UEG Week Recordings UEG Week Posters Online courses Guidelines Mistakes in... Podcasts Webinars
new
Gut Guide online
Visit ueg.eu Create myUEG account Log In
Visit ueg.eu Create myUEG account Log In

Filters:

UEG Online Course
accredited
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

Log in to continue.

This content is part of Gutflix. Log in with your myUEG account, or create one free, to watch it.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

Gastric polyps

Oliver Pech, Pradeep Bhandari, Raf Bisschops

Summary

AI Generated

An online educational course covers the diagnosis, endoscopic features, malignant potential, and management of gastric polyps, which are rare incidental findings that sometimes require resection.

  • Gastric polyps are frequently found incidentally during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, are rare, and generally produce few symptoms, though some have malignant potential and need resection
  • The course addresses various types of gastric polyps including their endoscopic appearance, diagnosis, pathology, malignant potential, and treatment
  • Learning objectives include becoming familiar with typical endoscopic features, gaining knowledge of necessary diagnostic work-up, and learning surveillance or treatment needs for different polyp types
  • The course is suitable for gastroenterologists in training, physicians and surgeons in other disciplines, nurses, bio-technicians, and advanced medical students with an interest in gastroenterology
Download PDF

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

This summary was generated by an AI large language model based on the content transcript. It is for informational purposes only and should not be considered a substitute for clinical judgment. Always rely on your professional expertise and the full clinical context when making clinical decisions.

Overview

Gastric polyps are frequently found incidentally during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Although gastric polyps are rare and generally produce few symptoms, some have malignant potential and need to be resected. 

This online course addresses the various types of gastric polyp and their endoscopic appearance, diagnosis, pathology, malignant potential and treatment. 

Learning objectives

  • To become familiar with the typical endoscopic features of gastric polyps
  • To gain knowledge of the necessary diagnostic work-up of a gastric polyp
  • To learn the need for surveillance or treatment for the different types of polyp

Target audience

This course is suitable for gastroenterologists in training, but is also built to serve physicians and surgeons in other disciplines, as well as nurses, bio-technicians and advanced-years’ medical students who have an interest in gastroenterology.

Reviewed & updated July 2022

Event

Gastric polyps

Topics

Digestive Oncology

Accreditation status

accredited

Duration

1 hour

Published

2018

More Like This:

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

Colin J. Rees Colin J. Rees, Evelien Dekker, Manon van der Vlugt, Laura Jane Neilson, Paul Fockens, Karlijn J. Nass, Charmayne V. Geerlings, Querijn N.E. van Bokhorst

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

Guilherme Macedo Guilherme Macedo, Irene Gullo, Rui Morais, Francisco Mendes

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (<2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (<2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

Pinghong Zhou Pinghong Zhou, Yunshi Zhong, Jinhua Yu, Yinhui Deng, Pingting Gao, Baohui Song, Mingyan Cai

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

Silvio Danese Silvio Danese, Brian G. Feagan, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Alessandra Oortwijn, Margaux Faes, Veerle Vyncke, Severine Vermeire, Stefan Schreiber

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

Maria Daca Alvarez Maria Daca Alvarez, Maria Pellisé Urquiza, Jorge Lopez Vicente, Akiko Ono, Marita Grimanesa Trelles Guzmán, Goretti Hernández Mesa, Eva Musulen, Alberto Perez Pedrosa, Luis Hernández Villalba, Rodrigo Jover, Lluïsa Sargatal, Alvaro Díaz González, Beatriz Peñas, Angel Ferrandez, Salvador Machlab, Marco Aurelio Alburquerque Miranda, VÍctor Jair Morales Alvarado, Pilar Diez Redondo, Fernando Martínez de Juan, Ignasi Puig, David Barquero Declara, Ángeles Eloisa Pizarro Moreno, Marta Ponce Romerto, Lara Aguilera, INMACULADA SALCES FRANCO, Alberto Herrero Tejada de Echanojauregui, Gemma Ibáñez Sanz, Luis Bujanda Fernández de Piérola, maria isabel portillo villares, Diana Zaffalon, Cristina Manzotti

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

Pengfei Li Pengfei Li, Yan Zhao, Hongwei Xu, Li Xie, Fang Zhou, Wensheng Pan

UEG Presentation
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky
PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

Log in to continue.

This content is part of Gutflix. Log in with your myUEG account, or create one free, to watch it.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

Querijn N.E. van Bokhorst 1, Charmayne V. Geerlings 1, Manon van der Vlugt 1,2, Karlijn J. Nass 3, Paul Fockens 1,2, Laura Jane Neilson 4,5, Colin J. Rees 4,5, Evelien Dekker 1,2

Affiliations

1 Amsterdam UMC, location VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands

2 Bergman Clinics, Amsterdam, Netherlands

3 Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, Netherlands

4 South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, South Shields, United Kingdom

5 Population Health Sciences Institute Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom

Summary

AI Generated

Summary is not available for this content yet.

Download PDF

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

This summary was generated by an AI large language model based on the content transcript. It is for informational purposes only and should not be considered a substitute for clinical judgment. Always rely on your professional expertise and the full clinical context when making clinical decisions.

Abstract

Introduction

Per-procedural patient comfort is one of the key performance measures for colonoscopy [1]. In daily practice, patient comfort is generally reported by clinicians using rating scales such as the Gloucester Comfort Scale (GCS) [2]. However, despite the widespread use of the GCS, insights regarding the extent to which clinician-reported GCS scores really represent the patient's experience are lacking. Therefore, we aimed to assess the level of agreement between clinician-reported GCS scores and the level of patient-reported discomfort and pain.

Aims & Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy for any indication at two Dutch endoscopy clinics were invited to complete the Newcastle ENDOPREM™, a validated measure of patient experience of gastrointestinal endoscopy [3], within 48 hours after colonoscopy. Colonoscopies were performed by gastroenterologists or supervised gastroenterologists in training. Per-procedural comfort from the clinician’s perspective is routinely reported by either the endoscopy nurse or endoscopist using the GCS (1 to 5 scale). Per-procedural experience from the patient’s perspective was reported in terms of both the level of discomfort and pain on a 1 (no discomfort/pain) to 5 (worst discomfort/pain imaginable) scale. Moderate to high discomfort scores were defined as scores >3. Levels of agreement between clinician- and patient-reported scores were assessed using Cohen's kappa statistic. Regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with moderate to high discomfort and pain scores.

Results

Of 579 invited patients, 243 (42%) returned a completed questionnaire and fulfilled the inclusion criteria (signed informed consent, no deep sedation [4]). Percentual agreement between GCS and patient-reported scores is displayed in Table 1. A GCS score >3 was reported for 18 (7%) patients. Discomfort and pain scores >3 were reported by 53 (22%) and 60 (25%) patients respectively. For these patients, GCS underestimated discomfort and pain levels as reported by patients in almost all cases (discomfort: 49/53 [92%], pain: 54/60 [90%]). The level of agreement between GCS and discomfort scores was minimal (Cohen’s κ: 0.34), agreement between GCS and pain scores was weak (Cohen’s κ: 0.47). Levels of agreement were better for sedated patients (asleep but with response to verbal or tactile stimulation, n = 125) compared to patients who were awake or slightly drowsy (n = 116) for both discomfort (Cohen’s κ: 0.45 vs. 0.20) and pain (Cohen’s κ: 0.45 vs. 0.38). Based on multivariable regression analyses, female gender, age <55 years and high procedural difficulty (as defined by the endoscopist) were associated with moderate to high patient-reported discomfort and pain scores. Moreover, where patients reported that they were anxious about discomfort and pain, anxious about procedure results, had a negative bowel preparation experience, felt unsafe, felt embarrassed or where procedures were longer than expected, moderate to high discomfort and pain scores were more common (all p<0.05).


Matching GCS score and patient-reported score, n (%)
GCS score lower than patient-reported score, n (%)
GCS score higher than patient-reported score
Discomfort
119 (49%)72 (30%)52 (21%)
Pain133 (55%)71 (29%)39 (16%)

Conclusion

Clinician-reported GCS scores, used to indicate per-procedural patient comfort, underreport discomfort and pain as reported by patients. A validated experience tool also allows the definition of patient factors that may be associated with greater patient reported discomfort and pain at colonoscopy. These findings support the use of patient-reported comfort scores for accurate monitoring of patients’ experience.

References

[1] Kaminski MF, Thomas-Gibson S, Bugajski M et al. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 378-397. DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-103411
[2] Ekkelenkamp VE, Dowler K, Valori RM et al. Patient comfort and quality in colonoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19: 2355-2361. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i15.2355
[3] Neilson LJ, Sharp L, Patterson JM et al. The Newcastle ENDOPREM: a validated patient reported experience measure for gastrointestinal endoscopy. BMJ Open Gastroenterol 2021; 8. DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2021-000653
[4] Lee JK, Lee YJ, Cho JH et al. Updates on the Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Clin Endosc 2019; 52: 451-457. DOI: 10.5946/ce.2019.172

Disclosure

PF received research support from Boston Scientific and a consulting feefrom Olympus and Cook Endoscopy. CR has received grant funding from ARC medical, Norgine, 3-D Matrix, Medtronic and Olympus medical. He was an expert witness for ARC medical and for Olympus medical. ED received a research grant from Fujifilm, a consulting fee for medical advice from Olympus, Fujifilm, GI Supply, PAION, Ambu and CPP-FAP and a speakers fee from Olympus, Roche, GI Supply, Norgine, Fujifilm and IPSEN.

Event

UEG Week Vienna 2024

Topics

Colorectal Digestive Oncology Endoscopy

Submission format

Abstract

Session

Screening colonoscopy: How to save lives

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2024; 12 (Supplement 8)

Published

2024

More Like This:

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

Colin J. Rees Colin J. Rees, Evelien Dekker, Manon van der Vlugt, Laura Jane Neilson, Paul Fockens, Karlijn J. Nass, Charmayne V. Geerlings, Querijn N.E. van Bokhorst

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

Guilherme Macedo Guilherme Macedo, Irene Gullo, Rui Morais, Francisco Mendes

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

Pinghong Zhou Pinghong Zhou, Yunshi Zhong, Jinhua Yu, Yinhui Deng, Pingting Gao, Baohui Song, Mingyan Cai

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

Silvio Danese Silvio Danese, Brian G. Feagan, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Alessandra Oortwijn, Margaux Faes, Veerle Vyncke, Severine Vermeire, Stefan Schreiber

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

Maria Daca Alvarez Maria Daca Alvarez, Maria Pellisé Urquiza, Jorge Lopez Vicente, Akiko Ono, Marita Grimanesa Trelles Guzmán, Goretti Hernández Mesa, Eva Musulen, Alberto Perez Pedrosa, Luis Hernández Villalba, Rodrigo Jover, Lluïsa Sargatal, Alvaro Díaz González, Beatriz Peñas, Angel Ferrandez, Salvador Machlab, Marco Aurelio Alburquerque Miranda, VÍctor Jair Morales Alvarado, Pilar Diez Redondo, Fernando Martínez de Juan, Ignasi Puig, David Barquero Declara, Ángeles Eloisa Pizarro Moreno, Marta Ponce Romerto, Lara Aguilera, INMACULADA SALCES FRANCO, Alberto Herrero Tejada de Echanojauregui, Gemma Ibáñez Sanz, Luis Bujanda Fernández de Piérola, maria isabel portillo villares, Diana Zaffalon, Cristina Manzotti

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

Pengfei Li Pengfei Li, Yan Zhao, Hongwei Xu, Li Xie, Fang Zhou, Wensheng Pan

UEG Poster
Standard Poster
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

Log in to continue.

This content is part of Gutflix. Log in with your myUEG account, or create one free, to watch it.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

Francisco Mendes 1, Rui Morais 1, Irene Gullo 1, Guilherme Macedo 1

Affiliations

1 Centro Hospitalar Universitário São João, Porto, Portugal

Summary

AI Generated

Summary is not available for this content yet.

Download PDF

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

This summary was generated by an AI large language model based on the content transcript. It is for informational purposes only and should not be considered a substitute for clinical judgment. Always rely on your professional expertise and the full clinical context when making clinical decisions.

Abstract

Introduction

Neuroendocrine neoplasms are a group of tumors originating from neuroendocrine cells and peptidergic neurons. Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are the second most common location for gastrointestinal NETs, albeit representing only 2% of all rectal neoplasms. Most of these are nonfunctional and asymptomatic although pain, blood loss and perianal discomfort can occur in larger lesions.
Endoscopically, rectal NETs typically appear as small and well-delimited submucosal lesions, with a yellowish color. The risk of lymph node metastasis is related to the tumor size, therefore, the current guidelines consider endoscopic resection as an option for rectal NETs smaller than 2 centimeters. The classical options for lesion removal include endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, EMR has a higher risk of incomplete resection, whereas ESD is more invasive and has an increased risk of complications (namely bleeding and perforation).
In this setting, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) appeared as an alternative that facilitates the complete removal of a lesion through the filling of the intestinal cavity with water. Previous Eastern studies suggest a higher complete resection rate with this endoscopic technique when compared to conventional EMR.

Aims & Methods

The present study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients submitted to UEMR of rectal NETs in a reference center.

Results

A total of 5 patients underwent UEMR for rectal NETs (Table 1). 3 patients had a tumor from the proximal rectum and 2 patients from the distal rectum. The tumor size ranged between 4 and 8 millimeters.
After marking the lesion borders, the entire rectal cavity was filled with saline and UEMR was performed. The lesion scar was closed with endoscopic clips in all cases. In a single case, delayed rectal bleeding was observed 3 days after procedure, solved with application of an additional endoscopic clip, without the need of inpatient management. No other complications were reported.
A R0 resection was observed in 80% of the cases. In a single case a positive basolateral margin was observed. However, after performance of a second UEMR in the scar (where no endoscopic evidence of residual lesion was found), there was absence of lesion in the histopathological sample. All the tumors had a G1 grade in the WHO 2019 Classification for Neuroendocrine Tumors, with a Ki-67 index ranging between 1 and 3%.
In all the cases there was absence of residual lesion or recurrence in the follow up endoscopy.

PatientTumor size, millimetersResection margins (R)Tumor grade (G)Ki67 (%)Recurrence
♂, 795R0G13No
♀, 648R0G12No
♂, 334R0G13No
♀, 468R0G13No
♂, 748R1G11No

Conclusion

This case series showcases UEMR as an effective alternative to conventional EMR, achieving high satisfactory complete resection rates, while having a low rate of procedure related complications. Therefore, UEMR should be contemplated when considering an endoscopic removal for rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms.

References

  1. Rinke, Anja et al. “European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) 2023 guidance paper for colorectal neuroendocrine tumours.” Journal of neuroendocrinology vol. 35,6 (2023)
  2. Srirajaskanthan, Rajaventhan et al. “Optimising Outcomes and Surveillance Strategies of Rectal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.” Cancers vol. 15,10 2766. 15 May. 2023
  3. Shi, Haitao et al. “Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (with videos): a single center retrospective study.” BMC gastroenterology vol. 22,1 276. 2 Jun. 2022
  4. Okada, Masahiro et al. “Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors.” Frontiers in medicine vol. 9 835013. 19 Apr. 2022

Conference

UEG Week Vienna 2024

Topics

Colorectal

Submission format

Abstract

Session

LOWER GI (Posters)

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2024; 12 (Supplement 8)

Published

2024

More Like This:

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

Colin J. Rees Colin J. Rees, Evelien Dekker, Manon van der Vlugt, Laura Jane Neilson, Paul Fockens, Karlijn J. Nass, Charmayne V. Geerlings, Querijn N.E. van Bokhorst

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

Guilherme Macedo Guilherme Macedo, Irene Gullo, Rui Morais, Francisco Mendes

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

Pinghong Zhou Pinghong Zhou, Yunshi Zhong, Jinhua Yu, Yinhui Deng, Pingting Gao, Baohui Song, Mingyan Cai

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

Silvio Danese Silvio Danese, Brian G. Feagan, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Alessandra Oortwijn, Margaux Faes, Veerle Vyncke, Severine Vermeire, Stefan Schreiber

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

Maria Daca Alvarez Maria Daca Alvarez, Maria Pellisé Urquiza, Jorge Lopez Vicente, Akiko Ono, Marita Grimanesa Trelles Guzmán, Goretti Hernández Mesa, Eva Musulen, Alberto Perez Pedrosa, Luis Hernández Villalba, Rodrigo Jover, Lluïsa Sargatal, Alvaro Díaz González, Beatriz Peñas, Angel Ferrandez, Salvador Machlab, Marco Aurelio Alburquerque Miranda, VÍctor Jair Morales Alvarado, Pilar Diez Redondo, Fernando Martínez de Juan, Ignasi Puig, David Barquero Declara, Ángeles Eloisa Pizarro Moreno, Marta Ponce Romerto, Lara Aguilera, INMACULADA SALCES FRANCO, Alberto Herrero Tejada de Echanojauregui, Gemma Ibáñez Sanz, Luis Bujanda Fernández de Piérola, maria isabel portillo villares, Diana Zaffalon, Cristina Manzotti

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

Pengfei Li Pengfei Li, Yan Zhao, Hongwei Xu, Li Xie, Fang Zhou, Wensheng Pan

UEG Poster
Standard Poster
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

Log in to continue.

This content is part of Gutflix. Log in with your myUEG account, or create one free, to watch it.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

Mingyan Cai 1, Baohui Song 1, Pingting Gao 1, Yunshi Zhong 1, Yinhui Deng 2, Jinhua Yu 2, Pinghong Zhou 1

Affiliations

1 Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan Univeristy, Shanghai, China

2 Fudan University, Shanghai, China

Summary

AI Generated

Summary is not available for this content yet.

Download PDF

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

This summary was generated by an AI large language model based on the content transcript. It is for informational purposes only and should not be considered a substitute for clinical judgment. Always rely on your professional expertise and the full clinical context when making clinical decisions.

Abstract

Introduction

Distinguishing gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) with high malignant risk is essential for the management of small submucosal tumors (SMTs).

Aims & Methods

We aimed to develop a machine learning model based on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) images to diagnose GISTs and non-GISTs as well as distinguish their potential malignancy. EUS images of 205 small gastric SMT (<2cm) patients were retrospectively included in the model development phase. An automatically optimized radiomics modeling system (AORMS) framework was developed to carry out the model learning based on the features extracted from the retrospective cohort. Three-fold cross-validation was used to train the machine learning model and produce the optimal model for differentiating between GIST and non-GIST as well as groups 1 and 4 GIST. Images of 178 patients from different centers were prospectively enrolled in the validation phase of the model. The diagnostic performance of the AORMS was evaluated in the development set and compared with the performance of endoscopists. Then, the performance of the AORMS was evaluated in the prospective validation set.

Results

The overall area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the AORMS were 0.762, 0.708, 0.819 and 0.649 for the diagnose of GIST, and 0.734, 0.872, 0.571 and 0.908 for the risk stratification of group 1 and 4 GIST. The accuracy of five experienced endoscopists ranged from 0.449 to 0.531 in diagnosing GIST, and from 0.702 to 0.809 in distinguishing group 1 and 4 GIST. The overall performance of AORMS is better than that of experienced endoscopists. In the prospective validation set, the AORMS also achieved 0.770 and 0.750 AUC for the diagnosis and risk stratification of small GISTs (<2cm).

Table 1. Diagnostic performance of the AORMS.



AUCACCSENSSPECPPVNPVLR+LR-
Model development cohort








Diagnosis of GIST
0.7620.708
0.819
0.649
0.750
0.644
2.333
0.279
Risk stratification of GIST
0.7340.8720.5710.9080.5710.8976.2070.472
Independent validation cohort







Diagnosis of GIST
0.7700.7420.6620.8060.7740.6443.4120.419
Risk stratification of GIST
0.7500.8720.6670.7570.6670.7952.7450.440
AORMS, automatically optimized radiomics modeling system; ACC, accuracy; AUC, area under the curve; GIST, gastrointestinal stromal tumor; LR+, positive likelihood ratio; LR-, negative likelihood ratio; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value; SENS, sensitivity; SPEC, specificity.

Conclusion

AORMS showed good and stable performance in diagnosis and risk stratification of GISTs, which may help endoscopists provide more accurate diagnosis for small gastric SMTs (<2cm).

Conference

UEG Week Copenhagen 2023

Topics

Oesophagus

Submission format

Abstract

Session

Advanced endoscopy (Posters)

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2023; 11 (Supplement 8)

Published

2023

More Like This:

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

Colin J. Rees Colin J. Rees, Evelien Dekker, Manon van der Vlugt, Laura Jane Neilson, Paul Fockens, Karlijn J. Nass, Charmayne V. Geerlings, Querijn N.E. van Bokhorst

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

Guilherme Macedo Guilherme Macedo, Irene Gullo, Rui Morais, Francisco Mendes

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

Pinghong Zhou Pinghong Zhou, Yunshi Zhong, Jinhua Yu, Yinhui Deng, Pingting Gao, Baohui Song, Mingyan Cai

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

Silvio Danese Silvio Danese, Brian G. Feagan, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Alessandra Oortwijn, Margaux Faes, Veerle Vyncke, Severine Vermeire, Stefan Schreiber

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

Maria Daca Alvarez Maria Daca Alvarez, Maria Pellisé Urquiza, Jorge Lopez Vicente, Akiko Ono, Marita Grimanesa Trelles Guzmán, Goretti Hernández Mesa, Eva Musulen, Alberto Perez Pedrosa, Luis Hernández Villalba, Rodrigo Jover, Lluïsa Sargatal, Alvaro Díaz González, Beatriz Peñas, Angel Ferrandez, Salvador Machlab, Marco Aurelio Alburquerque Miranda, VÍctor Jair Morales Alvarado, Pilar Diez Redondo, Fernando Martínez de Juan, Ignasi Puig, David Barquero Declara, Ángeles Eloisa Pizarro Moreno, Marta Ponce Romerto, Lara Aguilera, INMACULADA SALCES FRANCO, Alberto Herrero Tejada de Echanojauregui, Gemma Ibáñez Sanz, Luis Bujanda Fernández de Piérola, maria isabel portillo villares, Diana Zaffalon, Cristina Manzotti

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

Pengfei Li Pengfei Li, Yan Zhao, Hongwei Xu, Li Xie, Fang Zhou, Wensheng Pan

UEG Poster
Standard Poster
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

Log in to continue.

This content is part of Gutflix. Log in with your myUEG account, or create one free, to watch it.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

Stefan Schreiber 1, Brian G. Feagan 2,3, Severine Vermeire 4, Silvio Danese 5,6, Veerle Vyncke 7, Margaux Faes 7, Alessandra Oortwijn 8, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet 9,10,11

Affiliations

1 University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany

2 Alimentiv Inc., London, Canada

3 Western University, London, Canada

4 University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

5 IRCCS Hospital San Raffaele, Milan, Italy

6 Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy

7 Galapagos NV, Mechelen, Belgium

8 Galapagos B.V., Leiden, Netherlands

9 Nancy University Hospital, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France

10 University of Lorraine, Nancy, France

11 Paris IBD Center, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France|

Summary

AI Generated

Summary is not available for this content yet.

Download PDF

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

This summary was generated by an AI large language model based on the content transcript. It is for informational purposes only and should not be considered a substitute for clinical judgment. Always rely on your professional expertise and the full clinical context when making clinical decisions.

Abstract

Introduction

Ulcerative colitis (UC) treatment requires a patient-centric efficacy endpoint to assess treatment benefits, enabling a shift towards a personalized approach. Comprehensive disease control (CDC) is an individual multi-component endpoint based on findings from a patient and expert Delphi consensus on remission assessment in UC. CDC was defined as IBDQ remission, partial Mayo Clinic Score (pMCS) remission, biomarker (faecal calprotectin [FCP]) remission and endoscopic improvement.

Aims & Methods

We evaluated different definitions of CDC, and the contribution of different CDC components to the net treatment benefit (NTB) of filgotinib 200 mg (FIL200), an oral, once-daily, Janus kinase 1 inhibitor approved for UC treatment following the SELECTION trial (NCT02914522). CDC was assessed at week 58 (W58) of SELECTION in adult patients with active UC treated with FIL200 or placebo (PBO). The CDC definitions evaluated were: 4-component CDC (CDC4) with FCP <150 µg/g, CDC4-150; CDC4 with FCP <250 µg/g, CDC4-250; 5-component CDC (with histological remission [CDC5]) with FCP <150 µg/g, CDC5-150; and CDC5 with FCP<250 µg/g, CDC5-250. The proportion of patients achieving each combination of components was evaluated. NTB of FIL200 was assessed for each endpoint using generalized pairwise comparisons and is reported here for CDC4-150 (and excluding different components).

Results

At W58, 21.6%, 26.6%, 19.1% and 22.6% of FIL200-treated patients achieved CDC4-150, CDC4-250, CDC5-150 and CDC5-250, respectively. Among patients who did not achieve CDC4-150, 0.5% of patients did not achieve this composite endpoint because they did not achieve pMCS remission; whereas 5.0%, 10.1% and 6.0% did not do so because they did not achieve IBDQ remission, biomarker remission or endoscopic improvement, respectively. Positive overall NTB of FIL200 versus PBO was demonstrated with all CDC definitions, including those with histological remission (CDC5). For CDC4-150 at W58, excluding pMCS remission did not substantially change the NTB (Δ −0.33; Table) versus excluding IBDQ or biomarker remission, or endoscopic improvement (Δ 3.87, 6.93 and 3.20, respectively). Similar NTB results were seen for all CDC definitions, with or without histological remission.

Conclusion

CDC is a stringent, patient-level, multi-component endpoint achieved by ~1/5 of FIL200-treated patients at W58. While CDC4-150 could be the optimal operational definition, the addition of histological remission resulted in similar stringency, potentially allowing for the use of different CDC definitions based on context or resources. Additional NTB of FIL200 was identified in patients when IBDQ or biomarker remission or endoscopic improvement were excluded. Overall, CDC appears to be a suitable endpoint to assess individual comprehensive benefit in patients with UC. Prospective validation is needed.

Table. NTB with exclusion of different components of the CDC4-150 endpoint.


W10
W58
Number of pairsNTB (Δ NTB)
Number of pairsNTB (Δ NTB)
Favourable
Unfavourable
Neutral
Favourable
Unfavourable
Neutral
CDC4-150
14905
3616
122932
7.98 (–)
3931
1092
14497
14.47 (–)
CDC4-150 excluding IBDQ remission
3204
1760
117968
9.00 (1.02)
900
146
13451
18.33 (3.87)
CDC4-150 excluding pMCS remission
807
898
121227
7.92 (−0.06)
90
155
14252
14.13 (−0.33)
CDC4-150 excluding biomarker remission
6966
5525
110441
9.00 (1.02)
1760
408
12329
21.40 (6.93)
CDC4-150 excluding endoscopic improvement
7685
2538
112709
11.62 (3.64)
1056
432
13009
17.66 (3.20)
CDC4-150 was defined as simultaneous achievement of IBDQ remission (defined as an IBDQ total score ≥170), pMCS remission (defined as a pMCS ≤2 and no individual rectal bleeding, stool frequency or Physician’s Global Assessment subscore >1), biomarker remission (defined as an FCP concentration <150 µg/g) and endoscopic improvement (defined as a Mayo endoscopic subscore of 0 or 1). pMCS is the sum of Physician’s Global Assessment, rectal bleeding and stool frequency subscores. Generalized pairwise comparisons were used to compare each patient in the FIL200 group with each patient in the PBO group according to each outcome. The number of favourable pairs is the number of superior outcomes of FIL200 compared with PBO. The number of unfavourable pairs is the number of inferior outcomes of FIL200 relative to PBO. The number of neutral pairs is the number of tied outcomes of FIL200 relative to PBO. NTB for CDC4-150 was calculated as the proportion of favourable outcomes minus the proportion of unfavourable outcomes and represents the net probability that a random patient has a better outcome with FIL200 than with PBO. For example, a 10% NTB indicates a 10% greater probability of a positive outcome with FIL200 than with placebo. The NTB for CDC4-150 with excluded outcomes is the NTB for CDC4-150 achievement without including the given outcome in the definition of CDC4-150. The difference (Δ) in NTB is the additive contribution to the NTB of excluding a given component of CDC4-150 relative to achievement of full CDC4-150.
CDC4-150, four-component comprehensive disease control with faecal calprotectin <150 µg/g; FCP, faecal calprotectin; FIL200, filgotinib 200 mg; IBDQ, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire; NTB, net treatment benefit; PBO, placebo; pMCS, partial Mayo Clinic Score; W10, week 10; W58, week 58.

Disclosure

We thank Katrien Van Beneden for her contribution to conceptualization, investigation and data interpretation.
The SELECTION trial was sponsored by Gilead Sciences, Inc. (Foster City, CA, USA). Galapagos NV (Mechelen, Belgium) was a collaborator for the SELECTION trial and funded this analysis.
Medical writing support for the development of this abstract was provided by Hannah Stephens, PhD, of PharmaGenesis London, London, UK, and was funded by Alfasigma S.p.A.
VV and AO are employees of Alfasigma S.p.A at the time of abstract submission
SS has received personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Dr Falk Pharma, Eli Lilly, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos/Gilead Sciences, I-Mab, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Mylan, Pfizer, Protagonist, Provention Bio, Sandoz/Hexal, Takeda, Theravance Biopharma and UCB.
BGF has received grants and personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Biotech/Centocor, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Pfizer, Receptos and Takeda; and personal fees from Ablynx, ActoGeniX, Akebia Therapeutics, Inc., Allergan, Atlantic Pharmaceuticals, Avaxia Biologics, Inc., Avir Pharma, Baxter Healthcare Corporation, Biogen Idec, BiomX Israel, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Calypso Biotech, Celgene, Elan/Biogen, Eli Lilly, enGene, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Galapagos, Genentech/Roche, gIcare Pharma, Gilead Sciences, Given Imaging, Gossamer Bio, GSK, Inception IBD, Inc., Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Japan Tobacco Company, Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co. Ltd, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Lycera, Mesoblast, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Nestlé, Nextbiotix, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Par’Immune, Progenity, Prometheus, Protagonist, Qu Biologics, Q32 Bio (formerly AdMIRx, Inc.), Salix Pharmaceuticals, Shire, Sienna Biopharmaceuticals, Sigmoid Pharma, Synergy Pharma, Teva Pharmaceuticals, TiGenix, Tillotts Pharma, UCB, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, VHsquared, Vivelix Pharmaceuticals, Wyeth, Zealand Pharma and Zyngenia.
SV receives financial support for research from AbbVie, Galapagos, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer and Takeda; speaker and/or consultancy fees from AbbVie, Abivax, AbolerIS Pharma, AgomAb Therapeutics, Alimentiv, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Bior Therapeutics (formerly Progenity), Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Cytoki Pharma, Dr Falk Pharma, Eli Lilly, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Galapagos, Genentech-Roche, Gilead Sciences, GSK, Hospira, IMIDomics, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, Materia Prima, Mestag Therapeutics, MiroBio, Morphic, MRM Health, MSD, Mundipharma, Pfizer, ProDigest, Prometheus, Robarts Clinical Trials, Surrozen, Takeda, Theravance Biopharma, Tillotts Pharma AG, VectivBio, Ventyx Biosciences and Zealand Pharma.
SD reports personal fees from AbbVie, Allergan, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Athos Therapeutics, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Enthera, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, Hospira, Inotrem, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, MSD, Mundipharma, Mylan, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda, TiGenix, UCB and Vifor Pharma.
MF is an employee and shareholder of Galapagos NV.
VV and AO are former employees and shareholders of Galapagos NV, and employees of Alfasigma. S.p.A.
LP-B has received consulting fees from Abivax, AbbVie, Alimentiv, Alma Bio Therapeutics, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, CONNECT Biopharma, Cytoki Pharma, Eli Lilly, Enthera, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Gossamer Bio, GSK, HAC Pharma, IAG Image Analysis, Index Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Medac, Mopac, Morphic, MSD, Norgine, Novartis, OM Pharma, ONO Pharma, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pandion Therapeutics, Par’Immune, Pfizer, Prometheus, Protagonist, Roche, Roivant, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi, Takeda, Theravance Biopharma, Thermo Fisher Scientific, TiGenix, Tillotts Pharma, VectivBio, Ventyx, Viatris, Vifor Pharma and Ysopia; grants from Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi and Takeda; and speaking fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Ferring Pharmaceutics, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Medac, MSD, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda, Tillotts Pharma, Viatris and Vifor Pharma.

Conference

UEG Week Vienna 2024

Topics

IBD

Submission format

Abstract

Session

IBD (Posters)

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2024; 12 (Supplement 8)

Published

2024

More Like This:

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

Colin J. Rees Colin J. Rees, Evelien Dekker, Manon van der Vlugt, Laura Jane Neilson, Paul Fockens, Karlijn J. Nass, Charmayne V. Geerlings, Querijn N.E. van Bokhorst

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

Guilherme Macedo Guilherme Macedo, Irene Gullo, Rui Morais, Francisco Mendes

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

Pinghong Zhou Pinghong Zhou, Yunshi Zhong, Jinhua Yu, Yinhui Deng, Pingting Gao, Baohui Song, Mingyan Cai

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

Silvio Danese Silvio Danese, Brian G. Feagan, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Alessandra Oortwijn, Margaux Faes, Veerle Vyncke, Severine Vermeire, Stefan Schreiber

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

Maria Daca Alvarez Maria Daca Alvarez, Maria Pellisé Urquiza, Jorge Lopez Vicente, Akiko Ono, Marita Grimanesa Trelles Guzmán, Goretti Hernández Mesa, Eva Musulen, Alberto Perez Pedrosa, Luis Hernández Villalba, Rodrigo Jover, Lluïsa Sargatal, Alvaro Díaz González, Beatriz Peñas, Angel Ferrandez, Salvador Machlab, Marco Aurelio Alburquerque Miranda, VÍctor Jair Morales Alvarado, Pilar Diez Redondo, Fernando Martínez de Juan, Ignasi Puig, David Barquero Declara, Ángeles Eloisa Pizarro Moreno, Marta Ponce Romerto, Lara Aguilera, INMACULADA SALCES FRANCO, Alberto Herrero Tejada de Echanojauregui, Gemma Ibáñez Sanz, Luis Bujanda Fernández de Piérola, maria isabel portillo villares, Diana Zaffalon, Cristina Manzotti

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

Pengfei Li Pengfei Li, Yan Zhao, Hongwei Xu, Li Xie, Fang Zhou, Wensheng Pan

UEG Poster
Standard Poster
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

Log in to continue.

This content is part of Gutflix. Log in with your myUEG account, or create one free, to watch it.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

Maria Daca Alvarez 1, Cristina Manzotti 2, Diana Zaffalon 3, maria isabel portillo villares 4, Luis Bujanda Fernández de Piérola 5, Gemma Ibáñez Sanz 6, Alberto Herrero Tejada de Echanojauregui 7, INMACULADA SALCES FRANCO 8, Lara Aguilera 9, Marta Ponce Romerto 10, Ángeles Eloisa Pizarro Moreno 11, David Barquero Declara 12, Ignasi Puig 13, Fernando Martínez de Juan 14, Pilar Diez Redondo 15, VÍctor Jair Morales Alvarado 16, Marco Aurelio Alburquerque Miranda 17, Salvador Machlab 18, Angel Ferrandez 19, Beatriz Peñas 20, Alvaro Díaz González 21, Lluïsa Sargatal 3, Rodrigo Jover 22, Luis Hernández Villalba 23, Alberto Perez Pedrosa 24, Eva Musulen 25, Goretti Hernández Mesa 26, Marita Grimanesa Trelles Guzmán 27, Akiko Ono 28, Jorge Lopez Vicente 29, Maria Pellisé Urquiza 1

Affiliations

1 Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain

2 University of Milan, Milan, Italy

3 Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain

4 Osakideta, Bilbao, Spain

5 Instituto Biodonostia, San Sebastián, Spain

6 Hospital de Bellvitge, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain

7 Puerta de Hierro University Hospital, Majadahonda, Spain

8 Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain

9 Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain

10 Hospital Clinico Valencia, Valencia, Spain

11 Hospital Virgen del Rocio, Sevilla, Spain

12 Hospital de Sant Joan Despi,, Barcelona, Spain

13 Althaia, Xarxa Assistencial Universitària de Manresa, Manresa, Spain

14 Fundacion Instituto Valenciano de Oncologia, Valencia, Spain

15 Universitary Hospital Rio Hortega, Vallodolid, Spain

16 Hospital General de Granollers, Barcelona, Spain

17 Hospital de Palamós - Clínica Girona, Gerona, Spain

18 Consorcio Corporacion Sanitaria Parc Tauli, Sabadell, Spain

19 Hospital Clinico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Zaragoza, Spain

20 Hospital Ramon y Cajal, Madrid, Spain

21 Hospital Universitario Marques de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain

22 Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Alicante, Spain

23 Santos Reyes, Aranda de Duero, Spain

24 Complexo Hospitalario de Ourense, Ourense, Spain

25 Hospital Universitari General de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

26 Hospital Universitario de Canarias, La Laguna, Spain

27 Hospital Comarcal De Inca, Mallorca, Spain

28 Hospital Clinico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca, Murcia, Spain

29 Hospital Universitario de Mostoles, Madrid, Spain

Summary

AI Generated

Summary is not available for this content yet.

Download PDF

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

This summary was generated by an AI large language model based on the content transcript. It is for informational purposes only and should not be considered a substitute for clinical judgment. Always rely on your professional expertise and the full clinical context when making clinical decisions.

Abstract

Introduction

Treatment of rectal cancer requires an understanding of presenting stage and therapeutic modalities to provide appropriate and effective multimodality approaches that are oncological sound and respectful in terms of organ preservation and survivors’ quality of life. Imaging (endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) determines the locoregional staging and optimal treatment for rectal cancer patients. However, for pT1 rectal cancer usually arising into a locally resectable polyp, the yield and role of this diagnostic techniques are no well-established.

Aims & Methods

Aim: To describe the use of locoregional staging and analyze its yield in a pT1CRC state-wide population-based cohort of pT1 rectal cancers.
Patients and methods: Nation-wide population-based cohort, multicenter study (EpiT1Consortium), including 33 centers from 12 different Spanish states. All pT1 CRC cases diagnosed between 2007-2018 were included regardless of the treatment received. Exclusion criteria were: histology other than adenocarcinoma, cancer hereditary syndromes, inflammatory bowel disease, synchronous and metachronous colorectal cancer in the previous 5 years, metastatic neoplastic disease at the time of diagnosis. Information on the demographic of the patient, diagnosis, staging, treatment, complications and histology of pT1 as well as a minimum of 2 years follow-up were collected. Multivariate analysis was performed using binary logistic.

Results

From 3161 patients of the EpiT1 cohort, 681 pT1 rectal cancer with complete information on staging were included for the analysis. 424/681(62.3%) underwent staging: 234(55.2%) with MRI only, 131(30.9%) MRI and EUS, 59(13.9%) only EUS. The characteristics independently associated with the staging (MRI and/or EUS) were: location in lower/middle vs upper rectum (69.1% vs 30.9%; OR 2.8[1.7-4 .5]), suspicion of invasive carcinoma at baseline colonoscopy (64.8% vs 35.2%; OR 2.6[1.6-4.2]), high risk vs low risk histology (69.5% vs 30.5%; OR 2.4[1,3-4,2]), patient management by other specialist (surgeon, oncologist, MDT) vs gastroenterologist (82.7% vs 17.3%; OR 2.2[1.3-3.7]). T staging was correct with MRI in 54/191(28,3%) and with EUS in 69/117(59%) and considering staging by MRI or EUS, 67.1% of patients were over-staged for the T. For N staging considering MRI or EUS the sensitivity and specificity were 15.4% and 82.6%, respectively (Table 1).

Table 1. Diagnostic accuracy for N: in MRI+EUS, only MRI and only EUS


MRI and EUS

Only MRI

Only EUS


N+ or recurrence

(all therapies)

N=82

N+ (oncological surgery)

N=39

N+ or recurrence

(all therapies)

N=243

N+ (oncological surgery)

N=122

N+ or recurrence

(all therapies)

N=121

N+ (oncological surgery)

N=49

Sensitivity %

0% (0/2)

0% (0/1)

15,8% (3/19)

16,7% (2/12)

0% (0/6)

0% (0/2)

Specificity %

87,5% (70/80)

78,9% (30/38)

91,1% (204/224)

85,4% (94/110)

96,5% (111/115)

93,6% (44/47)

PPV %

0% (0/10)

0% (0/8)

13% (3/23)

11,1% (2/18)

0% (0/4)

0% (0/3)

NPV %

97,2% (70/72)

96,8% (30/31)

92,7% (204/220)

90,4% (94/104)

94,9% (111/117)

95,6% (44/46)

Conclusion

The limited yield of locoregional staging imaging techniques should be taken into account when choosing the therapeutic strategy of suspected/known T1 rectal cancers. For T staging, considering the high rate of over-staging with imaging modalities, a stepwise approach using histopathology from a local en-bloc resection as a first step seems reasonable. For N staging, a major effort has to be performed to increase the yield of staging modalities in clinical practice.

References

  • Toes-Zoutendijk E et al. Gut. 2018 Sep;67(9):1745-1746​​

  • Verseveld M et al. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021 48 (2022):1153-1160​​

  • Keys MT et al. Int J Epidemiol. 2021 Mar 3;50(1):143-155​

  • ​Benson AB et al . J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2022​​

  • Chan et al. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2019

Disclosure

No

Conference

UEG Week Copenhagen 2023

Topics

Colorectal

Submission format

Abstract

Session

PP 06 Other lower GI disorders (Posters)

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2023; 11 (Supplement 8)

Published

2023

More Like This:

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

Colin J. Rees Colin J. Rees, Evelien Dekker, Manon van der Vlugt, Laura Jane Neilson, Paul Fockens, Karlijn J. Nass, Charmayne V. Geerlings, Querijn N.E. van Bokhorst

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

Guilherme Macedo Guilherme Macedo, Irene Gullo, Rui Morais, Francisco Mendes

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

Pinghong Zhou Pinghong Zhou, Yunshi Zhong, Jinhua Yu, Yinhui Deng, Pingting Gao, Baohui Song, Mingyan Cai

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

Silvio Danese Silvio Danese, Brian G. Feagan, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Alessandra Oortwijn, Margaux Faes, Veerle Vyncke, Severine Vermeire, Stefan Schreiber

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

Maria Daca Alvarez Maria Daca Alvarez, Maria Pellisé Urquiza, Jorge Lopez Vicente, Akiko Ono, Marita Grimanesa Trelles Guzmán, Goretti Hernández Mesa, Eva Musulen, Alberto Perez Pedrosa, Luis Hernández Villalba, Rodrigo Jover, Lluïsa Sargatal, Alvaro Díaz González, Beatriz Peñas, Angel Ferrandez, Salvador Machlab, Marco Aurelio Alburquerque Miranda, VÍctor Jair Morales Alvarado, Pilar Diez Redondo, Fernando Martínez de Juan, Ignasi Puig, David Barquero Declara, Ángeles Eloisa Pizarro Moreno, Marta Ponce Romerto, Lara Aguilera, INMACULADA SALCES FRANCO, Alberto Herrero Tejada de Echanojauregui, Gemma Ibáñez Sanz, Luis Bujanda Fernández de Piérola, maria isabel portillo villares, Diana Zaffalon, Cristina Manzotti

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

Pengfei Li Pengfei Li, Yan Zhao, Hongwei Xu, Li Xie, Fang Zhou, Wensheng Pan

UEG Poster
Audio / Video Poster
Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

Log in to continue.

This content is part of Gutflix. Log in with your myUEG account, or create one free, to watch it.

Log In Create a free account

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

Wensheng Pan 1, Yan Zhao 2, Pengfei Li 3, Fang Zhou 3, Li Xie 3, Hongwei Xu 4

Affiliations

1 Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospital (Affiliated People’s Hospital), Hangzhou, China

2 Shanghai Tenth People’s Hospital, Shanghai, China

3 Takeda (China) International Trade Co, Shanghai, China

4 Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China

Summary

AI Generated

Summary is not available for this content yet.

Download PDF

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

This summary was generated by an AI large language model based on the content transcript. It is for informational purposes only and should not be considered a substitute for clinical judgment. Always rely on your professional expertise and the full clinical context when making clinical decisions.

Abstract

Introduction

Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection has a high prevalence (44.8%) in China and is an important risk factor of gastrointestinal diseases including gastric cancer. Bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT; bismuth + acid suppressant + 2 antibiotics [ABs]) is the currently recommended first-line regimen for H. pylori in China. Increasing AB resistance poses a vital challenge and remarkably reduces the eradication rate (ER) from 95% to 80% globally and 89% to 78% in China. Real-world ER analysis assessed only quadruple therapy in a few single centers and did not focus on different antibiotic combinations and other different regimens.

Aims & Methods

This study was designed to evaluate the diagnosis and treatment pattern of H. pylori infection and the effectiveness of eradication therapy in real-world settings in China. In this retrospective, multicenter study (NCT05073367), de-identified patient data were extracted from the electronic medical records database of 3 hospitals between January 1, 2019, and March 31, 2021. Patients aged ≥18 years with a record of H. pylori infection diagnosis were included. Here we presented the eradication rate of different treatment regimens and the eradication rate of different years with different treatment regimens.

Results

A total of 1426 patients received ET with efficacy evaluation duration>4 weeks after the eradication therapy and the total eradication rate was 72.09% (n=1028). Most patients (80.36%; n=1146) received standard BQT with an ER of 76.70% (n=879). 158 patients (11.08%) received dual therapy (ER=56.96%; n=90) and 122 patients (8.56%) received triple therapy (ER=48.36%; n=59). Compared with triple and dual therapies, BQT was the predominant regimen in all the years with an ER of 77.86%, 67.64%, and 82.78% in 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively. The ER of dual therapy was 50% in 2020 and 61.22% in 2021. The triple therapy ER showed a decreasing trend with 78.57% (n=11), 46.25% (n=37), 39.29% (n=11) from 2019 to 2021. Among the BQT regimens, amoxicillin plus furazolidone based regimens showed a higher ER (87.44%; n=181), while the ER of amoxicillin plus levofloxacin, amoxicillin plus clarithromycin based BQT was 77.94% (n=159) and 76.07% (n=391), respectively. Amoxicillin plus furazolidone based BQT showed a higher ER of 87.30%, 83.02%, and 90.11% in 2019, 2020, and 2021 respectively (Table 1).
Table 1. Eradication rate of H. pylori positive patients based on the type of eradication therapy

Total (N=1426) →
/Treatment regimens ↓
ER-success
n (%)b
Year 2019 Success
n (%)b
Year 2020
Success
n (%) b
Year 2021
Success
n
(%)b
Total1028 (72.09)454 (77.87)253 (60.96)321 (75.00)
Bismuth Quadruple Therapy
Amoxicillin and Clarithromycin
Amoxicillin and Furazolidone
Amoxicillin and Levofloxacin
Amoxicillin and Metronidazole
Other Bismuth Quadruple Therapy
879 (76.70)
391 (76.07)
181 (87.44)
159 (77.94)
2 (50.00)
146 (67.28)
443 (77.86)
169 (78.24)
55 (87.30)
126 (79.25)
2 (50.00)
91 (71.65)
186 (67.64)
106 (67.95)
44 (83.02)
10 (55.56)
0 (0.00)
26 (54.17)
250 (82.78)
116 (81.69)
82 (90.11)
23 (85.19)
0 (0.00)
29 (69.05)
Triple therapyc
Dual therapyc
59 (48.36)
90 (56.96)
11 (78.57)
0 (0.00)
37 (46.25)
30 (50.00)
11 (39.29)
60 (61.22)
Abbreviations: N, total number; n, number in respective category.
a% = The total usage count of BQT/Triple therapy/Dual therapy eradication therapy/the total usage count of all standard eradication therapies taken by eligible participants. Of BQT, the total usage count of different BQT/the total usage count of all BQT.
b% = The number of participants with a negative efficacy evaluation result/the number of participants receiving certain eradication therapy.
cConsidering the table size, outcomes of different treatment regimens under dual and triple therapy were not included in the table.

Conclusion

BQT-based regimens were predominantly prescribed for H. pylori management and the current H. pylori treatment regimens have a suboptimal eradication rate in the real-world settings.

Disclosure

The study was funded by Takeda China. Wensheng Pan, Yan Zhao, and Hongwei Xu have no conflicts of interest. Pengfei Li, Fang Zhou, and Li Xie are employees of Takeda, and they hold Takeda stock options. Medical writing for the development of this abstract was provided by Swathirajan CR, PhD, and Kusuma Kumari G, PhD, of Indegene Private Limited, and funded by Takeda China. Authors retained full control of the abstract content.

Conference

UEG Week Vienna 2024

Topics

Stomach & H. Pylori

Submission format

Abstract

Session

H.PYLORI (Posters)

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2024; 12 (Supplement 8)

Published

2024

More Like This:

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

PATIENT’S PER-PROCEDURAL COLONOSCOPY EXPERIENCE: HOW ACCURATE IS THE CLINICIAN’S ASSESSMENT?

Colin J. Rees Colin J. Rees, Evelien Dekker, Manon van der Vlugt, Laura Jane Neilson, Paul Fockens, Karlijn J. Nass, Charmayne V. Geerlings, Querijn N.E. van Bokhorst

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION OF RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS – A CASE SERIES OF AN INNOVATIVE ENDOSCOPIC APPROACH

Guilherme Macedo Guilherme Macedo, Irene Gullo, Rui Morais, Francisco Mendes

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

AUTOMATICALLY OPTIMIZED RADIOMICS MODELING SYSTEM FOR SMALL GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS (&LT;2CM) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND IMAGES

Pinghong Zhou Pinghong Zhou, Yunshi Zhong, Jinhua Yu, Yinhui Deng, Pingting Gao, Baohui Song, Mingyan Cai

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

COMPREHENSIVE DISEASE CONTROL IN PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE COLITIS: REFINEMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MULTI-COMPONENT ENDPOINT USING DATA FROM THE FILGOTINIB SELECTION TRIAL

Silvio Danese Silvio Danese, Brian G. Feagan, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Alessandra Oortwijn, Margaux Faes, Veerle Vyncke, Severine Vermeire, Stefan Schreiber

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

STAGING OF PT1 RECTAL CANCER IN A NATIONWIDE POPULATION BASED COHORT– EPIT1CONSORTIUM

Maria Daca Alvarez Maria Daca Alvarez, Maria Pellisé Urquiza, Jorge Lopez Vicente, Akiko Ono, Marita Grimanesa Trelles Guzmán, Goretti Hernández Mesa, Eva Musulen, Alberto Perez Pedrosa, Luis Hernández Villalba, Rodrigo Jover, Lluïsa Sargatal, Alvaro Díaz González, Beatriz Peñas, Angel Ferrandez, Salvador Machlab, Marco Aurelio Alburquerque Miranda, VÍctor Jair Morales Alvarado, Pilar Diez Redondo, Fernando Martínez de Juan, Ignasi Puig, David Barquero Declara, Ángeles Eloisa Pizarro Moreno, Marta Ponce Romerto, Lara Aguilera, INMACULADA SALCES FRANCO, Alberto Herrero Tejada de Echanojauregui, Gemma Ibáñez Sanz, Luis Bujanda Fernández de Piérola, maria isabel portillo villares, Diana Zaffalon, Cristina Manzotti

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT ERADICATION TREATMENTS IN CHINESE PATIENTS WITH HELICOBACTER PYLORI: A RETROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD STUDY

Pengfei Li Pengfei Li, Yan Zhao, Hongwei Xu, Li Xie, Fang Zhou, Wensheng Pan

The global reference point for the digestive health community

Platform Publisher

United European Gastroenterology

Wickenburggasse 1 1080 Vienna, Austria

Contact us

support@ueg.eu

ueg.eu

T: +43 1 997 1639

Legal

Terms & Conditions

Imprint

Privacy Policy

Explore

My Bookmarks

My recommendations

My fields of interest

© 2026 United European Gastroenterology

Change fields of interest

These fields are selected based on the interests in your myUEG profile.
Click the item to unselect it. You can select multiple items.