Centrally Distributed Adiposity as a Modifiable Risk Factor for Fecal Incontinence: U.S. Population-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Fecal incontinence (FI) is highly prevalent with substantial impacts on quality of life and healthcare utilization. The impact of obesity on FI remains unclear, with differing conclusions using BMI as risk factor. We aimed to determine the association between obesity and FI, and whether this relationship is dependent on the distribution of adiposity (waist circumference-to-height ratio, WHtR).

METHODS

This was a population-based analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, including participants who responded to the bowel health survey in 2005-2010. FI was defined by the accidental bowel leakage of solid stool, liquid, or mucus at least once in the past month. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to assess risk factors for FI.

RESULTS

A total of 7,606 participants were included, with an overall FI prevalence of 9.2%. When stratified by quartiles of body measurements, FI was increasingly prevalent from 1st to 4th quartile for both WHtR (range: 5.3%-12.5%) and BMI (range: 7.1%-10.5%). WHtR was associated with FI and was a stronger predictor than BMI in all quartiles of body measurement. On multivariable analysis, WHtR remained a significant predictor of FI comparing the 4th to the 1st quartile of body measurements (OR:1.77, CI:1.11-2.80, p=0.017), whereas BMI was not. A WHtR cutoff of >0.592 optimized the Youden index in prediction of FI in the overall sample.

CONCLUSION

WHtR was independently associated with increased odds of FI in this nationally representative sample of US adults, whereas BMI was not consistently correlated. This suggests bowel continence may depend more on how body mass is distributed.

Heartburn Relief Is the Major Unmet Need for Drug Development in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Threshold Value Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Heartburn symptoms contribute to healthcare-seeking among patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Despite clinical guidance, management is often dictated by insurance restrictions. Several potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs) are under development as a new class of therapy. We performed economic analyses to align GERD drug development with the needs of gastroenterologists, insurers and patients in a value-based environment.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was constructed to compare vonoprazan 20 mg daily (an example of a PCAB), common over-the-counter or prescription proton pump inhibitor regimens, and no treatment over a 1-year time horizon. Clinical responses were evaluated based on the proportions of heartburn-free days in a recent phase 3 multicenter trial. Healthcare utilization for persistent reflux symptoms was derived from national observational studies compared with healthy control subjects. Costs and quality-adjusted life years were reported.

RESULTS

Without insurance coverage for appropriate therapy, patients spend $4443 and insurers spend $3784 on average per year for inadequately treated GERD symptoms. Our model estimates that PCABs could save at least $3000 in annual costs to patients and insurers, could generate quality-adjusted life year gains (+0.06 per year), and could be cost-saving to insurers as a covered option at a price up to $8.57 per pill, if these drugs are able to demonstrate similar effectiveness to proton pump inhibitors in future trials evaluating heartburn relief and erosive esophagitis healing to regulators. Threshold prices reflect pricing after all pharmacy benefits manager rebates and discounts.

DISCUSSION

We demonstrate that aiming GERD-related drug development toward heartburn relief appears critical to align cost-effective incentives for industry and insurers with those of patients and gastroenterologists.

Optimizing the Management Algorithm for Adults With Functional Constipation Failing a Fiber/Laxative Trial in General Gastroenterology: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Minimization Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Anorectal function testing is traditionally relegated to subspecialty centers. Yet, it is an office-based procedure that appears capable of triaging care for the many patients with Rome IV functional constipation that fail empiric over-the-counter therapy in general gastroenterology, as an alternative to empirical prescription drugs. We aimed to evaluate cost-effectiveness of routine anorectal function testing in this specific population.

METHODS

We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis from the patient perspective and a cost-minimization analysis from the insurer perspective to compare 3 strategies: (i) empiric prescription drugs followed by pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) for drug failure, (ii) empiric PFPT followed by prescription drugs for PFPT failure, or (iii) care directed by up-front anorectal function testing. Model inputs were derived from systematic reviews of prospective clinical trials, national cost data sets, and observational cohort studies of the impact of chronic constipation on health outcomes, healthcare costs, and work productivity.

RESULTS

The most cost-effective strategy was upfront anorectal function testing to triage patients to appropriate therapy, in which the subset of patients without anal hypocontractility on anorectal manometry and with a balloon expulsion time of at least 6.5 seconds would be referred to PFPT. In sensitivity analysis, empiric PFPT was more cost effective than empiric prescription drugs except for situations in which the primary goal of treatment was to increase bowel movement frequency. If adopted, gastroenterologists would refer ∼17 patients per year to PFPT, supporting feasibility.

DISCUSSION

Anorectal function testing seems to be an emergent technology to optimize cost-effective outcomes, overcoming testing costs by phenotyping care.

Utilization of Rectal Examinations Before Magnetic Resonance Defecography Studies

IMPORTANCE

More information is needed to guide referring subspecialists on the appropriate patient evaluation before magnetic resonance defecography (MRD).

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate how often health care providers perform digital rectal examination (DRE) before ordering MRD to investigate causes of bowel and pelvic floor complaints.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort review, including MRD performed on female patients at an integrated health care system from 2016 through 2020. The primary outcome was the presence or absence of documented rectal examination in the year before defecography by the referring provider or 6 months prior by a primary care physician or pelvic floor physical therapist. We hypothesized that the overall rate of rectal examination would be high and unaffected by the referring provider's subspecialty.

RESULTS

Three hundred-four defecography tests were performed, with 209 patients (68.8%) referred by gastroenterology providers and 95 (31.2%) from other specialties. Gastroenterologists performed DRE in 32.8% of patients, in contrast to 84.4% of patients referred by other specialties ( P < 0.001). When comparing subspecialties that most commonly refer patients for MRD (gastroenterology, colorectal surgery and urogynecology), there was a statistically significant difference between gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons ( P < 0.001) as well as urogynecologists ( P < 0.001) but no difference in the rate of rectal examination between colorectal surgeons and urogynecologists ( P = 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

At our single integrated health system, the rate of DRE before MRD testing varied significantly by specialty. Our findings highlight the need for better understanding of DRE utility in the algorithms for evaluation of bowel and pelvic floor disorders.

Valuing innovative endoscopic techniques: Hemostatic powder for the treatment of gastrointestinal tumor bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Access to new endoscopic treatment modalities often depends on price. To resolve this gap and therefore help to ensure that care delivery can occur on a clinical basis, we aimed to establish the value to insurers of novel hemostatic powder to treat gastrointestinal tumor bleeding.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model developed to assess the impact of endoscopic intervention on the risk of 30-day readmission for gastrointestinal bleeding from an insurer perspective, was adapted to assess gastrointestinal tumor bleeding with hemostatic powder or standard endoscopic therapy. Costs were derived from Medicare populations. Outcomes were derived from a recent multicenter randomized clinical trial.

RESULTS

$651 to $1,613 to treat upper gastrointestinal tumor bleeding and $531 to $1,014 to treat lower gastrointestinal tumor bleeding based on risk reduction in 30-day hospital re-admission for re-bleeding. These valuations should represent medical device and incremental facility costs in addition to incremental physician and staff time.

CONCLUSIONS

Coverage for novel endoscopic hemostatic powder therapy appears cost-saving to insurers.

Optimizing the Management Algorithm for Esophageal Dysphagia After Index Endoscopy: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Minimization Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines advise esophageal motility testing for dysphagia when structural disorders are ruled out, but cost concerns impede adoption. We evaluated cost-effective positioning of esophageal motility testing in the algorithm to evaluate esophageal dysphagia.

METHODS

We developed a decision analytic model comparing 3 strategies: (i) esophageal manometry, (ii) screening impedance planimetry followed by esophageal manometry if needed, or (iii) nonalgorithmic usual care. Diagnostic test accuracy was adapted to expected rates of esophageal motility disorders in general gastroenterology populations. We modeled routine testing for all patients with nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia compared with selective testing with strong suspicion for achalasia. Cost outcomes were defined on national commercial and Medicare datasets stratified on age and sex. Health outcomes were modeled on populations with achalasia. The time horizon was 1 year.

RESULTS

Motility testing was preferred over nonalgorithmic usual care due to cost savings rather than health gains. To commercial insurers, routine esophageal manometry for nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia would be cost-saving below a reimbursed cost of $2,415. Screening impedance planimetry would be cost saving below a reimbursed cost of $1,130. The limit for reimbursed costs would be lower for patients older than 65 years to achieve cost savings mainly due to insurance. Sex did not significantly influence cost-effectiveness. Patients and insurers preferred routine screening impedance planimetry before manometry when the index of suspicion for achalasia was below 6%.

DISCUSSION

Aligning with practice guidelines, routine esophageal motility testing seems cost saving to patients and insurers compared with nonalgorithmic usual care to evaluate nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia. Choice of testing should be guided by index of suspicion.

Mini-review: Tailored per-oral endoscopic myotomy for type III achalasia

This mini-review summarizes the most recent literature regarding per-oral endoscopic myotomy for type III achalasia, emphasizing the poorly understood science of tailoring myotomy length during this procedure. In addition, special attention will be placed on the current subjective and objective biomarkers, such as the Eckardt score, used to evaluate treatment outcomes in this population to better contextualize the existing data on patient outcomes, as proposed by Low et al in the current issue of the Journal. Understanding the current treatment landscape for type III achalasia and identifying the key areas of research deficiencies will guide future investigation and management of this disease.

Commentary on "The Impact of Vertical Integration on Physician Behavior and Healthcare Delivery: Evidence from Gastroenterology Practices"

This paper was accepted by Stefan Scholtes, healthcare management.

Conflict of Interest Statement: E. D. Shah has consulted or served on advisory boards for Ardelyx, GI Supply, Mahana, Mylan, Neuraxis, Salix, Sanofi, and Takeda.

Funding: E. D. Shah is funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [Grant NIH 1K23DK134752].

Impact of Patient Subgroups on the Efficacy and Safety of Methylnaltrexone for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Advanced Illness

Purpose

We evaluated the impact of baseline patient characteristics on safety and efficacy of methylnaltrexone, a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist, in patients with advanced illness with opioid-induced constipation (OIC).

Patients and Methods

This analysis pooled data from 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (study 302: NCT00402038; study 4000: NCT00672477) in patients with advanced illness, including cancer, and OIC. Patients were randomized to receive subcutaneous methylnaltrexone (study 302: 0.15 mg/kg; study 4000: 8 or 12 mg based on weight) or placebo every other day for 2 weeks. The proportions of patients achieving rescue-free laxation within 4 or 24 hours after the first dose of study drug were assessed in patient subgroups stratified by baseline age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, cancer status, laxative type, and opioid requirement. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated.

Results

Overall, 363 patients were included in this analysis (methylnaltrexone, 178; placebo, 185). Mean (SD) age was 66.3 (13.7) years and 48.5% were men overall. A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving methylnaltrexone versus placebo achieved rescue-free laxation within 4 hours (111/178 [62.4%] vs 31/185 [16.8%]; P<0.0001) and 24 hours (135/178 [75.8%] vs 81/185 [43.8%]; P<0.0001) of the first dose. These trends were consistent across all subgroups. Most patients experienced ≥1 TEAE in the overall population (methylnaltrexone, 82.1%; placebo, 76.2%), which remained consistent when stratified by baseline characteristics. More than half of TEAEs were gastrointestinal in nature. Abdominal pain was more common in patients receiving methylnaltrexone than placebo across baseline characteristic subgroups.

Conclusion

Methylnaltrexone treatment was superior to placebo in achieving rescue-free laxation within 4 and 24 hours after the first dose, irrespective of patients' cancer status, baseline ECOG performance status, or baseline opioid or laxative use. The methylnaltrexone safety profile remained consistent across baseline characteristic subgroups.

Optimizing the Utility of Anorectal Manometry for Diagnosis and Therapy: A Roundtable Review and Recommendations

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Anorectal manometry (ARM) is a comprehensive diagnostic tool for evaluating patients with constipation, fecal incontinence, or anorectal pain; however, it is not widely utilized for reasons that remain unclear. The aim of this roundtable discussion was to critically examine the current clinical practices of ARM and biofeedback therapy by physicians and surgeons in both academic and community settings.

METHODS

Leaders in medical and surgical gastroenterology and physical therapy with interest in anorectal disorders were surveyed regarding practice patterns and utilization of these technologies. Subsequently, a roundtable was held to discuss survey results, explore current diagnostic and therapeutic challenges with these technologies, review the literature, and generate consensus-based recommendations.

RESULTS

ARM identifies key pathophysiological abnormalities such as dyssynergic defecation, anal sphincter weakness, or rectal sensory dysfunction, and is a critical component of biofeedback therapy, an evidence-based treatment for patients with dyssynergic defecation and fecal incontinence. Additionally, ARM has the potential to enhance health-related quality of life and reduce healthcare costs. However, it has significant barriers that include a lack of education and training of healthcare providers regarding the utility and availability of ARM and biofeedback procedures, as well as challenges with condition-specific testing protocols and interpretation. Additional barriers include understanding when to perform, where to refer, and how to use these technologies, and confusion over billing practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Overcoming these challenges with appropriate education, training, collaborative research, and evidence-based guidelines for ARM testing and biofeedback therapy could significantly enhance patient care of anorectal disorders.

Clinical History Does Not Reliably Predict Clinical Outcomes With Pelvic Floor Physical Therapy to Treat Chronic Constipation

Chronic constipation affects 10%-20% of the population and impacts quality-of-life similarly to rheumatoid arthritis or congestive heart failure.1 We recently showed in a prospective clinical trial that up-front, community-based pelvic floor physical therapy is effective to treat chronic constipation for patients seeking general gastroenterology care after failing a brief trial of osmotic laxative or soluble fiber supplementation2 and can be guided by anorectal function testing.3,4 In this post hoc analysis, we aimed to evaluate whether factors on clinical history including specific symptoms, work-productivity impairment, health-related quality-of-life impairment, and psychological factors are useful to inform patient selection on the expected likelihood of clinical response without using anorectal function tests.

Optimizing the Management Algorithm for Heartburn in General Gastroenterology: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Minimization Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Heartburn is the most common symptom seen in gastroenterology practice. We aimed to optimize cost-effective evaluation and management of heartburn.

METHODS

We developed a decision analytic model from insurer and patient perspectives comparing 4 strategies for patients failing empiric proton pump inhibitors (PPIs): (1) PPI optimization without testing, (2) endoscopy with PPI optimization for all patients, (3) endoscopy with PPI discontinuation when erosive findings are absent, and (4) endoscopy/ambulatory reflux monitoring with PPI discontinuation as appropriate for phenotypic management. Health outcomes were respectively defined on systematic reviews of clinical trials. Cost outcomes were defined on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services databases and commercial multipliers for direct healthcare costs, and national observational studies evaluating healthcare utilization. The time horizon was 1 year. All testing was performed off PPI.

RESULTS

PPI optimization without testing cost $3784/y to insurers and $3128 to patients due to lower work productivity and suboptimal symptom relief. Endoscopy with PPI optimization lowered insurer costs by $1020/y and added 11 healthy days/y by identifying erosive reflux disease. Endoscopy with PPI discontinuation added 11 additional healthy days/y by identifying patients without erosive reflux disease that did not need PPI. By optimizing phenotype-guided treatment, endoscopy/ambulatory reflux monitoring with a trial of PPI discontinuation was the most effective of all strategies (gaining 22 healthy days/y) and saved $2183 to insurers and $2396 to patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with heartburn, endoscopy with ambulatory reflux monitoring (off PPI) optimizes cost-effective management by matching treatment to phenotype. When erosive findings are absent, trialing PPI discontinuation is more cost-effective than optimizing PPI.

Chronic Pain and Mood Disorders Are Not Barriers to Symptom Improvement Under Collaborative Co-managed Care (C3)

OBJECTIVES

Patients with comorbid chronic pain and mood disorders have more severe gastrointestinal disease and higher healthcare expenses than their peers. We sought to determine whether management under our innovative Collaborative Co-Managed Care (C3) general gastroenterology care model improved outcomes.

METHODS

Patient questionnaires completed by outpatients at our GI Motility Center were analyzed alongside demographic information to determine predictors of response to treatment based on adequate relief of gastrointestinal symptoms and improvement in quality of life.

RESULTS

These comorbidities did not significantly impair response and may be associated with improved response under our model.

CONCLUSIONS

The C3 general gastroenterology care model anchors on setting expectations and team-based communication and improves outcomes of, and access to, care.

Up-Front Endoscopy Maximizes Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Satisfaction in Uninvestigated Dyspepsia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Practice guidelines promote a routine noninvasive, non-endoscopic initial approach to investigating dyspepsia without alarm features in young patients, yet many patients undergo prompt upper endoscopy. We aimed to assess tradeoffs among costs, patient satisfaction, and clinical outcomes to inform discrepancy between guidelines and practice.

METHODS

We constructed a decision-analytic model and performed cost-effectiveness/cost-satisfaction analysis over a 1-year time horizon on patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia without alarm features referred to gastroenterology. A RAND/UCLA expert panel informed model design. Four competing diagnostic/management strategies were evaluated: prompt endoscopy, testing for Helicobacter pylori and eradicating if present (test-and-treat), testing for H pylori and performing endoscopy if present (test-and-scope), and empiric acid suppression. Outcomes were derived from systematic reviews of clinical trials. Costs were informed by prospective observational cohort studies and national commercial/federal cost databases. Health gains were represented using quality-adjusted life years.

RESULTS

From the patient perspective, costs and outcomes were similar for all strategies (maximum out-of-pocket difference of $30 and <0.01 quality-adjusted life years gained/year regardless of strategy). Prompt endoscopy maximized cost-satisfaction and health system reimbursement. Test-and-scope maximized cost-effectiveness from insurer and patient perspectives. Results remained robust on multiple one-way sensitivity analyses on model inputs and across most willingness-to-pay thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

Noninvasive management strategies appear to result in inferior cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction outcomes compared with strategies promoting up-front endoscopy. Therefore, additional studies are needed to evaluate the drivers of patient satisfaction to facilitate inclusion in value-based healthcare transformation efforts.

American Gastroenterological Association-American College of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline: Pharmacological Management of Chronic Idiopathic Constipation

INTRODUCTION

Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) is a common disorder associated with significant impairment in quality of life. This clinical practice guideline, jointly developed by the American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology, aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of CIC in adults.

METHODS

The American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that conducted systematic reviews of the following agents: fiber, osmotic laxatives (polyethylene glycol, magnesium oxide, lactulose), stimulant laxatives (bisacodyl, sodium picosulfate, senna), secretagogues (lubiprostone, linaclotide, plecanatide), and serotonin type 4 agonist (prucalopride). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to assess the certainty of evidence for each intervention. The Evidence to Decision framework was used to develop clinical recommendations based on the balance between the desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 10 recommendations for the pharmacological management of CIC in adults. Based on available evidence, the panel made strong recommendations for the use of polyethylene glycol, sodium picosulfate, linaclotide, plecanatide, and prucalopride for CIC in adults. Conditional recommendations were made for the use of fiber, lactulose, senna, magnesium oxide, and lubiprostone.

DISCUSSION

This document provides a comprehensive outline of the various over-the-counter and prescription pharmacological agents available for the treatment of CIC. The guidelines are meant to provide a framework for approaching the management of CIC; clinical providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences as well as medication cost and availability. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to help guide future research opportunities and enhance the care of patients with chronic constipation.

American Gastroenterological Association-American College of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline: Pharmacological Management of Chronic Idiopathic Constipation

INTRODUCTION

Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) is a common disorder associated with significant impairment in quality of life. This clinical practice guideline, jointly developed by the American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology, aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of CIC in adults.

METHODS

The American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that conducted systematic reviews of the following agents: fiber, osmotic laxatives (polyethylene glycol, magnesium oxide, lactulose), stimulant laxatives (bisacodyl, sodium picosulfate, senna), secretagogues (lubiprostone, linaclotide, plecanatide), and serotonin type 4 agonist (prucalopride). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to assess the certainty of evidence for each intervention. The Evidence to Decision framework was used to develop clinical recommendations based on the balance between the desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 10 recommendations for the pharmacological management of CIC in adults. Based on available evidence, the panel made strong recommendations for the use of polyethylene glycol, sodium picosulfate, linaclotide, plecanatide, and prucalopride for CIC in adults. Conditional recommendations were made for the use of fiber, lactulose, senna, magnesium oxide, and lubiprostone.

DISCUSSION

This document provides a comprehensive outline of the various over-the-counter and prescription pharmacological agents available for the treatment of CIC. The guidelines are meant to provide a framework for approaching the management of CIC; clinical providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences as well as medication cost and availability. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to help guide future research opportunities and enhance the care of patients with chronic constipation.

The Rise of Private Equity in Gastroenterology Practices

Private equity (PE) investment in gastroenterology practices has significantly increased over the past several years. Because PE firms are prevented legally from owning a medical practice in many states, they usually form a management services organization to oversee all nonclinical aspects of the practice, leaving all clinical functions to the physician owners. Gastroenterology practices have become attractive investments to PE firms because of the willingness of gastroenterologists to join a PE-backed practice and the potential to earn profits through consolidating the market. Research has started to examine the effects of PE-backed practices on patients and on the gastroenterology specialty specifically. Questions remain regarding the benefits for physicians. This article examines PE investment in gastroenterology practices and how this may impact the specialty in the future.

Utility of Anorectal Testing to Predict Outcomes With Pelvic Floor Physical Therapy in Chronic Constipation: Pragmatic Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We performed a clinical trial that aimed to inform the clinical utility of anorectal manometry (ARM) and balloon expulsion time (BET) as up-front tests to predict outcomes with community-based pelvic floor physical therapy as the next best step to address chronic constipation after failing an empiric trial of soluble fiber supplementation or osmotic laxatives.

METHODS

We enrolled 60 treatment-naïve patients with Rome IV functional constipation failing 2 weeks of soluble fiber supplementation or osmotic laxatives. All patients underwent ARM/BET (London protocol) followed by community-based pelvic floor physical therapy. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and 12 weeks. The primary end point was clinical response (Patient Assessment of Constipation-Symptoms instrument).

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients completed pelvic rehabilitation and the post-treatment questionnaire. Contemporary frameworks define dyssynergia on balloon expulsion time and dyssynergic patterns (ARM), but these parameters did not inform clinical outcomes (area under the curve [AUC], <0.6). Squeeze pressure (>192.5 mm Hg on at least 1 of 3 attempts; sensitivity, 47.6%; specificity, 83.9%) and limited squeeze duration (inability to sustain 50% of squeeze pressure for >20 seconds; sensitivity, 71.4%; specificity, 58.1%) were the strongest predictors of clinical outcomes. Combining BET with squeeze duration (BET greater than 6.5 seconds and limited squeeze duration) improved predictive accuracy (AUC, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.90). BET poorly predicted outcomes as a single test (AUC, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.38-0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Using ARM to evaluate squeeze profiles, rather than dyssynergia, appears useful to screen patients with chronic constipation for up-front pelvic floor physical therapy based on likelihood of response. BET appears noninformative as a single screening test (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04159350).

An Office-Based, Point-of-Care Test Predicts Treatment Outcomes With Community-Based Pelvic Floor Physical Therapy in Patients With Chronic Constipation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Rectal evacuation disorders are common among constipated patients. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of an investigational point-of-care test (rectal expulsion device [RED]) to predict outcomes with community-based pelvic floor physical therapy.

METHODS

We enrolled patients meeting Rome IV criteria for functional constipation failing fiber/laxatives for more than 2 weeks. RED was inserted and self-inflated, and then time-to-expel was measured in a left lateral position. All patients underwent empiric community-based pelvic floor physical therapy in routine care with outcomes measured at 12 weeks. The primary end point was global clinical response (Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms score reduction, >0.75 vs baseline). Secondary end points included improvement in health-related quality-of-life (Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life score reduction, >1.0) and complete spontaneous bowel movement frequency (Food and Drug Administration complete spontaneous bowel movement responder definition).

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients enrolled in a feasibility phase to develop the use-case protocol. Sixty patients enrolled in a blinded validation phase; 52 patients (mean, 46.9 y; 94.2% women) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. In the left lateral position, RED predicted global clinical response (generalized area under the curve [gAUC], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.58-0.76]), health-related quality-of-life response (gAUC, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.58-0.77; P < .001), and complete spontaneous bowel movement response (gAUC, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.57-0.71; P < .001). As a screening test, a normal RED effectively rules out evacuation disorders (expected clinical response, 8.9%; P = .042). Abnormal RED in the left lateral position (defined as expulsion within 5 seconds or >120 seconds) predicted 48.9% clinical response to physical therapy. A seated maneuver enhanced the likelihood of clinical response (71.1% response with seated RED retained >13 seconds) but likely is unnecessary in most settings.

CONCLUSIONS

RED offers an opportunity to disrupt the paradigm by offering a personalized approach to managing chronic constipation in the community (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04159350).

Development of a Simple, Point-of-Care Device to Test Anorectal Function in Patients with Constipation: Randomized Clinical Trial

Functional constipation (FC) is one of the most frequently encountered gastrointestinal conditions in practice.¹ Practice guidelines universally recommend that patients with typical constipation symptoms and no alarm features be treated empirically with dietary/lifestyle interventions and laxative therapy.^2,3 Unfortunately, by the time a patient reaches a gastroenterologist, these treatments frequently have already been tried. Anorectal function testing (anorectal manometry [ARM] and balloon expulsion test [BET]) is the next best step in management guidelines in this all-too-common scenario, because treatment can then be targeted toward pelvic floor dysfunction or colon transit abnormalities. Unfortunately, more than 95% of patients continue to take only over-the-counter laxatives and receive empirical dietary advice, whereas fewer than 2% undergo physiologic evaluation to ascertain the cause of their symptoms.⁴ Indeed, more than 90% of patients desire more effective treatment options. These observations call into question the wisdom of a management strategy that fails to recognize the intrinsic diversity of the constipation universe and reinforces the misguided "one size fits all" empirical treatment strategy.

Subcutaneous Methylnaltrexone as Treatment for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Advanced Cancer and Noncancer Illnesses: A Post Hoc Analysis of Two Clinical Trials

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous (SC) methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in patients with and without active cancer.

Patients and Methods

We analyzed two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3/4 trials (NCT00402038, NCT00672477). Patients received SC methylnaltrexone (study 302, 0.15 mg/kg; study 4000, 8 mg or 12 mg based on body weight) or placebo every other day for 2 weeks. Patients were stratified by cancer status. Primary efficacy endpoints included proportion of patients achieving rescue-free laxation (RFL); secondary endpoints included time to RFL, pain intensity scores, and safety/tolerability. Trial results were evaluated separately.

Results

The safety population (patients receiving ≥1 study drug dose) included 364 patients (study 302, n=134; study 4000, n=230). Study 302 had 78 patients with active cancer (methylnaltrexone, n=37; placebo, n=41) and 56 without cancer (methylnaltrexone, n=26; placebo, n=30); study 4000 had 152 patients with active cancer (methylnaltrexone, n=79; placebo, n=73) and 78 without cancer (methylnaltrexone, n=37; placebo, n=41). A significantly greater proportion of patients treated with methylnaltrexone achieved a laxation response within 4 hours after at least 2 of the first 4 doses versus placebo, dosed by body weight (cancer, 54.1% [methylnaltrexone] vs 7.3% [placebo], P<0.0001; noncancer, 48.0% vs 10.0%; P<0.005) or given as a weight-adjusted fixed dose (cancer, 59.5% vs 6.8%; noncancer, 70.3% vs 14.6%; P<0.0001 each). With fixed-dose methylnaltrexone, average time to RFL for patients with and without cancer was <1 hour of the first dose; with methylnaltrexone dosed by body weight, the first RFL occurred in <4 and <7 hours of treatment in patients with and without cancer, respectively. No significant differences were found in pain scores. SC methylnaltrexone was well tolerated at all doses in all patient cohorts.

Conclusion

SC methylnaltrexone was efficacious in inducing rapid RFL and safe among patients with and without active cancer suffering from OIC.

Digital health for functional gastrointestinal disorders

BACKGROUND

Functional gastrointestinal disorders are a common but challenging set of conditions to treat. Gastroenterology practices often struggle to meet the needs of patients with functional disorders given the need for careful monitoring, frequent communication, and management of stressors that occur outside of the clinical setting. In recent years, applications in digital health have created a new set of tools that can improve the care of these patients, including through improved symptom tracking, physiologic monitoring, direct provision of care, and patient support.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review is to evaluate how digital applications are being used to manage functional gastrointestinal disorders today, with several examples of relevant technologies and organizations. It also the shortcomings of current treatment strategies and how they can be overcome.

2021 National Survey on Prior Authorization Burden and Its Impact on Gastroenterology Practice

INTRODUCTION

Prior authorizations (PAs) are intended to control prescription drug expenditures.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-six physician and advanced practice provider members of the American College of Gastroenterology completed a national survey to assess PA burden and impact.

RESULTS

One-half of PA requests relate to prescription refills. Greater than 50% of the respondents choose inferior treatments at least weekly because of perceived PA burden for preferred agents. One-half of the respondents reported a patient who experienced serious adverse events due to PA-related care delays.

DISCUSSION

PA is an administrative burden that exhausts practice resources and may have a negative impact on patient care.

Baseline Predictors of Discontinuation of Prescription Drug Therapy for IBS-C: Cohort Analysis at an Integrated Healthcare System

BACKGROUND

Effective prescription drug treatment of constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C) requires patients to remain on daily therapy, yet predictive factors to optimize treatment selection are unknown.

AIMS

We assessed whether common comorbidities including chronic overlapping pain conditions (COPCs), mood disorders, or concurrent medications influence the risk of discontinuing IBS-C prescription drug therapy.

METHODS

We included all IBS-C patients who initiated treatment with the secretagogues linaclotide or lubiprostone across the Michigan Medicine healthcare system between 2012 and 2016. A Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to model time-to-treatment discontinuation as a valid, quantifiable measure of IBS medication persistence using hazards ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Our cohort included 225 patients on linaclotide and 492 on lubiprostone (mean age 48.3 years, 86.9% women, 46.6% with at least one COPC, 60.3% with at least one mood disorder) with an average follow-up of 2.1 years. Patients with at least one COPC (HR = 0.566; 95%CI = 0.371-0.863) and also women (HR = 0.535; 95%CI = 0.307-0.934) had a lower risk of discontinuing linaclotide, while COPCs predicted a trend toward increased discontinuation of lubiprostone (HR = 1.254; 95%CI = 0.997-1.576). Age, comorbid mood disorders, and baseline use of narcotics or benzodiazepines did not significantly mediate the risk of treatment discontinuation; our findings remained stable in univariate and multivariable analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

COPCs and sex appear to influence the likelihood of discontinuation of two commonly prescribed secretagogues, while mood disorders, narcotics, and benzodiazepines may not. Routine assessment for comorbid COPCs prior to initiating therapy may optimize IBS-C treatment selection and outcomes in practice.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage in Patients With Malignant Biliary Obstruction: Which Is the Optimal Cost-Saving Strategy After Failed ERCP?

Background and Aim

Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) after failed primary ERCP in malignant distal biliary obstruction has similar clinical outcomes compared to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD), little is known about optimal cost-saving strategy after failed ERCP. We performed a cost analysis of EUS-BD and PTBD after failed ERCP in two countries with different health care systems in the East and West.

Methods

From an unpublished database nested in a randomized controlled trial, we compared the cost between EUS-BD and PTBD in Korea. The total cost was defined as the sum of the total biliary drainage costs plus the cost of hospital stay to manage adverse events. We also performed a cost-minimization analysis using a decision-analytic model of a US Medicare population.

Results

In Korea, the median total costs for the biliary intervention ($1,203.36 for EUS-BD vs. $1,517.83 for PTBD; P=.0015) and the median total costs for the entire treatment were significantly higher in PTBD ($4,175.53 for EUS-BD vs. $5,391.87 for PTBD; P=.0496) due to higher re-intervention rate in PTBD. In cost-minimization analysis of US Medicare population, EUS-BD would cost $9,497.03 and PTBD $13,878.44 from a Medicare insurance perspective (average cost-savings in choosing EUS-BD of $4,381.41 in the US). In sensitivity analysis, EUS-BD was favored over PTBD regardless of the expected re-intervention rate in EUS-BD and PTBD.

Conclusions

EUS-BD may have an impact on cost-savings due to better clinical outcomes profile compared to PTBD after failed ERCP, even in different medical insurance programs.

Comparing Costs and Outcomes of Treatments for Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Diarrhea: Cost-Benefit Analysis

BACKGROUND

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most expensive gastroenterological conditions and is an ideal target for developing a value-based care model. We assessed the comparative cost-benefit of treatments for IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D), the most common IBS subtype from insurer and patient perspectives.

METHODS

We constructed a decision analytic model assessing trade-offs among guideline-recommended and recently FDA-approved drugs, supplements, low FODMAP diet, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Outcomes and costs were derived from systematic reviews of clinical trials and national databases. Health-gains were represented using quality-adjusted life years (QALY).

RESULTS

From an insurer perspective, on-label prescription drugs (rifaximin, eluxadoline, alosetron) were significantly more expensive than off-label treatments, low FODMAP, or CBT. Insurer treatment preferences were driven by average wholesale prescription drug prices and were not affected by health gains in sensitivity analysis within standard willingness-to-pay ranges up to $150,000/QALY-gained. From a patient perspective, prescription drug therapies and neuromodulators appeared preferable due to a reduction in lost wages due to IBS with effective therapy, and also considering out-of-pocket costs of low FODMAP food and out-of-pocket costs to attend CBT appointments. Comparative health outcomes exerted influence on treatment preferences from a patient perspective in cost-benefit analysis depending on a patients' willingness-to-pay threshold for additional health-gains, but health outcomes were less important than out-of-pocket costs at lower willingness-to-pay thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

Costs are critical determinants of IBS treatment value to patients and insurers, but different costs drive patient and insurer treatment preferences. Divergent cost drivers appear to explain misalignment between patient and insurer IBS treatment preferences in practice.

Price Is Right: Exploring Prescription Drug Coverage Barriers for Irritable Bowel Syndrome Using Threshold Pricing Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prescription drug costs exert profound effects on commercial insurance coverage and access to effective therapy.

AIMS

We aimed to assess threshold pricing to achieve budget neutrality of FDA-approved drugs treating irritable bowel syndrome from an insurance perspective, based on cost-savings resulting in decreased healthcare utilization through effective disease management.

METHODS

We constructed a decision-analytic model from an insurance perspective to assess the budget impact of IBS prescription drugs under usual insurance coverage levels in practice: (1) unrestricted drug access or (2) step therapy in a primary care population of middle-age, care-seeking IBS patients. Budget-neutral drug prices were then calculated which resulted in $0 budget impact to insurers with a short-term, one-year time horizon.

RESULTS

If used according to FDA labeling, IBS-D drugs cost between $4778 and $16,844 per year and IBS-C drugs cost between $4319 and $4955 per year. These drug costs often exceed insurance expenditures of $6999 for IBS-D and $3929 for IBS-C if left untreated. Therefore, for drugs to have $0 budget impact to insurers, their prices would need to be discounted 36.7-74.2% for IBS-D drugs and 59.3-82.5% for IBS-C. IBS drugs are already priced to support step therapy "failing one of several common, inexpensive IBS treatments with a responder rate > 30-40%," reflecting the subpopulation with more severe disease and greater healthcare costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Broader prescription drug coverage for patients failing common, inexpensive IBS treatments to which at least 30-40% of patients would typically respond appears warranted to enable gastroenterologists to offer personalized approaches targeting specific mechanisms of this heterogeneous disease.

Anorectal manometry to diagnose dyssynergic defecation: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy

BACKGROUND

Chronic constipation is a common condition, and dyssynergic defecation underlies up to 40% of cases. Anorectal manometry is recommended to assess for dyssynergic defecation among chronically constipated patients but remains poorly standardized. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anorectal manometry and determine optimal testing parameters.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy including cohort studies of chronically constipated patients and case-control studies of patients with dyssynergic defecation or healthy controls. Meta-analysis was performed to determine summary sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

KEY RESULTS

A total of 15 studies comprising 2140 patients were included. Including all studies (estimating optimal diagnostic accuracy), the AUC was 0.78 [95% CI 0.72-0.82], summary sensitivity was 79% [61%-90%], and summary specificity was 64% [44%-79%] to diagnose dyssynergic defecation. In cohort studies only (estimating real-world diagnostic accuracy), the AUC was 0.72 [0.66-0.77], summary sensitivity was 86% [64%-95%], and summary specificity was 49% [30%-68%]. Employing three consecutive simulated defecation attempts improved sensitivity to 94%. A fourth simulated defecation maneuver with air insufflation may improve accuracy. Measuring anorectal pressures to identify complex dyssynergic patterns did not improve real-world diagnostic accuracy estimates over anal pressure measurement alone. Choice of manometry system did not impact diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Following the current iteration of the London consensus protocol (three simulated defecation attempts measuring anal relaxation), the role of anorectal manometry in evaluating dyssynergic defecation appears limited. Future iterations of this protocol may improve diagnostic accuracy.

Tegaserod for Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation in Women Younger Than 65 Years Without Cardiovascular Disease: Pooled Analyses of 4 Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Tegaserod was the first US Food and Drug Administration-approved drug for irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) in women and was recently reapproved for use. Recognizing that clinical trials were performed almost 20 years ago, we performed an integrated analysis on patient-reported outcomes relevant to current practice including previously unpublished data.

METHODS

Data from 4 12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trials evaluating tegaserod 6 mg b.i.d. in patients with IBS-C were pooled. We analyzed 2 groups: all women (overall population) and women younger than 65 years without a history of cardiovascular ischemic events (indicated population). The primary end point was subjective global assessment of IBS-C symptom relief. Responders rated themselves as "considerably" or "completely" relieved ≥50% of the time or at least "somewhat relieved" 100% of the time over the last 4 weeks.

RESULTS

The overall and indicated populations included 2,939 (tegaserod [n = 1,478]; placebo [n = 1,461]) and 2,752 (tegaserod [n = 1,386]; placebo [n = 1,366]) participants, respectively. The pooled odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for clinical response during the last 4 weeks in the overall and indicated populations with tegaserod were 1.37 (1.18, 1.59; P < 0.001) and 1.38 (1.18, 1.61; P < 0.001). In the overall and indicated populations, clinical response rates for tegaserod during the last 4 weeks were 43.3% and 44.1% versus 35.9% and 36.5% with placebo (P < 0.001). Adverse events were similar between groups. No significant cardiovascular events related to tegaserod were observed in patients with ≤1 cardiac risk factor.

DISCUSSION

Tegaserod 6 mg b.i.d. reduced IBS-C symptoms in overall and US Food and Drug Administration-indicated populations (women aged <65 years with no history of cardiovascular ischemic events).

Digestive Manifestations in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain uncertain. We aimed to assess the prevalence, spectrum, severity, and significance of digestive manifestations in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

METHODS

Consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were abstracted manually from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19.

RESULTS

A total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least 1 gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were increased to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.80-2.12) were not associated independently with mechanical ventilation or death.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common, but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course.

Systemic Disease Associations with Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction and Gastrointestinal Transit: A Review

Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGID) are now classified within the Rome IV framework as disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI). Disorders of gastrointestinal transit (as defined by abnormalities on contemporary gastrointestinal motility testing) frequently are associated with symptoms that are also characteristic of DGBIs. In this narrative review, we outline a non-inclusive set of systemic diseases or risk factors that have been classically associated with DGBIs and disorders of gastrointestinal transit; these include diabetes mellitus, paraneoplastic syndromes, surgery, Parkinson's disease, systemic sclerosis, endocrinopathies, polypharmacy, and post-infectious syndromes.

Psychological Health Among Gastroenterologists During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Survey

The COVID-19 pandemic poses unprecedented and unique challenges to gastroenterologists eager to maintain clinical practice, patients' health, and their own physical/mental well-being. We aimed to estimate the prevalence and critical determinants of psychological distress in gastroenterologists during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis Occurring in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is a rare and aggressive syndrome of excessive cytokine requiring prompt recognition and aggressive therapy.

AIMS

We aimed to systematically characterize HLH in moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature (PubMED; EMBASE) and FDA Adverse Event Reporting System in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Use of biologics was used as a surrogate definition for disease severity (consistent with usual and contemporary clinical management), to enable identification of rare HLH cases with the highest fidelity.

RESULTS

58 cases of HLH occurring in IBD patients are known (mean age: 26.0 years, 70% male, 83% with Crohn's disease, mean disease duration 7.0 years). 34.5% of patients were undergoing induction therapy at HLH diagnosis. All cases occurred on patients exposed to anti-TNF agents, but cases with anti-integrin or anti-IL-12/23 exposure were reported. 2/3 of cases did not report prior AZA/6MP exposure. Underlying opportunistic infection or lymphoma was found in > 80% of cases. Survival was 70% if promptly recognized and treated. Five patients restarted biologics after HLH resolved, and one patient developed recurrent HLH.

CONCLUSIONS

HLH is rare among IBD patients exposed to biologic therapy. Most cases had an identifiable infection or malignancy at the time of diagnosis as well as history of immunomodulator use. Risk factors may include younger age, male gender, presence of Crohn's disease, and induction phase of treatment. Our study is not intended to assess risk of HLH with specific IBD therapies.