Clinical trial: ulcerative colitis maintenance treatment with 5-ASA: a 1-year, randomized multicentre study comparing MMX with Asacol. 5-Aminosalicylic acid suppositories in the maintenance of remission in idiopathic proctitis or proctosigmoiditis: a double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial. Coated oral 5-aminosalicylic acid therapy for mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. A randomized study. Safety and efficacy of controlled-release mesalamine for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis. Pentasa UC Maintenance Study Group. 5-ASA enema versus oral sulphasalazine in maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis. Topical treatment with 5-aminosalicylic in distal ulcerative colitis by using a new suppository preparation. A double-blind placebo controlled trial. An oral preparation of mesalamine as long-term maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial. The Mesalamine Study Group. Is maintenance therapy always necessary for patients with ulcerative colitis in remission? Once daily versus conventional dosing of pH-dependent mesalamine long-term to maintain quiescent ulcerative colitis: Preliminary results from a randomized trial. Mesalamine once daily is more effective than twice daily in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis. Once-daily, high-concentration MMX mesalamine in active ulcerative colitis. Clinical trial: once-daily mesalamine granules for maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis - a 6-month placebo-controlled trial. A comparison of mesalamine suspension enema and oral sulfasalazine for treatment of active distal ulcerative colitis in adults. A double-blind clinical trial to compare the effects of 4-aminosalicylic acid to 5-aminosalicylic acid in topical treatment of ulcerative colitis. Coated oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (Claversal) is equivalent to sulfasalazine for remission maintenance in ulcerative colitis. A double-blind study. Double-blind comparison of an oral Escherichia coli preparation and mesalazine in maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis. Oral mesalamine (Asacol) for mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. A multicenter study. Comparative efficacy of coated, oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (Claversal) and sulphasalazine for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis. International Study Group. 5-Aminosalicylic acid enemas in refractory distal ulcerative colitis: a randomized, controlled trial. Optimum dosage of 5-aminosalicylic acid as rectal enemas in patients with active ulcerative colitis. Randomised trial of once- or twice-daily MMX mesalazine for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis. Topical treatment of distal active ulcerative colitis with beclomethasone dipropionate or mesalamine: a single-blind randomized controlled trial. A pilot feasibility study of once daily versus conventional dosing mesalamine for maintenance of ulcerative colitis. Therapeutic effectiveness and tolerance of 5-aminosalicylic acid in short term treatment of patients with ulcerative colitis at a low or medium phase of activity. 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. Different therapy for different types of ulcerative colitis in China. Direct comparison of two different mesalamine formulations for the induction of remission in patients with ulcerative colitis: a double-blind, randomized study. Once-daily dosing of delayed-release oral mesalamine (400-mg tablet) is as effective as twice-daily dosing for maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis. Beclomethasone dipropionate (3 mg) versus 5-aminosalicylic acid (2 g) versus the combination of both (3 mg/2 g) as retention enemas in active ulcerative proctitis. Comparison of budesonide and 5-aminosalicylic acid enemas in active distal ulcerative colitis. Maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis with the probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 is as effective as with standard mesalazine. Curcumin maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis: randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Long-term use of mesalamine (Rowasa) suppositories in remission maintenance of ulcerative proctitis. The optimal dose of 5-aminosalicylic acid in active ulcerative colitis: a dose-finding study with newly developed mesalamine. Once daily versus three times daily mesalazine granules in active ulcerative colitis: a double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, non-inferiority trial.
5-ASA-MMX (1.2 g/tablet) is a 5-aminosalicylic acid formulation, designed for once-daily dosing in the treatment of ulcerative colitis.
                To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 5-ASA-MMX (2.4 g/day, once daily), compared with Asacol (2.4 g/day, twice daily) in the maintenance of left-sided UC, through a double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, randomized, comparator study.
                In all, 331 patients with UC were randomized to receive either 5-ASA-MMX 2.4 g/day, once daily, or Asacol 2.4 g/day, twice daily, for 12 months. All patients were in remission for >or=1 month prior to the trial, with >or=1 documented relapse in the previous year. The co-primary endpoints of this study were the proportion of patients in clinical, and clinical and endoscopic remission following 12 months' treatment.
                In the intent-to-treat population, excluding those with major protocol deviations, 68.0 and 65.9% patients in the 5-ASA-MMX and Asacol groups, respectively, were in clinical remission (P = 0.69), and 60.9 and 61.7% of patients, respectively, were in clinical and endoscopic remission (P = 0.89). Diary card data revealed statistically significant treatment differences favouring 5-ASA-MMX. Both treatments were similarly tolerated.
                Once-daily 5-ASA-MMX is similarly effective with a comparable safety profile to Asacol administered twice daily, for the maintenance treatment of ulcerative colitis. Thirty patients with distal ulcerative colitis in remission (17 proctitis, 13 proctosigmoiditis) were randomly given either 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) or placebo suppositories, 400 mg bid. During the 1-yr follow-up, patients were assessed clinically every month, and flexible sigmoidoscopy with a rectal pinch biopsy specimen and laboratory data were carried out every 3 months. Two patients in the 5-ASA group chose to withdraw from the study, one relapsed, and 12 remained in remission. In the placebo group, one patient chose to withdraw, 11 relapsed, and three remained in remission. The cumulative remission rate at the 12th month was 92% in the 5-ASA group and 21% in the placebo group. Log rank test showed a significant difference in the relapse rate between the two groups (chi 2 = 14.26, p less than 0.001). No side effects were observed. We conclude that 5-ASA in suppository form (800 mg/day), administered for 1 yr, is safe and effective in maintaining remission of distal ulcerative colitis. We assessed oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) prepared with a pH-sensitive polymer coating in 87 patients with mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 5-ASA at a dosage of either 4.8 or 1.6 g per day or placebo for six weeks. The outcome was monitored by flexible proctosigmoidoscopic examinations and physicians' assessments at three-week intervals and by patients' recordings of daily symptoms. Results showed 24 percent complete and 50 percent partial responses in those receiving 4.8 g of 5-ASA per day as compared with 5 percent complete and 13 percent partial responses in those receiving placebo (P less than 0.0001, rank-sum test). At a dosage of 1.6 g per day, the response was twice as good as with placebo, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.51). Age, sex, duration of disease, duration of active symptoms, or extent of disease did not affect the clinical outcome. We conclude that oral 5-ASA administered in a dosage of 4.8 g per day is effective therapy, at least in the short term, for mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. This 12-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomized 205 ulcerative colitis patients in remission to placebo or controlled-release mesalamine at 4 g/day for 12 months. Patients were stratified to either pancolitis or left-sided disease, based on previous diagnosis. Maintenance of remission was defined as a sigmoidoscopic index of < 5, less than five stools per day, and the absence of rectal bleeding. A significantly greater number of patients maintained remission on mesalamine 4 g/day than on placebo at each of five study visits, following the first one-month visit (P < 0.05). The estimated 12-month remission rates for the mesalamine group were 64% (38% for placebo, P = 0.0004). Baseline subgroups (disease location, time since last flare of active disease, and previous response to oral/rectal steroids or sulfasalazine) did not influence remission rates. Treatment-related adverse events were rare. Controlled-release mesalamine is a safe and efficacious single agent for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis. This prospective trial in patients with left-sided ulcerative colitis evaluated the efficacy and acceptability of biweekly high-dose 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) enemas (4g/100ml) in maintaining a remission recently induced using daily 5-ASA enemas. Thirty-one patients were randomly assigned, 16 to 5-ASA and 15 to oral sulphasalazine (2g/day), and examined monthly. Sigmoidoscopy was performed "blind" at six months or at clinical relapse. Twelve patients on 5-ASA (75%) and nine on sulphasalazine (60%) remained in clinical and endoscopic remission throughout the study (NS), and the survival curve for 5-ASA was better at all points (NS). No patient stopped therapy due to side effects, and all those on 5-ASA chose to continue rectal maintenance therapy after the study. It was concluded that biweekly 5-ASA enemas is at least as effective as oral sulphasalazine in maintaining remission in unselected patients whose remission has been achieve using local therapy. Sixty-two patients with ulcerative colitis localised to the distal sigmoid colon and rectum (less than 20 cm) entered the trial. Thirty-two were treated with 5-ASA 500 mg suppositories (Asacol) 3 times a day for 1 month while 30 received a placebo given in the same regime. Clinical, sigmoidoscopic and histological assessment was carried out before, after 15 days and after 1 month of treatment. At the end of the study 5-ASA suppositories showed significantly better results in all the parameters recorded than placebo (p less than 0.01). There were no unwanted effects related to the use of suppositories. This treatment should therefore be offered as a first choice for patients with distal rectosigmoiditis. To compare the safety and efficacy of a pH-sensitive, polymer-coated oral formulation of mesalamine (Asacol, Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Cincinnati, Ohio) with those of placebo in maintaining remission in patients with ulcerative colitis.
                Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.
                Eight private practices, five university-based medical centers, and four hospitals or clinics.
                264 patients with ulcerative colitis that had been maintained in remission for at least 1 month while the patients were receiving stable doses of sulfasalazine or any oral mesalamine product.
                Coated mesalamine at oral dosages of 0.8 g/d or 1.6 g/d or matching placebo for 6 months.
                Treatment success, defined as maintenance of remission after 6 months, and treatment failure, defined as relapse during the study (as indicated by proctosigmoidoscopy at 1, 3, or 6 months of treatment) or withdrawal due to adverse events. Safety was assessed on the basis of laboratory analyses and patient- and investigator-noted adverse events.
                189 patients were compliant with the protocol for 6 months or stopped receiving therapy because of relapse or adverse events. Of these 189 patients, 25 of the 63 patients (39.7%) in the placebo group had treatment success compared with 40 of the 68 patients (58.8% [95% CI, 46.4% to 71.3%]) in the group receiving mesalamine, 0.8 g/d (P = 0.036) and 38 of the 58 patients (65.5% [CI, 52.4% to 78.6%]) in the group receiving mesalamine, 1.6 g/d (P = 0.006). In the intention-to-treat analysis of all patients, 42 of the 87 patients (48.3%) in the placebo group had treatment success compared with 57 of the 90 patients (63.3% [CI, 52.8% to 73.8%]) in the group receiving mesalamine, 0.8 g/d (P = 0.050) and 61 of the 87 patients (70.1% [CI, 59.9% to 80.3%]) in the group receiving mesalamine, 1.6 g/d (P = 0.005). Age, sex, and race were not found to predict treatment success or failure. The mesalamine tablet was well tolerated, and no clinically significant changes were seen in hematologic, hepatic, or renal laboratory profiles.
                Coated mesalamine at oral dosages of 0.8 g/d and 1.6 g/d is safe and effective in maintaining remission in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis. The efficacy of sulphasalazine and mesalazine in preventing relapse in patients with ulcerative colitis is well known. It is less clear how long such maintenance should be continued, and if the duration of disease remission is a factor that affects the risk of recurrence.
                To determine whether the duration of disease remission affects the relapse rate, by comparing the efficacy of a delayed-release mesalazine (Asacol, Bracco S.p.A., Milan, Italy) against placebo in patients with ulcerative colitis with short- and long-duration of disease remission.
                112 patients (66 male, 46 female, mean age 35 years), with intermittent chronic ulcerative colitis in clinical, endoscopic and histological remission with sulphasalazine or mesalazine for at least 1 year, were included in the study. Assuming that a lower duration of remission might be associated with a higher relapse rate, the patients were stratified according to the length of their disease remission, prior to randomization into Group A (Asacol 26, placebo 35) in remission from 1 to 2 years, or Group B (Asacol 28, placebo 23) in remission for over 2 years, median 4 years. Patients were treated daily with oral Asacol 1.2 g vs. placebo, for a follow-up period of 1 year.
                We employed an intention-to-treat analysis. In Group A, whilst no difference was found between the two treatments after 6 months, mesalazine was significantly more effective than placebo in preventing relapse at 12 months [Asacol 6/26 (23%), placebo 17/35 (49%), P = 0.035, 95% Cl: 48-2.3%]. In contrast, in Group B no statistically significant difference was observed between the two treatments, either at 6 or 12 months [Asacol 5/28 (18%), placebo 6/23 (26%), P = 0.35, 95% Cl: 31-14%] of follow-up. Patients in group B were older, and had the disease and remission duration for longer, than those in Group A.
                Mesalazine prophylaxis is necessary for the prevention of relapse by patients with ulcerative colitis in remission for less than 2 years, but this study casts doubt over whether continuous maintenance treatment is necessary in patients with prolonged clinical, endoscopic and histological remission, who are at very low risk of relapse. Multiple studies have demonstrated the efficacy of aminosalicylates in maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis (UC). A newer formulation of mesalamine can be administered once daily. We aimed to examine the efficacy and tolerability of pH-dependent mesalamine for long-term maintenance, and compare the rates of medication consumption between groups over a prolonged period.
                Subjects whose UC had been quiescent for at least 4 months, and who had been receiving mesalamine for maintenance only, were randomized to once daily or conventional dosing for 12 months. Disease activity and medication consumption was assessed every 3 months. The primary endpoint was the percentage of those with quiescent disease at 12 months.
                We enrolled 20 patients, 12 to once daily and 8 to conventional dosing. Six of the 12 patients (50%) in the once daily group compared with 5 of the 8 patients (62.5%) in the conventional group experienced a flare (p = 0.31). Only 5 of the 12 (42%) patients in the once daily group were adherent compared with 3 of 8 patients (37.5%) in the conventional dosing group (p = NS). Median amount consumed in the once daily group was 63% (range 0%-100%) and in the conventional group 55% (range 0%-100%), (p > 0.5). None of the adherent subjects in the once daily group experienced a flare, while 6 out of 7 (86%) who were non-adherent experienced a flare (p < 0.01). In the conventional dosing group, 1 in 3 adherent patients (33%) experienced a flare compared with 4 out of 5 (80%) in the non-adherent group (p < 0.01).
                Adherence, rather than medication regimen, appeared to be important in disease outcome at 12 months. Oral mesalamine (5-aminosalicylate) is the current standard of care for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. We investigated the efficacy and safety of once daily administration of prolonged-release mesalamine granules in maintenance of remission in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis, compared with the well established twice daily dosing regimen.
                In this multicenter, randomized, single blind, noninferiority trial, 362 patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis were randomly assigned (1:1) to groups that were given oral mesalamine 2 g, once daily, or 1 g, twice daily, for 12 months. The primary objective was to compare remission rates at 1 year, based on the ulcerative colitis disease activity index score, using Kaplan-Meier methodology.
                At 1 year, 70.9% of the group given 2 g mesalamine once daily remained in remission vs 58.9% of the group given 1 g mesalamine twice daily; this difference was statistically significant (P = .024), indicating the increased efficacy of once daily, compared with twice daily, dosing. Self-reported adherence to therapy, measured by visual analog scale score after 4, 8, and 12 months, was significantly greater in the group given 2 g mesalamine once daily, compared with twice daily, at all but 1 study visit (P < .05). Compliance measured by medication taken was not significantly different between the groups. The difference between the 2 groups in overall incidence of adverse events was not statistically significant (P = .23).
                Patients with ulcerative colitis given prolonged-release oral mesalamine 2 g once daily had better remission rates, acceptability, and self-reported adherence to therapy compared with patients given oral mesalamine 1 g twice daily. SPD476 (LIALDA in the US; MEZAVANT in the EU; otherwise known as MMX mesalamine; Shire Pharmaceuticals Inc., Wayne, PA, under license from Giuliani SpA, Milan, Italy) is a novel, once-daily, high-strength (1.2 g/tablet) formulation of mesalamine, utilizing MMX Multi Matrix System (MMX) technology designed to deliver the active drug throughout the colon. We performed a double-blind, multicenter study, comparing MMX mesalamine vs placebo for the treatment of active ulcerative colitis. A delayed-release oral mesalamine (ASACOL; Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH) reference arm was included.
                Three hundred forty-three patients with active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis received MMX mesalamine 2.4 g/day or 4.8 g/day given once daily, ASACOL 2.4 g/day given in 3 divided doses, or placebo for 8 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of patients in clinical and endoscopic remission (modified ulcerative colitis disease activity index of < or =1 with rectal bleeding and stool frequency scores of 0, no mucosal friability, and a > or =1-point reduction in sigmoidoscopy score from baseline).
                A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving MMX mesalamine 2.4 g/day given once daily (40.5%; P = .01) and 4.8 g/day given once daily (41.2%; P = .007) achieved clinical and endoscopic remission at week 8, vs placebo (22.1%). The clinical and endoscopic remission rate for ASACOL (32.6%; P = .124) was not significantly superior to placebo. All active treatments were well-tolerated.
                Once-daily MMX mesalamine was efficacious and well-tolerated for the induction of clinical and endoscopic remission. MMX mesalamine offers effective and convenient mesalamine therapy, potentially improving treatment compliance. Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic relapsing and remitting idiopathic inflammatory bowel disorder.
                To evaluate once-daily mesalamine (mesalazine) granules (MG) for maintenance of remission of UC.
                Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients (n=209 MG, n=96 placebo) with UC in remission [revised Sutherland Disease Activity Index (SDAI) rectal bleeding=0, mucosal appearance <2] who took MG 1.5 g or placebo once-daily for up to 6 months. Primary efficacy endpoint: the percentage of patients who remained relapse-free at month 6/end of treatment. Relapse was defined as SDAI rectal bleeding score ≥1 and a mucosal appearance score ≥2, a UC flare, or initiation of medication to treat a UC flare.
                The percentage of relapse-free patients at month 6/end of treatment was higher with MG than placebo (78.9% vs. 58.3%, P < 0.001) in the intent-to-treat analysis. Significant differences (P ≤ 0.025) favouring MG were observed for most secondary endpoints including improvement in rectal bleeding, physician's disease activity rating, stool frequency, the SDAI at month 6/end of treatment, patients classified as a treatment success and relapse-free duration. The incidence of adverse events was similar between groups.
                Once-daily mesalamine (mesalazine) was effective in maintaining remission of UC for 6 months.
                © 2010 Salix Pharmaceuticals. To compare the efficacy and safety of mesalamine (5-ASA) suspension enema versus oral sulfasalazine (SAS) in patients with active mild to moderate distal ulcerative colitis.
                Thirty-seven patients were randomly assigned to treatment with either rectal mesalamine, 4 g at night, (n = 19) or oral sulfasalazine, 1 g four times a day, (n = 18) in a 6-wk, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, multicenter study. Patients known to be refractory to SAS or 5-ASA preparations were excluded. Efficacy was assessed by a physician-rated Disease Activity Index (DAI), which included symptom evaluations and sigmoidoscopic findings, by physician-rated Clinical Global Improvement (CGI) scores, and by Patient Global Improvement (PGI) scores. Safety was assessed by adverse event reports, clinical laboratory tests, and physical examination. Results. Mean DAI scores indicated significant improvement from baseline in both treatment groups. CGI scores indicated that 94% of the 5-ASA patients were either "Very Much Improved" or "Much Improved" at wk 6 versus 77% of the SAS patients. PGI ratings showed more improvement in the 5-ASA treatment group than in the SAS group at wk 2 (p = 0.02) and at wk 4 (p = 0.04). Adverse events, primarily headache and nausea, occurred significantly more frequently (p = 0.02) in the SAS than in the 5-ASA group (83 vs 42%). Three patients were withdrawn from SAS treatment because of adverse events.
                Rectally administered 5-ASA is as effective as oral SAS in treatment of active distal ulcerative colitis but is associated with fewer and milder adverse events. Patients treated with 5-ASA reported improvement earlier than those treated with SAS. 5-Aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) is the active component of Salazopyrin and induces a prompt and excellent improvement, when administered as high dosage enema, in patients suffering from active ulcerative colitis. However, the high instability of this metabolite makes its large use difficult. We aimed at finding a more stable preparation and therefore wondered whether another similar molecule, i.e. 4-aminosalicylic acid (4-ASA, generally known as p-aminosalicylic acid, PAS), which differs from 5-ASA only for the position of the amino group, might be a valid alternative. Therefore, 4-ASA at 2 g dosage, administered as rectal enema, was compared to an equivalent preparation of 5-ASA. We carried out a double-blind therapeutical trial, in which 63 patients, similarly matched for age, sex and extent of disease, took part. The analysis of the final results showed that in the 5-ASA group, 26 (81%) out of 32 patients improved clinically, 25 (78%) sigmoidoscopically and 15 (46%) histologically. In the group of the 31 patients treated with 4-ASA, 24 (77%) improved clinically, 24 (77%) sigmoidoscopically and 13 (41%) histologically. Since no difference was registered between the two types of treatment (p = 0.141, X2 test), 4-ASA could be a possible form of treatment for active ulcerative colitis. In a double-blind, single-center, 1-year prospective trial, we compared a pH-dependent Eudragit L-coated formulation of oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) (Claversal), 0.5 g b.i.d., and sulfasalazine (SASP), 1 g b.i.d., in the prophylactic treatment of quiescent ulcerative colitis. Forty-four patients received 5-ASA and 44 received SASP. Clinical, sigmoidoscopic, and histologic findings were assessed at 6 and 12 months. The two groups were comparable in all pretrial characteristics. No significant difference was observed in the relapse rate in the two groups either after 6 months [5-ASA 20.5%, SASP 27.5%, p = 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 +/- 0.13] or after 12 months (5-ASA 38.4%, SASP 51%, p = 0.18, 95% CI 0.38 +/- 0.1). We conclude that (a) 5-ASA was as effective as SASP in maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis; (b) the relapse rate was, however, higher than expected in both groups; (c) the incidence of side effects was similar with both treatments. 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.
                A total of 120 patients with inactive ulcerative colitis were included in a double-blind, double-dummy study comparing mesalazine 500 mg t.d.s. to an oral preparation of viable E. coli strain Nissle (Serotype 06: K5: H1) for 12 weeks with regard to their efficacy in preventing a relapse of the disease. Study objectives were to assess the equivalence of the clinical activity index (CAI) under the two treatment modalities and to compare relapse rates, relapse-free times and global assessment.
                The start and end scores of the CAI demonstrated no significant difference (P = 0.12) between the two treatment groups. Relapse rates were 11.3% under mesalazine and 16.0% under E. coli Nissle 1917 (N.S.). Life table analysis showed a relapse-free time of 103 +/- 4 days for mesalazine and 106 +/- 5 days for E. coli Nissle 1917 (N.S.). Global assessment was similar for both groups. Tolerability to the treatment was excellent and did not differ. No serious adverse events were reported.
                From the results of this preliminary study, probiotic treatment appears to offer another option for maintenance therapy of ulcerative colitis. Additional support is provided for the hypothesis of a pathophysiological role for the intestinal environment in ulcerative colitis. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a pH-sensitive, polymer-coated oral preparation of mesalamine in patients with mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis.
                A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial.
                Five university-based medical centers, one inflammatory bowel disease center, and three private practice sites.
                A total of 158 patients with newly or previously diagnosed active ulcerative colitis.
                A pH-sensitive, polymer-coated oral preparation of mesalamine (5-aminosalicylic acid) was used at 1.6 and 2.4 g/d for 6 weeks.
                Efficacy was measured by scores for stool frequency, rectal bleeding, patient's functional assessment, sigmoidoscopic findings, and physician's global assessment. Stringent criteria for disease activity were established prospectively.
                The analysis of protocol-compliant patients showed a significant improvement at 3 weeks in patients taking 2.4 g/d of mesalamine compared with patients taking placebo (32% versus 9%; P = 0.003). At 6 weeks, both the 1.6 g/d (43%) and 2.4 g/d (49%) doses were significantly superior to placebo (23%) (P = 0.03 and P = 0.003, respectively). In addition, more patients worsened in the placebo group compared with the 2.4 g/d group (50% versus 19%; P = 0.003); however, there was no statistically significant difference in worsening between the 1.6 g/d mesalamine group and the placebo group. The oral mesalamine tablet was well tolerated, and no clinically significant changes were observed in hematologic, hepatic, or renal laboratory profiles.
                Colon-targeted oral mesalamine at 2.4 g/d is effective therapy for mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. It is well tolerated and should provide a viable therapeutic alternative to sulfasalazine. The safety and efficacy of Claversal (coated, oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) 0.75 g/day) and sulphasalazine 1.5-2.0 g/day were compared for the maintenance treatment of ulcerative colitis in a 1-year double-blind trial. Three hundred and thirty-four patients, whose disease was controlled on a stable dose of sulphasalazine (1.5-2.0 g/day) for a 1-month pre-trial, entered the study. On entry, patients were assigned in a random manner to continue sulphasalazine or to switch to coated 5-ASA. One hundred and thirty-one patients in the coated 5-ASA group and 142 on sulphasalazine were analysed for efficacy. No significant difference was observed between treatments with respect to the cumulative rate of relapse. Over the 12 months, 30 (28%) of the coated 5-ASA patients versus 29 (23%) of those treated with sulphasalazine had an exacerbation of their disease (log rank test P = 0.7011). The incidence of drug-related adverse events and subsequent withdrawals was similar. The high incidence of side-effects usually associated with sulphasalazine was not observed, probably due to the fact that this population was tolerant of sulphasalazine pre-trial. Of the 37 patients who reported adverse events with previous sulphasalazine therapy, however, only two (8%) of the 24 experienced those events when randomized to coated 5-ASA while five (38%) of the 13 who continued on sulphasalazine reported those same events. Coated 5-ASA is a safe, effective therapy for maintaining ulcerative colitis in remission. 5-Aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA), the presumed active moiety of sulfasalazine, has shown clinical efficacy when administered per rectum as initial therapy to patients with distal ulcerative colitis. We report the results of a randomized double-blind trial comparing nightly retention of a 4-g 5-ASA enema with continued administration of hydrocortisone enemas in 18 patients with persistent active distal ulcerative colitis after at least a 3-wk course of treatment with 100-mg hydrocortisone enemas with or without oral sulfasalazine. Continuation of hydrocortisone enemas rather than placebo was used in the control group to reflect the realistic alternative therapy likely to be employed in current practice. Response to therapy was assessed after 3 wk by comparing pretreatment and posttreatment point scores of clinical, sigmoidoscopic, and histological severity. Improvement in clinical score was achieved in seven of nine 5-ASA enema-treated patients versus one of nine hydrocortisone enema-treated patients (p less than 0.05). Sigmoidoscopic and histological improvement generally paralleled clinical improvement. We conclude that in patients with distal ulcerative colitis unresponsive to standard therapy, treatment with 5-ASA enemas results in significant short-term clinical and sigmoidoscopic improvement in a majority of cases. Moreover, a significantly greater number of refractory patients improve when switched to 5-ASA enemas than when continued on standard therapy. 5-Aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA), the active moiety of sulphasalazine (SASP), was given as a rectal enema to patients with mild to moderate distal ulcerative colitis to determine the minimum effective dosage. A double blind study was carried out using enemas containing 1, 2, or 4 g or 5-ASA or placebo for a one month treatment period. One hundred and thirteen patients with ulcerative colitis attending our outpatient clinic volunteered to participate. Clinical, sigmoidoscopic, and histological assessments were carried out at the beginning of the study and after 15 and 30 days of treatment. All patients who received 5-ASA enemas showed significantly better results than those who received a placebo enema (p less than 0.001) but no difference was detected among the patients receiving differing concentrations of 5-ASA. This study suggests that 1 g 5-ASA (in a 100 ml enema) is a sufficient dosage for patients with a mild to moderate attack of ulcerative colitis. Maintenance treatment in ulcerative colitis should be as convenient as possible, to increase the chance of compliance. MMX mesalazine is a once-daily, high-strength (1.2 g/tablet) formulation of 5-aminosalicylic acid. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of MMX mesalazine dosed once or twice daily as maintenance therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis.
                This multicentre, randomised, open-label trial enrolled patients with strictly defined clinical and endoscopic remission, immediately following an episode of mild to moderate ulcerative colitis. Patients were randomised to MMX mesalazine 2.4 g/day as a single (2x1.2 g tablet) or divided dose (1x1.2 g tablet twice daily) for 12 months.
                174 patients (37.9%; safety population n = 459) experienced 384 adverse events, the majority of which were mild or moderate in intensity. Eighteen patients (3.9%), nine in each group, experienced a total of 22 serious adverse events (10 in the once-daily and 12 in the twice-daily group). Most serious adverse events were gastrointestinal, experienced by 5 patients in the once-daily and 4 in the twice-daily group. At month 12, 64.4% (efficacy population, n = 451) of patients in the once-daily and 68.5% of patients in the twice-daily group were in clinical and endoscopic remission (p = 0.351). At month 12, 88.9% and 93.2% in each group, respectively, had maintained clinical remission (were relapse free).
                MMX mesalazine 2.4 g/day administered as a single or divided dose demonstrated a good safety profile, was well tolerated and was effective as maintenance treatment. High clinical and endoscopic remission rates can be achieved with once-daily dosing.
                NCT00151944. 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.
                To compare the efficacy and safety of the topically acting CS beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) versus mesalamine (5-ASA) in the treatment of active UC.
                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.
                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.
                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. This study was conducted to assess, in a small sample, the short-term outcomes of once-daily mesalamine versus conventional dosing in maintaining quiescent ulcerative colitis (UC) and to assess adherence rates with both regimens.
                Consecutive patients were randomly assigned to either a once-daily regimen, or they continued current conventional regimen (twice daily or 3 times daily). Patients were assessed at 3 months and 6 months. At each point, a clinical symptom disease score was obtained using patient questionnaires, and medication rates via pharmacy data. Adherence was defined as consumption of >80% of prescribed medication. Information was collected by an investigator blinded to treatment regimen.
                Twenty-two patients were enrolled in the study, 12 in the once-daily group (QD) and 10 in the conventional group (CD). At 3 months, no patients had experienced a relapse. All of the patients in the QD group and 70% of patients in the CD group were adherent (P = 0.04). The average amount of medication consumed in the QD group was significantly higher than in the CD group (90% vs. 75%, P = 0.02). At 6 months, 2 patients (1 patient from each group) experienced a clinical relapse (P = 0.76). Seventy-five percent vs. 70% of patients were adherent (P = 0.8); the amount of medication taken approached significance (90% vs. 76%, P = 0.07). All patients in the QD group reported being either "very satisfied" or "satisfied" with their regimen.
                In this randomized pilot trial, patients taking once-daily mesalamine had outcomes similar to those for patients on conventional regimens. A larger trial is warranted to assess whether true differences between regimens exist. The therapeutic effectiveness and tolerance of 5-aminosalicylic acid (5ASA), compared with Salazosulphapyridine (SASP) in treatment of ulcerative colitis have been evaluated in 86 patients with the disease at a low or medium phase of activity. After a treatment of six weeks, an improvement was noted in 63.6% (5ASA) and 61.3% (SASP) of these patients. However in no case was a complete remission of the disease observed on the basis of endoscopic inspection. In patients with pancolitis the improvement was lower (37.5% with 5ASA, 40% with SASP). The only side-effect was gastric intolerance, which occurred in 18.1% of the 5ASA and in 19% of the SASP patients. In conclusion we can assume that 5ASA and SASP largely overlap each other as regards both therapeutic effectiveness and occurrence of side-effects. 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.
                To compare the relapse preventing effect and safety profile of two doses of balsalazide and a standard dose of Eudragit coated mesalazine.
                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 metabolite N-Ac-5-ASA was analysed. The study lasted for 26 weeks.
                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 and N-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.
                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. To study the different therapy for different types of ulcerative colitis (UC) in China.
                Among 102 UC patients, 42 chronic relapse type UC patients were randomly divided into olsalazine sodium treatment group (n=21) and SASP group (n=21). Clinical effects and safety were observed in the 2 groups. Forty-two first episode type UC patients were randomly divided into Heartleaf houttuynia herb treatment group (n=21) and SASP group (n=21). Clinical effects were observed in the 2 groups while ultrastructure of colonic mucosa, ICAM-1 and the pressure of distant colon were studied in Heartleaf houttuynia herb group. Eighteen patients (8 males, 10 females) with refractory UC and unresponsive to high-dose prednisolone and sulfasalazine therapy more than one month were treated with Kangshuanling (7200 U/d). Prednisolone was gradually stopped and sulfasalazine was maintained. Stool frequency, rectal bleeding, colonoscopy, general well-being, histology were observed and CD62p, CD63, CD54, Pgp-170 (flow cytometry), TXA2 (RIA), blood platelet aggregation rate and thrombosis length in vitro were assessed.
                In the 42 chronic relapse type UC patients, the overall clinical effects of olsalazine sodium group (complete remission in 16, improvement in 4, inefficiency in 1) were better than those of SASP group (complete remission in 10, improvement in 4, inefficiency in 7, P<0.05). Symptomatic remission of olsalazine sodium group (complete remission in 15, partial remission in 5, inefficiency in 1) was better than that of SASP group (complete remission in 10, partial remission in 5, inefficiency in 6, P<0.05). The colonoscopic remission of olsalazine sodium group(complete remission in 11, partial remission in 9, inefficiency in 1) was better than that of SASP group (complete remission in 7, partial remission in 8, inefficiency in 6, P<0.05). The histologic remission of olsalazine sodium group (complete remission in 13, partial remission in 7, inefficiency in in 1) was better than that of SASP group (complete remission in 6, partial remission in 10, inefficiency in 5, P<0.05). The side effects of gastrointestinal tract in olsalazine sodium group were less than those of SASP group except for frequency of watery diarrhea. No other side effects were observed in olsalazine sodium group while ALT increase, WBC decrease and skin eruption were observed in SASP group. Two patients relapsed in olsalazine sodium group while 8 cases relapsed in SASP group during the flow-up period (from six months to one year). In the 42 first episode type UC patients, the clinical effect of Heartleaf houttuynia herb group (complete remission in 20, 95.2%; improvement in 1, 4.8%) was better than that of SASP group (complete remission in 15, 72.4%, improvement in 5, 23.8%; inefficiency in 1, 3.8%, P<0.01). The time of stool frequency recovering to normal (5.6+/-3.3 d), and blood stool disappearance (6.7+/-3.8 d) and abdominal pain disappearance (6.1+/-3.5 d) in Heartleaf houttuynia herb group was all shorter than that in SASP group (9.5+/-4.9 d, 11.7+/-6.1 d, 10.6+/-5.3 d, P<0.01). Heartleaf houttuynia herb could inhibit the epithelial cell apoptosis of colonic mucous membrane and the expression of ICAM-1 (45.8+/-5.7% vs 30.7+/-4.1%, P<0.05). Compared with normal persons, the mean promotive speed of contraction wave stepped up (4.6+/-1.6 cm/min vs 3.2+/-1.8 cm/min, P<0.05) and the mean amplitude of the wave decreased (14.2+/-9.3 kPa vs 18.4+/-8.0 kPa, P<0.05) in active UC patients. After treatment with Heartleaf houttuynia herb, these 2 indexes improved significantly (17.3+/-8.3 kPa, 3.7+/-1.7 cm/min, P<0.05). In normal persons, the postprandial pressure of sigmoid (2.9 +/-0.9 kPa) was higher than that of descending colon (2.0+/-0.7 kPa) and splenic flexure (1.7+/-0.6 kPa), while the colonic pressure (1.5+/-0.5 kPa, 1.4+/-0.6 kPa, 1.3+/-0.6 kPa) decreased significantly (P<0.05) in active UC patients. After treatment with Heartleaf houttuynia herb, the colonic pressure (2.6+/-0.8 kPa, 1.8+/-0.6 kPa, 1.6+/-0.5 kPa) recovered to normal. The pain threshold Heartleaf houttuynia herb, the colonic pressure (2.6+/-0.8 kPa, 1.8+/-0.6 kPa, 1.6+/-0.5 kPa) recovered to normal. The pain threshold of distant colon (67.3+/-18.9 mL) in active UC patients decreased significantly compared with that of normal persons (216.2+/-40.8 mL, P<0.05) and recovered to normal after treatment with Heartleaf houttuynia herb(187.4+/-27.2 mL, P<0.05). In the 18 refractory UC patients with platelet activation, after more than 4 wk of combined Kangshuanling and sulfasalazine therapy, 16 patients achieved clinical remission, with a highly significant statistical difference (P<0.01) between pre-and post-treatment mean scores for all disease parameters: stool frequency (8.2/d vs 1.6/d), rectal bleeding (score 2.7 vs 0.3), colonoscopy (score 2.6 vs 1.1), histology (score 12.0 vs 5.0), general well being (score 4.0 vs 0.6) and CD62p (8.0+/-3.1% vs 4.1+/-1.8%), CD63 (6.3+/-2.1% vs 3.2+/-1.6%), TXA2 (548+/-85 ng/L vs 390+/-67 ng/L), platelet aggregation rate (43.2+/-10.7% vs 34.8+/-8.1%), thrombosis length in vitro (2.3+/-0.6 cm vs 1.8+/-0.3 cm), CD54 in blood (26.9+/-6.9% vs 14.4+/-5.1%), CD54 in tissues (51.1+/-6.2% vs 23.1+/-4.1%), Pgp-170 in blood (18.9+/-3.9% vs 10.4+/-2.7%), Pgp-170 in tissues (16.5+/-3.2% vs 10.2+/-2.3%, P<0.01 or 0.05).
                Based on the characteristics of UC cases in China, different therapy should be given to different types of UC with expected satisfactory results. Mesalamine is the first-line drug for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). We directly compared the efficacy and safety of two mesalamine formulations for the induction of remission in patients with UC.
                In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized study, 229 patients with mild-to-moderate active UC were assigned to 4 groups: 66 and 65 received a pH-dependent release formulation of 2.4 g/day (pH-2.4 g) or 3.6 g/day (pH-3.6 g), respectively; 65 received a time-dependent release formulation of 2.25 g/day (Time-2.25 g), and 33 received placebo (Placebo). The drugs were administered three times daily for eight weeks. The primary endpoint was a decrease in the UC disease activity index (UC-DAI).
                In the full analysis set (n = 225) the decrease in UC-DAI in each group was 1.5 in pH-2.4 g, 2.9 in pH-3.6 g, 1.3 in Time-2.25 g and 0.3 in Placebo, respectively. These results demonstrate the superiority of pH-3.6 g over Time-2.25 g (P = 0.003) and the noninferiority of pH-2.4 g to Time-2.25 g. Among the patients with proctitis-type UC, a significant decrease in UC-DAI was observed in pH-2.4 g and pH-3.6 g as compared to Placebo, but not in Time-2.25 g. No differences were observed in the safety profiles.
                Higher dose of the pH-dependent release formulation was more effective for induction of remission in patients with mild-to-moderate active UC. Additionally, the pH-dependent release formulation was preferable to the time-dependent release formulation for patients with proctitis-type UC (UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, no. C000000288). The practice of dosing mesalamines in divided doses for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) began with sulfasalazine and was driven by sulfapyridine toxicity. This convention and the assumption that dosing multiple times a day is necessary to treat UC had not been challenged until recently. This study was conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of once-daily dosing of delayed-release mesalamine (Asacol 400-mg tablets) compared with twice-daily dosing for maintaining remission in UC patients.
                A multicenter, randomized, investigator-blinded, 12-month, active-control trial was conducted to assess the noninferiority of delayed-release mesalamine 1.6-2.4 g/day administered once daily compared with twice daily in patients with mild-to-moderate UC currently in clinical remission. The primary end point was maintenance of clinical remission at month 6.
                A total of 1023 patients were randomized and dosed. The primary objective of noninferiority was met. At month 6, 90.5% of patients receiving once-daily dosing had maintained clinical remission, compared with 91.8% of patients receiving twice-daily dosing (95% confidence interval for twice daily - once daily, -2.3 to 4.9). At month 12, 85.4% of patients receiving once-daily dosing had maintained clinical remission, compared with 85.4% of patients receiving twice-daily dosing (95% confidence interval for twice daily - once daily, -4.6 to 4.7). Both regimens had low rates of withdrawals as a result of adverse events and serious adverse events.
                Once-daily dosing of delayed-release mesalamine at doses of 1.6-2.4 g/day was shown to be as effective as twice-daily dosing for maintenance of clinical remission in patients with UC.
                2010 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Sixty patients with active distal ulcerative colitis participated in a multicentre randomized double-blind trial to compare the effect of a beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) enema (3 mg/100 ml) with 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) enemas (2 g/ 100 ml) and enemas with a combination of BDP/5-ASA (3 mg/2 g/100 ml). The patients were treated for 4 weeks and the efficacy of the drugs was evaluated by sigmoidoscopy, histology and subjective symptoms after that time. The overall results after 28 days of treatment were: clinical improvement 100% (BDP/5-ASA) vs. 70% (BDP) and 76% (5-ASA); endoscopic improvement 100% (BDP/5-ASA) vs. 75% (BDP) and 71% (5-ASA); histological improvement 95% (BDP/5-ASA) vs. 50% (BDP) and 48% (5-ASA). After 4 weeks of treatment seven of 19 patients (37%) receiving BDP/5-ASA had healed endoscopically, compared with six of 20 receiving BDP (30%) and two of 21 receiving 5-ASA (10%). Two patients on 5-ASA and three on BDP had a marked deterioration during treatment. The combination of BDP and 5-ASA was significantly superior to single-agent therapy in terms of both improved sigmoidoscopic and improved histological score. No differences in improvement between the 5-ASA vs. BDP-treated patients were noticed. No side effects were seen. The results of the study show that topical treatment of active distal ulcerative colitis with either 5-ASA or BDP is equally efficacious. So far, no data on topical combination therapy have been described. However, combination therapy with BDP/5-ASA seems superior to single-agent therapy and causes no adverse reactions. Budesonide is a new corticosteroid with high topical anti-inflammatory activity but little systemic effect. The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy and safety of budesonide enema (2 mg/100 mL) and 5-ASA enema (mesalazine 1 g/100 mL) given for 4 weeks in the treatment of active distal ulcerative colitis and proctitis.
                Ninety-seven patients were studied in a multicentre single-blind randomized group-comparative trial. The primary efficacy variables were endoscopy and histopathology scores obtained at 0, 2 and 4 weeks. Clinical symptoms were the secondary efficacy variables. Haematology, chemistry and adverse events were the safety variables.
                Budesonide and 5-ASA enemas both resulted in a significant improvement in endoscopy and histopathology scores but no difference could be demonstrated between the two treatment groups. There was also a significant improvement of symptoms (number of bowel movements per day, quality of stools, presence of blood and mucus, and state of well-being) within both groups but no difference between the two treatment groups. The clinical remission rate at 4 weeks was, however, 38% for patients treated with budesonide enema but 60% for those treated with 5-ASA enema (P = 0.03). No adverse events attributed to the study drugs were recorded in either of the groups.
                Budesonide enema 2 mg/100 mL appears to be as efficient and well-tolerated as 5-ASA enema in the treatment of active distal ulcerative colitis and proctitis. 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.
                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.
                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.
                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. Curcumin is a biologically active phytochemical substance present in turmeric and has pharmacologic actions that might benefit patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). The aim in this trial was to assess the efficacy of curcumin as maintenance therapy in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis (UC).
                Eighty-nine patients with quiescent UC were recruited for this randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial of curcumin in the prevention of relapse. Forty-five patients received curcumin, 1g after breakfast and 1g after the evening meal, plus sulfasalazine (SZ) or mesalamine, and 44 patients received placebo plus SZ or mesalamine for 6 months. Clinical activity index (CAI) and endoscopic index (EI) were determined at entry, every 2 months (CAI), at the conclusion of 6-month trial, and at the end of 6-month follow-up.
                Seven patients were protocol violators. Of 43 patients who received curcumin, 2 relapsed during 6 months of therapy (4.65%), whereas 8 of 39 patients (20.51%) in the placebo group relapsed (P=.040). Recurrence rates evaluated on the basis of intention to treat showed significant difference between curcumin and placebo (P=.049). Furthermore, curcumin improved both CAI (P=.038) and EI (P=.0001), thus suppressing the morbidity associated with UC. A 6-month follow-up was done during which patients in both groups were on SZ or mesalamine. Eight additional patients in the curcumin group and 6 patients in the placebo group relapsed.
                Curcumin seems to be a promising and safe medication for maintaining remission in patients with quiescent UC. Further studies on curcumin should strengthen our findings. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single nightly 500-mg Rowasa (mesalamine) suppository as maintenance therapy for patients with ulcerative proctitis in remission.
                In this 24-month, multicenter, double-blind trial, 65 patients with ulcerative proctitis in clinical and endoscopic remission were randomized to receive either a single nightly 500-mg rectal mesalamine (Rowasa) suppository or matching placebo as sole therapy. Efficacy was assessed by time to relapse (defined as rectal bleeding or increase in stool frequency for > or =1 wk and active inflammation upon endoscopy).
                Mean time to relapse was 453.4 days for mesalamine-treated patients and 158.0 days for placebo-treated patients. Survival analysis demonstrated that time to relapse was significantly greater for mesalamine-treated patients than for placebo-treated patients (p < 0.001). In addition, at both 12 and 24 months, the proportion of placebo-treated patients (86% at 12 months and 89% at 24 months) who relapsed was significantly (p < or = 0.001) greater than mesalamine-treated patients (32% and 46%, respectively). No statistically significant differences occurred between treatment groups in the reporting of any particular adverse event or the number of patients reporting adverse events.
                The results demonstrate that mesalamine suppositories are efficacious, well tolerated, and safe for the long-term maintenance of remission of ulcerative proctitis. 5-Aminosalicylate is the gold standard for inducing remission in patients with mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. The optimal dose is as yet not defined. Despite some recent developments, the ideal formulation for 5-aminosalicylic acid is still awaited. A new pellet preparation was designed combining slow and delayed release properties. Aims of the study were to find the optimal dose and to test efficacy and safety of a new 5-aminosalicylic acid formulation.
                Three hundred twenty-one patients were included in a double-blind multicenter trial. Inclusion criteria were active ulcerative colitis (Clinical Activity Index [CAI] and Endoscopic Index [EI] according to Rachmilewitz, CAI 6-12; EI >/=4). Three different doses of 5-aminosalicylic acid (0.5 g 3 times a day, 1.0 g 3 times a day, and 1.5 g 3 times a day) were studied for 8 weeks.
                Clinical remission rate (CAI </=4) was highest in the 1.0 g 3 times a day group (66 %), 50% in the 0.5 g 3 times a day group, and 55% in the 1.5 g 3 times a day group. Hierarchical testing showed no significance, indicating a lack of dose response across the 3 mesalamine doses. In addition, times to first clinical response were similar: 26.5 days (1.0 g 3 times a day), 27.5 days (0.5 g 3 times a day), and 21.5 days (1.5 g 3 times a day). Endoscopic improvement was better with 1.0 g mesalamine 3 times a day than with 0.5 g 3 times a day, but overall endoscopic and histologic improvement was not different between treatment groups. Baseline activity, duration, and localization of ulcerative colitis did have some influence on the therapeutic activity, but there was no significant interaction with the dose of the study drug. Safety, with special focus on kidney function, was excellent in all 3 groups.
                There is no significant dose response between mesalamine 1.5 g/day, 3.0 g/day, and 4.5 g/day. The optimal dose to induce remission of ulcerative colitis is 0.5 g 5-aminosalicylic acid 3 times a day. Patients failing with this dose may benefit from an increase of the dose up to 1.0 g 3 times a day, but should also be considered for alternative treatment. A newly developed pellet formulation of 5-aminosalicylic acid has promising efficacy and excellent safety. 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.
                A randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, multicentre, international, phase III non-inferiority study.
                54 centres in 13 countries.
                380 patients with confirmed diagnosis of established or first attack of ulcerative colitis (clinical activity index (CAI)>4 and endoscopic index > or =4 at baseline) were randomised and treated.
                8-week treatment with either 3 g OD or 1 g TID mesalazine granules.
                Clinical remission (CAI< or =4) at study end.
                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.
                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.
5-ASA was superior to placebo for maintenance therapy in ulcerative colitis. However, 5-ASA had a statistically significant therapeutic inferiority relative to SASP. Oral 5-ASA administered once daily is as effective and safe as conventional dosing for maintenance of remission in quiescent ulcerative colitis. There does not appear to be any difference in efficacy or safety between the various formulations of 5-ASA. Patients with extensive ulcerative colitis or with frequent relapses may benefit from a higher dose of maintenance therapy. High dose therapy appears to be as safe as low dose and is not associated with a higher incidence of adverse events.