Differences in Weight Loss Between Persons on Standard Balanced vs Nutrigenetic Diets in a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Many companies provide genetic tests for obesity-related polymorphisms (nutrigenetics) and make dietary recommendations for weight loss that are based on the results. We performed a randomized controlled trial to determine whether more participants who followed a nutrigenetic-guided diet lost ≥5% of their body weight than participants on a standard balanced diet for 8 and 24 weeks. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 51 obese or overweight U.S. veterans on an established weight management program at the Veterans Administration San Diego Healthcare System (the MOVE! program). Participants were randomly assigned to groups placed on a nutrigenetic-guided diet (balanced, low-carbohydrate, low-fat, or Mediterranean; n = 30) or a standard balanced diet (n = 21). Nutrigenetic diets were selected on the basis of results from the Pathway FIT test. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the percentage of participants on the balanced diet vs the nutrigenetic-guided diet who lost 5% of their body weight at 8 weeks (35.0% ± 20.9% vs 26.9% ± 17.1%, respectively; P = .28) or at 24 weeks. Both groups had difficulty adhering to the diets. However, adherence to the nutrigenetic-guided diet correlated with weight loss (r = 0.74; P = 4.0 × 10(-5)), but not adherence to standard therapy (r = 0.34; P = .23). Participants who had low-risk polymorphisms for obesity lost more weight than all other participants at 8 weeks (5.0% vs 2.9%, respectively; P = .02) and had significantly greater reductions in body mass index (6.4% vs 3.6%, respectively; P = .03) and waist circumference (6.5% vs 2.6%, respectively; P = .02) at 24 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective study, a nutrigenetic-based diet did not increase weight loss compared with a standard balanced diet. However, genetic features can identify individuals most likely to benefit from a balanced diet weight loss strategy; these findings require further investigation. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01859403.

An idiopathic case of pediatric retroperitoneal fibrosis with extensive magnetic resonance imaging and follow-up.

Retroperitoneal fibrosis has seldom been described in the pediatric literature. We present a child who presented with retroperitoneal fibrosis without any associated underlying vascular or inflammatory conditions. This is one of only a few cases of primary idiopathic retroperitoneal fibrosis in a pediatric patient to have been imaged extensively by MRI.

Video Capsule Endoscopy in Patients with Chronic Abdominal Pain with or without Associated Symptoms: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic abdominal pain (CAP) is a common indication for gastroenterology referrals. More insidious causes of CAP isolated to the small bowel, such as malignancies and Crohn's disease, are rising in incidence and causing more gastroenterologists to evaluate their patients with video capsule endoscopy (VCE). However, the role of VCE in patients with CAP is still unclear. AIMS: We assessed the efficacy of VCE in patients with CAP and whether it led to findings that contributed to disease management and meaningful interventions. METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated 607 capsule endoscopy studies at an open referral endoscopy unit. Ninety of the studies were for CAP. These studies were compared to those performed for other indications to compare diagnostic yield. In addition, we investigated whether VCE led to an intervention that improved clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, the number of abnormal findings in CAP patients was significantly lower than VCE performed for other indications (24.4% vs 39.0%, respectively p = 0.009). When patients with CAP presented with other pertinent clinical findings (e.g. nausea, weight loss, anemia, history of in inflammatory bowel disease, etc.), the likelihood of an abnormal finding increased to a level that was not different from those who received VCE for other indications (27.1%, p = 0.10). The findings from VCE lead to changed management and improved outcomes in 16.2% of CAP patients with associated symptoms. However, the subgroup that benefited the most were those who had a prior history of Crohn's disease. Patients with CAP who did not have any associated symptoms continued to have a significantly lower abnormal finding rate compared to those who received VCE for other indications (19.4%, p = 0.03) and VCE rarely led to a change in management that would improve outcomes (5.6%). CONCLUSIONS: VCE for CAP has a lower rate of abnormal findings than other indications. However, VCE is a useful diagnostic tool that can help provide a possible etiology of CAP in patients with associated symptoms. However, a change in management from VCE is likely to be limited to those with a history of Crohn's disease.

Methadone related deaths compared to all prescription related deaths.

BACKGROUND: Methadone is increasingly implicated in unintentional overdose deaths. Despite major interventions, rates continue to remain high. One primary intervention, Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMP) are limited in their ability to impact this epidemic due to federal law restricting Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) from sharing data to PDMPs, despite being a major source of Methadone dispensing. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study analyzed all prescription-related deaths occurring in San Diego County during the year 2013 with a specific focus on methadone-related deaths. All patients designated by medical examiner to have died by unintentional prescription were then referenced in the California PDMP, the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES). RESULTS: As a whole, patients who died had a high number of average prescriptions, 21, and averaged 4.5 different providers, and three different pharmacies. Methadone-related deaths (MRD) accounted for 46 out of the 254 total patient deaths (18.1%). Methadone prescriptions were found in 14 patients with PDMP reports, 10 of who had methadone on toxicology report. Notably, 100% of methadone prescribed by primary care specialists. MRD patients were less likely to have toxicology reports matching PDMP data compared to other related drug deaths (20.6 vs. 61.2%, p<0.0001). Of the 46 methadone deaths, only 10 (29.4%) had prescriptions for methadone recorded in the database. Out of the 51 patients with only one drug recorded at death, methadone was most common (n=12; 23.5%). While all deaths had a notably high rate of chronic prescriptions at death (68.8% compared to 2% for all patients in CURES), there was no significant difference between MRD and other drug-related deaths (73.5 vs. 67.8%, p=0.68, respectively). MRD patients were less likely than other drug patients to have matching PDMP data without any illicit substance or alcohol (14.7 vs. 41.4%, p=0.003, respectively). CONCLUSION: Methadone is a long-acting opioid that carries a higher risk profile than other opioids. In San Diego, the great majority of MRD had no data on methadone in the statewide PDMP database, bringing to question the restriction of OTP clinics from uploading information into the database. A risk-benefit analysis should be made to consider changing laws that would allow for OTP to input data into PDMP. OTP should make it standard of care to check PDMP data on their patients. Methadone prescribed for pain management should be limited to the most compliant patients.