Evaluation of stool collections to measure efficacy of PERT in subjects with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency

Nutritional considerations for a new era: A CF foundation position paper

OBJECTIVE

To provide interim advice and considerations to the CF Community around CF nutrition in the current era.

METHODS

The Cystic Fibrosis (CF) Foundation organized a multidisciplinary committee to develop a Nutrition Position Paper based on the rapidly changing nutrition landscape in CF, due in part to widespread use of cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator highly effective modulator therapy (HEMT). Four workgroups were formed: Weight Management, Eating Behavior/Food Insecurity, Salt Homeostasis and Pancreatic Enzyme use. Each workgroup conducted their own focused review of the literature.

RESULTS

The committee summarized current understanding of issues pertaining to the four workgroup topics and provided 6 key take-aways around CF Nutrition in the new era.

CONCLUSION

People with CF (pwCF) are living longer, particularly with the advent of HEMT. The traditional high fat, high calorie CF diet may have negative nutritional and cardiovascular consequences as pwCF age. Individuals with CF may have poor diet quality, food insecurity, distorted body image, and an higher incidence of eating disorders. An increase in overweight and obesity may lead to new considerations for nutritional management, given potential effects of overnutrition on pulmonary and cardiometabolic parameters.

Inherited causes of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency in pediatric patients: clinical presentation and laboratory testing

Pediatric patients with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) have symptoms that include abdominal pain, weight loss or poor weight gain, malnutrition, and steatorrhea. This condition can be present at birth or develop during childhood for certain genetic disorders. Cystic fibrosis (CF) is the most prevalent disorder in which patients are screened for EPI; other disorders also are associated with pancreatic dysfunction, such as hereditary pancreatitis, Pearson syndrome, and Shwachman-Diamond syndrome. Understanding the clinical presentation and proposed pathophysiology of the pancreatic dysfunction of these disorders aids in diagnosis and treatment. Testing pancreatic function is challenging. Directly testing aspirates produced from the pancreas after stimulation is considered the gold standard, but the procedures are not standardized or widely available. Instead, indirect tests are often used in diagnosis and monitoring. Although indirect tests are more widely available and easier to perform, they have inherent limitations due to a lack of sensitivity and/or specificity for EPI.

Coefficient of Fat Absorption to Measure the Efficacy of Pancreatic Enzyme Replacement Therapy in People With Cystic Fibrosis: Gold Standard or Coal Standard?

OBJECTIVES

We sought data on the validity, reliability, responsiveness, and feasibility of the coefficient of fat absorption (CFA) as a measure of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) efficacy in people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) and reviewed the literature for alternative measures.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for the Medical Subject Heading cystic fibrosis and the key words cystic fibrosis, fat absorption, CFA, and fecal fat imbalance; historical articles; and citations in bibliographies.

RESULTS

The lower the CFA, the greater its variability; thus, it is less variable in healthy individuals who have higher CFA than pwCF. In addition, the test-retest values for CFA are more variable in pwCF than the general population. There is no correlation between CFA and body mass index or PERT dose but CFA is related to gastrointestinal signs and symptoms. Research-quality CFA studies are expensive, time consuming, and odious to pwCF and research staff. Sparse stool tests, breath tests, and blood tests of fat absorption have been studied as potential alternatives to CFA to measure PERT efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the evidence, we conclude that CFA as a measure of the efficacy of PERT is more of a "coal standard" than a gold standard; developing suitable alternatives should be a priority.

Pancreatic Enzyme Replacement Therapy in Cystic Fibrosis

While typically considered a pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis patients develop significant nutritional complications and comorbidities, especially those who are pancreatic insufficient. Clinicians must have a high suspicion for cystic fibrosis among patients with clinical symptoms of pancreatic insufficiency, and pancreatic enzymatic replacement therapy (PERT) must be urgently initiated. PERT presents a myriad of considerations for patients and their supporting dieticians and clinicians, including types of administration, therapy failures, and complications.

Assessment of exocrine pancreatic function in children and adolescents with direct and indirect testing

The exocrine pancreas plays an important role in digestion. Understanding of the physiology and regulation of exocrine function provides insight into disease processes and basis of functional testing. Specifically, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) can cause maldigestion and thus a proper assessment of exocrine pancreatic function is important. There are indirect and direct methods for evaluating pancreatic function. Indirect methods are varied and include stool, serum, urine, and breath tests. Fecal elastase is a commonly used indirect test today. Direct methods involve stimulated release of pancreatic fluid that is collected from the duodenum and analyzed for enzyme activity. The most used direct test today is the endoscopic pancreatic function test. Indirect pancreatic function testing is limited in identifying cases of mild to moderate EPI, and as such in these cases, direct testing has higher sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing EPI. This review provides a comprehensive guide to indirect and direct pancreatic function tests as well as an in-depth look at exocrine pancreatic function including anatomy, physiology, and regulatory mechanisms.

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Most people with cystic fibrosis (CF) (80% to 90%) need pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) to prevent malnutrition. Enzyme preparations need to be taken whenever food is taken, and the dose needs to be adjusted according to the food consumed. A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of PERT is needed to guide clinical practice, as there is variability between centres with respect to assessment of pancreatic function, time of commencing treatment, dose and choice of supplements. This is an updated version of a published review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PERT in children and adults with CF and to compare the efficacy and safety of different formulations of PERT and their appropriateness in different age groups. Also, to compare the effects of PERT in CF according to different diagnostic subgroups (e.g. different ages at introduction of therapy and different categories of pancreatic function).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Most recent search: 07 November 2019. We also searched an ongoing trials website and the websites of the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture pancreatic enzyme replacements for any additional trials. Most recent search: 26 December 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials in people of any age, with CF and receiving PERT, at any dosage and in any formulation, for a period of not less than four weeks, compared to placebo or other PERT preparations.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trials and extracted outcome data. They also assessed the risk of bias and quality of the evidence (GRADE) of the trials included in the review.

MAIN RESULTS

14 trials were included in the review (641 children and adults with CF), two of these were parallel trials and 12 were cross-over trials. Interventions included different enteric and non-enteric-coated preparations of varying formulations in comparison to each other. The number of participants in each trial varied between 14 and 129. 13 trials were for a duration of four weeks and one trial lasted seven weeks. The majority of the trials had an unclear risk of bias from the randomisation process as the details of this were not given; they also had a high risk of attrition bias and reporting bias. The quality of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low. We mostly could not combine data from the trials as they compared different formulations and the findings from individual trials provided insufficient evidence to determine the size and precision of the effects of different formulations.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence of benefit from enteric-coated microspheres when compared to non-enteric coated pancreatic enzyme preparations up to one month. In the only comparison where we could combine any data, the fact that these were cross-over trials is likely to underestimate the level of inconsistency between the results of the trials due to over-inflation of CIs from the individual trials.There is no evidence on the long-term effectiveness and risks associated with PERT. There is also no evidence on the relative dosages of enzymes needed for people with different levels of severity of pancreatic insufficiency, optimum time to start treatment and variations based on differences in meals and meal sizes. There is a need for a properly designed trial that can answer these questions.

Registration of phase 3 crossover trials on ClinicalTrials.gov

BACKGROUND

In a randomized crossover trial, each participant is randomized to a sequence of treatments and treatment effect is estimated based on within-individual difference because each participant serves as his/her own control. This feature makes the design and reporting of randomized crossover trials different from that of parallel trials. Our objective was to characterize phase 3 crossover trials with results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov and identify issues and best practices for reporting.

METHODS

We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for phase 3 randomized crossover trials that provided results, registered at least one primary outcome, and included at least one link to a results publication in the record by August 6, 2019. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and extracted information from each record into an electronic form developed and maintained in the Systematic Review Data Repository.

RESULTS

Of the 124 crossover trials analyzed, two thirds were a simple "Intervention A then B" or "Intervention B then A" (AB|BA) design. Most trials (78%, 97/124) provided enough information to understand the participant flow throughout the trial. Baseline characteristics were most often reported for all participants as a single group (52%, 65/124). Primary outcomes and adverse events were most commonly reported "per intervention" (85%, 105/124, and 80%, 99/124, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The registration and reporting of randomized crossover trials must account for the paired nature of the design. Our observations and recommendations informed the development of guidelines for good reporting practices in the registration and reporting of randomized crossover trials.

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Most people with cystic fibrosis (80% to 90%) need pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy to prevent malnutrition. Enzyme preparations need to be taken whenever food is taken, and the dose needs to be adjusted according to the food consumed. A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy is needed to guide clinical practice, as there is variability between centres with respect to assessment of pancreatic function, time of commencing treatment, dose and choice of supplements. This is an updated version of a published review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in children and adults with cystic fibrosis and to compare the efficacy and safety of different formulations of this therapy and their appropriateness in different age groups. Also, to compare the effects of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in cystic fibrosis according to different diagnostic subgroups (e.g. different ages at introduction of therapy and different categories of pancreatic function).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Most recent search: 15 July 2016.We also searched an ongoing trials website and the websites of the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture pancreatic enzyme replacements for any additional trials. Most recent search: 22 July 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials in people of any age, with cystic fibrosis and receiving pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, at any dosage and in any formulation, for a period of not less than four weeks, compared to placebo or other pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy preparations.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trials and extracted outcome data. They also assessed the risk of bias of the trials included in the review.

MAIN RESULTS

One parallel trial and 12 cross-over trials of children and adults with cystic fibrosis were included in the review. The number of participants in each trial varied between 14 and 129 with a total of 512 participants included in the review. All the included trials were for a duration of four weeks. The included trials had mostly an unclear risk of bias from the randomisation process as the details of this were not given; they also mostly had a high risk of attrition bias and reporting bias.We could not combine data from all the trials as they compared different formulations. Findings from individual studies provided insufficient evidence to determine the size and precision of the effects of different formulations. Ten studies reported information on the review's primary outcome (nutritional status); however, we were only able to combine data from two small cross-over studies (n = 41). The estimated gain in body weight was imprecise, 0.32 kg (95% confidence interval -0.03 to 0.67; P = 0.07). Combined data from the same studies gave statistically significant results favouring enteric-coated microspheres over enteric-coated tablets for our secondary outcomes stool frequency, mean difference -0.58 (95% confidence interval -0.85 to -0.30; P < 0.0001); proportion of days with abdominal pain, mean difference -7.96% (95% confidence interval -12.97 to -2.94; P = 0.002); and fecal fat excretion, mean difference -11.79 g (95% confidence interval -17.42 to -6.15; P < 0.0001). Data from another single small cross-over study also favoured enteric-coated microspheres over non-enteric-coated tablets with adjuvant cimetidine in terms of stool frequency, mean difference -0.70 (95% confidence interval -0.90 to -0.50; P < 0.00001).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence of benefit from enteric-coated microspheres when compared to non-enteric coated pancreatic enzyme preparations up to one month. In the only comparison where we could combine any data, the fact that these were cross-over studies is likely to underestimate the level of inconsistency between the results of the studies due to over-inflation of confidence intervals from the individual studies.There is no evidence on the long-term effectiveness and risks associated with pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. There is also no evidence on the relative dosages of enzymes needed for people with different levels of severity of pancreatic insufficiency, optimum time to start treatment and variations based on differences in meals and meal sizes. There is a need for a properly designed study that can answer these questions.

ESPGHAN and NASPGHAN Report on the Assessment of Exocrine Pancreatic Function and Pancreatitis in Children

The purpose of this clinical report is to discuss several recent advances in assessing exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) and pancreatitis in children, to review the array of pancreatic function tests, to provide an update on the inherited causes of EPI, with special emphasis on newly available genetic testing, and to review newer methods for evaluating pancreatitis.

Malabsorption blood test: Assessing fat absorption in patients with cystic fibrosis and pancreatic insufficiency

The malabsorption blood test (MBT), consisting of pentadecanoic acid (PA), a free fatty acid, and triheptadecanoic acid (THA), a triglyceride that requires pancreatic lipase for absorption of the heptadecanoic acid (HA), was developed to assess fat malabsorption in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) and pancreatic insufficiency (PI). The objective was to construct a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model to describe PA and HA disposition in healthy subjects and CF subjects. A model was simultaneously fit to PA and HA concentrations, consisting of 1-compartment disposition and a transit model to describe absorption. PA bioavailability estimates for CF subjects without pancreatic enzyme administration (1.07 [0.827, 1.42]) and with enzymes (0.88 [0.72, 1.09]) indicated PA absorption comparable to healthy subjects. HA bioavailability in CF without enzyme administration was 0.0292 (0.0192, 0.0459) and with enzymes increased to 0.606 (0.482, 0.823). In CF, compared with taking enzymes with the MBT, HA bioavailability was further decreased by factors of 0.829 (0.664, 0.979) and 0.78 (0.491, 1.13) with enzymes taken 30 and 60 minutes after MBT, respectively. The MBT detected differences in fat absorption in subjects with CF with and without enzyme administration and with changes in enzyme timing. Future studies will address application of the MBT in CF and other malabsorption diagnoses.

Cystic fibrosis: an update for clinicians. Part 2: hepatobiliary and pancreatic manifestations

This paper, the second in the series, will build on the first and explore the importance of liver and pancreatic manifestations of cystic fibrosis (CF) and the effect on morbidity and mortality of this multifaceted genetic condition. It will also further develop the critical role of the gastroenterologist as part of the multidisciplinary group of clinicians and allied health staff in the effective management of patients with CF.

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Most people with cystic fibrosis (80% to 90%) need pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy to prevent malnutrition. Enzyme preparations need to be taken whenever food is taken, and the dose needs to be adjusted according to the food consumed. A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy is needed to guide clinical practice, as there is variability between centres with respect to assessment of pancreatic function, time of commencing treatment, dose and choice of supplements.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in children and adults with cystic fibrosis and to compare the efficacy and safety of different formulations of this therapy and their appropriateness in different age groups. Also, to compare the effects of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in cystic fibrosis according to different diagnostic subgroups (e.g. different ages at introduction of therapy and different categories of pancreatic function).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Most recent search: 14 August 2014.We also searched an ongoing trials website and the websites of the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture pancreatic enzyme replacements for any additional trials. Most recent search: 12 May 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials in people of any age, with cystic fibrosis and receiving pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, at any dosage and in any formulation, for a period of not less than four weeks, compared to placebo or other pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy preparations.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trials and extracted outcome data. They also assessed the risk of bias of the trials included in the review.

MAIN RESULTS

One parallel trial and 11 cross-over trials of children and adults with cystic fibrosis were included in the review. The number of participants in each trial varied between 14 and 129 with a total of 426 participants included in the review. All the included trials were for a duration of four weeks. The included trials had mostly an unclear risk of bias from the randomisation process as the details of this were not given; they also mostly had a high risk of attrition bias and reporting bias.We could not combine data from all the trials as they compared different formulations. Findings from individual studies provided insufficient evidence to determine the size and precision of the effects of different formulations. Ten studies reported information on the review's primary outcome (nutritional status); however, we were only able to combine data from two small cross-over studies (n = 41). The estimated gain in body weight was imprecise, 0.32 kg (95% confidence interval -0.03 to 0.67, P = 0.07). Combined data from the same studies gave statistically significant results favouring enteric-coated microspheres over enteric-coated tablets for our secondary outcomes stool frequency, abdominal pain and fecal fat excretion. Data from another single small cross-over study also favoured enteric-coated microspheres over non-enteric-coated tablets with adjuvant cimetidine in terms of stool frequency.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence of benefit from enteric-coated microspheres when compared to non-enteric coated pancreatic enzyme preparations up to one month. In the only comparison where we could combine any data, the fact that these were cross-over studies is likely to underestimate the level of inconsistency between the results of the studies due to over-inflation of confidence intervals from the individual studies.There is no evidence on the long-term effectiveness and risks associated with pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. There is also no evidence on the relative dosages of enzymes needed for people with different levels of severity of pancreatic insufficiency, optimum time to start treatment and variations based on differences in meals and meal sizes. There is a need for a properly designed trial that can answer these questions.