Maintenance of Crohn's disease over 12 months: fixed versus flexible dosing regimen using budesonide controlled ileal release capsules

Systematic review: outcomes and adverse events from randomised trials in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

The suitability of disease activity indices has been challenged, with growing interest in objective measures of inflammation.

AIM

To undertake a systematic review of efficacy and safety outcomes in placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with Crohn's disease.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were searched until November 2015, for RCTs of adult Crohn's disease patients treated with medical or surgical therapies. Data on efficacy and safety outcomes, end-point definitions, and measurement instruments were extracted and stratified by publication date (pre-2009 and 2009 onwards).

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-one RCTs (110 induction and 71 maintenance) were identified, including 23 850 patients. About 92.3% reported clinical efficacy endpoints. The Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) dominated, defining clinical response or remission in 63.5% of trials (35 definitions of response or remission). CDAI < 150 was the commonest endpoint, but reporting reduced between periods (46.4%-41.1%), whilst use of CDAI100 increased (16.8%-30.4%). Fistula studies most commonly reported fistula closure (9, 90.0%). Reporting of biomarker, endoscopy and histology endpoints increased overall (33.3%-40.6%, 14.4%-30.4% and 3.2%-12.5%, respectively), but were heterogeneous and rarely reported in fistula trials. Patient-reported outcome measures were reported in 41.4% of trials and safety endpoints in 35.4%. Many of the common adverse events relate to disease exacerbation or treatment failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Trial endpoints vary across studies, over time and are distinct in fistula studies. Despite growth in reporting of objective measures of inflammation and in patient-reported outcome measures, there is a lack of standardisation. This confirms the need for a core outcome set for comparative effectiveness research in Crohn's disease.

Reviewing the therapeutic role of budesonide in Crohn's disease

Oral budesonide is a glucocorticoid of primarily local action. In the field of digestive diseases, it is used mainly in inflammatory bowel disease, but also in other indications. This review addresses the pharmacology, pharmacodynamics and therapeutic use of budesonide. Its approved indications are reviewed, as well as other clinical scenarios in which it could play a role, in order to facilitate its use and improve the accuracy of its prescription.

Oral budesonide in gastrointestinal and liver disease: A practical guide for the clinician

Oral budesonide is a second-generation steroid that allows local, selective treatment of the gastrointestinal tract and the liver, minimizing systemic exposure. The results of randomized trials comparing budesonide versus placebo or active comparators have led to expert recommendations that budesonide be used to treat mild or moderate active ileocecal Crohn's disease, microscopic colitis (including both collagenous and lymphocytic colitis), ulcerative colitis, and non-cirrhotic autoimmune hepatitis. The mechanism of budesonide action obviates the need for dose tapering due to safety reasons after induction therapy. Where low-dose budesonide is used to maintain remission, usually in microscopic colitis, it does not appear to have adverse safety implications other than slight reductions in cortisol levels on rare occasions. As a gut-selective and liver-selective corticosteroid, budesonide offers an appealing alternative to conventional systemic glucocorticoids in diseases of these organs.

Use of corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs in inflammatory bowel disease: Clinical practice guidelines of the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The two main forms of intestinal bowel disease, namely ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, are not curable but can be controlled by various medical therapies. The Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IG-IBD) has prepared clinical practice guidelines to help physicians prescribe corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs for these patients. The guidelines consider therapies that induce remission in patients with active disease as well as treatment regimens that maintain remission. These guidelines complement already existing guidelines from IG-IBD on the use of biological drugs in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases.

Budesonide for induction of remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids are commonly used for the induction of remission in Crohn's disease. However, traditional corticosteroids can cause significant adverse events. Budesonide is an alternative glucocorticoid with limited systemic bioavailability.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral budesonide for the induction of remission in Crohn's disease.

SEARCH METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched up to June 2014: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane IBD/FBD Group Specialised Trial Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Reference lists of articles, as well as conference proceedings were manually searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing budesonide to a placebo or active comparator were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent investigators reviewed studies for eligibility, extracted the data and assessed study quality. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool The overall quality of the evidence supporting the outcomes was evaluated using the GRADE criteria. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3.5 software. The primary outcome was induction of remission (defined by a Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI) < 150) by week 8 to 16 of treatment. Secondary outcomes included: time to remission, mean change in CDAI, clinical, histological or endoscopic improvement, improvement in quality of life, adverse events and early withdrawal. We calculated the relative risk (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each dichotomous outcome and the mean difference and corresponding 95% CI for each continuous outcome. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. A random-effects model was used for the pooled analyses. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcomes and selected secondary outcomes was evaluated using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen studies (1805 patients) were included: Nine (779 patients) compared budesonide to conventional corticosteroids, three (535 patients) were placebo-controlled, and two (491 patients) compared budesonide to mesalamine. Ten studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. Three studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to open label design. One study was judged to be at high risk of bias due to selective reporting. After eight weeks of treatment, 9 mg budesonide was significantly more effective than placebo for induction of clinical remission. Forty-seven per cent (115/246) of budesonide patients achieved remission at 8 weeks compared to 22% (29/133) of placebo patients (RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.73; 3 studies, 379 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome was moderate due to sparse data (144 events). Budesonide was significantly less effective than conventional steroids for induction of remission at eight weeks. Fifty-two per cent of budesonide patients achieved remission at week 8 compared to 61% of patients who received conventional steroids (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.97; 8 studies, 750 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome was moderate due to risk of bias. Budesonide was significantly less effective than conventional steroids among patients with severe disease (CDAI > 300) (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.95). Studies comparing budesonide to mesalamine were not pooled due to heterogeneity (I(2) = 81%). One study (n = 182) found budesonide to be superior to mesalamine for induction of remission at 8 weeks. Sixty-eight per cent (63/93) of budesonide patients were in remission at 8 weeks compared to 42% (37/89) of mesalamine patients (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.16). The other study found no statistically significant difference in remission rates at eight weeks. Sixty-nine per cent (107/154) of budesonide patients were in remission at 8 weeks compared to 62% (132/242) of mesalamine patients (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.32). Fewer adverse events occurred in those treated with budesonide compared to conventional steroids (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.76) and budesonide was better than conventional steroids in preserving adrenal function (RR for abnormal ACTH test 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.78).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Budesonide is more effective than placebo for induction of remission in Crohn's disease. Although short-term efficacy with budesonide is less than with conventional steroids, particularly in those with severe disease or more extensive colonic involvement, the likelihood of adverse events and adrenal suppression with budesonide is lower. The current evidence does not allow for a firm conclusion on the relative efficacy of budesonide compared to 5-ASA products.

Budesonide for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids are effective for induction, but not maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease. Significant concerns exist regarding the risk for adverse events, particularly when corticosteroids are used for long treatment courses. Budesonide is a glucocorticoid with limited systemic bioavailability due to extensive first-pass hepatic metabolism and is effective for induction of remission in Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral budesonide for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease.

SEARCH METHODS

The following databases were searched from inception to 12 June 2014: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, the Cochrane IBD/FBD Group Specialised Trial Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Reference lists of articles, as well as conference proceedings were manually searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing budesonide to a control treatment, or comparing two doses of budesonide, were included. The study population included patients of any age with quiescent Crohn's disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent investigators reviewed studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed study quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was maintenance of remission at various reported follow-up times during the study. Secondary outcomes included: time to relapse, mean change in CDAI, clinical, histological, improvement in quality of life, adverse events and study withdrawal. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The Chi(2) and I(2) statistics were used to assess heterogeneity. Random-effects models were used to allow for expected clinical and statistical heterogeneity. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies (n = 1273 patients) were included in the review: eight studies compared budesonide to placebo, one compared budesonide to 5-aminosalicylates, one compared budesonide to traditional systemic corticosteroids, one compared budesonide to azathioprine, and one compared two doses of budesonide. Nine studies used a controlled ileal release form of budesonide, while three used a pH-modified release formulation. Nine studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. Three studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to blinding and one of these studies also had inadequate allocation concealment. Budesonide 6 mg daily was no more effective than placebo for maintenance of remission at 3 months, 6 months or 12 months. At three months 64% of budesonide 6 mg patients remained in remission compared to 52% of placebo patients (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.58; 6 studies, 540 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome was low due to moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 56%) and sparse data (315 events). At six months 61% of budesonide 6 mg patients remained in remission compared to 52% of placebo patients (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.39; 5 studies, 420 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome was moderate due to sparse data (238 events). At 12 months 55% of budesonide 6 mg patients remained in remission compared to 48% of placebo patients (RR 1.13; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.35; 5 studies, 420 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome was moderate due to sparse data (215 events). Similarly, there was no significant benefit for budesonide 3 mg compared to placebo at 6 and 12 months. There was no statistically significant difference in continued remission at 12 months between budesonide and weaning doses of prednisolone (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.13; 1 study, 90 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to sparse data (51 events) and high risk of bias (no blinding). Budesonide 6 mg was better than mesalamine 3 g/day at 12 months (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.03 to 6.12; 1 study, 57 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was very low due to very sparse data (18 events) and high risk of bias (no blinding). There was no statistically significant difference in continued remission at 12 months between budesonide and azathioprine (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.61 to 1.08; 1 study 77 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was very low due to sparse data (55 events) and high risk of bias (single-blind and no allocation concealment). The use of budesonide 6 mg resulted in slight improvements in CDAI scores when assessed at 6 months (MD -24.30, 95% CI -46.31 to -2.29) and 12 months (MD -23.49, 95% CI -46.65 to -0.32) and mean time to relapse of disease (MD 59.93 days, 95% CI 19.02 to 100.84). Mean time to relapse was significantly shorter for patients receiving budesonide than for those receiving azathioprine (MD -58.00, 95% CI -96.68 to -19.32). Adverse events were not more common in patients treated with budesonide compared to placebo (6 mg: RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.52; 3 mg: RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.24). These events were relatively minor and did not result in increased rates of study withdrawal. Commonly reported treatment-related adverse effects included acne, moon facies, hirsutism, mood swings, insomnia, weight gain, striae, and hair loss. Abnormal adrenocorticoid stimulation tests were seen more frequently in patients receiving both 6 mg (RR 2.88, 95% CI 1.72 to 4.82) and 3 mg daily (RR 2.73, 95% CI 1.34 to 5.57) compared to placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest budesonide is not effective for maintenance of remission in CD, particularly when used beyond three months following induction of remission. Budesonide does have minor benefits in terms of lower CDAI scores and longer time to relapse of disease. However, these benefits are offset by higher treatment-related adverse event rates and more frequent adrenocorticoid suppression in patients receiving budesonide.

Azathioprine is superior to budesonide in achieving and maintaining mucosal healing and histologic remission in steroid-dependent Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

The effects of azathioprine (AZA) and budesonide (BUD) on mucosal healing and histologic remission of Crohn's disease (CD) are insufficiently studied. In this prospective study we evaluated the comparative effects of AZA and BUD on endoscopic and histologic activity in patients with steroid-dependent Crohn's ileocolitis or proximal colitis who had achieved clinical remission on conventional steroids.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to AZA (2.0-2.5 mg/kg a day) or BUD (6-9 mg a day) for 1 year. The study protocol included clinical examination, laboratory tests, calculation of the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI), completion of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), at baseline and then every 2 months for 1 year. Ileocolonoscopy with regional biopsies was performed at baseline and then at the end of the study to assess mucosal healing and the histologic activity of CD.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients were randomized to AZA and 39 to BUD. At the end of the study 32 and 25 patients in the AZA and BUD groups, respectively, were in clinical remission (P = 0.07). The Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) score fell significantly only in the AZA group (P < 0.0001). Complete or near complete healing was achieved in 83% of AZA-treated patients compared with only 24% of BUD-treated patients (P < 0.0001). Histologic activity as assessed by an average histology score (AHS) fell significantly only in the AZA group (P < 0.001 versus baseline) and was significantly lower than in the BUD group at the end of the study (P < 0.001). Eight patients in the AZA group were withdrawn for adverse events (n = 6) or relapse of disease compared with 14 patients in the BUD group who were withdrawn for relapse of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with steroid-dependent inflammatory Crohn's ileocolitis or proximal colitis who achieve clinical remission with conventional steroids, a 1-year treatment with AZA was superior to BUD in achieving and maintaining mucosal healing and histologic remission.

Budesonide for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids have been shown to be effective for induction, but not maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease. However, significant concerns exist regarding their risk for adverse events, particularly when used for long treatment courses. Budesonide is a glucocorticoid with limited systemic bioavailability due to extensive first-pass hepatic metabolism. Budesonide has been shown to be effective for induction of remission in Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral budesonide for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane IBD/FBD Group Specialised Trial Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Reference lists of articles, as well as conference proceedings were manually searched. Study authors, study sponsors and pharmaceutical companies were also contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing budesonide to a control treatment, or comparing two doses of budesonide, were included. The study population included patients of any age with Crohn's disease in remission. The primary outcome was maintenance of remission at various reported follow-up times during the study, up to 12 months following enrollment. Secondary outcomes included: time to relapse, mean change in CDAI, clinical, histological or endoscopic improvement, improvement in quality of life, adverse events and study withdrawal.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent investigators reviewed studies for eligibility, extracted the data and assessed study quality using Jadad's criteria. A random or fixed effects model was chosen based on an assessment of heterogeneity, and studies were weighted using the DerSimonian & Laird or the Mantel-Haenszel method accordingly. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 4.2.10 software.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies were included in the review: 8 studies compared budesonide with placebo, one compared budesonide to 5-aminosalicylates, one compared budesonide to traditional systemic corticosteroids, and one compared two doses of budesonide with no control group. Eight studies used a controlled ileal release form of budesonide, while three used a pH-modified release formulation. Budesonide 6 mg daily was no more effective than placebo for maintenance of remission at 3 months (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.58; P = 0.05), 6 months (RR 1.15; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.39; P = 0.14), or 12 months (RR 1.13; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.35; P = 0.19). Budesonide was not more effective than weaning doses of prednisolone for maintenance of remission at 12 months (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.13; P = 0.20), but was better than mesalamine 3 grams per day (RR of remission 2.51; 95% CI 1.03 to 6.12; P = 0.04). Budesonide 3 mg daily was more effective than placebo at 3 months (RR 1.31; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.67; P = 0.03). This benefit was not sustained at 6 months (RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.50; P = 0.53), or 12 months (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.30; P = 0.70). No differences in efficacy were detected based on the different formulations of budesonide, methods used to induce remission, or budesonide dose. The use of budesonide 6 mg resulted in slight improvements in CDAI scores when assessed at 6 months (WMD -24.3; 95% CI -46.31 to -2.29; P = 0.03) and 12 months (WMD -23.49; 95% CI -46.65 to -0.32; P = 0.05) and mean time to relapse of disease (WMD 59.93 days; 95% CI 19.02 to 100.84; P = 0.004). Adverse events were more frequent in patients treated with 6 mg of budesonide compared with placebo (RR 1.49; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.19; P = 0.05), but not in patients using lower doses of budesonide. These events were relatively minor and did not result in increased rates of study withdrawal. Abnormal adrenocorticoid stimulation tests were seen more frequently in patients receiving both 6 mg daily (RR 2.88; 95% CI 1.72 to 4.82; P < 0.0001) and 3 mg daily (RR 2.73; 95% CI 1.34 to 5.57; P = 0.006) compared with placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Budesonide is not more effective than placebo or weaning prednisolone for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease. Some modest benefits are noted in patients receiving budesonide compared with placebo in terms of lower CDAI scores and longer time to relapse of disease. However, these benefits are offset by higher treatment-related adverse event rates and more frequent adrenocorticoid suppression in patients receiving budesonide. Therefore, budesonide is not recommended for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease.

Budesonide for induction of remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids play a key role in the induction of remission in Crohn's disease. However, corticosteroids can cause significant adverse events. Budesonide is an alternate enteral glucocorticoid with limited systemic bioavailability.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral budesonide for the induction of remission in Crohn's disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane IBD/FBD Group Specialised Trial Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Reference lists of articles, as well as conference proceedings were manually searched. Pharmaceutical companies were also contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing budesonide to a control treatment were included. The study population included patients of any age with active Crohn's disease (CDAI > 150). The primary outcome was induction of remission (CDAI < 150) by week 8 to 16 of treatment. Secondary outcomes included: time to remission, mean change in CDAI, clinical, histological or endoscopic improvement, improvement in quality of life, adverse events and early withdrawal.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent investigators reviewed studies for eligibility, extracted the data and assessed study quality. A random effects model was used and studies were weighted using the DerSimonian & Laird method. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 4.2.10 software.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies were included: 9 compared budesonide with conventional corticosteroids, 2 were placebo-controlled, and 1 compared budesonide with mesalamine. After 8 weeks of treatment, budesonide was significantly more effective than placebo (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.23) or mesalamine (RR 1.63; 95% CI 1.23 to 2.16) for induction of remission. Budesonide was significantly less effective than conventional steroids for induction of remission (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.98), particularly among patients with severe disease (CDAI > 300) (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.95). Fewer adverse events occurred in those treated with budesonide compared to conventional steroids (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.76) and budesonide was better able to preserve adrenal function (RR for abnormal ACTH test 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.78).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Budesonide is more effective than placebo or mesalamine for induction of remission in Crohn's disease. Although short-term efficacy with budesonide is less than with conventional steroids, particularly in those with severe disease or more extensive colonic involvement, the likelihood of adverse events and adrenal suppression is lower.

Medical management of mild to moderate Crohn's disease: evidence-based treatment algorithms for induction and maintenance of remission

BACKGROUND

Patients with Crohn's disease alternate between periods of active, symptomatic disease and periods of remission. The treatment goal for Crohn's disease is to induce and then maintain remission of symptoms.

AIM

To review evidence from randomized, controlled, clinical trials on medical therapies for inducing and maintaining remission in patients with mild-to-moderate Crohn's disease, and to suggest the best evidence-based approaches for induction and maintenance therapies.

METHODS

PubMed search using the following terms: sulfasalazine or salicylazosulfapyridine or aminosalicylate or aminosalicylic acid or mesalamine or mesalazine or corticosteroid or prednisone or prednisolone or methylprednisolone or budesonide or antibiotic or metronidazole or ciprofloxacin or immunosuppressive or azathioprine or mercaptopurine or thiopurine or methotrexate and Crohn's disease.

RESULTS

Randomized, controlled trials demonstrated that sulfasalazine, budesonide, and conventional corticosteroids are effective for inducing remission of mild-to-moderate Crohn's disease when administered for a period of 8-16 weeks. An ideal maintenance therapy does not currently exist.

CONCLUSIONS

Selection of maintenance therapy is based on a combination of evidence from controlled trials and patient features including disease severity and location, co-morbidities, previous response to treatment, and previous surgical resection. The options for maintenance therapy include therapy cessation and patient observation following successful induction, budesonide, or immunosuppressive therapy.

Budesonide for induction of remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids continue to play a central role in induction of remission in active Crohn's disease. However, their use comes at a price of significant adverse effects when used repeatedly or for extended periods. Newer corticosteroid agents with limited systemic bioavailability offer a tantalizing option, if they can be shown to be efficacious and safer than conventional corticosteroids. Budesonide is the main alternative corticosteroid currently available in an enteric formulation.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of oral budesonide for the treatment of acute flares of Crohn's disease. A secondary but important endpoint was to evaluate the adverse effect profile.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following sources were used to search the literature for potentially relevant papers and trials. 1. A computer-assisted search of the on-line bibliographic database MEDLINE from 1986 onwards. 2. Hand searching the reference lists of trials and review articles identified by means of the computer- assisted search. 3. Proceedings from major gastrointestinal meetings were manually searched from 1990 onwards. 4. Contact with the relevant pharmaceutical companies that have been involved in the development of budesonide.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Potentially relevant articles were reviewed in an independent unblinded fashion by two authors to determine if they met the criteria specified below: 1) STUDY POPULATION: Patients of any age with acutely active Crohn's disease, as defined by a CDAI > 150. 2) METHODOLOGY: Randomized double blind controlled trials comparing budesonide to a control treatment. Patients in the control arm may have received placebo, conventional corticosteroids, 5-aminosalicylic acid or sulfasalazine. 3) OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical remission was the outcome measure of interest. The definition of remission was usually a CDAI < 150 by 8 to 16 weeks of therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eligible articles were reviewed in duplicate and the results of the primary research trials were abstracted onto specially designed data extraction forms. The proportion of patients achieving remission in the active treatment and control groups of each study were derived from the data provided in the original research papers. Where possible, data were broken down based on site of disease or other strata used by the individual trials.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Data extracted from the original research articles were converted, where necessary, into individual 2 x 2 tables (remission versus no remission x budesonide versus control) for each of the individual studies. Where available, individual 2 x 2 tables for strata within studies were also used. The presence of significant heterogeneity among studies was tested for using the chi-square test. Because this is a relatively insensitive test for the presence of heterogeneity, a p-value of 0.10 was regarded as statistically significant. Where p < 0.10 the data from the individual studies were still combined but the pooled results were interpreted with caution. The 2 x 2 tables were synthesized into a summary test statistic using the pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals as described by Cochran and Mantel and Haenszel. A fixed effects model was used for the pooling of data. The analysis was performed initially by combining data from all trials to estimate the response rate to budesonide therapy. The analysis was also performed by combining only studies with comparable control groups.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies were deemed eligible for review.

EFFICACY

Budesonide was superior to placebo for induction of remission with a pooled odds ratio for the two placebo-controlled trials of 2.85 (95% CI 1.67 - 4.87). A single trial comparing budesonide with mesalamine demonstrated an odds ratio of 2.80 (95% CI 1.50 - 5.20) in favour of budesonide over mesalamine for induction of remission in active Crohn's disease. However, budesonide was inferior to conventional corticosteroids (prednisone or prednisolone) for induction of remission with a pooled odds ratio for the five trials of 0.69 (95% CI 0.51 - 0.95).

SAFETY

The two trials comparing budesonide versus placebo (Greenberg 1994; Tremaine 2002) showed no difference between study groups for proportion of reported corticosteroid-related adverse effects with the pooled odds ratio for both trials of 0.98 (95% CI 0.58 - 1.67). Five trials comparing budesonide versus prednisone showed the budesonide study group had fewer reported corticosteroid-related adverse effects than the prednisone study group (pooled odds ratio was 0.38 (95% CI 0.28 - 0.53).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

With disease in the ileum or ascending colon, budesonide offers an effective therapy which is somewhat less efficacious but with fewer adverse effects than conventional corticosteroids (e.g. prednisone, prednisolone, or 6-methylprednisolone).

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 as maintenance treatment in Crohn's disease: a placebo-controlled trial

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of budesonide capsules 6 mg daily for prolongation of time to relapse and maintenance of remission in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) affecting the ileum and/or ascending colon.

METHODS

In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial, 110 patients with CD, who had previously achieved remission in a placebo-controlled trial of budesonide 9 mg daily, were randomly assigned to receive budesonide 6 mg once daily or placebo for 52 weeks. Primary outcome measure was time to relapse [CD activity index (CDAI) of >150 plus an increase of at least 60 points from study entry or withdrawal due to clinical deterioration].

RESULTS

Median time to relapse was 360 days for budesonide patients; 169 days for placebo patients (P = 0.132). No significant differences were seen between groups in relapse rates at 1 year. Budesonide was safe and well tolerated, with a similar adverse events profile to placebo.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with budesonide 6 mg once daily had a trend towards a prolonged time to relapse and lower CDAI scores compared with patients treated with placebo, but relapse rates were not significantly different at the 1-year end point.

Targeted delivery, safety, and efficacy of oral enteric-coated formulations of budesonide

Budesonide is a potent corticosteroid with a high first-pass metabolism rate. Two commercially available enteric-coated pH-dependent release formulations (Entocort EC and Budenofalk) deliver budesonide to the ileum and proximal colon, regions most commonly affected in Crohn's disease. The drug's effectiveness in this disease has been proven in multiple, placebo-controlled trials, where it has been shown to be superior to mesalamine and placebo, and equivalent to prednisolone for the control of mild to moderately active right-sided Crohn's disease. This beneficial therapeutic effect comes with less adrenal suppression and a small improvement in the clinical adverse effect profile, as compared to prednisolone. However, budesonide provides no benefit over conventional therapy for left-sided colonic disease, and it is less effective for treatment of more severe disease activity and more distal colonic disease. Continuous budesonide does not prolong remission and is, therefore, best used in an intermittent fashion to treat acute exacerbations.

Advances in the treatment of Crohn's disease

The medical therapy of Crohn's disease has improved considerably in recent years. In large part, this is due to the introduction of new efficacious agents, both "biologics" and traditional small molecules. Further study of older drugs has also advanced our ability to devise the optimum approach to individual Crohn's disease patients by better clarifying the benefits, adverse effects, and means to optimize doses of established medications. In this review, we present an evidence-based approach to the medical management of active Crohn's disease, Crohn's disease in remission, and perianal Crohn's disease that emphasizes recent advances that have come from the results of randomized controlled clinical trials.

Oral Budesonide in the Management of Crohn's Disease

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of oral budesonide (Entocort EC) in the treatment of mild to moderate Crohn's disease (CD).

DATA SOURCES

The MEDLINE database (1966-December 2002) was searched using the key words budesonide and inflammatory bowel diseases and restricted to the English language. The references from relevant articles were also reviewed for additional citations.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Articles and abstracts that evaluated oral budesonide for management of CD were considered, with emphasis on randomized, controlled clinical trials.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Budesonide's high potency at the glucocorticoid receptor and extensive first-pass hepatic metabolism result in a topical antiinflammatory effect on intestinal tissue, with minimal systemic glucocorticoid adverse effects. Clinical trials have demonstrated that budesonide is effective in the treatment of patients with mild to moderate CD of the ileum and ascending colon, with efficacy similar to prednisolone and superior to mesalamine. Long-term therapy with budesonide increased the duration of CD remission, but the effect was not sustained up to 1 year. Budesonide failed to prevent postsurgical relapse of CD. Adrenal suppression and glucocorticoid-related adverse effects have been reported at lower rates in patients treated with budesonide compared with prednisolone. Patients prescribed budesonide should be monitored for hepatic dysfunction and potential drug interactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Budesonide is an effective and relatively safe option for treatment of mild to moderate CD of the ileum and ascending colon.

Review article: maintenance treatment of Crohn's disease

The aetiology of Crohn's disease is unknown and therefore no curative treatments are available for the disease. The natural history of Crohn's disease is characterized by recurrent flare-ups of symptoms. Several drug treatments are effective in inducing clinical remission. However, no drug treatments are available in order to prevent clinical relapses, although several drug regimens may delay clinical flare-ups. Crohn's disease treatment for maintaining clinical remission needs to be tailored in relation to specific characteristics of each patient. The frequency of clinical relapse indeed shows marked variations in subgroups of patients, as the likelyhood of relapse is higher in patients in clinical remission for less than 6 months. Treatment strategies for maintaining remission may therefore differ among inactive patients. In chronically active, steroid-dependent or steroid-refractory Crohn's disease patients immunomodulatory drugs (azathioprine 2-2.5 mg/kg by mouth, 6-mercaptopurine 1-1.5 mg/kg by mouth, or methotrexate 15-25 mg/i.m./week) should be added to oral mesalazine (2.4 g/day), while in long-term inactive Crohn's disease patients mesalazine alone may be effective in delaying relapse. Recently, treatment with anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha monoclonal antibodies (Infliximab or CDP571) has shown efficacy in delaying relapse in responsive patients. One other issue which needs to be considered before selecting drug treatments for maintaining remission in Crohn's disease, is that Crohn's disease activity is currently assessed on the basis of standard clinical scores which may not appropriately reflect the biological activity of the disease. Clinical remission as defined by standardized scores may include heterogeneous subgroups of patients showing different endoscopic and histological activity or persistence of activated immunocompetent cells within the gut. Several sub-clinical markers of relapse have indeed been reported in quiescent Crohn's disease, although their usefulness in clinical practice in currently uncertain.