Citations

LINKED CONTENTThis article is linked to Grover et al and Elwing & Sayuk papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16591 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16603

Objectives Pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma (ACC) is a rare pancreatic cancer. The advancement of treatment is hampered because of the limited knowledge of its molecular mechanism. Methods Whole-exome sequencing was performed on DNA extracted from 11 pure ACC surgical samples. Potential germline variants were removed on the basis of polymorphic databases, alternative allele frequency, coverage depth, and Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer (COSMIC) annotations after variant calling procedure. Mutation profiles and signatures were assessed through the Mutational Patterns package. Results A median of 34 somatic mutations were detected (range, 19–60). Three novel recurrent small deletions were identified. Common pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma mutations or neuroendocrine tumor mutants were not found. FAT atypical cadherin 4, mucin 5B, titin, and zinc finger homeobox 3 were consistently mutated across 4 independent ACC studies. A high contribution of COSMIC mutational signature 1 was seen in ACC, indicating deamination of 5-methylcytosine. The majority of the patients had COSMIC signatures 6, 15, or 20, relating to defective DNA mismatch repair. Six patients showed COSMIC mutational signature 10 because of the altered activity of DNA polymerase epsilon. Conclusions Distinct mutational signatures pathways were found in ACC and targeting them may improve clinical outcome.

SummaryBackgroundIrritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients often experience meal‐associated symptoms. However, the underlying mechanisms are unclear.AimTo determine small intestinal mechanisms of lipid‐induced symptoms and rectal hypersensitivity in IBSMethodsWe recruited 26 IBS patients (12 IBS‐C, 14 IBS‐D) and 15 healthy volunteers (HV). In vivo permeability was assessed using saccharide excretion assay. Rectal sensitivity was assessed using a barostat before and after small bowel lipid infusion; symptoms were assessed throughout. Next, an extended upper endoscopy with probe‐based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) was performed with changes induced by lipids. Duodenal and jejunal mucosal biopsies were obtained for transcriptomics.ResultsFollowing lipid infusion, a higher proportion of HV than IBS patients reported no pain, no nausea, no fullness and no urgency (P < 0.05 for all). In a model adjusted for sex and anxiety, IBS‐C and IBS‐D patients had lower thresholds for first rectal sensation (P = 0.0007) and pain (P = 0.004) than HV. In vivo small intestinal permeability and mean pCLE scores were similar between IBS patients and HV. Post‐lipid, pCLE scores were higher than pre‐lipid but were not different between groups. Baseline duodenal transient receptor potential vanilloid (TRPV) 1 and 3 expression was increased in IBS‐D, and TRPV3 in IBS‐C. Duodenal TRPV1 expression correlated with abdominal pain (r = 0.51, FDR = 0.01), and inversely with first rectal sensation (r = −0.48, FDR = 0.01) and pain (r = −0.41, FDR = 0.02) thresholds.ConclusionLipid infusion elicits a greater symptom response in IBS patients than HV, which is associated with small intestinal expression of TRPV channels. TRPV‐mediated small intestinal chemosensitivity may mediate post‐meal symptoms in IBS.

Background and aims Artificial intelligence has been shown to increase adenoma detection rate (ADR) as the main surrogate outcome parameter of colonoscopy quality. To which extent this effect may be related to physician experience is not known. We performed a randomised trial with colonoscopists in their qualification period (AID-2) and compared these data with a previously published randomised trial in expert endoscopists (AID-1). Methods In this prospective, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial (AID-2), 10 non-expert endoscopists (<2000 colonoscopies) performed screening/surveillance/diagnostic colonoscopies in consecutive 40–80 year-old subjects using high-definition colonoscopy with or without a real-time deep-learning computer-aided detection (CADe) (GI Genius, Medtronic). The primary outcome was ADR in both groups with histology of resected lesions as reference. In a post-hoc analysis, data from this randomised controlled trial (RCT) were compared with data from the previous AID-1 RCT involving six experienced endoscopists in an otherwise similar setting. Results In 660 patients (62.3±10 years; men/women: 330/330) with equal distribution of study parameters, overall ADR was higher in the CADe than in the control group (53.3% vs 44.5%; relative risk (RR): 1.22; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.40; p<0.01 for non-inferiority and p=0.02 for superiority). Similar increases were seen in adenoma numbers per colonoscopy and in small and distal lesions. No differences were observed with regards to detection of non-neoplastic lesions. When pooling these data with those from the AID-1 study, use of CADe (RR 1.29; 95% CI: 1.16 to 1.42) and colonoscopy indication, but not the level of examiner experience (RR 1.02; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.16) were associated with ADR differences in a multivariate analysis. Conclusions In less experienced examiners, CADe assistance during colonoscopy increased ADR and a number of related polyp parameters as compared with the control group. Experience appears to play a minor role as determining factor for ADR. Trial registration number NCT:04260321.

INTRODUCTION: Significant variability between colonoscopy operators contributes to postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers (CRCs). We aimed to estimate postcolonoscopy colorectal neoplasia (CRN) detection by multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA), which has not previously been studied for this purpose. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort of patients with +mt-sDNA and completed follow-up colonoscopy, positive predictive value (PPV) for endpoints of any CRN, advanced adenoma, right-sided neoplasia, sessile serrated polyps (SSP), and CRC were stratified by the time since previous colonoscopy (0–9, 10, and ≥11 years). mt-sDNA PPV at ≤9 years from previous average-risk screening colonoscopy was used to estimate CRN missed at previous screening colonoscopy. RESULTS: Among the 850 studied patients with +mt-sDNA after a previous negative screening colonoscopy, any CRN was found in 535 (PPV 63%). Among 107 average-risk patients having +mt-sDNA ≤9 years after last negative colonoscopy, any CRN was found in 67 (PPV 63%), advanced neoplasia in 16 (PPV 15%), right-sided CRN in 48 (PPV 46%), and SSP in 20 (PPV 19%). These rates were similar to those in 47 additional average risk persons with previous incomplete colonoscopy and in an additional 68 persons at increased CRC risk. One CRC (stage I) was found in an average risk patient who was mt-sDNA positive 6 years after negative screening colonoscopy. DISCUSSION: The high PPV of mt-sDNA 0–9 years after a negative screening colonoscopy suggests that lesions were likely missed on previous examination or may have arisen de novo . mt-sDNA as an interval test after negative screening colonoscopy warrants further study.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroenterologists at all levels of practice benefit from formal mentoring. Much of the current literature on mentoring in gastroenterology is based on expert opinion rather than data. In this study, we aimed to identify gender-related barriers to successful mentoring relationships from the mentor and mentee perspectives. METHODS: A voluntary, web-based survey was distributed to physicians at 20 academic institutions across the United States. Overall, 796 gastroenterology fellows and faculty received the survey link, with 334 physicians responding to the survey (42% response rate), of whom 299 (90%; 129 women and 170 men) completed mentorship questions and were included in analysis. RESULTS: Responses of women and men were compared. Compared with men, more women preferred a mentor of the same gender (38.6% women vs 4.2% men, P < 0.0001) but less often had one (45.5% vs 70.2%, P < 0.0001). Women also reported having more difficulty finding a mentor (44.4% vs 16.0%, P < 0.0001) and more often cited inability to identify a mentor of the same gender as a contributing factor (12.8% vs 0.9%, P = 0.0004). More women mentors felt comfortable advising women mentees about work-life balance (88.3% vs 63.8%, P = 0.0005). Nonetheless, fewer women considered themselves effective mentors (33.3% vs 52.6%, P = 0.03). More women reported feeling pressured to mentor because of their gender (39.5% vs 0.9% of men, P < 0.0001). Despite no gender differences, one-third of respondents reported negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their ability to mentor and be mentored. DISCUSSION: Inequities exist in the experiences of women mentees and mentors in gastroenterology, which may affect career advancement and job satisfaction.

AbstractBackgroundThe novel Coronavirus (SARS‐CoV‐2) has caused almost 2 million deaths worldwide. Both Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency have recently approved the first COVID‐19 vaccines, and a few more are going to be approved soon.MethodsSeveral different approaches have been used to stimulate the immune system in mounting a humoral response. As more traditional approaches are under investigation (inactivated virus vaccines, protein subunit vaccines, recombinant virus vaccines), more recent and innovative strategies have been tried (non‐replicating viral vector vaccines, RNA based vaccines, DNA based vaccines).ResultsSince vaccinations campaigns started in December 2020 in both the US and Europe, gastroenterologists will be one of the main sources of information regarding SARS‐CoV 2 vaccination for patients in their practice, including vulnerable patients such as those with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), patients with chronic liver disease, and GI cancer patients.ConclusionsThus, we must ourselves be well educated and updated in order to provide unambiguous counseling to these categories of vulnerable patients. In this commentary, we aim to provide a comprehensive review of both approved COVID‐19 vaccines and the ones still under development, and explore potential risks, benefits and prioritization of vaccination.

AbstractBackground and AimRecently, the BLI Adenoma Serrated International Classification (BASIC) system was developed by European experts to differentiate colorectal polyps. Our aim was to validate the BASIC classification system among the US‐based endoscopy experts.MethodsParticipants utilized a web‐based interactive learning system where the group was asked to characterize polyps using the BASIC criteria: polyp surface (presence of mucus, regular/irregular and [pseudo]depressed), pit appearance (featureless, round/non‐round with/without dark spots; homogeneous/heterogeneous distribution with/without focal loss), and vessels (present/absent, lacy, peri‐cryptal, irregular). The final testing consisted of reviewing BLI images/videos to determine whether the criteria accurately predicted the histology results. Confidence in adenoma identification (rated “1” to “5”) and agreement in polyp (adenoma vs non‐adenoma) identification and characterization per BASIC criteria were derived. Strength of interobserver agreement with kappa (k) value was reported for adenoma identification.ResultsTen endoscopy experts from the United States identified conventional adenoma (vs non‐adenoma) with 94.4% accuracy, 95.0% sensitivity, 93.8% specificity, 93.8% positive predictive value, and 94.9% negative predictive value using BASIC criteria. Overall strength of interobserver agreement was high: kappa 0.89 (0.82–0.96). Agreement for the individual criteria was as follows: surface mucus (93.8%), regularity (65.6%), type of pit (40.6%), pit visibility (66.9%), pit distribution (57%), vessel visibility (73%), and being lacy (46%) and peri‐cryptal (61%). The confidence in diagnosis was rated at high ≥4 in 67% of the cases.ConclusionsA group of US‐based endoscopy experts have validated a simple and easily reproducible BLI classification system to characterize colorectal polyps with >90% accuracy and a high level of interobserver agreement.