Parkman, Henry P.

ABSTRACT Introduction Chronic gastroduodenal disorders remain challenging to manage, and new diagnostic approaches are needed to better delineate underlying causes and guide therapeutic decisions. Body Surface Gastric Mapping (BSGM) technologies combine high‐resolution gastric myoelectrical activity measurements with symptom and psychological profiling to provide mechanistic insights into gastric motor and sensory dysfunction. An International Working Group convened to derive the first consensus classification of BSGM phenotypes (the “Auckland Classification”). Methods A Technical Group conducted a systematic literature and clinical database review to identify objective test biomarkers and candidate disease mechanisms. Evidence was synthesized across 50 studies (primarily in gastroparesis, chronic nausea and vomiting, and functional dyspepsia), and BSGM phenotypes were mapped to existing treatment guidelines. Subsequently, iterative review and development of consensus was performed by a Consensus Group composed of international clinical experts familiar with BSGM. Eleven statements underlying the classification were then derived and circulated as a final survey to establish agreement. Results Six BSGM phenotypes were endorsed: three defined by myoelectrical abnormalities (Dysrhythmic, High Frequency, and Low Meal Response) and three by characteristic symptom associations (Sensorimotor, Continuous, and Delayed Onset Symptoms). Published studies plausibly linked these phenotypes to mechanisms including interstitial cell of Cajal depletion, vagal impairment, hypomotility, visceral hypersensitivity, gut‐brain dysregulation, and small bowel dysfunction. Phenotypes were also mapped to existing mechanism‐based treatment guidelines. Ten out of the eleven statements had > 80% agreement. Conclusions The Auckland Classification, derived by international consensus, presents a structured framework for BSGM‐defined patient phenotypes. Evidence and mechanism‐based treatment options are suggested for each phenotype to provide a foundation for research, further validation, and a pathway for integrating BSGM into clinical care.

ABSTRACT Background Patients with gastroparesis (Gp) can have a variety of symptoms. Apart from use of prokinetics, symptomatic therapies for the predominant symptom (PrS) are used. Aims (1) To classify Gp patients based on their PrS; (2) To determine differences in Gp symptoms, gastric emptying (GE), quality of life (QOL), treatments, and symptom improvement among Gp patients with different PrS. Methods Gp patients were enrolled in a multicenter registry and followed for 96‐weeks. Patients recorded their PrS and completed questionnaires assessing symptoms and QOL at enrollment and at follow up visits. Results Of 1013 Gp patients (361 diabetic, 607 idiopathic, 45 post‐fundoplication), the PrS were nausea (31%), vomiting (20%), abdominal pain (20%), bloating (9%), fullness (4%), GERD (4%), constipation (3%). Abdominal pain was more often a PrS in idiopathics, whereas vomiting was more often a PrS in diabetics. QOL scores were lower in the abdominal pain PrS group. PrS was associated with greater use of directed symptomatic treatment (antiemetic agents and gastric electrical stimulation for nausea and vomiting, prokinetic agents for vomiting and fullness, and constipation medications for constipation). Of 555 patients followed over 48 weeks, GCSI improved by ≥ 1 in 26% overall, more often in patients with initial PrS of nausea (32%) and bloating (35%) and less often for initial PrS of fullness (13%) or abdominal pain (15%). Conclusions In Gp patients, the most common PrS were nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. PrS is associated with QOL, treatments utilized, and patient outcomes. Thus, the PrS of a patient with Gp provides useful information about their present condition and future outcome.

ABSTRACT Background In the United States, metoclopramide is the only medication approved for gastroparesis. There is a need to reappraise the main considerations involved in the approval of pharmacological treatments of gastroparesis. Objectives and Methods We conducted a literature review to address issues that might impact the approval of medications for gastroparesis. We appraised the epidemiology, clinical presentations, variations in diagnostic tests, and their thresholds for identification of gastroparesis. Based on the review, we proposed trial designs for proof of efficacy and safety of novel medications for gastroparesis. Results Based on epidemiological studies, the age‐adjusted prevalence in US population is 152,005 for all categories (definite, probable and possible) of gastroparesis. The major symptoms of gastroparesis are nausea, vomiting, early satiety and postprandial fullness and may lead to hospitalisation or emergency department visits. It is essential to appraise gastric emptying with a solid meal over at least 3 h using scintigraphy or a stable isotope breath test. Diagnostic thresholds have been established for these diagnostic tests and at present, reproducibility, normative data, and coefficient of variation are well established for the 320‐kcal real egg solid meal. Based on published guidelines on clinical efficacy of medications used in gastroparesis, we propose targeting the gastroparesis symptom subscales, such as nausea and vomiting, with pharmacological agents specifically directed at their causative mechanisms rather than targeting the underlying dysmotility. Conclusion The evidence documented here justifies consideration of gastroparesis as an orphan disease, as well as an innovative approach to supplement the regulatory bodies' recommendations and guidance to industry. We propose treatment trials of 4‐weeks duration and considering the use of specific symptoms of gastroparesis as clinical endpoints based on a pharmaceutical agent's mechanism of action, rather than using a total gastroparesis symptom score. Such an approach would include evidence of safety and efficacy of new medications targeting gastroparesis subscales, and approval for marketing would be based on the symptoms specifically ameliorated in robust trials.

ABSTRACT Background Chronic gastroduodenal symptoms arise from heterogeneous gastric motor dysfunctions. This study applied multimodal physiological testing using gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES) with intragastric meal distribution (IMD) and Gastric Alimetry body surface gastric mapping (BSGM) to define motility and symptom associations. Methods Patients with chronic gastroduodenal symptoms underwent simultaneous supine GES and BSGM with a 30 m baseline, 99mTC‐labeled egg meal, and 4 h postprandial recording. IMD (ratio of counts in the proximal half of the stomach to the total gastric counts) was calculated immediately after the meal (IMD0), with < 0.568 defining abnormal IMD. BSGM phenotyping followed a consensus approach, based on normative spectral reference intervals. Results Among 67 patients (84% female, median age 40 years, median BMI 24 kg/m 2 ), median IMD0 was 0.76 (IQR: 0.69–0.86) with 5 (7.5%) meeting abnormal IMD criteria. Delayed gastric emptying ( n = 18) was associated with higher IMD0 (median 0.9 vs. 0.7, p = 0.004). On BSGM, 15 patients had abnormal spectrograms (5 [7.5%] high frequency and 10 [14.9%] low rhythm stability and/or amplitude); and in these patients, higher IMD0 (proximal retention) strongly correlated to delayed BSGM meal responses ( R = −0.71, p = 0.003). Lower IMD, indicating antral distribution, correlated with higher gastric frequencies ( R = −0.27, p = 0.03). BSGM abnormalities paired with abnormal IMD were associated with worse dyspeptic symptoms. Conclusion Proximal retention of food as assessed by IMD correlated with delayed emptying, and in the presence of neuromuscular spectral abnormalities (abnormal frequencies or rhythms), delayed motility responses on BSGM. Patients with multiple motor abnormalities experience worse dyspeptic symptoms.

ABSTRACT Background Chronic neurogastroduodenal disorders are challenging to manage, with therapy often initiated on a trial and error basis. Prokinetics play a significant role in management, but responses are variable and have been associated with adverse events, impacting widespread use. We investigated whether body surface gastric mapping (BSGM) biomarkers (using Gastric Alimetry) could inform patient selection for prokinetic therapy. Methods Patients with chronic gastroduodenal symptoms taking oral prokinetic agents, regardless of gastric emptying status, were prospectively recruited and underwent BSGM (30 m baseline, 482 kcal standardized meal, 4 h postprandial recording) while off‐prokinetic agents. Patients were followed up with daily symptom diaries. A subset was compared to matched patients not taking prokinetic agents. Prokinetic responders were defined based on symptom improvement greater than a minimum clinically important difference methodology. Key Results Forty‐two patients (88% female; median age 36; median BMI 26) taking prokinetics were analyzed. Prokinetic prescribing, compared to matched patients, was independent of BSGM metrics ( p > 0.15). In patients on existing prokinetics (withheld for BSGM), lower amplitudes predicted reduced symptom burden, whereas low rhythm stability predicted a worse symptom burden ( p < 0.05). In prokinetic‐naive patients (i.e., started on a prokinetic during the study), a lower postprandial amplitude predicted responders (mean 37.5 ± 10.6 uV in responders [ n = 5] vs. mean 54.8 ± 6.6 uV among nonresponders [ n = 3], p = 0.047). Conclusions Gastric Alimetry biomarkers may help in the prediction of prokinetic response in patients with chronic gastroduodenal symptoms. Lower postprandial amplitudes, indicating a reduced meal response, appear to predict benefit, while impaired rhythm stability predicted poorer therapeutic response.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic neurogastroduodenal disorders are heterogeneous and thought to lie on a spectrum of disease encompassing both sensory and neuromuscular pathologies. Abnormalities of interstitial cells of Cajal (ICC), a subset of which generate pacemaker signals and subsequently motility, have been implicated in their pathophysiology. We systematically reviewed the literature to pool ICC deficits observed in chronic neurogastroduodenal disorders. METHODS: Studies quantifying gastric ICC from the corpus or antrum, in adult patients with gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia (FD), or chronic nausea and vomiting syndromes (CNVS) were analyzed (PROSPERO: CRD42024613226). MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL databases were searched systematically. Random effects meta-analyses were used to compare ICC counts by disorder group with subgroup analysis by quantification methodology. RESULTS: Overall, 2,158 studies were screened and 22 included. Comparative studies (n = 12) showed patients with chronic neurogastroduodenal disorders (n = 167 with gastroparesis, n = 19 with FD ± CNVS) had lower ICC counts than nondiabetic controls (n = 130); standardized mean difference −1.58, 95% confidence interval −2.09 to −1.07, P < 0.0001, with more severe deficits in gastroparesis compared to FD ± CNVS (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.44, P = 0.048). A spectrum of ICC deficits was evident in a subgroup of studies using gold-standard methods with c-KIT antibody and 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole-stained nuclei confirmation (7 studies, 246 patients: mean ICC counts 2.29 in gastroparesis vs 3.49 in FD ± CNVS, and 5.27 in controls; P < 0.001 all comparisons). Most studies were at high risk of bias (n = 21). DISCUSSION: Marked depletion of ICC is a consistent finding in neurogastroduodenal disorders. A spectrum of disease is revealed, with greater depletion associated with delayed emptying. Techniques for clinically defining ICC-driven gastric neuromuscular dysfunction should be prioritized.

ABSTRACTIntroductionStudies demonstrate an overlap of constipation with gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia, but the impact of treatments that target constipation on improving upper gastrointestinal (UGI) symptoms is unexplored. We quantified the effects of constipation medication therapies on UGI and constipation symptom severity in subjects presenting with symptoms of gastroparesis.MethodsFifty‐six subjects with symptoms of gastroparesis underwent concurrent wireless motility capsule and gastric emptying scintigraphy and were recommended to receive either a new medication therapy for constipation or a change in constipation therapy based on investigator interpretation of test results. Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI), upper abdominal pain, and constipation scores were compared between baseline and 6 months. Data were compared between delayed or non‐delayed gastric emptying and the presence or absence of slow colonic transit.Key ResultsSubjects with slow colonic transit had improvements in GCSI (p = 0.007) and constipation scores (p = 0.004) after treatment with a new or changed constipation medication, with the delayed emptying subgroup driving GCSI improvements (p = 0.004). Reductions in nausea/vomiting (p = 0.02) and early satiety/fullness subscores (p = 0.002) with trends to improved bloating/distention subscores (p = 0.06) were observed in this subgroup, but upper abdominal pain was unchanged. Subjects with normal colonic transit showed no improvement in GCSI scores regardless of gastric emptying status (p > 0.05).Conclusions and InferencesIdentifying and treating delayed colonic transit in gastroparetic (delayed gastric emptying) subjects improves global UGI symptoms as well as selected individual symptoms. Evaluation of whole gut motility as well as recognizing and managing extragastric delay may promote improved outcomes in these patients.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02022826

AbstractIntroductionThe American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index‐Daily Diary (ANMS GCSI‐DD) is a patient‐reported outcome (PRO) instrument for gastroparesis. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the ANMS GCSI‐DD and determined a meaningful change threshold using the data from a phase 2b trial in adults with moderate‐to‐severe idiopathic or diabetic gastroparesis (DG).MethodsThe psychometric properties of ANMS GCSI‐DD were analyzed using other clinician‐ and patient‐reported outcomes from 242 patients during the 12‐week trial. Trial exit interviews were conducted in a cohort of 32 patients to capture their perspectives on meaningful change from the trial.ResultsANMS GCSI‐DD demonstrated good performance: unidimensionality scores exhibited good fit; internal consistency reliability was >0.70; test–retest reliability was above 0.90, and convergent validity showed strong correlations (0.70–0.90) with overall severity rating and moderate correlations (0.30–0.70) with other outcomes. ANMS GCSI‐DD scores discriminated among groups with varying severity of gastroparesis symptoms in known‐groups validity (p < 0.001) and were responsive to symptom improvement. Triangulation of the quantitative anchor‐based estimates of 0.9–1.4 category points as a meaningful change in the ANMS GCSI‐DD composite score, and the qualitative exit interview findings of 0.5–1.5 as meaningful change, supports a one‐point change on a five‐point scale (0–4) as the meaningful change threshold.ConclusionThe ANMS GCSI‐DD is a reliable and valid PRO instrument to employ in clinical development for patients with moderate‐to‐severe idiopathic or DG, and a one‐point score change in the ANMS GCSI‐DD composite score is recommended as a meaningful change threshold of symptom change.

INTRODUCTION: Pharmacologic therapies for symptoms of gastroparesis (GP) have limited efficacy, and it is difficult to predict which patients will respond. In this study, we implemented a machine learning model to predict the response to prokinetics and/or neuromodulators in patients with GP-like symptoms. METHODS: Subjects with suspected GP underwent simultaneous gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES) and wireless motility capsule and were followed for 6 months. Subjects were included if they were started on neuromodulators and/or prokinetics. Subjects were considered responders if their GP Cardinal Symptom Index at 6 months decreased by ≥1 from baseline. A machine learning model was trained using lasso regression, ridge regression, or random forest. Five-fold cross-validation was used to train the models, and the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) was calculated using the test set. RESULTS: Of the 150 patients enrolled, 123 patients received either a prokinetic and/or a neuromodulator. Of the 123, 45 were considered responders and 78 were nonresponders. A ridge regression model with the variables, such as body mass index, infectious prodrome, delayed gastric emptying scintigraphy, no diabetes, had the highest AUC-ROC of 0.72. The model performed well for subjects on prokinetics without neuromodulators (AUC-ROC of 0.83) but poorly for those on neuromodulators without prokinetics. A separate model with gastric emptying time, duodenal motility index, no diabetes, and functional dyspepsia performed better (AUC-ROC of 0.75). DISCUSSION: This machine learning model has an acceptable accuracy in predicting those who will respond to neuromodulators and/or prokinetics. If validated, our model provides valuable data in predicting treatment outcomes in patients with GP-like symptoms.