Oral budesonide versus prednisolone in patients with active extensive and left-sided ulcerative colitis

Post-hospitalization Short Versus Long Steroid Taper Strategies in Patients With Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis: A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes

Background

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory colon disease characterized by relapsing flares and remission episodes. However, the optimal steroid tapering strategy in patients hospitalized for acute severe UC (ASUC) remains relatively unknown. We aim to examine the clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized for ASUC regarding variable prednisone taper regimens upon discharge.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed all adult patients admitted to our facility with ASUC between 2000 and 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the duration of steroid taper on discharge (< 6 and > 6 weeks). Patients who had colectomy at index admission were excluded from the analysis. The primary outcome was rehospitalization for ASUC within 6 months of index admission. Secondary outcomes included the need for colectomy, worsening endoscopic disease extent and/or severity during the follow-up period (6 months), and a composite outcome as a surrogate of worsening disease (defined as a combination of all products above). Two-sample t-tests and Pearson's chi-square tests were used to compare the means of continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors for rehospitalization with ASUC.

Results

A total of 215 patients (short steroid taper = 91 and long steroid taper = 124) were analyzed. A higher number of patients in the long steroid taper group had a longer disease duration since diagnosis and moderate-severe endoscopic disease activity (63.8 vs. 25.6 months, p < 0.0001, 46.8% vs. 23.1%, P = ≤ .05, respectively). Both groups had similar disease extent, prior biologic therapy, and the need for inpatient rescue therapy. At the 6-month follow-up, rates of rehospitalization with a flare of UC were comparable between the 2 groups (68.3% vs. 68.5%, P = .723). On univariate and multivariate logistic regression, escalation of steroid dose within four weeks of discharge (aOR 6.09, 95% CI: 1.82-20.3, P  = .003) was noted to be the only independent predictor for rehospitalization with ASUC.

Conclusions

This is the first study comparing clinical outcomes between post-discharge steroid tapering regimens in hospitalized patients for ASUC. Both examined steroid taper regimens upon discharge showed comparable clinical results. Hence, we suggest a short steroid taper as a standard post-hospitalization strategy in patients following ASUC encounters. It is likely to enhance patient tolerability and reduce steroid-related adverse effects without adversely affecting outcomes.

Management and treatment optimization of patients with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis

INTRODUCTION

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease with a significant health-care burden worldwide. While medical therapy aims to induce and maintain remission, optimal management of mild to moderate UC remains challenging due to heterogeneity in severity classifications and non-standardized approaches. This comprehensive review summarizes current evidence and knowledge gaps to optimize clinical decision-making in patients with mild to moderate UC.

AREAS COVERED

After an extensive literature search of PubMed, Medline, and Embase through August 2023, we provide an overview of definitions utilized to characterize mild to moderate UC severity and established therapeutic targets. Current medical treatments including mesalazine formulations, corticosteroids, and their combinations are surveyed. The role of emerging intestinal ultrasound, telemedicine, and home testing is explored. Individualized, patient-centered paradigms aiming to streamline care delivery through proactive identification of relapses are also examined.

EXPERT OPINION

Addressing inconsistencies in disease activity stratification will better align tailored regimens with each patient's profile. Advancing noninvasive technologies like ultrasound criteria and home testing could improve UC management by enabling personalized models. Realizing individualized plans through informed shared-decision making between health-care providers and fully engaged patients holds promise to maximize quality of life outcomes. Continuous improvement relies on innovation bridging different domains to overcome current limitations and push the field toward more predictive and tailored care.

Different levels of healing in inflammatory bowel diseases: mucosal, histological, transmural, barrier and complete healing

Mucosal healing on endoscopy has emerged as a key prognostic parameter in the management of patients with IBD (Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis/UC) and can predict sustained clinical remission and resection-free survival. The structural basis for this type of mucosal healing is a progressive resolution of intestinal inflammation with associated healing of ulcers and improved epithelial barrier function. However, in some cases with mucosal healing on endoscopy, evidence of histological activity in mucosal biopsies has been observed. Subsequently, in UC, a second, deeper type of mucosal healing, denoted histological healing, was defined which requires the absence of active inflammation in mucosal biopsies. Both levels of mucosal healing should be considered as initial events in the resolution of gut inflammation in IBD rather than as indicators of complete transmural healing. In this review, the effects of anti-inflammatory, biological or immunosuppressive agents as well as small molecules on mucosal healing in clinical studies are highlighted. In addition, we focus on the implications of mucosal healing for clinical management of patients with IBD. Moreover, emerging techniques for the analysis of mucosal healing as well as potentially deeper levels of mucosal healing such as transmural healing and functional barrier healing of the mucosa are discussed. Although none of these new levels of healing indicate a definitive cure of the diseases, they make an important contribution to the assessment of patients' prognosis. The ultimate level of healing in IBD would be a resolution of all aspects of intestinal and extraintestinal inflammation (complete healing).

GADECCU 2022 Guideline for the treatment of Ulcerative Colitis. Adaptation and updating of the GETECCU 2020 Guideline

INTRODUCTION

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory disease that compromises the colon, affecting the quality of life of individuals of any age. In practice, there is a wide spectrum of clinical situations. The advances made in the physio pathogenesis of UC have allowed the development of new, more effective and safer therapeutic agents.

OBJECTIVES

To update and expand the evaluation of the efficacy and safety of relevant treatments for remission induction and maintenance after a mild, moderate or severe flare of UC.

RECIPIENTS

Gastroenterologists, coloproctologists, general practitioners, family physicians and others health professionals, interested in the treatment of UC.

METHODOLOGY

GADECCU authorities obtained authorization from GETECCU to adapt and update the GETECCU 2020 Guide for the treatment of UC. Prepared with GRADE methodology. A team was formed that included authors, a panel of experts, a nurse and a patient, methodological experts, and external reviewers. GRADE methodology was used with the new information.

RESULTS

A 118-page document was prepared with the 44 GADECCU 2022 recommendations, for different clinical situations and therapeutic options, according to levels of evidence. A section was added with the new molecules that are about to be available.

CONCLUSIONS

This guideline has been made in order to facilitate decision-making regarding the treatment of UC, adapting and updating the guide prepared by GETECCU in the year 2020.

A review of the therapeutic management of ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic relapsing and remitting gastrointestinal disorder of uncertain aetiology. The last two decades have seen an expansion in the therapeutic arsenal used to treat UC. This has resulted in improved clinical remission and response rates. Nonetheless, staples in our current medical management originate from trials conducted in the early 20th century. In this review article, we aim to outline the key milestones in the history of the medical management of UC in addition to highlighting promising therapeutic developments for the future.

Saudi Arabia consensus guidance for the diagnosis and management of adults with inflammatory bowel disease

Optimal management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) relies on a clear understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This article provides concise guidelines for the management of IBD in adults, based on the most up-to-date information at the time of writing and will be regularly updated. These guidelines were developed by the Saudi Ministry of Health in collaboration with the Saudi Gastroenterology Association and the Saudi Society of Clinical Pharmacy. After an extensive literature review, 78 evidence-and expert opinion-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in adults were proposed and further refined by a voting process. The consensus guidelines include the finally agreed on statements with their level of evidence covering different aspects of IBD diagnosis and treatment.

Reducing Pain in Experimental Models of Intestinal Inflammation Affects the Immune Response

The incidence of inflammatory bowel disease with its two main manifestations, colitis ulcerosa and Crohn's disease, is rising globally year after year. There is still a tremendous need to study the underlying pathomechanisms and a well-established tool in order to better understand the disease are colitis models in rodents. Since the concept of the 3Rs was proposed by Russell and Burch, this would include pain medication in animal models of intestinal inflammation as a reduction of suffering. This review argues against pain medication because the administration of pain medication in its current form has an impact on the inflammatory process and the immune response, thus falsifying the results and the reproducibility and therefore leading to misconceptions.

Comparative Outcomes of Budesonide MMX versus Prednisolone for Ulcerative Colitis: Results from a British Retrospective Multi-Centre Real-World Study

During the COVID-19 pandemic many IBD units chose Budesonide MMX (Cortiment) as the first-line treatment for flares of ulcerative colitis (UC) in outpatients for its favourable side effect profile. This retrospective study of all UC patients treated with oral steroids between 1 March 2019–30 June 2019 and 1 March 2020–30 June 2020 aimed to compare Cortiment with Prednisolone in routine clinical practice. Outcomes included the need for hospitalisation for acute severe ulcerative colitis, symptoms at four weeks and end of treatment, and the need for rescue Prednisolone. The 2019 and 2020 cohorts did not differ at the baseline. Cortiment prescriptions rose from 24.5% in 2019 to 70.1% in 2020 (p < 0.001). At week four there were significant differences between 2019 and 2020 in mean bowel frequency (3.49 vs. 5.85, p = 0.001), rectal bleeding <50% (89.7% vs. 73.1% of patients, p = 0.039), and physician global assessment (PGA) (39.2% vs. 19.8% in remission, p = 0.045). There was no significant difference in hospital admissions, rectal bleeding, and PGA at week eight. Rescue Prednisolone was required in 10% of Cortiment patients in 2019 vs. 31.3% in 2020 (p = 0.058). Active IBD is associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes prompting the careful evaluation of the choice of first-line steroid for UC, as Cortiment was associated with worse outcomes at four weeks.

GETECCU 2020 guidelines for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Developed using the GRADE approach

INTRODUCTION

Since the first edition of the Guidelines was published in 2013, much information has been generated around the treatment of ulcerative colitis, and new drugs and action protocols have been introduced. Clinical practice has changed substantially, warranting new approaches and a comprehensive review and update of the evidence.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Once again, we used the GRADE approach, supported by an electronic tool (https://gradepro.org). The clinical scenarios are the same as in the previous version (induction and maintenance in severe and mild-moderate flare-ups), as are the variables and their evaluation. However, in the updated guidelines, three questions have been deleted, 14 added and 30 maintained, making a total of 44 clinical questions. After an exhaustive review of the evidence, the recommendations are now updated.

RESULTS

Of the 44 questions analysed, no recommendation could be established in two due to the very low quality of the evidence, while in the other 42, based on different degrees of quality of evidence, recommendations were made according to the GRADE system. In 25 of these questions the final recommendation is strongly in favour, in six strongly against, in seven weakly in favour and in four weakly against. According to the scenarios and recommendations, six algorithms are proposed as a simple guide for practical decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

The aim of this update of the 2013 guidelines is to provide answers, based on the GRADE approach, to the different questions we ask ourselves daily when deciding the most appropriate treatment for our patients with ulcerative colitis in the different clinical scenarios.

Glucocorticoid Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Mechanisms and Clinical Practice

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) comprises ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). IBD etiopathology is multifactorial and involves alteration of immune cells and chronic activation of the inflammatory cascade against yet unknown environmental factors that trigger the disease. IBD therapy aims at improving the quality of life and reducing the risk of disease-related complications to avoid the need for surgery. There is no specific cure for IBDs, and the focus of therapy is supportive measures and use of anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive drugs. Glucocorticoids (GCs) are powerful anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory agents used to treat many acute and chronic inflammatory diseases. GCs remain basic treatment for moderate-to-severe IBD, but their use is limited by several important adverse drug effects. Topical administration of a second-generation of GCs, such as budesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), represents a valid alternative to use of older, systemic GCs. Administration of second-generation GCs shows promisingly high topical activity and less systemic toxicity, but maintenance therapy with these new GCs in IBD patients is associated with multiple adverse effects. In this review, we make a comparative analysis of the efficacy of first-generation and second-generation GCs in IBD treatment. Unraveling GC biology at the molecular level to uncouple their clinical benefits from detrimental effects is important. One approach is to consider new GC mediators, such as glucocorticoid-induced leucine zipper, which may have similar anti-inflammatory properties, but avoids the side effects of GCs. This in-depth analysis can help to improve the development and the clinical outcomes of GC therapies in IBD.

[Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Elderly Patients - What Are Different and What Should We Know?]

As the incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are increasing with an ageing population, the incidence and prevalence of IBD in the elderly continue to increase. Older IBD patients can be classified into two groups; elderly-onset IBD patients and elderly IBD patients who were diagnosed at a young age and transitioning into advanced age. Clinicians must consider elderly-onset specific phenotypes or prognosis and age-related concerns in the treatment of elderly IBD patients. There is a paucity of evidence whether there is a different disease process when IBD occurs in older age yet. Clinicians may expect similar therapeutic effects in older and younger patients in drug selection, but since older patients are often excluded from clinical trials, evidence to support this assumption is currently lacking. Also, the risk of side effects may be higher in elderly patients. Therefore, when making management decisions in the elderly, clinicians should assess an individual's frailty rather than only considering an individual's chronological and biological age. Knowing specific requirements for managing older IBD patients may help to make an appropriate therapeutic strategy for this patient group.

First United Arab Emirates consensus on diagnosis and management of inflammatory bowel diseases: A 2020 Delphi consensus

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the main entities of inflammatory bowel disease characterized by chronic remittent inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract. The incidence and prevalence are on the rise worldwide, and the heterogeneity between patients and within individuals over time is striking. The progressive advance in our understanding of the etiopathogenesis coupled with an unprecedented increase in therapeutic options have changed the management towards evidence-based interventions by clinicians with patients. This guideline was stimulated and supported by the Emirates Gastroenterology and Hepatology Society following a systematic review and a Delphi consensus process that provided evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding diagnosis, evaluation of disease severity, appropriate and timely use of different investigations, choice of appropriate therapy for induction and remission phase according to disease severity, and management of main complications.

The Historical Role and Contemporary Use of Corticosteroids in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The use of corticosteroids to treat patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] has been the bedrock of IBD therapeutics since the pioneering work of Truelove and Witts in the UK in the 1950s and subsequent large cohort studies in the USA and Europe. Nevertheless, although effective for induction of remission, these agents do not maintain remission and are associated with a long list of recognised side effects, including a risk of increased mortality. With the arrival of an increasing number of therapies for patients with IBD, the question arises as to whether we are using these agents appropriately in contemporary practice. This review discusses the historical background to steroid usage in IBD, and also provides a brief review of the literature on side effects of corticosteroid treatment as relevant to IBD patients. Data on licensed medications are presented with specific reference to the achievement of corticosteroid-free remission. We review available international data on the incidence of corticosteroid exposure and excess, and discuss some of the observations we and others have made concerning health care and patient-level factors associated with the risk of corticosteroid exposure, including identification of 'at-risk' populations.

Inflammatory Bowel Disease - Non-biological treatment

Nowadays, non-biological treatments remain valuable approaches among the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Mesalamine is the core treatment of mild‑to‑moderate ulcerative colitis (UC) and corticosteroids are crucial for the induction of remission of moderate‑to‑severe flares in both UC and Crohn's disease (CD). Even approaches as cyclosporine, tacrolimus, azathioprine, methotrexate, and surgery still have a nuclear position as strategies to induce and/or maintain remission in IBD. Due to their particularities and to the accumulated evidence, each of these strategies conquered peculiar roles in the overall IBD strategy, all of them contributing to better outcomes. This review emphasizes the particular roles that non-biological treatments gained over time: recent mesalamine formulations to increase adhesion rates, higher doses of 5-ASA for high-risk patients, MMX technology to improve drug release and attain higher bowel concentrations, cyclosporine as a bridge to vedolizumab, tacrolimus as a potential alternative to thiopurines or infliximab, azathioprine in combination therapy with infliximab and dubious in monotherapy, and surgery as a mean to a "better end".

British Society of Gastroenterology endorsed guidance for the management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced enterocolitis

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a novel class of cancer treatment that have improved outcomes for a subset of cancer patients. They work by antagonising inhibitory immune pathways, thereby augmenting immune-mediated antitumour responses. However, immune activation is not cancer-specific and often results in the activation of immune cells in non-cancer tissues, resulting in off-target immune-mediated injury and organ dysfunction. Diarrhoea and gastrointestinal tract inflammation are common and sometimes serious side-effects of this type of therapy. Prompt recognition of gastrointestinal toxicity and, in many cases, rapid institution of anti-inflammatory or biologic therapy (or both) is required to reverse these complications. Management of organ-specific complications benefits from multidisciplinary input, including engagement with gastroenterologists for optimal management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced enterocolitis. In this British Society of Gastroenterology endorsed guidance document, we have developed a consensus framework for the investigation and management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced enterocolitis.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are the principal forms of inflammatory bowel disease. Both represent chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, which displays heterogeneity in inflammatory and symptomatic burden between patients and within individuals over time. Optimal management relies on understanding and tailoring evidence-based interventions by clinicians in partnership with patients. This guideline for management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults over 16 years of age was developed by Stakeholders representing UK physicians (British Society of Gastroenterology), surgeons (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland), specialist nurses (Royal College of Nursing), paediatricians (British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition), dietitians (British Dietetic Association), radiologists (British Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology), general practitioners (Primary Care Society for Gastroenterology) and patients (Crohn's and Colitis UK). A systematic review of 88 247 publications and a Delphi consensus process involving 81 multidisciplinary clinicians and patients was undertaken to develop 168 evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations for pharmacological, non-pharmacological and surgical interventions, as well as optimal service delivery in the management of both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided regarding indications for, initiation and monitoring of immunosuppressive therapies, nutrition interventions, pre-, peri- and postoperative management, as well as structure and function of the multidisciplinary team and integration between primary and secondary care. Twenty research priorities to inform future clinical management are presented, alongside objective measurement of priority importance, determined by 2379 electronic survey responses from individuals living with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, including patients, their families and friends.

Budesonide MMX: efficacy and safety profile in the treatment of ulcerative colitis

Introduction: Ulcerative colitis is an idiopathic, chronic inflammatory disease of the colonic mucosa. Its clinical course is unpredictable, marked by alternating periods of exacerbation and remission. Traditional oral corticosteroids are still the mainstay treatment for the induction of ulcerative colitis remission in patients failing or intolerant to aminosalicylates, but the risk of side effects and complications limits their usefulness. Based on these considerations, new steroids with low systemic bioavailability, such as Beclomethasone dipropionate and Budesonide, have been developed. Areas covered: We reviewed the current literature about the efficacy, safety and the role of budesonide MMX in the treatment of ulcerative colitis. The evidence reviewed in this article is a summation of relevant scientific publications, expert opinion statements, and current practice guidelines. Expert opinion: Budesonide MMX is a novel formulation that uses a Multi-Matrix System (MMX) technology to facilitate the release of high concentrations of active drug into the colon. Budesonide MMX at the dose of 9 mg/day for 8 weeks is effective and safe in inducing clinical and endoscopic remission in patients with mild to moderate UC, who had an inadequate response or were intolerant to either first line conventional therapy with topical and oral 5-aminosalicylic acid.

Histologic Healing Rates of Medical Therapies for Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

Histologic remission is a potentially valuable means of assessing disease activity and treatment response in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the efficacy of existing therapies to achieve this outcome is unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of histologic outcomes in UC randomized controlled trials and examined the relationship between histologic and endoscopic outcomes.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane IBD Register were searched for randomized controlled trials of aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, immunosuppressives, biologics, and small molecules. Histologic and endoscopic remission and response data were independently extracted and pooled using binomial-normal random-effect or fixed-effect models. Pooled efficacy estimates were calculated as risk ratios (RRs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Univariable and multivariable random-effect meta-regression models examined factors associated with histologic remission.

RESULTS

Seventy-four studies (68 induction and 7 maintenance) were identified. Topical aminosalicylate enemas [37.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI), 29.0-46.3] and suppositories (44.9%, 95% CI, 28.9-62.3) had the highest induction of histologic remission rates. Aminosalicylate enemas (RR = 4.14, 95% CI, 2.35-7.31), aminosalicylate suppositories (RR = 3.94, 95% CI, 1.26-12.32), and budesonide multimatrix (RR = 1.47, 95% CI 1.08-1.99) had higher histologic remission rates than placebo. Data were lacking for biologics and immunosuppressives. The pooled histologic remission rate for placebo in induction studies was 10.4% (95% CI, 7.1-15.2). Histologic and endoscopic remission correlated strongly (r = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50-0.78). In multivariate analysis of placebo-arm data, less severe clinical disease activity and corticosteroid use were associated with higher histologic remission rates. Similarly, mild clinical disease activity was associated with higher histologic remission rates when active-arm data were analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Histologic remission rates for current UC treatments ranged from 15.0% to 44.9% according to drug class and patient population with the highest rates observed for topical aminosalicylates. Placebo remission rates were low with relatively narrow CIs. These data provide benchmarks to inform future trial design. Histologic remission is a potential treatment target in clinical practice.

Pharmacotherapy of ulcerative colitis - current status and emerging trends

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic mucosal inflammation of the large intestine restricted to the rectum and colon. Its clinical course follows an intermittent pattern with episodes of relapse, followed by remission and eventually resulting in mucosal damage. Although there is no permanent cure for UC, the currently available pharmacotherapy aims to induce and maintain clinical remission, promote the healing of colonic mucosa and avert any surgical intervention. The conventional drug therapy comprising of 5-aminosalicylates, thiopurines and corticosteroids has advanced recently in terms of formulations and dosing schedule, resulting in improved efficacy, safety and compliance. Calcineurin inhibitors, such as cyclosporin and tacrolimus, have emerged as steroid sparing agents. The treatment paradigm of UC patients who are refractory to conventional drugs has changed in view of the availability of biologics. Currently, there are four biologics approved by the US FDA for the treatment of UC, namely, infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab and vedolizumab, and several others are undergoing clinical trial. In this comprehensive review, the advantages and limitations of the medical therapy of UC are elaborated with an emphasis on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic aspects of the drugs.

AGA Technical Review on the Management of Mild-to-Moderate Ulcerative Colitis

Most patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) have mild-to-moderate disease activity, with low risk of colectomy, and are managed by primary care physicians or gastroenterologists. Optimal management of these patients decreases the risk of relapse and proximal disease extension, and may prevent disease progression, complications, and need for immunosuppressive therapy. With several medications (eg, sulfasalazine, diazo-bonded 5-aminosalicylates [ASA], mesalamines, and corticosteroids, including budesonide) and complex dosing formulations, regimens, and routes, to treat a disease with variable anatomic extent, there is considerable practice variability in the management of patients with mild-moderate UC. Hence, the American Gastroenterological Association prioritized clinical guidelines on this topic. To inform clinical guidelines, this technical review was developed in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework for interventional studies. Focused questions included the following: (1) comparative effectiveness and tolerability of different oral 5-ASA therapies (sulfalsalazine vs diazo-bonded 5-ASAs vs mesalamine; low- (<2 g) vs standard (2-3 g/d) vs high-dose (>3 g/d) mesalamine); (2) comparison of different dosing regimens (once-daily vs multiple times per day dosing) and routes (oral vs rectal vs both oral and rectal); (3) role of oral budesonide in patients mild-moderate UC; (4) comparative effectiveness and tolerability of rectal 5-ASA and corticosteroid formulations in patients with distal colitis; and (5) role of alternative therapies like probiotics, curcumin, and fecal microbiota transplantation in the management of mild-moderate UC.

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.

Comparative safety of systemic and low-bioavailability steroids in inflammatory bowel disease: Systematic review and network meta-analysis

AIMS

Oral systemic corticosteroids have been used to induce remission in patients with active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) for over 50 years; however, the wide array of adverse events (AEs) associated with these drugs prompted the development of steroid compounds with targeted delivery and low systemic bioavailability. This study assessed corticosteroids' comparative harm using network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, the Cochrane Library, clinical trial registries, regulatory authorities' websites and major conference proceedings, through March 2017. Randomized controlled trials that recruited adult IBD patients and compared oral systemic corticosteroids (prednisone/prednisolone) or compounds/formulations with low systemic bioavailability (budesonide, budesonide MMX, and beclomethasone dipropionate) with placebo, or against each other, were considered eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and outcomes, and rated each trial's risk-of-bias.

RESULTS

We identified and synthesized evidence from 31 trials including 5689 IBD patients. Budesonide MMX was associated with significantly fewer corticosteroid-related AEs than oral systemic corticosteroids [odds ratio (OR): 0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.13-0.49] and beclomethasone (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.13-1.00), but not significantly fewer AEs than budesonide (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.37-1.11); it performed equally good with placebo. By contrast, the occurrence of serious AEs, and treatment discontinuations due to AEs, did not differ between the comparator treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Budesonide MMX is associated with fewer corticosteroid-related AEs than its comparator steroid treatments for adult IBD patients. Further high-quality research is warranted to illuminate the steroid drugs' comparative safety profiles.

The clinical course after glucocorticoid treatment in patients with inflammatory bowel disease is linked to suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Adrenal insufficiency (AI) secondary to treatment with glucocorticoids (GCs) is common in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but little is known about the relationship between AI and the clinical course in IBD. The aim of the study was to compare the clinical course in IBD patients with normal adrenal function versus patients with subnormal adrenal function.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study on 63 patients with IBD who had performed a low-dose short Synacthen test (LDSST) (1 μg) immediately (1-7 days) after a standard course of GCs. A subnormal LDSST was defined as serum cortisol <550 nmol/L. Outcomes were time to next flare and fecal calprotectin levels.

RESULTS

Sixty-three percent (n = 40) of the IBD patients had a subnormal LDSST. Patients who were steroid-free (n = 41) after the LDSST were observed for 3 years. Patients with a peak serum cortisol <400 nmol/L immediately after GC treatment had significantly longer time until the next flare-up of their IBD and tended to use a lower cumulative prednisolone dose during the study period in comparison to the other subgroups. Fecal calprotectin levels were significantly lower in patients with a peak s-cortisol <550 nmol/L versus patients with peak s-cortisol ⩾550 nmol/L (median 336 µg/g (IQR 521) versus 955 µg/g (IQR 1867); p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

GC-induced AI is common in patients with IBD and is associated with lower disease activity. This suggests a link between responsiveness to GC treatment and suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in IBD.

Safety Considerations with the Use of Corticosteroids and Biologic Therapies in Mild-to-Moderate Ulcerative Colitis

BACKGROUND

The risk of corticosteroid-associated adverse events can limit the use of systemic corticosteroids. Oral, topically acting, second-generation corticosteroids that deliver drug to the site of inflammation, and biologic therapies, are effective treatment alternatives. The aim of this review was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of topically acting corticosteroids and biologic therapies versus oral systemic corticosteroids for ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for clinical and observational trials, systematic reviews, and case reports/series published between January 1950 and September 30, 2016. Search terms used included "corticosteroids," "beclomethasone dipropionate," "budesonide," "infliximab," "adalimumab," "golimumab," and "vedolizumab" in combination with "ulcerative colitis" or "inflammatory bowel disease."

RESULTS

A total of 582 studies were identified from PubMed searches. Only 1 direct comparative trial for oral topically acting corticosteroids and systemic corticosteroids was available, and no comparative trials versus biologic therapies were identified. In patients with mild-to-moderate UC, short-term (4-8 wk) oral beclomethasone dipropionate or oral budesonide multimatrix system demonstrated safety profiles comparable with placebo with few corticosteroid-related adverse events reported. Based on long-term data in patients with moderate-to-severe UC, biologics have a generally tolerable adverse event profile, although infections, infusion reactions, and autoimmune disorders were frequently reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Second-generation corticosteroids, beclomethasone dipropionate and budesonide multimatrix system, exhibited a favorable safety profile in patients with mild-to-moderate UC. For biologics, which are only indicated in moderate-to-severe UC, additional studies are needed to further ascertain the benefit to risk profile of these agents in patients with mild-to-moderate disease (see Video Abstract, Supplemental Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/IBD/B653).

Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the Elderly Patient: Challenges and Opportunities

The population of older patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) continues to grow, partly reflecting the aging global population in general. The debilitating effects of IBD compound age-related decrements in health and functional capacity, and make the medical management of older patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis distinctly challenging to clinicians. Here, we review the recent literature describing the pharmacologic management of IBD in this population, with focus on the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of common treatment options, such as steroids, immunomodulators, tumor necrosis factor-α antagonists, and integrin antagonists; surgical interventions in older patients are also discussed. Few studies have systematically and prospectively evaluated the clinical challenges in the medical management of IBD in this patient population, leaving a limited evidence base to which clinicians can turn to for guidance. Treatment patterns may thus be suboptimal. For example, prolonged steroid use in the elderly was found to be common, causing significant morbidity from side effects in a particularly vulnerable population. Finally, within the context of a limited evidence base, we discuss common treatment scenarios to define the parameters within which physicians can individualize care for older patients with IBD. Overall, older patients with IBD are at higher risk of adverse events and less treatment responsiveness compared with younger patients, underscoring the need for future studies to fully characterize appropriate treatment courses for this population.

Safety of treatments for inflammatory bowel disease: Clinical practice guidelines of the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IG-IBD)

Inflammatory bowel diseases are chronic conditions of unknown etiology, showing a growing incidence and prevalence in several countries, including Italy. Although the etiology of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis is unknown, due to the current knowledge regarding their pathogenesis, effective treatment strategies have been developed. Several guidelines are available regarding the efficacy and safety of available drug treatments for inflammatory bowel diseases. Nevertheless, national guidelines provide additional information adapted to local feasibility, costs and legal issues related to the use of the same drugs. These observations prompted the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IG-IBD) to establish Italian guidelines on the safety of currently available treatments for Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. These guidelines discuss the use of aminosalicylates, systemic and low bioavailability corticosteroids, antibiotics (metronidazole, ciprofloxacin, rifaximin), thiopurines, methotrexate, cyclosporine A, TNFα antagonists, vedolizumab, and combination therapies. These guidelines are based on current knowledge derived from evidence-based medicine coupled with clinical experience of a national working group.

Defining endoscopic response and remission in ulcerative colitis clinical trials: an international consensus

BACKGROUND

Recently, endpoints for clinical trials have been changing from measuring clinical response to mucosal healing in ulcerative colitis. Endoscopic evaluation is the current gold standard to assess mucosal lesions and has become a major measure of therapeutic efficacy in addition to patients reported outcomes.

AIM

To achieve consensus on endoscopic definitions of remission and response for clinical trials in patients with ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

In reaching the current international recommendations on an International Organization For the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IOIBD) initiative, we first performed a systematic review of technical aspects of endoscopic scoring systems. Then, to achieve consensus on endoscopic definitions of remission and response for clinical trials, we conducted a two-round vote using a Delphi-style process among fifteen specialists in the field of inflammatory bowel diseases.

RESULTS

The literature review showed that many endoscopic indices have been proposed to evaluate disease activity in ulcerative colitis; most are unvalidated and arbitrary definitions have been used in clinical trials for defining endoscopic response or remission. At the end of the voting process, the investigators ranked initially the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (UCEIS) 0 for the definition of endoscopic remission, and a decrease in Mayo endoscopic score ≥1 grade or a decrease in UCEIS ≥2 points for the definition of endoscopic response in ulcerative colitis.

CONCLUSIONS

These international recommendations represent the first consensus on measurement indices for endoscopic outcomes in ulcerative colitis. They should be subject to prospective testing in clinical trials of ulcerative colitis.

Systematic review: second-generation vs. conventional corticosteroids for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Oral corticosteroids are the mainstay treatment for induction of ulcerative colitis remission in patients failing or intolerant to aminosalicylate therapy, but the poor tolerability profile of these drugs limits their usefulness. Second-generation, gut-selective corticosteroids may offer a safe alternative to systemic agents.

AIM

To review the efficacy and safety of systemic and second-generation oral corticosteroids for the induction of remission in ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for randomised, controlled, and open-label trials of orally administered corticosteroids published between January 1950 and September 2015. Additional trials were identified from review of citation lists. Trials that compared oral corticosteroids with non-oral agents or in combination with agents other than aminosalicylates were excluded.

RESULTS

Of the 240 studies identified, 21 were eligible for inclusion. Few trials directly compared oral systemic and second-generation corticosteroids (n = 4). Some second-generation corticosteroids had questionable efficacy vs. placebo or mesalazine (mesalamine), but beclomethasone dipropionate and budesonide MMX demonstrated a comparative benefit. Only beclomethasone dipropionate was similar to conventional corticosteroids for induction of remission and other clinical endpoints. Direct comparative trials for budesonide MMX were unavailable. Second-generation corticosteroids had an overall favourable safety profile, with minimal adverse effects on cardiovascular and metabolic parameters and a low incidence of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Beclomethasone dipropionate and budesonide MMX provide greater induction of remission in ulcerative colitis than placebo or mesalazine but additional active-comparator trials are needed to firmly establish the efficacy profile vs. systemic corticosteroids. Second-generation corticosteroids have a more favourable safety and tolerability profile than systemic corticosteroids.

Mucosal Healing Is Associated With Improved Long-term Outcomes of Patients With Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The paradigm for treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC) is shifting from resolving symptoms toward objective measures such as mucosal healing (MH). However, it is unclear whether MH is associated with improved long-term outcomes. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and analyze studies comparing long-term outcomes of patients with MH with those without MH.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of 3 large databases to identify prospective studies of patients with active UC that included outcomes of patients found to have MH at the first endoscopic evaluation after initiation of UC therapy (MH1) compared with those without MH1. The primary outcome was clinical remission after at least 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes included proportions of patients who were free of colectomy or corticosteroids and rate of MH after at least 52 weeks.

RESULTS

We analyzed 13 studies comprising 2073 patients with active UC. Patients with MH1 had pooled odds ratio of 4.50 for achieving long-term (after at least 52 weeks) clinical remission (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.12-9.52), 4.15 for remaining free of colectomy (95% CI, 2.53-6.81), 8.40 for achieving long-term MH (95% CI, 3.13-22.53), and 9.70 for achieving long-term corticosteroid-free clinical remission (95% CI, 0.94-99.67), compared with patients without MH1. We found no difference in outcomes if patients achieved MH1 while receiving biologic versus non-biologic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In a meta-analysis, we associated MH with long-term clinical remission, avoidance of colectomy, and corticosteroid-free clinical remission. MH is therefore appropriate goal of UC therapy.

Budesonide for the treatment of ulcerative colitis

INTRODUCTION

Budesonide is a synthetic corticosteroid characterized by enhanced topical potency and limited systemic bioavailability. Its use in ulcerative colitis (UC) was limited to rectal preparations until recently when the new oral budesonide formulation incorporating the multi-matrix system technology was introduced. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the current role of oral and rectal budesonide in managing UC patients Areas covered: In this paper, we described the chemical structure and pharmacologic characteristics of the different oral and rectal budesonide preparations, provided a summary of the published trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of budesonide in UC, and discussed the current status of its use in this population Expert opinion: Budesonide is effective in inducing remission in a subset of patients with mild-moderate UC. Nevertheless, the current evidence suggests inferiority of oral budesonide to 5-aminosalisylates (5-ASA) and systemic steroids, whereas rectal applications are comparable to other rectal steroid preparations, but still inferior to rectal 5-ASA. In clinical practice, several issues need clarification including, its exact position in the line of induction agents; the role of combining budesonide and 5-ASAs; the role of combining oral and rectal budesonide; and the role of budesonide in maintenance therapy.

New Applications for Traditional Drugs in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: What Do Cochrane Reviews Tell Us?

Although multiple innovative treatments of inflammatory bowel disease have become available, research continues to refine the value of existing drug therapies for Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. What can Cochrane reviews tell us about evolving applications for traditional agents in inflammatory bowel disease? A Cochrane Collaboration symposium held at the 2014 Digestive Diseases Week annual meeting addressed this question. This article reviews the data presented at that session.

Oral budesonide for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids are first-line therapy for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis. Although corticosteroids may improve symptoms, they have significant adverse effects. Steroids which act topically, with less systemic side-effects may be more desirable. Budesonide is a topically acting corticosteroid with extensive first pass hepatic metabolism. There are currently three formulations of budesonide: two standard formulations including a controlled-ileal release capsule and a pH-dependent capsule both designed to release the drug in the distal small intestine and right colon; and the newer Budesonide-MMX® capsule designed to release the drug throughout the entire colon.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral budesonide for the induction of remission in ulcerative colitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialised Register from inception to April 2015. We also searched reference lists of articles, conference proceedings and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing oral budesonide to placebo or another active therapy for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis were considered eligible. There were no exclusions based on patient age or the type, dose, duration or formulation of budesonide therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent investigators reviewed studies for eligibility, extracted 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. The primary outcome was induction of remission (as defined by the primary studies) at week eight. Secondary outcomes included clinical, endoscopic and histologic improvement, adverse events and early withdrawal. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for each dichotomous outcome and the mean difference (MD) and corresponding 95% CI for each continuous outcome. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies (1808 participants) were included. Four studies compared budesonide-MMX® with placebo, one small pilot study looked at clinical remission at week four, and was subsequently followed by three large, studies that assessed combined clinical and endoscopic remission at week eight. Although two placebo-controlled studies had mesalamine and Entocort (standard budesonide) treatment arms, these studies were not sufficiently powered to compare Budesonide-MMX® with these active comparators. One small study compared standard budesonide with prednisolone and one study compared standard budesonide to mesalamine. Four studies were rated as low risk of bias and two studies had an unclear risk of bias. A pooled analysis of three studies (900 participants) showed that budesonide-MMX® 9 mg was significantly superior to placebo for inducing remission (combined clinical and endoscopic remission) at 8 weeks. Fifteen per cent (71/462) of budesonide-MMX® 9 mg patients achieved remission compared to 7% (30/438) of placebo patients (RR 2.25, 95% CI 1.50 to 3.39). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was moderate due to sparse data (101 events). A subgroup analysis by concurrent mesalamine use suggests higher efficacy in the 442 patients who were not considered to be mesalamine-refractory (RR 2.89, 95% CI 1.59 to 5.25). A subgroup analysis by disease location suggests budesonide is most effective in patients with left-sided disease (RR 2.98, 95% CI 1.56 to 5.67; 289 patients). A small pilot study reported no statistically significant difference in endoscopic remission between budesonide and prednisolone (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.42; 72 patients). GRADE indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was very low due to unclear risk of bias and very sparse data (10 events). Standard oral budesonide was significantly less likely to induce clinical remission than oral mesalamine after 8 weeks of therapy (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.91; 1 study, 343 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was moderate due to sparse data (161 events). Another study found no difference in remission rates between budesonide-MMX® 9 mg and mesalamine (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.71; 247 patients). GRADE indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (37 events). One study found no difference in remission rates between budesonide-MMX® 9 mg and standard budesonide 9 mg (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.65; 212 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (32 events). Suppression of plasma cortisol was more common in prednisolone-treated patients (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.0 to 0.33). While budesonide does appear to suppress morning cortisol to some extent, mean morning cortisol values remained within the normal range in 2 large studies (n = 899) and there was no difference in glucocorticoid-related side-effects across different treatment groups. Further, study withdrawal due to adverse events was not more common in budesonide compared with placebo treated patients (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.38). Common adverse events included worsening ulcerative colitis, headache, pyrexia, insomnia, back pain, nausea, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, flatulence and nasopharyngitis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate quality evidence to supports the use of oral budesonide-MMX® at a 9 mg daily dose for induction of remission in active ulcerative colitis, particularly in patients with left-sided colitis. Budesonide-MMX® 9 mg daily is effective for induction of remission in the presence or absence of concurrent 5-ASA therapy. Further, budesonide-MMX® appears to be safe, and does not lead to significant impairment of adrenocorticoid function compared to placebo. Moderate quality evidence from a single study suggests that mesalamine may be superior to standard budesonide for the treatment of active ulcerative colitis. Low quality evidence from one study found no difference in remission rates between budesonide MMX® and mesalamine. Very low quality evidence from one small study showed no difference in endoscopic remission rates between standard budesonide and prednisolone. Low quality evidence from one study showed no difference in remission rates between budesonide-MMX® and standard budesonide. Adequately powered studies are needed to allow conclusions regarding the comparative efficacy and safety of budesonide versus prednisolone, budesonide-MMX® versus standard budesonide and budesonide versus mesalamine.

Clinical practice guidelines for the medical management of nonhospitalized ulcerative colitis: the Toronto consensus

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The medical management of ulcerative colitis (UC) has improved through the development of new therapies and novel approaches that optimize existing drugs. Previous Canadian consensus guidelines addressed the management of severe UC in the hospitalized patient. We now present consensus guidelines for the treatment of ambulatory patients with mild to severe active UC.

METHODS

A systematic literature search identified studies on the management of UC. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Statements were developed through an iterative online platform and then finalized and voted on by a working group of specialists.

RESULTS

The participants concluded that the goal of therapy is complete remission, defined as both symptomatic and endoscopic remission without corticosteroid therapy. The consensus includes 34 statements focused on 5 main drug classes: 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA), corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapies, and other therapies. Oral and rectal 5-ASA are recommended first-line therapy for mild to moderate UC, with corticosteroid therapy for those who fail to achieve remission. Patients with moderate to severe UC should undergo a course of oral corticosteroid therapy, with transition to 5-ASA, thiopurine, anti-TNF (with or without thiopurine or methotrexate), or vedolizumab maintenance therapy in those who successfully achieve symptomatic remission. For patients with corticosteroid-resistant/dependent UC, anti-TNF or vedolizumab therapy is recommended. Timely assessments of response and remission are critical to ensuring optimal outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal management of UC requires careful patient assessment, evidence-based use of existing therapies, and thorough assessment to define treatment success.

Oral prolonged release beclomethasone dipropionate and prednisone in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis: results from a double-blind, randomized, parallel group study

OBJECTIVES

Double-blind study comparing efficacy and safety of the topically acting corticosteroid beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) to prednisone (PD) in patients with active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

Overall, 282 patients were randomized to receive BDP-prolonged release tablets 5 mg once daily for 4 weeks and then every other day for an additional 4 weeks or oral PD 40 mg once daily for the initial 2 weeks tapered of 10 mg every 2 weeks during the 8-week study period. Efficacy end point was the non-inferiority of BDP vs. PD in terms of Disease Activity Index (DAI) score <3 or reduction by at least 3 points for patients with a baseline DAI ≥7 at week 4. Safety end point was the proportion of patients with steroid-related adverse events (AEs) and cortisol <150 nmol/l at week 4.

RESULTS

DAI response rates at week 4 were 64.6% and 66.2% with BDP and PD, respectively, demonstrating non-inferiority of BDP vs. PD (delta: -1.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) -13.00-9.88, P=0.78). Patients with steroid-related AEs and cortisol <150 nmol/l at week 4 were 38.7% in the BDP group and 46.9% in the PD group (P=0.17 between groups). No safety signals were observed in both the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

BDP was non-inferior to PD in the treatment of active UC, with a good safety profile in both the groups.

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of oral budesonide for prophylaxis of acute intestinal graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (PROGAST)

Background

Gastrointestinal graft–versus-host disease (GvHD) is a potentially life-threatening complication after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT). Since therapeutic options are still limited, a prophylactic approach seems to be warranted.

Methods

In this randomised, double-blind-phase III trial, we evaluated the efficacy of budesonide in the prophylaxis of acute intestinal GvHD after SCT. The trial was registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00180089.

Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 3 mg capsule three times daily oral budesonide or placebo. Budesonide was applied as a capsule with pH-modified release in the terminal ileum. Study medication was administered through day 56, follow-up continued until 12 months after transplantation. If any clinical signs of acute intestinal GvHD appeared, an ileocolonoscopy with biopsy specimens was performed.

Results

The crude incidence of histological or clinical stage 3–4 acute intestinal GvHD until day 100 observed in 91 (n =48 budesonide, n =43 placebo) evaluable patients was 12.5% (95% CI 3-22%) under treatment with budesonide and 14% (95% CI 4-25%) under placebo (p = 0.888). Histologic and clinical stage 3–4 intestinal GvHD after 12 months occurred in 17% (95% CI 6-28%) of patients in the budesonide group and 19% (CI 7-32%) in the placebo group (p = 0.853). Although budesonide was tolerated well, we observed a trend towards a higher rate of infectious complications in the study group (47.9% versus 30.2%, p = 0.085). The cumulative incidences at 12 months of intestinal GvHD stage >2 with death as a competing event (budesonide 20.8% vs. placebo 32.6%, p = 0.250) and the cumulative incidence of relapse (budesonide 20.8% vs. placebo 16.3%, p = 0.547) and non-relapse mortality (budesonide 28% (95% CI 15-41%) vs. placebo 30% (95% CI 15-44%), showed no significant difference within the two groups (p = 0.911). The trial closed after 94 patients were enrolled because of slow accrual. Within the limits of the final sample size, we were unable to show any benefit for the addition of budesonide to standard GvHD prophylaxis.

Conclusions

Budesonide did not decrease the occurrence of intestinal GvHD in this trial. These results imply most likely that prophylactic administration of budenoside with pH-modified release in the terminal ileum is not effective.

Low bioavailability steroids in inflammatory bowel disease: an old chestnut or a whole new ballgame?

At present, therapy of inflammatory bowel disease is still far from being fully satisfactory; old drugs like steroids, for instance, still represent a cornerstone in the treatment of active disease despite their associated important side effects and incomplete clinical efficacy. In the last years, new therapeutic strategies have been suggested in order to avoid or at least limit steroids use and in this direction the so-called low bioavailability steroids appeared to be a promising therapeutic weapon; however, some grey areas about their real utility and manner of use still remain. The aim of this review is to evaluate the available evidence about the use of oral budesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate in inflammatory bowel disease, to critically assess their current position in the therapeutic algorithm of these diseases and to give simple and practical indications for their use in every-day clinical practice.

“Mucosal healing” in ulcerative colitis: Between clinical evidence and market suggestion

In recent decades, the prominent role of endoscopy in the management of ulcerative colitis (UC) has been translated into the concept of mucosal healing (MH) as a fundamental therapeutic end-point. This is partially the consequence of growing evidence of a positive prognostic role of MH on the disease course and partially due to market cues indicating a higher rate of MH in patients treated by novel potent biologic agents. The aim of the present review is to clarify the current knowledge of MH in UC, analyzing the definition, the putative prognostic role and the association of MH with the current drugs used to treat UC patients. Because solid data about the management of UC patients based solely on the healing of the mucosa are not yet available, a tailored approach for individual patients thatconsiders the natural history of UC and the presence of prognostic indicators of aggressive disease is desirable. Consequently, unnecessary examinations and treatment would be avoided and restricted to UC patients who require the maximum amount of effort to affect the disease course in the short and long term.

The role of mucosal healing in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease

OPINION STATEMENT

Mucosal healing is a promising therapeutic endpoint in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Currently, the treatment of IBD focuses predominantly on clinical remission, without requiring a demonstration of mucosal healing. However, recent studies suggest that achieving mucosal healing engenders better outcomes. In this review, we will examine the concept of mucosal healing, including its definitions and assessment techniques, and will evaluate the data regarding the potential benefits of achieving mucosal healing in the treatment of IBD. Furthermore, we will discuss how often mucosal healing can be expected with each of the therapies for IBD. While achieving mucosal healing is an ideal outcome, it may not be practical or feasible in any given patient. Although we suggest that mucosal healing be discussed with all patients, the practicing physician should realize that this goal may not be possible and should manage the patient accordingly.

Long-term safety and efficacy of budesonide in the treatment of ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic, relapsing, and remitting inflammatory disease involving the large intestine (colon). Treatment seeks to break recurrent inflammation episodes by inducing and maintaining remission. Historically, oral systemic corticosteroids played an important role in inducing remission of this chronic disease; however, their long-term use is limited and can lead to adverse events. Budesonide is a synthetic steroid with potent local anti-inflammatory effects and low systemic bioavailability due to high first-pass hepatic metabolism. Several studies have demonstrated oral budesonide’s usefulness in treating active mild to moderate ileocecal Crohn’s disease and microscopic colitis and in an enema formulation for left sided UC. However, there is limited information regarding oral budesonide’s efficacy in UC. A novel oral budesonide formulation using a multimatrix system (budesonide-MMX) to extend drug release throughout the colon has been developed recently and seems to be an effective treatment in active left sided UC patients. This article summarizes budesonide’s long-term safety and efficacy in treating UC.

Novel extended release budesonide formulation for treatment of ulcerative colitis

INTRODUCTION

Budesonide , a synthetic, non-halogenated corticosteroid, has been introduced in the topical treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). Budesonide MMX, a novel, once-daily oral formulation of budesonide that uses a multi-matrix system (MMX) technology to extend the release of budesonide throughout the colon proved to be effective for the treatment of active UC. The focus of this review is the current status of budesonide MMX in extensive and left-sided UC.

AREAS COVERED

This paper covers the recent studies of budesonide MMX to describe its efficacy and safety in the treatment of mild-to-moderately active left-sided UC. A literature search and review of budesonide MMX were carried out using the PubMed database up to August 2013.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical studies of budesonide MMX in adults with mild-to-moderately active UC demonstrated its efficacy and tolerability in achieving clinical and endoscopic remission. Although one trial is still ongoing, budesonide MMX 9 mg tablets represented the first orally administered topical corticosteroid formulation targeting the entire colon for the management of patients with active, mild-to-moderate UC.

Oral locally active steroids in inflammatory bowel disease

IBD is a chronic and relapsing inflammatory disorder of the gut that demands long-lasting treatment targeting both flare-up periods and maintenance of remission. Oral systemic steroids have been used to induce remission in patients with active IBD for over 50 years due to their potent anti-inflammatory effects. The efficacy of systemic steroids in this setting has been largely demonstrated. However, the wide range of adverse events associated with these drugs has prompted the development of equally effective but less toxic steroid compounds. Currently, topically acting oral steroids are an important therapeutic option for Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis and microscopic colitis, being oral budesonide and oral beclomethasone established elements of the IBD armamentarium. At present, oral budesonide is the first-line therapy to induce remission in microscopic colitis and mild to moderate ileocaecal CD patients and oral beclomethasone is effective treating mild to moderate UC patients with left-sided or extensive disease. This review aims at evaluating the current role of these compounds in IBD clinical practice.

Glucocorticosteroids in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease and approaches to minimizing systemic activity

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are a group of inflammatory conditions characterized by chronic, uncontrolled inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract. Reported prevalence is high in the United States and northern Europe, while the incidence varies greatly across the rest of Europe. Glucocorticosteroids are the standard treatment for IBD, but due to adverse events their use can be limited. However, new formulations of glucocorticosteroids have been developed to reduce systemic activation. The aim of this review was to assess and summarize the efficacy and safety of new formulations of glucocorticosteroids. A MEDLINE search identified publications focused on new formulations of nonsystemic steroid-based drugs for IBD and benefits and limitations of each of the new glucocorticosteroid formulations were identified. Budesonide has good efficacy and is an established treatment for Crohn's disease; it has been shown to be beneficial for the induction of remission in these patients, although it is not recommended for the maintenance of induced remission. Glucocorticosteroids are not recommended for the maintenance of remission in patients with IBD. However, a recent study suggested that beclomethasone dipropionate may be effective for prolonged treatment in patients in the postacute phase of Crohn's disease who were treated with a short course of systemic steroids. The efficacy of fluticasone propionate and prednisolone metasulphobenzoate in IBD is not well established given the small number of patients enrolled in the few published clinical trials. While the tolerability of these glucocorticosteroids is favourable, more research comparing these new agents with traditional systemic glucocorticosteroids is warranted.