Alternative Gastrointestinal Conditions Identified in Patients Meeting Rome IV Criteria for Irritable Bowel Syndrome or Functional Diarrhea Referred to Secondary Care: A Prospective Study

Introduction: Organic gastrointestinal (GI) disorders can be missed in individuals with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). This study investigated the frequency of organic disorders in patients with diarrhea-predominant IBS or functional diarrhea and the impact of treatment for any identified alternative diagnoses. Methods: Between April 2019 and March 2020, the results of comprehensive investigations, including blood and fecal tests, a 75selenium homophobic acid taurine scan, a breath test, and endoscopies performed on consecutive eligible patients, were recorded. Symptom burden was reassessed after treatment for any GI conditions identified. Results: 66 (15 males) consecutive patients were included. Two patients (3%) were diagnosed with colonic malignancy; 21 (38%) had bile acid diarrhea; one (1%) had pancreatic exocrine insufficiency; and 31 (54%) had small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. 21 patients (32%) had at least two GI diagnoses. Significant improvement in symptoms occurred following treatment (p<0.0001). Conclusions: Multiple co-existing conditions were detected in many of these patients, with one-third of the cohort having more than one abnormal test. When these alternative diagnoses were treated, patients reported significant symptomatic improvement. Larger studies are required to validate our findings, and these patients\u27 investigative and management pathways should be amended accordingly

Improving the well-being of men by Evaluating and Addressing the Gastrointestinal Late Effects (EAGLE) of radical treatment for prostate cancer: study protocol for a mixed-method implementation project

Introduction: Radiotherapy treatment for prostate cancer can cause bowel problems, which may lead to severe difficulties for cancer survivors including limiting travel, work or socialising. These symptoms can appear at any time following radiotherapy. This study focuses on the early identification and protocol-based management of effects known to cause long-term, or even permanent, changes to the well-being of prostate cancer survivors. The rationale of this study is to improve the care offered to men and their families following pelvic radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Method and analysis: Implementation research methodology will be used to adopt a multicomponent intervention at three UK centres. The intervention package comprises a standardised clinical assessment of relevant symptoms in oncology outpatient clinics and rapid referral to an enhanced gastroenterological service for patients identified with bowel problems. Gastroenterology staff will be trained to use an expert practice algorithm of targeted gastroenterology investigations and treatments. The evaluation of the intervention and its embedding within local practices will be conducted using a mixed-methods design. The effect of the new service will be measured in terms of the following outcomes: acceptability to staff and patients; quality of life; symptom control and cost effectiveness. Data collection will take place at baseline, 6 months (±2 months), and 12 months (±2 months) after entry into the study. Ethics and dissemination: The study has ethical approval from the North West-Liverpool East Research Ethics Committee and the appropriate NHS governance clearance. All participants provide written informed consent. The study team aim to publish the results of the study in peer-reviewed journals as well as at national and international conferences. Trial registration number: UKCRN1697

Gastroenterologist and nurse management of symptoms after pelvic radiotherapy for cancer: an economic evaluation of a clinical randomized controlled trial (the ORBIT study)

Background: Over 20 distressing gastrointestinal symptoms affect many patients after pelvic radiotherapy, but in the United Kingdom few are referred for assessment. Algorithmic-based treatment delivered by either a consultant gastroenterologist or a clinical nurse specialist has been shown in a randomized trial to be statistically and clinically more effective than provision of a self-help booklet. In this study, we assessed cost-effectiveness. Methods: Outcomes were measured at baseline (pre-randomization) and 6 months. Change in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was the primary outcome for the economic evaluation; a secondary analysis used change in the bowel subset score of the modified Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ-B). Intervention costs, British pounds 2013, covered visits with the gastroenterologist or nurse, investigations, medications and treatments. Incremental outcomes and incremental costs were estimated simultaneously using multivariate linear regression. Uncertainty was handled non-parametrically using bootstrap with replacement. Results: The mean (SD) cost of treatment was £895 (499) for the nurse and £1101 (567) for the consultant. The nurse was dominated by usual care, which was cheaper and achieved better outcomes. The mean cost per QALY gained from the consultant, compared to usual care, was £250,455; comparing the consultant to the nurse, it was £25,875. Algorithmic care produced better outcomes compared to the booklet only, as reflected in the IBDQ-B results, at a cost of ~£1,000. Conclusion: Algorithmic treatment of radiation bowel injury by a consultant or a nurse results in significant symptom relief for patients but was not found to be cost-effective according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) criteria.</p

Practice guidance on the management of acute and chronic gastrointestinal problems arising as a result of treatment for cancer

Backgound The number of patients with chronic gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms after cancer therapies which have a moderate or severe impact on quality of life is similar to the number diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease annually. However, in contrast to patients with inflammatory bowel disease, most of these patients are not referred for gastroenterological assessment. Clinicians who do see these patients are often unaware of the benefits of targeted investigation (which differ from those required to exclude recurrent cancer), the range of available treatments and how the pathological processes underlying side effects of cancer treatment differ from those in benign GI disorders. This paper aims to help clinicians become aware of the problem and suggests ways in which the panoply of syndromes can be managed. Methods A multidisciplinary literature review was performed to develop guidance to facilitate clinical management of GI side effects of cancer treatments. Results Different pathological processes within the GI tract may produce identical symptoms. Optimal management requires appropriate investigations and coordinated multidisciplinary working. Lactose intolerance, small bowel bacterial overgrowth and bile acid malabsorption frequently develop during or after chemotherapy. Toxin-negative Clostridium difficile and cytomegalovirus infection may be fulminant in immunosuppressed patients and require rapid diagnosis and treatment. Hepatic side effects include reactivation of viral hepatitis, sinusoidal obstruction syndrome, steatosis and steatohepatitis. Anticancer biological agents have multiple interactions with conventional drugs. Colonoscopy is contraindicated in neutropenic enterocolitis but endoscopy may be life-saving in other patients with GI bleeding. After cancer treatment, simple questions can identify patients who need referral for specialist management of GI symptoms. Other troublesome pelvic problems (eg, urinary, sexual, nutritional) are frequent and may also require specialist input. The largest group of patients affected by chronic GI symptoms are those who have been treated with pelvic radiotherapy. Their complex symptoms, often caused by more than one diagnosis, need systematic investigation by gastroenterologists when empirical treatments fail. All endoscopic and surgical interventions after radiotherapy are potentially hazardous as radiotherapy may induce significant local ischaemia. The best current evidence for effective treatment of radiation-induced GI bleeding is with sucralfate enemas and hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Conclusions All cancer units must develop simple methods to identify the many patients who need help and establish routine referral pathways to specialist gastroenterologists where patients can receive safe and effective treatment. Early contact with oncologists and/or specialist surgeons with input from the patient's family and friends often helps the gastroenterologist to refine management strategies. Increased training in the late effects of cancer treatment is required

A proposed tailored investigational algorithm for women treated for gynaecological cancer with long-term gastrointestinal consequences

Background and aim: Long-term changes in gastrointestinal function impacting quality of life after treatment for cancer are common. Peer reviewed guidance to investigate and manage GI dysfunction following cancer treatment has been published. This study reviewed gastrointestinal symptoms of women previously treated for gynaecological cancer and considered whether suggested algorithms could be amended to optimise management for this cohort. Methods: Demographic and clinical data recorded for patients attending a specialist consequences of cancer treatment gastroenterology service prospectively are reported using median and range. The Wilcoxon signed rank test analysed changes in symptoms between initial assessment to discharge from the service. Results: Between April 2013 and March 2016, 220 women, with a median age of 57 years (range 24–83 years), treated for gynaecological cancer (cervical (50%)), endometrial (28%), ovarian (15%), vaginal or vulval (7%) attended. Twelve gastrointestinal symptoms were statistically significantly reduced by time of discharge from the specialist gastroenterology clinic including bowel frequency ≥ 4/day (88%), type 6 or 7 stool consistency (36%), urgency (31%) and incontinence (21%). General quality of life improved from a median score of 4 at first assessment to a median of 6 at discharge (p &lt; 0.001). A median of four (range, 1–9) diagnoses were made. Conclusion: Women with gastrointestinal symptoms after cancer treatment benefit from a systematic management approach. After excluding disease recurrence, a proposed investigational algorithm and the oncology team includes FBC, U&amp;Es, LFTs, thyroid function test, vitamin B 12, vitamin D, a hydrogen methane breath test and a SeHCAT scan. If rectal bleeding is present, iron studies, flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy should be performed. Patients with normal investigations or symptoms not responding to treatment require gastroenterology input. </p

The impact of specialised gastroenterology services for pelvic radiation disease (PRD): Results from the prospective multi-centre EAGLE study

To undertake a mixed-methodology implementation study to improve the well-being of men with gastrointestinal late effects following radical radiotherapy for prostate cancer. All men completed a validated screening tool for late bowel effects (ALERT-B) and the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Score (GSRS); men with a positive score on ALERT-B were offered management following a peer reviewed algorithm for pelvic radiation disease (PRD). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at baseline, 6 and 12 months; and healthcare resource usage (HRU) and patient, support-giver, staff experience and acceptability of staff training (qualitative analysis) were assessed. Two nurse- and one doctor-led gastroenterology services were set up in three UK cancer centres. Men (n = 339) who had had radical radiotherapy for prostate cancer at least 6 months previously, were recruited; of which 91/339 were eligible to participate; 58/91 men (63.7%) accepted the referral. Diagnoses included: radiation proctopathy (n = 18); bile acid malabsorption (n = 15); fructose or lactose intolerance and/or small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (n = 20); vitamin B12/D deficiency (n = 20). Increases in quality of life, sexual activity and/or sexual function, and decrease in specific symptoms (e.g. bowel-related or urinary) between 6 and 12 months were observed. Limited HRU modelling suggested staff costs were £117-£185, depending on the service model; total costs averaged £2,243 per patient. Both staff and patients welcomed the new service although there was concern about long-term funding and sustainability beyond the timeframe of the study (qualitative). PRD is increasingly recognised worldwide as an ongoing consequence of curative pelvic radiotherapy, despite widespread implementation of advanced radiotherapy techniques. Specialised services following national guidelines are required