Effect of budesonide enema on remission and relapse rate in distal ulcerative colitis and proctitis

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticosteroid enemas are equally effective as 5-ASA enemas in the treatment of active distal ulcerative colitis (UC). With the introduction of budesonide, the risk of systemic side effects may be reduced. We investigated whether budesonide enema, 2 mg/100 ml, administered twice daily (b.i.d.) could increase the remission rate in comparison with the once daily (o.d.) standard regimen. Furthermore, we evaluated whether 2 mg budesonide enema, given twice weekly, could have a relapse preventing effect. METHODS: 149 patients with active distal UC were treated in a controlled, double-blind multicentre study with two parallel groups: placebo enema in the morning and budesonide enema in the evening (i.e. 2 mg/day) or budesonide enema b.i.d. (i.e. 4 mg/day) until remission (absence of clinical symptoms and endoscopic healing) or at most 8 weeks. Patients in remission were randomized to either budesonide enema or placebo enema twice weekly for 24 weeks or until relapse. RESULTS: The remission rates at 4 weeks were 33% for o.d. and 41% for b.i.d. regimens (NS) and correspondingly 51% and 54% at 8 weeks (NS). The b.i.d. group had an increased frequency of impaired adrenal function, 32% versus 4.8% (P = 0.001). The relapse rates during maintenance treatment with budesonide enema and placebo were 15% versus 24% after 8 weeks, 31% versus 27% after 16 weeks and 41% versus 51% after 24 weeks (NS). CONCLUSION: Budesonide enema 2 mg o.d. appears to be the optimal dosage in active distal UC. We could not show that budesonide enema twice weekly is sufficient to maintain remission.     

Effect of weekend 5-aminosalicylic acid (mesalazine) enema as maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis: results from a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND: 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) is known to be effective in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis (UC). The aim of the current study was to investigate the effect of 5-ASA enemas, as a maintenance therapy for UC, when administered twice weekly as a weekend treatment regimen, compared to daily oral 5-ASA alone. We hypothesized that the weekend enema therapy would be better tolerated by patients who worked or attended school. METHODS: Between January 2004 and August 2005, patients with UC, in whom remission of the condition had just been induced, were randomly assigned to either: the weekend 5-ASA enema group (n=11), who received 1 g 5-ASA enemas twice a week on Saturday and Sunday plus oral 5-ASA 3 g/day for 7 days, or to the daily oral 5-ASA use only group (n=13), who received only oral 5-ASA 3 g/day for 7 days. The primary endpoint of the study was defined as the incidence of relapse. The study was stopped after 24 patients had been enrolled because an interim analysis showed a significant benefit of the weekend 5-ASA enema group. RESULTS: In the weekend enema group, 2 patients (18.2%) had relapses compared with 10 (76.9%) in the oral 5-ASA only group. The multivariate hazard ratio of relapse associated with weekend 5-ASA enema, relative to the oral alone group, was 0.19 (95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the beneficial effects of adding weekend 1 g 5-ASA enema to daily 3 g oral 5-ASA as maintenance therapy for UC.     

A randomized trial of nicotine enemas for active ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is largely a disease of nonsmokers in which transdermal nicotine improves the symptoms but often causes adverse events (AEs). Nicotine enemas cause fewer AEs and were used as supplemental treatment for active UC. METHODS: We treated 104 patients with active UC with either 6-mg nicotine enemas or placebo enemas for 6 weeks in a randomized double-blind study. Patients continued their oral therapy, if any, for UC: 68 patients were taking mesalamine, 15 patients were taking prednisolone, and 12 patients were taking thiopurines during the study. Clinical, sigmoidoscopic, and histologic assessments were made at baseline and at the end of the study and symptoms were recorded daily on a diary card. The primary end point was induction of clinical remission and clinical improvement also was measured by the UC disease activity index. After the study, patients then used nicotine enemas daily for 4 weeks and sigmoidoscopy with a biopsy examination was repeated. AEs and salivary cotinine levels were monitored throughout the study. RESULTS: Clinical remission was achieved in 14 of 52 (27%) patients on active treatment and 14 of 43 (33%) patients on placebo (P = .55). The UC disease activity index improved by 1.45 points in the active group and by 1.65 points for those on placebo (P = .88). Only 1 patient discontinued treatment because of an AE (abdominal pain). In the 47 patients taking mesalamine only, active treatment conferred benefit that was not statistically significant; disease remission occurred in 9 of 25 patients on active therapy and 4 of 21 patients on placebo (P = .20). CONCLUSIONS: Six-milligram nicotine enemas were well tolerated but were not found to be efficacious for active UC.     

A controlled randomized trial of budesonide versus prednisolone retention enemas in active distal ulcerative colitis

Sixty-four patients with active distal ulcerative colitis participated in a multicentre, randomized, investigator-blind trial to compare the effect of budesonide enema, 2 mg/100 ml, with prednisolone disodium phosphate enema, 31.25 mg/100 ml. Budesonide is a new potent corticosteroid with a rapid first-pass elimination. The patients were treated for 4 weeks, and the efficacy of the drugs were evaluated by sigmoidoscopy, histology, and subjective symptoms after 2 and 4 weeks. After 4 weeks of treatment 16 of 31 patients (52%) receiving budesonide enema had healed endoscopically, compared with 8 of 33 (24%) (p = 0.045) receiving prednisolone enema. Budesonide was superior to prednisolone in terms of both significantly improved sigmoidoscopic and histologic scores and subjective symptoms evaluated by visual analogue scales. The patients receiving prednisolone had a significant depression of endogenous cortisol levels during the treatment period, but not the patients receiving budesonide. Budesonide enema seems to be a promising therapy for active distal ulcerative colitis and causes no adverse reactions.     

Budesonide CIR capsules (once or twice daily divided-dose) in active Crohn's disease: a randomized placebo-controlled study in the United States

OBJECTIVES: Budesonide controlled ileal release (CIR) capsules deliver budesonide, a glucocorticosteroid with high topical and low systemic activity, to the distal ileum and the proximal colon. In four previous controlled trials in Crohn's disease, remission rates ranged from 51% to 69%. We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this drug in a population of patients in the United States with Crohn's disease. METHODS: In this multicenter, double blind, randomized trial, 200 patients in the United States with mild to moderate Crohn's disease (Crohn's Disease Activity Index [CDAI] between 200 and 450) involving the distal ileum and/or ascending colon received 9 mg of budesonide CIR once daily, 4.5 mg b.i.d., or placebos for 8 wk. The primary outcome was remission defined by a CDAI of 150 or less. RESULTS: Remission was achieved in 48%, 53%, and 33% with 9 mg once daily, 4.5 mg b.i.d., and placebos, respectively, after 8 wk of treatment. Differences between the groups were not significant. The differences in mean change from baseline CDAI between the combined budesonide and placebo groups was significant (p < 0.05). There was no difference in observed adverse events between treatment groups, although a modest decrease in plasma cortisol levels was observed relative to the placebo (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of symptomatic Crohn's disease with budesonide CIR capsules (9 mg daily) was safe, and remission rates were similar to those achieved in previous trials. Although the remission rate did not significantly differ from the placebo response in this study, there was a significant change in the mean CDAI from baseline in the combined treatment groups relative to the placebo.     

Combined oral and enema treatment with Pentasa (mesalazine) is superior to oral therapy alone in patients with extensive mild/moderate active ulcerative colitis: a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Oral aminosalicylates are well established in the treatment of active mild/moderate ulcerative colitis (UC) when the disease is extensive (that is, beyond the splenic flexure). The majority of clinical symptoms relate to disease activity in the distal part of the colon and therefore this study was designed to investigate if adding a mesalazine enema to oral mesalazine has additional benefit for patients with extensive mild/moderate active UC. METHODS: A randomised double blind study was performed in 127 ambulatory patients. All received 4 g/day (twice daily dosing) oral mesalazine for eight weeks. During the initial four weeks, they additionally received an enema at bedtime containing 1 g of mesalazine or placebo. Disease activity was assessed using the ulcerative colitis disease activity index, with clinical and endoscopic signs at four and eight weeks. RESULTS: Remission was obtained in 44% (95% confidence interval (CI) 31%, 58%) of the mesalazine enema group (Me) and in 34% (95% CI 21%, 49%) of the placebo enema group (Pl) at four weeks (p = 0.31) and in 64% (95% CI 50%, 76%) of the Me group versus 43% (95% CI 28%, 58%) of the Pl group at eight weeks (p = 0.03). Improvement was obtained in 89% (95% CI 78%, 96%) of the Me group versus 62% (95% CI 46%, 75%) of the Pl group at four weeks (p = 0.0008) and in 86% (95% CI 75%, 94%) of the Me group versus 68% (95% CI 53%, 81%) of the Pl group at eight weeks (p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: In patients with extensive mild/moderate active UC, the combination therapy is superior to oral therapy. It is safe, well accepted, and may be regarded as firstline treatment.     

Controlled, open, randomized multicenter trial comparing the effects of treatment on quality of life, safety and efficacy of budesonide foam and betamethasone enemas in patients with active distal ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND/AIMS: There is evidence of a higher quality of life with foams as compared with enemas. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of treatment with budesonide foam or betamethasone enema on the quality of life and the clinical outcome in patients with distal ulcerative colitis. METHODOLOGY: In an open multicenter trial, patients with active distal ulcerative colitis were randomized to receive 2 mg/50 mL budesonide foam or 5 mg/100 mL betamethasone enema. Primary outcome variable was the change in the mean Life Quality Index. Therapeutic efficacy was determined by clinical activity, endoscopical and histological indices. RESULTS: 38 patients were included in the study. The decrease of the mean Life Quality Index was more pronounced in the budesonide group. No significant difference in the efficacy of treatment was observed for both groups. Betamethasone suppressed the plasma cortisol level in the majority of the patients (87%) compared to only 22% of the patients receiving budesonide. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of life is not significantly different in patients during treatment with budesonide foam or betamethasone enema for active distal ulcerative colitis. However, while having comparable clinical efficacy budesonide foam has less effect on the plasma cortisol level thus potentially minimizing steroid side effects.     

Topical treatment of distal active ulcerative colitis with beclomethasone dipropionate or mesalamine: a single-blind randomized controlled trial

GOALS: Therapy for active ulcerative colitis (UC) usually involves rectal formulations of corticosteroids (CS), which are characterized by the risk of systemic steroid-related adverse effects. BACKGROUND: To compare the efficacy and safety of the topically acting CS beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) versus mesalamine (5-ASA) in the treatment of active UC. STUDY: Patients with mild to moderate distal active UC were randomized to a 6-week treatment with BDP 3 mg enema o.d. or 5-ASA 1 g enema daily in a single-blind, multicenter, parallel-group, controlled study. The primary efficacy variable was the decrease in Disease Activity Index (DAI) score. Safety variables were adrenal function, monitoring of adverse events, vital signs, and laboratory parameters. RESULTS: A total of 217 patients were enrolled and treated with BDP (n = 111) or 5-ASA (n = 106). A significant decrease in the DAI score (P < 0.05) was observed in both treatment groups, with a clinical remission rate of 36.7% in the BDP group and of 29.2% in the 5-ASA group. Both treatments were well tolerated. No changes from baseline in morning cortisol levels were observed in the BDP group. CONCLUSIONS: BDP administered as a rectal enema over a 6-week treatment period was efficacious and safe in patients with active UC, without interference with pituitary adrenal axis.     

A new oral delivery system for 5-ASA: preliminary clinical findings for MMx

BACKGROUND: Multi-matrix (MMx), a new delivery system for mesalazine, seems to release 5-aminosalicyclic acid (5-ASA) preferentially in the sigmoid colon. This study had 2 objectives: (1) to evaluate the therapeutic response to MMx in patients with active left-sided disease and (2) to gain additional insights as to how the therapy would compare with topical 5-ASA. METHODS: Patients received either 1.2 g of 5-ASA MMx three times per day plus placebo enema or 4 g of 5-ASA enema plus placebo tablets for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was clinical remission (clinical activity index < or =4) at 8 weeks. Secondary endpoints were endoscopic and histologic remissions. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients were enrolled. Clinical remission rates at 4 and 8 weeks were 57.5% and 60.0% for patients treated with MMx and 68.4% and 50.0% for patients randomized to 5-ASA enemas, respectively (95% confidence interval for the difference at 8 weeks, -12 to +32). Endoscopic remission was achieved by 45.0% of patients on 5-ASA MMx and by 36.8% of those on enema, whereas 15.0% and 8% of patients, respectively, showed histologic remission. Compliance was 97.0% for oral and 87.5% for topical therapy. In the enema group, compliance was 88.0% for the patients in remission and 65.5% for those with active disease. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary studies suggest that similar rates for induction of remission can be expected from 5-ASA enemas and MMx for patients with left-sided ulcerative colitis.     

High Prevalence of Hemochromatosis in Nord-Trøndelag

Sixty-four patients with active distal ulcerative colitis participated in a multicentre, randomized, investigator-blind trial to compare the effect of budesonide enema, 2 mg/100 ml, with prednisolone disodium phosphate enema, 31.25 mg/100 ml. Budesonide is a new potent corticosteroid with a rapid first-pass elimination. The patients were treated for 4 weeks, and the efficacy of the drugs were evaluated by sigmoid-oscopy, histology, and subjective symptoms after 2 and 4 weeks. After 4 weeks of treatment 16 of 31 patients (52%) receiving budesonide enema had healed endo-scopically, compared with 8 of 33 (24%) (p = 0.045) receiving prednisolone enema. Budesonide was superior to prednisolone in terms of both significantly improved sigrnoidoscopic and histologic scores and subjective symptoms evaluated by visual analogue scales. The patients receiving prednisolone had a significant depression of endogenous cortisol levels during the treatment period, but not the patients receiving budesonide. Budesonide enema seems to be a promising therapy for active distal ulcerative colitis and causes no adverse reactions.     

Incomplete Remission with Short-Term Prednisolone Treatment in Collagenous Colitis: a Randomized Study

Background: Microscopic colitis is a disease of unknown aetiology characterized by chronic watery diarrhoea and diarrhoea can be eliminated by budesonide but frequently recurs when budesonide is stopped. We studied whether prednisolone could induce remission in patients with disabling, chronic diarrhoea due to microscopic colitis. Methods: A double-blind, randomized (3:1) trial of oral prednisolone 50 &#114 mg daily or placebo for 2 weeks. Remission was defined as stool weight &#104 200 &#114 g/day or frequency &#104 2/day; effect was defined as >50% reduction of either stool frequency or weight. Six centres screened 31 consecutive patients and included 11 with collagenous colitis and 1 with lymphocytic colitis. Median duration of diarrhoea was 9 months. Patients had a normal colonoscopy, and no evidence of coeliac disease, bile acid or lactose malabsorption. Patients with gastrointestinal infection, previous gastrointestinal surgery, abnormal biochemical screening or recent treatment with immunosuppressive agents were excluded. Results: Stool weight (grams) declined in 7 of 9 patients given prednisolone and in 1 of 3 receiving placebo; changes in median weight were from 430 to 278 and from 825 to 489, respectively. Stool frequency (per day) declined from 6 to 3 and from 8 to 5. Remission was obtained in 2 and 0, and effect in 5 and 0, respectively (NS; Fisher exact test). Conclusions: Prednisolone 50 &#114 mg daily for 2 weeks induces incomplete remission in patients with chronic diarrhoea due to collagenous colitis.     

Maintenance therapy with budesonide and formoterol in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Lung function in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be improved acutely by oral corticosteroids and bronchodilators. Whether clinical improvement can be maintained by subsequent inhaled therapy is unknown. COPD patients (n=1,022, mean prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 36% predicted) initially received formoterol (9 microg b.i.d.) and oral prednisolone (30 mg o.d.) for 2 weeks. After this time, patients were randomised to b.i.d. inhaled budesonide/formoterol 320/9 microg, budesonide 400 microg, formoterol 9 microg or placebo for 12 months. Postmedication FEV1 improved by 0.21 L and health-related quality of life using the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) by 4.5 units after run-in. Fewer patients receiving budesonide/formoterol withdrew from the study than those receiving budesonide, formoterol or placebo. Budesonide/formoterol patients had a prolonged time to first exacerbation (254 versus 96 days) and maintained higher FEV1 (99% versus 87% of baseline), both primary variables versus placebo. They had fewer exacerbations (1.38 versus 1.80 exacerbations per patient per year), had higher prebronchodilator peak expiratory flow, and showed clinically relevant improvements in SGRQ versus placebo (-7.5 units). Budesonide/formoterol was more effective than either monocomponent in both primary variables. Budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler (Symbicort) maintains the benefit of treatment optimisation, stabilising lung function and delaying exacerbations more effectively than either component drug alone or placebo.     

A randomised trial comparing mesalazine and prednisolone foam enemas in patients with acute distal ulcerative colitis.

Distal ulcerative colitis can be treated with oral or rectal mesalazine, or both. A foam enema preparation has been developed and its efficacy investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mesalazine foam enemas compared with prednisolone foam enemas in the treatment of patients with acute distal ulcerative colitis. Patients aged over 18 years presenting with a relapse of distal ulcerative colitis were randomly allocated treatment with mesalazine foam enema (n = 149 evaluable patients) and prednisolone foam enema (n = 146 evaluable patients) for four weeks. A randomised multicentre investigator blind parallel group trial was conducted. It was found that after four weeks of treatment, clinical remission was achieved by 52% of mesalazine treated patients and 31% of patients treated with prednisolone (p < 0.001). There was a trend in favour of more patients in the mesalazine group achieving sigmoidoscopic remission (40% v 31%, p = 0.10). Histological remission was achieved by 27% and 21% of patients receiving mesalazine and prednisolone respectively. Symptoms improved in both treatment groups. Significantly more mesalazine patients had no blood in their stools after four weeks of treatment (67% v 40%, p < 0.001). Prednisolone treated patients had significantly fewer days with liquid stools than mesalazine patients, with a median of 0 and 1 days respectively by week 4 (p = 0.001). In this study mesalazine foam enema was superior to prednisolone foam enema with regards to clinical remission, this was supported by favourable trends in sigmoidoscopic and histological remission rates. Both treatments were well tolerated.     

Budesonide foam as a new therapeutic principle in distal ulcerative colitis in comparison with mesalazine enema. An open, controlled, randomized and prospective multicenter pilot study

Budesonide is a locally acting steroid with a high first-pass metabolism in the liver and low systemic effects. We performed the first pilot study comparing budesonide foam (1 mg/50 ml b.i.d.) with mesalazine enemas (4 g/60 ml o.d.). 33 patients from 3 centres were enrolled in this open randomized clinical trial. 16 patients got budesonide foam and 17 got mesalazine enemas. The drugs were administered for 4 weeks. Histological index (HI) and endoscopic index (EI) were assessed at day 1 and day 28, clinical activity index (CAI) at day 1, 14 and 28. For patients with left-sided colitis and proctosigmoiditis improvement was defined as decrease in CAI of > or = 2 points. For patients with proctitis improvement was defined as decrease in HI of > or = 1 point. The primary efficacy evaluation was performed with the intention to treat population (n = 32). Improvement was found in 67% of the patients in the budesonide group compared to 71% in the mesalazine group. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Adverse events were mild and rare in both groups. Both treatments had no significant influence on plasma cortisol. In this pilot study for distal ulcerative colitis budesonide foam is as safe and effective as mesalazine enema.     

A steroid enema, budesonide, lacking systemic effects for the treatment of distal ulcerative colitis or proctitis.

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether budesonide enema (2 mg/100 ml) had a significantly better effect than placebo in the treatment of distal ulcerative colitis or proctitis. The trial was of controlled, randomized, double-blind design and included 41 treated patients. The treatment time was 4 weeks, with revisits after 2 and 4 weeks. If no improvement was seen, the patient could be switched over to open-label therapy with budesonide enema. Sigmoidoscopy, histology, blood chemistry, and diary cards were used for estimating the effect of treatment. The results showed that budesonide was superior to placebo. Sigmoidoscopy and biopsy scores improved significantly (p less than 0.01) in budesonide-treated patients compared with placebo. Significantly more patients switched over to open budesonide treatment in the placebo group owing to lack of efficacy compared with budesonide (p less than 0.001). No drug-related adverse experiences occurred, and there was no decrease in endogenous morning plasma cortisol levels. It is concluded that budesonide enema appears to be an effective and safe treatment for distal ulcerative colitis and proctitis.     

Budesonide for maintenance of remission in patients with Crohn's disease in medically induced remission: a predetermined pooled analysis of four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral budesonide for maintenance of remission in patients with mild to moderately active Crohn's disease (CD) of the ileum and/or ascending colon. METHODS: Four double-blind, placebo-controlled trials with identical protocols were combined according to a predetermined analysis plan. Three hundred eighty patients with CD in medically induced remission (CD activity index [CDAI]< or =150) were randomized to receive oral budesonide 3 mg, 6 mg, or placebo daily for 12 months. The primary outcome measure was time to relapse (increase in CDAI of 60 points above baseline and >150). RESULTS: The median time to relapse was 268, 170, and 154 days for budesonide 6 mg, budesonide 3 mg, and placebo groups, respectively (p= 0.0072). The frequency of adverse events and glucocorticosteroid side effects were similar in all groups. CONCLUSION: Budesonide 6 mg/day is effective for prolonging time to relapse and for significantly reducing rates of relapse at 3 and 6 months but not 12 months in patients with CD in medically induced remission.     

Budesonide Enema in Distal Ulcerative Colitis: a Randomized Dose-Response Trial with Prednisolone Enema as Positive Control

The effect of budesonide, 1, 2, and 4mg/l00ml in daily enemas, on active distal ulcerative colitis was compared with that of prednisolone disodium phosphate enemas, 25 mg/100 ml, in a multicentre, randomized, group-comparative trial. A total of 146 patients with active disease were treated for 2 weeks. Data from 139 were valid for statistical analyses. Bowel habits, proctoscopy findings, and histologic pictures were evaluated, and plasma Cortisol was determined for measurement of influence on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Clinical symptoms and proctoscopy findings improved within all treatment groups. The improvement of these effect variables tended to be less after treatment with the lowest dose of budesonide, 1 mg/100 ml, than after the other treatments. Plasma Cortisol did not change in any of the budesonide groups, whereas a mean reduction of 30% (P = 0.07) was observed after prednisolone. It can be concluded that budesonide enemas of 2 mg/100 ml constitute an attractive alternative to prednisolone enemas for topical treatment of distal ulcerative colitis.     

Rebamipide enema therapy as a treatment for patients with active distal ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND: The clinical efficacy of corticosteroids in the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) is well-established. However, prolonged usage of these drugs can result in serious complications. Rebamipide {2-(4-chlorobenzoylamino)-3[2-(1H)-quinolinon-4-yl] propionic acid}, a cytoprotective agent, has been reported to have anti-inflammatory activity and to repair mucosal injury in animal colitis models. The aim of the present study was to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of a novel Rebamipide enema therapy in UC patients. METHODS: Twenty patients with the active distal type of UC in whom corticosteroid treatment had been unsuccessful were treated with rectal administration of Rebamipide twice a day for 3 weeks, during which corticosteroid dosage was kept constant. The efficacy of treatment was assessed from clinical symptoms and endoscopic findings. The anti-inflammatory effect of Rebamipide was also examined by monitoring changes in the intensity of histological inflammation and levels of cytokine activity in the rectal mucosa. RESULTS: At 3 weeks after the initiation of Rebamipide enema therapy, 11 patients (55%) achieved clinical remission. Sixteen (80%) were colonoscopically judged to be responders, with decreased levels of interleukin (IL)-1beta but not of IL-8, and an increased ratio of IL-1 receptor antagonist/IL-1beta in organ cultures of mucosal tissues. The change in the number of infiltrating neutrophils was not significantly correlated with the clinical response to this therapy. No side-effects were noted in any patients. CONCLUSION: Rebamipide enema therapy proved to be safe and useful in corticosteroid-refractory patients with the active distal type of UC.     

Intermittent therapy with high-dose 5-aminosalicylic acid enemas maintains remission in ulcerative proctitis and proctosigmoiditis

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of intermittent therapy with mesalazine enemas and continuous oral mesalazine to maintain remission of distal ulcerative colitis or proctitis. METHODS: Thirt-yeight patients with distal ulcerative colitis (n=17) or ulcerative proctitis (n=21) in clinical, endoscopic, and histologic remission were randomly assigned to receive either oral mesalazine (0.5 g three times/day, Eudragit L coating, n=19) or intermittent therapy with mesalazine enemas (4 g of 5-aminosalicylic acid enema every third night, n=19). Both groups were comparable in regard to sex, age, age at disease onset, extent and duration of disease, number and mode of treatment of previous attacks, and time in remission. Patients were reviewed at the beginning of the study and, subsequently, at two-month intervals for 24 months or until a relapse occurred. At each visit, diaries were reviewed and clinical and laboratory assessments were performed. Sigmoidoscopy was carried out and biopsies were obtained by a blinded observer. Histology was assessed without knowledge of the patient's clinical state or treatment category. RESULTS: At the end of the study, 6 of 19 patients on oral mesalazine (32 percent) and 14 of 19 patients on mesalazine enemas (74 percent) were still in full remission (log rank test: 15.280,P <0.001). Differences in relapse rates between groups were significant even when data were stratified by extent of disease (P <0.01). In the oral group, six and seven patients relapsed at 12 and 24 months, respectively. In the enema group, three and two relapses occurred in the first and second year of the study, respectively. All patients complied with the treatment satisfactorily and there were no dropouts. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that intermittent therapy with mesalazine enemas is more effective than continuous oral mesalazine in maintaining remission in patients with distal ulcerative colitis and proctitis.Read at the meeting of the First United European Gastroenterology Week, Athens, Greece, September 25 to 30, 1992.     

Randomized, double blind controlled trial of subcutaneous recombinant human interleukin-11 versus prednisolone in active Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-11 has shown benefit in animal inflammatory bowel disease models. Recently, recombinant human interleukin-11 (rhIL-11) has been observed to induce remission in a subset of patients with mild to moderate Crohn's disease (CD). The present study compared the efficacy of rhIL-11 versus prednisolone in remission induction in CD. METHODS: Patients with active CD were randomly assigned to receive either subcutaneous rhIL-11 (1 mg once weekly) and prednisolone placebo tablets, or active prednisolone (60 mg/day) and rhIL-11 placebo, for 12 weeks. Prednisolone/placebo was tapered after week 1, and patients were assessed every second week. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients received medication: 13/27 (rhIL-11) and 17/24 (prednisolone) completed 12 weeks of treatment. Remission rates (intent to treat) for rhIL-11 versus prednisolone were 4% versus 46% at week 4 (p < 0.001) and 19% versus 50% at week 6 (p < 0.05). Response to treatment (deltaCDAI > 100) was seen in 19% (rhIL-11) versus 63% (prednisolone) after 4 weeks (p < 0.002) and 37% versus 63% after 6 weeks (p = 0.1). After 12 weeks of treatment, it was observed that 22% (rhIL-11) versus 21% (prednisolone) had remained in remission. Frequent side effects of rhIL-11 included fever (n = 3), rash (4), arthralgia/arthritis (3), nausea/vomiting (3), and headache (6). CONCLUSION: rhIL-11 is well tolerated but significantly inferior when compared to prednisolone in short-term remission induction in patients with active CD. In this patient cohort, both treatments appeared to be poor in maintaining remission over a period of 3 months.