About

The provided page text does not contain a specific professional biography or detailed information about Professor Loren Laine's research focus, background, or key contributions. It primarily includes general information about Yale School of Medicine's research activities, history, strategic plans, and departmental resources, but does not mention individual faculty members or their specific work.

Research topics

• Medicine
• Internal medicine
• Surgery
• Family medicine
• Intensive care medicine
• Demography
• Emergency medicine
• Biology
• Pathology
• Microbiology

Selected publications

• TOPICAL HEMOSTATIC AGENTS: A POTENTIAL BREAKTHROUGH IN MALIGNANCY-RELATED GI BLEEDING? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS

  Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2025-05-01

  review
  PublisherDOI

• 742: RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL EVALUATING THE EFFICACY OF HUMAN-GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TEAMING ON TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE, USABILITY, AND TRUST: THE GUT-GPT SIMULATION STUDY

  Gastroenterology · 2025-05-01

  article
  PublisherDOI

• Sa2054: EXPERT-ALIGNED UNSUPERVISED EMBEDDINGS FOR RANKING CLINICAL LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS: A STUDY IN UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING

  Gastroenterology · 2025-05-01

  article
  PublisherDOI

• Mo1265: A COMPARISON OF THALIDOMIDE AND SOMATOSTATIN ANALOGUES IN THE TREATMENT OF INTESTINAL ANGIOECTASIAS: A NETWORK META-ANALYSIS

  Gastroenterology · 2025-05-01

  article
  PublisherDOI

• A96 WHICH IS THE BEST ENDOSCOPIC HEMOSTATIC THERAPY FOR DIEULAFOY’S LESIONS? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

  Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025-02-01

  reviewOpen access

  Abstract Background Dieulafoy’s lesion (DL) is an uncommon but serious cause of significant gastrointestinal bleeding, typically treated with various endoscopic therapies. Aims This systematic review and meta-analysis is the first to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic hemostatic therapies for treating DL, including endoscopic band ligation (EBL), endoscopic hemoclip placement (EHP), over-the-scope clips (OTSC), thermocoagulation, topical hemostatic agents (THA) and injection methods (epinephrine, sclerosant). Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to March 2024, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies comparing different endoscopic techniques for DL. Two authors conducted study selection, data extraction and quality assessment independently. The primary outcome was 7-day further bleeding. Further bleeding is a composite outcome of failure to achieve immediate hemostasis and rebleeding. Secondary outcomes included failure to achieve immediate hemostasis, rebleeding, overall mortality, adverse events, and additional hemostatic therapy. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed by Chi2 (P<0.15) and I2 tests (>25%). The GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence (CoE). Results We included 7 RCTs, 4 comparative cohort studies, and 27 single-arm cohort studies from 5501 citations. Meta-analyses of EBL compared to EHP showed RRs for 7-day further bleeding in RCTs and cohort studies of 0.66, 95%CI 0.09-5.03 and RR 0.22, 95% CI0.05-0.95, respectively (very low CoE). Additionally, RR for EBL compared to thermocoagulation for 7-day further bleeding in a cohort study was 0.15, 95%CI 0.01- 2.71 (very low CoE). RRs for epinephrine injection alone compared to EBL/EHP and thermocoagulation were 4.37, 95%CI 1.43-13.33 and 10.08, 95%CI 0.63-162.0, respectively (very low CoE). Table 1 shows the results of the standard meta-analyses and proportional meta-analyses. Conclusions Epinephrine should not be used as monotherapy for the treatment of DL. Mechanical endoscopic therapies, especially EBL, appear to be an effective option for DL. Further research is needed to assess the roles of OTSC and THA in managing DL and obtain more precise estimates of the effectiveness of EBL, EHP, and thermocoagulation. Table: Outcomes in patients with DL treated with different endoscopic interventions. Funding Agencies None

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Integrating oncogeriatric principles into hematologic cancer care

  Journal of Geriatric Oncology · 2025-11-01

  article1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• S1331 Natural History and Outcomes of Patients With Upper GI Bleeding from Tumors

  The American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2025-10-01

  article

  Introduction: Recent information evaluating the clinical course and outcomes in patients with upper GI bleeding from tumors outside clinical trials of endoscopic therapy is limited. We evaluated the outcomes of hospitalized patients with tumor-related upper GI bleeding receiving endoscopy at an urban US hospital and compared them to outcomes at the same center 10 years ago. Methods: Consecutive patients hospitalized (6/2015-11/2024) with hematemesis, melena, and/or hematochezia receiving endoscopy were searched using ICD 9/10 codes for upper GI tumors. Procedure reports were reviewed to confirm biopsy-proven tumors without other causes of GI bleeding. Study endpoints included hemostasis at the conclusion of endoscopy and rebleeding. Rebleeding was defined as recurrent bleeding in patients without active bleeding on index endoscopy or whose bleeding stopped spontaneously or with endoscopic, interventional radiologic, or surgical intervention. Results: 107 (mean age 58 ± 13 years, 81 (76%) men) patients met study criteria with tumor originating from the esophagus in 13 (12%), stomach in 84 (79%), duodenum in 9 (8%), and jejunum in 1 (1%). At presentation, 62 (58%) patients did not have a prior diagnosis of malignancy and 66 (62%) had evidence of metastatic disease. Hemodynamic instability was observed in 50 (47%) patients, and 28 (26%) were on anti-thrombotic therapy. High-risk stigmata of bleeding were reported in 48 (45%) patients: active bleeding in 31 (29%) including spurting 2 (2%) and oozing 29 (27%), non-bleeding visible vessel in 3 (3%), and adherent clot in 14 (13%). Endoscopic therapy was performed in 19 (18%), including TC-325 hemostatic powder spray in 6 (6%), epinephrine injection alone in 6 (6%), hemoclips in 3 (3%), bipolar coagulation in 2 (2%), polysaccharide hemostatic powder in 1 (1%), and alcohol injection in 1 (1%). Overall, 9 (8%) patients did not attain hemostasis; 13 (13%) of 103 and 19 (19%) of 100 developed rebleeding within 3 and 7 days, respectively. During a mean follow-up of 10.6 ± 16.7 months, 50 (47%) patients developed rebleeding, similar to 48 (47%) of 103 from the 2005-2012 cohort. Conclusion: Active bleeding was encountered in nearly one-third of patients with tumor-related upper GI bleeding. Most patients attained endoscopic hemostasis with or without therapy. Similar to a decade ago, initial control of bleeding was successful in most patients, but nearly a half developed long-term recurrent bleeding.

  PublisherDOI

• American Foregut Society White Paper Report on the Use of Potassium-Competitive Acid Blockers in the Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

  Foregut The Journal of the American Foregut Society · 2025-03-18 · 5 citations

  articleOpen access

  Background: Suppression of gastric acid secretion with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has been the mainstay of medical treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) for more than 30 years. Members of a newer class of medication, the potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs), can inhibit gastric acid production faster, longer, and more potently than PPIs. In November 2023, vonoprazan became the first P-CAB to receive FDA approval for GERD treatment. Methods: The American Foregut Society (AFS) convened a 13-member panel of expert gastroenterologists and foregut surgeons to produce a white paper report on how clinicians might use P-CABs to treat GERD. After conducting a comprehensive literature review, panelists proposed 20 total statements on key aspects of P-CAB pharmacokinetics, use of P-CABs for erosive esophagitis and non-erosive reflux disease, and P-CAB safety, as well as 13 recommendation statements on how to use a P-CAB in clinical practice. Using RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Methodology, panelists independently voted to rank each statement for appropriateness, and, after panel review and discussion of first-round voting results, statements were accepted, discarded, or modified for a final round of voting. Results: Twenty-three statements were finally accepted (3 on P-CAB pharmacokinetics, 5 on P-CABs for erosive esophagitis, 3 on P-CABs for non-erosive reflux disease, 4 on P-CAB safety, 8 on how to use P-CABs in clinical practice). Conclusions: This AFS white paper report provides the statements accepted by the expert panel on the use of P-CABs in the treatment of GERD, and summarizes the literature review that provided the rationale for those statements.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• A43 TOPICAL HEMOSTATIC AGENTS: A POTENTIAL BREAKTHROUGH IN MALIGNANCY-RELATED GI BLEEDING? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS

  Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025-02-01

  reviewOpen access

  Abstract Background Malignancy-related gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) has been challenging to treat with conventional endoscopic techniques. Topical hemostatic agents (THAs), which do not cause mucosal injury and can be applied over large surface areas, may offer a promising solution in cancer-related GIB. Aims To assess the effectiveness and safety of THAs in malignancy-related GIB compared to conventional endoscopic techniques. Methods We conducted a systematic review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials until March 2024. RCTs that compared THA vs conventional endoscopic techniques in malignant GIB were included. Two authors conducted study selection, data extraction and quality assessment independently. The primary outcome was 30-day further bleeding. Further bleeding is a composite outcome of failure to achieve immediate hemostasis and rebleeding. Secondary outcomes included failure to achieve immediate hemostasis, 6-month mortality, 30-day rebleeding, blood transfusions needed, length of hospitalization, and adverse events. RevMan 5.4 was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI, random effects model). Heterogeneity was assessed by Chi 2 (P<0.15) and I 2 tests (>25%). We assessed the certainty of evidence (CoE) for each outcome using the GRADE approach. Results Results: We identified 5100 citations and 4 RCTs with 122 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference between THA and conventional endoscopic methods with respect to 30-day further bleeding through THAs reduce the risk of immediate hemostatic failure. There was no significant difference noted in 30-day rebleeding. THAs did not significantly impact 6-month mortality or blood transfusions. THAs were found to increase the average length of hospitalization by 4.28 days. Conclusions TC-325 appears superior to conventional endoscopic techniques in achieving immediate hemostasis for malignancy-related GIB. It may reduce further bleeding over 30 days as well, but the evidence is very uncertain and further research is needed to assess bleeding risk over this period and beyond. TC-325 did not appear to reduce 6-month mortality. Table 1. Summary of Findings Forest plot of further bleeding Funding Agencies:

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Sa1332: REEVALUATING WHAT WE TAKE FOR GRANTED: THE FIRST SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF ENDOSCOPIC HEMOSTATIC THERAPIES IN MALLORY-WEISS TEARS

  Gastroenterology · 2025-05-01

  article
  PublisherDOI

Recent grants

• Evaluation of the National Randomized Proton Pump Inhibitor De-prescribing (RaPPID) Program

  NIH · 2018–2021

• Fecal Microbiota Transplant National Registry

  NIH · $7.0M · 2016–2027

Frequent coauthors

• Dennis Shung

  58 shared

• Christopher P. Cannon

  Harvard University

  53 shared

• John J. Kim

  44 shared

• Adrian J. Stanley

  37 shared

• Kenneth R. McQuaid

  San Francisco VA Health Care System

  36 shared

• Ángel Lanas

  Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa

  36 shared

• James Buxbaum

  35 shared

• Stig Borbjerg Laursen

  Odense University Hospital

  35 shared

Education

• M.D., Medicine

  Yale School of Medicine