You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Original article
Oxyntic gastric atrophy in Helicobacter pylori gastritis is distinct from autoimmune gastritis
  1. Marino Venerito1,
  2. Mariya Varbanova1,
  3. Friedrich-Wilhelm Röhl2,
  4. Dirk Reinhold3,
  5. Katrin Frauenschläger4,
  6. Doerthe Jechorek4,
  7. Jochen Weigt1,
  8. Alexander Link1,
  9. Peter Malfertheiner1
  1. 1Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, Otto-von-Guericke University Hospital, Magdeburg, Germany
  2. 2Institute for Biometrics and Medical Informatics, Otto-von-Guericke-University Hospital, Magdeburg, Germany
  3. 3Institute of Molecular and Clinical Immunology, Otto-von-Guericke University Hospital, Magdeburg, Germany
  4. 4Institute of Pathology, Otto-von-Guericke University Hospital, Magdeburg, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Professor Peter Malfertheiner, Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, Leipziger Str. 44, Magdeburg 39120, Germany; peter.malfertheiner{at}med.ovgu.de

Abstract

Aim To assess characteristics of oxyntic gastric atrophy (OGA) in autoimmune gastritis (AIG) compared with OGA as a consequence of Helicobacter pylori infection.

Methods Patients undergoing oesophagogastroduodenoscopy from July 2011 to October 2014 were prospectively included (N=452). Gastric biopsies were obtained for histology and H. pylori testing. Serum gastrin-17 (G17), pepsinogen (PG) I, PGII and antibodies against H. pylori and cytotoxin-associated gene A protein were determined in all patients. Antibodies against parietal cells and intrinsic factor were determined in patients with advanced (moderate to severe) OGA. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were calculated for serum biomarkers and compared with histology.

Results Overall, 34 patients (8.9%) had advanced OGA by histology (22 women, age 61±15 years). Current or past H. pylori infection and AIG were present in 14/34 and 22/34 patients, respectively. H. pylori-negative AIG patients (N=18) were more likely to have another autoimmune disease (OR 6.3; 95% CI 1.3 to 29.8), severe corpus atrophy (OR 10.1; 95% CI 1.9 to 54.1) and corpus intestinal metaplasia (OR 26.9; 95% CI 5.3 to 136.5) compared with H. pylori-positive patients with advanced OGA. Antrum atrophy was present in 39% of H. pylori-negative AIG patients. The diagnostic performance of G17, PG I and PGI/II was excellent for AIG patients (AUC=0.83, 0.95 and 0.97, respectively), but limited for H. pylori-positive patients with advanced OGA (AUC=0.62, 0.75 and 0.67, respectively).

Conclusions H. pylori-negative AIG has a distinct clinical, morphological and serological phenotype compared with advanced OGA in H. pylori gastritis.

  • GASTRIC PATHOLOGY
  • AUTOIMMUNITY
  • HELICOBACTER PYLORI

https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2015-203405

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Introduction

    Gastric atrophy (GA) is a condition characterised by a decreased density or loss of appropriate glands in the stomach and their replacement with interglandular extracellular matrix and/or metaplastic changes of the gastric glands.1The aetiology of GA is restricted to two risk factors: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection and autoimmune gastritis (AIG). According to the updated Sydney system classification, GA can be scored as absent, mild, moderate or severe.2 GA can involve pyloric glands (gastric antrum), oxyntic glands (gastric corpus) or both (extensive atrophy).3 According to the current evidence, the causes of oxyntic gastric atrophy (OGA) are (1) H. pylori infection (environmental aetiology), (2) AIG (primary autoimmunity) and (3) combined H. pylori-autoimmune aetiology.4–6 OGA independent of its aetiology is a condition associated with hypo- or achlorhydria, and low serum pepsinogen (PG) I concentrations.7 In patients with autoimmune OGA, secondary hypergastrinaemia, antral G cell hyperplasia and corpus enterochromaffin-like (ECL) cell hyperplasia are commonly observed.8 Patients with OGA are at increased risk for developing iron-deficiency anaemia, pernicious anaemia, type 1 neuroendocrine tumour (NET) of the gastric body and gastric cancer (GC).9

    Gastrin-17 (G17), PGI and PGI/II ratio are biomarkers that can be measured in serum to screen for advanced (moderate to severe) OGA. PG I is produced by chief cells which are part of cellular components of oxyntic glands whereas PG II is produced in the whole gastric and duodenal mucosa.10 In patients with advanced OGA serum PG I levels are decreased whereas PG II levels are normal or may even be increased. Therefore, low serum PG I levels or a low ratio of PG I to PG II are used as surrogate markers for advanced OGA.11 In OGA the decreased gastric acidity results in loss of the negative pH control effect and consequent increased gastrin release from antral G cells. Thus, increased serum G17 is a marker for hypo hypochlorhydria or achlorhydria.

    The clinical usefulness of G17, PG I and PG I/II ratio for the diagnosis of OGA continues to be an issue of debate.12 In this study we sought to assess the characteristics of advanced (moderate to severe) OGA as a consequence of H. pylori infection as compared with advanced OGA in AIG. Furthermore, we determined the diagnostic performance of G17, PGI and PGI/II ratio for the diagnosis of advanced OGA in these two groups of patients.

    Materials and methods

    Study population

    In this prospective single centre study a total of 452 patients (63% women, mean age 55.7±15.7 years, range 18–94, 48% H. pylori-positive), presenting to the Otto-von-Guericke University Hospital from July 2011 to October 2014 for oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) were enrolled. Inclusion criteria were as follows: patients older than 18 years of age, patients not receiving antibiotic treatment and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) 2 weeks before the OGD. Patients on long-term PPI therapy where included if PPI therapy was stopped 2 weeks before OGD. Exclusion criteria were as follows: presence of hepatic, renal, lung, metabolic, hematological, or malignant diseases; pregnancy or nursing. Patients with type 1 G1 NET of the stomach were included as these tumours have an excellent prognosis and represent a common finding in patients with OGA. Serum samples were obtained from all patients before undergoing OGD for determination of PG I and PG II, G17, antibodies against H. pylori, cytotoxin-associated gene A protein (CagA), H+/K+-ATPase antigen (antiparietal cell antibodies, APCA) and intrinsic factor (AIFA).

    The study was in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 as revised in 1983. All patients provided written informed consent.

    OGD and biopsy protocol

    During OGD biopsies from gastric antrum (N=2), incisura angularis (N=1) and corpus (N=2) were collected for histological examination. One further biopsy from the antrum and corpus each was collected for rapid urease test (RUT).

    H. pylori testing

    Patients with positive results for at least one test among serology (either H. pylori-IgG or CagA IgG), RUT, histology or reporting eradication therapy in the past were classified as H. pylori-positive. Patients with negative results in all tests and denying a previous H. pylori eradication therapy were considered H. pylori-negative.

    Structured questionnaire

    Before undergoing OGD patients were interviewed using a structured questionnaire providing information on demographics, medical history and current daily medication after recruitment. Patients with moderate to severe (advanced) OGA diagnosed by histology (ie, Sydney Score 2–3 based on both corpus biopsies) were contacted again later and specifically asked about long-term PPI therapy (beside the 2 weeks before OGD), vitamin B12 substitution and previous H. pylori infection and eradication therapy in a telephone interview.

    Determination of PG I, PG II, G17 and IgG antibodies against H. pylori

    Serum samples were obtained after an overnight fast from all participants, centrifuged at 2000g for 15 min and stored at −80°C until the assay was performed. Serum concentration of basal G17, PG I, PG II and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies against H. pylori were measured blinded to case-control status in the same batch by a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay using commercial kits (BIOHIT, Helsinki). The averages of the duplicate values for G17, PG I and PG II were used for analysis. With respect to G17, for values above 40 pmol/L, we routinely did not perform any further dilution as higher values of G17 do not add any relevant clinical information. For values above 40 pmol/L the value of 40 pmol/L was used for statistical analysis.

    CagA determination

    CagA was determined using a CagA IgG kit (GD33; Genesis Diagnostics, London, UK), according to manufacturers’ instructions.13 Patients with anti-CagA IgG ≥6.25 U/mL were classified as H. pylori-positive. All serological examinations were carried out in the same laboratory.

    Determination of APCA and AIFA

    APCAs against H+/K+-ATPase antigen were detected by immunofluorescence test using rat liver, kidney and stomach as a substrate (Generic Assays GmbH, Dahlewitz/Berlin, Germany). Bound IgG was detected using antihuman IgG fluorescein isothiocyanate at a screening dilution of 1 in 20. APCA were reported as negative or positive if there was cytoplasmic staining of parietal cells. Presence of AIFA was assayed using a quantitative ELISA method (Alegria System, ORGENTEC Diagnostika GmbH, Mainz, Germany). The cut-off used was 6 U/mL. Test results were interpreted according to the manufacturer's instructions. All serological examinations were carried out in a blinded fashion in the same laboratory.

    Histology

    Multiple histology sections (3–5 μm thick) were obtained from each paraffin embedded biopsy. Sections were stained with H&E, periodic acid–Schiff, chromogranin A and modified Giemsa for H. pylori. The sections were examined by light microscopy. At each biopsy sample site, gastritis was distinguished in non-atrophic (ie, no loss of appropriate glands) and atrophic (ie, loss of appropriate glands). Mucosal atrophy was scored according to the updated Sydney system using a visual analogue scale (0=absent; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe). On the basis of the topographic locations (oxyntic and angular/antral) of the histology changes, the gastritis stage was also assessed according to the OLGA (Operative Link on Gastritis Assessment) staging system.14 ECL-cell hyperplasia was defined as up to five adjacent cells labelled with chromogranin A. Advanced OGA was defined as moderate to severe OGA (ie, Sydney Score 2–3) based on histological evaluation of both corpus biopsies. Two specialised gastrointestinal pathologists (KF, DJ), jointly assessed all the histology specimens and reached a consensus on the atrophy scores.

    Definition of AIG

    Criteria for defining AIG were the presence of ECL cell hyperplasia diagnosed by immunohistochemical staining for chromogranin A (up to five adjacent cells with chromogranin A labelling) in patients without previous long-term PPI therapy (conditio sine qua non) with or without positivity for APCA and/or AIFA. Indeed, ECL cell hyperplasia is a constant histological finding in patients with AIG even in early stages of the disease.8 The only differential diagnosis in the presence of ECL cell hyperplasia may be long-term PPI changes. Long-term use of PPIs can suppress acid, which stimulates gastrin production and ECL cell hyperplasia. This differential can be resolved by considering medication history. With respect to APCA and AIFA a seroconversion may be observed in late stages of AIG and thus a subset of AIG patients may have negative APCA and/or AIFA serology.15

    Statistical analysis

    All data were analysed using the SPSS Statistics (V.22), IBM Corporation, New York, USA. The description of the clinical characteristics has the form mean±SD for continuous variables or n (%) for variables with discrete levels.

    Distribution of the demographic characteristics and related factors between patients with and without advanced OGA were compared by Student's t test (Welch test, Satterthwaite's approximation to compute the degree of freedom) for metric parameters and by Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. OR with corresponding 95% CI were also estimated. In the presence of a zero the OR was estimated using the null hypothesis (Peto OR). In the subanalysis comparing clinical features of patients with H. pylori-negative AIG (N=18) and patients with H. pylori-positive advanced OGA (N=10) the two H. pylori-negative patients without AIG features and the four patients with overlapping features (H. pylori-positive AIG patients) were excluded.

    Receivers operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to calculate the overall diagnostic performance of G17, PGI and the PGI/PGII ratio for the diagnosis of advanced OGA, and in the subgroups of patients with AIG and H. pylori infection. In the subgroup analysis, the diagnostic performance of G17, PGI and the PGI/PGII ratio was tested for diagnosing advanced OGA in patients with AIG (N=22) and those with H. pylori-positive advanced OGA (N=10). For all calculations (ie, for advanced OGA and subgroups) patients without advanced OGA (N=332) served as controls. The two H. pylori-negative patients without AIG features were excluded from this subgroup analysis. If the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was ≥0.60, the best cut-off points were assessed using the Youden-Index, and then sensitivity analysis and likelihood ratios were also calculated. According to the AUC the diagnostic performance of the tests was defined as excellent (0.90–1), good (0.80–0.90), fair (0.70–0.80) or limited (0.60–0.70). The diagnostic performance of G17, PGI and the PGI/PGII ratio was assessed against histology (gold standard). For selected cut-off points diagnostic performance was also calculated. All analyses were made two-tailed with a critical probability of α=5% without α-adjustment. To support the interpretation, the corresponding p values are added in text.

    Results

    Study population characteristics

    Figure 1 shows the number of patients included in the study. Of 452 patients that underwent OGD, 69 did not meet the selection criteria whereas in 17 patients sera were missing. Of the 384 eligible patients (mean age 54.7±15.6 years, range 18–94), 34 (8.9%) had advanced OGA by histology (22 women, age 61±15 years). Of the 22 (65%) patients with AIG, 18 were H. pylori-negative and 4 were H. pylori-positive, respectively. With respect to the remaining 12 patients, 10 were H. pylori-positive with no AIG features (29%) whereas 2 patients (6%) had neither AIG nor present or past H. pylori infection. Clinical, serological and histological characteristics of patients with advanced OGA according to H. pylori status and the presence of AIG are shown in table 1. Interestingly, antrum atrophy of any grade was observed in 39% of patients with H. pylori-negative AIG but in none of the four patients with AIG with a positive H. pylori status. Because of the small number, patients with H. pylori-positive AIG (N=4) and H. pylori-negative advanced OGA (N=2) were excluded from statistical analysis.

    View this table:
    Table 1

    Clinical, serological and histological characteristics of study patients according to Helicobacter pylori status and the presence of autoimmune gastritis (AIG)

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Flow diagram of the enrolment of study patients. OGA, oxyntic gastric atrophy; AIG, autoimmune gastritis; pos, positive; neg, negative.

    Comparison of H. pylori-negative AIG to H. pylori-positive advanced OGA

    In table 2 clinical and histological differences between patients with H. pylori-negative AIG (N=18) and those with H. pylori-positive advanced OGA (N=10) are shown. No differences were observed between groups with respect to age and gender distribution. According to a priori defined criteria the prevalence of APCA and ECL cell hyperplasia was higher in patients with H. pylori-negative AIG. One patient with AIG had APCA and AIFA. One patient with ECL cell hyperplasia and a NET of the stomach, but neither APCA nor AIFA, nor current or previous H. pylori infection, nor long-term PPI therapy was classified to having AIG.

    View this table:
    Table 2

    Differences in clinical and histological characteristics of H. pylori-negative AIG and H. pylori-positive advanced OGA

    Ppatients with H. pylori-negative AIG were more likely to have another autoimmune disease in general (OR 6.3; 95% CI 1.3 to 29.8), autoimmune thyroid disease (OR 7.4; 95% CI 1.3 to 42.7), severe corpus atrophy (OR 10.1; 95% CI 1.9 to 54.1) and corpus intestinal metaplasia (OR 26.9; 95%CI 5.3 to 136.5) compared with H. pylori-positive patients with advanced OGA. NETs were observed only in patients with AIG.

    Figures 2 and 3 highlight the differences of endoscopic and histological features of advanced OGA between patients with H. pylori gastritis and AIG.

    Figure 2
    Figure 2

    Endoscopic appearance of advanced oxyntic gastric atrophy (OGA) in Helicobacter pylori infection and autoimmune gastritis (AIG). High definition conventional white-light (A+C) and FICE (B+D) endoscopic appearance of corpus mucosa with advanced OGA (image magnified with zoom endoscope) in patients with H. pylori infection (Zoom 1:200) and AIG (Zoom 1:60), respectively, are shown. Endoscopic signs of OGA comprising smooth mucosa, whitish discolouration and visible vessels are evident in AIG (C+D), whereas in H. pylori gastritis (A+B), despite the presence of OGA, signs of inflammation with subepithelial haemorrhage and oedema of the mucosa are predominant. Biopsies revealed OGA grades 2 and 3 according to the updated Sydney System classification in H. pylori gastritis and AIG, respectively. FICE, flexible spectral imaging colour enhancement.

    Figure 3
    Figure 3

    Histopathological features of oxyntic gastric atrophy (OGA) in Helicobacter pylori infection and autoimmune gastritis (AIG). In (A) a biopsy specimen of a patient with H. pylori infection and OGA is shown. In the lamina propria an infiltrate of lymphocytes, plasma cells and neutrophils (H&E) and a focal moderate shrinkage of oxyntic gastric glands can be seen. H. pylori infection was identified by Warthin-Starry staining (data not shown). Staining with antichromogranin antibodies (brown) shows a normal distribution of enterochromaffin-like (ECL) cells (B). In (C) a biopsy specimen of a patient with AIG is shown (H&E). An infiltrate of lymphocytes and plasma cells can be observed. Neutrophils are absent. There is a severe OGA with absence of parietal cells, focal intestinal metaplasia (arrows) and pseudopyloric metaplasia (*). Staining with antichromogranin antibodies (brown) shows linear and micronodular ECL cell hyperplasia (D).

    Diagnostic performance of G17, PG I and PG I/II for the diagnosis of advanced OGA

    Figure 4 shows the area under the G17 (AUC=0.76), PGI (AUC=0.86) and PGI/II (AUC=0.86) ROC curves for patients with advanced OGA. Overall, the optimal cut-off levels to detect advanced OGA were 17 pmol/L for G17 (sensitivity, 0.74%; specificity, 0.74%), 60 µg/L for PG I (sensitivity, 0.71%; specificity, 0.93%), and 5 pmol/L for PG I/II ratio (sensitivity, 0.74%; specificity, 0.95%), respectively.

    Figure 4
    Figure 4

    Area under the G17 (A), PGI (B), and PGI/II-ratio (C) ROC curves (AUC) for the diagnosis of advanced oxyntic gastric atrophy (OGA). ROC, receiver operating characteristic; G17, gastrin 17; PG, pepsinogen.

    The diagnostic performance of G17, PG I and PG I/II considered as a panel for the diagnosis of advanced OGA as compared with histology was assessed according to manufacturer’s recommendations and according to the ROC curves generated from our study population as well.

    According to manufacturer’s recommendations, the diagnostic performance of the panel was as follows: sensitivity 41.7% (95% CI 22 to 63%), specificity 99.7% (95% CI 98 to 100%), positive predictive value 7.1% (95% CI 5 to 10%) and negative predictive value 92.9% (95% CI 90 to 95%). According to the ROC curves generated from our study population sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the panel were as follows: sensitivity 58.8% (95% CI 41 to 75%), specificity 98.4% (95% CI96 to 100%), positive predictive value 5.4% (95% CI 3 to 8%) and negative predictive value 94.6% (95% 92 to 97%). Thus, according to the cut-offs generated from the ROC curves there was a clear increase of the sensitivity with a low decrease in specificity of the panel (data not shown).

    Figures 5 and 6 show the area under the G17, PGI, and PGI/II curves of patients with H. pylori-negative AIG (N=18) and H. pylori gastritis with advanced OGA (N=10), respectively. Again, because of the small number, patients with H. pylori-positive AIG (N=4) and H. pylori-negative advanced OGA (N=2) were excluded from statistical analysis.

    Figure 5
    Figure 5

    Area under the G17 (A), PGI (B), and PGI/II-ratio (C) ROC curves (AUC) for the diagnosis of advanced oxyntic gastric atrophy (OGA) in patients with autoimmune gastritis (AIG). ROC, receiver operating characteristic; G17, gastrin 17; PG, pepsinogen.

    Figure 6
    Figure 6

    Area under the G17 (A), PGI (B), and PGI/II-ratio (C) ROC curves (AUC) for the diagnosis of advanced oxyntic gastric atrophy (OGA) in patients with Helicobacter pylori infection. ROC, receiver operating characteristic; G17, gastrin 17; PG, pepsinogen.

    The performance of G17, PG I and PG I/II was good to excellent for patients with H. pylori-negative AIG (AUC=0.83, 0.95 and 0.97, respectively), but low for H. pylori positive patients with advanced OGA (AUC=0.62, 0.75 and 0.67, respectively). Optimal cut-off levels to detect advanced OGA were 19 pmol/l for G17 (sensitivity 0.82%; specificity 0.76%), 50 µg/L for PG I (sensitivity 0.96%; specificity, 0.95%) and 5 µg/L for PG I/II ratio (sensitivity, 0.96%; specificity 0.95%) for patients with AIG and 10 pmol/L for G17 (sensitivity 0.70%; specificity 0.60%), 80 µg/L for PG I (sensitivity 0.60%; specificity 0.80%) and 5 µg/L for PG I/II ratio (sensitivity 0.40%; specificity 0.95%) for H. pylori-positive patients, respectively. In figures 5 and 6 cut-offs for serum PG I, PG II and G17 levels in patients with histological OGA are shown either according to manufacturer′s recommendations (G17 >10 pmol/L, PG I<30 µg/L, PG II/II ratio <3) or optimised as suggested by the ROC curves based on our study population. The means and SDs of G17, PGI and PGI/II ratio in patients with advanced OGA and in the subgroups of patients with H. pylori-negative AIG and H. pylori gastritis with advanced OGA are shown in table 3.

    View this table:
    Table 3

    Serum pepsinogen (PG) I, PG I/II ratio and gastrin-17 (G17) in patients with or without advanced* oxyntic gastric atrophy (OGA) and depending on the aetiology of advanced OGA (Helicobacter pylori vs autoimmune gastritis)

    Discussion

    In our study we found H. pylori-negative AIG with a distinct morphological and serological phenotype compared with advanced OGA in H. pylori gastritis. Strict prestudy criteria allowed identifying a few features for the differentiation of these two entities.

    The first feature is that patients with H. pylori-negative AIG were more likely to have another autoimmune disease (OR 18.8; 95% CI 2.0 to 173.9). As reported in previous studies, the most common autoimmune disease among H. pylori-negative AIG was autoimmune thyroid disease (39%).16 Furthermore, we confirm the association of patients with H. pylori-negative AIG with rheumatoid arthritis and primary biliary cirrhosis, which has been described in few case reports before.17 ,18 Noteworthy, none of the four patients with H. pylori-positive AIG had another autoimmune disease. Indeed, apart from the case of idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), a role of H. pylori infection in the development of extragastrointestinal autoimmune diseases is unlikely.19

    Another feature was that patients with H. pylori-negative AIG were more likely to have severe corpus atrophy, and corpus intestinal metaplasia compared with H. pylori-positive patients with advanced OGA.

    In line with our previous report, we confirmed the presence of atrophy in the antrum in a subset (39%) of patients with AIG.11 It is of interest to note, that none of the patients with H. pylori-positive AIG had atrophy of the antrum, which however does not preclude the hypothesis that H. pylori infection might in some cases serve as trigger for AIG.

    OGA is a precancerous condition, associated with a fourfold to fivefold increased risk for developing GC and therefore screening for OGA is recommended.20 ,21 H. pylori serology combined with increased serum G17 and a low serum PGI and PGI/II ratio are currently the best available non-invasive tests for identification of subjects with advanced OGA at increased risk of GC.22 ,23 Manufacturer’s recommendations suggest using a G17>10 pmol/L, PG I <30 µg/L and PG I/II<3 as reference values for detecting OGA.24 However, these cut-offs may require adaptations in different populations. According to our data G17>17 pmol/L, PG I<60 µg/L and PG I/II<5 represent better cut-offs for detecting OGA in our population, irrespective of their aetiology.

    In a recent study of 91 patients with dyspepsia the discriminatory ability of serological biomarkers to detect OGA of any grade according to the updated Sydney classification was reported to be insufficient.12 The higher diagnostic performance observed in our study population is obtained by the exclusion of patients with early stages of OGA. In early stages of OGA (stage 1 according to the updated Sydney classification) serum levels of OGA biomarkers are not expected to be abnormal, as this is known for other conditions in which serum biomarkers become abnormal only in advanced/end-stage disease (ie, creatine levels in chronic kidney disease, albumin or bilirubin levels in liver cirrhosis).25

    Serum parameters indicate a more constant severe loss of function reflected by G17, PG I and PG I/II ratio in AIG. Accordingly, in the subgroup of patients with AIG the diagnostic performance of serological markers was good (increased G17) to excellent (low PG I and PG I/II ratio) for the diagnosis of advanced OGA but their diagnostic performance was limited in patients with present or past H. pylori infection. The high diagnostic performance of an increased G17 and a low PG I and PG I/II ratio in patients with AIG is due to extensive atrophic changes of the oxyntic mucosa in these patients. This is different in the H. pylori-induced OGA where the patchy distribution of focal areas of severe atrophy surrounded by less severe mucosal changes may lead to less functional loss. The severity of OGA may also in part explain the differences between the two groups, as patients with AIG had more often severe (grade 3) atrophy when compared with patients with H. pylori induced OGA. Stratification according to the aetiology of OGA is mandatory for a better interpretation of G17, PGI and PGI/II ratio. By increasing the cut-off for PG I and decreasing the cut-off for G17 the diagnostic performance of these parameters for identifying OGA can be increased in H. pylori-induced OGA.

    The risk for GC development is not established in patients with AIG. OGA may lead to the development of pernicious anaemia, which was already present in 50% of our patients with AIG compared with 17% of patients with OGA with H. pylori gastritis. In a recent meta-analysis the pooled GC incidence rate among patients with pernicious anaemia was of 0.27% per person-years, with an overall GC relative risk of 6.8 (95% CI 2.6 to 18.1).26 Thus, the magnitude of GC risk for patients with pernicious anaemia does not differ from that of patients with OGA. According to the ‘ABCD method’ (group A: H. pylori antibody negative and normal PG level; group B: H. pylori antibody positive and normal PG level; group C: H. pylori antibody positive and low PG level; group D: H. pylori antibody negative and low PG level) adopted in Japan that stratifies individuals by serology for their GC risk, patients of the group D (ie, low PG I and/or low PG I/ PG II ratio testing negative for H. pylori serology) carry the highest risk for developing GC (HR 120.4).27 ,28 Most of the patients of the group D are patients with AIG and/or patients with pernicious anaemia. Patients resulting positive for serological OGA should undergo OGD with biopsies according to the Sydney classification and OLGA staging system. According to current guidelines, endoscopic follow-up should thereafter be reserved to patients with extensive GA at 3 year intervals in order to diagnose GC at an early stage.29

    In summary, H. pylori-negative AIG has a distinct clinical, morphological and serological phenotype compared with advanced OGA in H. pylori gastritis. An increased G17 and a low PG I and PG I/II ratio showed a good diagnostic performance for advanced OGA. According to the aetiology of advanced OGA the diagnostic performance of serological biomarkers was high in patients with AIG and low in patients with present or past H. pylori infection. The performance of serological markers of OGA can be increased by optimising their cut-offs.

    Take home messages

    • The aetiology of oxyntic gastric atrophy (OGA), a precancerous condition associated with a fourfold to fivefold increased risk for developing gastric cancer, is restricted to two risk factors: Helicobacter pylori infection and autoimmune gastritis (AIG).

    • Among patients with advanced OGA, patients with H. pylori-negative AIG are more likely to have another autoimmune disease, severe OGA (stage 3 according to the updated Sydney classification) and intestinal metaplasia of the corpus.

    • The diagnostic performance of an increased G17 and a low PGI and PGI/II ratio for the diagnosis of advanced OGA is high in patients with AIG but low in patients with present or past H. pylori infection, and thus stratification according to the aetiology of OGA is helpful for a better interpretation of these serological biomarkers.

    • Clinical, morphological and serological criteria may help to discern between AIG and H. pylori-induced advanced OGA.

    Acknowledgments

    The authors thank the endoscopic team for its assistance during the upper GI endoscopies. The authors also thank Marion Holley, Ursula Stolz (Department of Gastroenterology) for their experimental work.

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Rugge M,
      2. Correa P,
      3. Dixon MF, et al
      . Gastric mucosal atrophy: interobserver consistency using new criteria for classification and grading. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2002;16:1249–59. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2036.2002.01301.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    2. ↵
      1. Dixon MF,
      2. Genta RM,
      3. Yardley JH, et al
      . Classification and grading of gastritis. The updated Sydney System. International Workshop on the Histopathology of Gastritis, Houston 1994. Am J Surg Pathol 1996;20:1161–81. doi:10.1097/00000478-199610000-00001
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    3. ↵
      1. Venerito M,
      2. Malfertheiner P
      . Preneoplastic conditions in the stomach: always a point of no return? Dig Dis 2015;33:5–10. doi:10.1159/000369185
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    4. ↵
      1. Rugge M,
      2. Fassan M,
      3. Pizzi M, et al
      . Letter: gastric cancer and pernicious anaemia-often Helicobacter pylori in disguise. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2013;37:764–5. doi:10.1111/apt.12239
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    5. ↵
      1. Negrini R,
      2. Savio A,
      3. Poiesi C, et al
      . Antigenic mimicry between Helicobacter pylori and gastric mucosa in the pathogenesis of body atrophic gastritis. Gastroenterology 1996;111:655–65. doi:10.1053/gast.1996.v111.pm8780570
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    6. ↵
      1. Claeys D,
      2. Faller G,
      3. Appelmelk BJ, et al
      . The gastric H+,K+-ATPase is a major autoantigen in chronic Helicobacter pylori gastritis with body mucosa atrophy. Gastroenterology 1998;115:340–7. doi:10.1016/S0016-5085(98)70200-8
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    7. ↵
      1. Venerito M,
      2. Kohrs S,
      3. Wex T, et al
      . Helicobacter pylori infection and fundic gastric atrophy are not associated with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a case-control study. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011;23:859–64. doi:10.1097/MEG.0b013e3283496469
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    8. ↵
      1. Park JY,
      2. Lam-Himlin D,
      3. Vemulapalli R
      . Review of autoimmune metaplastic atrophic gastritis. Gastrointest Endosc 2013;77:284–92. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2012.09.033
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    9. ↵
      1. Neumann WL,
      2. Coss E,
      3. Rugge M, et al
      . Autoimmune atrophic gastritis--pathogenesis, pathology and management. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013;10:529–41. doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2013.101
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    10. ↵
      1. Agréus L,
      2. Kuipers EJ,
      3. Kupcinskas L, et al
      . Rationale in diagnosis and screening of atrophic gastritis with stomach-specific plasma biomarkers. Scand J Gastroenterol 2012;47:136–47. doi:10.3109/00365521.2011.645501
      OpenUrlPubMed
    11. ↵
      1. Venerito M,
      2. Radünz M,
      3. Reschke K, et al
      . Autoimmune gastritis in autoimmune thyroid disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2015;41:686–93. doi:10.1111/apt.13097
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    12. ↵
      1. McNicholl AG,
      2. Forné M,
      3. Barrio J, et al
      . Accuracy of GastroPanel for the diagnosis of atrophic gastritis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014;26:941–8. doi:10.1097/MEG.0000000000000132
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    13. ↵
      1. Wex T,
      2. Venerito M,
      3. Kreutzer J, et al
      . Serological prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany, in 2010. Clin Vaccine Immunol 2011;18:2109–12. doi:10.1128/CVI.05308-11
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    14. ↵
      1. Rugge M,
      2. Meggio A,
      3. Pennelli G, et al
      . Gastritis staging in clinical practice: the OLGA staging system. Gut 2007;56:631–6. doi:10.1136/gut.2006.106666
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    15. ↵
      1. Ottesen M,
      2. Feldt-Rasmussen UF,
      3. Andersen J, et al
      . Pernicious anemia. A study of initial forms of the disease and diagnostic significance of determination of the intrinsic factor antibody and parietal cell antibody. Ugeskr Laeger. 1992;154:3758–62.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    16. ↵
      1. Centanni M,
      2. Marignani M,
      3. Gargano L, et al
      . Atrophic body gastritis in patients with autoimmune thyroid disease: an underdiagnosed association. Arch Intern Med 1999;159:1726–30. doi:10.1001/archinte.159.15.1726
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    17. ↵
      1. Nakao E,
      2. Mitsunaga A,
      3. Hamano T, et al
      . Case report of rheumatoid arthritis associated with type A gastritis and Hashimoto thyroiditis. Nihon Shokakibyo Gakkai Zasshi 2010;107:1927–32.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    18. ↵
      1. Wakabayashi T,
      2. Ohno H,
      3. Hayakawa Y, et al
      . Primary biliary cirrhosis associated with type A gastritis and chronic thyroiditis. J Gastroenterol 1999;34:415–19. doi:10.1007/s005350050286
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    19. ↵
      1. Smyk DS,
      2. Koutsoumpas AL,
      3. Mytilinaiou MG, et al
      . Helicobacter pylori and autoimmune disease: cause or bystander. World J Gastroenterol 2014;20:613–29. doi:10.3748/wjg.v20.i3.613
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    20. ↵
      1. Vannella L,
      2. Lahner E,
      3. Osborn J, et al
      . Risk factors for progression to gastric neoplastic lesions in patients with atrophic gastritis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010;31:1042–50. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2010.04268.x
      OpenUrlPubMed
    21. ↵
      1. de Vries AC,
      2. van Grieken NC,
      3. Looman CW, et al
      . Gastric cancer risk in patients with premalignant gastric lesions: a nationwide cohort study in the Netherlands. Gastroenterology 2008;134:945–52. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2008.01.071
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    22. ↵
      1. Miki K,
      2. Ichinose M,
      3. Ishikawa KB, et al
      . Clinical application of serum pepsinogen I and II levels for mass screening to detect gastric cancer. Jpn J Cancer Res 1993;84:1086–90. doi:10.1111/j.1349-7006.1993.tb02805.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    23. ↵
      1. De Vries AC,
      2. Kuipers EJ
      . Epidemiology of premalignant gastric lesions: implications for the development of screening and surveillance strategies. Helicobacter 2007;12:22e31.
      OpenUrl
    24. ↵
    25. ↵
      1. Varis K,
      2. Kekki M,
      3. Härkönen M, et al
      . Serum pepsinogen I and serum gastrin in the screening of atrophic pangastritis with high risk of gastric cancer. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl 1991;186:117–23. doi:10.3109/00365529109103998
      OpenUrlPubMed
    26. ↵
      1. Vannella L,
      2. Lahner E,
      3. Osborn J, et al
      . Systematic review: gastric cancer incidence in pernicious anaemia. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2013;37:375–82. doi:10.1111/apt.12177
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    27. ↵
      1. Miki K
      . Gastric cancer screening by combined assay for serum anti-Helicobacter pylori IgG antibody and serum pepsinogen levels—“ABC method”. Proc Jpn Acad Ser B Phys Biol Sci 2011;87:405–14. doi:10.2183/pjab.87.405
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    28. ↵
      1. Watabe H,
      2. Mitsushima T,
      3. Yamaji Y, et al
      . Predicting the development of gastric cancer from combining Helicobacter pylori antibodies and serum pepsinogen status: a prospective endoscopic cohort study. Gut 2005;54:764–8. doi:10.1136/gut.2004.055400
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    29. ↵
      1. Dinis-Ribeiro M,
      2. Areia M,
      3. de Vries AC, et al.
      , European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; European Helicobacter Study Group; European Society of Pathology; Sociedade Portuguesa de Endoscopia Digestiva. Management of precancerous conditions and lesions in the stomach (MAPS): guideline from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), European Helicobacter Study Group (EHSG), European Society of Pathology (ESP), and the Sociedade Portuguesa de Endoscopia Digestiva (SPED). Endoscopy 2012;44:74–94. doi:10.1055/s-0031-1291491
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science

    Supplementary materials

    • Abstract in German

      This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

    Footnotes

    • Handling editor Cheok Soon Lee

    • Contributors MVe and PM designed the research study. MVe and MVa collected the data. MVe, AL and DR performed the research. MVe, MVa and F-WR performed statistical analysis. KF and DJ performed the histopathological assessment of gastric biopsies. JW supervised endoscopies of all patients included in the study. MVe and PM analysed the data and wrote the paper. All authors approved the final version of the article, including the authorship list.

    • Funding Supported in part by a research grant from the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Frauen (BMBF-0315905D) to PM in the frame of ERA-NET PathoGenoMics.

    • Competing interests PM has served as a speaker for Takeda, AstraZeneca and Reckitt Benckiser.

    • Ethics approval Ethics Committee of the Otto-von-Guericke University Hospital of Magdeburg (registration number 80/11).

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.