Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent the standard of care as first- or second-line treatment in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most prescribed drugs worldwide and are known to affect gut microbiota, which is gaining interest in its association with outcomes for patients on ICIs.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of PPIs on outcomes in RCC patients receiving immunotherapy.

We retrospectively collected data from patients with metastatic RCC who received the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab for first-line treatment (Cohort 1) or single-agent nivolumab for second-line or third-line treatment (Cohort 2) from five international centers with expertise in the treatment of RCC. Data about clinicopathological characteristics, PPI use, and outcome on ICIs were collected. Endpoints of the study were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

Two hundred and eighteen patients (71% male, median age 61 years) were included in the analysis, 62 in Cohort 1 (including 25 patients receiving PPIs) and 156 in Cohort 2 (including 88 patients receiving PPIs), and were followed up for a median of 42 months. In Cohort 1, no difference was observed in ORR (48% vs 57%; p = 0.203), PFS (12.2 vs 8.5 months; p = 0.928), or OS (not reached [NR] vs 27.3 months; p = 0.84). In Cohort 2, no difference was observed in ORR (32% vs 28%; p = 0.538), PFS (6.7 vs 9.0 months; p = 0.799), or OS (16.0 vs 26.0 months; p = 0.324).

In patients with RCC, concomitant PPI use did not seem to affect survival outcomes on ICIs, either as combination therapy or monotherapy.

Genomic sequencing, bioinformatics, and initial speciation (e.g., relative abundance) of the commensal microbiome have revolutionized the way we think about the "human" body in health and disease. The interactions between the gut bacteria and the immune system of the host play a key role in the pathogenesis of gastrointestinal diseases, including those impacting the esophagus. Although relatively stable, there are a number of factors that may disrupt the delicate balance between the luminal esophageal microbiome (EM) and the host. These changes are thought to be a product of age, diet, antibiotic and other medication use, oral hygiene, smoking, and/or expression of antibiotic products (bacteriocins) by other flora. These effects may lead to persistent dysbiosis which in turn increases the risk of local inflammation, systemic inflammation, and ultimately disease progression. Research has suggested that the etiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease-related esophagitis includes a cytokine-mediated inflammatory component and is, therefore, not merely the result of esophageal mucosal exposure to corrosives (i.e., acid). Emerging evidence also suggests that the EM plays a major role in the pathogenesis of disease by inciting an immunogenic response which ultimately propagates the inflammatory cascade. Here, we discuss the potential role for manipulating the EM as a therapeutic option for treating the root cause of various esophageal disease rather than just providing symptomatic relief (i.e., acid suppression).

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are drugs used to suppress gastric acid production and treat GI disorders such as peptic ulcers and gastro-oesophageal reflux. They have been considered low risk, have been widely adopted, and are often over-prescribed. Recent studies have identified an increased risk of enteric and other infections with their use. Small studies have identified possible associations between PPI use and GI microbiota, but this has yet to be carried out on a large population-based cohort.

We investigated the association between PPI usage and the gut microbiome using 16S ribosomal RNA amplification from faecal samples of 1827 healthy twins, replicating results within unpublished data from an interventional study.

We identified a significantly lower abundance in gut commensals and lower microbial diversity in PPI users, with an associated significant increase in the abundance of oral and upper GI tract commensals. In particular, significant increases were observed in Streptococcaceae. These associations were replicated in an independent interventional study and in a paired analysis between 70 monozygotic twin pairs who were discordant for PPI use. We propose that the observed changes result from the removal of the low pH barrier between upper GI tract bacteria and the lower gut.

Our findings describe a significant impact of PPIs on the gut microbiome and should caution over-use of PPIs, and warrant further investigation into the mechanisms and their clinical consequences.

There have been concerns raised about the potential adverse effects of proton pump inhibitors, especially with long-term use. In particular, their potent action can suppress the features and delay the diagnosis of gastric cancer, while prolonged exposure may hasten the development of gastric carcinoids.

To examine the use of proton pump inhibitors in patients at the major teaching hospital in Tasmania, Australia, principally to determine the appropriateness of the therapy according to published guidelines.

A retrospective review of the medical records of all patients prescribed any of the proton pump inhibitors at the hospital over a 7-month period, was performed. An extensive range of demographic and clinical variables was recorded for each patient. The patients were also asked a series of questions during their hospitalization to extract some of the relevant information - in particular, if and when they had undergone endoscopy.

The 200 patients (52% males) had a mean age of 69 +/- 16.4 years. The most common indications for using proton pump inhibitors were acute gastrointestinal bleeding (20.9%), severe refractory ulcerating oesophagitis (17.3%), mild/moderate oesophageal reflux (17.3%) and refractory peptic ulcer (11.7%). A large number of patients were using a proton pump inhibitor for 'other' indications (39.6%). The prescribing of proton pump inhibitors satisfied the approved indications, as outlined in the Australian Schedule of Pharmaceutical Benefits, in only 37.1% of cases. Endoscopy had been performed in 54.1% of patients prior to commencing therapy with a proton pump inhibitor and within the next 7 days in another 12.8% of patients. Only 59% of patients had previously been treated with an H2-receptor antagonist before commencing therapy with a proton pump inhibitor. Even worse, only 58.5% of patients had used an H2-receptor antagonist before a proton pump inhibitor for mild/moderate oesophagitis. The median duration of proton pump inhibitor therapy for patients admitted to the hospital and already receiving one of the drugs was 450 days. Over half of the patients were being concurrently treated with other drugs which are known to cause or exacerbate gastro-oesophageal disease, and 18% were smokers.

Whereas the proton pump inhibitors are undoubtedly effective agents, studies of their prescribing in practice consistently suggest over-use prior to endoscopy, use in patients who do not fit the approved criteria, and prescribing for indications in which 'less powerful' agents should have been sufficiently effective for the patient's symptoms. This poses economic and safety concerns, particularly in light of the suggestion that these drugs could delay the diagnosis of gastric cancer.

To determine (i) the relationship between prescriptions for proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and upper gastrointestinal conditions, and (ii) compliance with Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) prescribing guidelines for PPIs.

Drug utilisation evaluation.

800-bed metropolitan teaching hospital.

253 patients dispensed PPIs from the hospital pharmacy over five consecutive weeks (11 January to 15 February 1999).

Recorded gastrointestinal conditions; previous trial of H2-antagonist therapy; compliance with PBS criteria for prescribing PPIs.

Seventy patients (27.7%) had no appropriate upper gastrointestinal tract investigations, and 62 patients (24%) did not receive an adequate trial of H2-antagonist therapy before the commencement of a PPI. The major indications for use of PPIs in investigated patients were gastro-oesophageal reflux in 99 (54%) and peptic ulcer disease in 30 (16.4%). In only 57 patients (22.5%) did PPI prescriptions comply with PBS prescribing guidelines. Clinical indications that failed to meet prescribing criteria included milder forms of gastro-oesophageal reflux, gastritis/duodenitis, and non-specific dyspepsia with normal endoscopy results.

Drug utilisation data indicate widespread use of PPIs outside current prescribing guidelines. Many patients have not had relevant investigations and/or an adequate trial of H2-antagonist therapy. These findings explain the considerable hospital expenditure on PPIs.