Bifidobacterium breve Bif195 ameliorates aspirin-induced gastric mucosal damage: A randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Gastric and duodenal ulcerations are common during multiple-dosing aspirin treatment, such as for prevention of cardiovascular disease. On capsule endoscopy, oral administration of the bacterial strain Bifidobacterium breve Bif195 (DSM 33360) reduced the risk of aspirin-induced small intestinal damage, without affecting cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibition. AIM: To evaluate endoscopically the effect of Bif195 on aspirin-induced stomach and duodenal mucosal damage METHODS: Twenty-five healthy volunteers underwent two intervention periods in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover design including four gastroduodenoscopies and 6 weeks washout. Each intervention was a 4-week oral co-treatment of aspirin 300 mg daily and Bif195 (≥1011 colony-forming units daily) or placebo. Primary endpoint was change in Lanza score - ranging from 0 (normal mucosa) to 4 (>10 erosions or ulcer). RESULTS: All 25 participants (56% females); age 27.3 (±4.8) years; BMI 23.2 (±3.4) kg/m2 , completed the trial exhibiting significant increases in Lanza scores during placebo treatment as compared to baseline. Bif195 reduced gastric Lanza score with an odds ratio of 7.2 (95% confidence interval 1.72-30.08, p = 0.009) compared to placebo with no related adverse events. There were no significant changes in Lanza scores in the duodenum. CONCLUSIONS: Bif195 reduces aspirin-induced gastric mucosal damage and may serve as a safe supplement during multiple-dosing aspirin treatment.

Safety and efficacy of liraglutide versus colesevelam for the treatment of bile acid diarrhoea: a randomised, double-blind, active-comparator, non-inferiority clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Bile acid diarrhoea is an underdiagnosed disease estimated to affect 1-2% of the general population. Case reports indicate that the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist liraglutide might be an effective treatment for bile acid diarrhoea. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of liraglutide for the treatment of bile acid diarrhoea. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, double-blind, active-comparator, double-dummy, non-inferiority clinical trial at the Center for Clinical Metabolic Research at Copenhagen University Hospital-Herlev and Gentofte, Hellerup, Denmark. Patients aged 18-75 years with 75selenium-homotaurocholic acid test (SeHCAT)-verified moderate-to-severe primary bile acid diarrhoea were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive liraglutide (one daily subcutaneous injection uptitrated from 0·6-1·8 mg per day over 3 weeks) or colesevelam (three capsules of 625 mg twice daily), the standard of care, for 6 weeks following one run-in week with no treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants experiencing a reduction in daily stool frequency of 25% or greater after 6 weeks. Data from all participants were included in the analysis of the primary outcome. The non-inferiority limit was set to 15% in favour of colesevelam. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2018-003575-34) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between April 1, 2019, and Jan 31, 2021, 52 patients were enrolled; 26 were assigned to liraglutide and 26 to colesevelam. 20 (77%) of 26 participants on liraglutide and 13 (50%) of 26 on colesevelam experienced a 25% or greater reduction in stool frequency, corresponding to a significant risk difference of -27% in favour of liraglutide (one-sided 95% CI -100 to -6). Liraglutide was therefore superior to colesevelam in reducing daily stool frequency. Mild nausea with a duration of 10-21 days was reported by six participants in the liraglutide group and by one participant in the colesevelam group. No other adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: The superiority of liraglutide compared with colesevelam in reducing stool frequency suggests consideration of liraglutide as a potential new treatment modality for bile acid diarrhoea, although larger confirmatory trials powered for superiority are warranted. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk, Novo Nordisk Foundation, Foundation for the Advancement of Medical Science under The A.P. Møller and Chastine Mc-Kinney Møller Foundation.

Long-Term Effects of a Web-Based Low-FODMAP Diet Versus Probiotic Treatment for Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Including Shotgun Analyses of Microbiota: Randomized, Double-Crossover Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The long-term management of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) poses many challenges. In short-term studies, eHealth interventions have been demonstrated to be safe and practical for at-home monitoring of the effects of probiotic treatments and a diet low in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs). IBS has been linked to alterations in the microbiota. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether a web-based low-FODMAP diet (LFD) intervention and probiotic treatment were equally good at reducing IBS symptoms, and whether the response to treatments could be explained by patients' microbiota. METHODS: Adult IBS patients were enrolled in an open-label, randomized crossover trial (for nonresponders) with 1 year of follow-up using the web application IBS Constant Care (IBS CC). Patients were recruited from the outpatient clinic at the Department of Gastroenterology, North Zealand University Hospital, Denmark. Patients received either VSL#3 for 4 weeks (2 × 450 billion colony-forming units per day) or were placed on an LFD for 4 weeks. Patients responding to the LFD were reintroduced to foods high in FODMAPs, and probiotic responders received treatments whenever they experienced a flare-up of symptoms. Treatment response and symptom flare-ups were defined as a reduction or increase, respectively, of at least 50 points on the IBS Severity Scoring System (IBS-SSS). Web-based ward rounds were performed daily by the study investigator. Fecal microbiota were analyzed by shotgun metagenomic sequencing (at least 10 million 2 × 100 bp paired-end sequencing reads per sample). RESULTS: A total of 34 IBS patients without comorbidities and 6 healthy controls were enrolled in the study. Taken from participating subjects, 180 fecal samples were analyzed for their microbiota composition. Out of 21 IBS patients, 12 (57%) responded to the LFD and 8 (38%) completed the reintroduction of FODMAPs. Out of 21 patients, 13 (62%) responded to their first treatment of VSL#3 and 7 (33%) responded to multiple VSL#3 treatments. A median of 3 (IQR 2.25-3.75) probiotic treatments were needed for sustained symptom control. LFD responders were reintroduced to a median of 14.50 (IQR 7.25-21.75) high-FODMAP items. No significant difference in the median reduction of IBS-SSS for LFD versus probiotic responders was observed, where for LFD it was -126.50 (IQR -196.75 to -76.75) and for VSL#3 it was -130.00 (IQR -211.00 to -70.50; P>.99). Responses to either of the two treatments were not able to be predicted using patients' microbiota. CONCLUSIONS: The web-based LFD intervention and probiotic treatment were equally efficacious in managing IBS symptoms. The response to treatments could not be explained by the composition of the microbiota. The IBS CC web application was shown to be practical, safe, and useful for clinical decision making in the long-term management of IBS. Although this study was underpowered, findings from this study warrant further research in a larger sample of patients with IBS to confirm these long-term outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03586622; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03586622.

Protocol for a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, double-dummy 6-week clinical trial comparing the treatment effects of the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist liraglutide versus the bile acid sequestrant colesevelam on bile acid malabsorption.

INTRODUCTION: Bile acid malabsorption (BAM) is a socially debilitating disease characterised by high stool frequency and urgency caused by a spillover of bile acids into the colon. Bile acid sequestrants (BASs) have limited therapeutic effect but represent the only available treatment option. Cases reporting total remission of BAM-related symptoms after treatment with liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, prompted us to design a clinical trial investigating the therapeutic effect of this compound in patients with BAM. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Fifty adult individuals with moderate or severe BAM as assessed by the 75selenium-homotaurocholic acid test (SeHCAT) will, after a run-in period of 10 days with no BAM treatment, be randomised to either treatment with the BAS colesevelam or liraglutide (double blinded) for 6 weeks. Daily symptom diaries and questionnaires will be filled in. Blood and faecal samples will be collected and SeHCAT will be performed at baseline, after week 3 and at end of trial. The primary endpoint is change in daily stool frequency. Secondary endpoints include changes from baseline in questionnaires, biochemistry, SeHCAT and faecal bile acid content and microbial composition. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study complies with Danish and European Union legislation and is approved by the Danish Medicines Agency, the Regional Scientific Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark and the Danish Data Protection Agency. The study is monitored by the Capital Region of Denmark's good clinical practice unit. All results, positive, negative and inconclusive, will be disseminated at national and/or international scientific meetings and in peer-reviewed scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCA: 2018-003575-34; Pre-results.

The NIMO Scandinavian Study: A Prospective Observational Study of Iron Isomaltoside Treatment in Patients with Iron Deficiency.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous iron allows for efficient and well-tolerated treatment in iron deficiency and is routinely used in diseases of the gastrointestinal tract. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to determine the probability of relapse of iron deficiency over time and to investigate treatment routine, effectiveness, and safety of iron isomaltoside. METHODS: A total of 282 patients treated with iron isomaltoside were observed for two treatments or a minimum of one year. RESULTS: Out of 282 patients, 82 had Crohn's disease and 67 had ulcerative colitis. Another 133 patients had chronic blood loss, malabsorption, or malignancy. Patients who received an iron isomaltoside dose above 1000 mg had a 65% lower probability of needing retreatment compared with those given 1000 mg. A clinically significant treatment response was shown, but in 71/191 (37%) of patients, anaemia was not corrected. The mean dose given was 1100 mg, lower than the calculated total iron need of 1481 mg. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 4% of patients. CONCLUSION: Iron isomaltoside is effective with a good safety profile, and high doses reduce the need for retreatment over time. Several patients were anaemic after treatment, indicating that doses were inadequate for full iron correction. This trial is registered with NCT01900197.

eHealth: individualization of mesalazine treatment through a self-managed web-based solution in mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: To individualize treatment with mesalazine for ulcerative colitis relapses through a self-managed, web-based solution to optimize the short-term disease course. METHODS: Prospective, open-label, web-guided study with 3 months mesalazine therapy among patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. Once a week, patients completed the simple clinical colitis activity index (SCCAI) and registered fecal calprotectin (FC) on the web application: www.meza.constant-care.dk. SCCAI and FC were summed and resulted in a total inflammatory burden score (TIBS). Deep remission was defined as SCCAI ≤1; FC = 0, and TIBS ≤1. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients (62% females; median age 45 yr) were included in the study and allocated 4.8 g mesalazine per day. Of these, 82 (86%) patients were adherent to web therapy, completing 3 months of web-guided mesalazine therapy. Of the 82 adherent patients, 72 (88%) continued mesalazine and 10 (12%) needed rescue therapy. From weeks 0 to 12, patients had experienced a significant reduction in mean SCCAI (4.6 versus 1.6, P < 0.001), mean FC (437 versus 195, P < 0.001), and mean TIBS (6.7 versus 2.4, P < 0.001). Based on TIBS values (≤1), the dose of mesalazine was reduced to 2.4 g in 25% of patients at week 3 in 50% of subjects at week 5 and in 88% of patients at week 12. CONCLUSIONS: Web-guided therapy with mesalazine in mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis helps to individualize the dose and improve adherence to therapy. The study confirms mesalazine efficacy in mild-to-moderate UC, significantly improving TIBS values in majority of the patients.