John Wd McDonald

Azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUNDnMaintenance of remission is a major issue in inflammatory bowel disease. In ulcerative colitis, the evidence for the effectiveness of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for the maintenance of remission is still controversial.nnnOBJECTIVESnTo assess the effectiveness and safety of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis.nnnSEARCH METHODSnThe MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to 30 July 2015. Both full randomized controlled trials and associated abstracts were included.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnRandomized controlled trials of at least 12 months duration that compared azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine with placebo or standard maintenance therapy (e.g. mesalazine) were included.nnnDATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISnTwo authors independently extracted data using standard forms. Disagreements were solved by consensus including a third author. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was failure to maintain clinical or endoscopic remission. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. Analyses were performed separately by type of control (placebo, or active comparator). Pooled risk ratios were calculated based on the fixed-effect model unless heterogeneity was shown. The GRADE approach was used to assess the overall quality of evidence for pooled outcomes.nnnMAIN RESULTSnSeven studies including 302 patients with ulcerative colitis were included in the review. The risk of bias was high in three of the studies due to lack of blinding. Azathioprine was shown to be significantly superior to placebo for maintenance of remission. Fourty-four per cent (51/115) of azathioprine patients failed to maintain remission compared to 65% (76/117) of placebo patients (4 studies, 232 patients; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.86). A GRADE analysis rated the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome as low due to risk of bias and imprecision (sparse data). Two trials that compared 6-mercaptopurine to mesalazine, or azathioprine to sulfasalazine showed significant heterogeneity and thus were not pooled. Fifty per cent (7/14) of 6-mercaptopurine patients failed to maintain remission compared to 100% (8/8) of mesalazine patients (1 study, 22 patients; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.90). Fifty-eight per cent (7/12) of azathioprine patients failed to maintain remission compared to 38% (5/13) of sulfasalazine patients (1 study, 25 patients; RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.66 to 3.50). One small study found that 6-mercaptopurine was superior to methotrexate for maintenance of remission. In the study, 50% (7/14) of 6-mercaptopurine patients and 92% (11/12) of methotrexate patients failed to maintain remission (1 study, 26 patients; RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.95). One very small study compared azathioprine with cyclosporin and found that there was no significant difference between patients failing remission on azathioprine (50%, 4/8) or cyclosporin (62.5%, 5/8) (1 study, 16 patients, RR 0.80 95% CI 0.33 to 1.92). When placebo-controlled studies were pooled with aminosalicylate-comparator studies to assess adverse events, there was no statistically significant difference between azathioprine and control in the incidence of adverse events. Nine per cent (11/127) of azathioprine patients experienced at least one adverse event compared to 2% (3/130) of placebo patients (5 studies, 257 patients; RR 2.82, 95% CI 0.99 to 8.01). Patients receiving azathioprine were at significantly increased risk of withdrawing due to adverse events. Eight per cent (8/101) of azathioprine patients withdrew due to adverse events compared to 0% (0/98) of control patients (5 studies, 199 patients; RR 5.43, 95% CI 1.02 to 28.75). Adverse events related to study medication included acute pancreatitis (3 cases, plus 1 case on cyclosporin) and significant bone marrow suppression (5 cases). Deaths, opportunistic infection or neoplasia were not reported.nnnAUTHORS CONCLUSIONSnAzathioprine therapy appears to be more effective than placebo for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis. Azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine may be effective as maintenance therapy for patients who have failed or cannot tolerate mesalazine or sulfasalazine and for patients who require repeated courses of steroids. More research is needed to evaluate superiority over standard maintenance therapy, especially in the light of a potential for adverse events from azathioprine. This review updates the existing review of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis which was published in the Cochrane Library (September 2012).

Methotrexate for induction of remission in refractory Crohn's disease

BACKGROUNDnAlthough corticosteroids are effective for induction of remission of Crohns disease, many patients relapse when steroids are withdrawn or become steroid dependent. Furthermore, corticosteroids exhibit significant adverse effects. The success of methotrexate as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis led to its evaluation in patients with refractory Crohns disease. Methotrexate has been studied for induction of remission of refractory Crohns disease and has become the principal alternative to azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine therapy. This systematic review is an update of previously published Cochrane reviews.nnnOBJECTIVESnThe primary objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of methotrexate for induction of remission in patients with active Crohns disease in the presence or absence of concomitant steroid therapy.nnnSEARCH METHODSnWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane IBD/FBD group specialized register from inception to June 9, 2014 for relevant studies. Conference proceedings and reference lists were also searched to identify additional studies.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnRandomized controlled trials of methotrexate compared to placebo or an active comparator for treatment of active refractory Crohns disease in adult patients (> 17 years) were considered for inclusion.nnnDATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISnThe primary outcome was failure to enter remission and withdraw from steroids. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events, serious adverse events and quality of life. We calculated the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for each outcome. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. The GRADE approach was used to assess the overall quality of evidence supporting the primary outcome.nnnMAIN RESULTSnSeven studies (495 patients) were included. Four studies were rated as low risk of bias. Three studies were rated as high risk of bias due to open label or single-blind designs. The seven studies differed with respect to participants, intervention, and outcomes to the extent that meta-analysis was considered to be inappropriate. GRADE analyses indicated that the quality of evidence was very low to low for most outcomes due to sparse data and inadequate blinding. Three small studies which employed low dose oral methotrexate showed no statistically significant difference in failure to induce remission between methotrexate and placebo or between methotrexate and 6-mercaptopurine. For the study using 15 mg/week of oral methotrexate 33% (5/15) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 11% (2/18) of placebo patients (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 13.31). For the study using 12.5 mg/week of oral methotrexate 81% (21/26) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 77% (20/26) of placebo patients (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.39). This study also had an active comparator arm, 81% (21/26) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 59% (19/32) of 6-mercaptopurine patients (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.92). For the active comparator study using 15 mg/week oral methotrexate, 20% (3/15) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 6% of 6-mercaptopurine patients (RR 3.20, 95% CI 0.37 to 27.49). This study also had a 5-ASA arm and found that methotrexate patients were significantly more likely to enter remission than 5-ASA patients. Twenty per cent (3/15) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 86% (6/7) of 5-ASA patients (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.67). One small study which used a higher dose of intravenous or oral methotrexate (25 mg/week) showed no statistically significant difference between methotrexate and azathioprine. Forty-four per cent (12/27) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 37% of azathioprine patients (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.29). Two studies found no statistically significant difference in failure to enter remission between the combination of infliximab and methotrexate and infliximab monotherapy. One small study utilized intravenous methotrexate (20 mg/week) for 5 weeks and then switched to oral (20 mg/week). Forty-five per cent (5/11) of patients in the combination group failed to enter remission compared to 62% of infliximab patients (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.69). The other study assessing combination therapy utilized subcutaneous methotrexate (maximum dose 25 mg/week). Twenty-four per cent (15/63) of patients in the combination group failed to enter remission compared to 22% (14/63) of infliximab patients (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.03). A large placebo-controlled study which employed a high dose of methotrexate intramuscularly showed a statistically significant benefit relative to placebo. Sixty-one per cent of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 81% of placebo patients (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93; number needed to treat, NNT=5). Withdrawals due to adverse events were significantly more common in methotrexate patients than placebo in this study. Seventeen per cent of methotrexate patients withdrew due to adverse events compared to 2% of placebo patients (RR 8.00, 95% CI 1.09 to 58.51). The incidence of adverse events was significantly more common in methotrexate patients (63%, 17/27) than azathioprine patients (26%, 7/27) in one small study (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.21 to 4.89). No other statistically significant differences in adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events or serious adverse events were reported in any of the other placebo-controlled or active comparator studies. Common adverse events included nausea and vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhea, skin rash and headache.nnnAUTHORS CONCLUSIONSnThere is evidence from a single large randomized trial which suggests that intramuscular methotrexate (25 mg/week) provides a benefit for induction of remission and complete withdrawal from steroids in patients with refractory Crohns disease. Lower dose oral methotrexate does not appear to provide any significant benefit relative to placebo or active comparator. However, these trials were small and further studies of oral methotrexate may be justified. Comparative studies of methotrexate to drugs such as azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine would require the randomization of large numbers of patients. The addition of methotrexate to infliximab therapy does not appear to provide any additional benefit over infliximab monotherapy. However these studies were relatively small and further research is needed to determine the role of methotrexate when used in conjunction with infliximab or other biological therapies.

Methotrexate for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUNDnSafe and effective long-term treatments that reduce the need for corticosteroids are needed for Crohns disease. Although purine antimetabolites are moderately effective for maintenance of remission patients often relapse despite treatment with these agents. Methotrexate may provide a safe and effective alternative to more expensive maintenance treatment with TNF-α antagonists. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review.nnnOBJECTIVESnTo conduct a systematic review of randomized trials examining the efficacy and safety of methotrexate for maintenance of remission in Crohns disease.nnnSEARCH METHODSnThe Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane IBD/FBD Group Specialized Trials Register were searched from inception to June 9, 2014. Study references and review papers were also searched for additional trials.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared methotrexate to placebo or any other active intervention for maintenance of remission in Crohns disease were eligible for inclusion.nnnDATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISnTwo authors independently reviewed studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed study quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients maintaining clinical remission as defined by the studies and expressed as a percentage of the total number of patients randomized (intention-to-treat analysis). We calculated the pooled risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria.nnnMAIN RESULTSnFive studies (n = 333 patients) were included in the review. Three studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. Two studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to blinding. Intramuscular methotrexate was superior to placebo for maintenance of remission at 40 weeks follow-up. Sixty-five per cent of patients in the intramuscular methotrexate group maintained remission compared to 39% of placebo patients (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.67; 76 patients).The number needed to treat to prevent one relapse was four. A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of evidence supporting this outcome was moderate due to sparse data (40 events). There was no statistically significant difference in maintenance of remission at 36 weeks follow-up between oral methotrexate (12.5 mg/week) and placebo. Ninety per cent of patients in the oral methotrexate group maintained remission compared to 67% of placebo patients (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.67; 22 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (17 events). A pooled analysis of two small studies (n = 50) showed no statistically significant difference in continued remission between oral methotrexate (12.5 mg to 15 mg/week) and 6-mercaptopurine (1 mg/kg/day) for maintenance of remission. Seventy-seven per cent of methotrexate patients maintained remission compared to 57% of 6-mercaptopurine patients (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.00). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of evidence supporting this outcome was very low due to high risk of bias in one study (no blinding) and very sparse data (33 events). One small (13 patients) poor quality study found no difference in continued remission between methotrexate and 5-aminosalicylic acid (RR 2.62, 95% CI 0.23 to 29.79). A pooled analysis of two studies (n = 145) including one high quality trial (n = 126) found no statistically significant difference in maintenance of remission at 36 to 48 weeks between combination therapy (methotrexate and infliximab) and infliximab monotherapy. Fifty-four percent of patients in the combination therapy group maintained remission compared to 53% of monotherapy patients (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.38, P = 0.95). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of evidence supporting this outcome was low due to high risk of bias in one study (no blinding) and sparse data (78 events). Adverse events were generally mild in nature and resolved upon discontinuation or with folic acid supplementation. Common adverse events included nausea and vomiting, symptoms of a cold, abdominal pain, headache, joint pain or arthralgia, and fatigue.nnnAUTHORS CONCLUSIONSnModerate quality evidence indicates that intramuscular methotrexate at a dose of 15 mg/week is superior to placebo for maintenance of remission in Crohns disease. Intramuscular methotrexate appears to be safe. Low dose oral methotrexate (12.5 to 15 mg/week) does not appear to be effective for maintenance of remission in Crohns disease. Combination therapy (methotrexate and infliximab) does not appear to be any more effective for maintenance of remission than infliximab monotherapy. The results for efficacy outcomes between methotrexate and 6-mercaptopurine and methotrexate and 5-aminosalicylic acid were uncertain. Large-scale studies of methotrexate given orally at higher doses for maintenance of remission in Crohns disease may provide stronger evidence for the use of methotrexate in this manner.

Interventions for Treating Microscopic Colitis: A Cochrane Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Functional Bowel Disorders Review Group Systematic Review of Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVES:To conduct a systematic review to determine effective treatments for patients with collagenous colitis or lymphocytic colitis, the two subtypes of microscopic colitis.METHODS:Relevant papers were identified via the MEDLINE, PUBMED, and Cochrane Collaboration databases, manual searches of the references of identified papers and review papers on microscopic colitis, as well as searches of abstracts from major gastroenterological meetings.RESULTS:All studies assessing treatment of microscopic colitis had relatively small sample sizes. A total of 10 randomized trials included patients with collagenous colitis. Budesonide was studied for induction of response in three trials and for maintenance of response in two trials. The pooled odds ratio for inducing clinical response with budesonide was 12.32 (95% confidence interval, CI 5.53–27.46), and for maintaining clinical response was 8.82 (95% CI 3.19–24.37), with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 2 patients for each outcome. Budesonide also induced and maintained histological response and was well tolerated. Bismuth subsalicylate, prednisolone, and mesalamine with or without cholestyramine may be effective, whereas Boswellia serrata extract and probiotics were ineffective for treating collagenous colitis. Three randomized trials included patients with lymphocytic colitis. Budesonide was shown in one study to be effective for inducing clinical response (OR 9.00; 95% CI 1.98–40.93), with an NNT of three patients. Budesonide also induced histological response and was well tolerated. Bismuth subsalicylate and mesalamine with or without cholestyramine may be effective for treating lymphocytic colitis. No trials assessed maintenance of response in patients with lymphocytic colitis.CONCLUSIONS:Budesonide is effective and well tolerated for inducing and maintaining clinical and histological responses in patients with collagenous colitis, and for inducing clinical and histological responses in patients with lymphocytic colitis. Determining the magnitude of benefit is limited by the small sample sizes of the studies. The evidence for other agents, including bismuth subsalicylate, prednisolone, B. serrata extract, probiotics, and mesalamine with or without cholestyramine is weaker. It is not clear that any of these agents induce or maintain actual remission of collagenous or lymphocytic colitis, as opposed to clinical or histological response.

Interventions for treating collagenous colitis.

BACKGROUNDnCollagenous colitis is a cause of chronic diarrhea. Treatment has been based mainly on anecdotal evidence. This review was performed to identify therapies for collagenous colitis that have been proven in randomized trials.nnnOBJECTIVESnTo determine effective treatments for patients with collagenous colitis.nnnSEARCH STRATEGYnRelevant papers published between 1970 and December 2007 were identified via the MEDLINE and PUBMED databases. Manual searches from the references of identified papers, as well as review papers on collagenous or microscopic colitis were performed to identify additional studies. Abstracts from major gastroenterological meetings were searched to identify research submitted in abstract form only. Finally, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Functional Bowel Disorders Group Specialized Trials Register were searched for other studies.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnTen randomized trials were identified. Seven of these compared active treatment to placebo for treating active disease. Of these, 1 trial studied bismuth subsalicylate, 1 trial studied Boswellia serrata extract, 3 trials studies budesonide, 1 trial studied prednisolone, and 1 trial studied probiotics. One trial compared mesalamine to mesalamine + cholestyramine for treating active disease. Two trials compared budesonide to placebo in maintaining response induced by budesonide.nnnDATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISnData were extracted independently by each author onto 2x2 tables (treatment versus comparator and response versus no response). For therapies assessed in one trial only, P-values were derived using the chi-square test. For therapies assessed in more than one trial, summary test statistics were derived using the Peto odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals. Data were combined for analysis only if the outcomes were sufficiently similar in definition.nnnMAIN RESULTSnIn treating active disease, there were 9 patients with collagenous colitis in the trial studying bismuth subsalicylate (nine 262 mg tablets daily for 8 weeks). Clinical response occurred in 100% of patients who received bismuth subsalicylate compared to 0% of patients who received placebo (P = 0.03). Thirty-one patients were enrolled in the trial studying Boswellia serrata extract (three 400 mg capsules daily for 8 weeks). Clinical response occurred in 44% of patients who received Boswellia serrata extract compared to 27% of patients who received placebo (P = 0.32). A total of 94 patients were enrolled in 3 trials studying budesonide (9 mg daily or in a tapering schedule for 6 to 8 weeks). Clinical response occurred in 81% of patients who received budesonide compared to 17% of patients who received placebo (P < 0.00001). The pooled odds ratio for clinical response to treatment with budesonide was 12.32 (95% CI 5.53 to 27.46), with a number needed to treat of 2 patients. Statistically significant histological response occurred with treatment in all 3 trials studying budesonide therapy. Eleven patients were enrolled in the trial studying prednisolone (50 mg daily for 2 weeks). Clinical response occurred in 63% of patients who received prednisolone compared to 0% who received placebo (P = 0.15). Twenty-nine patients were enrolled in the trial studying probiotics (2 capsules containing 0.5 x 10(10) CFU each of L. acidophilus LA-5 and B. animalis subsp. lactis strain BB-12 twice daily for 12 weeks). Clinical response occurred in 29% of patients who received probiotics compared to 13% of patients who received placebo (P = 0.38). Twenty-three patients were enrolled in the trial studying mesalamine (800 mg three times daily) with or without cholestyramine (4 g daily) for 6 months. Clinical response occurred in 73% of patients who received mesalamine alone compared to 100% of patients who received mesalamine + cholestyramine (P = 0.14). In maintaining response, 80 patients who had responded to open-label budesonide were enrolled in 2 trials studying budesonide (6 mg daily for 6 months). Clinical response was maintained in 83% of patients who received budesonide compared to 28% of patients who received placebo (P = 0.0002). The pooled odds ratio for maintenance of clinical response to treatment with budesonide was 8.40 (95% CI 2.73 to 25.81), with a number needed to treat of 2 patients. Histological response was maintained in 48% of patients who received budesonide compared to 15% of patients who received placebo (P = 0.002).nnnAUTHORS CONCLUSIONSnBudesonide is effective for inducing and maintaining clinical and histological response in patients with collagenous colitis. The evidence for benefit with bismuth subsalicylate and for mesalamine with or without cholestyramine is weak. There is no evidence for the effectiveness of Boswellia serrata extract, prednisolone, or probiotics. These agents and other therapies require further study.

Methotrexate for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUNDnUlcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease. Corticosteroids and 5-aminosalicylates are the most commonly used therapies. However, many patients require immunosuppressive therapy for steroid-refractory and steroid-dependent disease. Methotrexate is a medication that is effective for treating a variety of inflammatory diseases, including Crohns disease. This review was performed to determine the effectiveness of methotrexate treatment in UC patients. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review.nnnOBJECTIVESnTo assess the efficacy and safety of methotrexate for induction of remission in patients with UC.nnnSEARCH METHODSnMEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane IBD/FBD group specialized trials register were searched from from inception to June 26, 2014. Study references and review papers were also searched for additional trials. Abstracts from major gastroenterological meetings were searched to identify research published in abstract form only.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnRandomized controlled trials comparing methotrexate with placebo or an active comparator in patients with active ulcerative colitis were considered for inclusion.nnnDATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISnTwo authors independently reviewed studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed study quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients who achieved clinical remission and withdrawal from steroids as defined by the studies and expressed as a percentage of the total number of patients randomized (intention-to-treat analysis). We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria.nnnMAIN RESULTSnTwo studies (n = 101 patients) were included in the review. One study (n = 67) compared oral methotrexate 12.5 mg/week) to placebo. The other study (n = 34) compared oral methotrexate (15 mg/week) to 6-mercaptopurine (1.5 mg/kg/day) and 5-aminosalicylic acid (3 g/day). The placebo-controlled study was judged to be at low risk of bias. The other study was judged to be at high risk of bias due to an open-label design. There was no statistically significant difference in clinical remission rates between methotrexate and placebo patients. Forty-seven per cent (14/30) of methotrexate patients achieved clinical remission and complete withdrawal from steroids during the study period compared to 49% (18/37) of placebo patients (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.59. A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (32 events). There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of patients who achieved clinical remission and withdrawal from steroids in the study comparing oral methotrexate to 6-mercaptopurine and 5-aminosalicylic acid. At 30 weeks, 58% (7/12) of methotrexate patients achieved clinical remission and withdrawal from steroids compared to 79% (11/14) of 6-mercaptopurine patients (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.29) and 25% of 5-aminosalicylic acid patients (RR 2.33, 95% CI 0.64 to 8.49). GRADE analyses indicated that the overall quality of the evidence was very low due to very sparse data (18 and 9 events respectively) and and high risk of bias. In the placebo-controlled trial two patients (7%) were withdrawn from the methotrexate group due to adverse events (leucopenia, migraine) compared to one patient (3%) who had a rash in the placebo group (RR 2.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 25.91). Adverse events experienced by methotrexate patients in the active comparator study included nausea and dyspepsia, mild alopecia, mild increase in aspartate aminotransferase levels, peritoneal abscess, hypoalbuminemia, severe rash and atypical pneumonia.nnnAUTHORS CONCLUSIONSnAlthough methotrexate was well-tolerated, the studies showed no benefit for methotrexate over placebo or active comparators. The results for efficacy outcomes between methotrexate and placebo, methotrexate and 6-mercaptopurine and methotrexate and 5-aminosalicylic acid were uncertain. Whether a higher dose or parenteral administration would be effective for induction therapy is unknown. At present there is no evidence supporting the use of methotrexate for induction of remission in active ulcerative colitis. A trial in which larger numbers of patients receive a higher dose of oral methotrexate should be considered. Currently there are two large ongoing placebo-controlled trials (METEOR and MERIT-UC) assessing the efficacy and safety of intramuscular or subcutaneous methotrexate in patients with active UC which may help resolve the evidence supporting the use of methotrexate as therapy for active of ulcerative colitis.

Interventions for treating lymphocytic colitis

BACKGROUNDnLymphocytic colitis is a cause of chronic diarrhea. It is a subtype of microscopic colitis characterized by chronic, watery, non-bloody diarrhea and normal endoscopic and radiologic findings. The etiology of this disorder is unknown.Therapy is based mainly on case series and uncontrolled trials, or by extrapolation of data for treating collagenous colitis, a related disorder. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review.nnnOBJECTIVESnTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatments for clinically active lymphocytic colitis.nnnSEARCH METHODSnThe MEDLINE, PUBMED and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to 11 August 2016 to identify relevant papers. Manual searches from the references of included studies and relevant review articles were performed.Abstracts from major gastroenterological meetings were also searched to identify research submitted in abstract form only. The trial registry web site www.ClinicalTrials.gov was searched to identify registered but unpublished trials. Finally, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Functional Bowel Disorders Group Specialized Trials Register were searched for other studies.nnnSELECTION CRITERIAnRandomized controlled trials assessing medical therapy for patients with biopsy-proven lymphocytic colitis were considered for inclusion DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data was independently extracted by at least two authors. Any disagreements were resolved by consensus. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis. The primary outcome was clinical response as defined by the included studies. Secondary outcome measures included histological response as defined by the included studies, quality of life as measured by a validated instrument and the occurrence of adverse events. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome and selected secondary outcomes was assessed using the GRADE criteria. Data were combined for analysis if they assessed the same treatments. Dichotomous data were combined using a pooled RR along with corresponding 95% CI. A fixed-effect model was used for the pooled analysis.nnnMAIN RESULTSnFive RCTs (149 participants) met the inclusion criteria. These studies assessed bismuth subsalicylate versus placebo, budesonide versus placebo, mesalazine versus mesalazine plus cholestyramine and beclometasone dipropionate versus mesalazine. The study which assessed mesalazine versus mesalazine plus cholestyramine and the study which assessed beclometasone dipropionate versus mesalazine were judged to be at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding. The study which compared bismuth subsalicylate versus us placebo was judged as low quality due to a very small sample size and limited data. The other 3 studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. Budesonide (9 mg/day for 6 to 8 weeks) was significantly more effective than placebo for induction of clinical and histological response. Clinical response was noted in 88% of budesonide patients compared to 38% of placebo patients (2 studies; 57 participants; RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.25 to 3.33; GRADE = low). Histological response was noted in 78% of budesonide patients compared to 33% of placebo patients (2 studies; 39 patients; RR 2.44, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.28; GRADE = low). Forty-one patients were enrolled in the study assessing mesalazine (2.4 g/day) versus mesalazine plus cholestyramine (4 g/day). Clinical response was noted in 85% of patients in the mesalazine group compared to 86% of patients in the mesalazine plus cholestyramine group (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.28; GRADE = low). Five patients were enrolled in the trial studying bismuth subsalicylate (nine 262 mg tablets daily for 8 weeks versus placebo). There were no differences in clinical (P=0.10) or histological responses (P=0.71) in patients treated with bismuth subsalicylate compared with placebo (GRADE = very low). Forty-six patients were enrolled in the trial studying beclometasone dipropionate (5 mg/day or 10 mg/day) versus mesalazine (2.4 g/day). There were no differences in clinical remission at 8 weeks (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.24; GRADE = low) and 12 months of treatment (RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.40 to 4.18; GRADE = very low). Although patients receiving beclometasone dipropionate (84%) and mesalazine (86%) achieved clinical remission at 8 weeks, it was not maintained at 12 months (26% and 20%, respectively). Adverse events reported in the budesonide studies include nausea, vomiting, neck pain, abdominal pain, hyperhidrosis and headache. Nausea and skin rash were reported as adverse events in the mesalazine study. Adverse events in the beclometasone dipropionate trial include nausea, sleepiness and change of mood. No adverse events were reported in the bismuth subsalicylate study.nnnAUTHORS CONCLUSIONSnLow quality evidence suggests that budesonide may be effective for the treatment of active lymphocytic colitis. This benefit needs to be confirmed by a large placebo -controlled trial. Low quality evidence also suggests that mesalazine with or without cholestyramine and beclometasone dipropionate may be effective for the treatment of lymphocytic colitis, however this needs to be confirmed by large placebo-controlled studies. No conclusions can be made regarding bismuth subsalicylate due to the very small number of patients in the study, Further trials studying interventions for lymphocytic colitis are warranted.

Sargramostim (GM-CSF) for induction of remission in Crohn's disease: a cochrane inflammatory bowel disease and functional bowel disorders systematic review of randomized trials.

Background: We planned to systematically review the efficacy of sargramostim (granulocyte colony stimulating factor [GM‐CSF]) for remission induction in patients with Crohns disease (CD). Methods: A literature search to April 2011 was performed to identify all randomized trials studying sargramostim in patients with CD. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate study quality and the GRADE criteria were utilized to assess the overall quality of the evidence. Results: Three randomized studies (total 537 patients) were identified. The risk of bias was low for the three included studies. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients who achieved clinical remission (GM‐CSF 25.3%; placebo 17.5%; relative risk [RR] 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80–3.50; P = 0.17), or 100‐point clinical response (GM‐CSF 38.3%; placebo 24.8%; RR 1.71 95% CI 0.98–2.97; P = 0.06). There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients (GM‐CSF 95.8%; placebo 89.3%) who experienced adverse events (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.99–1.16; P = 0.08), or serious adverse events (GM‐CSF 12.0% vs. placebo 4.8%; RR 2.21; 95% CI 0.84–5.81; P = 0.11). Conclusions: Sargramostim does not appear to be more effective than placebo for induction of clinical remission or improvement in active CD. However, the GRADE analysis indicates that the overall quality of the evidence for the primary and secondary outcomes was low due to sparse data and heterogeneity, indicating that further research likely would have a significant impact on the effect estimates. (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012;)

Unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis: a Cochrane inflammatory bowel disease and functional bowel disorders systematic review of randomized trials.

Background: We aimed to systematically review the efficacy of unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) for remission induction in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods: A literature search to April 2011 was performed to identify all randomized trials studying UFH or LMWH use in patients with UC. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess study quality. Results: LMWH administered subcutaneously showed no benefit over placebo for any outcome, including clinical remission, and clinical, endoscopic, or histological improvement. High‐dose LMWH administered via an extended colon‐release tablet demonstrated benefit over placebo for clinical remission (odds ratio [OR] 2.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32–5.67; P = 0.007), clinical improvement (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.30–6.87; P = 0.01), and endoscopic improvement (OR 2.25; 95% CI 1.01–5.01; P = 0.05) but not endoscopic remission or histologic improvement. LMWH was not beneficial when added to standard therapy for clinical remission, clinical improvement, endoscopic remission, or endoscopic improvement. One study examining UFH versus corticosteroids for the treatment of severe UC demonstrated the inferiority of UFH for clinical improvement. More patients assigned to UFH had rectal hemorrhage as an adverse event. Conclusions: LMWH administered by extended colon‐release tablets may be effective for the treatment of active UC. This benefit needs to be confirmed by further randomized controlled studies. The same benefits were not seen when LMWH was administered subcutaneously at lower doses. There is no evidence to support the use of UFH for the treatment of active UC. (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2011;)

A randomized controlled trial of a humanized Alpha4Beta7 antibody in Ulcerative Colitis (UC)

A randomized controlled trial of a humanized Alpha 4 Beta 7 antibody in Ulcerative Colitis (UC)