Dataset Information

Randomised controlled trial of mesalazine in IBS.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Low-grade intestinal inflammation plays a role in the pathophysiology of IBS. In this trial, we aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of mesalazine in patients with IBS.

Design

We conducted a phase 3, multicentre, tertiary setting, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with Rome III confirmed IBS. Patients were randomly assigned to either mesalazine, 800 mg, or placebo, three times daily for 12 weeks, and were followed for additional 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was satisfactory relief of abdominal pain/discomfort for at least half of the weeks of the treatment period. The key secondary endpoint was satisfactory relief of overall IBS symptoms. Supportive analyses were also performed classifying as responders patients with a percentage of affirmative answers of at least 75% or >75% of time.

Results

A total of 185 patients with IBS were enrolled from 21 centres. For the primary endpoint, the responder patients were 68.6% in the mesalazine group versus 67.4% in the placebo group (p=0.870; 95% CI -12.8 to 15.1). In explorative analyses, with the 75% rule or >75% rule, the percentage of responders was greater in the mesalazine group with a difference over placebo of 11.6% (p=0.115; 95% CI -2.7% to 26.0%) and 5.9% (p=0.404; 95% CI -7.8% to 19.4%), respectively, although these differences were not significant. For the key secondary endpoint, overall symptoms improved in the mesalazine group and reached a significant difference of 15.1% versus placebo (p=0.032; 95% CI 1.5% to 28.7%) with the >75% rule.

Conclusions

Mesalazine treatment was not superior than placebo on the study primary endpoint. However, a subgroup of patients with IBS showed a sustained therapy response and benefits from a mesalazine therapy.

Trial registration number

ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT00626288.

SUBMITTER: Barbara G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4717362 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionIrritable bowel syndrome (IBS) has high rates of psychiatric comorbidity, and impairs health-related quality of life (HRQL). Cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for IBS, but access to treatment remains low. Our proposed solution is a CBT-based smartphone app, Zemedy.Methods and analysisThis randomised controlled trial of Zemedy (V.2.0) uses an education and relaxation training active control app meant to simulate treatment as usual. A target N of 300 participants complete baseline questionnaires and consent at screening, and are then allocated to either the immediate treatment (Zemedy) or the active control. Treatment lasts 8 weeks, after which both groups complete the same battery used at baseline, and the control group is crossed over to Zemedy. After another 8 weeks, the crossed-over participants will be surveyed once more. Follow-up questionnaires are administered at 3, 6 and 12 months post-treatment. Primary outcomes include gastrointestinal symptom severity and HRQL. Clinically significant change will be defined as post-treatment scores falling within 2 SD of the healthy mean. Analysis will include intent-to-treat between-groups comparisons, controlling for baseline symptom severity, as well as moderation and mediation analyses. We hypothesise that the Zemedy app will outperform the active control app in reducing IBS symptom severity and improving HRQL.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Pennsylvania. Results will provide essential information on the efficacy and acceptability of an app-based CBT treatment for IBS. The data gathered may help establish the Zemedy app as an empirically supported intervention for IBS and will assist funding bodies in deciding whether to invest in its further development and dissemination. The results will be disseminated to patients with IBS via the media and the company website, to healthcare professionals via professional training (e.g. webinars and grand rounds talks) and to researchers via conferences and publications.Trial registration numberNCT04665271 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04665271).

Project description:To address uncertainties prior to conducting a fully powered randomised controlled trial of Morita Therapy plus treatment as usual (TAU) versus TAU alone, or to determine that such a trial is not appropriate and/or feasible.Pilot parallel group randomised controlled feasibility trial.Participants aged ?18 years with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-IV major depressive disorder, with or without DSM-IV anxiety disorder(s), recruited from general practice record searches in Devon, UK.We randomised participants on a 1:1 basis stratified by symptom severity, concealing allocation using a secure independent web-based system, to receive TAU (control) or 8-12 sessions of Morita Therapy, a Japanese psychological therapy, plus TAU (intervention).Rates of recruitment, retention and treatment adherence; variance and estimated between-group differences in follow-up scores (on the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) (depressive symptoms); Generalised Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire 7 (anxiety symptoms); Short Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire/Work and Social Adjustment Scale (quality of life); Morita Attitudinal Scale for Arugamama (attitudes)) and their correlation with baseline scores.We recruited 68 participants, 5.1% (95% CI 3.4% to 6.6%) of those invited (34 control; 34 intervention); 64/68 (94%; 95% CI 88.3% to 99.7%) provided 4-month follow-up data. Participants had a mean age of 49 years and mean PHQ-9 score of 16.8; 61% were female. Twenty-four of 34 (70.6%) adhered to the minimum treatment dose. The follow-up PHQ-9 (future primary outcome measure) pooled SD was 6.4 (95% CI 5.5 to 7.8); the magnitude of correlation between baseline and follow-up PHQ-9 scores was 0.42 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.61). Of the participants, 66.7% and 30.0% recovered in the intervention and control groups, respectively; 66.7% and 13.3% responded to treatment in the intervention and control groups, respectively.A large-scale trial of Morita Therapy would require 133 participants per group and is feasible with minor modifications to the pilot trial protocol. Morita Therapy shows promise in treating depression and may provide patients with a distinct alternative to current treatments.ISRCTN17544090; Pre-results.

Project description:The role vitamin D intake/production plays in sarcoidosis-associated hypercalcaemia is uncertain. However, authoritative reviews have recommended avoiding sunlight exposure and vitamin D supplements, which might lead to adverse skeletal outcomes from vitamin D insufficiency. We investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on surrogate measures of skeletal health in patients with sarcoidosis and vitamin D insufficiency.Randomised, placebo-controlled trial.Clinical research centre.27 normocalcaemic patients with sarcoidosis and 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) <50 nmol/L.50 000 IU weekly cholecalciferol for 4 weeks, then 50 000 IU monthly for 11 months or placebo.The primary endpoint was the change in serum calcium over 12 months, and secondary endpoints included measurements of calcitropic hormones, bone turnover markers and bone mineral density (BMD).The mean age of participants was 57 years and 70% were women. The mean (SD) screening 25OHD was 35 (12) and 38 (9) nmol/L in the treatment and control groups, respectively. Vitamin D supplementation increased 25OHD to 94 nmol/L after 4 weeks, 84 nmol/L at 6 months and 78 nmol/L at 12 months, while levels remained stable in the control group. 1,25-Dihydroxy vitamin D levels were significantly different between the groups at 4 weeks, but not at 6 or 12 months. There were no between-groups differences in albumin-adjusted serum calcium, 24 h urine calcium, markers of bone turnover, parathyroid hormone or BMD over the trial. One participant developed significant hypercalcaemia after 6 weeks (total cholecalciferol dose 250 000 IU).In patients with sarcoidosis and 25OHD <50 nmol/L, vitamin D supplements did not alter average serum calcium or urine calcium, but had no benefit on surrogate markers of skeletal health and caused one case of significant hypercalcaemia.This trial is registered at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (http://www.anzctr.org.au). The registration number is ACTRN12607000364471, date of registration 5/7/2007.