In people without a history of gastrectomy and those who have not recently had antibiotics or proton ,pump inhibitors, urea breath tests had high diagnostic accuracy while serology and stool antigen tests were less accurate for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection.This is based on an indirect test comparison (with potential for bias due to confounding), as evidence from direct comparisons was limited or unavailable. The thresholds used for these tests were highly variable and we were unable to identify specific thresholds that might be useful in clinical practice.We need further comparative studies of high methodological quality to obtain more reliable evidence of relative accuracy between the tests. Such studies should be conducted prospectively in a representative spectrum of participants and clearly reported to ensure low risk of bias. Most importantly, studies should prespecify and clearly report thresholds used, and should avoid inappropriate exclusions.

Objective Similarities in the clinical and laboratory features of primary Sjögren’s syndrome (SS) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have led to attempts to treat patients with primary SS or SLE with similar biologic therapeutics. However, the results of many clinical trials are disappointing, and no biologic treatments are licensed for use in primary SS, while only a few biologic agents are available to treat SLE patients whose disease has remained refractory to other treatments. With the aim of improving treatment selections, this study was undertaken to identify distinct immunologic signatures in patients with primary SS and patients with SLE, using a stratification approach based on immune cell endotypes. Methods Immunophentyping of 29 immune cell subsets was performed using flow cytometry in peripheral blood from patients with primary SS (n = 45), patients with SLE (n = 29), and patients with secondary SS associated with SLE (SLE/SS) (n = 14), all of whom were considered to have low disease activity or be in clinical remission, and sex‐matched healthy controls (n = 31). Data were analyzed using supervised machine learning (balanced random forest, sparse partial least squares discriminant analysis), logistic regression, and multiple t‐tests. Patients were stratified by K‐means clustering and clinical trajectory analysis. Results Patients with primary SS and patients with SLE had a similar immunologic architecture despite having different clinical presentations and prognoses. Stratification of the combined primary SS, SLE, and SLE/SS patient cohorts by K‐means cluster analysis revealed 2 endotypes, characterized by distinct immune cell profiles spanning the diagnoses. A signature of 8 T cell subsets that distinctly differentiated the 2 endotypes with high accuracy (area under the curve 0.9979) was identified in logistic regression and machine learning models. In clinical trajectory analyses, the change in damage scores and disease activity levels from baseline to 5 years differed between the 2 endotypes. Conclusion These findings identify an immune cell toolkit that may be useful for differentiating, with high accuracy, the immunologic profiles of patients with primary SS and patients with SLE as a way to achieve targeted therapeutic approaches.

ObjectivePrimary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is a progressive, autoimmune, cholestatic liver disease affecting approximately 15 000 individuals in the UK. Updated guidelines for the management of PBC were published by The European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) in 2017. We report on the first national, pilot audit that assesses the quality of care and adherence to guidelines.DesignData were collected from 11 National Health Service hospitals in England, Wales and Scotland between 2017 and 2020. Data on patient demographics, ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) dosing and key guideline recommendations were captured from medical records. Results from each hospital were evaluated for target achievement and underwent χ2 analysis for variation in performance between trusts.Results790 patients’ medical records were reviewed. The data demonstrated that the majority of hospitals did not meet all of the recommended EASL standards. Standards with the lowest likelihood of being met were identified as optimal UDCA dosing, assessment of bone density and assessment of clinical symptoms (pruritus and fatigue). Significant variations in meeting these three standards were observed across UK, in addition to assessment of biochemical response to UDCA (all p<0.0001) and assessment of transplant eligibility in high-risk patients (p=0.0297).ConclusionOur findings identify a broad-based deficiency in ‘real-world’ PBC care, suggesting the need for an intervention to improve guideline adherence, ultimately improving patient outcomes. We developed the PBC Review tool and recommend its incorporation into clinical practice. As the first audit of its kind, it will be used to inform a future wide-scale reaudit.

Our objective was to investigate the effectiveness of booster sessions after self-management interventions as a means of maintaining selfmanagement behaviours in the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PsychINFO. Two authors independently identified eligible trials and collected data. We calculated the odds ratio for the analyses of dichotomous data and standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous variables. Our search identified 14 studies with a total of 1695 patients. All studies were at high risk of bias and provided very low quality evidence. For the primary outcomes, booster sessions had no evidence of an effect on improving patient-reported outcomes on physical function (SMD 20.13, 95% CI 20.32 to 20.06; P 5 0.18), pain-related disability (SMD 20.16, 95% CI 20.36 to 0.03; P 5 0.11), and pain self-efficacy (SMD 0.15, 95% CI 20.07 to 0.36; P 5 0.18). For the secondary outcomes, booster sessions caused a significant reduction in patient-reported pain catastrophising (SMD 20.42, 95% CI 20.64 to 20.19; P 5 0.0004) and no evidence of an effect on patient-reported pain intensity, depression, coping, or treatment adherence. There is currently little evidence that booster sessions are an effective way to prolong positive treatment effects or improve symptoms of long-term musculoskeletal conditions after self-management interventions. However, the studies were few with high heterogeneity, high risk of bias, and overall low quality of evidence. Our review argues against including booster sessions routinely to self-management interventions for the purpose of behaviour maintenance.