Ralph Mueller

Once-daily versus three-times-daily mesalazine granules in active ulcerative colitis: A double-blind, double-dummy, randomised non-inferiority trial

Objectives: To determine the therapeutic equivalence and safety of once daily (OD) versus three times daily (TID) dosing of a total daily dose of 3 g Salofalk (mesalazine) granules in patients with active ulcerative colitis. Design: A randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, multicentre, international, phase III non-inferiority study. Setting: 54 centres in 13 countries. Patients: 380 patients with confirmed diagnosis of established or first attack of ulcerative colitis (clinical activity index (CAI)>4 and endoscopic index ⩾4 at baseline) were randomised and treated. Interventions: 8-week treatment with either 3 g OD or 1 g TID mesalazine granules. Main outcome measures: Clinical remission (CAI⩽4) at study end. Results: 380 patients were evaluable for efficacy and safety by intention-to-treat (ITT); 345 for per protocol (PP) analysis. In the ITT population, 79.1% in the OD group (n = 191) and 75.7% in the TID group (n = 189) achieved clinical remission (p<0.0001 for non-inferiority). Significantly more patients with proctosigmoiditis achieved clinical remission in the OD group (86%; n = 97) versus the TID group (73%; n = 100; p = 0.0298). About 70% of patients in both treatment groups achieved endoscopic remission, and 35% in the OD group and 41% in the TID group achieved histological remission. About 80% of all patients preferred OD dosing. Similar numbers of adverse events occurred in 55 patients (28.8%) in the OD group and in 61 patients (32.3%) in the TID group, indicating that the two dosing regimens were equally safe and well tolerated. Conclusions: OD 3 g mesalazine granules are as effective and safe as a TID 1 g schedule. With respect to the best possible adherence of patients to the treatment, OD dosing of mesalazine should be the preferred application mode in active ulcerative colitis. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00449722

Azathioprine versus mesalazine for prevention of postoperative clinical recurrence in patients with Crohn's disease with endoscopic recurrence: efficacy and safety results of a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, multicentre trial

Objective The aim of the study was to compare azathioprine versus mesalazine tablets for the prevention of clinical recurrence in patients with postoperative Crohns disease (CD) with moderate or severe endoscopic recurrence. Methods This was a 1 year, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised study which took place in 21 gastroenterology centres in Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany and Israel. The study participants were 78 adults with CD who had undergone resection with ileocolonic anastomosis in the preceding 6–24 months without subsequent clinical recurrence and with a Crohns disease activity index (CDAI) score <200, but with moderate or severe endoscopic recurrence. The study drugs were azathioprine 2.0–2.5 mg/kg/day or mesalazine 4 g/day over 1 year. The primary end point was therapeutic failure during 1 year, defined as a CDAI score ≥200 and an increase of ≥60 points from baseline, or study drug discontinuation due to lack of efficacy or intolerable adverse drug reaction. Results Treatment failure occurred in 22.0% (9/41) of azathioprine-treated patients and 10.8% (4/37) of mesalazine-treated patients, a difference of 11.1% (95% CI −5.0% to 27.3%, p=0.19). Clinical recurrence was significantly less frequent with azathioprine versus mesalazine (0/41 (0%) vs 4/37 (10.8%), p=0.031), whereas study drug discontinuation due to adverse drug reactions only occurred in azathioprine-treated patients (9/41 (22.0%) vs 0%, p=0.002). The proportion of patients showing ≥1 point reduction in Rutgeerts score between baseline and month 12 was 63.3% (19/30) and 34.4% (11/32) in the azathioprine and mesalazine groups, respectively (p=0.023). Conclusions In this population of patients with postoperative CD at high risk of clinical recurrence, superiority for azathioprine versus mesalazine could not be demonstrated for therapeutic failure. Clinical trial registration number NCT00946946.

Budesonide Is Effective in Treating Lymphocytic Colitis: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS Budesonide is effective in treating collagenous colitis, but no treatment is established for lymphocytic colitis. We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the effects of budesonide in patients with lymphocytic colitis. METHODS Forty-two patients (median age, 61 years) with lymphocytic colitis and chronic diarrhea were randomly assigned to groups that were given oral doses of budesonide (9 mg/d) or placebo for 6 weeks. Nonresponders at week 6 were given open-label budesonide (9 mg/d) for 6 additional weeks. A complete colonoscopy and histologic and quality-of-life analyses were performed at baseline and at week 6. The primary end point was clinical remission at 6 weeks, with last observation carried forward (LOCF). All patients who left the study in clinical remission were followed for relapse. RESULTS At week 6, 86% of patients given budesonide were in clinical remission (with LOCF) compared with 48% of patients given placebo (P = .010). Furthermore, open-label budesonide therapy induced clinical remission in 7 of 8 patients given placebo. Histologic remission was observed in 73% of patients given budesonide compared with 31% given placebo (P = .030). Only 1 patient discontinued budesonide therapy prematurely. During a mean follow-up period of 14 months, 15 patients (44.1%) experienced a clinical relapse (after a mean of 2 months); 8 of the relapsing patients were retreated with and responded again to budesonide. CONCLUSIONS Budesonide effectively induces clinical remission in patients with lymphocytic colitis and significantly improves histology results after 6 weeks. Clinical relapses occur but can be treated again with budesonide.

A randomised, double-blind trial comparing budesonide formulations and dosages for short-term treatment of eosinophilic oesophagitis

Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of two different budesonide formulations (effervescent tablet for orodispersible use (BET) and viscous suspension (BVS)) with different daily dosages for short-term treatment of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE). Design Adults with active EoE (n=76) randomly received 14 days’ treatment with either BET 2×1 mg/day (BET1, n=19) or BET 2×2 mg/day (BET2, n=19), or BVS 2×5 mL (0.4 mg/mL)/day (BVS, n=19) or placebo (n=19) in a double-blind, double-dummy fashion, with a 2-week follow-up. Primary end point was histological remission (mean of <16 eosinophils/mm2 hpf). Secondary end points included endoscopy score, dysphagia score, drug safety and patients preference for drug formulation. Results Histological remission occurred in 100%, 94.7% and 94.7% of budesonide (BET1, BET2, BVS, respectively) and in 0% of placebo recipients (p<0.0001). The improvement in total endoscopic intensity score was significantly higher in the three budesonide groups compared with placebo. Dysphagia improved in all groups at the end of treatment; however, improvement of dysphagia persisted only in those treated with BET1 (p=0.0196 vs placebo). There were no serious adverse events. Local fungal infection (stained fungi) occurred in two patients of each budesonide group (10.5%). The effervescent tablet was preferred by 80% of patients. Conclusions BET or BVS was highly effective and safe for short-term treatment of EoE. The 1 mg (twice daily) dosage was equally effective as the 2 mg twice daily dosage. The majority of patients preferred the effervescent tablet formulation. ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02280616; EudraCT number, 2009-016692-29.

Randomised clinical trial: a comparative dose-finding study of three arms of dual release mesalazine for maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis.

Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2011; 33: 313–322

Clinical trial: randomized‐controlled clinical study comparing the efficacy and safety of a low‐volume vs. a high‐volume mesalazine foam in active distal ulcerative colitis

Background  Rectally administered mesalazine (mesalamine; 5‐aminosalicylic acid) is the first‐line therapy for treatment of distal ulcerative colitis. Recently, a high‐volume 5‐aminosalicylic acid foam has been shown to be as effective and safe as standard 5‐aminosalicylic acid enema.

Low-dose budesonide for maintenance of clinical remission in collagenous colitis: a randomised, placebo-controlled, 12-month trial

Objective This 1-year study aimed to assess low-dose budesonide therapy for maintenance of clinical remission in patients with collagenous colitis. Design A prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled study beginning with an 8-week open-label induction phase in which patients with histologically confirmed active collagenous colitis received budesonide (Budenofalk, 9 mg/day initially, tapered to 4.5 mg/day), after which 92 patients in clinical remission were randomised to budesonide (mean dose 4.5 mg/day; Budenofalk 3 mg capsules, two or one capsule on alternate days) or placebo in a 12-month double-blind phase with 6 months treatment-free follow-up. Primary endpoint was clinical remission throughout the double-blind phase. Results Clinical remission during open-label treatment was achieved by 84.5% (93/110 patients). The median time to remission was 10.5 days (95% CI (9.0 to 14.0 days)). The maintenance of clinical remission at 1 year was achieved by 61.4% (27/44 patients) in the budesonide group versus 16.7% (8/48 patients) receiving placebo (treatment difference 44.5% in favour of budesonide; 95% CI (26.9% to 62.7%), p<0.001). Health-related quality of life was maintained during the 12-month double-blind phase in budesonide-treated patients. During treatment-free follow-up, 82.1% (23/28 patients) formerly receiving budesonide relapsed after study drug discontinuation. Low-dose budesonide over 1 year resulted in few suspected adverse drug reactions (7/44 patients), all non-serious. Conclusions Budesonide at a mean dose of 4.5 mg/day maintained clinical remission for at least 1 year in the majority of patients with collagenous colitis and preserved health-related quality of life without safety concerns. Treatment extension with low-dose budesonide beyond 1 year may be beneficial given the high relapse rate after budesonide discontinuation. Trial registration numbers http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01278082) and http://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu (EudraCT: 2007-001315-31).

Peripheral blood eosinophils and other non‐invasive biomarkers can monitor treatment response in eosinophilic oesophagitis

Monitoring of the treatment response in eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) requires structured endoscopical and histological examination of the oesophagus. Less invasive methods would be highly desirable.

A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of trichuris suis ova in active crohn's disease

Abstract Background and Aims: To investigate the efficacy and safety of three different dosages of embryonated, viable eggs of Trichuris suis [TSO] versus placebo for induction of remission in mildly-to-moderately active ileocolonic, uncomplicated Crohn’s disease [CD]. Methods: Adults with active CD [n = 252] randomly received six fortnightly doses of 250, 2500, or 7500 TSO/15 ml suspension/day [TSO 250, TSO 2500, TSO 7500], or 15 ml placebo solution/day, in a double-blind fashion, with 4 weeks’ follow-up. Primary endpoint was the rate of clinical remission [Crohn’s Disease Activity Index [CDAI] < 150] at end of treatment, ie at Week 12 or withdrawal. Secondary endpoints included the course of clinical remission, rate of clinical response, change in CDAI, change in markers of inflammation, mucosal healing, and Physician’s Global Assessment. Results: Clinical remission at Week 12 occurred in 38.5%, 35.2%, and 47.2% of TSO 250, TSO 2500, and TSO 7500 patients, respectively, and in 42.9% of placebo recipients. TSO induced a dose-dependent immunological response. There was no response regarding laboratory markers of inflammation. Other secondary efficacy variables also showed no advantage of TSO over placebo for treatment of active CD. Administration of TSO did not result in any serious adverse drug reaction. Review of non-serious suspected adverse drug reactions following TSO did not reveal any safety concerns. Conclusions: Administration of 250–7500 TSO fortnightly over 12 weeks was safe and showed a dose-dependent immunological response, but no TSO dose showed a clinically relevant effect over placebo for induction of clinical remission or response in mildly-to-moderately active, ileocolonic CD.

Once versus three times daily dosing of oral budesonide for active Crohn's disease: A double-blind, double-dummy, randomised trial

BACKGROUND Oral budesonide 9 mg/day represents first-line treatment of mild-to-moderately active ileocolonic Crohns disease. However, there is no precise recommendation for budesonide dosing due to lack of comparative data. A once-daily (OD) 9 mg dose may improve adherence and thereby efficacy. METHODS An eight-week, double-blind, double-dummy randomised trial compared budesonide 9 mg OD versus 3mg three-times daily (TID) in patients with mild-to-moderately active ileocolonic Crohns disease. Primary endpoint was clinical remission defined as CDAI <150 at week 8 (last observation carried forward). RESULTS The final intent-to-treat population comprised 471 patients (238 [9 mg OD], 233 [3 mg TID]). The confirmatory population for the primary endpoint analysis was the interim per protocol population (n=377; 188 [9 mg OD], 189 [3mg TID]), in which the primary endpoint was statistically non-inferior with budesonide 9 mg OD versus 3 mg TID. Clinical remission was achieved in 71.3% versus 75.1%, a difference of -3.9% (95% CI [-14.6%; 6.4%]; p=0.020 for non-inferiority). The mean (SD) time to remission was 21.9 (13.8) days versus 21.4 (14.6) days with budesonide 9 mg OD versus 3 mg TID, respectively. In a subpopulation of 122 patients with baseline SES-CD ulcer score ≥1, complete mucosal healing occurred in 32.8% (21/64) on 9 mg OD and 41.4% (24/58) on 3mg TID; deep remission (mucosal healing and clinical remission) was observed in 26.6% (17/64) and 32.8% (19/58) of patients, respectively. Treatment-emergent suspected adverse drug reactions were reported in 4.6% of 9 mg OD and 4.7% of 3 mg TID patients. CONCLUSIONS Budesonide at the recommended dose of 9 mg/day can be administered OD without impaired efficacy and safety compared to 3mg TID dosing in mild-to-moderately active Crohns disease.