Systematic review: Disease-specific instruments to assess gastrointestinal symptoms in functional dyspepsia

Patient-reported outcome measures in functional dyspepsia: a systematic review and COSMIN analysis

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD) as a type of disorders of brain-gut interaction (DBGI), patient self-reporting of its symptoms becomes an important component of clinical outcome assessment. We performed a systematic review using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines to identify the best available patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of FD.

METHODS

The study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We searched four databases with no date limit, looking for previously confirmed PROMs for evaluating FD symptoms. An overall rating was then assigned based upon COSMIN guidelines, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the level of evidence for psychometric properties of included PROMs.

RESULTS

Thirty articles covering outcome indicators of 24 patient reports were included. The Leuven Postprandial Distress Scale (LPDS) showed adequate content validity and moderate quality evidence of adequate internal consistency to generate an A recommendation.

CONCLUSION

LPDS is currently the most recommended PROM for patient self-reported FD symptoms. However, it fails to assess two important areas of cross-cultural validity/ measurement invariance and measurement error. Future research can be continuously improved on this basis.

Placebo response in pharmacological trials in patients with functional dyspepsia-A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological trials in functional dyspepsia (FD) are associated with high placebo response rates. We aimed to identify the magnitude and contributing factors to the placebo response.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a dichotomous outcome in adult patients with FD that compared an active pharmacotherapeutic treatment with placebo. Our main outcome was identification of the magnitude of the pooled placebo response rate for the following endpoints: symptom responder, symptom-free responder, adequate relief responder, and combined endpoint responder (i.e., the primary endpoint of each specific trial regarding treatment response). Several putative moderators (i.e., patient, disease, and trial characteristics) were examined.

KEY RESULTS

We included 26 RCTs in our analysis. The pooled placebo response rate was 39.6% (95% CI 30.1-50.0) using the symptom responder definition, 20.5% (12.8-31.0) using the symptom-free responder definition, 38.5% (33.8-43.6) using the adequate relief responder definition, and 35.5% (31.6-39.7) using the combined endpoint responder definition. A lower overall baseline symptom score was significantly associated with a higher placebo response rate. No other moderators were found to significantly impact the placebo response rate. Due to the lack of data, no analyses could be performed according to individual FD subtypes or symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

The pooled placebo response rate in pharmacological trials in FD is about 39%, depending on which responder definitions is used. Future trials should consider applying an entry criterion based on minimal level of symptom severity to decrease the placebo response. We also suggest separate reporting of core FD symptoms pending more concrete harmonization efforts in FD trials.

Psychometric evaluation of an experience sampling method-based patient-reported outcome measure in functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Due to important biases, conventional end-of-day and end-of-week assessment methods of gastrointestinal symptoms in functional dyspepsia (FD) are considered suboptimal. Real-time symptom assessment based on the experience sampling method (ESM) could be a more accurate measurement method. This study aimed to evaluate validity and reliability of an ESM-based patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for symptom assessment in FD.

METHODS

Thirty-five patients with FD (25 female, mean age 44.7 years) completed the ESM-based PROM (a maximum of 10 random moments per day) and an end-of-day symptom diary for 7 consecutive days. On day 7, end-of-week questionnaires were completed including the Nepean Dyspepsia Index (NDI) and Patient Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptom Severity Index (PAGI-SYM).

KEY RESULTS

Experience sampling method and corresponding end-of-day scores for gastrointestinal symptoms were significantly associated (ICCs range 0.770-0.917). However, end-of-day scores were significantly higher (Δ0.329-1.031) than mean ESM scores (p < 0.05). Comparing ESM with NDI and PAGI-SYM scores, correlations were weaker (Pearson's r range 0.467-0.846). Cronbach's α coefficient was good for upper gastrointestinal symptoms (α = 0.842). First half-week and second half-week scores showed very good consistency (ICCs range 0.913-0.975).

CONCLUSION AND INFERENCES

Good validity and reliability of a novel ESM-based PROM for assessing gastrointestinal symptoms in FD patients was demonstrated. Moreover, this novel PROM allows to evaluate individual symptom patterns and can evaluate interactions between symptoms and environmental/contextual factors. ESM has the potential to increase patients' disease insight, provide tools for self-management, and improve shared decision making. Hence, this novel tool may aid in the transition toward personalized health care for FD patients.

Efficacy and safety of spore-forming probiotics in the treatment of functional dyspepsia: a pilot randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Current treatments for functional dyspepsia have limited efficacy or present safety issues. We aimed to assess spore-forming probiotics in functional dyspepsia as monotherapy or add-on therapy to long-term treatment with proton-pump inhibitors.

METHODS

In this single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial that took place at University Hospitals Leuven (Leuven, Belgium), adult patients (≥18 years) with functional dyspepsia (as defined by Rome IV criteria, on proton-pump inhibitors or off proton-pump inhibitors) were randomly assigned (1:1) via computer-generated blocked lists, stratified by proton-pump inhibitor status, to receive 8 weeks of treatment with probiotics (Bacillus coagulans MY01 and Bacillus subtilis MY02, 2·5 × 10⁹ colony-forming units per capsule) or placebo consumed twice per day, followed by an open-label extension phase of 8 weeks. Individuals with a history of abdominal surgery, diabetes, coeliac or inflammatory bowel disease, active psychiatric conditions, and use of immunosuppressant drugs, antibiotics, or probiotics in the past 3 months were excluded. All patients and on-site study personnel were masked to treatment allocation in the first 8 weeks. Symptoms, immune activation, and faecal microbiota were assessed and recorded. The primary endpoint was a decrease of at least 0·7 in the postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) score of the Leuven Postprandial Distress Scale in patients with a baseline PDS score of 1 or greater (at least mild symptoms), assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04030780.

FINDINGS

Between June 3, 2019, and March 11, 2020, of 93 individuals assessed for eligibility, we included 68 patients with functional dyspepsia (51 [75%] women, mean age 40·1 years [SD 14·4], 34 [50%] on proton-pump inhibitors). We randomly assigned 32 participants to probiotics and 36 to placebo. The proportion of clinical responders was higher with probiotics (12 [48%] of 25) than placebo (six [20%] of 30; relative risk 1·95 [95% CI 1·07-4·11]; p=0·028). The number of patients with adverse events was similar with probiotics (five [16%] of 32) and placebo (12 [33%] of 36). Two serious adverse events occurring during the open-label phase (appendicitis and syncope in two separate patients) were assessed as unlikely to be related to the study product.

INTERPRETATION

In this exploratory study, B coagulans MY01 and B subtilis MY02 were efficacious and safe in the treatment of functional dyspepsia. Participants had potentially beneficial immune and microbial changes, which could provide insights into possible underlying mechanisms as future predictors or treatment targets.

FUNDING

MY HEALTH.

Differentiation of functional gastrointestinal disorders from healthy volunteers by lactulose hydrogen breath test and test meal

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common disorder of gut-brain interaction with incompletely understood pathophysiology. Consequently, heterogeneous expert opinions on diagnostic tests and assessment of treatment efficacies exist. So far, no consensus about the most relevant diagnostic and outcome tool has been reached. In this study, we aimed to analyze the significance of a combined lactulose hydrogen breath test (LHBT) and liquid meal, yet representing a standardized test in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), in FD.

METHODS

We analyzed data of 146 FD, 204 IBS patients, and 50 healthy volunteers (HV). All patients underwent LHBT with a meal-drink consisting of 30-g Lactulose and 400-mL Ensure®. Effect of abdominal symptom generation in FD/IBS compared with HV was assessed on a patient-reported Likert-scale.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference between FD/IBS patients and HV in LHBT-induced abdominal pain (odds ratio [OR] 246.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 26.6-2290.7; OR 161.2, 95% CI 16.9-1534.8), abdominal bloating (OR 384.8, 95% CI 92.9-2135.4; OR 524.1, 95% CI 114.7-3432.3), borborygmi (OR 9.9, 95% CI 2.2-46.9; OR 17.7, 95% CI 4.7-67.4), nausea only in FD (OR 174.4, 95% CI 15.5-5375.5), and diarrhea in IBS only (OR 25.8, 95% CI 2.0-7012.6). Hydrogen production was not significantly different in FD/IBS and HV.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we demonstrated significant differences in postprandial symptom generation in FD and IBS compared with HV after LHBT. This does not only allow us to discriminate FD/IBS from HV but may also represent a diagnostic and monitoring tool for FD/IBS in the future, including monitoring of treatment effects.

Development of a real-time patient-reported outcome measure for symptom assessment in patients with functional dyspepsia using the experience sampling method

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to assess symptoms in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). Current end-of-day questionnaires have several limitations including sensitivity to recall and ecological bias. The experience sampling method (ESM) is characterized by random and repeated assessments across momentary states in daily life and therefore less sensitive to these limitations. This study describes the development of a novel PROM based on ESM technology.

METHODS

An initial draft of the PROM was developed based on literature. Focus group interviews with FD patients according to Rome IV criteria, and an expert meeting with international opinion leaders in the field of functional gastrointestinal disorders were conducted in order to select items for the PROM. Cognitive interviews were performed to evaluate patients' understanding of the selected items and to create the definitive PROM.

KEY RESULTS

A systematic literature search revealed 59 items across four domains (ie, physical status; mood and psychological factors; context and environment; and nutrition, medication, and substance use). After patient focus group interviews and an international expert meeting, the number of items was reduced to 33. Cognitive interviews resulted in some minor linguistic changes in order to improve patients' understanding.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

A novel digital ESM-based PROM for real-time symptom assessment in patients with functional dyspepsia was developed. This novel PROM has the potential to identify individual symptom patterns and specific triggers for dyspeptic symptoms, and optimize treatment strategies.

Pharmacological treatments for functional nausea and functional dyspepsia in children: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Chronic idiopathic nausea (CIN) and functional dyspepsia (FD) cause considerable strain on many children's lives and their families. Areas covered: This study aims to systematically assess the evidence on efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments for CIN or FD in children. CENTRAL, EMBASE, and Medline were searched for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) investigating pharmacological treatments of CIN and FD in children (4-18 years). Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess methodological quality of the included articles. Expert commentary: Three RCTs (256 children with FD, 2-16 years) were included. No studies were found for CIN. All studies showed considerable risk of bias, therefore results should be interpreted with caution. Compared with baseline, successful relief of dyspeptic symptoms was found for omeprazole (53.8%), famotidine (44.4%), ranitidine (43.2%) and cimetidine (21.6%) (p = 0.024). Compared with placebo, famotidine showed benefit in global symptom improvement (OR 11.0; 95% CI 1.6-75.5; p = 0.02). Compared with baseline, mosapride versus pantoprazole reduced global symptoms (p = 0.011; p = 0.009). One study reported no occurrence of adverse events. This systematic review found no evidence to support the use of pharmacological drugs to treat CIN or FD in children. More high-quality clinical trials are needed.

ABBREVIATIONS

AP-FGID: Abdominal Pain Related Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders; BART: Biofeedback-Assisted Relaxation Training; CIN: Chronic Idiopathic Nausea; COS: Core Outcomes Sets; EPS: Epigastric Pain Syndrome; ESPGHAN: European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition; FAP: Functional Abdominal Pain; FD: Functional Dyspepsia; GERD: Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease; GES: Gastric Electrical Stimulation; H2RAs: H2 Receptor Antagonists; IBS: irritable bowel syndrome; NASPGHAN: North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition; PDS: Postprandial Distress Syndrome; PPIs: Proton Pump Inhibitor; PROMs: Patient Reported Outcome Measures; RCTs: Randomized Controlled Trials; SSRIs: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; TCAs: tricyclic antidepressants.