Point of care testing for hepatitis C in the priority settings of mental health, prisons and drug & alcohol facilities - the PROMPt Study.

BACKGROUND: A barrier to hepatitis C virus (HCV) cure is conventional testing. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of HCV antibody and RNA point-of-care-testing (POCT) on testing rates, linkage to care, treatment and acceptability of testing in three priority settings in Australia. METHODS: Participants were enrolled in an interventional cohort study at a reception prison, inpatient mental health service (MHS), and inpatient alcohol and other drug (AOD) unit-between October 2020 and December 2021. HCV POCT was performed using SD Bioline HCV antibody fingerstick test and a reflexive Xpert® HCV Viral Load Fingerstick test using capillary blood samples. A retrospective audit of HCV testing and treatment data was performed at each site for the preceding 12-month period to generate a historical control. RESULTS: 1,549 participants received a HCV antibody test with 17% (264/1,549) receiving a positive result, of which 21% (55/264) tested HCV RNA positive. Across all settings the rate of testing per year significantly increased between the historical controls and the study intervention period by three-fold (RR:2.57 95% CI: 2.32, 2.85) for HCV antibody testing and four-fold (RR:1.62; 95% CI:1.31, 2.01) for RNA testing. Treatment uptake was higher during the POCT intervention (86%, 47/55; P=0.010) compared to the historical controls (61%, 27/44). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated across three settings that the use of HCV antibody and RNA POCT increased testing rates, treatment uptake linkage to care. The testing model was highly acceptable for most participants. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN-12621001578897.

Increase in distal esophageal wall thickness with time in adult patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.

Background and Aim: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic disease which may progress to a fibro-stenotic phenotype due to esophageal sub-epithelial fibrosis. Esophageal wall thickening in patients with EoE has been demonstrated in a few studies using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). The aim of this study was to longitudinally assess the endoscopic appearance, wall thickness, histology, and dysphagia score of EoE patients. Methods: Patients with EoE were recruited and studied between February 2012 and April 2021. Patients were evaluated on two separate occasions at least 12 months apart with endoscopy, EUS, and esophageal mucosal biopsies. The dysphagia score and epidemiology data were also assessed. Results: A total of 16 EoE patients were included with a mean follow-up duration of 2.2 ± 1.2 years. In 14/16 (88%) patients, the total wall thickness of the distal esophagus significantly increased (P = 0.0012) as a result of thickening of the muscularis propria (P = 0.0218). However, only 1/14 (7%) patient had an increase in the dysphagia score, while 8/14 (57%) and 5/14 (36%) had a stable and reduced dysphagia score, respectively. No differences were found in the total thickness of other esophageal regions, dysphagia score, endoscopic appearance, and eosinophil count over time. Conclusion: Distal esophageal wall thickness increases with time in EoE patients, independent of the dysphagia score and eosinophil count.

Methods of tissue preparation after EUS-guided tissue acquisition without rapid on-site assessment: Results of a randomized study.

In the absence of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE), it is not clear which method of tissue preparation is best to process tissue obtained from EUS guidance. Cytological smearing (CS), cell block (CB), and direct histology (DH) are the available techniques. AIM: To compare the diagnostic yield of three techniques of tissue preparation for EUS-guided tissue acquisition without ROSE. METHODS: Patients who were referred for EUS-FNA of peri-gastrointestinal masses were recruited. Without ROSE, each lesion was biopsied with three needle passes, and the order in which tissue is prepared was randomized to either (i) CS + CB, (ii) CB only, or (iii) DH only. The prepared specimens were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 243 specimens were taken from 81 patients. Tissue diagnosis was achieved in 78/81 (96.3%) of patients, including 63 neoplasms (PDAC [n = 45], pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors [PNET; n = 4], cholangiocarcinoma [n = 5], metastatic disease [n = 4], lymphoma [n = 1], linitis plastica [n = 2], leiomyoma [n = 2]) and 15 benign pathologies (chronic pancreatitis [n = 8], reactive nodes [n = 5], inflammatory biliary stricture [n = 1], and pancreatic rest [n = 1]). The three non-diagnostic cases were found to be PDAC (n = 2) and PNET (n = 1). Sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy was highest with DH (94 and 95%), which was significantly better than that by CS + CB (43 and 54%; P = 0.0001) and CB-only preparations (32 and 48.6%; P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between the CS + CB and CB-only arms (P > 0.22). CONCLUSION: Without ROSE, our findings suggest that with just a single pass, DH should be the tissue preparation method of choice given its significantly higher diagnostic accuracy compared with CS and/or CB techniques.

Distal esophageal wall thickness correlates with dysphagia in adult patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Thickening of the esophageal wall in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been shown in studies using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). We hypothesise that transmural inflammation in EoE results in prominent esophageal wall thickening compared with the mucosal inflammation in GERD. The aim of this study was to compare the relationship among dysphagia, endoscopic appearance, wall thickness, histology, and motility in EoE and GORD. METHODS: EoE and GERD patients were prospectively studied between February 2012 and April 2021. Patients were studied on 2 separate occasions with endoscopy, EUS and mucosal biopsies, followed by high-resolution manometry. Epidemiology and dysphagia data were obtained. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients (31 EoE, 14 GERD) were included. There were no significant differences in age, sex, duration of disease and presence of esophageal motility disorders. EoE patients had a higher dysphagia score (P < 0.001), EREFS score (P < 0.001) and peak eosinophil count (P < 0.001) compared with GERD patients. Thickness of the submucosa in the distal esophagus in EoE was significantly higher than GERD (P = 0.003) and positively correlated with duration of disease (P = 0.01, R = 0.67). Positive correlation was also found between dysphagia score and distal total esophageal wall thickness (P = 0.03, R = 0.39) in EoE patients. No correlation was found between these variables in GERD patients. CONCLUSION: Distal esophageal wall thickness positively correlates with dysphagia score in EoE but not GERD. This appears to be related to the composition of the submucosa which can be identified using EUS.

Combined chemotherapy and endoscopic ultrasound-guided intratumoral 32P implantation for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated clinical outcomes of combined chemotherapy and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided intratumoral radioactive phosphorus-32 (32P) implantation in locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LAPC). METHODS: Consecutive patients with newly diagnosed LAPC were recruited over 20 months. Baseline computed tomography and 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (18FDG) positron emission tomography-computed tomography were performed and repeated after 12 weeks to assess treatment response. Following two cycles of conventional chemotherapy, patients underwent EUS-guided 32P implantation followed by six chemotherapy cycles. RESULTS: 12 patients with LAPC (median age 69 years [interquartile range 61.5-73.3]; 8 male) completed treatment. Technical success was 100 % with no procedural complications. At 12 weeks, median reduction in tumor volume was 8.2 cm3 (95 % confidence interval 4.95-10.85; P = 0.003), with minimal or no 18FDG uptake in nine patients (75 %). Tumor downstaging was achieved in six patients (50 %), leading to successful resection in five (42 %), including four R0 resections (80 %). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided 32P implantation was feasible, well tolerated, and resulted in a 42 % surgical resection rate. Further evaluation in a larger randomized multicenter trial is warranted.