Efficacy of pharmacological therapies in patients with IBS with diarrhoea or mixed stool pattern: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Over half of patients with IBS have either diarrhoea (IBS-D) or a mixed stool pattern (IBS-M). The relative efficacy of licenced pharmacological therapies is unclear in the absence of head-to-head trials. We conducted a network meta-analysis to resolve this uncertainty. DESIGN: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Embase Classic, the Cochrane central register of controlled trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov through January 2019 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of licenced pharmacological therapies (alosetron, eluxadoline, ramosetron and rifaximin) in adults with IBS-D or IBS-M. Trials included in the analysis reported a dichotomous assessment of overall response to therapy, and data were pooled using a random effects model. Efficacy and safety of all pharmacological therapies were reported as a pooled relative risk with 95% CIs to summarise the effect of each comparison tested. Treatments were ranked according to their p score. RESULTS: We identified 18 eligible RCTs (seven alosetron, five ramosetron, two rifaximin and four eluxadoline), containing 9844 patients. All were superior to placebo for the treatment of IBS-D or IBS-M at 12 weeks, according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended endpoint for trials in IBS. Alosetron 1 mg twice daily was ranked first for efficacy, based on the FDA-recommended composite endpoint of improvement in both abdominal pain and stool consistency, effect on global symptoms of IBS and effect on stool consistency. Ramosetron 2.5µg once daily was ranked first for effect on abdominal pain. Total numbers of adverse events were significantly greater with alosetron 1 mg twice daily and ramosetron 2.5µg once daily, compared with placebo. Rifaximin 550 mg three times daily ranked first for safety. Constipation was significantly more common with all drugs, except rifaximin 550 mg three times daily. CONCLUSION: In a network meta-analysis of RCTs of pharmacological therapies for IBS-D and IBS-M, we found all drugs to be superior to placebo, but alosetron and ramosetron appeared to be the most effective.

Alosetron versus traditional pharmacotherapy in clinical practice: effects on resource use, health-related quality of life, safety and symptom improvement in women with severe diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Severe diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) is associated with decreased health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and increased health care costs. Treatment recommendations for IBS-D often start with traditional pharmacotherapy (TP), with escalation to alosetron, rifaximin or eluxadoline if there is no success. There has been no previous head-to-head clinical trial comparing IBS-D treatment outcome for alosetron versus TP. This study, GSK protocol S3B30020, evaluated resource use, work productivity, health-related quality of life and global symptom response in women with IBS-D who were treated with alosetron or TP. METHODS: A total of 1956 patients who met criteria for severe IBS-D were randomized to treatment with alosetron 1 mg twice daily (BID) or only TP for up to 24 weeks. Work productivity and resource use were evaluated by standard questionnaires, HRQOL by the IBSQOL instrument and IBS symptoms by the Global Improvement Scale (GIS). RESULTS: Compared to only TP, alosetron-treated patients reported: (1) fewer clinic/office visits for any health problem (p = .0181) or for IBS-D (p = .0004); (2) reduced use of over-the-counter medications for IBS-D (p < .0001); (3) fewer days of lost work productivity (p < .0001); (4) decreased restriction of social and outdoor activities (p < .0001); and (5) greater global improvement in IBS-D symptoms (p < .0001). Alosetron treatment improved HRQOL scores for all domains (p < .0001). Incidence of adverse events during alosetron use was not remarkable and was similar to that previously reported. CONCLUSIONS: Alosetron 1 mg BID significantly reduced health care utilization and lost productivity, and significantly improved global IBS symptoms, HRQOL, and participation in outdoor and social activities compared with treatment response to TP.

Alosetron use in clinical practice: significant improvement in irritable bowel syndrome symptoms evaluated using the US Food and Drug Administration composite endpoint.

BACKGROUND: Alosetron is approved to treat women with severe IBS and diarrhea (IBS-D) who have failed standard therapy. In our study, we aimed to evaluate alosetron efficacy using new US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) endpoints and utilization in clinical practice. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, multicenter, observational 12-week study evaluated women with severe IBS-D enrolled in the alosetron prescribing program. The coprimary FDA endpoints were changes from baseline in stool consistency and abdominal pain severity. Responders achieved a 30% decrease compared with baseline in weekly average of the worst abdominal pain in the past 24 h, and a 50% or greater reduction from baseline in the number of days/week with at least one stool of type 6 (mushy) or type 7 (watery) consistency. Secondary endpoints included changes from baseline in stool frequency, fecal urgency and fecal incontinence. RESULTS: Enrolled patients (n = 192) were primarily White (90.6%), with a mean age of 44.5 years. Patient and physician rating of IBS severity was between moderate and severe (85.9% concordance, Spearman coefficient 0.429, p < 0.0001). Alosetron 0.5 mg twice daily (82.8%) was the most common dosing regimen. A total of 152 alosetron-treated patients completed the study. Of 105 fully evaluable patients, 45% met the FDA composite endpoint responder criteria for ⩾50% of the study period. Improvements in all individual symptoms were statistically significant compared with baseline. There were no serious adverse events, cases of colonic ischemia, or complications of constipation. CONCLUSION: In a clinical practice setting study, alosetron demonstrated treatment success using a rigorous FDA composite endpoint and also improved multiple other IBS symptoms, including fecal urgency and incontinence in women with severe IBS-D [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01257477].

Rifaximin and eluxadoline - newly approved treatments for diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: what is their role in clinical practice alongside alosetron?

INTRODUCTION: Diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) is a common functional gastrointestinal condition in which patients experience abdominal pain, diarrhea, bloating, cramps, flatulence, fecal urgency, and incontinence. AREAS COVERED: We review two recently approved therapies that focus on treating underlying pathogenic mechanisms of IBS-D: (1) the non-absorbable antibiotic rifaximin, and (2) the opioid receptor agonist/antagonist eluxadoline. We compare the safety and efficacy data emerging from rifaximin and eluxadoline registration trials with safety and efficacy data from the alosetron clinical development program. EXPERT OPINION: The rifaximin and eluxadoline clinical development programs for IBS-D have demonstrated significant improvement in IBS-D endpoints compared to placebo. Direct comparison of primary endpoint results from the alosetron, rifaximin, and eluxadoline pivotal trials is not possible; however, general estimates of efficacy can be made, and these demonstrate similar and significantly greater responses to 'adequate relief' and a composite endpoint of abdominal pain/stool form for each agent compared to placebo. With the recent approval in the United States of rifaximin and eluxadoline for IBS-D, how should clinicians employ these agents? We suggest that they be utilized sequentially, taking into consideration patient symptoms and severity, prior medical history, mode of action, cost, availability, managed care coverage, and adverse event profiles.

The Zelnorm epidemiologic study (ZEST): a cohort study evaluating incidence of abdominal and pelvic surgery related to tegaserod treatment.

BACKGROUND: Pre-marketing clinical studies of tegaserod suggested an increased risk of abdominal surgery, particularly cholecystectomy. We sought to quantify the association between tegaserod use and the occurrence of abdominal or pelvic surgery, including cholecystectomy. METHODS: This cohort study was conducted within an insured population. Tegaserod initiators and similar persons who did not initiate tegaserod were followed for up to six months for the occurrence of abdominal or pelvic surgery. Surgical procedures were identified from health insurance claims validated by review of medical records. The incidence of confirmed outcomes was compared using both as-matched and as-treated analyses. RESULTS: Among 2,762 tegaserod initiators, there were 94 abdominal or pelvic surgeries (36 gallbladder): among 2,762 comparators there were 134 abdominal or pelvic surgeries (37 gallbladder) (hazard ratio HR] = 0.70, 95% confidence interval [C.I.] = 0.54-0.91 overall, HR = 0.98, 95% C.I. = 0.62-1.55 for gallbladder). Current tegaserod exposure compared to nonexposure was associated with a rate ratio [RR] of 0.68 (95% C.I. = 0.48-0.95) overall, while the RR was 0.99 (95% C.I. = 0.56-1.77) for gallbladder surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, tegaserod use was not found to increase the risk of abdominal or pelvic surgery nor the specific subset of gallbladder surgery.

Tegaserod and the risk of cardiovascular ischemic events: an observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Tegaserod, a partial 5-HT(4) agonist previously approved for treatment of irritable bowel syndrome with constipation and chronic idiopathic constipation, was suspended from US marketing in 2007, based on pooled clinical trial results which contained a signal suggesting increased risk of cardiovascular ischemic events (CVIEs). We sought to evaluate whether there was an association between tegaserod and CVIE in a setting of routine clinical practice. METHODS: This was a matched cohort study conducted within a large US health insurance database, involving 52 229 patients who initiated tegaserod and 52 229 patients with similar characteristics who did not initiate tegaserod. Participants were followed for up to 6 months for the occurrence of CVIE (myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, coronary revascularization, and stroke). Outcomes were identified using insurance claims and were confirmed by review of medical records. We conducted as-matched analyses providing hazard ratios (HRs) along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and as-treated analyses accounting for changes in dispensed therapy. RESULTS: There was no increased risk of CVIE associated with tegaserod treatment. The as-matched association between tegaserod and ischemic cardiovascular outcomes (HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.73-1.23) and stroke (HR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.46-1.77) did not change substantially in the as-treated analyses (cardiovascular relative risk [RR] = 1.14, 95% CI 0.83-1.56; stroke: RR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.49-2.02). The results were largely unaffected by adjustment for characteristics or subgroup analyses. CONCLUSION: In this observational study of tegaserod use, we found no evidence for an increased risk of CVIE in tegaserod users.

Long-term tegaserod treatment for dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia: results of two identical 1-year cohort studies.

BACKGROUND: Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a chronic disorder that adversely affects health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Published information on its long-term management is minimal and treatment options are limited. AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate safety, efficacy and HRQoL with tegaserod 6 mg twice daily over 1 year in women with FD who completed one of two 6-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind studies. METHODS: About 780 patients received tegaserod 6 mg twice daily in two identical 1-year extension studies. Scheduled assessments included adverse events, the Short-Form Nepean Dyspepsia Index (SF-NDI), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-Dyspepsia (WPAI-Dyspepsia) questionnaire, and patient perceptions of treatment efficacy. RESULTS: Mean tegaserod treatment duration in the two studies was 236 and 222 days. Most adverse events occurred in the first 6 months, were similar to previous reports (commonly diarrhea), and were transient and well tolerated. SF-NDI, WPAI-Dyspepsia scores and perceived symptom relief improved from baseline over the 1-year evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term safety profile of tegaserod in women with FD was consistent with that of short-term treatment and accompanied by improvements in HRQoL, work productivity and symptom relief. These long-term results add to the clinical experience with FD and support the potential value of a 5-HT(4) agonist in the management of FD.

Tegaserod treatment for dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia: results of two randomized, controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: Therapies for dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia (FD) are limited. We studied tegaserod, a selective serotonin type 4 receptor agonist, in patients with FD. METHODS: Two identical multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials enrolled women >/=18 yr with recurring mid-upper abdominal discomfort characterized by postprandial fullness, early satiety, and/or bloating. Patients were randomized to tegaserod 6 mg b.i.d. or placebo. Two patient-reported primary variables were assessed: percentage of days with satisfactory symptom relief, and symptom severity using the composite average daily severity score (CADSS). RESULTS: In total, 2,667 women were randomized with no differences between trials in terms of recruitment method, Helicobacter pylori status, heartburn, or medication use. Mean percentage of days with satisfactory symptom relief for tegaserod versus placebo in Trial 1: 32.2%versus 26.6% (95% CI of treatment difference 2.82, 9.27; P < 0.01), Trial 2: 31.9%versus 29.4% (95% CI of treatment difference -0.21, 6.53; P= 0.066). Mean CADSS in Trial 1: 3.14 versus 3.35 (95% CI of treatment difference -0.29, -0.10; P < 0.0001), Trial 2: 3.15 versus 3.23 (95% CI of treatment difference -0.18, 0.01; P= 0.094). Meta-analysis showed significant benefit for both end points: increase in days with satisfactory relief 4.6% (95% CI 2.29, 6.96); decrease in CADSS 0.14 (95% CI 0.21, 0.07). Treatment effect was greater in patients with severe baseline symptoms. Diarrhea requiring study discontinuation was more common with tegaserod than placebo (4.1%vs 0.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Some improvement in dysmotility-like FD was observed with tegaserod treatment. The clinical implication of this improvement is uncertain.

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of tegaserod over 13 months in patients with chronic constipation.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term safety and tolerability of tegaserod in patients with chronic constipation (CC). METHODS: This 13-month, uncontrolled extension study enrolled CC patients who completed a 12-wk randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled core study. Patients receiving tegaserod 6 or 2 mg b.i.d. during the core study continued on the same dose; those receiving placebo were switched to tegaserod 6 mg b.i.d (placebo-to-tegaserod). Safety and tolerability were assessed by monitoring adverse events (AEs), laboratory parameters, vital signs, and electrocardiograms. Symptom evaluations included patient satisfaction with bowel habit and bothersomeness of constipation, abdominal distension/bloating, and abdominal discomfort/pain. RESULTS: A total of 842 patients entered the extension study; 451 (54%) completed. AEs typically occurred within the first month of tegaserod treatment. Long-term treatment neither increased AE incidence nor revealed new safety risks. Headache (11.3%, 14.5%, and 16.1% in the tegaserod 6 mg b.i.d., 2 mg b.i.d., and placebo-to-tegaserod groups, respectively) and abdominal pain (8.8%, 8.8%, 10.9%) were the most common AEs. Diarrhea, the most common drug-related AE (4.9%, 2.5%, 8.0%), rarely led to discontinuation (0.7%, 0.0%, 2.2%). Diarrhea was transient, resolved without treatment interruption or rescue medication, and had no clinically significant consequences. Of 27 serious AEs, none were considered treatment related. No deaths or reports of ischemic colitis occurred in tegaserod-treated patients. No clinically relevant changes occurred in other safety parameters. Safety findings were similar in patients switched from placebo to tegaserod and those maintained on tegaserod. CONCLUSIONS: Tegaserod has a favorable safety profile and is well tolerated during continuous long-term treatment in patients with CC.

Omeprazole-induced slowing of gastrointestinal transit in mice can be countered with tegaserod.

Omeprazole, besides suppressing gastric acid, causes delayed gastric emptying, which may be associated with aggravated dyspeptic symptoms. Effects of omeprazole on small intestinal transit are unknown. In this study, we evaluated in mice if (a) omeprazole affects transit of a meal through the stomach and small intestine and (b) co-treatment with the promotility agent, tegaserod, can prevent the slowing effect of omeprazole. Omeprazole (40-150 mg/kg, i.p. once daily for 5 days) delayed gastric emptying of the meal in a dose-related manner. Small intestinal transit was then evaluated at the lowest dose of omeprazole (40 mg/kg) that did not retard gastric emptying. Such transit was significantly delayed after this dose of omeprazole compared with vehicle-treated controls. When tegaserod (0.10 mg/kg) was administered concomitantly with the omeprazole, small intestinal transit of the meal was not slowed and was not different from controls. These results show that omeprazole reduces aboral transit of luminal contents through the stomach and small bowel of mice and that this delay is reversed by tegaserod.

The incidence of abdominal and pelvic surgery among patients with irritable bowel syndrome.

Rates of abdominopelvic surgery, with a particular focus on gallbladder procedures, were measured in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) (n = 108,936) and compared with those in a general population sample (n = 223,082). The patient sample was selected from persons who were members of a managed care organization during the years 1995-2000. Medical records from a randomly selected subset of IBS patients were reviewed to confirm the diagnosis. Crude and standardized rates and adjusted rate ratios for surgery were calculated. The incidence of abdominopelvic surgery, excluding gallbladder procedures, was 87% higher in patients with IBS than that for the general population. The incidence of gallbladder surgery was threefold higher in IBS patients than the general population. Patients with IBS have an increased risk for abdominopelvic and gallbladder surgery and, thus, an associated risk for experiencing morbidity and mortality associated with these surgical procedures.

Tegaserod does not alter fasting or meal-induced biliary tract motility.

OBJECTIVE: Tegaserod is a 5-HT(4) receptor partial agonist that increases peristaltic activity of the intestinal tract. It is approved for the treatment of patients with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C). IBS is a chronic gastrointestinal disorder of function that is reported to be associated with an increased incidence of abdominal surgery including cholecystectomy. The effect of tegaserod on nongut digestive organs, such as the gallbladder and biliary tract, has not been previously investigated. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effects of tegaserod on gallbladder contractility and on functional status of the sphincter of Oddi during both the interdigestive and the digestive periods in healthy female subjects and in female patients with IBS-C. METHODS: During a 6-wk, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study, gallbladder contractility and concomitant change in luminal diameter of the common hepatic duct (CHD) and the common bile duct (CBD, both proximal and distal) in response to a standard liquid meal were quantified using real-time ultrasonography. Changes in luminal diameter of the CHD and the CBD were used as a surrogate marker for sphincter of Oddi function. Ultrasound measurements were conducted every 15 min from 45 min before, to 60 min after the test meal to observe the impact of tegaserod on gallbladder volume and any concomitant change in the diameters of the CHD and the CBD that developed in response to gallbladder contraction. The ultrasound measurements of gallbladder contractility, along with the CHD and the CBD diameters, were repeated after each of the two 2-wk periods of treatment with tegaserod or placebo. The recommended dose of tegaserod (6 mg b.i.d.) for IBS-C patients was used in healthy female subjects (n = 13) and female patients with IBS-C (n = 20). Twice this dose (12 mg b.i.d.) was also evaluated in an additional 20 female patients with IBS-C. Statistical evaluations were conducted using a two-sided analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: Gallbladder contractility variables including ejection fraction, ejection rate and ejection period, fasting and residual volume, and maximal emptying, were similar after 2 wk of treatment with tegaserod 6 mg b.i.d. and placebo in healthy female subjects and female patients with IBS-C. There were no significant changes in the luminal diameters of the CHD or the CBD after tegaserod compared to placebo in any cohort. Additionally, no significant dilation (> or =7 mm in diameter) of the CHD or CBD was observed during maximal gallbladder emptying. Similar results were also observed when tegaserod was given at 12 mg b.i.d. in patients with IBS-C. Tegaserod treatment had no significant effect on plasma CCK concentration in response to the test meal. No significant abdominal pain or unexpected adverse events were reported during the study. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed no significant pharmacodynamic effect of tegaserod on gallbladder contractility or on CBD and CHD diameters as a surrogate marker of sphincter of Oddi function during both the interdigestive (fasting) and the digestive (postprandial) periods in healthy female subjects and female patients with IBS-C.

Results of a phase I multiple-dose clinical study of ursodeoxycholic Acid.

BACKGROUND: The hydrophilic bile acid, ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), may indirectly protect against colon carcinogenesis by decreasing the overall proportion of the more hydrophobic bile acids, such as deoxycholic acid (DCA), in aqueous phase stool. In the AOM rat model, treatment with UDCA resulted in a significant decrease in adenoma formation and colorectal cancer. It was hypothesized that there is a dose-response relationship between treatment with the more hydrophilic bile acid, UDCA, and a reduction in the proportion of the more hydrophobic bile acid, DCA, in the aqueous stool phase, suggesting the potential of UDCA as a chemopreventive agent. METHODS: Eighteen participants were randomized to 300, 600, or 900 mg/day UDCA for 21 days in this multiple-dose, double-blinded study. Seventy-two-hour stool samples were collected pretreatment and on days 18-20 of UDCA treatment for bile acid measurements. Pharmacokinetics were performed and blood bile acids were measured at days 1 and 21 of UDCA treatment. RESULTS: There were no serious adverse events associated with UDCA treatment. There was a dose-response increase in the posttreatment to baseline ratio of UDCA to DCA from the 300 mg/day to the 600 mg/day group, but not between the 600 and the 900 mg/day groups, in both aqueous and solid phase stool. This posttreatment increase was statistically significant in aqueous phase stool for the 300 and 600 mg/day treatment groups (P = 0.038 and P = 0.014, respectively), but was only marginally significant in the 900 mg/day treatment group (P = 0.057). Following the first dose administration, a dose-dependent increase in plasma ursodeoxycholic concentrations was observed in fasting subjects; however, when these levels were measured postprandially following 3 weeks of treatment, the areas under the plasma concentration-time profile (AUC) were not statistically different and remained relatively unchanged over time. CONCLUSIONS: UDCA treatment did not decrease the quantity of DCA in fecal water or solids; however, it did decrease the proportion of DCA in fecal water and solids in relation to UDCA. Thus, 3 weeks of UDCA treatment resulted in an overall increase in hydrophilicity of bile acids in the aqueous phase stool, with a peak effect observed with a daily dose of 600 mg/day. Much larger studies are needed to determine the effect of ursodeoxycholic administration on deoxycholic concentration, overall hydrophilicity of stool bile acids, and the long-term effects on intermediate biomarkers of cellular damage.

Fecal bile acid concentrations in a subpopulation of the wheat bran fiber colon polyp trial.

Factors that affect the concentration of secondary bile acids in the aqueous phase of stool may have a greater impact on colon carcinogenesis than those that only modify the total fecal bile acid concentration. This hypothesis was tested using stool samples of a subset of participants enrolled in a Phase III colorectal adenomatous polyp prevention trial, which documented the inability of a 13.5 g/day wheat bran fiber (WBF) supplement to reduce polyp recurrence. Stool was collected from 68 consecutively consented participants who were enrolled in a Phase III clinical trial of WBF for the prevention of adenomatous polyp recurrence. Nineteen (27.9%) of these fecal bile acid substudy participants were on the low fiber (2.0 g/day) intervention group, whereas 49 (72.7%) were on the high fiber (13.5 g/day) intervention group for approximately 3 years. Sixty-four participants had both the aqueous and solid phases of stool samples analyzed for bile acid content. Bile acid concentrations, measured in microg/ml for fecal water and microg/mg for dry feces, were determined for lithochilic, deoxycholic, chenodeoxycholic, cholic, ursodeoxycholic, isodeoxycholic, isoursodeoxycholic, ursocholic, 7-ketolithocholic, and 12-ketolithocholic acids. There were no significant differences between the low and high fiber groups concerning mean or median aqueous phase concentrations of lithocholic or deoxycholic bile acids. In contrast, the median concentrations of deoxycholic acid and other secondary bile acids (including lithochilic, isodeoxycholic, ursodeoxycholic, isoursodeoxycholic, ursocholic, 7-ketolithocholic, and 12-ketolithocholic acids) were significantly lower for the high fiber group in the solid-phase stool (P < 0.05). These results document that a high WBF intervention, taken for a median of 2.4 years, does not significantly reduce aqueous-phase concentrations of secondary bile acids in stool, although their concentrations in solid-phase stool were suppressed. Thus, the inability of the high WBF intervention to reduce colorectal adenoma recurrence may be a consequence of its lack of effect on fecal aqueous-phase secondary bile acid concentrations.

Simultaneous quantitation of fatty acids, sterols and bile acids in human stool by capillary gas-liquid chromatography.

A simple method for the simultaneous gas-liquid chromatographic quantitation of fatty acids, sterols and bile acids from human fecal samples is described. The various compounds are directly converted into the n-butyl ester-trimethylsilyl ether derivatives, without prior isolation from the stool. Under these conditions, fecal bile acid derivatives are well resolved from each other and from those of fecal fatty acids and sterols without overlaps. The method was found to be reproducible and recoveries were similar to those obtained after exhaustive solvent extraction of fecal sterols, fatty acids and bile acids. Optimum derivatization conditions that allowed maximum recovery of fecal components with minimal destruction and application of the method for simultaneous bile acid, fatty acid and sterol analysis in human stool are described.

Patchy field defects of apoptosis resistance and dedifferentiation in flat mucosa of colon resections from colon cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Abnormal areas in normal-appearing flat colonic mucosa (field defects) may predispose individuals to colon cancer. Markers of field defects would indicate cancer risk. METHODS: We evaluated apoptosis capability, dedifferentiation, frequency of simple aberrant crypts, aberrant crypt foci, microadenomas, and total nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide levels at locations within normal-appearing flat mucosa obtained from colon resections. RESULTS: Among goblet cells from colonic mucosa samples of individuals without colonic neoplasia, there was a high mean deoxycholate-induced apoptotic index (AI) of 59.1% and high Dolichos biflorus agglutinin (DBA) lectin reactivity (differentiation) in 85.0% of samples. In contrast, flat mucosa samples from colon cancer patients had a significantly (P <.01) lower average AI of 37.4%, and a significantly (P =.03) lower percentage (40.5%) had high DBA reactivity. For colon cancer patients, AI and DBA reactivity values were patchy within a resection. Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide levels were highly variable among individuals without neoplasia, and aberrant crypt foci and microadenomas were rare. CONCLUSIONS: AI and aberrant DBA reactivity are promising indicators of colon cancer risk. Our results attest to the importance of obtaining multiple samples to assess colon cancer risk because of the patchy nature of field defects.