (if not previously prescribed) or a triple regimen with PPI + C + L could be used but achieved suboptimal (<80%) results.

Two-week, high-dose proton pump inhibitor, moxifloxacin triple Helicobacter pylori therapy after failure of standard triple or non-bismuth quadruple treatments.

BACKGROUND: Aim was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a moxifloxacin-containing second-line triple regimen in patients whose previous Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment failed. METHODS: Prospective multicentre study including patients in whom a triple therapy or a non-bismuth-quadruple-therapy failed. Moxifloxacin (400mg qd), amoxicillin (1g bid), and esomeprazole (40 mg bid) were prescribed for 14 days. Eradication was confirmed by (13)C-urea-breath-test. Compliance was determined through questioning and recovery of empty medication envelopes. RESULTS: 250 patients were consecutively included (mean age 48 ± 15 years, 11% with ulcer). Previous (failed) therapy included: standard triple (n = 179), sequential (n = 27), and concomitant (n = 44); 97% of patients took all medications, 4 were lost to follow-up. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol eradication rates were 82.4% (95% CI, 77-87%) and 85.7% (95% CI, 81-90%). Cure rates were similar independently of diagnosis (ulcer, 77%; dyspepsia, 82%) and previous treatment (standard triple, 83%; sequential, 89%; concomitant, 77%). At multivariate analysis, only age was associated with eradication (OR = 0.957; 95% CI, 0.933-0.981). Adverse events were reported in 25.2% of patients: diarrhoea (9.6%), abdominal pain (9.6%), and nausea (9.2%). CONCLUSION: 14-day moxifloxacin-containing triple therapy is an effective and safe second-line strategy in patients whose previous standard triple therapy or non-bismuth quadruple (sequential or concomitant) therapy has failed, providing a simple alternative to bismuth quadruple regimen.