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

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the esophagus. Inflammation in EoE has been associated with potential risk of esophageal cancer (EC), with controversial results by the most recent studies [1] [2] [3].

Aims & Methods

The aim of this study was to estimate the true risk burden of EC in EoE, further investigating the confounding role of overlapping gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or Barrett Esophagus (BE) on EC occurrence. We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study on aggregated data of EoE patients accessing the global federated health research network “TriNetX”, with access to electronic medical records from approximately a hundred million patients across large healthcare organizations (HCOs), based on the ICD-10 code (K20.0), from January 1^st 2000 until March 31^st 2025. We inferred the risk of EC, by comparing two different EoE cohorts: cohort A including EoE diagnosis (excluding eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders [EGIDS]), not applying any other restrictive criteria; cohort B with only pure EoE diagnosis excluding any instance of GERD (K21.0) and Barrett esophagus (BE) (K22.7) or other EGIDS. The control cohort comprised patients encountered in outpatient clinic for undefined issues (Z00), without diagnosis of EoE/BE or pre-cancerous lesions. We used propensity score nearest neighbor greedy matching, adjusting for PPI use, family history of GI cancer, age, sex, other esophageal diseases (K22.0) and GERD status. Kaplan-Meyer (KM) curves with censoring were built for time-to-event analysis. Log Rank test was used to compare KM curves. Hazard Ratios (HRs) and Risk Ratio (RR) estimation for EC risk were calculated and compared. Sub-analyses for squamous-cell cancer (SCC) vs adenocarcinoma, and for EC location in the esophagus (distal, medium and proximal) were implemented.

Results

After 1:1 propensity score matching, 92,447 patients with EoE (with or without GERD) (cohort A) (mean age 38.9±20.7 years, M 59.7%, previous history of malignant GI neoplasm 2.7%, GERD 40.4%, other esophageal diseases 14.9%, PPI use 40.4%; all p>0.05 with control group) and 32,270 patients pure EoE (without GERD/BE) (cohort B) (mean age 33.9±19.3 years, M 64.7%, previous history of malignant GI neoplasm 1.2%, GERD 0%, other esophageal diseases 8.3%, PPI use 23.2%; all p>0.05 with control group), were compared with controls subjects. Mean follow-up of cohort A was 1298.6 days compared to 1046.5 days in cohort B. The total number of EC occurrences in cohort A were 44 in EA group compared to 31 in the control group, resulting in a HR of 1.676 (1.058-2.657, 95%CI), while a non-significant RR of 1.419 (0.896, 2.247, 95%CI). The KM survival analysis resulted significant (log-rank test p=0.026). Interestingly, when comparing cohort B (pure EoE without GERD or BE) with the control group, only 10 instances of EC in both groups where encountered during the follow-up, with a non-significant HR of 0.893 (0.290-2.754 95%CI) with no difference in the KM survival analysis (p= 0.844). No differences in sub-analysis for squamous cell or adenocarcinoma cancer, neither for EC occurrence in different esophageal localizations were detected.

Conclusion

The results from this global retrospective study on more than 90,000 EoE patients, confirmed the irrelevant risk of EC in pure EoE. The mild association reported in other studies may be likely due to EoE overlap with GERD/BE. No specific surveillance for EC seems needed in EoE when GERD and BE are not present.

References

1. Albaneze N, Cotton CC, Anderson C, Katzka DA, Dellon ES. No Association Between Eosinophilic Oesophagitis and Oesophageal Cancer in US Adults: A Case-Control Study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2025 Jan;61(2):363-368. doi: 10.1111/apt.18431. Epub 2024 Dec 4. PMID: 39629856; PMCID: PMC11680457.
2. Zhou MJ, Hsing AW, Clarke JO. Prevalence and predictors of Barrett's esophagus and esophageal cancer in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. Dis Esophagus. 2025 Jan 7;38(1):doae120. doi: 10.1093/dote/doae120. PMID: 39775829.
3. Uchida AM, Schuman SS, Pyne A, Peterson K, Carlson M, Garber JJ, Roelstraete B, Ludvigsson JF. Risk of Cancer Diagnosis in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis Using a Nationwide Swedish Population Cohort. United European Gastroenterol J. 2024 Dec;12(10):1378-1387. doi: 10.1002/ueg2.12713. Epub 2024 Nov 20. PMID: 39565026; PMCID: PMC11652337.

Disclosure

E.V. received speaker and/or consulting fees from Sanofi/Regeneron, Falk Pharma, Apollo Therapeutics, and Aurora Biofarma. EVS received consulting fees from Dr Falk Pharma and Reckitt Benckiser; research support from Medtronic and Diversatek Healthcare. DAC.: Medtronic(Speaking, Consulting, License); Diversatek (Consulting); Braintree(Consulting); Medpace (Consulting); Phathom Pharmaceuticals(Speaking); Regeneron/Sanofi(Speaking). AJB received research funding from BMS, Sanofi/Regeneron, SST, and Dr. Falk Pharma and received speaker and/or consulting fees from Uniquity, Laborie, Medtronic, BMS, Dr. Falk Pharma, Calypso Biotech, Eupraxia, Aqilion, Alimentiv, Sanofi/Regeneron, Uniquity, Reckitt, AlfaSigma and AstraZeneca. All other authors did not have any disclosures.

Introduction

Human transglutaminase 2 (TG2) plays a key role in celiac disease (CeD) pathogenesis, spurring development of the oral TG2 inhibitor ZED1227. In the phase 2a CEC-003/CEL study in CeD patients on a gluten-free diet (GFD), once-daily treatment with ZED1227 with gluten challenge (3 g/day) for 6 weeks led to significant improvement in the ratio of intestinal villous height to crypt depth (VH:CrD) versus placebo.¹ Despite adherence to a gluten-free diet, up to half of CeD patients report persistent symptoms often combined with varying degrees of small intestinal injury. Hence, potential treatments for CeD should ideally address these symptoms and improve mucosal injury.

Aims & Methods

The aim of the present study was a dose-ranging trial of ZED1227 in CeD patients with residual symptoms and villous atrophy despite a GFD. This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 2b study. It enrolled adult CeD patients who had followed a GFD for at least one year and who experienced at least one moderate or severe gastrointestinal (GI) symptom in the month prior to baseline. All patients underwent an initial 5-week placebo run-in phase, followed by endoscopy and 1:1:1:1 randomization of patients with VH:CrD ≤2.5. Treatment was placebo thrice-daily (TID) or ZED1227 at doses of 10 mg TID, 25 mg TID, or 50 mg once-daily (QD) for 12 weeks. No gluten challenge was carried out. The primary endpoint was the rate of patients with both improvement by ≥ 0.4 in VH:CrD and improvement by ≥ 15% in either of two symptom scores (non-stool GI or diarrhea severity) on the celiac disease symptom diary (CDSD) from the end of the run-in phase to week 12. Key secondary endpoints included the change in VH:CrD, change in CDSD GI total severity score, and safety.

Results

A total of 397 patients were randomized to the 4 arms, of whom 92.7% completed treatment. The primary endpoint was achieved by 27.1% of patients receiving 10 mg ZED1227 TID, 16.9% for 25 mg TID, 25.3% for 50 mg QD, and 19.3% for placebo, with no significant differences between any treatment arm and placebo. The mean change in VH:CrD ratio from baseline was 0.21 for 10 mg ZED1227 TID, 0.17 for 25 mg TID, and 0.26 for 50 mg QD versus 0.12 for placebo. Within-group changes from baseline to week 12 were statistically significant within each arm, while the between-group difference in changes was significant only for 50 mg ZED1227 QD versus placebo (p<0.05). Similarly, mean changes in the CDSD GI total severity score were -0.96 with 10 mg ZED1227 TID, -0.95 with 25 mg TID, -1.20 with 50 mg QD, and -1.05 with placebo. Improvements within each arm were again statistically significant, with no significant differences between any treatment arm and placebo. There were no notable differences in the rates of adverse events or serious adverse events (SAEs) between the study arms, and no SAEs related to the study drug were reported.

Conclusion

The CEC-004/CEL study did not meet its primary endpoint of combined improvement in histology and symptoms. However, changes in the VH:CrD ratio achieved with 50 mg ZED1227 QD were statistically superior to placebo, consistent with the results of the prior CEC-003/CEL study. Significant within-group improvement from baseline to week 12 in both histologic and symptom outcomes within the placebo group underscored the challenges of clinical trials without deliberate gluten exposure in patients with the heterogeneous symptom and histology typical of partially treated CeD. The favorable safety profile of ZED1227 was confirmed, and no new safety concerns were identified.

References

1. Schuppan D, Maki M, Lundin KEA, Isola J, Friesing-Sosnik T, Taavela J, et al. A Randomized Trial of a Transglutaminase 2 Inhibitor for Celiac Disease. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(1):35-45.

Disclosure

Sponsor of the trial: Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH
Acknowledgement: This research was supported by Takeda.

Introduction

TPM502 is a mixture of three distinct nanoparticles, each coupled with one celiac disease (CeD)-relevant gluten peptide, representing immunodominant and deamidated CD4⁺ T cell epitopes. TPM502 targets liver sinusoidal endothelial cells, which are unconventional antigen-presenting cells capable of inducing antigen-specific tolerance.

Aims & Methods

TCeD21 (NCT00565136) was a phase 2a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study in HLA-DQ2.5-positive adults with confirmed CeD on a gluten-free diet. Patients achieving a predefined IL-2 response to a single dose (6 g) gluten challenge (GC1) were randomized into four cohorts to receive two intravenous infusions with escalating doses of TPM502 or placebo on day (D) 1 and D15. The GC was repeated 7 days after the second TPM502 dose (GC2). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells collected from each patient at predefined timepoints were analyzed by high-dimensional (30-color) flow cytometry, before and after HLA-DQ2.5-gliadin-specific tetramer (tet) enrichment, using surface staining for various phenotypic markers. The study aimed to characterize the phenotypes of gluten-specific T cells in CeD patients before and after TPM502 treatment to assess its immunomodulatory effects.

Results

Samples from 36 patients completing the study (12 placebo, 24 TPM502) were analyzed across five timepoints. In the placebo group, tet⁺ CD45RA^-CD62L^-CD4⁺ T (Ttet) cells increased after both GCs. By contrast, the TPM502 cohorts exhibited elevated Ttet cell numbers before GC2 (D22) but showed limited expansion afterward (D29), suggesting that TPM502 treatment may prevent further activation-induced expansion. Moreover, the frequency of activated Ttetcells—indicated by activation markers CD38, ICOS, and OX40—significantly decreased across all TPM502 dose levels after GC2 compared to the placebo group (fold change D22 vs D29, all p < 0.0001 by Kruskal-Wallis test). Notably, the diminished gluten response of Ttet cells post-treatment was accompanied by enhanced expression of co-inhibitory receptors TIGIT and PD-1 (D-21 vs D29, p < 0.0001), along with reduced CD127 expression (p < 0.01), indicative of decreased cell survival. These phenotypic changes, consistent with T cell exhaustion or anergy, persisted until study end and were visibly distinct from those in the placebo group, as illustrated by the heatmap of delta log-transformed flow cytometry data of Ttet cells across timepoints, clustered hierarchically. Gliadin-specific CD4⁺ regulatory T cells (CD25⁺CD127^- Ttet) and CD39⁺ Ttet cells increased post-treatment at the highest TPM502 dose, suggesting the induction of regulatory states in these T cells. Moreover, pre-enriched samples showed reduced activation of αEβ7⁺ γδ⁺ and CD8⁺ Tcells after GC2 at the highest TPM502 dose, suggesting potential bystander effects.

Conclusion

Data from the first longitudinal tetramer-based flow cytometry analysis in CeD patients provide evidence that TPM502 induces antigen-specific tolerance through T-cell immunomodulation. These results corroborate other pharmacodynamic outcomes generated in this study, including a significant and dose-dependent reduction in ex vivo IL-2 and IFN-γ secretion by gluten-specific T cells after treatment. In addition to a good safety and tolerability profile of TPM502, this nanoparticle-mediated induction of antigen-specific tolerance may provide a novel therapeutic avenue to treat celiac disease.

Introduction

In patients with disorders of the gut-brain interaction abdominal bloating is a visceral sensation (sensation of pressure/fullness), whereas visible abdominal distension is a somatic manifestation with abnormal postural tone (abdominophrenic dyssynergia, i.e., diaphragmatic push and abdominal wall relaxation). Abdominophrenic dyssynergia can be corrected by a simple non-instrumental technique, and our aim was to determine the relation of distension and bloating responses over time.

Aims & Methods

In a randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel trial (ClincalTrials.gov number NCT06150638) 40 consecutive patients (34 women, 6 men; age range 18–58 years) with disorders of gut-brain interaction complaining of visible abdominal distension were randomized to receive biofeedback or placebo. Patients in the biofeedback group were explained the mechanism of distension, and were taught to relax the diaphragm and contract the abdominal wall, using an original audiovisual support and hands-on guidance by a trained operator. In the placebo group, sham measurements of abdominal and thoracic motion were performed, and a pill of placebo was administered. Three 30-min sessions were performed over a 4-week intervention period, with instructions to perform daily exercises (biofeedback group) or to take placebo three times a day (control group) at home. After the intervention, patients allocated to the placebo group were offered biofeedback treatment. After receiving biofeedback treatment, patients in both groups were instructed to continue practicing these same exercises over time, and were followed up: visible abdominal distension and sensation of abdominal pressure/fullness (bloating) were measured at 1 and 3 months using 10-cm scales for 7 consecutive days, and the mean values (±SE) were calculated.

Results

After undergoing the three treatment sessions, abdominal distension improved in the biofeedback group (n=19; by 24±7 %), but not in the placebo group (n=20; 8±3 % change; p=0.025 vs feedback group). In the 20 patients randomized to placebo, subsequent biofeedback treatment improved abdominal distension (by 35±7 %). Follow-up in all patients after biofeedback (n=36) showed a sustained improvement in abdominal distension and bloating sensation at 1 month (by 39±5 % and 36±7 %, respectively; p<0.001 vs before treatment for both), and at 3 months (by 37±5 % and 34±8 %, respectively; p<0.003 vs before treatment for both).

Conclusion

In patients with disorders of gut-brain interaction, correction of abdominophrenic dyssynergia by a simple, non-instrumental technique, produces a sustained improvement of visible abdominal distension, associated with a concomitant improvement of bloating sensation.

Disclosure

I have the following Conflict of Interest to declare: Coloplast, Schwabe