One-Day versus Three-Day Low-Residue Diet and Bowel Preparation Quality before Colonoscopy: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: One-day low-residue diet (LRD) is recommended before colonoscopy, but only three single-center trials compared the 1-day versus 3-day LRD. The aim of this multicenter study was to compare the impact of a 3-day versus 1-day LRD on its ability to adequately and successfully prepare the bowel of outpatients that require a colonoscopy. The outpatients' tolerance and adherence to the LRD were also considered. METHODS: Consecutive outpatients were randomized to 1-day versus 3-day LRD at three open-access endoscopy units. The primary endpoint consisted of the proportion of patients with a satisfactory degree of bowel cleanliness (Score 2-3 on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale [BBPS] in each segment). Secondary endpoints were patients' tolerance and adherence to the prescribed diet evaluated by a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: 289 patients were included in the study (1-day LRD arm = 143, 3-day LRD arm = 146). BBPS ≥2 was not significantly different in the two dietary regimens in any of the three colonic segments (71% vs. 72%, p = 0.9). The percentage of patients with incomplete preparation was similar in the two arms (9% vs. 9%; p = 1.0). No significant differences were found among colonoscopy findings in terms of abnormalities (81% vs. 84%, p = 0.8). Both groups scored similarly in overall tolerance to LRD (48% vs. 49%, p = 1.0) and also in whether they would have adopted a different dietary regimen (p = 0.3). CONCLUSION: Our multicenter randomized study confirmed that optimal bowel cleansing is reached through a 1-day LRD.

Synaptic mechanisms underlying onset and progression of memory deficits caused by hippocampal and midbrain synucleinopathy.

Cognitive deficits, including working memory, and visuospatial deficits are common and debilitating in Parkinson's disease. α-synucleinopathy in the hippocampus and cortex is considered as the major risk factor. However, little is known about the progression and specific synaptic mechanisms underlying the memory deficits induced by α-synucleinopathy. Here, we tested the hypothesis that pathologic α-Synuclein (α-Syn), initiated in different brain regions, leads to distinct onset and progression of the pathology. We report that overexpression of human α-Syn in the murine mesencephalon leads to late onset memory impairment and sensorimotor deficits accompanied by reduced dopamine D1 expression in the hippocampus. In contrast, human α-Syn overexpression in the hippocampus leads to early memory impairment, altered synaptic transmission and plasticity, and decreased expression of GluA1 AMPA-type glutamate receptors. These findings identify the synaptic mechanisms leading to memory impairment induced by hippocampal α-synucleinopathy and provide functional evidence of the major neuronal networks involved in disease progression.

Optimization of direct anti-viral agent treatment schedule: Focus on HCV genotype 3.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Direct antiviral agents (DAAs) have led to high sustained virological responses (SVR) in hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients. However, genotype 3 patients respond to treatment in a suboptimal way. This study aims to identify which of the several treatment schedules recommended for genotype 3 would constitute the best option. METHODS: Twenty-four Italian centers were involved in this real-life study of HCV genotype 3 patients treated with DAAs. To expand the number of cases, we conducted a systematic review of the literature on the outcome of genotype 3 patients treated with DAAs. RESULTS: A total of 233 patients with HCV genotype 3 were enrolled. Cirrhotic patients accounted for 83.7%. Overall, the SVR12 rate was achieved by 205 patients (88.0%); the SVR rates were 78.8% after sofosbuvir/ribavirin, 92.5% after sofosbuvir/daclatasvir ± ribavirin, and 100% after sofosbuvir/ledipasvir (seven patients). No difference in rate of SVR was observed in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients (92.2 vs 94.4) using a combination regimen of NS5A and NS5B inhibitors.The systematic review of the literature provided data of 3311 patients: The mean weighted SVR12 rate was 84.4% (CI: 80.4-87.8); the rates varied from 79.0% (CI: 70.9-85.3) with sofosbuvir/ribavirin, to 83.7% (CI: 66.2-93.1) with sofosbuvir/ledispavir, and to 88.2% (CI: 83.3-91.7) with sofosbuvir/daclatasvir. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reinforce the concept that patients with HCV genotype 3 should no longer be considered difficult-to-treat individuals. The optimal therapeutic regimen for these patients appears to be the combination sofosbuvir/daclatasvir, administered for 12 weeks without the use of RBV in non-cirrhotic patients. In cirrhotics the meta-analytic approach suggests extending therapy to 24 weeks.

Validation of a Simple Scoring System to Predict Sorafenib Effectiveness in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is recommended for the treatment of advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Nonetheless, it is expensive, effective in few patients, and may cause significant adverse effects. Therefore, accurate selection of patients is needed. In a previous study, we constructed a simple scoring system to predict patients' outcomes based on the occurrence of sorafenib adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to validate this scoring system in a real-life cohort of HCC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical records of 279 outpatients treated with sorafenib in eight Italian centers were retrospectively analyzed. Adverse effects considered to calculate the score were skin toxicity, diarrhea, and arterial hypertension, occurring during the first month of therapy. For each adverse effect, 1 point was assigned if present; and 0 points if absent (resulting in a total score between 0 and 3). RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) was 10.8 months and median time to progression (TTP) was 5.1 months. At multivariate analysis, performance status, α-fetoprotein (AFP), and Child-Pugh score were independently associated with TTP and OS. A progressive increase of OS and TTP was observed in patients with scores from 0 to 3 (p < 0.001). Six-, 12-, and 24-month survival probabilities were 55.1, 24.5, and 7.9% in score 0 patients, and 100, 80.9, and 46.2% in score 3 patients, respectively. Complete response was observed in one patient (0.4%), partial responses in 41 (15.2%), and stable disease in 117 (43.5%). The disease control rate in patients with scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 was 34.3, 51.6, 80.9, and 96.3%, respectively (p < 0.001). Complete or partial responses were not observed in score 0 patients. CONCLUSIONS: We have validated a useful scoring system to predict outcomes in sorafenib-treated HCC patients. This score is easy to calculate and suitable for implementation in daily clinical practice.

Impact of Telaprevir in HCV Patients with Cirrhosis and RVR: Real-Life Data from Boceprevir or Telaprevir based "Triple Therapy" Experience in Southern Italy.

Background and Rationale of Study: The real-life data of triple therapy-based treatment in patients with chronic hepatitis C were investigated in this survey of 12 clinical centers of southern Italy. This retrospective study analyzed data from 176 consecutive patients. METHODS: 125 (70%) patients were treated with telaprevir, and 51(30%) with boceprevir. There were no differences in demographic characteristics between the groups. The degree of Liver Fibrosis (LF) was evaluated according to Liver Biopsy (LB) and/or Transient Elastography (TE). 53/176 patients (30%) had liver cirrhosis. Sixteen patients (9%) were treatment naïve, and the remaining were not: 92 were non-responders (52, 84%), 63 relapsed (35,79%), and 5 discontinued treatment (2, 8%). RESULTS: Overall, the rapid Virological Response (RVR) rate was 67.6%. Of the 103 patients who had follow-up for at least 12 weeks after the end of treatment, 61 (59, 2%) achieved a Sustained Virological Response (SVR). According to multivariate analysis for SVR, RVR was the only independent predictive factor of SVR, irrespective of the degree of LF and the type of response to previous treatments. In telaprevir-treated patients, the rate of RVR was similar in patients with F0-F2, F3 and F4 fibrosis (85%, 84%, 78%, respectively), and the SVR rates among RVR patients was similar irrespective of LF. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this real-life study confirm the efficacy reported in clinical trials, although cirrhosis appears to play a smaller role in influencing treatment efficacy. Moreover, RVR is the only independent predictive factor of response regardless of cirrhosis. Based on RVR and for patients with cirrhosis, a shorter therapy might be considered, at least with telaprevir-based therapy.

Sustained virological response: a milestone in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C.

AIM: To evaluate the long-term eradication of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and liver-related complications in chronically infected patients that have achieved sustained virological response. METHODS: One hundred and fifty subjects with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) or cirrhosis and sustained virological response (SVR) between the years of 1989 and 2008 were enrolled in a long-term clinical follow-up study at the Gastrointestinal and Liver Unit of the University Hospital of Naples "Federico II". At the beginning of the study, the diagnosis of HCV infection was made on the basis of serum positivity for antibodies to HCV and detection of HCV RNA transcripts, while a diagnosis of chronic hepatitis was formulated using imaging techniques and/or a liver biopsy. SVR was achieved by interferon-based therapy, both conventional and pegylated, with and without ribavirin treatment. The patients were evaluated for follow-up at a median length of 8.6 years, but ranged from 2-19.9 years. Among them, 137 patients had pre-treatment CHC and 13 had cirrhosis. The patients were followed with clinical, biochemical, virological, and ultrasound assessments on a given schedule. Finally, a group of 27 patients underwent a liver biopsy at the beginning of the study and transient elastography at their final visit to evaluate changes in liver fibrosis. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 8.6 years (range 2-19.9 years). HCV RNA remained undetectable in all patients, even in patients who eventually developed liver-related complications, indicating no risk of HCV recurrence. Three liver-related complications were observed: two cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and one case of bleeding from esophageal varices resulting in an incidence rate of 0.23%/person per year. Further, all three complications took place in patients diagnosed with cirrhosis before treatment began. Only one death due to liver-related causes occurred, resulting in a mortality rate of 0.077% person per year. This amounts to a 99.33% survival rate in our cohort of patients after therapy for HCV infection. Finally, of the 27 patients who underwent a liver biopsy at the beginning of the study, a reduction in liver fibrosis was observed in 70.3% of the cases; only three cases registering values of liver stiffness indicative of significant fibrosis. CONCLUSION: Patients with CHC and SVR show an excellent prognosis with no risk of recurrence and a very low rate of mortality. Our data indicate that virus-eradication following interferon treatment can last up to 20 years.

Hepatitis B virus infection and immunosuppressive therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Hepatitis B reactivation has been widely reported in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy in oncohaematological and transplant settings, with a high frequency of hepatic failure. This topic has received growing scientific interest and several studies reported the preventive effect of antiviral agents on hepatitis B reactivation during immunosuppression therapy. Routine prophylaxis is therefore recommended and specific recommendations were elaborated by AASLD, EASL and AISF. On the contrary, few data are available on the risk of HBV reactivation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving immunosuppressive therapy, and major questions regarding the optimal management (screening, prophylaxis, therapy, monitoring) of IBD patients with HBV infection remain to be addressed. The aim of this paper is to provide a systematic review of the literature to underline the main aspects of HBV infection and reactivation in patients affected by IBD treated with conventional or biological immunosuppressive drugs.