Introduction

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, progressive, esophageal disease driven by type 2 inflammation.

Aims & Methods

The aim of this analysis was to determine the histopathologic effect of dupilumab on esophageal inflammation in patients aged 1–11 years with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) from the phase 3 EoE KIDS trial. In Part A, patients were randomized to receive weight-tiered dupilumab or placebo for 16 weeks. In Part B, all patients received weight-tiered dupilumab for 36 weeks. Biopsies from proximal, mid, and distal esophageal regions were analyzed. Peak eosinophil count (PEC) and EoE Histologic Scoring System (HSS) grade/stage scores were assessed at baseline, Week 16, and Week 52.

Results

At Week 16, dupilumab vs placebo treatment resulted in significantly greater improvements in PEC (least squares mean percent change -86.09% vs 20.98%, respectively; P<0.0001) and improvements from baseline were observed in EoE-HSS grade and stage total scores, and inflammatory and architectural sub-scores (Table). Improvements were maintained at Week 52 with continued dupilumab. For those who switched from placebo at Week 16, improvements were observed at Week 52. Improvements in individual component scores were also observed.

Table. Mean percent change from Part A baseline in EoE-HSS scores at Weeks 16 and 52.

	Week 16a			Week 52
	Placebo (N=34)	Dupilumab (N=37)	LS mean difference	Placebo (N=18)	Dupilumab (N=37)
EoE-HSS grade
Total score	5.0%	-64.4%	-69.4****	-63.6%	-68.5%
Inflammatory sub-score	5.7%	-77.4%	-83.1****	-79.4%	-83.7%
Architectural sub-score	1.0%	-50.5%	-51.5****	-45.3%	-55.5%
EoE-HSS stage
Total score	5.8%	-62.3%	-68.1****	-58.2%	-63.5%
Inflammatory sub-score	7.9%	-96.3%	-104.3****	-89.6%	-96.6%
Architectural sub-score	9.0%	-41.0%	-50.0****	-32.4%	-51.0%

****P<0.0001. ^aLS mean percent change.
EoE-HSS, Eosinophilic Esophagitis Histologic Scoring System; LS, least squares.

Conclusion

Dupilumab treatment improved a range of histopathologic aspects of EoE through 52 weeks versus placebo in children aged 1–11 years with EoE.

Disclosure

Collins MH: Arena, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Calypso Biotech, EsoCap Biotech, GSK, Receptos, Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., Robarts Clinical Trials Inc. Alimentiv, Inc., Sanofi, Shire, a Takeda company – advisory board/consultancy fees.
Lerner D: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. – educational board fees.
Pesek RD: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. – advisory board/consultancy fees.
Zevit N: AstraZeneca, Rafa Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., Sanofi, Takeda – advisory board/consultancy fees. Adare Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Falk Pharma – advisory board/consultancy fees. Dr. Falk Pharma, Rafa Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., Sanofi – speaker fees. Rome Foundation – honoraria.
Xia C, Raphael BP, Radwan A: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. – employees and shareholders.
Zaghloul S, Angello JT: Sanofi – employees, may hold stock and/or stock options in the company.

Introduction

Corpus atrophic gastritis (CAG) requires endoscopic-histological surveillance due to the risk of developing gastric neoplastic lesions (GNL). This study aimed to identify variables associated with GNL development at long-term follow-up using a feature ranking method based on a novel One-Class Support Vector Machine (SVM) model.

Aims & Methods

A dataset containing clinical, endoscopic, and histological variables from consecutive CAG patients (2001-2023) adhering to a surveillance program was considered. GNL presence at the longest available follow-up was recorded. Gastric biopsies and histological evaluations were conducted according to the updated Sydney system. CAG patients with any missing data or a GNL diagnosis at the baseline gastroscopy were excluded from the final analysis. A Fisher score-based feature ranking method and One-Class SVM were used to select the optimal subset of baseline variables associated with GNL development, aiming to achieve average sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) above 80%.

Results

Overall, 355 CAG patients were initially considered. Of these, 36 were excluded due to the presence of GNL at baseline gastroscopy, and 216 for missing data. Thus, a total of 103 patients were considered and grouped into: CAG patients with [22 patients (F 68.1%), median age 68 (35-83) years] and without GNL at follow-up [81 patients (F 72.8%), median age 59(26-84) years]. After a median follow-up of 60 (12-192) months, 13 epithelial GNL (gastric adenocarcinoma or high/low-grade dysplasia) and nine type-1 gastric-neuroendocrine-tumors (T1gNET) were recorded. Parietal-cell-antibodies and pepsinogen-I < 30 μg/l were associated with both epithelial GNL and T1gNET. Antral inflammation and age > 60 were linked to epithelial GNL, while anti-thyroperoxidase-antibodies, smoking, and dyspeptic symptoms at CAG diagnosis were linked to T1gNET. Low-dose aspirin and H. pylori eradication therapy showed inverse associations with epithelial GNL and T1gNET, respectively.

Conclusion

This is the first study in which an AI model simultaneously considers clinical, endoscopic, and histological characteristics from a dataset of CAG patients, showing good sensitivity and specificity in identifying those variables associated with developing GNL. Nonetheless, we acknowledge the need for improved variable standardization and data balancing between groups to enhance model performance further.

Introduction

Few studies have examined esophageal motility disorders in patients with type 2 diabetes operated with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or gastric bypass (RYGB).

Aims & Methods

We have recently reported overall prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in this group of patients (1) and now aimed to investigate potential differences between the two surgical methods regarding the prevalence of dysmotility 5 years after surgery. Furthermore, we also aimed to analyse and report on the available GERD-data in detail.
In the Oseberg study (January 2013 – December 2022), 125 patients with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m² and type 2 diabetes were screened, sixteen patients were excluded or withdrew consent, leaving 109 patients allocated to SG (n=55) or RYGB (n=54). To assess reflux symptoms, GerdQ (Gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire) was completed. Gastroscopy and 24-hour pH monitoring were used to examine GERD. High-resolution manometry with the Chicago classification v3.0 was used to assess esophageal motility.

Results

At inclusion the average age was 47.7 years (SD 9.6), BMI was 42.3 kg/m2 (5.3), and 66% were women. At the 5-year follow-up, 29 (53%) patients in SG-group and 32 (59%) in RYGB-group underwent gastroscopy, 22 (40%) vs. 25 (46%) underwent 24-hour pH monitoring, 23 (42%) vs. 26 (48%) underwent manometry, and 42 (76%) vs. 42 (78%) completed GerdQ. The proportion of patients with GERD symptoms (GerdQ ≥8) was low in both groups, with a slightly lower prevalence after RYGB (2%) than after SG (14%). There was no difference in the prevalence of erosive esophagitis between the groups (38% in SG and 41% in RYGB), all findings with less advanced esophagitis (Los Angeles grades A and B), but one patient in each group had new onset Barrett's esophagus. The proportion of patients with pH<4 for more than 6% of the recording (Acid exposure time, AET) was significantly higher after SG compared with RYGB (59% versus 8%, p < 0.0001). Esophageal dysmotility was diagnosed in 14 (61%) after SG compared with 19 (73%) patients after RYGB. Most of these patients (n=22) had hypertensive or hypotensive lower esophageal sphincter (LES), with no difference between groups. The remaining 11 patients had ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) or elevated distal contractile integral (DCI). None of the patients with dysmotility reported swallowing difficulties or chest pain with food intake.

Conclusion

The Oseberg study demonstrates a high prevalence of asymptomatic esophageal dysmotility after SG or RYGB with uncertain clinical relevance. Furthermore, a seven times higher prevalence of pathological acid reflux after SG compared with RYGB was demonstrated, but the prevalences of erosive esophagitis and esophageal dysmotility were approximately similar between groups. Few of the examined patients reported GERD symptoms, hence objective assessment of GERD should be included in long-term follow-up after SG to detect and prevent the development of Barrett's esophagus, dysplasia, and adenocarcinoma.

References

1. Hauge JW et al., Effect of gastric bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy on the remission of type 2 diabetes, weight loss, and cardiovascular risk factors at 5 years (Oseberg): secondary outcomes of a single-centre, triple-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2025 Apr 1:S2213-8587(24)00396-6

Introduction

Pathological esophageal acid exposure may persist in patients with Barrett’s esophagus (BE) despite standard proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and symptom control, although current guidelines recommend at least standard-dose PPI for all patients with BE.¹

Aims & Methods

Aim was to evaluate the role of esophageal function testing in assessing acid exposure in BE patients on PPI therapy and in predicting neoplastic progression. We conducted a multicenter retrospective study including asymptomatic BE patients (defined by GerdQ total score <8 and a score of 0 on the first GerdQ item) who underwent high-resolution manometry and 24-hour pH impedance monitoring while on various PPI regimens. Maximal PPI therapy included esomeprazole 40 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg, rabeprazole 20 mg, or lansoprazole 30 mg, all administered twice daily. All other regimens were considered standard dosing. Index upper endoscopy with biopsies was performed under the same therapeutic regimen. Histologically, presence and degree of neoplasia (all confirmed by a second pathologist) was recorded. Acid exposure time (AET) <4% was defined as adequate acid control; AET >6% as pathological reflux. Predictors of pathological reflux and neoplasia were assessed using logistic regression analysis.

Results

A total of 135 patients (2016-2025) were included (mean age 58 ± 15 years; 73% male). Median BE length was C1 (range 0–3 cm) and M2 (range 1–5 cm), with 41% (n=56) classified as having long-segment BE. Sixty-seven patients (50%) were on standard-dose PPI. Pathological reflux was identified in 37 patients (27%), of whom 25 (67%) were on standard-dose therapy. Fourteen patients (10%) had borderline AET values (4–6%). Among the 84 patients (62%) with adequate acid control, 33 (39%) were taking standard-dose PPI. On multivariable analysis, standard-dose PPI (OR 3.04; 95% CI 1.34–6.89; p=0.008) and type III esophagogastric junction morphology (OR 2.52; 95% CI 1.01–5.01; p=0.047), consistent with manometric hiatal hernia, were independently associated with pathological reflux. Non-dysplastic BE was found in 112 patients, while 13 (10%) had neoplasia at index endoscopy (8 low-grade dysplasia, 3 high-grade dysplasia, 2 intramucosal adenocarcinoma). Pathological reflux was the only independent predictor of neoplasia (OR 10.41; 95% CI 2.65–41.26; p<0.001).

Table 1. Logistic regression analysis for factors associated with neoplasia on index endoscopy.

	Univariable analysis		Multivariable analysis
	OR (95% CI)	p-value	OR (95% CI)	p-value
Age, years	1.01 (0.96-1.05)	0.695	-	-
BMI, kg/m2	0.95 (0.83-1-10)	0.957	-	-
Male gender	0.71 (0.19-2.54)	0.783	-	-
PPI standard dose vs maximal	0.85 (0.27-2.69)	0.792	-	-
Long-segment BE vs short	1.70 (0.53-5.52)	0.371	-	-
Ineffective/absent contractility vs normal	0.96 (0.30-3.03)	0.939	-	-
EGJ type III morphology vs I/II	3.98 (1.16-13.71)	0.028	3.18 (0.86-11.78)	0.082
AET >6% vs <6%	11.72 (3.01-45.65)	0.001	10.41 (2.65-41.26)	<0.001

Conclusion

Nearly one-third of asymptomatic BE patients exhibit pathological reflux on pH-monitoring despite PPI treatment, predominantly among those on standard-dose and with manometric hiatal hernia. Nonetheless, adequate acid control is achieved in over one-third of patients on standard PPI therapy. Pathological reflux is associated with a 10-fold increased risk of neoplasia.

References

1. Shaheen NJ, Falk GW, Iyer PG, et al. Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus: An Updated ACG Guideline. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022;117(4):559-587.

Introduction

The TOGAS consortium (TOwards GAstric cancer Screening) was established to explore effective gastric cancer screening strategies within Europe. One key method involves the detection and eradication of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), the leading causative agent of gastric cancer. In Western Europe, infection rates are higher among males, smokers, and individuals of lower socioeconomic status—groups that tend to engage less with preventive health services.

Aims & Methods

This pilot study aimed to determine whether targeted screening in high-risk occupational settings improves participation and outcomes compared to population-based screening via general practice.
Key outcome measures included;

1. Response rate
2. Prevalence of the infection
3. Treatment effectiveness

This prospective pilot study recruited individuals aged 30–34 years from January 2024 to March 2025. Participants were invited either through general practices (general population group, GP) or through two occupational screening programs (targeted group, TG) representing higher-risk, male-dominated workforces: the Irish Defence Forces and Construction Workers Health Trust. Exclusion criteria included prior H. pylori treatment or gastrectomy. All participants underwent serologic screening (BIOHIT H. pylori IgG antibody). The TG was offered initial on-site screening at their workplace; the GP group attended a local hospital. All seropositive individuals were offered confirmatory 13-C urea breath testing (Richen IR Force 200) in a local hospital. Confirmed cases were offered a 10-day regimen of PYLERA (Metronidazole/Tetracycline/Bismuth subcitrate) with Esomeprazole 40 mg BD. Eradication was assessed ≥6 weeks post-treatment. Response rates, demographics, infection prevalence, and treatment outcomes were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U and Chi² tests (significance p < 0.05).

Results

3030 individuals were invited for screening: 2824 in the GP group(GPG), 206 in the TG. Key demographics and risk factors of each group are shown in Table 1. The invitation response and participation rates were significantly higher in the TG versus the GPG (31% v’s 14%; p < 0.001, 30% v’s 14% p <0.00, respectively). H. pylori seroprevalence rates were similar between groups: 18% (11/60) in the TG, 19% (64/333) in the GPG (p<0.70). Confirmatory 13-C UBT was completed in 91% (10/11) of those who tested positive in the TG and 98% (63/64) of the GPG. Overall, ‘true’ prevalence rates based on serology & confirmatory 13-C UBT results were 10%(6/59) in the TG v’s 14% (44/325) in the GPG(p = 0.47). Treatment adherence exceeded 90% in both groups, with 100% adherence in the TG and 90% in the GPG. Among those who completed post-treatment testing (n=37), eradication was achieved in 100% of the TG (2/2) and 89% of the GPG (31/35).

Table 1 Basic Demographics by Group

	Targeted group	General population
Gender, male	97%	33%
Median age, years	31	32
Smoking status Current/previous Non-smoker	41% (24) 59% (34)	34% (137) 66% (266)
Socioeconomic status(self-rated) Higher Middle Lower Prefer not to answer	69% (40/58) 22% (13/58) 0 9% (5/58)	85% (337/397) 11% (42/397) 0% (2/397) 4% (16/397)
Family history of H.pylori infection	3% (2)	9% (36)

Conclusion

Targeted occupational screening in high-risk populations demonstrated superior response and engagement rates compared to general practice-based screening. These early results suggest this approach may be a more effective and resource-conscious strategy in low-to-intermediate risk countries and merit further evaluation in broader implementation efforts.

References

1. Teo CH, Ng CJ, Booth A, White A. Barriers and facilitators to health screening in men: A systematic review. Soc Sci Med. 2016 Sep;165:168-176. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.07.023. Epub 2016 Aug 1. PMID: 27511617. 5.
2. Lou L, Wang L, Zhang Y, et al. Sex difference in incidence of gastric cancer: an international comparative study based on the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017.BMJ Open 2020;10:e033323. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033323
3. Salmani H, Ahmadi M, Shahrokhi N. The Impact of Mobile Health on Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review. Cancer Informatics. 2020;19. doi:10.1177/1176935120954191
4. CSO. (2023, May 30). Employment, Occupation, Industry and Commuting - CSO -Central Statistics Office. https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/pcpsr/censusofpopulation2022- summaryresults/employmentoccupationindustryandcommuting/

Disclosure

Dr. Deane reports receipt of research funding support from EU4 Health grant GA number: 101101252. Receipt of ​13-C Urea Breath Test bags for this study was provided for by Richen - Dr Deane was the winner of the Richen Global ​Research Competition 2023

Introduction

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have marked a breakthrough in the management of a wide range of cancer types, leading to increased overall survival. However, this treatment is frequently associated with the onset of various immune-related adverse events (irAEs), including ICI-related diarrhea and colitis.¹ Current recommendations for patients with diarrhea or colitis grade 2 or higher (graded via CTCAE)² include the discontinuation of ICI and administration of immune suppressants (e.g. steroids or biologics), which may lead to worse outcomes in these patients.³ Therefore, alternative therapeutic strategies to manage irAEs are needed. The gut microbiota plays a pivotal role in the onset of gastrointestinal irAEs, but the role of its therapeutic modulation on these disorders is mostly unknown. ^4,5

Aims & Methods

Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of therapeutic microbiome modulation for gastrointestinal irAEs in cancer patients. We enrolled cancer patients affected by ICI-related diarrhea/colitis referred to our Microbiome Clinic from January 2023 to March 2025. After clinical evaluation, patients were stratified according to severity of diarrhea (graded via CTCAE)² and then received a microbiome-modulating therapy. Patients were followed-up for at least 8 week after the initiation of therapy. We collected data about patient demographics (age and gender), patient’s overall health status as assessed by the the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI)⁶, type of cancer, oncological therapy and its suspension, time in weeks from initiation of cancer therapy to onset of diarrhea, severity of diarrhea (graded via CTCAE)², time in weeks until resolution of diarrhea and resumption of oncological therapy

Results

We enrolled 42 patients in the study period (8 males, 34 females, mean age 58,3 years-old, mean CCI-index 5.8). All patients were treated with ICI (Pembrolizumab: n=25 , Dostarlimab: n=4, Nivolumab: n=4; Atezolizumab: n=3; Novulumab and Ipilumab: n=2, Cemiplimab: n=2; Mogamulizumab: n=1; Pertuzumab: n=1). Ten patients experienced G1 diarrhea (23,8%), 16 (38,1) G2, 15 (35,7%) G3 and one G4 (2,4%). As indicated by current European Guidelines³, 30 patients (71,4%) had to interrupt ICI due to diarrhea. Multi-strain probiotics were administered to 27 (64.3% ) patients, rifaximin to 22 (52,4%). Overall, 21 patients (50%) needed therapy with systemic steroids. Seven patients who experienced ICI-related colitis refractory to steroids and biologics were successfully treated with FMT. Twenty-eight patients (66.7% ) had a resolution of the diarrhea (G0) and 11 patients (26.2%) had diarrhea G1 at a mean time of 8 weeks. Upon resolution of diarrhea, nine of the 30 patients who had interrupted ICI (30%) were able to resume the treatment. None of the patients experienced any adverse event related to gut microbiota modulation as defined by CTCAE².

Conclusion

Therapeutic modulation of gut microbiota appears to be a promising safe and effective approach for treating ICI-related diarrhea and colitis. However, these preliminary findings need confirmation through more consolidated and well-designed studies.

References

1. Dougan M, Wang Y, Rubio-Tapia A, Lim JK. AGA Clinical Practice Update on Diagnosis and Management of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Colitis and Hepatitis: Expert Review. Gastroenterology. 2021;160(4):1384-1393. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2020.08.063
2. Freites-Martinez A, Santana N, Arias-Santiago S, Viera A. Using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE - Version 5.0) to Evaluate the Severity of Adverse Events of Anticancer Therapies. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2021;112(1):90-92. doi:10.1016/j.ad.2019.05.009
3. Haanen J, Obeid M, Spain L, et al. Management of toxicities from immunotherapy: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2022;33(12):1217-1238. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.10.001
4. Wang Y, Wiesnoski DH, Helmink BA, et al. Fecal microbiota transplantation for refractory immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated colitis. Nat Med. 2018;24(12):1804-1808. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0238-9
5. Wang T, Zheng N, Luo Q, et al. Probiotics Lactobacillus reuteri Abrogates Immune Checkpoint Blockade-Associated Colitis by Inhibiting Group 3 Innate Lymphoid Cells. Front Immunol. 2019;10. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2019.01235
6. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-383. doi:10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8

Disclosure

G.I. has received personal fees for acting as speaker for Biocodex, Danone, Sofar, Malesci, Metagenics and Tillotts Pharma, and for acting as consultant and/or advisor for Ferring Therapeutics, Giuliani, Malesci and Tillotts Pharma. A.G. reports personal fees for consultancy from Eisai Srl, 3PSolutions, Real Time Meeting, Fondazione Istituto Danone, SinergieSrl, Board MRGE and Sanofi SpA personal fees for acting as a speaker for Takeda SpA, AbbVie and Sandoz SpA and personal fees for acting on advisory boards for VSL3 and Eisai. G.C. has received personal fees for acting as advisor for Ferring Therapeutics. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.