Benefits of Prokinetics, Gastroparesis Diet, or Neuromodulators Alone or in Combination for Symptoms of Gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Prokinetics have limited effectiveness for treating symptoms of gastroparesis. Thus, alternative or adjunct therapies, such as gastroparesis diets or neuromodulators, are often prescribed. Their therapeutic benefits alone or in combination remain unclear. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-nine patients with symptoms of gastroparesis underwent wireless motility capsule gastric emptying time and gastric emptying scintigraphy. Based on test results, changes in therapy were recommended. Changes in Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) and individual symptom scores over 6 months were related to recommendations for prokinetics, gastroparesis diet, or neuromodulators given as solo new therapies or in dual combinations. Multivariate analyses were performed to adjust for gastric emptying and other variables. RESULTS: In the whole group regardless of therapy, GCSI scores decreased by 0.53 points (interquartile range, -1.25 to 0.05; P < .0001) over 6 months. GCSI did not decrease for prokinetics as solo new therapy (P = .95). Conversely, neuromodulators as solo therapy decreased GCSI scores (P = .04) and all individual symptoms except nausea/vomiting (P = .86). Prokinetics combined with gastroparesis diets or neuromodulators improved GCSI scores (P ≤ .04) and most individual symptoms. Adjusting for gastric emptying time on multivariate analyses showed greater GCSI decreases for nondelayed emptying for neuromodulators as solo new therapy (P = .01). Gastric emptying scintigraphy, gender, diabetes, and functional dyspepsia did not influence responses to any treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Initiating prokinetics as solo new therapy had little benefit for patients with symptoms of gastroparesis. Neuromodulators as the only new therapy decreased symptoms other than nausea and vomiting, especially with nondelayed gastric emptying. Adding gastroparesis diets or neuromodulators to prokinetics offered relief, suggesting that combination therapies may be more useful in managing these patients. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02022826.).

Baseline Predictors of Longitudinal Changes in Symptom Severity and Quality of Life in Patients With Suspected Gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Whether gastric emptying tests predict longitudinal outcomes in patients with symptoms of gastroparesis is unclear. We aimed to determine whether baseline gastric emptying tests and gut motility parameters could impact longitudinal symptom(s) and quality of life (QOL) in a prospective, observational cohort study of patients with symptoms of gastroparesis. METHODS: One hundred fifty patients with gastroparesis symptoms underwent simultaneous scintigraphy (GES) and wireless motility capsule (WMC) measurement of gastric emptying and other motility parameters. Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Symptoms and Quality of Life were administered at baseline, and 3 and 6 months after testing. Multivariable generalized linear marginal models were fit to determine which baseline parameters predict longitudinal changes in symptoms and QOL. RESULTS: Overall upper GI symptoms and QOL scores were moderate in severity at baseline and significantly improved over 6 months. Clinical variables, including female gender, harder stools by Bristol stool form score, and presence of functional dyspepsia (FD) by Rome III criteria, were predictive of more severe upper GI symptoms. Even after controlling for these clinical factors, delayed gastric emptying by GES or WMC was associated with worse symptom severity and QOL scores. Low gastric and elevated small bowel contractile parameters by WMC were also independently associated with more severe upper GI symptoms and worse QOL scores. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline features, including demographic and clinical variables, delayed gastric emptying and abnormal gastrointestinal contractility, were independent predictors of more severe longitudinal symptoms and worse quality of life outcomes. These factors may help to risk stratify patients and guide treatment decisions. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02022826.

Constipation in Patients With Symptoms of Gastroparesis: Analysis of Symptoms and Gastrointestinal Transit.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Constipation can be an important symptom in some patients with gastroparesis. The aims were to: 1) Determine prevalence of constipation and delayed colonic transit in patients with symptoms of gastroparesis; 2) Correlate severity of constipation to severity of symptoms of gastroparesis; and 3) Relate severity of constipation to GI transit delays assessed by gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES) and wireless motility capsule (WMC). METHODS: Patients with symptoms of gastroparesis underwent gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES), wireless motility capsule (WMC) assessing gastric emptying, small bowel transit, and colonic transit, and questionnaires assessing symptoms using a modified Patient Assessment of Upper GI Symptoms [PAGI-SYM] and Rome III functional GI disorder questionnaire. RESULTS: Of 338 patients with symptoms of gastroparesis, 242 (71.5%) had delayed gastric emptying by scintigraphy; 298 (88.2%) also met criteria for functional dyspepsia. Severity of constipation was severe/very severe in 34% patients, moderate in 24%, and none/very mild/mild in 42%. Increasing severity of constipation was associated with increasing symptoms of gastroparesis and presence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Severity of constipation was not associated with gastric retention on GES or WMC. Delayed colonic transit was present in 108 patients (32% of patients). Increasing severity of constipation was associated with increasing small bowel transit time, colonic transit time, and whole gut transit time. CONCLUSIONS: Severe/very severe constipation and delayed colon transit occurs in a third of patients with symptoms of gastroparesis. The severity of constipation is associated with severity of gastroparesis symptoms, presence of IBS, small bowel and colon transit delay, but not delay in gastric emptying. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01696747.

Migraine and Gastroparesis.

PURPOSEOF REVIEW: Migraine is a chronic and disabling disease affecting a significant proportion of the world's population. There is evidence that gastroparesis, a gastrointestinal (GI) dysmotility disorder in which transit of gastric contents is delayed, can occur in the setting of migraine. This article aims to review recent literature on overlap in the pathophysiology and clinical manifestations of migraine and gastroparesis and highlight management considerations when these disorders coexist. RECENT FINDINGS: There has been increasing recognition of the importance of the connection between the GI tract and the brain, and mounting evidence for the overlap in the pathophysiology of migraine and gastroparesis specifically. There exists a complex interplay between the central, autonomic, and enteric nervous systems. Studies show that gastroparesis may be present during and between acute migraine attacks necessitating modification of management to optimize outcomes. Gastric dysmotility in the setting of migraine can impact absorption of oral migraine medications and alternate formulations should be considered for some patients. Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation has been FDA cleared for migraine treatment and is also being studied in gastroparesis. Dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system is a significant feature in the pathophysiology of gut motility and migraine, making treatments that modulate the vagus nerve attractive for future research.

How the North American Consensus Protocol Affects the Performance of Glucose Breath Testing for Bacterial Overgrowth Versus a Traditional Method.

INTRODUCTION: The North American Consensus guidelines for glucose breath testing (GBT) for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) incorporated changes in glucose dosing and diagnostic cutoffs. We compared GBT positivity based on hydrogen and methane excretion and quantified symptoms during performance of the North American vs older modified Rome Consensus protocols. METHODS: GBT was performed using the North American protocol (75 g glucose, cutoffs >20 parts per million [ppm] hydrogen increase after glucose and >10 ppm methane anytime) in 3,102 patients vs modified Rome protocol (50 g glucose, >12 ppm hydrogen and methane increases after glucose) in 3,193 patients with suspected SIBO. RESULTS: Positive GBT were more common with the North American vs modified Rome protocol (39.5% vs 29.7%, P < 0.001). Overall percentages with GBT positivity using methane criteria were greater and hydrogen criteria lower with the North American protocol (P < 0.001). Peak methane levels were higher for the North American protocol (P < 0.001). Times to peak hydrogen and methane production were not different between protocols. With the North American protocol, gastrointestinal and extraintestinal symptoms were more prevalent after glucose with both positive and negative GBT (P < 0.04) and greater numbers of symptoms (P < 0.001) were reported. DISCUSSION: GBT performed using the North American Consensus protocol was more often positive for SIBO vs the modified Rome protocol because of more prevalent positive methane excretion. Symptoms during testing were greater with the North American protocol. Implications of these observations on determining breath test positivity and antibiotic decisions for SIBO await future prospective testing.

Role of endoscopic functional luminal imaging probe in predicting the outcome of gastric peroral endoscopic pyloromyotomy (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoluminal functional luminal imaging probe (EndoFLIP) is an imaging tool that measures the physiologic characteristics of GI sphincters. In this study, we used EndoFLIP to evaluate the association between the pyloric physiologic measurements and the clinical outcomes of gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy (G-POEM) in patients with refractory gastroparesis. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients from 5 centers who underwent G-POEM for management of refractory gastroparesis and had EndoFLIP measurements were evaluated. Cross-sectional area (CSA), balloon pressure, and the distensibility index (DI) of the pylorus were evaluated by EndoFLIP at 40 mL and 50 mL balloon fills before and after G-POEM. One-year clinical success and change in gastric emptying study 3 months after the G-POEM procedure were compared with the EndoFLIP measurements. RESULTS: Clinical success was achieved in 26 (70%) patients. Post-G-POEM CSA and DI were significantly higher in the clinical success group with both 40-mL volume distension (CSA: 89.9 ± 64.8 vs 172.5 ± 71.9 mm2, P =.003; DI: 5.8 ± 4.4 vs 8.8 ± 6.1 mm2/mm Hg, P =.043) and 50-mL volume distention (CSA: 140.1 ± 89.9 vs 237.5 ± 80.3 mm2, P =.003; DI: 5.6 ± 3.3 vs 9.9 ± 6.6 mm2/mm Hg, P =.049). CSA using 40-mL volume distention with an area under the curve of 0.83 yielded a specificity of 91% and a sensitivity of 71% at a cutoff point of 154 mm2. CONCLUSIONS: Post-G-POEM CSA of the pylorus is associated with clinical success and improvement in a gastric emptying scan after G-POEM. EndoFLIP measurements of the pylorus have the potential to be used as a tool to predict the clinical outcome of G-POEM.

Marijuana Use in Patients with Symptoms of Gastroparesis: Prevalence, Patient Characteristics, and Perceived Benefit.

BACKGROUND: Marijuana may be used by some patients with gastroparesis (Gp) for its potential antiemetic, orexigenic, and pain-relieving effects. AIMS: The aim of this study was to describe the use of marijuana by patients for symptoms of Gp, assessing prevalence of use, patient characteristics, and patients' perceived benefit on their symptoms of Gp. METHODS: Patients with symptoms of Gp underwent history and physical examination, gastric emptying scintigraphy, and questionnaires assessing symptoms. Patients were asked about the current use of medications and alternative medications including marijuana. RESULTS: Fifty-nine of 506 (11.7%) patients with symptoms of Gp reported current marijuana use, being similar among patients with delayed and normal gastric emptying and similar in idiopathic and diabetic patients. Patients using marijuana were younger, more often current tobacco smokers, less likely to be a college graduate, married or have income > $50,000. Patients using marijuana had higher nausea/vomiting subscore (2.7 vs 2.1; p = 0.002), higher upper abdominal pain subscore (3.5 vs 2.9; p = 0.003), more likely to be using promethazine (37 vs 25%; p = 0.05) and dronabinol (17 vs 3%; p < 0.0001). Of patients using marijuana, 51% had been using it for more than 2 years, 47% were using this once or more per day, and 81% of marijuana users rated their benefit from marijuana as better or much better. CONCLUSIONS: A subset of patients (12%) with symptoms of Gp use marijuana. Patients with severe nausea and abdominal pain were more likely to use marijuana and perceive it to be beneficial for their symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01696747.

Opioid Use and Potency Are Associated With Clinical Features, Quality of Life, and Use of Resources in Patients With Gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Many patients with gastroparesis are prescribed opioids for pain control, but indications for opioid prescriptions and the relationship of opioid use to gastroparesis manifestations are undefined. We characterized associations of use of potent vs weaker opioids and presentations of diabetic and idiopathic gastroparesis. METHODS: We collected data on symptoms, gastric emptying, quality of life, and health care resource use from 583 patients with gastroparesis (>10% 4-h scintigraphic retention) from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Gastroparesis Consortium, from January 2007 through November 2016. Patients completed medical questionnaires that included questions about opioid use. The opioid(s) were categorized for potency relative to oral morphine. Symptom severities were quantified by Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Disorders Symptoms questionnaires. Subgroup analyses compared patients on potent vs weaker opioids and opioid effects in diabetic vs idiopathic etiologies. RESULTS: Forty-one percent of patients were taking opioids; 82% of these took potent agents (morphine, hydrocodone, oxycodone, methadone, hydromorphone, buprenorphine, or fentanyl). Abdominal pain was the reason for prescription for 61% of patients taking opioids. Mean scores for gastroparesis, nausea/vomiting, bloating/distention, abdominal pain, and constipation scores were higher in opioid users (P ≤ .05). Opioid use was associated with greater levels of gastric retention, worse quality of life, increased hospitalization, and increased use of antiemetic and pain modulator medications compared with nonusers (P ≤ .03). Use of potent opioids was associated with worse gastroparesis, nausea/vomiting, upper abdominal pain, and quality-of-life scores, and more hospitalizations compared with weaker opioids (tapentadol, tramadol, codeine, or propoxyphene) (P ≤ .05). Opioid use was associated with larger increases in gastric retention in patients with idiopathic vs diabetic gastroparesis (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid use is prevalent among patients with diabetic or idiopathic gastroparesis, and is associated with worse symptoms, delays in gastric emptying, and lower quality of life, as well as greater use of resources. Potent opioids are associated with larger effects than weaker agents. These findings form a basis for studies to characterize adverse outcomes of opioid use in patients with gastroparesis and to help identify those who might benefit from interventions to prevent opioid overuse.

Validation of Diagnostic and Performance Characteristics of the Wireless Motility Capsule in Patients With Suspected Gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: It is a challenge to make a diagnosis of gastroparesis. There is good agreement in results from wireless motility capsule (WMC) analysis and gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES), but the diagnostic yield of WMC is unclear and the accuracy of this method has not been validated. We compared the performance characteristics of WMC vs GES in assessing gastric emptying in patients with suspected gastroparesis. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 167 subjects with gastroparesis (53 with diabetes and 114 without) at 10 centers, from 2013 through 2016. Subjects were assessed simultaneously by GES and with a WMC to measure gastric emptying and regional transit. Delayed gastric emptying by GES was defined as more than 10% meal retention at 4 hrs whereas delayed gastric emptying by WMC was defined as more than 5 hrs for passage of the capsule into the duodenum; a severe delay in gastric emptying was defined as a gastric emptying time of more than 12 hrs by WMC or more than 35% retention at 4 hrs by GES. Rapid gastric emptying was defined as less than 38% meal retention at 1 hr based on by GES or gastric emptying times less than 1:45 hrs by WMC. We compared diagnostic and performance characteristics of GES vs WMC. RESULTS: Delayed gastric emptying was detected in a higher proportion of subjects by WMC (34.6%) than by GES (24.5%) (P=.009). Overall agreement in results between methods was 75.7% (kappa=0.42). In subjects without diabetes, the WMC detected a higher proportion of subjects with delayed gastric emptying (33.3%) than GES (17.1%) (P < .001). A higher proportion of subjects with diabetes had delayed gastric emptying detected by GES (41.7%) compared with non-diabetic subjects (17.1%) (P=.002). Severe delays in gastric emptying were observed in a higher proportion of subjects by WMC (13.8%) than by GES (6.9%) (P = .02). Rapid gastric emptying was detected in a higher proportion of subjects by GES (13.8%) than by WMC (3.3%) (P < .001). Regional and generalized transit abnormalities were observed in 61.8% subjects and only detected by WMC. CONCLUSION: Although there is agreement in analysis of gastric emptying by GES vs WMC, WMC provides higher diagnostic yield than GES. WMC detects delayed gastric emptying more frequently than GES and identifies extra-gastric transit abnormalities. Diabetic vs non-diabetic subjects have different results from GES vs WMC. These findings could affect management of patients with suspected gastroparesis. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02022826.

Ethnic, Racial, and Sex Differences in Etiology, Symptoms, Treatment, and Symptom Outcomes of Patients With Gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gastroparesis is a chronic disorder of the stomach characterized by nausea, vomiting, early satiety, postprandial fullness, and abdominal pain. There is limited information on gastroparesis in minority populations. We assessed ethnic, racial, and sex variations in the etiology, symptoms, quality of life, gastric emptying, treatments, and symptom outcomes of patients with gastroparesis. METHODS: We collected information from the National Institutes of Health Gastroparesis Consortium on 718 adult patients, from September 2007 through December 2017. Patients were followed every 4 or 6 months, when data were collected on medical histories, symptoms (based on answers to the PAGI-SYM questionnaires), and quality of life (based on SF-36). Follow-up information collected at 1 year (48 week) was used in this analysis. Comparisons were made between patients of self-reported non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic ethnicities, as well as and between male and female patients. RESULTS: Our final analysis included 552 non-Hispanic whites (77%), 83 persons of Hispanic ethnicity (12%), 62 non-Hispanic blacks (9%), 603 women (84%), and 115 men (16%). A significantly higher proportion of non-Hispanic blacks (60%) had gastroparesis of diabetic etiology than of non-Hispanic whites (28%); non-Hispanic blacks also had more severe retching (2.5 vs 1.7 score) and vomiting (2.9 vs 1.8 score) and a higher percentage were hospitalized in the past year (66% vs 38%). A significantly higher proportion of Hispanics had gastroparesis of diabetic etiology (59%) than non-Hispanic whites (28%), but Hispanics had less-severe nausea (2.7 vs 3.3 score), less early satiety (3.0 vs 3.5 score), and a lower proportion used domperidone (8% vs 21%) or had a peripherally inserted central catheter (1% vs 7%). A higher proportion of women had gastroparesis of idiopathic etiology (69%) than men (46%); women had more severe symptoms of stomach fullness (3.6 vs 3.1 score), early satiety (3.5 vs 2.9 score), postprandial fullness (3.7 vs 3.1 score), bloating (3.3 vs 2.6 score), stomach visibly larger (3.0 vs 2.1 score), and upper abdominal pain (2.9 vs 2.4 score). A lower proportion of women were hospitalized in past year (39% vs 53% of men). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with gastroparesis, etiologies, symptom severity, and treatments vary among races and ethnicities and between sexes. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01696747.

Aprepitant Has Mixed Effects on Nausea and Reduces Other Symptoms in Patients With Gastroparesis and Related Disorders.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There are few effective treatments for nausea and other symptoms in patients with gastroparesis and related syndromes. We performed a randomized trial of the ability of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist aprepitant to reduce symptoms in patients with chronic nausea and vomiting caused by gastroparesis or gastroparesis-like syndrome. METHODS: We conducted a 4-week multicenter, double-masked trial of 126 patients with at least moderate symptoms of chronic nausea and vomiting of presumed gastric origin for a minimum of 6 months. Patients were randomly assigned to groups given oral aprepitant (125 mg/day, n = 63) or placebo (n = 63). The primary outcome from the intention-to-treat analysis was reduction in nausea, defined as a decrease of 25 mm or more, or absolute level below 25 mm, on a daily patient-reported 0-to-100 visual analog scale (VAS) of nausea severity. We calculated relative risks of nausea improvement using stratified Cochran-Mental-Haenszel analysis. RESULTS: Aprepitant did not reduce symptoms of nausea, based on the primary outcome measure (46% reduction in the VAS score in the aprepitant group vs 40% reduction in the placebo group; relative risk, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.8-1.7) (P = .43). However, patients in the aprepitant group had significant changes in secondary outcomes such as reduction in symptom severity (measured by the 0-5 Gastroparesis Clinical Symptom Index) for nausea (1.8 vs 1.0; P = .005), vomiting (1.6 vs 0.5; P = .001), and overall symptoms (1.3 vs 0.7; P = .001). Adverse events, predominantly mild or moderate in severity grade, were more common in aprepitant (22 of 63 patients, 35% vs 11 of 63, 17% in the placebo group) (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial of patients with chronic nausea and vomiting caused by gastroparesis or gastroparesis-like syndrome, aprepitant did not reduce the severity of nausea when reduction in VAS score was used as the primary outcome. However, aprepitant had varying effects on secondary outcomes of symptom improvement. These findings support the need to identify appropriate patient outcomes for trials of therapies for gastroparesis, including potential additional trials for aprepitant. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT01149369.

Delayed Gastric Emptying Associates With Diabetic Complications in Diabetic Patients With Symptoms of Gastroparesis.

OBJECTIVES: Diabetic gastroparesis (Gp) occurs more often in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) than in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Other diabetic end-organ complications include peripheral neuropathy, nephropathy, and retinopathy (together termed triopathy). This study determines the prevalence of diabetic complications (retinopathy, nephropathy, and peripheral neuropathy) in diabetic patients with symptoms of Gp, assessing the differences between T1DM and T2DM and delayed and normal gastric emptying (GE). METHODS: Diabetic patients with symptoms of Gp underwent history and physical examination, GE scintigraphy, electrogastrography with water load, autonomic function testing, and questionnaires assessing symptoms and peripheral neuropathy. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-three diabetic patients with symptoms of Gp were studied: 59 with T1DM and 74 with T2DM and 103 with delayed GE and 30 without delayed GE. The presence of retinopathy (37% vs 24%; P = 0.13), nephropathy (19% vs 11%; P = 0.22), and peripheral neuropathy (53% vs 39%; P = 0.16) was not significantly higher in T1DM than in T2DM; however, triopathies (all 3 complications together) were seen in 10% of T1DM and 3% of T2DM (P = 0.04). Diabetic patients with delayed GE had increased prevalence of retinopathy (36% vs 10%; P = 0.006) and number of diabetic complications (1.0 vs 0.5; P = 0.009); however, 39% of diabetic patients with delayed GE did not have any diabetic complications. DISCUSSION: In diabetic patients with symptoms of Gp, delayed GE was associated with the presence of retinopathy and the total number of diabetic complications. Only 10% of patients with T1DM and 3% of those with T2DM had triopathy of complications, and 39% of diabetic patients with Gp did not have any diabetic complications. Thus, the presence of diabetic complications should raise awareness for Gp in either T1DM or T2DM; however, diabetic Gp frequently occurs without other diabetic complications.

GI Motility Testing: Stomach, Small Bowel, and Colon.

Symptoms of abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, bloating, abdominal distention, diarrhea, and constipation are common and may relate to abnormalities in gastrointestinal motility. There are a number of different options to study gastrointestinal motility. This article reviews novel and standard motility tests available in the stomach, small bowel, and colon. The indications for testing, technical details, advantages, and disadvantages of each test will be summarized.

Abdominal Pain in Patients with Gastroparesis: Associations with Gastroparesis Symptoms, Etiology of Gastroparesis, Gastric Emptying, Somatization, and Quality of Life.

Abdominal pain can be an important symptom in some patients with gastroparesis (Gp). AIMS: (1) To describe characteristics of abdominal pain in Gp; (2) describe Gp patients reporting abdominal pain. METHODS: Patients with idiopathic gastroparesis (IG) and diabetic gastroparesis (DG) were studied with gastric emptying scintigraphy, water load test, wireless motility capsule, and questionnaires assessing symptoms [Patient Assessment of Upper GI Symptoms (PAGI-SYM) including Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI)], quality of life (PAGI-QOL, SF-36), psychological state [Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), State-Trait Anxiety Index (STAI), PHQ-15 somatization scale]. RESULTS: In total, 346 Gp patients included 212 IG and 134 DG. Ninety percentage of Gp patients reported abdominal pain (89% DG and 91% IG). Pain was primarily in upper or central midline abdomen, described as cramping or sickening. Upper abdominal pain was severe or very severe on PAGI-SYM by 116/346 (34%) patients, more often by females than by males, but similarly in IG and DG. Increased upper abdominal pain severity was associated with increased severity of the nine GCSI symptoms, depression on BDI, anxiety on STAI, somatization on PHQ-15, the use of opiate medications, decreased SF-36 physical component, and PAGI-QOL, but not related to severity of delayed gastric emptying or water load ingestion. Using logistic regression, severe/very severe upper abdominal pain associated with increased GCSI scores, opiate medication use, and PHQ-15 somatic symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal pain is common in patients with Gp, both IG and DG. Severe/very severe upper abdominal pain occurred in 34% of Gp patients and associated with other Gp symptoms, somatization, and opiate medication use. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01696747.

Linking the Gastrointestinal Behavior of Ibuprofen with the Systemic Exposure between and within Humans-Part 2: Fed State.

Exploring the intraluminal behavior of an oral drug product in the human gastrointestinal (GI) tract remains challenging. Many in vivo techniques are available to investigate the impact of GI physiology on oral drug behavior in fasting state conditions. However, little is known about the intraluminal behavior of a drug in postprandial conditions. In a previous report, we described the mean solution and total concentrations of ibuprofen after oral administration of an immediate-release (IR) tablet in fed state conditions. In parallel, blood samples were taken to assess systemic concentrations. The purpose of this work was to statistically evaluate the impact of GI physiology (e.g., pH, contractile events) within and between individuals (intra and intersubject variability) for a total of 17 healthy subjects. In addition, a pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed by noncompartmental analysis, and PK parameters were correlated with underlying physiological factors (pH, time to phase III contractions postdose) and study parameters (e.g., ingested amount of calories, coadministered water). Moreover, individual plasma profiles were deconvoluted to assess the fraction absorbed as a function of time, demonstrating the link between intraluminal and systemic behavior of the drug. The results demonstrated that the in vivo dissolution of ibuprofen depends on the present gastric pH and motility events at the time of administration. Both intraluminal factors were responsible for explaining 63% of plasma Cmax variability among all individuals. For the first time, an in-depth analysis was performed on a large data set derived from an aspiration/motility study, quantifying the impact of physiology on systemic behavior of an orally administered drug product in fed state conditions. The data obtained from this study will help us to develop an in vitro biorelevant dissolution approach and optimize in silico tools in order to predict the in vivo performance of orally administered drug products, especially in fed state conditions.

Linking the Gastrointestinal Behavior of Ibuprofen with the Systemic Exposure between and within Humans-Part 1: Fasted State Conditions.

The goal of this project was to explore and to statistically evaluate the responsible gastrointestinal (GI) factors that are significant factors in explaining the systemic exposure of ibuprofen, between and within human subjects. In a previous study, we determined the solution and total concentrations of ibuprofen as a function of time in aspirated GI fluids, after oral administration of an 800 mg IR tablet (reference standard) of ibuprofen to 20 healthy volunteers in fasted state conditions. In addition, we determined luminal pH and motility pressure recordings that were simultaneously monitored along the GI tract. Blood samples were taken to determine ibuprofen plasma levels. In this work, an in-depth statistical and pharmacokinetic analysis was performed to explain which underlying GI variables are determining the systemic concentrations of ibuprofen between (inter-) and within (intra-) subjects. In addition, the obtained plasma profiles were deconvoluted to link the fraction absorbed with the fraction dissolved. Multiple linear regressions were performed to explain and quantitatively express the impact of underlying GI physiology on systemic exposure of the drug (in terms of plasma Cmax/AUC and plasma Tmax). The exploratory analysis of the correlation between plasma Cmax/AUC and the time to the first phase III contractions postdose (TMMC-III) explains ∼40% of the variability in plasma Cmax for all fasted state subjects. We have experimentally shown that the in vivo intestinal dissolution of ibuprofen is dependent upon physiological variables like, in this case, pH and postdose phase III contractions. For the first time, this work presents a thorough statistical analysis explaining how the GI behavior of an ionized drug can explain the systemic exposure of the drug based on the individual profiles of participating subjects. This creates a scientifically based and rational framework that emphasizes the importance of including pH and motility in a predictive in vivo dissolution methodology to forecast the in vivo performance of a drug product. Moreover, as no extensive first-pass metabolism is considered for ibuprofen, this study demonstrates how intraluminal drug behavior is reflecting the systemic exposure of a drug.

White Paper AGA: Gastroparesis: Clinical and Regulatory Insights for Clinical Trials.

Gastroparesis continues to represent a large unmet clinical need and a major opportunity for new drug development. This has led to increasing interest by federal funding agencies, regulatory bodies, and industry. This article summarizes the proceedings of the gastroparesis section of the "Drug Development Conference: Clinical Endpoints in Upper GI Disorders" organized by the American Gastroenterological Association in Washington, DC, on October 27-28, 2016. The presentation, diagnosis, and current therapeutic strategies are briefly reviewed, followed by a detailed discussion of the regulatory strategy, recommended endpoints, and future directions.

Gastroduodenal Disorders.

Symptoms that can be attributed to the gastroduodenal region represent one of the main subgroups among functional gastrointestinal disorders. A slightly modified classification into the following 4 categories is proposed: (1) functional dyspepsia, characterized by 1 or more of the following: postprandial fullness, early satiation, epigastric pain, and epigastric burning, which are unexplained after a routine clinical evaluation; and includes 2 subcategories: postprandial distress syndrome that is characterized by meal-induced dyspeptic symptoms and epigastric pain syndrome that does not occur exclusively postprandially; the 2 subgroups can overlap; (2) belching disorders, defined as audible escapes of air from the esophagus or the stomach, are classified into 2 subcategories, depending on the origin of the refluxed gas as detected by intraluminal impedance measurement belching: gastric and supragastric belch; (3) nausea and vomiting disorders, which include 3 subcategories: chronic nausea and vomiting syndrome; cyclic vomiting syndrome; and cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome; and (4) rumination syndrome.