Wolfgang Kruis

Maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis with the probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 is as effective as with standard mesalazine

Background and aim: Evidence exists for the pathogenic role of the enteric flora in inflammatory bowel disease. Probiotics contain living microorganisms which exert health effects on the host. We compared the efficacy in maintaining remission of the probiotic preparation Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 and established therapy with mesalazine in patients with ulcerative colitis. Patients and methods: In total, 327 patients were recruited and assigned to a double blind, double dummy trial to receive either the probiotic drug 200 mg once daily (n = 162) or mesalazine 500 mg three times daily (n = 165). The study lasted for 12 months and patients were assessed by clinical and endoscopic activity indices (Rachmilewitz) as well as by histology. The primary aim of the study was to confirm equivalent efficacy of the two drugs in the prevention of relapses. Results: The per protocol analysis revealed relapses in 40/110 (36.4%) patients in the E coli Nissle 1917 group and 38/112 (33.9%) in the mesalazine group (significant equivalence p = 0.003). Subgroup analyses showed no differences between the treatment groups in terms of duration and localisation of disease or pretrial treatment. Safety profile and tolerability were very good for both groups and were not different. Conclusions: The probiotic drug E coli Nissle 1917 shows efficacy and safety in maintaining remission equivalent to the gold standard mesalazine in patients with ulcerative colitis. The effectiveness of probiotic treatment further underlines the pathogenetic significance of the enteric flora.

Double-blind comparison of an oral Escherichia coli preparation and mesalazine in maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis

Aminosalicylates are used as standard treatment for maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis. As yet, there is no other existing alternative with proven efficacy. In light of the hypothesis that the intestinal environment may contribute to the pathophysiology of ulcerative colitis, a trial was conducted to test the effects of probiotic treatment with an oral preparation of non‐pathogenic E. coli.

European evidence-based Consensus on the management of ulcerative colitis: Current management

### 5.1 General The general principles for treating active ulcerative colitis are to consider the activity, distribution (proctitis, left-sided, extensive,1 and pattern of disease (relapse frequency, course of disease, response to previous medications, side-effect profile of medication, extra-intestinal manifestation), before treatment decisions are made in conjunction with the patient. #### 5.1.1 Disease activity The principal scoring systems used for clinical trials are covered in Section 5.1.2 and have been comprehensively reviewed.2 Some additional points are clinically relevant. In clinical practice it matters most to distinguish severe ulcerative colitis necessitating hospital admission from those with mild or moderate disease who can generally be treated as outpatients. The simplest, best validated and most widely used index for identifying acute severe UC remains that of Truelove & Wi_tts 3: any patient who has a bloody stool frequency ≥ 6/day and a tachycardia (> 90 bpm), or temperature > 37.8 °C, or anaemia (haemoglobin 30 mm/h) has severe ulcerative colitis (Table 1.3). This index has been used in 20/32 studies of intensive intravenous treatment for severe UC.4 Only one additional criterion in addition to the bloody stool frequency ≥ 6/day is needed to define a severe attack.5 While these criteria have the major limitation of being unresponsive and cannot track the course of disease, they do distinguish the severe from the moderate or mild and have value in everyday practice because they are easy to use, which no other index achieves. It should be standard practice to confirm active colitis by sigmoidoscopy or proctoscopy before starting treatment. Rectal mucosal biopsy helps exclude unexpected causes of symptoms similar to active disease (such as cytomegalovirus, amoebic, or other infection, rectal mucosal prolapse, Crohns disease, or even irritable bowel syndrome and haemorrhoidal bleeding). #### 5.1.2 Approach Patients should be encouraged to participate actively in …

Genetic Analysis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease in a Large European Cohort Supports Linkage to Chromosomes 12 and 16

BACKGROUND & AIMS Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a complex disorder of unknown etiology. Epidemiological investigations suggest a genetic basis for IBD. Recent genetic studies have identified several IBD linkages. The significance of these linkages will be determined by studies in large patient collections. The aim of this study was to replicate IBD linkages on chromosomes 12 and 16 in a large European cohort. METHODS Three hundred fifty-nine affected sibling pairs from 274 kindreds were genotyped using microsatellite markers spanning chromosomes 12 and 16. Affection status of the sibling pairs was defined as Crohns disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC). RESULTS Nonparametric statistical analyses showed linkage for both chromosomes. Two-point results for chromosome 12 peaked at D12S303 (logarithm of odds [LOD], 2.15; P = 0.003) for CD and at D12S75 (LOD, 0.92; P = 0.03) for UC. Multipoint analyses produced a peak LOD of 1.8 for CD. Chromosome 16 showed linkage for CD at marker D16S415 (LOD, 1.52; P = 0.007). Multipoint support peaked above markers D16S409 and D16S411 (LOD, 1.7). CONCLUSIONS These data are consistent with linkage of IBD to chromosomes 12 and 16. The replication of genetic risk loci in a large independent family collection indicates important and common susceptibility genes in these regions and will facilitate identification of genes involved in IBD.

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

Updated German Guideline on Diagnosis and Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis, 2011

! Hintergrund Die Colitis ulcerosa (CU) ist neben dem Morbus Crohn die wichtigste chronisch-entzundliche Darmerkrankung (CED). Die Inzidenz fur die Colitis ulcerosa liegt in Deutschland bei bei 3,0–3,9 pro 100000 Einwohner [1, 2]. Die Pravalenz durfte in der westlichen Welt derzeit bei 160– 250 pro 100000 Einwohner liegen [3, 4]. Der hochste Gipfel der alterspezifischen Inzidenz liegt bei den 16bis 25-Jahrigen, wenn auch die Verteilung uber die Altersdekaden weit gleichmasiger ist als fruher beschrieben wurde [2]. Somit beginnt fur die meisten Patienten ihre Erkrankung wahrend der Schulzeit oder der Berufausbildung und dauert wahrend ihres gesamten beruflichen Lebens an. Daraus folgt, dass durch die Erkrankung nicht nur direkte Kosten (Medikamente, Arztbesuche, Operationen, Krankenhausaufenthalte etc.), sondern auch umfangreiche indirekte Kosten (Rente, Arbeitsausfalle etc.) entstehen. Es ist davon auszugehen, dass bei Patienten mit CU ca. die Halfte der Gesamtkosten den indirekten Kosten zuzuordnen sind [5]. An direkten medizinischen Kosten wurden dabei zuletzt zwischen 2500 und 5000€ pro Inhaltsverzeichnis! Hintergrund Die Colitis ulcerosa (CU) ist neben dem Morbus Crohn die wichtigste chronisch-entzündliche Darmerkrankung (CED). Die Inzidenz für die Colitis ulcerosa liegt in Deutschland bei bei 3,0–3,9 pro 100000 Einwohner [1, 2]. Die Prävalenz dürfte in der westlichen Welt derzeit bei 160– 250 pro 100000 Einwohner liegen [3, 4]. Der höchste Gipfel der alterspezifischen Inzidenz liegt bei den 16bis 25-Jährigen, wenn auch die Verteilung über die Altersdekaden weit gleichmäßiger ist als früher beschrieben wurde [2]. Somit beginnt für die meisten Patienten ihre Erkrankung während der Schulzeit oder der Berufausbildung und dauert während ihres gesamten beruflichen Lebens an. Daraus folgt, dass durch die Erkrankung nicht nur direkte Kosten (Medikamente, Arztbesuche, Operationen, Krankenhausaufenthalte etc.), sondern auch umfangreiche indirekte Kosten (Rente, Arbeitsausfälle etc.) entstehen. Es ist davon auszugehen, dass bei Patienten mit CU ca. die Hälfte der Gesamtkosten den indirekten Kosten zuzuordnen sind [5]. An direkten medizinischen Kosten wurden dabei zuletzt zwischen 2500 und 5000€ pro Inhaltsverzeichnis

Mesalazine inhibits activation of transcription factor NF-κB in inflamed mucosa of patients with ulcerative colitis

OBJECTIVES:The salicylate mesalazine is commonly used for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases, yet its precise mechanism of action is unknown. Because transcription factor NF-κB plays an important role in inflammatory bowel diseases, we investigated the effects of mesalazine therapy on NF-κB activation in patients with ulcerative colitis.METHODS:A total of 20 patients with moderately active ulcerative colitis received mesalazine for 8 wk. Biopsies were taken before and after drug administration and analyzed for NF-κB activation using an antibody specific for active NF-κB.RESULTS:In biopsies of active ulcerative colitis but not in noninflamed mucosa, activation of NF-κB was detected predominantly in macrophages. Mesalazine therapy resulted in a strong abrogation of NF-κB activation in situ.CONCLUSIONS:Our results suggest that the therapeutic properties of mesalazine rely at least in part on the inhibition of NF-κB activation, resulting in the suppression of proinflammatory gene expression in the inflamed mucosa.

Chemoprevention of colorectal neoplasia in ulcerative colitis: the effect of 6-mercaptopurine.

BACKGROUND & AIMS Evidence suggests that mesalamine-based anti-inflammatory medicines may prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) in ulcerative colitis (UC). If mesalamine exerts its chemopreventive effect by its anti-inflammatory activity, then other medications that reduce colitis activity also should possess chemopreventive properties. Our aim was to determine the effect of the immunomodulators 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) and azathioprine (AZA) in preventing the development of dysplasia or CRC in UC. METHODS Patients with UC who underwent a surveillance colonoscopy in 1996-1997 were identified from a gastrointestinal pathology database. A proportional hazards analysis assessing 6MP/AZA use as a time-changing covariate was performed to evaluate the effect of 6MP/AZA on: (1) progression to any neoplasia (low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, or CRC), and (2) progression to advanced neoplasia (high-grade dysplasia or CRC). RESULTS A total of 315 subjects met inclusion criteria and were followed for an average of 8 years from their first surveillance examination. There were no significant differences in rates of progression to advanced neoplasia or to any neoplasia between 6MP/AZA users and never-users by log-rank testing. The proportional hazards analysis resulted in hazard ratios of 1.06 (95% confidence interval, .59-1.93) and 1.30 (95% confidence interval, .45-3.75) when considering the effect of exposure to 6MP/AZA on progression to any or to advanced neoplasia, respectively. The results were unaffected by known potential confounders. CONCLUSIONS In UC patients with no initial history of dysplasia, 6MP/AZA use appears to have little or no effect on the rate of neoplastic transformation in the colon. Importantly, the use of 6MP/AZA did not increase malignant transformation in UC.

Low dose balsalazide (1.5 g twice daily) and mesalazine (0.5 g three times daily) maintained remission of ulcerative colitis but high dose balsalazide (3.0 g twice daily) was superior in preventing relapses

BACKGROUND Balsalazide is a new 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) containing prodrug. Its efficacy in comparison with standard mesalazine therapy and the optimum dose for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis are still unclear. AIMS To compare the relapse preventing effect and safety profile of two doses of balsalazide and a standard dose of Eudragit coated mesalazine. METHODS A total of 133 patients with ulcerative colitis in remission were recruited to participate in a double blind, multicentre, randomised trial: 49 patients received balsalazide 1.5 g twice daily, 40 received balsalazide 3.0 g twice daily, and 44 received mesalazine 0.5 g three times daily. Efficacy assessments were clinical activity index (CAI) and endoscopic score according to Rachmilewitz, and a histological score. In addition, laboratory tests were performed and urinary excretion of 5-ASA and its metaboliteN-Ac-5-ASA was analysed. The study lasted for 26 weeks. RESULTS Balsalazide 3.0 g twice daily resulted in a significantly higher clinical remission rate (77.5%) than balsalazide 1.5 g twice daily (43.8%) and mesalazine 0.5 g three times daily (56.8%) (p=0.006). The respective times to relapse were 161 days, 131 days (p=0.003), and 144 days (NS). Accordingly, pairwise contrasts of the final endoscopic score demonstrated a significant difference (p=0.005) between the two balsalazide treatment groups while differences between either of these two groups and mesalazine were not statistically significant. Patients treated with balsalazide excreted less 5-ASA andN-Ac-5-ASA than patients receiving mesalazine but these differences were not statistically significant. Discontinuation of the trial because of adverse effects occurred in nine patients: three in the balsalazide 1.5 g twice daily group, two in the balsalazide 3.0 g twice daily group, and four in the mesalazine 0.5 g three times daily group. No clinically important new drug safety related findings were identified in this study. CONCLUSIONS High dose balsalazide (3.0 g twice daily) was superior in maintaining remission in patients with ulcerative colitis compared with a low dose (1.5 g twice daily) or a standard dose of mesalazine (0.5 g three times daily). All three treatments were safe and well tolerated.

Long-Term Effectiveness of Azathioprine in IBD Beyond 4 Years: A European Multicenter Study in 1176 Patients

In Crohn’s disease the optimal duration of azathioprine treatment is still controversial and for ulcerative colitis only limited data are available to support its efficacy. Charts of 1176 patients with IBD from 16 European centers were analyzed. Flare incidences and steroid dosages were assessed for the time before and during treatment and after discontinuation. Within the first 4 years, azathioprine suppressed flare incidence and steroid consumption in both diseases (P < 0.001). While in CD discontinuation after 3–4 years did not lead to reactivation, this was the case in UC. However, continuation beyond 4 years further improved clinical activity in CD and steroid requirement in both diseases (P < 0.001). Discontinuation of azathioprine may thus be considered after 3–4 years in CD patients in complete remission without steroid requirement. In all other CD patients and for UC patients in general, continuation seems beneficial. These results support a novel differential algorithm for long-term azathioprine therapy in IBD.