廣岡 芳樹

Introduction. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer deaths, closely linked to the intestinal microbiota and bile acid metabolism. Secondary bile acids, like deoxycholic and lithocholic acid, are associated with increased CRC risk due to their disruption of vital cellular functions. In contrast, isoallolithocholic acid (isoalloLCA) shows potential health benefits, highlighting the complex role of bile acids in CRC. A specific primer set was previously developed to amplify homologs of the 5α-reductase gene (5ar), which are involved in the biosynthesis of isoalloLCA, thereby enabling the estimation of abundance of 5ar (5ar levels) in the intestine.Hypothesis/Gap Statement. We hypothesized that 5ar levels in the intestine are associated with CRC.Aim. This study aimed to investigate intestinal 5ar levels and compare them across different stages of the adenoma-carcinoma sequence, providing insights into novel strategies for monitoring CRC risk.Methodology. DNA was extracted from intestinal lavage fluids (ILF) collected during 144 colonoscopies. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was employed to examine the sequence of 5ar homologues, using a specific primer set on DNA from seven selected ILFs - four from carcinoma patients and three from individuals with non-neoplastic mucosa. Additionally, we used quantitative PCR (qPCR) to measure 5ar levels in all 144 DNA samples.Results. We conducted 144 colonoscopies and categorized patients according to the adenoma-cancer sequence: 52 with non-neoplastic mucosa, 69 with adenomas and 23 with carcinoma. Analysis of 292,042 NGS-derived 5ar sequences revealed the seven most prevalent amplicon sequence variants, each 254 base pairs in length. These closely matched or were identical to 5ar sequences in Bacteroides uniformis, Phocaeicola vulgatus and Phocaeicola dorei. Furthermore, qPCR analysis demonstrated significantly lower 5ar levels in the carcinoma group compared to those in the non-neoplastic mucosa group (P = 0.0004). A similar, though not statistically significant, trend was observed in the adenoma group (P = 0.0763), suggesting that 5ar levels decrease as CRC progresses.Conclusion. These findings indicate that PCR-based monitoring of 5ar levels in intestinal samples over time could provide a non-invasive, rapid and cost-effective method for assessing an increased risk of CRC.

For pancreatic masses, an evaluation of their vascularity using contrast-enhanced ultrasonography can help improve their characterization. This study was designed to evaluate the utility and safety of contrast-enhanced transabdominal ultrasonography (CE-TUS) and endoscopic ultrasonography (CE-EUS) in the diagnosis of pancreatic masses including solid or cystic masses. This multi-center comparative open-label superiority study is designed to compare Plain (P)-TUS/EUS alone with P-TUS/P-EUS plus CE-TUS/CE-EUS. Three hundred and one patients with a total of 232 solid pancreatic masses and 69 cystic masses were prospectively enrolled. The primary endpoints are to compare the diagnostic accuracy between P-TUS/P-EUS alone and P-TUS/P-EUS plus CE-TUS/CE-EUS for both the TUS and EUS of solid pancreatic masses, and to compare the diagnostic accuracy between P-EUS alone and P-EUS plus CE-EUS in cystic pancreatic masses. The secondary endpoints are to compare the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of P-TUS/P-EUS alone and P-TUS/P-EUS plus CE-TUS/CE-EUS for pancreatic solid/cystic masses, and the accuracy of P-TUS alone and P-TUS plus CE-TUS for pancreatic cystic masses. Other secondary endpoints included comparing the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CE-TUS, CE-EUS and CE-computed tomography (CT) for solid/cystic pancreatic masses. The safety, degree of effective enhancement, and diagnostic confidence obtained with CE-TUS/CE-EUS will also be assessed.

Abstract Background and Aim Potassium‐competitive acid blockers more strongly suppress the gastric acid barrier than proton pump inhibitors and cause dysbiosis. However, preventive measures in this regard have not been established. We aimed to evaluate whether 1‐kestose, a known prebiotic, was effective at alleviating dysbiosis caused by potassium‐competitive acid blockers. Methods Patients scheduled to undergo endoscopic resection for superficial gastroduodenal tumors were enrolled and randomized 1:1 to receive either 1‐kestose or placebo. All patients were started on potassium‐competitive acid blocker (vonoprazan 20 mg/day) and took 1‐kestose 10 g/day or placebo (maltose) 5 g/day for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the effect of 1‐kestose on potassium‐competitive acid blocker‐induced alterations in the microbiome. The fecal microbiome was analyzed before and after potassium‐competitive acid blocker treatment via MiSeq (16S rRNA gene V3–V4 region). Results Forty patients were enrolled, and 16 in each group were analyzed. In the placebo group, the Simpson index, an alpha diversity, was significantly decreased and relative abundance of Streptococcus was significantly increased by 1.9‐fold. In the kestose group, the Simpson index did not change significantly and relative abundance of Streptococcus increased 1.3‐fold, but this was not a significant change. In both groups, no adverse events occurred, ulcers were well healed, and pretreatment and posttreatment short‐chain fatty acid levels did not differ. Conclusions The potassium‐competitive acid blocker caused dysbiosis in the placebo group; this effect was prevented by 1‐kestose. Thus, 1‐kestose may be useful in dysbiosis treatment.

Abstract Background and study aims Esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has a higher complication rate than gastric ESD. Scissor-type devices, including the stag beetle (SB) knife, are reportedly safer and have shorter procedure times than tip devices. To clarify the characteristics of the SB knife, we compared the treatment outcomes of esophageal ESD with a tip-type knife to those with an SB knife combination. Patients and methods Between January 2016 and March 2023, clinical data from 197 lesions in 178 patients who underwent esophageal ESD were analyzed retrospectively. Every lesion was assigned to either the tip-type group or the SB group based on the devices with which the submucosa was initially dissected. We compared procedure time and complications and analyzed the risk of muscular exposure using multivariate analysis. Results Procedure time was not significantly different between the tip-type and SB groups (60.3±42.2 min vs. 58.8±29.1 min). The variation in procedure time was significant according to F test P=0.002). Incidence of muscular exposure was significantly lower in the SB group than in the tip-type group (24.5% vs. 11.1%, P=0.016). These differences were significant in resected specimens larger than 21 mm. Procedure time over 60 minutes (odds ratio [OR] 2.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15–5.42, P=0.02) was a risk factor for muscular exposure, and submucosal dissection with an SB knife was a safety factor (OR 0.4, 95% CI: 0.18–0.89, P=0.02). Conclusions Performing esophageal ESD with an SB knife is a safe procedure with less variation in procedure time and less muscule exposure.